Issuu on Google+

The-Academic-Profession-in Ireland-2015-Cover-AW_Layout 1 08/05/2015 15:06 Page 1

University College Dublin An Colテ。iste Ollscoile, Baile テ》ha Cliath

The Academic Profession in Ireland

University College Dublin An Colテ。iste Ollscoile, Baile テ》ha Cliath

University College Dublin Belfield Dublin 4 Ireland

ISBN 978-1-905254-92-7

The Academic Profession in Ireland Marie Clarke, Jonathan Drennan, David Harmon, Abbey Hyde and Yurgos Politis


The-Academic-Profession-in Ireland-2015-Cover-AW_Layout 1 08/05/2015 15:06 Page 2

Copyright Š UCD 2015 ISBN 978-1-905254-92-7


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Marie Clarke, Jonathan Drennan, David Harmon, Abbey Hyde and Yurgos Politis


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Authors Dr Marie Clarke is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Education, University College Dublin. She was the principal investigator in the European Science Foundation/Irish Research Council for the Social Sciences-funded programme of research entitled: The Academic Profession in Europe: Responses to Societal Change (EUROAC). She is author of a nine country study entitled Creating a Supportive Working Environment in European Higher Education published by Education International Research Institute. She is published internationally and nationally in higher education, education history/policy and followership. She was appointed Head of the School of Education, UCD, for a four-year term from 2007-2011, and has been a member of UCD Governing Authority since 2009. Professor Jonathan Drennan is Professor of Healthcare Research at the Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southampton. He holds a PhD and master’s degree in education from University College Dublin, a postgraduate diploma in statistics from Trinity College Dublin and a bachelor’s degree in nursing from the University of Ulster. He has published a number of papers on higher education in leading international journals including: Studies in Higher Education, Nurse Education Today, Advances in Health Sciences Education and Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. He has also published chapters on engaging university students and the research function of the academic profession in Europe. His specialisation is the impact and outcomes of the master’s degree for health professionals. He has extensive experience of large-scale research projects, having worked as principal investigator and co-applicant on a number of nationally and internationally funded studies. He was principal investigator in a European Science Foundation/Irish Research Council for the Social Sciences-funded programme of research entitled: The Academic Profession in Europe: Responses to Societal Change (EUROAC). He also chaired the survey design group, which developed and tested the Irish National Student Survey – a measure of student engagement that is being used throughout the higher education sector in Ireland.

Page 2


The Academic Profession in Ireland

David Harmon is the Managing Director of Insight Statistical Consulting, an independent provider of expert marketing research and statistical services to the public and private sector. The company was established in 1989 at Trinity College Dublin and maintains close links with the School of Computer Science and Statistics there. David joined the company in 1993 following completion of the Management Science and Information Systems Studies (MSISS) degree course. He also holds a Master of Business Studies in Marketing Research from University College Dublin (Graduate Business School) and has recently completed a Postgraduate Diploma in Policy Evaluation using Official Statistics at the Institute of Public Administration. David takes an active role in key projects and has considerable experience working with data from the educational sector.

Dr Abbey Hyde is an Associate Professor at the UCD School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin. She has been the principal investigator of a number of nationally competitive research grants and has published over 80 articles in journals of international standing. She is the co-author of four book chapters reporting on the EUROHESC programme of research (a comparative analysis of the academic profession in Europe). Articles on aspects of higher education have also been published in journals such as Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, Advances in Health Sciences Education, and Innovations in Education and Teaching International. Dr Yurgos Politis is a postdoctoral researcher at the Higher Education Research Centre (HERC) in DCU on the COMMIT (committing to the social dimension in universities) and ESRALE (European Study and Research in Adult Learning and Education) projects. He was a postdoctoral researcher in UCD, firstly with the School of Education (2011-2012) on the Irish component of a major European research project The Academic Profession in Europe: Responses to Societal Change (EUROAC), and then with SMARTLab on the Inclusive Learning Project (20132014). Yurgos is co-editor of New Voices in Higher Education Research and Scholarship. He is a member of the Scientific Advisory Board for the INTED 2015 conference, as well as a member of the programme committee of ICALT 2015 (The 15th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies). He is a founding member of the Early Career Higher Education Researchers’ (ECHER)

Page 3


The Academic Profession in Ireland

network, which was established in 2011. He is also a member of the Society for Research in Higher Education (SRHE).

Page 4


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Acknowledgements We are greatly indebted to everyone who took the time to participate in this study. We thank the Irish Research Council Humanities and Social Sciences, now the IRC, for funding this project through the European Science Foundation in 2010. We would also like to thank our colleagues from Austria, Germany, Finland, Poland, Romania and Switzerland, who formed part of the EUROAC team of countries conducting this research.

Page 5


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Contents Acknowledgements333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333= List of tables3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333A List of figures3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333399 Executive summary3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339< Professional context3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339> Teaching33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339@ Research33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339A Governance and management333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333:9 1.

2

3.

The changing context of higher education33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333:; 1.1

Introduction333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333:;

1.2

Changes in the higher education landscape3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333:;

1.3

Academic identity333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333:=

1.4

Gender and the academic profession3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333:>

1.5

Mid-life career academics333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333:>

1.6

Decision-making33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333:?

1.7

Summary33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333:@

Higher education in Ireland33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;8 2.1

Introduction333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;8

2.2

Structures3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;8

2.3

Economic recession and higher education333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;;

2.4

Policy directions in higher education333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;=

2.5

Staffing levels and career structures33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;>

2.6

Research333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;?

2.7

Teaching333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;@

2.8

Summary33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;A

Survey and sample characteristics33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<8 3.1

Description of study33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<8

3.2

Characteristics of participants33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<<

3.3

Degree profiles333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<>

3.4

Employment patterns333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=9

3.4.1

Current work context333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=9

3.4.2 

Employment experience since first degree33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=:

3.4.3 

Employment experience within the higher education sector33333333333333333333==

3.4.4

Employment contracts3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=?

4. Professional work context3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=@ 4.1

Introduction333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=@ Page 6


The Academic Profession in Ireland

5.

6.

7.

4.2

Affiliation333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=@

4.3

Teaching and research preferences3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=A

4.4

Time spent on various activities3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>:

4.5

Involvement in service-related activities333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>=

4.6

Job satisfaction333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>A

4.7

Changing current academic position3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?8

4.8

Perception of working in academia3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?<

Teaching33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?? 5.1

Introduction333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333??

5.2

Teaching responsibilities33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333??

5.3

Teaching activities33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333@;

5.4

Institutional expectations33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333@?

5.5

Teaching practices33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333A9

5.6

Role of research and service in teaching333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333A=

5.7

Range of supports and facilities for teaching3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333A@

Research33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398= 6.1

Introduction333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398=

6.2

Collaboration333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398=

6.3

Research focus333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398A

6.4

Research activities33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333399;

6.5

Range of scholarly outputs33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333399?

6.6

Research expectations333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:;

6.7

Research funding3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:>

Governance and management of higher education institutions3333333333333333333333333333339;8 7.1

Introduction33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;8

7.2

Influence on academic policies3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;8

7.3

Primary decision makers3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;<

7.3.1

Academic appointments and promotions3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;<

7.3.2

Academic programmes33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339<9

7.3.3

Teaching33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339<@

7.3.4

Research priorities3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=:

7.3.5

Budget priorities33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=>

7.3.6

International links33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=A

7.4

Evaluation processes333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>:

7.4.1

Teaching33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>:

7.4.2

Research33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>>

Page 7


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.4.3  7.5

Administration33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?8

Governance and management3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?<

7.5.1

Institutional mission3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?<

7.5.2

Managerial approaches33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?=

7.5.3

Communication and collegiality33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339@8

7.5.4

Personnel decisions33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339@?

Bibliography333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339A9

Page 8


The Academic Profession in Ireland

List of tables Table 1: Higher education institutions recognised under the Universities Act, 1997 as amended333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;9 Table 2: Institutes of technology33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333;: Table 3: Weighting for non-response333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<: Table 4: Key respondents' characteristics3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<; Table 5: Gender and grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<< Table 6: Gender and age group of respondents33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<= Table 7: Qualifications of respondents by gender333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<> Table 8: Qualifications and institution3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<> Table 9: Degrees and academic grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<? Table 10: Current school, academic discipline and gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=8 Table 11: Current academic grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=9 Table 12: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed FULL TIME in the following areas?333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=: Table 13: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed PART TIME in the following areas?333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=; Table 14: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed FULL TIME in the following areas?333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=; Table 15: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed PART TIME in the following areas?333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=< Table 16: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed FULL TIME in the following areas?333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=< Table 17: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed PART TIME in the following areas?333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333== Table 18: Number of institutions employed in since completing highest degree333333333== Table 19: Number of institutions employed in since completing highest degree333333333=> Table 20: Number of institutions employed in since completing highest degree333333333=> Table 21: Current employment contract3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=? Table 22: Please indicate how important each of the following affiliations is to you=@ Table 23: Please indicate whether your interests lie primarily in teaching or primarily in research333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=A Table 24: Considering all your professional work, how many hours do you spend in a typical week on each of the following activities when classes ARE in session?333333333>: Table 25: Considering all your professional work, how many hours do you spend in a typical week on each of the following activities when classes ARE NOT in session? 333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>: Table 26: Service-related activities by gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>= Table 27: How would you rate your overall satisfaction with your current job?333333333>A Table 28: Please indicate the extent to which you considered making a major change to your job33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?9 Table 29: Please indicate the extent to which you took action to execute this change 333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?; Table 30: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with each of the following statements:333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?< Table 31: Since you started your career, please indicate the extent to which you believe working conditions in higher education have improved or declined33333333333333333?=

Page 9


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 32: Proportion of teaching responsibilities with various student groups (valid unweighted n=950)3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?? Table 33: The approximate number of students you instruct at each of these levels by gender (valid unweighted n=973)3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333@8 Table 34: During the current (or previous) academic year, have you been involved in any of the following teaching activities? (valid unweighted n=991)3333333333333333333333333333333@; Table 35: Does your institution set quantitative load targets or regulatory expectations for individual faculty for the following: (valid unweighted n=681)?3333333333333333333333333333333@@ Table 36: Teaching practices: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333A9 Table 37: Informing teaching content: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333A= Table 38: Informing teaching content: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333A@ Table 39: Evaluation of classrooms, technology for teaching and laboratories333333333989 Table 40: How would you characterise your research efforts undertaken during this (or the previous) academic year?33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398= Table 41: Research focus3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398A Table 42: Please indicate whether you have been involved in the following research activities during this or the previous academic year: (valid unweighted n=862)333333399; Table 43: Scholarly outputs over the previous three years (valid unweighted n=893) 333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333399? Table 44: What percentage of your publications in the last three years were â&#x20AC;Ś333333399A Table 45: Research expectations33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:< Table 46: In the current (or previous) academic year, what percentage of the funding for your research came from (valid unweighted n=564)?333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:> Table 47: How influential are you, personally, in helping to shape key academic policies?33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;8 Table 48: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;< Table 49: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339<9 Table 50: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339<@ Table 51: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=: Table 52: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=> Table 53: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=A Table 54: Who is regularly evaluating your teaching? (valid unweighted n=838)33339>: Table 55: Who is regularly evaluating your research? (valid unweighted n=690)33339>> Table 56: Who is regularly evaluating the administrative aspects of your work? (valid unweighted n=701)333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?8 Table 57: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements that relate to relationships and governance at your institution333333333333333333339?= Table 58: Communication and collegiality between management and academics33339@8 Table 59: Levels of information and participation in decision making33333333333333333333333339@; Table 60: Personnel decisions333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339@?

