From the Editor. David Laurence. ADE Bulletin 127 (Winter 2001), pp. 1 7 ISSN: CrossRef DOI: /ade.127.1

Transcription

1 From the Editor David Laurence ADE Bulletin 127 (Winter 2001), pp. 1 7 ISSN: CrossRef DOI: /ade Copyright 2001 by The Association of Departments of English All material published by the The Association of Departments of English in any medium is protected by copyright. Users may link to the ADE Web page freely and may quote from ADE publications as allowed by the doctrine of fair use. Written permission is required for any other reproduction of material from any ADE publication. Send requests for permission to reprint material to the ADE permissions manager by mail (26 Broadway, New York, NY ), (permissions@mla.org), or fax ( ).

2 From the Editor TO HELP chairs negotiate the provisions of their service more effectively, participants at the 1999 summer seminar in Polson, Montana, asked the ADE to conduct a survey to document the types of support and compensation that chairs in the ADE community receive. Lawrence Rodgers, chair of the English department at Kansas State University, created a draft that became the basis for a questionnaire the ADE posted on its Web site from March to May Member chairs were invited by to complete the questionnaire, and chairs of 248 of the 725 member departments responded 34.2% of the membership. Of these, 241 were from United States institutions and 7 from Canadian ones. In the United States based response group, as table 1 indicates, larger institutions and those granting advanced degrees are overrepresented, as they are in the ADE membership. The table compares the 241 United States respondents in three dimensions institutional size, type (PhD-, MA-, BA-, or AA-granting), and sector (public, private, or private church-related) with a universe of 3,029 higher education institutions from the file of institutional characteristics from the National Center for Education Statistics. (The Table 1 Institutional Characteristics of the 241 Respondents from the United States Compared with the Universe of 3,029 Twoand Four-Year United States Higher Education Institutions Universe of 3,029 Survey respondents Institutions Number Percentage Percentage Public Private, independent Private, church-related Doctorate Master s Bachelor s Associate s ,000 or fewer students ,001 2, ,001 5, ,001 15, More than 15, ,029 institutions are those accredited by an agency recognized by the United States Secretary of Education and included in the Carnegie classification of institutions; private for-profit institutions and institutions granting only first-professional degrees or first certificates have been excluded.) Despite this disproportionate representation among respondents, the survey gives chairs a snapshot of compensation and support in both ADE departments overall and in the institutions similar to theirs. Since the data show that size, type, and sector make a significant difference in the kind and amount of compensation chairs receive, breaking down the responses in this regard is relevant to whatever discussions chairs or potential chairs have with their institutions. Results for the respondents overall are shown in tables 2 through 6, while tables 7 through 15 sort responses by institutional size, type, or sector and tables 16 and 17 by gender. Table 2 lists, in descending frequency, kinds of compensation: release time from teaching, an annual stipend, additional discretionary funds, a permanent addition to base salary, and a paid Table 2 Compensation Received as Department Chair (248 Respondents) Number Percentage Release time from teaching Annual stipend not added permanently to base salary Discretionary funds for travel or other professional use Permanent supplement to base salary Promise of one-semester paid leave or sabbatical Promise of full-year s paid leave or sabbatical Extra compensation or benefits No extra compensation or benefits ADE Bulletin, No.127, Winter by the association of departments of english

