ERIC EJ1074674: A Political and Economic Climate of Crisis?: Perceptions of the Academe at ALA-Accredited LIS Schools

2015·3.5 MB·English

by  ERIC

A Political and Economic Climate of Crisis?:
Perceptions of the Academe at ALA-Accredited
LIS Schools
Andrew Tsou
Department of Information & Library Science, Indiana University Bloomington.
Email: [email protected]
Cassidy R. Sugimoto
School of Informatics & Computing, Indiana University Bloomington. Email: [email protected]
Academia is an ever-evolving institution. Where once it was viewed as a body primarily
charged with educating students, many instances universities now consider research to
be their primary raison d’être. This research surveyed library and information science
(LIS) faculty members employed at institutions accredited by the American Libraries
Association (ALA) in order to discern their views and opinions regarding contemporary
academe and the expectations placed upon them. 140 tenured or tenure-track profes-
sors responded to an online questionnaire that concerned topics such as perceptions of
academia, job duties, and the institutional expectations that were placed upon them.
Respondents generally agreed that they were very satisfied with their jobs, even as they
raised doubts as to the manner in which they were evaluated. In addition, the respond-
ing faculty members indicated that they were generally highly motivated to perform
research, despite reports of changing and increasing pressures on higher education,
generally, and LIS education, specifically. The results can be used to inform the further
refinement of higher education and its rewards. This will provide an opportunity for
educating prospective LIS academics about the expectations that will be placed upon
them and to build appropriate career support.
Introduction and Background tenure criteria, but most large universities
place the greatest amount of importance
There exists in the North American on research, with teaching and service
higher education environment a triad of as secondary components of the tenure
duties assigned to professors—teaching, evaluation process, when they are con-
research, and service (Gardner & Veliz, sidered at all (Gardner & Veliz, 2014).
2014), and “incompetent faculty” are de- It has been suggested that “how this tri-
fined as “those who fail to meet the teach- umvirate of faculty work is distributed...
ing, research, and service expectations at varies greatly by both institutional type
their institution” (Rothgeb, 2014, p. 182). as well as individual setting; for example,
Of these three duties, it is the research teaching and advising may be emphasized
component that is widely considered to be more strongly at a liberal arts institution
the most important when it comes to ten- whereas research is indicated as the most
ure decisions and possibilities for promo- important for those employed at research
tion (Gardner, & Veliz, 2014; Lawrence, universities” (Gardner & Veliz, 2014, pp.
Celis, & Ott, 2014; Roche, 1990; Todd, 106-107). This is a phenomenon supported
Madill, Shaw, & Bown, 2008; Wolfgang, by Rothgeb and Burger (2009), who found
Gupchup, & Plake, 1995). Different uni- that “Ph.D. departments overwhelmingly
versities in North America have different regard research as more important than
J. of Education for Library and Information Science, Vol. 56, No. 3—(Summer) July 2015
232 ISSN: 0748-5786 © 2015 Association for Library and Information Science Education
doi:10.12783/issn.2328-2967/56/2/5
A Political and Economic Climate of Crisis? 233
teaching and service, while BA and MA consideration” (p. 346). There is a trend
institutions are more likely to treat teach- towards “advocacy for increasing, rather
ing either as more important than research than decreasing, the importance of schol-
or as equally important” (p. 518). Despite arship in general” (Green, 2008, p. 118),
this, professors report spending as much (if although this seems to be at odds with the
not more) time on teaching and service as very title of the profession, which implies
they do on research (Green, 2008), and the the overarching importance of pedagogy.
fictitious notion that all three elements are Indeed, it has been argued that the impor-
of equal (or even comparable) importance tance placed upon research is detrimental
in terms of tenure decisions is “codified in not only to the academy’s teaching con-
promotion and tenure dossiers where fac- cerns, but to the integrity of the university
ulty members are required to demonstrate itself (Crimmel, 1984).