Page 10


The Academic Profession in Ireland

List of figures Figure 1: Gender by age band33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<= Figure 2: Academic discipline: highest degree and gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333<@ Figure 3: Academic discipline by highest degree and institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333<A Figure 4: Type of HEI in which currently employed3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=9 Figure 5: Employment contract and gender333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=? Figure 6: Affiliation and gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=A Figure 7: Interest in teaching and research by gender33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>8 Figure 8: Interest in teaching and research by grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>8 Figure 9: Teaching and research by age group333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>9 Figure 10: Interest in research and teaching by institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>9 Figure 11: Hours during week when classes are in session by grade3333333333333333333333333333333>; Figure 12: Hours during week when classes are not in session by grade33333333333333333333333>; Figure 13: Hours during week when classes are in session by institution3333333333333333333333>< Figure 14: Hours during week when classes are not in session333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>< Figure 15: Service activities and gender333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>> Figure 16: Service activities and grade333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>? Figure 17: Service activities and institution333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>@ Figure 18: Levels of satisfaction by gender333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333>A Figure 19: Levels of satisfaction by grade333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?8 Figure 20: Levels of satisfaction by institution333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?8 Figure 21: Extent to which considered making a major change to their job by gender 333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?: Figure 22: Deterioration in working conditions by gender33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?= Figure 23: Deterioration in working conditions by grade3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?> Figure 24: Deterioration and institution3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?> Figure 25: Proportion of time teaching students by gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?@ Figure 26: Proportion of time teaching students by grade333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333?@ Figure 27: Proportion of time spent teaching students by institution3333333333333333333333333333333?A Figure 28: Average number of students by gender33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333@9 Figure 29: Average number of students by grade3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333@9 Figure 30: Average number of students by institution3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333@: Figure 31: Teaching activities and gender333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333@< Figure 32: Teaching activities and grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333@= Figure 33: Teaching activities and institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333@> Figure 34: Management and teaching â&#x20AC;&#x201C; % agree or strongly agree that there is a supportive attitude of management towards teaching activities33333333333333333333333333333333333333333@? Figure 35: Institutional expectations with reference to teaching and gender33333333333333333@@ Figure 36: Institutional expectations with reference to teaching and grade3333333333333333333@A Figure 37: Institutional expectations with reference to teaching and institution3333333333A8 Figure 38: I spend more time than I would like teaching basic skills due to student deficiencies3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333A: Figure 39: In my teaching I emphasise practice-based knowledge and skills333333333333333A; Figure 40: In my courses I emphasise international perspectives or content33333333333333333A< Figure 41: My research activities inform my teaching3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333A> Figure 42: My service activities (services to clients and/or patients, unpaid consulting, public or voluntary services) inform my teaching333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333A?

Page 11


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Figure 43: I am encouraged to improve my instructional skills in response to teaching evaluations33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333AA Figure 44: At my institution there are adequate training courses for enhancing teaching quality333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333988 Figure 45: Evaluation of classrooms3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398: Figure 46: Evaluation of technology for teaching333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398; Figure 47: Evaluation of laboratories333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398< Figure 48: Collaborative activities by gender33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398> Figure 49: Collaborative activities by grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398? Figure 50: Collaborative research activities by institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333398@ Figure 51: Research focus by gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333998 Figure 52: Research focus by grade3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333999 Figure 53: Research orientation and institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333399: Figure 54: Research activities by gender33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333399< Figure 55: Research activities by grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333399= Figure 56: Research activities by institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333399> Figure 57: Scholarly outputs by gender33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333399@ Figure 58: Range of publications by gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:8 Figure 59: Range of publications by grade333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:9 Figure 60: Range of scholarly outputs by institution333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:: Figure 61: Attitude of management towards research activities333333333333333333333333333333333333339:; Figure 62: Research expectations by gender333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:= Figure 63: Sources of research funding by gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:? Figure 64: Sources of research funding by grade3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:@ Figure 65: Sources of research funding by institution3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339:A Figure 66: Level of influence by gender33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;9 Figure 67: Level of influence by grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;: Figure 68: Level of influence by institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;; Figure 69: Appointment of new faculty by gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;= Figure 70: Appointment of new faculty by grade333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;> Figure 71: Appointment of new faculty by institution333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;? Figure 72: Faculty promotion tenure decision by gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;@ Figure 73: Faculty promotion tenure decision by grade333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339;A Figure 74: Faculty promotion tenure decision by institution333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339<8 Figure 75: Admission standards and gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339<: Figure 76: Admission standards and grade333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339<; Figure 77: Admission standards and institution333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339<< Figure 78: Approval of new academic programmes by gender33333333333333333333333333333333333333339<= Figure 79: Approval of new academic programmes by grade3333333333333333333333333333333333333333339<> Figure 80: Approval of new academic programmes by institution3333333333333333333333333333333339<? Figure 81: Primary influence on teaching allocation by gender333333333333333333333333333333333333339<A Figure 82: Primary influence on teaching allocation by grade333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=8 Figure 83: Primary influence on teaching allocation by institution333333333333333333333333333333339=9 Figure 84: Setting internal research priorities and gender33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=; Figure 85: Setting internal research priorities and grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=< Figure 86: Setting internal research priorities and institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333339== Figure 87: Budget priorities and gender333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=> Figure 88: Budget priorities and grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=? Figure 89: Budget priorities and institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339=@

Page 12


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Figure 90: International linkages and gender33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>8 Figure 91: International linkages and grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>8 Figure 92: International linkages and institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>9 Figure 93: Evaluation of teaching role by gender333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>; Figure 94: Evaluation of teaching role by grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>< Figure 95: Evaluation of teaching role by institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>= Figure 96: Evaluation of research by gender333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>? Figure 97: Evaluation of research by grade33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>@ Figure 98: Evaluation of research by institution33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339>A Figure 99: Evaluation of administrative role by gender3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?9 Figure 100: Evaluation of administrative role by grade3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?: Figure 101: Evaluation of administrative role by institution3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?; Figure 102: There is a strong emphasis on the institution's mission33333333333333333333333333333339?< Figure 103: There is a top-down management style3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?> Figure 104: There is a strong performance orientation33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?? Figure 105: There is a cumbersome administrative process33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339?@ Figure 106: Top-level management are providing competent leadership3333333333333333333339?A Figure 107: There is good communication between management and academics33339@9 Figure 108: There is collegiality in decision-making processes333333333333333333333333333333333333339@: Figure 109: I am kept informed with what is going on at this institution3333333333333333333339@< Figure 110: Lack of academic staff involvement in decision making is a real problem 33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339@= Figure 111: Students should have a stronger voice in determining policy affecting them3333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333339@> Figure 112: Considering the research quality when making personnel decisions3333339@@ Figure 113: Considering the teaching quality when making personnel decisions333339@A Figure 114: Recruiting academics who have work experience outside of academia9A8

Page 13


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Executive summary This study examined the nature and extent of the changes experienced by the academic profession in Ireland in recent years. The report outlines current characteristics of the academic profession â&#x20AC;&#x201D; those who teach and/or research â&#x20AC;&#x201D; providing a profile of academics in Ireland. Three themes are investigated: the professional contexts of Irish academics, their teaching and research situations, and their experiences of governance and management within their institutions. International studies in this area indicate that the sector has experienced a decline in public funding, and has been subjected to greater oversight and control by governments through external assessments of research and teaching performances. Research has moved from being an individual activity to being more collaborative, multidisciplinary and internationally focussed. Securing research funding has become increasingly important. Pedagogical approaches have become increasingly diversified and technologically focussed. Academics derive their primary identity from their discipline. They are influenced by their organisational settings and the professional and social networks that emerge in those contexts. Women are under-represented in the most senior academic ranks. Mid-career academics, though difficult to define from a career stage point of view, are a very important category in higher education institutions (HEIs). Faculty work during this stage of the academic career is different from the work distribution of early career faculty. Research from the European context indicates that academics are removed from the decision-making processes in their institutions. The Irish higher education sector has witnessed considerable change in recent decades. The system, while small by international standards, is quite diverse. Historically, HEIs in Ireland have retained autonomy, but with the onset of the economic recession, accompanied by cuts in funding, successive governments have consolidated their efforts to hold the sector more accountable in a range of areas. This is evident in the range of reports published about the sector since 2009. The gender disparity among Irish academics in the senior ranks is clearly evident. The age profile has become skewed towards the older end of the spectrum. Academics in Ireland in the main rely on national funding agencies to support their work, and at government level a more concentrated effort has been made to focus research on priority areas that are linked to national economic and social development.

Page 14


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The student population in higher education has witnessed an increase in numbers, which is predicted to continue in the future. The staffâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;student ratio is high by international standards at 19:3. HEIs in Ireland have been involved in considerable curricular change, focussing on innovative pedagogies and assessment approaches. The majority of research literature about Irish higher education has focussed on issues surrounding policy development,

1

access,

2

entry to college,

3

participation/retention, 4 gender, 5 management, 6 teaching/curriculum and student experience.7 Yet very little is known about the people who teach and carry out research in Irelandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s higher education institutions, about the characteristics of the profession in general or about their views as to what is required to ensure its sustainability and development. The findings from this baseline study, which was conducted during the academic year 2010/2011, the first of its kind in Ireland, provide a basis for policy-makers and university managers to meet the challenge of building, supporting and maintaining a strong academic workforce.

 9!+19A@A19A@A19AA819AA919AA;19AA@19AAA19AAA1:88;2""!19A@92$!1:88?2$!

! ,"$!1 :89<2 ,"$! :89<1 :89:1 :8991 :8992 +! ! !1 9AA:2 !!+1 :88A1 :88>2

"$1 :8982 "*+1 $+ ! %1 :89<2 "*+1 :89<2 +!1 :8992 :8982 :88>2 "+ !  +&1 :8991 '!!%%1 $!1 +1 "+ !  +&1 :89:2 1 :88<2 %"$!1 9AA>2  '(!1 :88=2 1:8892")+1:88?1:89;2%1:89:2% 1:89<1:89<1:89;1:8992&1:8893

:+$!! "+1:89;2!+1:88?2!+1:8892!+!1:8882!+19AAA2!+19AA923

 !1"!%!""!19AAA2 +!19AA?2 +!!"$!19AA@2 "+!+$!1:8992 '$1 "!% ! $(!1 :88;2 '$#+ ! !%1 :8882 7"!!1 "+1 !+1 :88>2 ")+1 :88A3 ;#$& !& " '&"!1 :88:2 '"+1 9AAA2 $!!1 +!1 !+ ! $'+1 9AAA2 !+1 9AA82 !+19AA>2!+1:8892+!1:8993 <!+19AAA2'!!1!!$+1%! "+1:89;2 "+1($&1 +&1$ "+1:8982 ""$1

$$1$!1$")+1+!!1 "$!!!!"!1:88>2 "$!1!!! !1:8893 =(!1$'

! +!1:8982$' 1(!! +!:88A2 +!19AA?27"!!"$1:89<1 :89<27"!!"$1:89;27"!!"$1:89:1:89:27"!!"$1:89927"!!"$1:8981:89827"!!"$1 :88@24$-1. "$1"+!1"!!"+1 !!1:89;3 > +!1$'

!(!1:89:2$' 1(!! +!1:88A27"!!"$!$("1:89<2 7"!!"$!"$!%%"!1:89<27"!!"$1$("!&1:89<24"!!"$!&1:89:3

?$+1$ 1 !!'!4'(!1:88A2$ "+1 +&14"!!1 %!+!1:88<2

(%1:8982!+1$!$1$ "!!+!1:88?2'$(+1:8982&,#&$! $(+1:8992 $%'$(+"&'!&! !&5 61:89;2 "*+!$+1:89:2 ""$1 '$#+ ! '$$+1:8982"!!"$!!&$1:89921 ""$!  '!1:88=2$+1:89:2")+1 :89:2:89;3

Page 15


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Professional context •

Over two-thirds (69%) of senior academics were male and under one-third (31%) were female. A higher proportion of males (15%) were senior lecturers compared to females (9%). At associate professor level there was a higher proportion of males (6%) compared to females (2%). At professor level 9% were males and 2% were females.

Almost three-quarters of academics (74%) in the university sector had doctoral degrees compared to just over one-quarter (26%) in the nonuniversity sector.

A higher proportion of males (58%) had doctoral degrees compared to females (49%).

There is high employment stability in Irish higher education, as the majority (71%) have permanent positions, but it is gendered. Over three-quarters of males (76%) had permanent tenured contracts compared to two-thirds of females (66%).

Academics in the university sector had worked in more higher education institutions than academics in the non-university sector.

The vast majority of academics (90%) felt that their academic discipline was their most important affiliation. Three-quarters (75%) indicated the importance of school/department affiliation, and over two-thirds (68%) considered affiliation to their institution as being important.

A higher proportion of female respondents (72%) considered their institution as being important or very important to them compared to their male colleagues (62%).

A higher proportion of males (41%) indicated a preference for research compared to their female counterparts (35%).

Academics reported that they worked 53 hours per week when classes were in session. The average hours spent on teaching when classes were in session was 22, they spent 13 hours on research, four hours on service, nine hours on administration and five hours other academic activities.

When classes were not in session, academics reported that they worked 48 hours per week. When classes were not taking place the focus shifted to

Page 16


The Academic Profession in Ireland

research where academics indicated that they spent an average of 20 hours on research, nine hours on teaching related matters, nine hours on administration, four hours on service, and six hours on other academic activities. •

Over half of academics (58%) indicated that they had a relatively high level of satisfaction in their current job.

