Advertisement

Research in Higher Education

, Volume 31, Issue 6, pp 587–604 | Cite as

Research note: Some corrections and suggestions for working with the national faculty survey databases

  • Richard J. Bentley
  • Robert T. Blackburn
  • Jeffery P. Bieber
Article
  • 40 Downloads

Abstract

Our ability to understand the faculty work environment has been greatly enhanced by the availability of largescale national surveys of the professoriate since the 1950s. This technical note identifies ways to improve data comparability among the national faculty surveys. It begins by identifying the national surveys and some of their attributes. The study then estimates faculty sizes and calculates weights for faculty in selected disciplines and institution types. The weights are designed specifically for four surveys conducted in 1969, 1975, 1980, and 1988.

Keywords

National Survey Work Environment Data Comparability Education Research Technical Note 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allison, Paul D., and Stewart, John A. (1974). Productivity differences among scientists: Evidence for accumulative advantage.American Sociological Review 39: 596–606.Google Scholar
  2. American Council on Education (1987).Fact Book. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  3. American Universities and Colleges (1968). 10th edition. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  4. American Universities and Colleges (1983). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  5. American Universities and Colleges (1987). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  6. Astin, Alexander W. (1982).Minorities in American Higher Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  7. Astin, Helen S. (1978). Factors affecting women's scholarly productivity. In H. S. Astin and W. Z. Hirsch (eds.),Essays in Honor of Rosemary Park (pp. 133–157). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
  8. Bayer, Alan E. (1970).College and University Faculty: A Statistical Description (vol. 5, no. 5). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.Google Scholar
  9. Bentley, Richard J., and Blackburn, Robert T. (in press). Changes in academic research performance over time: A study of institutional accumulative advantage.Research in Higher Education.Google Scholar
  10. Berelson, Bernard (1960).Graduate Education in the United States. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  11. Bieber, Jeffrey P. (1990). Faculty research productivity 1972–1988: Development of constant units of measurement. Doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  12. Biglan, Anthony (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas.Journal of Applied Psychology 57(3): 195–203.Google Scholar
  13. Blackburn, Robert T., Boberg, Alice, O'Connell, Coleman, and Pellino, Glenn R. (1980).Project for Faculty Development Program Evaluation. Ann Arbor, MI: Center for the Study of Higher Education, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  14. Blackburn, Robert T., and Lawrence, Janet H. (1989).Faculty at Work: Final Report of the National Survey. Ann Arbor, MI: National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  15. Blackburn, Robert T., and Christopher, Mackie (1990). Faculty attitude and behavior reliabilities on the University of Michigan 1988 national faculty survey. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  16. Blackburn, Robert T., Lawrence, Janet H., Bieber, Jeffrey P., and Yoon, Kwang (1988). Changes in the faculty work environment 1968–1984. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
  17. Bowen, Howard R., and Schuster, Jack H. (1986).American Professors: A National Resource Imperiled. New York: Oxford Press.Google Scholar
  18. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education (1973).A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  19. Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education (1976).A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education (revised edition).Google Scholar
  20. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1984).Technical Report: 1984 Carnegie Foundation National Surveys of Higher Education. Princeton, NJ: Opinion Research Corporation.Google Scholar
  21. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1987, July 8). Carnegie foundation's classifications of more than 3,300 institutions of higher education.Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. 22–26, 28–30.Google Scholar
  22. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1989a).A Technical Report: The Condition of the Professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1989b).Survey Among College and University Faculty. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  24. Clark, Mary J., and Centra, John A. (1985). Influences on the career accomplishments of Ph.D.'sResearch in Higher Education 23(3): 256–269.Google Scholar
  25. Drew, David E., and Tronvig, Jill A. (1988).Assessing the Quality of National Data About Academic Scientists. Claremont, CA.: Claremont Graduate School.Google Scholar
  26. Higher Education Research Institute (n.d.). Technical report to 1980 national survey (exact title unknown). Los Angeles, CA.: Higher Education Research Institute, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  27. Ladd, Everett C., and Lipset, Seymour M. (1975).Technical Report: 1975 Survey of the American Professoriate. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
  28. Ladd, Everett C., and Lipset, Seymour M. (1977).Technical Report: 1977 Survey of the American Professoriate. Storrs, CT: University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
  29. Lazarsfeld, Paul F., and Theilens, Wagner (1958).The Academic Mind: Social Scientists in a Time of Crisis. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
  30. Long, John S. (December 1978). Productivity and academic position in the scientific career.American Sociological Review 43: 889–908.Google Scholar
  31. Long, John S., and McGinnis, Robert (August 1981). Organizational context and scientific productivity.American Sociological Review 46: 422–442.Google Scholar
  32. Morton, Herbert S., and Price, Anne J. (1986). The ACLS survey of scholars: Views on publications, computers, libraries.Scholarly Communication 5: 1–16. Washington, DC: American Council of Learned Societies.Google Scholar
  33. National Center for Educational Statistics (1989).NCES-2000. Washington, DC: Department of Education.Google Scholar
  34. Office of Educational Research and Improvement (1990).Survey Report: 1988 National Survey of Postsecondary Faculty. NCES 90-365 Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  35. Parsons, Talcott, and Platt, Gerald M. (1968).The American Academic Profession: A Pilot Study. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Roizen, Judith, Fulton, Oliver, and Trow, Martin A. (1978).Technical Report: 1975 Carnegie Council National Surveys of Higher Education. Berkeley, CA: Center for Studies in Higher Education, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  37. Shyrock, R. H. (1959).The University of Pennsylvania Faculty: A Study of American Higher Education. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  38. Trow, Martin A. (1975). Technical report on the 1969 Carnegie Commission survey of faculty and student opinion. In Martin A. Trow (ed.),Teachers and Students. Berkeley, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  39. Wanner, Richard A., Lewis, Lionel S., and Gregorio, David I. (October 1981). Research productivity in academia: A comparative study of the sciences, social sciences, and humanities.Sociology of Education 54: 238–253.Google Scholar
  40. Wilson, Logan (1942).The Academic Man. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard J. Bentley
    • 1
  • Robert T. Blackburn
    • 1
  • Jeffery P. Bieber
    • 2
  1. 1.University of MichiganAnn Arbor
  2. 2.College of William and MaryUSA

Personalised recommendations