their productivity in teaching and research Although teaching and research have
(with some emphasis on service as well)” alternately been considered the focal
(Fairweather, 2002, p. 29). This is par- concern of university activity at different
ticularly problematic for underrepresented points in time, the intersection between the
minorities (Todd, Madill, Shaw, & Bown, two is a matter of debate (Hattie & Marsh,
2008). 1996). A study by Fairweather (2002)
Historically, this was not the case. In the found that a very small number of North
pre-World War II era, teaching was con- American academics actually manage to
sidered to be a university’s primary con- be highly productive in terms of both of
cern (Boyer, 1990; Hattie & Marsh, 1996). teaching and original research, and indeed,
It was only near the middle of the 20th the high demands placed upon academics’
century that research became the primary time precludes excellence in both areas for
focus of universities likely due to changing all but the most elite of faculty (Linsky &
funding regimes as well as increased em- Straus, 1975). As O’Meara (2011) wrote,
phasis on international competition. It has “a common refrain from both faculty and
been suggested that research in institutions administrators is that their institutional
is directly tied to economic growth (San- missions and reward systems are out of
berg et al., 2014), which explains the shift- alignment, overly impacted by the status
ing focus to research in the 20th and 21st system of higher education, rather than
centuries. As early as 1958, “young faculty institutional needs and mission” (p. 161).
were hired as teachers . . . [but] were eval- However, it has also been claimed that
uated primarily as researchers” (Boyer, p. presuming a positive correlation between
11). Boyer suggested that this change was teaching and research is merely a matter
welcomed by academics, who “found it of common sense (Ferber, 1974), and it
more rewarding . . . to deliver a paper at a has been argued that “research is much
national convention in New York or Chica- more likely to overlap with independent
go than teach undergraduates back home” study instruction or dissertation commit-
(p. 12). Nevertheless, professors generally tee work than it is to influence classroom
express “a desire for greater balance in the teaching” (Fairweather, 2002, p. 29), im-
emphasis placed on various aspects of their plying a connection between research and
performance,” particularly as many schol- service, rather than research and teaching.
ars believe that “teaching and service re- Furthermore, some academics consider
main undervalued” (Wolfgang, Gupchup, dissertation work to be a type of teaching,
& Plake, 1995, p. 342). This study of pro- which raises the point that the boundaries
fessors found that, at their universities, “re- between the academic triad are oftentimes
search was clearly the most important fac- blurred, or at least perceived as such. Con-
tor in determining academic rewards and versely, Hattie and Marsh (1996) found
that teaching tended to be only a minimal that “the common belief that research and
234 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
teaching are inextricably entwined is an any) faculty members have ever been de-
enduring myth” (p. 529), and a contem- nied tenure on the basis of insufficient ser-
poraneous study by Olsen and Simmons vice” (p. 48).
(1996) established that “research and Although the triad of academic faculty
teaching performance are unrelated when members’ duties has been well-document-
teaching is defined by instructional prac- ed, there is less research into scholars’
tices” (p. 36). perceptions of academia and their job ex-
From professors’ perspectives, research pectations. This study attempts to address
is an important aspect of their job, but this gap in the literature by surveying
there is still “the desire to have more im- academic faculty members in library and
portance placed on other aspects of their information science (LIS) departments
work, especially teaching”, for some fac- accredited by the American Library As-
ulty (Wolfgang, Gupchup, & Plake, 1995, sociation (ALA). LIS was selected given
p. 347). This may be due to the psycho- that it is a growing area of research and
logical burden of being judged on activi- scholarship; in addition, it is responsible
ties that do not reflect a plurality of the for training future practitioners as well as
scholar’s time; Green (2008) found that academics. It is worth mentioning that the
“a majority of faculty devote more time to trend towards an emphasis on research for
teaching and service than scholarship” (p. promotion (rather than job performance)
126). This is a necessary consequence of is seen in tenure-track academic librar-
the way the academe works, given that “a ians as well as LIS faculty (Best & Kneip,
majority of faculty members are required 2010; Sassen & Wahl, 2014), so much that
to fulfill their primary responsibility only such practitioners are considered part of
after completion of their secondary (teach- the “publish or perish” world (Galbraith,
ing) and tertiary responsibilities” (p. 126). Smart, Smith, & Reed, 2014). This sug-
Nevertheless, it has been argued that it gests that an emphasis on research meth-
is in academics’ self-interests to put the ods classes in MLS curricula is critical,
majority of their effort into their research given that research has grown increasingly
duties (Jencks & Riesman, 1968), despite important for professional success.
their other, purportedly more selfless ob- As a case study, this research will fa-
ligations. cilitate future research across a broader
The amount of time occupied by faculty academic spectrum. Specifically, this ar-
members’ service duties is not trivial. A ticle will address the following research
2006 study by Taylor, Fender, and Burke questions:
found that each committee chairmanship
RQ 1: How do LIS faculty members in
decreased research output by 16.9%, and
North America perceive their job duties
serving as a program director or depart-
and academia in general?
ment chair impacted an individual’s pro-
RQ 2: How do LIS faculty members in
ductivity to the tune of a 42% decrease.