Around two out of every five academics (41%) either agreed or strongly agreed that it was a poor time for young people to embark on a career in academia in their field of study.

Over one-third (38%) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that their job is a source of considerable personal strain.

The majority of academics (57%) were of the view that working conditions had deteriorated. A significantly higher proportion of university academics (63%) perceived a deterioration in working conditions compared to academics in the non-university sector (50%).

Page 17


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Teaching •

On average, academics spent two-thirds (66%) of their time teaching undergraduate students, 15% of their time instructing masters’ students, 9% of their time working with doctoral students and 6% of their time teaching graduate diploma/higher diploma students.

Males spent twice as much time (12%) working with doctoral students compared to their female (6%) colleagues.

Junior academics (69%) spent a higher proportion of their time teaching undergraduate students compared to senior colleagues (52%).

Academics from other HEIs spent, on average, over three-quarters (78%) of their time instructing undergraduate programmes, compared to their university colleagues who spent half their time teaching undergraduates (55%).

Within undergraduate programmes the average number of students taught was 176, at masters level it was 16 students, at graduate diploma/higher diploma nine students, and at doctoral level three students.

Academics in the university sector taught, on average, a higher number of students (208) compared to those in other HEIs (140).

Classroom teaching/lecturing was the main teaching activity (97%).

Engaging with students through electronic communication (92%) was an important element of teaching.

Meeting students on an individual basis (88%) outside of scheduled class time was an important part of teaching.

The development of course materials (90%) was also an important activity, with more than four out of five (84%) academics engaged in curricular and programme development.

Project work (72%) and individualised instruction (72%) were also important features of the instructional process. The least common teaching activity was distance education (18%).

Other

HEI

respondents

were

more

likely

to

be

involved

in

curriculum/programme development (87% v 81%), project and group work (77% v 67%), and practical and laboratory work (59% v 46%). A higher proportion

of

other

HEI

academics

employed

information

and

Page 18


The Academic Profession in Ireland

communications-based technology (55% v 45%) as part of their teaching activities. •

Around two out of every five academics (41%) were of the view that management was not supportive of teaching activities, one-third either agreed (30%) or strongly agreed (3%) that management was supportive of teaching activities.

The majority (85%) indicated that there were institutional expectations around teaching hours.

Over one-third of academics (38%) indicated that there were institutional expectations about the number of students in their class and the number of graduate students supervised.

A high proportion of academics (84%) emphasised practice-based approaches and international content (80%) in their teaching.

Over four-fifths (82%) of academics used their research activities to inform their teaching, and two-thirds (66%) drew on their service experience.

Just over half of academics (53%) indicated that they were encouraged to improve their teaching in response to teaching evaluations.

Three-fifths of academics (60%) felt that the institution provided adequate training courses to support their teaching.

Over half of academics (57%) rated classroom conditions as good or very good.

Nearly two-thirds (64%) viewed technology for teaching positively.

A high proportion of academics (60%) rated laboratories highly.

Research •

Over half of academics engaged in collaborative research activity at an international level (58%), as well as with colleagues from their own institutions (57%) and at other institutions in Ireland (54%).

Over three-fifths of academics (63%) categorised their research activities as applied. A similar proportion categorised their research as international in orientation, while over half (56%) were involved in multidisciplinary research. Over half of academics (53%) stated that their research was not commercially orientated. Page 19


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A higher proportion of males (53%) described their research as theoretically focussed compared to females (38%).

Males (40%) were less likely to identify their research as socially orientated compared to over half of female colleagues (53%). Over one-fifth of males (21%) viewed their research as being commercially orientated compared to 15% of females.

A statistically significantly higher proportion of male respondents were active across all research activities. The biggest differences across gender were supervising a research team or a team of graduate research assistants (54% males v 37% females), and managing research contracts or budgets (48% males v 32% females).

Scholarly outputs were in the main peer reviewed (47%), published internationally (39%) and co-authored with colleagues (29%).

A higher percentage of publications by male academics relative to females were peer reviewed (53% v 42%), published internationally (46% v 32%) and were published electronically/online (34% v 19%).

In addition, a higher

proportion of male academics indicated that their publications were coauthored with other colleagues both in Ireland (32% v 26%) and in other countries (18% v 11%). •

Compared to academics in other HEIs, a considerably larger percentage of publications from university sector respondents were peer reviewed (59% v 26%), published internationally (51% v 16%), co-authored with colleagues from Ireland (34% v 19%), and co-authored with international colleagues (19% v 6%).

Over two-fifths of academics (44%) viewed management in their institution as supportive of research activities.

Over two-thirds (72%) indicated that there was increased pressure to raise external funds, and almost three-fifths (59%) perceived a greater emphasis on commercially orientated and interdisciplinary research.

An average of around two in five academics (39%) had received funding from their own institutions, and less than one-third (31%) had received research funding from national agencies. Approximately 13% received funding from Government agencies.

Page 20


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A higher proportion of females received funding from their own institution compared to their male colleagues (42% v 36%). Over one-third of males (34%) had received funding from public research funding agencies compared to just over one-quarter of females.

Governance and management •

Over three-quarters of academics (83%) felt that they had influence at school or departmental level.

Almost half (47%) indicated that they had no influence at college/faculty level.

At institutional level, almost three-quarters (74%) did not feel influential.

The majority of academics (58%) viewed the Head of School/Department as having the primary influence in relation to the allocation of teaching workload.

There were mixed views about who set research priorities: over one-quarter (28%) attributed this role to institutional managers, while the same proportion viewed the Head of School/Department (28%) as being responsible. Onequarter (25%) attributed this role to individual academics.

With reference to budgeting priorities, almost half of academics (44%) viewed institutional managers as being responsible for this area. One-third (36%) attributed this responsibility to the Faculty/College Committees/Board.

Almost half of academics (47%) viewed individual academics as being responsible for developing international links. One-quarter (25%) indicated that institutional managers were responsible.

With reference to evaluation processes, a majority (82%) identified students as being the main evaluators of their teaching, while over half (56%) viewed individual academics as performing this role.

Over half (57%) identified external reviewers as evaluators of their research, over two-fifths (41%) viewed themselves as being the main assessors, and over one-third (39%) viewed the Head of School/Department as having a role.

With reference to the emphasis on institutional mission, almost half of academics (48%) indicated that this was emphasised in their institution.

Page 21


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Over three-quarters (77%) of academics viewed the management style in their institutions as being top down.

Over half of academics (51%) did not view the leadership provided by toplevel management as competent.

Over three-quarters (76%) viewed administrative processes in their institution as cumbersome.

Over one-third (39%) suggested that there was a strong performance orientation within their institutions.

Almost two-thirds (63%) of academics disagreed that the communication between management and staff was good.

Over half (56%) felt there was a lack of collegiality in decision-making processes.

Two in five academics (43%) indicated that they were not kept informed about what was going on in their institution.

Over half of academics (59%) viewed the lack of academic staff involvement in decision-making as a real problem in institutions.

Mixed views emerged about the role that students should play in determining policies that affect them. Just over two in five (41%) academics agreed that students should have a greater say, while just over one-quarter (26%) disagreed.

Around two in five academics (40%) believed that the quality of research was not emphasised as part of the appointments process. One in three (33%) believed that this aspect of an applicant’s work was emphasised.

Over half of academics (55%) did not believe that the quality of teaching was emphasised in the appointments process. Almost half (49%) were of the view that experience outside the academy was not taken into account in the appointments process.

Page 22


The Academic Profession in Ireland

1.

The changing context of higher education

1.1

Introduction

This chapter reviews international literature with reference to the changing context of the higher education sector. The issue of academic identity is explored. The role played by context in the socialisation processes of academics is considered. The challenges faced by women and mid-career academics in the profession are examined. The attitudes of academics towards decision-making processes are explored.

1.2

Changes in the higher education landscape

In the European context during the late 1980s and 1990s, public support for higher education decreased in a number of countries, both financially and politically (Enders & de Weert, 2004). Universities and colleges were expanding, new activities were added to existing portfolios and this was accompanied by growth in academic staff numbers. By the late 1990s this situation had changed and impacted negatively on the size and profile of the academic profession, as well as faculty workload, productivity and outputs. The balance between block and grant funding for research shifted in favour of a performance based funding approach (Enders & de Weert, 2004). In most countries, public funding for higher education declined sharply from the late 1990s (Enders & de Weert, 2004). Higher education institutions (HEIs) became more dependent on private financing, primarily in the form of tuition fees and private research contracts (Robinson, 2006). The decline of public funding was accompanied by greater government oversight and management. New Zealand and Australia instituted extensive policies of performance-based assessments. Universities in the United Kingdom, traditionally decentralised and largely autonomous from government, became more tightly controlled. Teaching and research are regularly subject to assessment based on externally imposed performance indicators. Several Canadian provinces and many American states have also imposed performance indicators on HEIs (Robinson, 2006). An ageing academic workforce is now a feature of higher education systems in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, the Czech Republic

Page 23


The Academic Profession in Ireland

and the Netherlands. It is also a problem in Australia (Bexley, James & Arkoudis, 2011). The role performed by the professional academic has also changed. Teaching has become more complex and includes embracing new teaching technologies (Hyde et al., 2011). There is greater student heterogeneity and this has implications for teaching and cultural engagement. For many academics dealing with diverse student populations is challenging. This is particularly the case where they are expected to teach students in the one setting when these participants are pursuing different qualifications and courses. The associated tasks with continuous assessment, small group teaching and the development of new programmes are challenging (Clarke, 2015). The institutional emphasis on teaching performance linked to evaluation and quality outcomes makes it difficult for those who require continuous support in these areas (Clarke, 2015). The high status perception of research is a common theme across the literature. The research role has changed from being closely associated to the researcher. Research groups; temporary grant-funded research centres, clusters and alliances now dominate the discourse (Mittelstrass, 2010). Academics are expected to be research active and publish their work in journal articles (Murray & Cunningham, 2011). However, there are only a certain number of journals and there is a limited amount of research funding. The pressure to publish (Wellington & Torgerson, 2005) has been accentuated in a context where securing research funding is dependent on research publications (Murphy, 1998). Research outputs also impact on the reputation of universities and other institutes of higher education, as well as affecting the career trajectories of academics (Drennan et al., 2013). The impact of research at a reputational level is evident in the impetus from management in universities to increase the global standing of their institutions through research outputs and the acquisition of research funding. Furthermore, the investment in research has been aligned to the economic goals of countries, and is explicitly stated in policy documents at European Union (EU) level (Drennan et al., 2013). Promotion to posts requires not just evidence of academic writing, but also the capacity to lead research teams and organise the activities of others (Hyde et al., 2011).

Page 24


The Academic Profession in Ireland

1.3

Academic identity

Academic identity generally derives from the teaching and research activities that are subject or discipline based (Deem, 2006). While the academic department (or a subunit of it) is usually the main one for academic staff, faculty members also operate within research, curriculum development or teaching programme teams (Trowler & Knight, 2000). Discipline-based cultures are the primary source of faculty members’ identity and include assumptions about what is to be known and how, tasks to be performed, standards for effective performance, patterns of publication, professional interaction, and social and political status (Becher, 1989). Each discipline has its own concept of success as a vehicle for prestige. Despite these differences, the academic profession possesses a set of common values across disciplinary and institutional boundaries, such as “academic freedom, the community of scholars, scrutiny of accepted wisdom, truth seeking, collegial governance, individual autonomy, and service to society through the production of knowledge, the transmission of culture, and education of the young” (Kuh & Whitt, 1986: 76). In the same vein, reward structures in the academic profession across disciplines are based on prestige and symbolic recognitions such as publications and awards. Faculty members learn the academic culture according to their discipline and specific department through the socialisation process (Mendoza, 2007). Organisational socialisation has been defined as a “ritualized process that involves the transmission of culture” through a mutually adaptive process between the organisation and individuals (Tierney & Rhoads, 1993: 21). It should also be remembered that individuals bring a multitude of experiences to work and academic contexts that are likely to influence the ways they make sense of socialisation experiences (Trice, 1993). Their development is also linked to their access to both professional and social networks. Individuals’ networks influence career outcomes, including job satisfaction and attainment (Podolny & Barron, 1997), promotion and advancement (Burt, 1992), and overall career success (Sweitzer, 2009). Social network scholars have argued that individuals’ social networks may also serve as identity construction mechanisms (Ibarra, Kilduff & Tsai, 2005). Professional networks have remained highly gendered, with women experiencing greater difficulty than their male colleagues in establishing and maintaining high-level network ties (Rogers, 2000).

