Concepts and Methods

  • William K. Cummings
  • Martin J. Finkelstein
Part of the The Changing Academy – The Changing Academic Profession in International Comparative Perspective book series (CHAC, volume 4)


This chapter describes the framework underlying the Changing Academic Profession survey of 2007–2008, the sampling and data collection procedures, as well as the nature of the survey instrument. While it provides a general conceptual and methodological backdrop for the entire international initiative involving 19 individual national studies, we focus here the methodological details of the US survey. Specifically, the US version of the survey was conducted online by SPSS Research Services. Approximately 1,148 usable responses were received from an original sample of N = 5772, stratified by institutional type/size and by control. Respondents overrepresented faculty in doctoral universities and underrepresented faculty in baccalaureate level institutions, and overrepresented women and tenured faculty. A weighting scheme was employed to adjust the data file to approximate national population parameters as reported by the National Center for Education Statistics.


National System Cross Tabulation Academic Rank Institutional Type Academic Profession 
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.


  1. Altbach, P. G. (Ed.). (1996). The international academic profession: Portraits of fourteen countries. Princeton: Carnegie Foundation.Google Scholar
  2. Astin, A. (1985). Achieving academic excellence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  3. Bess, J. L., & Dee, J. (2008). Understanding college and university organization: Theories for effective policy and practice (Vols. I and II). Sterling: Stylus Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Carnegie Council for Policy Studies. (1994). A classification of institutions of higher education. New York: McGraw Hall.Google Scholar
  5. Fairweather, J. S. (2005). Beyond the rhetoric: Trends in the relative value of teaching and research in faculty salaries. The Journal of Higher Education, 76(4), 401–422.Google Scholar
  6. Finkelstein, M., Seal, R. K., & Schuster, J. H. (1998). The new academic generation: A profession in transformation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Groves, R. M. (2006). Non-response rates and non-response bias in household surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 70, 646–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Groves, R. M., & Peytcheva, E. (2008). The impact of non-response rates on non-response bias: A meta analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(Summer 2008), 167–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Educational LeadershipThe George Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Education Leadership, Management and PolicySeton Hall UniversitySouth OrangeUSA

Personalised recommendations