3 2 From the Editor leave or sabbatical. Table 3 displays for the 75% of respondents who receive an annual stipend, a permanent supplement to base salary, or both the range in amount. (Because 4.8% of chairs receive both, this is a lower number than the combination of those answering yes to receiving annual stipends and to receiving permanent supplements in table 2.) Table 4 shows the compensation of respondents as they compare their packages with those of other chairs in their institutions. Most respondents find their packages to be average, while roughly similar groups find theirs below or much below average or above or much above average. The number of courses taught by respondents before becoming chair and while serving as chair (in ) are represented in table 5 for institutions on the semester system and in table 6 for those on the quarter system. (Since the number of respondents on the quarter system totals only 21, we have not included percentages for that table or broken down the figures for kind of institution in subsequent tables.) In tables 7 through 15, chairs can get a more precise sense of how their compensation and support compares with those of chairs in similar institutions. To some degree the figures of size, type, and sector are Table 3 Dollar Amount of Annual Stipend or Permanent Supplement to Base Salary (248 Respondents) Number Percentage Less than $1, $1,000 $3, $3,001 $5, $5,001 $10, $10,001 $15, More than $15, No response Table 4 Compensation Package as Compared by Respondent with Those of Other Department Chairs at Respondent s Institution (248 Respondents) Number Percentage Much above average Above average Average Below average Much below average No response interrelated, since PhD- and MA-granting institutions tend to be large, and public universities include a greater proportion of large PhD- and MA-granting institutions than smaller BA-granting colleges. (Unfortunately the few responses from chairs at community colleges reflect the small representation of this Table 5 Number of Courses Taught per Year (Semester System) before Service as Chair, during Service as Chair Before During ( ) Number of Number of Courses Responses Percentage Responses Percentage None One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten Total Note: Two responses for Before and six for During were omitted because categories were left blank. Table 6 Number of Courses Taught per Year (Quarter System) before Service as Chair, during Service as Chair Number of Responses Courses Before During ( ) None 0 2 One 0 4 Two 0 1 Three 3 7 Four 3 0 Five 2 1 Six 8 0 Seven 2 1 Eight 1 0 Nine 0 1 Ten 0 0 Eleven 0 0 Twelve 2 0 Total Note: One response for Before and five for During were omitted because categories were left blank.

4 From the Editor 3 Table 7 Annual Stipend or Permanent Supplement to Salary by Institutional Size Kind of Compensation Institutional Size Annual Permanent 2,000 or fewer 2,001 5,000 5,001 15,000 More than 15,000 Stipend Supplement Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No No Total Table 8 Annual Stipend or Permanent Supplement to Salary by Institutional Type Kind of Compensation Institutional Type Annual Permanent Doctorate Master s Bachelor s Associate s Stipend Supplement Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No No Total Table 9 Annual Stipend or Permanent Supplement to Salary by Institutional Sector Institutional Sector Kind of Compensation Public Private, Independent Private, Church-Related Annual Stipend Permanent Supplement Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Yes Yes No Yes Yes No No No Total Table 10 Dollar Amount of Annual Stipend or Permanent Supplement to Base Salary by Institutional Size Institutional Size 2,000 or fewer 2,001 5,000 5,001 15,000 More than 15,000 Dollar Range Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Less than $1, $1,000 $3, $3,001 $5, $5,001 $10, $10,001 $15, More than $15, No response Total

5 4 From the Editor Table 11 Dollar Amount of Annual Stipend or Permanent Supplement to Base Salary by Institutional Type Institutional Type Doctorate Master s Bachelor s Associate s Dollar Range Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Less than $1, $1,000 $3, $3,001 $5, $5,001 $10, $10,001 $15, More than $15, No response Total Table 12 Dollar Amount of Annual Stipend or Permanent Supplement to Base Salary by Institutional Sector Institutional Sector Public Private, Independent Private, Church-Related Dollar Range Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Less than $1, $1,000 $3, $3,001 $5, $5,001 $10, $10,001 $15, More than $15, No response Total Table 13 Number of Courses Taught per Year (Semester System) before Service as Chair, during Service as Chair, by Institutional Size Institutional Size 2,000 or fewer 2,001 5,000 5,001 15,000 More than 15,000 Courses Before During Before During Before During Before During None One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten Total