Page 25


The Academic Profession in Ireland

1.4

Gender and the academic profession

While the number of women academics has increased in an international context in recent years, the academic workforce remains dominated by men. The representation of women in academic jobs ranges from a low of less than 32% in Canada to over 39% in the United States (Robinson, 2006). The general picture of the overall distribution of women, however, masks even more striking differences between ranks and status of appointment. Women are far more seriously under-represented in the most senior academic ranks and are more likely to hold part-time and fixed-term appointments. Professional networks have remained highly gendered, with women experiencing greater difficulty than their male colleagues in establishing and maintaining high-level network ties (Rogers, 2000). On average, academic women, are more likely than academic men to place geographic limits on their careers. Family responsibility or husbandsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; careers could constrain the geographic mobility of married academic women (Bielby & Bielby, 1992), and unmarried women may also be geographically constrained, preferring to stay in a particular location because of family or social ties (Rosenfeld & Jones, 1987). Although the gap appears to be closing, women have tended to publish less than their male colleagues (Zuckerman, 1987). Part of this publication gap is attributed to womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s heavier domestic responsibilities, or to job segregation that disproportionately places women in jobs such as skills-related teaching, with high teaching demand but fewer publishable topics. Women spend more time than men on class preparation, and female teachers are more service orientated, working on committees as well as in their capacity as unofficial counsellors to students (Branch, 2003).

1.5

Mid-life career academics

Baldwin et al. (2005) suggest that mid-career is the longest and, in most cases, the most productive phase of academic life. It covers as much as 15 to 25 years of oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s professional career. During this period, most faculty teach the majority of their students, produce the bulk of their scholarship and publications, and serve their institution, disciplines and society in a variety of expert and leadership roles.

Page 26


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Furthermore, faculty in the middle years represents the largest segment of the academic profession (Baldwin et al., 2005). Issues of definition bedevil the midcareer phase of academic life. Mid-career is a variable phenomenon that arrives once a person advances beyond novice status and becomes a full-fledged member of his or her profession and institution (Hall, 1986). It continues until disengagement begins in anticipation of retirement or a major career transition. Most faculty need several years in the occupation to advance beyond novice status and become established professionals. Todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mid-career faculty are living through a period of unprecedented change in higher education (Baldwin et al., 2005). Greater student diversity, new educational applications of technology, for-profit education competitors, and increased use of part-time and term-contract appointments are some of the developments transforming faculty work and careers. Teaching and administration begin to take larger portions of faculty time, while time devoted to research, service and professional development decreases, supporting the view that faculty work during midlife and beyond has a perceptibly different character than the work distribution of early-life faculty (Baldwin et al., 2005).

1.6

Decision-making

Governance is important to the life of academics and to the higher institutions. Participation should facilitate getting to know the diversity of people, programmes and values across institutions. Yet, a number of international studies suggest that academics do not feel part of the decision-making processes. Management processes are removed from academic staff for a number of reasons. These include the impact of external pressures, financial factors, erosion of autonomy, greater emphasis on accountability and autonomy, and competition between institutions as expressed in ranking systems (Shattock, 2013). Increased staffâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;student ratios and the dispersal of campuses across different locations and cultural regions contribute to less involvement by academics in decision-making processes (Shattock, 2013). The introduction of modular teaching, the restructuring of academic units, and mergers of different departments, schools and faculties, has also contributed to the distance that has emerged between academics and senior management.

Page 27


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Collective decision-making and self-governance by scholars (governance by committee) have been features of the traditional university (Park, 2013). However, the collective decision-making in the traditional chair system of university governance included only a few members, as not all academics were equally involved. The extent to which managerialist ideology has superseded collegiality is debatable (Hyde et al., 2013). Research suggests that managerialism has neither been wholeheartedly rejected nor accepted by academics. There are variations in how it has rolled out in terms of its timing, pace and extent, in different social locations (Hyde et al., 2013). Even within the same country, cultural variations may be observed across universities, individual departments, and in the attitudes of individual faculty.

1.7

Summary

The research literature suggests that higher education has undergone many changes. The sector has experienced a decline in public funding, and has been subjected to greater oversight and control by governments, through external assessments of research and teaching performances. Research has moved from being an individual activity to being more collaborative, multidisciplinary and internationally focussed. Securing research funding has become increasingly important. Pedagogical approaches have become increasingly diversified and technologically focussed. Academics derive their identity from their discipline. They are influenced by their organisational settings, and the professional and social networks that emerge in this context. The academic workforce is male dominated. Women are underrepresented in the most senior academic ranks and they also find it difficult to establish and maintain high-level network contacts. They are not as geographically mobile as their male colleagues. They tend to publish less and this has been linked to higher teaching loads, as well as being more orientated towards service related activities. Mid-career academics, though difficult to define from a career stage point of view, are a very important category in higher education institutions. Studies have revealed that this group are faced with unprecedented changes in higher education reflecting diverse groups of students and technological developments. Faculty work during this stage of the academic career is different from the work distribution of

Page 28


The Academic Profession in Ireland

early career faculty. Research from the European context indicates that academics are removed from the decision-making processes in their institutions.

Page 29


The Academic Profession in Ireland

2

Higher education in Ireland

2.1

Introduction

This chapter examines recent structural and policy aspects of the higher education system in Ireland. The impact of the economic recession on higher education from 2009 is also explored. Matters concerning staffing levels, gender issues, teaching and research are considered.

2.2

Structures

The Irish third-level sector is quite diverse, consisting of a binary model of tertiary education, with seven universities, 14 institutes of technology (IoTs) and over 20 other third-level educational institutions. The system is comparatively small from an international perspective. Historically, the universities provided degree and postgraduate education. Since the late 1960s, regional technical colleges (now IoTs) were established to provide sub-degree programmes. Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT) emerged independently of the regional system (Clarke, Kenny & Loxley, 2015). The focus of these colleges was on skills-based vocational and technical training in areas such as business, engineering, electronics, science and food technology (but also containing from an early time elements of music, art, languages, media studies, social science and child care). From the 1990s the clear division between degree providing universities and sub-degree providing colleges became blurred. Irish higher education is governed by a number of legislative provisions, which include the Irish Universities Act (1908); the Higher Education Authority Act (1971); [University of Limerick Act (1989) Dublin City University Act (1989): under this legislation the National Institutes for Higher Education in Limerick and Dublin were designated as universities]; the Universities Act (1997); the Vocational Education Acts (1930; Amendment Acts, 1936; 1944; 1970; 2001); the Dublin Institute of Technology Act (1992); the Regional Technical Colleges Act (1992); the Regional Technical Colleges Amendment Acts (1994, 1999); and the Institutes of Technology Act (2006). In February 2014 the General Scheme for Legislation on Technological Universities was published, which outlined the legislative provisions for technological universities,

Page 30


The Academic Profession in Ireland

including specifics on merger among Dublin IoTs, and more general merger provisions for other IoTs considering re-designation as technological universities (Hazelcorn & Harkin, 2014). The National University of Ireland (NUI) is a federal university comprising the largest element of the Irish university system. The NUI provides a supportive framework for its confederate institutions, to promote the objects of the University, thus contributing to educational, cultural, social and economic advancement. The NUI currently comprises four Constituent Universities (UCC, UCD, NUI Maynooth and NUI Galway); five Recognised Colleges; and one College of a Constituent University. Each institution within the NUI federation has its own governing authority; the overall governing authority of the university is the NUI Senate and is headed by the Chancellor. The Universities Act (1997) provides the legislative basis for the university sector (Coate & Mac Labhrainn, 2008). Table 1: Higher education institutions recognised under the Universities Act, 1997 as amended Name National University of Ireland University College Cork University College Dublin National University of Ireland, Galway National University of Ireland, Maynooth Trinity College Dublin University of Limerick Dublin City University

Abbreviation UCC UCD NUIG NUIM TCD UL DCU

Opened 1909 {1845} {1854} {1845} {1795} 1592 1989 1989

Page 31


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 2: Institutes of technology Name Athlone Institute of Technology Institute of Technology, Blanchardstown Institute of Technology, Carlow Cork Institute of Technology Dublin Institute of Technology Dundalk Institute of Technology Dun Laoghaire Institute of Art, Design and Technology Institute of Technology, Sligo Galway-Mayo Institute of Technology Letterkenny Institute of Technology Limerick Institute of Technology Institute of Technology, Tallaght Institute of Technology, Tralee Waterford Institute of Technology

Abbreviation AIT ITB ITC CIT DIT DkIT IADT ITS GMIT LYIT LIT ITT Dublin IT Tralee WIT

Opened 1970 2000 1970 1974 1992 1970 1997 1970 1972 1971 1993 1992 1977 1970

The Irish system also includes an assortment of private providers of higher education, including the Dublin Business School, which is owned by the for-profit education company Kaplan Inc. and Hibernia College (Coate & Mac Labhrainn, 2008). The Higher Education Authority (HEA) was set up on an ad hoc basis in 1968 and was established on a statutory basis in 1971. Since the introduction of the Higher Education Authority Act of 1971, funding and policy advisory responsibility for the universities had been vested in the HEA. The non-university institutions were previously funded and directly steered through the Department of Education and Skills (DES). The HEA is now the statutory funding authority for the universities, institutes of technology and a number of other designated institutions, and is the advisory body to the Minister for Education and Skills in relation to the higher education sector. Apart from control of salaries, institutions have autonomy of operation within the overall budgetary framework (HEA, 2012). The OECD (2004) in its review of higher education, Review of Higher Education in Ireland Examiners Report, recommended enhanced co-ordination within the system, more collaboration between institutions through funding mechanisms in research, first degree and postgraduate degree work, and more emphasis to be placed on widening access and lifelong learning. The onset of the economic recession in the latter part of the first decade of the 21st century had a significant impact on the Irish higher education system.

Page 32


The Academic Profession in Ireland

2.3

Economic recession and higher education

Since the 1990s, the DES, in line with other Government departments, began to focus on priorities within and between expenditure programmes commencing with the Expenditure Review Initiative in 1997. This became known as the Value for Money Policy Review in 2006 (DES, 2007). It resulted in more focused decision-making on matters of educational expenditure with consequent altered approaches to policy formation (Gleeson & Ó Donnabháin, 2009). Policy decisions are influenced by both the global and more importantly the European context. This is evident in the language employed by the DES in policy documents, which reflects what pertains in international organisations such as the World Trade Organisation, the OECD and the EU in policy documents (Seery, 2008). The EU Lisbon Agenda (2000) in particular, and the introduction of National Reform Programmes in 2005 under the revised Lisbon Agenda, resulted in the Irish government identifying major policy areas such as education and training, lifelong learning and the development of a high-skilled, innovative and adaptable workforce for the knowledge economy (Government of Ireland, 2007). The global recession impacted significantly on Ireland, which is a small open economy. However, the impact of the Irish sovereign debt and the ensuing financial crisis had much more serious repercussions on the country. The funding of higher education must be viewed in the context of this recession and the consequent economic reforms mandated under the National Recovery Plan 2011-2014, and the Programme of Financial Support for Ireland, which the EU and the IMF provided for Ireland (Clarke & Killeavy, 2013). Since 1987, many issues affecting public service workers in Ireland, including wages and conditions, were decided within a process termed “social partnership”. This involved a series of tripartite agreements reached between the Government, representatives of the business community and the trades unions. This process came to an end in 2009 and was replaced by social dialogue, which resulted in the publication of the Public Sector Agreement 2010-2014 (Croke Park Agreement) in 2010. This agreement aimed to reduce the numbers working in the public service; allow for the redeployment of staff and the implementation of changes in a performance management and deployment system. It was replaced by the Public

Page 33


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Service Stability Agreement 2013-2016, known as the ‘Haddington Road Agreement’ (DPER, 2013). In his Exchequer Budget speech (2011), the Minister for Education and Skills referred to a 2% real funding reduction for the higher education sector, comprising a 5% reduction in State funding and a parallel €250 increase in the student contribution from 2012/13. The Minister signalled a further 2% funding reduction in 2013, and 1% in each of 2014 and 2015. The Government’s allocated budget for education in Ireland in 2012 was €8.242 billion. Third-level education accounted for €1.6 billion, of which €1.1 billion related to recurrent provision to institutions (Hyland, 2012; Government of Ireland, 2012). Both universities and IoTs rely on three key sources of income: the state grant; tuition fees; and research grants/contracts. As a result of cuts to State funding, institutions have increasingly focused on generating income from international students and research. The sector as a whole experienced a 29.5% (€385,688,801.00) cut in funding during the period 2007 to 2014. When the funding is disaggregated per sector the cuts experienced were: colleges 24.4% (-€14,358,919.00); universities 26% (-€200,610,172.00); and IoTs 32.4% (-€170,719,711.00) (Clarke, Kenny & Loxley, 2015). Higher education institutions (HEIs) currently receive more income in tuition fees from both national and international students (Grant Thornton, 2014). They receive other income such as student registration charges and interest income. Research income in higher education institutions increased by 16% in the period 2007-11 (Grant Thornton, 2014). Capital budgets have also been affected by the funding cuts. HEIs have increasingly relied on private investment to support capital projects. It is estimated that between 2005 and 2008, total private investment (including philanthropic) accounted for 50% of total capital investment in higher education (Delaney & Healy, 2014). Enrolment in third-level education increased rapidly from the 1970s to 2010 (Delaney & Healy, 2014) and, based on projected numbers, this trend is expected to continue. This is attributed to higher numbers entering higher education after secondary school, students remaining longer in studies, and increased numbers of mature students attending higher education (Delaney & Healy, 2014). Between 2008 and 2014 enrolments in the university sector experienced an increase of 14.2% (n=15,346), while the IoT sector witnessed an increase of 19.5% (n=16,294). Both Page 34


