Changing Nature of the Academic Profession: preliminary findings from a national survey

1. Changing Nature of the Academic Profession: preliminary findings from a national survey Leo Goedegebuure Jeannet van der Lee CHEMP Seminar Series: 19 June 2008

2. Background • International comparative project • Follows from 1990s Carnegie Survey • 21 countries preliminary data available under construction

3. 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?

4. 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)

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. Citizenship at birth >40% 10% 1-10% 0.5 -1% <1%

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

10. CARNEGIE Gender disparities evident by rank, particularly at senior levels Academic Rankby Gender

11. Job Satisfaction • Rather satisfied (very high to high 55%) • Compared to Carnegie: 1990s

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. CARNEGIE 46 hours per week Activity Average 50 hours per week

16. 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

17. 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%)

18. CARNEGIE Preference for teaching 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%).

19. Preferences for teaching v research

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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