Changing Nature of the Academic Profession:

preliminary findings from a national survey

Leo Goedegebuure

Jeannet van der Lee

CHEMP Seminar Series: 19 June 2008

Background

• International comparative project• Follows from 1990s Carnegie Survey• 21 countries

preliminary data available

under construction

Central Questions

• To what extent is the nature of academic work changing?• What are the external and internal drivers of these

changes?• How does this differ between countries, disciplines, and

types of higher education institutions?• What are the consequences for the attractiveness of an

academic career?

Method

• Target population: all academic staff in universities working in faculties rather than central administration, who do not have adjunct, casual or honorary appointments as their substantive position

• 21 institutions volunteered to participate in response to invitation sent to all 37 Australian universities

• Representative of state and institutional groupings• Participating institutions supplied population list from

which sampling frame was constructed and the staff sample drawn (no central frame exists)

Survey distribution & response

• Online survey distributed to 5,496 individuals• Survey period: September to December 2007• 1,252 responses after final validation• Final response rate of 24.2 per cent• The sample is representative of the total population

hence outcomes can be generalised

A few words on theCarnegie Study

• Australia included in the 1990s study• As yet we do not have the original

dataset available • Therefore, comparisons are made on

reported outcomes in a number of publications

• Note: the 2007 survey is not a replication of the Carnegie Study but some elements are identical

Introducing Colin and Cheryl

• Born 1960• Married (82%)• 2 children• English = first language• Partner tertiary educated (54%),

non-academic (78%)• Colin - 91% no major breaks• Cheryl - 44% 4 years interruption• 1st academic in family• 27% - father tertiary educated• 20% - mother tertiary educated

Citizenship at birth

>40%

0.5 -1%1-10%10%

<1%

Work

• Colin 14 yrs, 3 institutions, full-time• Cheryl 11 yrs• Both employed full-time (85%)• Females more part-time• Males occupy higher ranks

Academic Rankby Gender

CARNEGIE

Gender disparities evident by

rank, particularly at senior

levels

CARNEGIE

Gender disparities evident by

rank, particularly at senior

levels

Job Satisfaction

• Rather satisfied (very high to high 55%)• Compared to Carnegie: 1990s

1990s 2007

Very Satisfied

75

14

Satisfied 41

Neutral 25

Dissatisfied 25 20

Job Satisfaction

• If I had to do it again, I would not become an academic

• This is a poor time for a young person to begin an academic career

1990s 2007

Agree 16 21

Neutral 18 20

Disagree 66 59

1990s 2007

Agree 33 46

Neutral 21 18

Disagree 46 36

Job Satisfaction (2007)

• 2/3 believe working conditions deteriorated

• 3/4 have considered changing jobs, outside sector (38%), other institution (33%), 25% overseas, 15% management

• 11% have undertaken concrete action

Some interpretations

• Pearson and Seiler (1983) Moses (1986) context factors such as work environment are most influential

• Watty, Bellamy and Morley (2003) (2008) autonomy most important in determining satisfaction

• 2007 survey suggests support for both propositions, but further analysis necessary

Activity

Average 50 hours per week

CARNEGIE

46 hours per week

CARNEGIE

46 hours per week

Teaching

• Mostly undergraduate (59%), master (27%), doctoral (22%)

• Undergrad classes ~ 220 students• Classroom instruction, individualized

instruction, course materials & curricula. • 1/4 distance education, 14% offshore• Practically orientated knowledge & skills• Teaching reinforced by research• Teach basic skills due to deficiencies• Quality focused

Research

• Individual (79%), Collaborative (88%)• Collaborators: Australian (70%), Overseas (61%) • Publications: 67% peer reviewed, 52% Aust co-authored

(o/s 20%), 45% published overseas• Ethical compliance, results freely available• High expectation to increase productivity (conform

Carnegie)• Funding should not be concentrated on most productive

researchers• $$ = research councils (49%),

institutional (44%)

Teaching v Research

• The majority of Australian academics express a preference for research over teaching, with only 7% indicating a preference for teaching.

• 70% prefer both teaching and research, but lean towards research (40%) or have a strong preference for research (29%).

CARNEGIE

Preference for

teaching

CARNEGIE

Preference for

teaching

Preferences for teaching v research

Level A Level B Level C Level D Level E

90 07 90 07 90 07 90 07 90 07

Teaching 56 28 56 29 48 34 30 20 25.5 8

Research 44 72 44 71 52 66 70 80 74.5 92

Management

• Most influence department school inst• Influence = international linkages, internal

research priorities• Shared power managers & faculty committees• Budget - institutional (56%) faculty (21%)• Internal mgt: government & external diminished• Institutional management: top-down;

administration cumbersome; strong performance orientation; little collegiality in decision making; communication with academics poor ~ managerialism

• University should play an active role in community

Where to next?

• Further detailed comparison with 1990’s Carnegie survey

• International comparisons and benchmarking

• More detailed analysis reflecting current policy issues such as diversity, governance & management, and the international academic labour market

Project website

• http://www.une.edu.au/chemp/projects/cap/

• email chemp@une.edu.au to be kept up to date on further project outcomes