The Academic Profession in Ireland

sectors combined showed an increase in enrolments of 16.5% (n=31,640) (Clarke, Kenny & Loxley, 2015). 2.4

Policy Directions in Higher Education

A Higher Education Strategy Group was appointed in 2010 to examine higher education in Ireland. Its report, published in 2011 and entitled National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030, was endorsed by the Government as the future blueprint for the sector. The report identified three overarching challenges faced by the higher education system: higher future enrolments of students with diverse profiles; the impact of the global environment on research performance; and changing patterns of work with the accompanying need for lifelong access to develop knowledge-based skills. The HEA has published a series of reports, which focussed on different aspects of the higher education sector. These include: Proposal to incorporate a fee adjustment in the core grant allocations to the universities (2010); A Study of Progression in Irish Higher Education (2010); Regional Clusters, Consolidation Leading to Mergers, Strategic Dialogue (2011); Revised Employment Control Framework for the Higher Education Sector (2011); Sustainability Report (2011); A Proposed Reconfiguration of the Irish System of Higher Education; Report prepared by an International Expert Panel for the Higher Education Authority of Ireland (2012); Report of the International Review Panel on the Structure of Initial Teacher Education Provision in Ireland: Review conducted on behalf of the Department of Education and Skills (2012); Review of Funding Model for Higher Education Institutions: Consultation document (2012); Review of the Provision of Creative Arts Programmes in Dublin (2012); Towards a Future Higher Education Landscape, including Process and Criteria for Designation as a Technological University and Guidelines on Regional Clusters (2012); Report to the Minister for Education and Skills on system re-configuration, inter-institutional collaboration and system governance in Irish Higher Education (2013); Review of Funding Model for Higher Education Institutions: Consultation Document; Completing the Landscape Process for Irish Higher Education (2013); Towards a Performance evaluation framework: Profiling Irish higher education (2013); Higher Education System Performance First Report 2014-2016 Volume II Institutional and Sectoral Profiles 2011-12 (2014).

Page 35


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Through these publications the HEA has recommended: the development of regional clusters to provide for co-ordinated provision; the formation of strategic alliances between institutions; the development of thematic clusters facilitating collaboration on areas of national and international importance; the creation of technological universities through merging IoTs; and the imposition of performance targets on institutions with a view to achieving national objectives. This has marked a new direction in policy development for higher education. Hazelcorn and Harkin (2014) argue that between 2011 and 2014, the restructuring aspects of the higher education strategy highlight a more centralised approach than had previously been the case.

2.5

Staffing levels and career structures

While the higher education sector has experienced a significant rise in the number of student enrolments the numbers of academic staff teaching these students has reduced (Clarke, Kenny & Loxley, 2015). The introduction of the Employment Control Framework (ECF) in 2009 as part of the National Recovery Plan sought to reduce the cost of the public sector pay bill. Specific ceilings for core-funded posts in higher education institutions were outlined. During 2011, in all HEA-funded institutions, there were 9,441 core academic staff (HEA, 2014). From a review of the annual staff returns submitted by HEIs to the HEA, the university’s academic staffing levels were (4433.86) in 2007 declining to (4239.79) in 2014. In the IoT sector staffing levels were (4799.56) in 2007 declining to (4338.70) in 2014. In the Colleges staffing levels were reduced from (466.93) in 2007 to (424.13) in 2014. Overall there has been a 7.2% (697.63 WTE) reduction in academic staff working in the higher education sector in the period 2007-2014 (Clarke, Kenny & Loxley, 2015). The career structure is generally consistent across Irish HEIs. Most will commence on an entry level, early career grade. These are variously known as ‘assistant lecturers’, ‘junior lecturers’ or ‘below the bar lecturers’ (Lalor, 2010). Over time, entry-level lecturers will seek to progress to the ‘full’ lecturer scale. In both the IoT and university sectors, this advancement is awarded on merit, typically representing achievements in teaching, research/scholarly activity, and contribution to the department, college and ‘community’ (academic and wider community). The

Page 36


The Academic Profession in Ireland

majority of academics will progress to this level. A smaller number of vacancies exist at the next level, typically termed ‘senior lecturer’. Competition to progress to this grade (based on excellence in teaching, research and service) is high. Advancement to associate professor, and professor, as well as higher management grades within the university, such as Dean (Head) of Faculty, President (or Provost, in TCD) is more difficult. In the IoT sector, lecturers may progress to senior lecturers (teaching) (SL1s), SL2 (Head of Department), SL3 (Head of School), Faculty Director, and President (Lalor, 2010). In 2009, Ireland had the second highest Glass Ceiling Index in Europe for women in higher education (EC, 2009). While women accounted for 55% of all PhD students and 41% of all PhD-qualified researchers in HEIs in 1998/99, they accounted for only 5% of professors (Forfas, 2008). The EU average was 12%. In 2003-2004 only 12% of associate professors were female, which represented an increase on the previous figures available in 1998-1999 (Forfas, 2008). In HEA funded institutions in Ireland during 2011, 44% of all academic staff were female. Over one-quarter (28%) of female academic staff were at senior level. The age group distribution of the academic workforce in Ireland has become skewed toward the older end of the spectrum. In 2005, 21% of academics in Ireland were over 55 years compared to an average over all occupations of 12% (Expert Group on Future Skills Needs, 2005). In 2011, almost two-thirds of Irish academics were aged over 40 years (44% aged between 40 and 54 years and 18% aged 55 years and over) (HEA, 2014).

2.6

Research

The Irish Research Council was launched during March 2012 as a merger of the Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences (IRCHSS) and the Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering and Technology (IRCSET). Its remit is to cover the sciences, engineering, technology, humanities, social sciences, business and law, and to focus on human capital development at postgraduate and early-stage postdoctoral researcher levels (O Carroll, 2012). The research funding and infrastructure (physical and organisational) in Ireland has multiple strands. Higher education research and development expenditure, the majority of which is provided from public sources, increased from €200m in 1998

Page 37


The Academic Profession in Ireland

to an estimated €660m in 2007, while the numbers graduating with PhDs grew from 808 in 2005 to an estimated 1,100 in 2008 (Forfas, 2008). This was accompanied by the introduction of the Programme for Research and Development in Third-Level Institutions (PRTLI) and the establishment of Science Foundation Ireland (SFI). In 2006, the Irish Government endorsed a Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation (SSTI). A wide range of Government departments and agencies support research in higher education and there are significant variations in the funding instruments used by these bodies and the conditions attaching to them (Forfas, 2008). In 2012, the Government identified 14 research priority areas and sought greater coordination between institutions to deliver on these areas (DEI, 2012).

2.7

Teaching

Since 2000, a total of €33.5m was invested in teaching and learning, €22.6m of which was allocated through the Strategic Innovation Fund (SIF) since 2007. Towards the end of 2012 the National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning was established by the HEA in conjunction with the Irish Universities Association (IUA) and Institutes of Technology Ireland (IOTI). This body was set up to provide the infrastructural support for the teaching mission of HEIs. In the last decade, a number of initiatives aimed at providing greater flexibility and choice to students has been introduced within the higher education sector. These include the adoption of the European Credit Transfer System (ECTS) to allow for credit accumulation and ease of transfer of students between institutions in Ireland and abroad. Variations on modularisation and semesterisation have also been introduced, and provision has been made for more elective modules associated with core course content. A number of changes have sought to improve the effectiveness of teaching and learning for students in Irish higher education. These include the introduction of enquiry and problem-based learning, peer-assisted learning and group work, an increased focus on learning outcomes, and changes to assessment methods. In 2011 the student–academic staff ratio (FTE/Core) was 19:3 (HEA, 2014). International students accounted for 7% of total full time enrolment in the system. The number of EU students in HEA funded institutions totalled 3,180 and non-EU students accounted for 5% of international students totalling 8,481 (HEA, 2014).

Page 38


The Academic Profession in Ireland

2.8

Summary

The Irish higher education sector has witnessed considerable change in recent decades. The system, while small by international standards, is quite diverse. Historically, institutions have retained their autonomy, but the onset of the economic recession, accompanied by cuts in funding, has resulted in the Government seeking more accountability from the sector. It is clear from recent successive reports that governments want HEIs to become more accountable. The gender disparity among Irish academics in the senior ranks is clearly evident and the age profile has become skewed towards the older end of the spectrum. The Irish higher education sector has benefitted from high levels of Government investment in research. Academics in Ireland in the main rely on national funding agencies to support their work. At Government level, a more concentrated effort has been made to focus research on priority areas that link with national strategies. The student population in higher education has witnessed an increase in numbers, which is predicted to continue. The staffâ&#x20AC;&#x201C;student ratio is high at 19:3. Higher education institutions in Ireland have been involved in considerable curricular change, focussing on innovative pedagogies and assessment approaches. This report, the first baseline study of its kind nationally, captures the views of academics in the Irish higher education sector during the period 2010-11, about their professional contexts; teaching; research; and the management and governance of their institutions.

Page 39


The Academic Profession in Ireland

3.

Survey and sample characteristics

3.1

Description of study

In 1992 the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching designed one of the first comparative studies to explore the nature of the academic profession. The survey instrument used in that study was administered in 14 countries (Australia, Brazil, Chile, Germany, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Russia, Sweden, Mexico, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the US) and secured 20,000 responses. In 2004 it was decided to repeat the study with the inclusion of additional topics, which focussed on the organisational fabric of the higher education system, academic career settings and the professionalisation of academic work. This study was entitled The Changing Academic Profession (CAP). The survey instrument was distributed in 19 countries (Australia, Brazil, Germany, Hong Kong, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, the US, Argentina, Canada, China, Finland, Italy, Malaysia, Norway, Portugal and South Africa) and achieved 18,000 responses. In the CAP survey the response rates were around 30% on average (Canada, 17%; UK, 15%; Hong Kong, 13%; and Portugal 4%). In 2008, the European Science Foundation decided to collaborate with various national research promotion agencies to provide support for European research consortia in the thematic area of Higher Education and Social Change in Europe (Euro HESC). In this framework, a study entitled The Academic Profession in Europe: Responses to Societal Challenges (EUROAC) was supported. Twelve countries participated in this study (Austria, Croatia, Ireland, Poland, Switzerland, the Netherlands, Finland, Germany, Italy, Norway, Portugal and the United Kingdom) securing 16,467 respondents. The response rate varied from country to country. Response rates above 30% were reached in Norway, Italy and Germany; between 10% and 30% in The Netherlands, Finland, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Poland and Croatia; and less than 10% in Austria, Switzerland and Portugal. The Irish study received funding from the Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences (IRCHSS). The survey addressed academics at all HEA-funded institutions of higher education providing at least bachelor programmes (Tertiary Type A according to the OECD classification or â&#x20AC;&#x153;Level 5Aâ&#x20AC;? according to

Page 40


The Academic Profession in Ireland

the UNESCO ISCED-97 classification). Care was taken to ensure that the group reflected the diverse features of the higher education system in Ireland. A letter was written to the Registrar of each institution outlining the nature of the study. Permission was sought to distribute the CAP survey to staff through their official email. In the institutions surveyed, individual academics were targeted who were employed full-time or spent a substantial part of their work time on teaching and/or research. The questionnaire was administered during the academic year 201011 and focussed on a number of areas, including demographic characteristics, academics' perceptions of their profession, their teaching, research and governance systems within their institutions. Ethical approval was received from University College Dublin in which the study was based. Consent to participate was indicated on the survey, which allowed each respondent to indicate their agreement to participate in the study. As a rule, responses were included if respondents provided answers to more than half of the questions posed. The total response rate to the survey in Ireland was 1,178 (approximately 12% of Irish academics in 2011). The 1,178 valid survey responses were weighted to reflect the known population parameters of inter-locked institution type (university or other) and grade (senior or junior) as provided by the Higher Education Authority (HEA). Since response rates were different across the various sub-populations of academics, a series of weights were calculated to reflect these different response rates. As with all sample surveys, it is assumed that the sample of academics from the sub-populations is a true representation of their respective populations. Table 3 summarises the differences between the sample profile and known population profile of academics.

