Innovative Higher Education

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 113–122 | Cite as

The Three-ring Circus of Academia: How to Become the Ringmaster



The three-ring circus of academia is made up of research, teaching, and service. It is also characterized by continuous action that must be facilitated by the academic ringmaster. Academic life is more difficult than most anticipate because the responsibilities are time-consuming, diverse, and conflicting. Therefore, this article focuses on strategies faculty members can develop to meet these pressing demands. Specifically, we begin with a discussion of how to balance research, teaching, and service. We then highlight strategies faculty members can use in becoming an effective academic ringmaster. We conclude with a discussion of life outside the “big top.”

Key words

college teaching faculty development junior faculty research productivity tenure 


  1. Acker, S., & Armenti, C. (2004). Sleepless in academia. Gender and Education, 16, 3–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams, K. A. (2004). What colleges and universities want in new faculty. Retrieved May 18, 2006, from Association of American Colleges and Universities Web site:
  3. Austin, A. E. (2002). Creating a bridge to the future: Preparing new faculty to face changing expectations in a shifting context. The Review of Higher Education, 26, 119–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ballantine, J. (1995). Teaching the elephant to dance: A parable about the scholarship of learning. Sociological Focus, 28, 207–221.Google Scholar
  5. Boice, R. (1990). Professors as writers: A self-help guide to productive writing. Stillwater, OK: New Forums.Google Scholar
  6. Boice, R. (1992). The new faculty member: Supporting and fostering professional development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  7. Carroll, V. S. (2003). The teacher, the scholar, the self: Fitting thinking and writing into a four–four load. College Teaching, 51, 22–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Colbeck, C. L. (1998). Merging in seamless blend—How faculty integrate teaching and research. The Journal of Higher Education, 69, 647–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fox, M. F. (1992). Research, teaching, and publication productivity: Mutuality versus competition in academia. Sociology of Education, 65, 293–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gillespie, D., Dolšak, N., Kochis, B., Krabill, R., Lerum, K., Peterson, A., et al. (2005). Research circles: Supporting the scholarship of junior faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 30, 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gunter, R., & Stambach, A. (2003). As balancing act and as game: How women and men science faculty experience the promotion process. Gender Issues, 21, 24–42.Google Scholar
  12. Hattie, J., & Marsh, H. W. (1996). The relationship between research and teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66, 507–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ishiyama, J. (2002). Does early participation in undergraduate research benefit social science and humanities students? College Student Journal, 36, 380–386.Google Scholar
  14. Jacobs, J. A., & Winslow, S. E. (2004). Overworked faculty: Job stresses and family demands. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 596, 104–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Koblinsky, S. A., Kuvalanka, K. A., & McClintock-Comeaux, M. (2006). Preparing future faulty and family professionals. Family Relations, 55, 29–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kremer, J. (1990). Construct validity of multiple measures in teaching, research, and services and reliability of peer ratings. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 213–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lancy, D. F. (2003). What one faculty member does to promote undergraduate research. In J. Kinkead (Ed.), Valuing and supporting undergraduate research (pp. 87–92). New directions for teaching and learning, vol. 93. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. Mallard, K. S., & Atkins, M. W. (2004). Changing academic cultures and expanding expectations: Motivational factors influencing scholarship at small Christian colleges and universities. Christian Higher Education, 3, 373–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marsh, H. W., & Hattie, J. (2002). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness. The Journal of Higher Education, 73, 603–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Milem, J. F., Berger, J. B., Dey, E. L. (2000). Faculty time allocation: A study of change over twenty years. The Journal of Higher Education, 71, 454–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moyer, A., Salovey, P., & Casey-Cannon, S. (1999). Challenges facing female doctoral students and recent graduates. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 607–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mullen, C. A., & Forbes, S. A. (2000). Untenured faculty: Issues of transition adjustment and mentorship. Mentoring & Tutoring, 8, 31–46.Google Scholar
  23. Neumann, R. (1994). The teaching-research nexus: Applying a framework to university students’ learning experiences. European Journal of Education, 29, 323–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Page, M. C., Abramson, C. I., & Jacobs-Lawson, J. M. (2004). The national science foundation research experiences for undergraduates program: Experiences and recommendations. Teaching of Psychology, 31, 241–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smeby, J. C. (1998). Knowledge production and knowledge transmission. The interaction between research and teaching at universities. Teaching in Higher Education, 3, 5–20.Google Scholar
  26. Sorcinelli, M. D. (2000). Principles of good practice: Supporting early-career faculty. Guidance for deans, department chairs, and other academic leaders (Report No. HE 033 809). Washington DC: American Association for Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED450634).Google Scholar
  27. Toews, M. L., & Cerny, J. M. (2006). The impact of service-learning on student development: Students’ reflections in a family diversity course. Marriage & Family Review, 38, 79–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wankat, P. C. (2004, March). Effective, efficient teaching. Paper presented at workshop at University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, IL.Google Scholar
  29. Ware, M. E., Davis, S. F., & Smith, R. A. (1998, August). Developing students, developing faculty: Incompatible or compatible goals? Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED422555).Google Scholar
  30. Wolverton, M. (1998). Treading the tenure-track tightrope: Finding balance between research excellence and quality teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 23, 61–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zanna, M. P., & Darley, J. M. (1987). The compleat academic: A practical guide for the beginning social scientist. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dept. of Family and Consumer SciencesTexas State UniversitySan MarcosUSA

Personalised recommendations