North America believe that they are per-
When one considers that teaching obliga-
ceived by their students, colleagues, and
tions also weigh heavily on faculty mem-
universities in general?
bers’ minds, the opportunity cost for serv-

ing on doctoral committees is likely to The results of this broad exploratory
appear even more severe. Nevertheless, study can inform our understanding of
service is frequently the most ignored as- the contemporary nature of the profes-
pect of academic life. Many studies, when sioriate. This is particularly relevant for
they consider the issue of “service” at all, professional schools, such as LIS, where
tend to conclude that it is a relatively mi- faculty members are balancing the often
nor factor (Street, Baril, & Benke, 2003), competing nature of teaching a profes-
with Park (1996) claiming that “few (if sional group of students while maintaining
A Political and Economic Climate of Crisis? 235
a high research portfolio. It is hoped that jobs, LIS, and academia in general. No
this research will inform the development personally identifying information was
of higher education policies and assist fac- collected, and given that the optional com-
ulty in understanding the perceptions of ments box was the only input field that
the nature of academic work. invited respondents to offer an extended
textual response, no serious ethical is-
Methods sues were raised by the questionnaire. The
complete survey instrument can be found
In February 2013, 834 individuals em- in Appendix A.
ployed as faculty members in an LIS pro- A total of 150 responses were recorded,
gram at an ALA-accredited school were e- for a response rate of 18.9% (the survey
mailed a survey hosted via Google Docs. actually logged 153 responses; however,
This sampling frame was compiled from three of these responses were completely
the faculty listings on the universities’ blank). This is an acceptable rate for an
public websites; adjuncts, lecturers, and online survey, given that e-mail has his-
other non-tenure-track faculty members torically tended to be associated with
were excluded. If an individual’s rank or relatively low response rates (Schaefer &
e-mail could not be located, the person Dillman, 1998), and indeed, our 18.9%
was excluded from the final list. In addi- response rate coincides nicely with the
tion, 17 individuals were removed from 19.4% response rate obtained by Dykema,
consideration after e-mails sent to them Stevenson, Klein, Kim, and Day (2013)
were returned “undeliverable,” and a fur- in their research into increasing response
ther 25 individuals indicated via direct e- rates. Due to the nature of the survey, we
mail responses that they either were not have no information regarding the demo-
qualified to take the survey or were on graphics or motivations of non-respon-
sabbatical or otherwise checking their e- dents, and this is consequentially a limita-
mail infrequently, leaving a sample of 792 tion of this study. Most respondents (60%)
individuals. The survey was left open for were tenured, while a third were tenure-
two weeks, and no reminder e-mails were track faculty (throughout the survey and
sent. The rationale for this was that there this paper, we use the term “tenure-track”
was no way of knowing which individu- to refer to faculty members who, while not
als had completed the survey, and taken currently tenured, are working towards
in conjunction with the knowledge that that goal—i.e., the rank of Assistant Pro-
follow-up e-mails do not positively affect fessor). Non-tenure-track faculty were
response rates (Anseel, Lievens, Schol- omitted from consideration for the study
laert, & Choragwicka, 2010), it was felt (n = 10). Therefore, the total population
that there would be little benefit in sending represented in the Findings consists of 140
out reminder e-mails. academics.