Page 41


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 3: Weighting for non-response

Sample

Population

Weight

Senior – University

26%

16%

0.64

Senior – Other HEI

5%

4%

0.82

Junior – University

42%

37%

0.88

Junior – Other HEI

26%

42%

1.58

Total

100%

100%

Some aspects of the weighted sample should be noted with reference to the survey. Responses from the under-represented group Junior lecturers from nonUniversity sector, were weighted up and responses from Senior lecturers from the University sector weighted down. Unless otherwise stated, all results quoted in this report from this point on are based on the weighted sample of responses. In some cases, a chi-squared statistic is quoted when testing the independence between two categorical variables such as grade by gender. The chi-square methodology is explained as follows:

1. Calculate the expected values in each category of the variable by multiplying the sample size n by each of the hypothesised proportions. 2. Calculate the χ2 statistic with degrees of freedom one less than the number of categories:



 

   

 

3. Look up the critical value of the chi-square distribution for the appropriate degrees of freedom at the required one-sided significance level. If χ2 >= χ2c

reject the null hypothesis.

If χ2 < χ2c

do not reject the null hypothesis.

Page 42


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A (weighted) summary of the key characteristics of academics in this study is provided in Table 4.

Table 4: Key respondents' characteristics Attribute

Count

%

Male

462

51%

Female

446

49%

Universities

635

54%

Other HEIs

543

46%

Less than 40

315

35%

40-49 years

330

37%

50+ years

245

28%

Junior

933

79%

Senior

245

21%

Gender

Institution

Age

Grade

The gender split was approximately even across all respondents (note that 23% of all respondents did not provide a gender response). Just over half of all respondents (54%) were from the university sector with the others (46%) coming from institutes of technology or other colleges. Approximately one-fifth (21%) of all respondents categorised themselves as a senior academic grade, i.e., professor, associate professor or senior lecturer.

Page 43


The Academic Profession in Ireland

3.2

Characteristics of participants

The profile of respondents was explored across gender, grade, institution and age range. The type of HEI, the degree status, academic discipline and current teaching area is presented. The years of continuous employment in various institutions, and the range and type of employment contracts, were examined. Table 5 shows the percentage of academic respondents by gender and grade. Table 5: Gender and grade Grade Junior

Gender

Senior

Total

Count 327

Column N % 46%

Count 135

Column N % 69%

Count 462

Column N% 51%

Female

384

54%

61

31%

446

49%

Total

711

100%

197

100%

908

100%

Male

Although the overall split between males and females was relatively even, there were noticeable differences when explored by academic grade. Over two-thirds (69%) of senior academics were male compared to 31% of females. A statistically significantly higher proportion of females were represented in the junior grades (Ď&#x2021;2 = 32, df = 1, p = 0.001). The proportion of academics within each of the age bands was relatively even, with 35% aged less than 40, 37% aged between 40 and 49, and 28% aged 50+ years old. Table 6 cross-tabulates the age and gender characteristics of all academics.

Page 44


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 6: Gender and age group of respondents Age group Less than 40

Gender

40-49 years old

50+ years old

Total

Column Column Column Column Count N % Count N % Count N % Count N % 144 46% 161 50% 148 61% 454 51%

Male Female

170

54%

163

50%

96

39%

429

49%

Total

314

100%

324

100%

244

100%

883

100%

Although the overall split between males and females was relatively even, a statistically significantly higher proportion (61%) of older academics were male (Ď&#x2021;2 = 12, df = 2, p = 0.002).

The gender by age band is illustrated in Figure 1. Figure 1: Gender by age band 80%

60% 61% Less than 40 (n = 314)

54% %

50% 40%

50%

46% 39%

40-49 years old (n = 324) 50+ years old (n = 244)

20%

0% Male

Female

Page 45


The Academic Profession in Ireland

3.3

Degree profiles

Table 7 shows the degree profiles of respondents. Over half of respondents (54%) had a doctoral qualification. Table 7: Qualifications of respondents by gender Gender Male

Degrees

Female

Total

Column Column Column Count N % Count N % Count N % 374 81% 327 74% 701 77%

First degree [e.g., Bachelor's] Second degree [e.g., Master's]

306

66%

305

69%

612

68%

Doctoral degree

267

58%

220

49%

487

54%

27

6%

10

2%

37

4%

462

100%

444

100%

906

100%

Post-doctoral degree Total

A statistically significantly higher proportion of male respondents (58%) had doctoral degrees compared to their female (49%) colleagues (Ď&#x2021;2 = 21, df = 4, p = 0.001). A higher proportion of academics working in the university sector were more likely to hold a doctoral qualification (74%) than those in the non-university sector (26%). Table 8 illustrates the data.

Table 8: Qualifications and institution Institution University

Degrees

First degree [e.g., Bachelor's] Second degree [e.g., Master's] Doctoral degree Post-doctoral degree Total

Other HEI

Total

Count 494

Column N% 78%

Count 418

Column N% 77%

Count 911

Column N% 78%

397

63%

414

77%

811

69%

472

74%

139

26%

611

52%

37

6%

8

1%

45

4%

633

100%

540

100%

1173

100%

A statistically significantly higher proportion of respondents from senior grades (83%) had a doctoral degree than their junior (44%) counterparts (Ď&#x2021;2 = 142, df = 4, p = 0.001). Table 9 illustrates the data. Page 46


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 9: Degrees and academic grade Grade Junior

Degrees

First degree [e.g., Bachelor's] Second degree [e.g., Master's] Doctoral degree Post-doctoral degree Total

Senior

Total

Column Column Column Count N % Count N % Count N % 723 78% 188 77% 911 78% 660

71%

150

61%

811

69%

407

44%

203

83%

611

52%

25

3%

20

8%

45

4%

928

100%

245

100%

1173

100%

The academic discipline of respondents in which the highest degree was secured is illustrated in Figure 2. One-sixth of respondents (16%) had higher degrees in the humanities and arts. There was an almost an equal proportion (15%) when comparing physical sciences, mathematics, computer science, and business, administration and economics (15%). Some notable differences emerged between males and females with reference to academic discipline and highest degree. Figure 2 illustrates the data.

Page 47


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Figure 2: Academic discipline: highest degree and gender % 0% Education/Teacher training

5%

10%

12% 20% 11% 14% 14% 15%

Business and administration, economics

3% 3%

Male (n = 461) 10% 8%

Life sciences

9% 16% 5% 2% 1% 7%

Health sciences, medical sciences

Other

Female (n = 441) 20%

Physical sciences, mathematics, computer sciences

Agriculture

25%

11%

Social and behavioural sciences

Engineering, manufacturing and construction, architecture

20%

5%

Humanities and arts

Law

15%

17% 3% 4%

A statistically significantly higher proportion of males had secured their highest degree (20%) in the “Physical sciences, mathematics, computer sciences” and “Engineering, manufacturing and construction, architecture” (16%) disciplines, whereas a statistically significantly higher proportion of females were found in the “Humanities and arts” (20%) and “Health sciences, medical sciences” (17%) (χ2 = 105, df = 11, p = 0.001). Differences also emerged between institutions with reference to academic discipline and highest degree (Figure 3).

Page 48


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Figure 3: Academic discipline by highest degree and institution % 0%

5%

10%

19% 14% 12%

Social and behavioural sciences

9% 12%

Business and administration, economics

19% 3% 3%

University (n = 629)

Agriculture

13% 16% 6% 17% 2% 1% 15%

Health sciences, medical sciences

Other

Other HEI (n = 536)

11% 5%

Physical sciences, mathematics, computer sciences Engineering, manufacturing and construction, architecture

25%

10%

Humanities and arts

Life sciences

20%

7%

Education/Teacher training

Law

15%

8% 3% 3%

A statistically significantly higher proportion of university sector respondents had secured their highest degrees in the “Humanities and arts” (19%) and “Health sciences, medical sciences” disciplines (15%), whereas academics from the nonuniversity sector had a higher proportion of degrees in “Business and administration, economics” (19%), “Physical sciences, mathematics, computer sciences” (16%) and “Engineering, manufacturing and construction, architecture” (17%) (χ2 = 114, df = 11, p = 0.001).

Page 49


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The majority of respondents worked in schools/departments located in the humanities and arts, and business, administration and economics areas. Table 10 shows how these proportions differ by academic discipline and gender. Table 10: Current school, academic discipline and gender Gender Male

Current School

Female

Total

Count 18

Column N% 4%

Count 25

Column N% 6%

Count 43

Column N% 5%

Humanities and arts

53

12%

85

20%

139

16%

Social and behavioural sciences

37

8%

45

11%

82

9%

Business and administration, economics Law

72

16%

67

16%

139

16%

11

2%

9

2%

20

2%

Life sciences

39

9%

36

9%

75

9%

Physical sciences, mathematics, computer sciences

83

18%

34

8%

117

13%

Engineering, manufacturing and construction, architecture Agriculture

78

17%

29

7%

107

12%

10

2%

3

1%

13

1%

Health sciences, medical sciences

46

10%

97

23%

144

16%

Other

17

4%

14

3%

30

3%

Total

452

100%

427

100%

880

100%

Education/teacher training

Almost one-third (32%) of respondents worked in schools located in the humanities and arts, and business, administration and economics areas. A statistically significantly higher proportion of males were found in the “Physical sciences, mathematics, computer sciences” (18%) and “Engineering, manufacturing and construction, architecture” (17%) disciplines, whereas a higher proportion of females worked in the “Humanities and arts” (20%) and “Health sciences, medical sciences” (22.8%) (χ2 = 97, df = 11, p = 0.001).

Page 50


The Academic Profession in Ireland

3.4

Employment patterns

3.4.1

Current work context

Over half (54%) of respondents worked in the university sector. There was a similar gender profile across institutions as illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Type of HEI in which currently employed 80%

60%

%

54% 55% 40%

43%

Male (n = 462) 39%

Female (n = 446)

20%

3%

0% University

Institute of Technology

5%

Other

Table 11 presents the grade profile by gender. Table 11: Current academic grade Gender Male

Grade

Female

Total

Count 35

Column N% 7%

Count 66

Column N% 15%

Count 100

Column N% 11%

264

57%

286

64%

549

61%

Senior lecturer

67

15%

42

9%

109

12%

Associate professor

28

6%

10

2%

38

4%

Professor

40

9%

10

2%

50

6%

Other

28

6%

33

7%

61

7%

Total

462

100%

446

100%

908

100%

Junior/associate lecturer Lecturer

Although the overall split between male and female was relatively even there were

Page 51


The Academic Profession in Ireland

noticeable differences when explored by grade. At grade level the differences were pronounced. A statistically significantly higher proportion of males were found in the senior grades (30%) compared to their female (13%) colleagues (Ď&#x2021;2 = 42, df = 5, p = 0.001). A higher proportion of males (15%) were senior lecturers compared to females (9%). At associate professor level there was a higher proportion of males (6%) compared to females (2%). At professor level 9% were males and 2% were females. 3.4.2

Employment experience since first degree

When asked about their employment experiences since their first degree a number of interesting patterns emerged. Table 12 presents the data with reference to full-time employment. Part-time employment patterns are presented in Table 13. Table 12: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed FULL TIME in the following areas? Gender Male

Higher education institutions Research institutes Government or public sector institutions (excluding higher education institutions) Industry or private sector institutions Self-employed

Female

Total

Median 15

Valid N 437

Median 11

Valid N 403

Median 12

Valid N 840

3

106

3

89

3

194

5

112

6

129

6

240

5

173

6

132

5

305

1

58

2

52

2

111

On average academics spent a median of 12 years working in HEIs since the completion of their first degree, a median of six years in government or public sector institutions, and a median of five years working in industry. Males tended to have worked for a longer period in HEIs.