6 From the Editor 5 Table 14 Number of Courses Taught per Year (Semester System) before Service as Chair, during Service as Chair, by Institutional Type Institutional Type Doctorate Master s Bachelor s Associate s Courses Before During Before During Before During Before During None One Two Three Four Five Six Seven Eight Nine Ten Total group in the ADE membership.) Variations do show up, however, in the different ways of sorting responses. While patterns of course release are similar in public, private independent, and private churchrelated institutions, patterns of kind and amount of financial compensation vary significantly among them; as a result we represent the latter but not the former in the tables. The two tables (13 and 14) showing courses taught before and during service as chair list the number of respondents in each category for number of courses taught per year (0 through 10). Thus they record course release not on an individual basis but as trends for each group. The trends are dramatic: in institutions of 2,001 5,000 students, for example, nearly 60% of respondents were teaching 8 or more courses before they became chair, while more than 80% were teaching 4 or fewer courses after. Significant course release is clearly one of the most widespread ways to support chairs in their administrative work and should be sought by chairs who are not receiving it. Table 15 displays by institutional size the number of chairs who receive staff support, showing the most significant variable shared by respondents at larger institutions to be the provision of a personal secretary or assistant chair. In tables 16 and 17 we record the gender of chairs. Among our respondents, a disproportionate number of men chair departments of large institutions and those granting postbaccalaureate degrees, while a disproportionate number of women chair departments Table 15 Staff Support Received by Chair by Institutional Size (248 Respondents) Kind of Support, with Number Percentage Number of Institutional Size Receiving Receiving Respondents Personal secretary 2,000 or fewer ,001 5, ,001 15, More than 15, Total Department secretary 2,000 or fewer ,001 5, ,001 15, More than 15, Total Assistant chair 2,000 or fewer ,001 5, ,001 15, More than 15, Total Student aides 2,000 or fewer ,001 5, ,001 15, More than 15, Total

7 6 From the Editor in small institutions and those granting BA or AA degrees. This result will not surprise most observers, though the extent of the difference may. Compensation also differs in particular areas and to some extent overall: the percentage of women chairs who receive no stipend or benefits (20.7%) is double the percentage of men (10.4%) in the same situation. It is difficult to reach conclusions in the distribution of dollar size of compensation between men and women in small institutions because of the low percentage of respondents receiving financial compensation at all: 31.0% of chairs from institutions of 2,000 students or fewer, for instance. In institutions of 5,001 students and greater, where a significant proportion receives financial compensation (90.0%), women and men are represented roughly proportionately in range of stipend or supplement size. The differences in staff support by gender of chair closely follow the differences in size of institution. Provision of a department secretary or student aides is virtually the same between men and women: 57.3% of men and 61.0% of women are provided with department secretaries; 43.3% of men and 46.3% of women have student aides. Provision of a personal secretary, however, is Table 16 Gender of Chairs by Institutional Size, Type, and Sector (246 Respondents) 164 Men (66.7%) 82 Women (33.3%) Number of Number Percentage Number Percentage Respondents Institutional size Less than 1, ,000 2, ,001 5, ,001 15, More than 15, Institutional type Doctorate Master s Bachelor s Associate s Institutional sector Public Private, independent Private, church-related Note: Two respondents who did not answer the question about gender have been deducted from the totals. Table 17 Kinds of Compensation Received, by Gender (246 Respondents) Number and Percentage of Respondents Men Women Men and Women Kinds of Compensation Number Percentage Number Percentage Number Percentage Annual stipend Permanent supplement One-semester leave One-year leave Travel fund Extra stipend or benefits Some None Note: Two respondents who did not answer the question about gender have been deducted from the totals.

8 From the Editor % for men compared to 25.6% for women, and of an assistant chair 29.9% compared with 15.9%. (These figures for staff support by gender are not represented in the tables.) Lawrence Rogers, in the following article, discusses how chairs might use this and other information to negotiate a compensation package that not only is best for them during their term of office but also takes into account such other considerations as opportunity costs resulting from their diversion from scholarly activity (crucial given that only 21.0% of respondents listed a permanent supplement to base salary as part of their compensation package), not to mention improvements that might be agreed on for the department as a whole. A chair at one of the summer seminars revealed that his successor had negotiated a doubling of the department s operating budget as part of his recruitment package; the outgoing chair concluded from this that the most effective way for a chair to improve the outlook of his or her department is to resign immediately. We hope that this survey does not lead to resignations, however, but to informed, fair, and productive compensation and support packages for department chairs in all sizes, types, and sectors of institutions. Work Cited David Laurence James Papp Natl. Center for Educ. Statistics. Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Institutional Characteristics Data File, Aug Oct <