The bulk of the survey was comprised
of Likert-scale questions, with respon- Findings
dents given the choice of “strongly agree,”
“agree,” “neither agree nor disagree,” Intersection between Teaching and
“agree,” and “strongly agree.” Other sec- Research
tions of the survey asked questions that
required specific answers (e.g., the in- The vast majority of respondents
tended audience[s] for faculty members’ primarily instructed graduate students
research), and the final page of the survey (88.2%), while only 6.5% primarily in-
collected basic demographic information structed undergraduates. 68.2% reported
and provided a comments box for respon- that they involve students in the conduct
dents to share their thoughts about their of their research. Tenured or tenure-track
236 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
Figure 1. Average amount of time spent on each of the three components of academe.
faculty reported having worked at an aca- haps implying that classroom integration
demic institution for an average of 12.1 is an ancillary concern when compared
years. All faculty members reported teach- to the importance of formally publishing
ing average of 6.3 credit hours per semes- the results. As Figures 2 and 3 show, the
ter and supervised an average of 2.1 di- vast majority of respondents felt engaged
rected readings or independent studies per with their duties, finding them personally
semester. Several respondents indicated rewarding (it should be noted that all fig-
that their university operated on the quar- ures given in the figures are raw numbers,
terly system; accordingly, their responses not percentages). This may be due to the
were excluded from consideration for freedom allocated to academics; 89.3% of
these questions. respondents said that they felt free to con-
As seen in Figure 1, respondents de- duct research as they see fit, with a slightly
voted the plurality of their working time to lower 83.2% feeling free to educate their
teaching, on average. The percentages do students as they see fit (76.7% said that
not add up to exactly 100 due to some in- they have the latitude to teach the classes
stances in which an individual’s totals did that they wish to teach).
not add up to precisely 100. In some cases, Furthermore, most respondents
the percentages were expressed in a range, “agreed” or “strongly agreed” that they in-
which was then averaged out (e.g., if an vested more into their teaching then was
individual responded that they invested expected of them (70%), with only 47.3%
15–20% of their time into any given area, indicating that they invested more into
this was coded as 17.5%). their research then was expected of them
Most respondents (93.3%) indicated (Figure 4). Tellingly, only nine respon-
that they integrate the results of their re- dents disagreed that they invested more
search with their teaching duties, suggest- into their teaching than was expected of
ing that the ideal of scholars disseminat- them, and none strongly disagreed.
ing their research in a classroom setting One might postulate that these find-
has not yet been betrayed. Interestingly, ings are a reflection of the heavy research
however, fewer reported researching with expectations placed onto faculty, which
the intention of sharing their research re- would necessarily preclude a great number
sults in a classroom setting (64.2%), per- of scholars from exceeding these expecta-
A Political and Economic Climate of Crisis? 237
Figure 2. Engagement with research and teaching duties.
tions. However, as seen in Figure 5, most ferent factions of academia can (and do)
respondents feel that both their teaching concentrate on different aspects of the
loads and the expectations placed on their university paradigm, although it can be
research are realistic, which would sug- argued that too much emphasis is placed
gest that the greater investment in teaching on research, even in venues where it would
is one that is individually, not institution- be more appropriate to focus on classroom
ally created. instruction. As one respondent noted, “on
The tension between teaching and re- the whole, universities are for teaching . . .
search duties is not irreconcilable. Dif- but in the most research-intensive [univer-
Figure 3. Personal fulfillment via research and teaching duties.
238 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
Figure 4. Responses to the statements “I invest more into my [research/teaching] than is expected
of me.”
sities], we can do research [that] no one be counter-productive. Indeed, given the
else can.” Another faculty member noted high volume of research that is produced,
that “society as a whole is suffering from it would not be unfair to presume that
too much information and few academics much of this is of low quality; one sur-
can review even a portion of the litera- vey respondent explicitly stated that “the
ture effectively and consistently in their pressure to publish ‘x’ number of papers
field,” suggesting that further production per year in order to be granted tenure re-
of knowledge (at least at the current rate) duces the significance of the research con-
is not necessarily beneficial and may even ducted. People seem to study anything and
Figure 5. Perceptions of how realistic universities’ research/teaching expectations are.