Page 52


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The median number of years worked part time in higher education institutions was five years, compared with three years for self-employment. Table 13: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed PART TIME in the following areas? Gender Male

Higher education institutions Research institutes

Female

Total

Median 5

Valid N 170

Median 5

Valid N 198

Median 5

Valid N 368

1

31

2

23

1

54

1

32

2

26

1

59

1

31

3

30

2

62

1

35

3

38

3

73

Government or public sector institutions (excluding higher education institutions) Industry or private sector institutions Self-employed

Junior lecturers tended to have a more varied employment experience than their senior counterparts. Tables 14 and 15 present the data. Table 14: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed FULL TIME in the following areas? Grade Junior

Higher education institutions Research institutes

Senior

Total

Median 11

Valid N 856

Median 21

Valid N 235

Median 12

Valid N 1,091

3

190

5

69

3

259

6

255

6

58

6

313

6

333

5

81

5

414

1

128

1

26

1

154

Government or public sector institutions (excluding higher education institutions) Industry or private sector institutions Self-employed

In addition to spending more time employed in HEIs, senior grade academics spent a median of five years working full time in research institutes compared to their junior colleagues (three years). Table 15 presents the part-time results, which did not differ significantly between grades.

Page 53


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 15: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed PART TIME in the following areas? Grade Junior Median Higher education institutions Research institutes Government or public sector institutions (excluding higher education institutions) Industry or private sector institutions Self-employed

Senior

5

Valid N 402

1

Median

Total

6

Valid N 58

60

1

1

64

2 3

Median 5

Valid N 461

12

1

72

1

12

1

76

71

1

14

2

85

85

1

12

3

96

Academics in the non-university sector had wider employment experiences than their university colleagues (Tables 16 and 17).

Table 16: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed FULL TIME in the following areas? Institution University

Higher education institutions Research institutes Government or public sector institutions (excluding higher education institutions) Industry or private sector institutions Self-employed

Other HEI

Total

Median 13

Valid N 595

Median 12

Valid N 496

Median 12

Valid N 1,091

3

164

3

96

3

259

5

163

6

149

6

313

3

162

6

252

5

414

1

78

2

77

1

154

Page 54


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 17: Following completion of your first degree, how long (in years) have you been employed PART TIME in the following areas? Institution University Median Higher education institutions Research institutes Government or public sector institutions (excluding higher education institutions) Industry or private sector institutions Self-employed

3.4.3

Other HEI

5

Valid N 212

1

Median

Total

5

Valid N 249

39

1

1

42

1 2

Median 5

Valid N 461

33

1

72

1

35

1

76

37

3

47

2

85

47

5

49

3

96

Employment experience within the higher education sector

The survey indicated that academics had worked in a number of HEIs since the completion of their highest degree. Those in the university sector worked in a median of four institutions, while those in the non-university sector worked in a median of three institutions. Tables 18, 19 and 20 present the results from the median number of institutions by gender, grade and institution.

Table 18: Number of institutions employed in since completing highest degree Gender Male

Female

Total

HEIs (highest degree)

Median 3

Valid N 369

Median 2

Valid N 352

Median 3

Valid N 721

Other (highest degree)

2

189

2

161

2

349

Males worked in a median of three HEIs since completing their highest degree (two for female colleagues, Table 19).

Page 55


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 19: Number of institutions employed in since completing highest degree Grade Junior

Senior

Total

HEIs (highest degree)

Median 3

Valid N 701

Median 3

Valid N 214

Median 3

Valid N 915

Other (highest degree)

2

343

2

95

2

438

Senior grades worked in a median of three HEIs since completing their highest degree (the same as their junior colleagues, Table 20).

Table 20: Number of institutions employed in since completing highest degree Institution University

Median HEIs (highest degree Other (highest degree)

Other HEI

3

Valid N 534

2

244

Median

Total

2

Valid N 382

2

195

Median 3

Valid N 915

2

438

Academics in the university sector had worked in more higher education institutions than academics in the non-university sector.

Page 56


The Academic Profession in Ireland

3.4.4

Employment contracts

Over two-thirds (71%) of academics had permanent tenured contracts. Just over one in ten (12%) were employed on fixed-term contracts and one in ten were permanent but did not have tenure. Table 21 illustrates the data.

Table 21: Current employment contract Gender Male

Female

Total

Count 342

Column N% 76%

Count 288

Column N% 66%

Count 630

Column N% 71%

Permanent not tenured

38

8%

54

12%

92

10%

Fixed-term contract

51

11%

59

13%

110

12%

Other

21

5%

37

9%

58

7%

Total

452

100%

438

100%

890

100%

Permanent tenured

The survey indicated that a statistically significantly higher proportion of males (76%) had permanent tenured contracts compared to their female (66%) colleagues (Ď&#x2021;2 = 12, df = 3, p = 0.007). Figure 5 illustrates the data.

Figure 5: Employment contract and gender 100%

80% 76% 60%

66%

%

Male (n = 452) 40%

Female (n = 438)

20% 8% 12%

11% 13%

5% 9%

Permanent Not tenured

Fixed-term contract

Other

0% Permanent tenured

Page 57


The Academic Profession in Ireland

4. Professional work context

4.1

Introduction

This chapter explores the views of academics about their affiliation to their discipline, school/department and institution, and preferences for teaching and research. The hours spent on teaching, research, service and administration during and out of term time are assessed. Their levels of satisfaction with their current position and their perceptions of their current working contexts are also presented.

4.2

Affiliation

When academics were asked about their primary affiliation with reference to academic discipline, school/department and institution, approximately 90% viewed their academic discipline as being important or very important, 75% indicated that their school/department was important or very important and 68% viewed their institution as being important or very important. Table 22 presents the data.

Table 22: Please indicate how important each of the following affiliations is to you My academic discipline/field

My school/ department (at this institution)

My institution

Very unimportant

5%

5%

6%

Unimportant

1%

6%

7%

Neither unimportant or important

4%

14%

18%

Important

34%

43%

45%

Very important

56%

32%

23%

Valid unweighted n

1,040

1,036

1,037

Page 58


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Figure 6 shows how results for each of these key questions differ by gender.

Figure 6: Affiliation and gender

% Important or very important

100% 92% 80%

88% 73% 75%

60%

72% 62%

Male [n > 476]

40%

Female [n > 431]

20%

0% My academic discipline/ field

My school/department (at this institution)

My institution

A higher proportion of female respondents (72%) considered their institution as being important or very important compared to their male colleagues (62%). Affiliation was consistent across grades and institution.

4.3

Teaching and research preferences

One-fifth of respondents (20%) indicated a preference for teaching. Over one-third indicated a preference for both with a slight preference for research (37%), as shown in Table 23.

Table 23: Please indicate whether your interests lie primarily in teaching or primarily in research All valid respondents Primarily in teaching

20%

In both, but leaning towards teaching

36%

In both, but leaning towards research

37%

Primarily in research

7%

Valid unweighted n

1,032

Page 59


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A statistically significantly higher proportion of males (41%) leaned more towards research than teaching than their female counterparts (35%) (Ď&#x2021;2 = 18, df = 3, p < 0.001). Figure 7 illustrates the data.

Figure 7: Interest in teaching and research by gender 60%

40%

41%

%

43%

Male [n = 476]

35% 30% 20% 21%

Female [n = 429]

17% 8%

0% Primarily in teaching

In both, but In both, but leaning towards leaning towards teaching research

5%

Primarily in research

Differences in results also emerged between grades. Figure 8 illustrates the data.

Figure 8: Interest in teaching and research by grade 60% 56% 40% %

39%

Junior [n = 703]

32% 20%

25%

23% 7%

5%

0% Primarily in teaching

Senior [n = 329]

In both, but In both, but leaning towards leaning towards teaching research

12%

Primarily in research

While junior and senior grades were both interested in teaching and research, a statistically significantly higher proportion of those at senior level (56%) indicated a preference towards research (Ď&#x2021;2 = 68, df = 3, p < 0.001).

Page 60


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Differences also emerged among different age groups, as illustrated in Figure 9. Figure 9: Teaching and research by age group 60%

40%

44%

%

40% 35% 28%

20%

35% 35%

31%

20% 13%

8% 6% 6%

0%

Primarily in teaching In both, but leaning In both, but leaning Primarily in research towards teaching towards research Less than 40 (n = 299)

40-49 years old (n = 325)

50+ years old (n =262)

A statistically significantly higher proportion of academics under 40 years (44%) indicated an interest in both but were more research orientated (Ď&#x2021;2 = 26, df = 6 p < 0.001). Figure 10 illustrates the interests with reference to institution and differences in results also emerged.

Figure 10: Interest in research and teaching by institution 60% 56% 40% %

45% University [n = 702]

36% 29%

20%

Other HEI [n = 330]

16% 0%

10% 3%

6% Primarily in teaching

In both, but In both, but leaning towards leaning towards teaching research

Primarily in research

A higher proportion of university academics (56%) indicated that they were more interested in research and a statistically significantly higher proportion of academics (45%) in the non-university sector were more teaching orientated (Ď&#x2021;2 = 263, df = 3, p < 0.001).

Page 61


The Academic Profession in Ireland

4.4

Time spent on various activities

All academics were asked about the amount of time that they spent on teaching, research, service and administration each week during and outside of the teaching term time. Academics reported that on average they worked 53 hours per week when classes were in session. The average hours spent on teaching when classes were in session was 22, they spent 13 hours on research, four hours on service, nine hours on administration and five hours on other academic activities. When classes were not in session academics reported that they worked 48 hours per week on average. When classes were not taking place the focus shifted to research, where academics indicated that they spent 20 hours on research, nine hours on teaching-related matters, nine hours on administration, four hours on service and six hours on other academic activities. Tables 24 and 25 presents the data. Table 24: Considering all your professional work, how many hours do you spend in a typical week on each of the following activities when classes ARE in session? All valid respondents Hours 1-8

9-16

17-24

25-32

33-40

>40

Mean hours

Valid unweighted n

Teaching

10%

23%

28%

22%

7%

9%

22

955

Research

39%

38%

12%

7%

1%

3%

13

961

Service

90%

8%

1%

0%

0%

0%

4

785

Admin

56%

31%

7%

4%

0%

0%

9

956

Other

82%

16%

1%

0%

0%

0%

5

779

Table 25: Considering all your professional work, how many hours do you spend in a typical week on each of the following activities when classes ARE NOT in session? All valid respondents Hours

Valid unweighted n

1-8

9-16

17-24

25-32

33-40

>40

Mean hours

Teaching

53%

34%

8%

4%

1%

0%

9

908

Research

20%

24%

19%

21%

5%

10%

20

898

Service

85%

12%

2%

1%

0%

0%

4

708

Admin

57%

30%

8%

3%

1%

1%

9

880

Other

78%

19%

2%

1%

0%

0%

6

726

Page 62


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A different picture emerged with reference to academic grade. Figures 11 and 12 present the data.

Figure 11: Hours during week when classes are in session by grade 30

Hours (Mean)

25 23

20

Junior [n > 594]

18

15

16

10

Senior [n > 171]

13

12 8

5 3

4

5

7

0 Teaching

Research

Service

Administration

Other

Figure 12: Hours during week when classes are not in session by grade 30

Hours (Mean)

25 23

20

Junior [n > 532]

20

15 10 10 5

Senior [n >162]

12 8

7 4

5

5

7

0 Teaching

Research

Service

Administration

Other

Junior grades spent more time on teaching-related activities when classes were in session (23 hours) compared to their senior colleagues, who spent 18 hours. Senior academics spent more time on research (16 hours) and administration (13 hours). During out of term time, junior academics spent more time on teaching-related activities (10 hours), while their senior colleagues spent more time on research (23 hours), administration (12 hours) and other academic activities (seven hours).

Page 63


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Academics working in the university and non-university sectors allocated their time differently to various tasks. Figures 13 and 14 illustrate the data.

Figure 13: Hours during week when classes are in session by institution 30

Hours (Mean)

25

26

20 15

University [n > 420]

18 16

10

Other HEIs [n > 348]

11 9

7

5 4

6

3

4

0 Teaching

Research

Service

Administration Other academic activities

Figure 14: Hours during week when classes are not in session 30 25 Hours (Mean)

25 20 University [n > 382]

15 14 10

Other HEIs [n >312]

12 10

5

8

7 5

4

6

5

0 Teaching

Research

Service

Administration Other academic activities

Those working in the non-university sector spent more time on teaching-related activities when classes were in (26 hours) and out of session (12 hours) than those in the university sector. Academics in the university sector spent more time on researchrelated activities when classes were in (16 hours) and out of session (25 hours). Those working in the university sector spent more time on administration than academics in the non-university sector.

Page 64


The Academic Profession in Ireland

4.5

Involvement in service-related activities

Over two-thirds (69%) of academics indicated that they had acted as peer reviewers for journals, acted as research sponsors and engaged in institutional evaluations during the previous academic year. Almost half (48%) served as members of national and international scientific committees, boards and bodies. Just over half of respondents (51%) served as a member of a community organisation or participated in community-based projects. Table 26 presents the data.

