Abstract
On the basis of a national survey on academics, this chapter discusses their perception of the governance and management within the institutions in which they work. With some variation according to institutional type, academics reported moderate to less than appropriate working conditions and yet, at the same time, they expressed that such conditions have improved somehow during the last years. Mexican academics perceived an absence of clear academic criteria in academics’ appointment and promotion, as well as a relatively low influence, on their part, in key professional decisions; this situation speaks of Mexican academics as managed professionals. Academics also reported low levels of communication between management and academics, a top-down administrative style, relatively low involvement in collegial decision-making, cumbersome processes, and a low appraisal of top-level administrators as competent leaders. Nevertheless, Mexican academics expressed a high appreciation of their career, as well as high levels of job satisfaction, whose sources could be found in other aspects, more intrinsic to their work, than to the governance and management of their institutions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The data used for this report was obtained by the Network of Researchers on Academics, with the financial support of the Undersecretariat of Higher Education and the Universidad Autónoma de Baja California. Additionally, the National Association of Universities and Higher Education Institutions was critical in facilitating institutional collaboration with the project.
- 2.
The 911 Formats are a set of mandatory annually collected questionnaires jointly managed by the Secretariat of Public Education and the National Association of Universities and Higher Education Institutions.
- 3.
Due to the internal structure of Mexican HEIs, the “actors” involved in the analysis do not correspond exactly to those in the CAP questionnaire. The “institutional governing boards” category was added. On the other hand, academics’ influence, both individually and by way of committees, has been aggregated.
- 4.
The large majority of public federal and state institutions are autonomous. While these institutions attend about 43.2% of student enrollment, 63.2% of respondents to the 2007 CAP Survey worked in them.
- 5.
Public research centers and public federal institutions had 89.4% and 27.5%, respectively, of its full-time personnel in the National Researchers System, while the national average was around 20%.
- 6.
This item was included in the Mexican questionnaire considering its potential relevance as a general appreciation of the way faculty perceives the impact of current public policies.
- 7.
Item only included in the Mexican questionnaire.
References
Abraham, S. Y., et al. (2002, June). 1999 National study of postsecondary faculty (NSOPF:99) (Methodology report). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
Asociación Nacional de Universidades e Instituciones de Educación Superior. (2006). Consolidación y avance de la educación superior en México: Elementos de diagnóstico y propuestas. México: Autor.
Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (CFAT).
Braxton, J. M. (1996). Faculty teaching and research: Is there a conflict? In J. M. Braxton (Ed.), New directions for institutional research, 90. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brennan, J. (2006, September). The changing academic profession: The driving forces. In Research Institute for Higher Education (Ed.), Reports of changing academic profession project workshop on quality, relevance, and governance in the changing academic international perspectives (COE Publication Series No. 20) (pp. 37–44). Hiroshima, Japan: Hiroshima University.
Clark, B. R. (1987). The academic life: Small worlds, different worlds. Princeton: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Cordero-Arroyo, G., Galaz-Fontes, J. F., & Sevilla-García, J. J. (2003). La evaluación de la diversidad en el trabajo académico: Los programas de estímulo de la UABC 1990–2002. México: Asociación Nacional de Universidades e Instituciones de Educación Superior, y Universidad Autónoma de Baja California.
Díaz-Barriga, A., Barrón-Tirado, C., & Díaz-Barriga-Arceo, F. (2008). Impacto de la evaluación en la educación superior mexicana: Un estudio en las universidades públicas estatales. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; Asociación Nacional de Universidades e Instituciones de Educación Superior, & Plaza y Valdés.
Galaz-Fontes, J. F. (2002). La satisfacción en el trabajo de académicos en una universidad pública estatal. Perfiles Educativos, 24(96), 47–72.
Galaz-Fontes, J. F., Padilla-González, L. E., & Gil-Antón, M. (2007). The increasing expectation of relevance for higher education and the academic profession: Some reflections on the case of México. In M. Kogan & U. Teichler (Eds.), Key challenges to the academic profession (pp. 29–49). Paris/Kassel: International Centre for Higher Education Research Kassel.
Galaz-Fontes, J.F., Gil-Antón, M., Padilla-González, L.E., Sevilla-García, J.J., Arcos-Vega, J.L., & Martínez-Stack, J.G. (2009, January 13–14). The Mexican academic profession in Mexico: Changes, continuities and challenges derived from a comparison of two national surveys 15 years apart. Paper presented at the international conference “The Changing Academic Profession over 1992–2007: International, Comparative and Quantitative Perspectives.” Hiroshima, Japan.