A Political and Economic Climate of Crisis? 239
everything so just they can get published, While none of the respondents suggest-
regardless of the study’s contribution to ed that their teaching duties interfered with
society.” their research goals, there were several re-
In addition, a majority (68%) of respon- spondents who decried the effect that re-
dents reported involving students in the search expectations have on their instruc-
conduct of their research, and indeed, one tional goals. One respondent opined that
respondent wrote that “research is the bus they found “the focus on research to often
I drive—and I strive to bring interested be to the detriment of teaching. Teaching
students aboard whenever possible.” The should be the priority in any educational
rewards structure of academe is worth tak- institution, but research is usually given
ing into account; as another respondent priority,” while another suggested that
noted, “we are supposedly evaluated on “teaching seems to be no longer valued in
two out of four areas (Research, teaching, academia . . . it almost seems like higher
service and community engagement) but education continue offering classes only to
it’s really only teaching and research that collect tuition funds to pay researchers.”
count.” Figure 8 demonstrates that a slight ma-
jority of respondents felt that academia
Perceptions of Academia is the ideal environment for knowledge
creation, while slightly less than half
As Figure 6 demonstrates, the respon- (47.6%) were prepared to state that aca-
dents generally felt that the primary goal demia is the ideal environment for dis-
of the university should be to educate seminating knowledge. 84.1% of those
students. Conversely, as Figure 7 shows, respondents who answered both ques-
few respondents actually preferred teach- tions gave identical answers (i.e., if the
ing to conducting original research, sug- respondent “agreed” that academia is the
gesting that academics recognize that their optimal climate for creating new knowl-
personal desires may often be at odds with edge, they also “agreed” that academia is
what they believe the university’s primary the optimal climate for disseminating new
goal should be. knowledge). Of the 23 respondents whose
Figure 6. Responses to the statements “The university’s primary goal should be to conduct and
disseminate original research” and “The university’s primary goal should be to educate students.”
240 JOURNAL OF EDUCATION FOR LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SCIENCE
Figure 7. Responses to the statement “I would rather teach than conduct research.”
replies to the two questions differed, only strongly agreed that scholarly research
four gave dynamically opposed answers is important to the world outside of aca-
(e.g., answering “agree” for one question demia, a mere 10.9% of respondents felt
and “disagree” for another): the remaining that the current publishing system ensures
19 respondents gave contiguous responses that only the most valuable and important
(e.g., answering “agree” for one question research is formally disseminated, and
and “strongly agree” for another). 77.9% felt that there are productive av-
While 90.6% of respondents agreed or enues of dissemination that are not used
Figure 8. Perceptions of academia in relation to knowledge creation/dissemination.
A Political and Economic Climate of Crisis? 241
in academia. This suggests that academics and faculty members’ goals relative to the
may feel that their work is valuable yet not acquisition of new knowledge (at least
properly disseminated. Taken in conjunc- as perceived by academics). One respon-
tion with the finding that nearly half of re- dent even stated that “if students don’t
spondents felt that academia is the optimal value learning the information necessary
climate for disseminating knowledge, it for their future work, it’s hard to feel that
appears as if academics feel as if the system teaching is a worthwhile use of my time.”
is broken, not the idea of academia itself. Nevertheless, as Figure 9 demonstrates,
Indeed, one respondent even noted that the surveyed scholars were more likely
“Higher education is broken and adminis- to feel valued by their students than they
trators not only don’t know it, they’re the were by their colleagues, and few “strong-
ones who’ve broken it. Tenure is a ridicu- ly agreed” that they were valued by their
laous [sic] marker of success (which is not parent institution. It is also interesting to
to say that we don’t need tenure for aca- note that 67.3% of respondents felt that
demic freedom). It would be easy to say their colleagues were a positive influence
that the academy is now a corporation, but on their academic activities, which fits
that’s simplistic. A serious examination of nicely with the 68.7% who felt valued by
how mission and values have altered dra- their colleagues.
matically is needed.”
Perhaps predictably, 99.3% of respon- Research Publications and Tenure
dents agreed with the statement “acquiring
new knowledge is important to me person- It is no secret that a high level of research
ally” (and no one disagreed); however, productivity is an important consideration
68.7% felt that most students enroll at uni- for academics hoping to attain tenure, but
versities for the sole intention of acquiring there are certainly audiences beyond ten-
a degree, suggesting that there is a funda- ure committees that academics target their
mental difference between students’ goals research to. The majority of respondents to
Figure 9. Number of respondents who felt valued by their students, colleagues, and parent institu-
tion.