Gil-Antón, M. (1996). The Mexican academic profession. In P. G. Altbach (Ed.), The international academic profession: Portraits of fourteen countries (pp. 305–337). Princeton: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Gil-Antón, M. (1997). Origen no es destino. Otra vuelta de tuerca a la diversidad del oficio académico en México. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 2(4), 255–297.
Gil Antón, M. (2000). Un siglo buscando doctores. Revista de la Educación Superior, 29(1), 23–42. No. 113.
Gil-Antón, M. (2002). Big city love: The academic workplace in Mexico. In P. G. Altbach (Ed.), The decline of the guru: The academic profession in developing and middle-income countries (pp. 23–51). Boston: Boston College, Center for International Higher Education.
Gil-Antón, M. (2008). Los académicos en instituciones privadas que captan demanda. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 37(1), 115–121. No. 145.
Grediaga-Kuri, R., Padilla-González, L., & Huerta-Bárcenas, M. (2003). Una propuesta de clasificación de las instituciones de educación superior en México. México: Asociación Nacional de Universidades e Instituciones de Educación Superior.
Kent-Serna, R. (1993). Higher education in Mexico: From unregulated expansion to evaluation. Higher Education, 25, 73–83.
López-Zárate, R. (2003). Formas de gobierno y gobernabilidad institucional. Análisis comparativo de seis instituciones de educación superior. México: Asociación Nacional de Universidades e Instituciones de Educación Superior.
López-Zárate, R., & Y Casillas, M. A. (2005). El PIFI. Notas sobre su diseño e instrumentación. In A. Díaz-Barriga & J. Mendoza-Rojas (Eds.), Educación superior y Programa Nacional de Educación 2001–2006 (pp. 37–74). México: Asociación Nacional de Universidades e Instituciones de Educación Superior.
Mendoza-Rojas, J. (2002). Transición de la educación superior contemporánea en México: De la planeación al estado evaluador. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, y Miguel Angel Porrúa.
Metzger, W. P. (1987). The academic profession in the United States. In B. R. Clark (Ed.), The academic profession: National, disciplinary and institutional settings (pp. 123–208). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Muñoz-Izquierdo, C., et al. (2004). Desarrollo y heterogeneidad de las instituciones de educación superior particulares. México: Asociación Nacional de Universidades e Instituciones de Educación Superior.
Navarro, M. A. (2005). El PIFI: Acotar la planeación, acotar el futuro. In A. Díaz-Barriga & J. Mendoza-Rojas (Eds.), Educación superior y Programa Nacional de Educación 2001–2006 (pp. 75–90). México: Asociación Nacional de Universidades e Instituciones de Educación Superior.
Padilla-González, L. E., Jiménez-Loza, L., & Ramírez-Gordillo, M. D. (2008). La satisfacción con el trabajo académico: Motivaciones y condiciones del entorno institucional que la afectan. El caso de una universidad pública estatal. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 13(38), 843–865.
Paulsen, M. B. (2001). The relation between research and the scholarship of teaching. In C. Kreber (Ed.), Scholarship revisited: Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching, new directions for teaching and learning (pp. 19–29). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. No. 86.
Rhoades, G. (1998). Managed professionals: Unionized faculty and restructuring academic labor. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Porter, L. (2003). La universidad de papel: Ensayos sobre la educación superior en México. México: UNAM.
Rubio-Oca, J. (Ed.). (2006a). La mejora de la calidad en la universidades públicas en el periodo 2001–2006. La formulación, desarrollo y actualización de los Programas Integrales de Fortalecimiento Institucional: Un primer recuento de sus impactos. México: Secretaría de Educación Pública.
Rubio-Oca, J. (Ed.). (2006b). La política educativa y la educación superior en México, 1995–2006: Un balance. Mexico: Secretaría de Educación Pública, Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Secretaría de Educación Pública. (2006). Programa de mejoramiento del profesorado, PROMEP. Un primer análisis de su operación e impactos en el fortalecimiento académico de las universidades públicas. México: SEP, Secretaría de Educación Superior.
Urbano-Vidales, G., Aguilar-Sahagún, G., & Rubio-Oca, J. (2006). Programa de Mejoramiento del Profesorado: Un primer análisis de su operación e impactos en el proceso de fortalecimiento académico de las universidades públicas. México: Secretaría de Educación Pública.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Galaz-Fontes, J.F., Sevilla-García, J.J., Padilla-González, L.E., Arcos-Vega, J.L., Gil-Antón, M., Martínez-Stack, J. (2011). México: A Portrait of a Managed Profession. In: Locke, W., Cummings, W., Fisher, D. (eds) Changing Governance and Management in Higher Education. The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1140-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1140-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1139-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1140-2
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)