Table 26: Service-related activities. All respondents % yes

Valid unweighted n

48%

986

69%

1,024

Served as an editor of a journal/book series

21%

925

Served as an elected officer or leader in professional/academic associations/organisations

34%

952

Served as an elected officer or leader of a trade union

7%

899

7%

897

51%

993

24%

929

Served as a member of national/international scientific committees/boards/bodies Served as a peer reviewer (e.g., for journals, research sponsors, institutional evaluations)

Substantial involvement in local, national or international politics Served as a member of a community organisation or participated in community-based projects Worked with local, national or international social service agencies

Page 65


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Some differences emerged between males and females in relation to these activities. A statistically significantly higher proportion of male respondents served as members of national/international scientific committees/boards/bodies (χ2 = 9, df = 1, p = 0.002), engaged in peer reviewing (χ2 =25, df = 1, p < 0.001), acted as editors of a journal/book series (χ2 = 12, df = 1, p < 0.001) and had substantial involvement in local, national or international politics (χ2 =4, df = 1, p = 0.037). Figure 15 illustrates the data. Figure 15: Service activities and gender % Yes 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

55%

Served as a member of national/international scientific committees/boards/bodies

44% 76%

Served as a peer reviewer (e.g. for journals, research sponsors, institutional evaluations)

59% 28%

Served as an editor of journal/book series

17% 37%

Served as an elected officer or leader in professional/academic associations/ organizations

Served as an elected officer or leader of a trade union

34% 7%

Male [n >= 229] Female [n >=171]

8% Substantial involvement in local, national or international politics

10% 6%

Served as a member of a community organization or participated in communitybased projects

Worked with local, national or international social service agencies

51% 49% 21% 27%

Page 66


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Differences also emerged between grades and involvement in service-related activities. A statistically significantly higher proportion of senior academics relative to junior academics served as members of national/international scientific committees/boards/bodies (χ2 = 105, df = 1, p < 0.001), served as peer reviewers (χ2 = 98, df = 1, p < 0.001), served as an editor of a journal/book series (χ2 = 58, df = 1, p < 0.001), served as an elected officer or leader in professional/academic associations/organisations (χ2 = 27, df = 1, p < 0.001) and served as an elected officer or leader of a trade union (χ2 = 4, df = 1, p = 0.046). Figure 16 illustrates the data.

Figure 16: Service activities and grade % Yes 0%

20%

Served as a member of national/ international scientific committees/ boards/bodies

40%

Substantial involvement in local, national or international politics

58% 93% 17% 42% Junior [n > =329]

30% 50%

Senior [n > =165]

9% 5% 6% 10%

Served as a member of a community organization or participated in community-based projects Worked with local, national or international social service agencies

100%

78%

Served as an elected officer or leader in professional/academic associations/organizations Served as an elected officer or leader of a trade union

80%

39%

Served as a peer reviewer (e.g. for journals, research sponsors, institutional evaluations) Served as an editor of journal/book series

60%

51% 45% 25% 23%

Page 67


The Academic Profession in Ireland

At the institutional level differences also emerged with reference to service-related activities (see Figure 17). A statistically significantly higher proportion of university academics relative to other HEI academics stated that they served as a member of national/international scientific committees/boards/bodies (χ2 = 55, df = 1, p < 0.001), served as a peer reviewer (χ2 = 138, df = 1, p < 0.001), served as an editor of a journal/book series (χ2 = 42, df = 1, p < 0.001), served as an elected officer or leader in a professional/academic association/organisation (χ2 = 8, df = 1, p = 0.005) and had substantial involvement in local, national or international politics (χ2 = 4, df = 1, p = 0.035). In addition, a statistically significantly higher proportion of HEI academics relative to university academics stated that they served as an elected officer or leader of a trade union (χ2 = 30, df = 1, p < 0.001), and served as a member of a community organisation or participated in community-based projects (χ2 = 13, df = 1, p < 0.001). Figure 17: Service activities and institution % Yes 0%

20%

Served as a member of national/international scientific committees/boards/bodies

60%

Served as an elected officer or leader of a trade union

Substantial involvement in local, national or international politics

100%

59%

81% 45% 30% 12%

Served as an elected officer or leader in professional/academic associations/ organizations

80%

34%

Served as a peer reviewer (e.g. for journals, research sponsors, institutional evaluations)

Served as an editor of journal/book series

40%

University [n > =341]

39% 30%

Other HEIs [n > =153]

4% 14% 9% 5% 44%

Served as a member of a community organization or participated in communitybased projects

56% 23%

Worked with local, national or international social service agencies

27%

Page 68


The Academic Profession in Ireland

4.6

Job satisfaction

When academics were asked to rate their overall job satisfaction on a five-point scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is a very low level of satisfaction and 5 is a very high level of satisfaction, 58% indicated that they a relatively high level of satisfaction (i.e., the combined proportion that reported a score of either 4 or 5). In contrast, around one in six (18%) reported very low levels of satisfaction (i.e., the combined proportion that reported a score of either 1 or 2). Table 27 presents the data.

Table 27: How would you rate your overall satisfaction with your current job? All valid respondents 5 (very high)

16%

4

42%

3

24%

2

13%

1 (very low)

5%

Valid unweighted n

1,039

The data revealed no statistically significant differences in job satisfaction across gender (Figure 18), academic grade (Figure 19) or institutional context (Figure 20).

Figure 18: Levels of satisfaction by gender

46%

50%

39%

40%

Female [n = 433] 15%

16%

14%

6%

4%

10%

12%

22%

20%

Male [n = 480]

26%

%

30%

0% Very Low

2

3

4

Very High

Page 69


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Figure 19: Levels of satisfaction by grade

42%

40%

44%

50%

30%

17%

16%

12%

4%

5%

10%

14%

20%

22%

25%

%

Junior [n = 703] Senior [n = 336]

0% Very Low

2

3

4

Very High

Figure 20: Levels of satisfaction by institution

40%

40%

44%

50%

18%

15%

11%

5%

4%

10%

14%

20%

University [n = 708] 21%

26%

%

30%

Other HEIs [n = 331]

0% Very Low

4.7

2

3

4

Very High

Changing current academic position

Just over half (52%) of respondents had not considered making any major changes to their job in the previous academic year. Nearly one-third (30%) had considered a position outside of academia, and 29% had considered an academic post in another country. Just over one-fifth (21%) considered an academic position in another HEI in Ireland and 18% thought about moving into a management position in their own institution. Table 28 presents the data.

Page 70


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 28: Please indicate the extent to which you considered making a major change to your job All respondents % yes

Valid unweighted n

18%

981

5%

951

6%

942

21%

967

29%

964

To a position outside academia

30%

997

I have not considered making any major changes in my job

52%

892

To a management position within your higher education institution To a management position within another higher education institution in Ireland To a management position within a higher education institution in another country To an academic position in a higher education institution within Ireland To an academic position in a higher education institution in another country

A statistically significantly higher proportion of males relative to females considered changing their job to a management position within their own institution (Ď&#x2021;2 = 4, df = 1, p = 0.030) and considered changing their job to an academic position in a higher education institution in another country (Ď&#x2021;2 = 18, df = 1, p < 0.001). Figure 21 illustrates the data.

Page 71


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Figure 21: Extent to which considered making a major change to their job by gender % Yes 0%

20%

To a management position within your higher education institution To a management position within another higher education institution in Ireland To a management position within a higher education institution in another country To an academic position in another higher education institution within Ireland To an academic position in a higher education institution in another country To a position outside academia

40%

60%

80%

100%

21% 15% 7% 4% 7%

Male [n > =367]

4%

Female [n >= 335]

24% 20% 37% 22% 29% 31%

I have not considered making any major changes in my job

50% 51%

Of those that said they considered making a change, few actually acted on it. Of those that indicated moving to an academic position in a HEI in another country, only 12% actually acted on this. In addition, only 10% of those that said they considered moving to a management position within their higher education institution actually acted on it. Equally, only 10% of those who indicated considering a move to a position outside academia actually acted on it.

Page 72


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 29: Please indicate the extent to which you took action to execute this change All respondents that considered making a change in each instance Valid % yes unweighted n To a management position within your higher education institution To a management position within another higher education institution in Ireland To a management position within a higher education institution in another country To an academic position in a higher education institution within Ireland To an academic position in a higher education institution in another country To a position outside academia

10%

180

2%

51

3%

60

8%

206

12%

296

10%

288

Page 73


The Academic Profession in Ireland

4.8

Perception of working in academia

Around two out of every five academics (41%) either agreed or strongly agreed that it was a poor time for young people to embark on a career in academia in their field of study. Only a relatively small proportion (11%) of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that if they had the chance to do it over again, they would not become an academic. Over one-third (38%) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that their job is a source of considerable personal strain. Table 30 presents the data.

Table 30: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with each of the following statements: All respondents This is a poor time for any young person to begin an academic career in my field

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

My job is a source of considerable personal strain

Strongly agree

20%

4%

12%

Agree

21%

7%

26%

Neither agree nor disagree

18%

12%

22%

Disagree

28%

35%

25%

Strongly disagree

13%

41%

15%

Valid unweighted n

1,031

1,028

1,020

All academics were asked to indicate the extent to which they believed working conditions had improved or declined since the start of their career. Table 31 presents the data. The majority of academics (57%) were of the view that working conditions had deteriorated.

Page 74


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Table 31: Since you started your career, please indicate the extent to which you believe working conditions in higher education have improved or declined All valid respondents Very much improved

5%

4

18%

Stayed the same

20%

2

37%

Very much deteriorated

20%

Valid unweighted n

1,032

This perception did not differ significantly by gender, with the majority of both males (57%) and females (60%) indicating that they perceived a deterioration in working conditions since the start of their career. Figure 22 illustrates the data. Figure 22: Deterioration in working conditions by gender

20%

Female [n = 427] 5% 3%

10%

Male [n = 479]

17%

20%

19%

21%

19%

%

30%

19%

40%

39%

38%

50%

0% Very Much Deteriorated

2

Stayed the same

4

Very Much Improved

A statistically significantly higher proportion of senior academics perceived a deterioration in working conditions (Ď&#x2021;2 = 19, df = 4, p = 0.001). Figure 23 illustrates the data.

Page 75


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Figure 23: Deterioration in working conditions by grade 50%

36%

40%

40%

Junior [n = 697] Senior [n = 335]

4%

6%

18%

10%

10%

18%

19%

20%

23%

25%

%

30%

0% Very Much Deteriorated

2

Stayed the same

4

Very Much Improved

A statistically significantly higher proportion of university academics perceived a deterioration in working conditions (Ď&#x2021;2 = 27, df = 4, p < 0.001). Figure 24 illustrates the data.

Figure 24: Deterioration and institution 60% 50% 42%

Other HEIs [n = 332] 6%

4%

24% 13%

20%

20%

10%

19%

20%

University [n = 700]

31%

30% 21%

%

40%

0% Very Much Deteriorated

2

Stayed the same

4

Very Much Improved

Page 76


The Academic Profession in Ireland

5.

Teaching

5.1

Introduction

This chapter examines the teaching responsibilities of academics with reference to undergraduate and graduate students. Their involvement in various teaching activities was also explored. The expectations and regulatory expectations set by institutions are assessed. Their attitudes to a range of teaching issues are examined.

5.2

Teaching responsibilities

On average academics spent 66% of their time teaching undergraduate students, 15% of their time instructing masters students, 9% of their time working with doctoral students and 6% of their time teaching graduate diploma/higher diploma students. Table 32 presents the data.

Table 32: Proportion of teaching responsibilities with various student groups (valid unweighted n=950)

0% Undergrad programmes Graduate/higher diploma programmes Masters programmes Doctoral programmes Continuing professional education programmes Other

Proportion of time spent on each group 26% 51% 1% - 25% 50% 75%

75% 100%

Mean proportion of time spent

8%

7%

18%

21%

46%

66%

76%

16%

5%

1%

1%

6%

47%

32%

14%

4%

3%

15%

65%

23%

9%

3%

1%

9%

85%

14%

1%

0%

0%

2%

95%

4%

0%

0%

1%

2%

The percentage of instruction time spent on average by males (64%) and females (67%) is similar for undergraduate programmes. In relation to teaching doctoral students, males spent twice as much time (12%) on this activity compared to their female (6%) colleagues. Figure 25 illustrates the data.

Page 77


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Figure 25: Proportion of time teaching students by gender 80% 64% 67%

Mean %

60% 40% 15% 16%

20%

5% 8%

12% 6%

2% 2%

1% 2%

Continuing professional education programmes

Other

0% Undergraduate Graduate/ Higher programmes Diploma programmes

Masters programmes

Male [n = 457]

Doctoral programmes

Female [n = 398]

Junior academics (69%) spent a higher proportion of their time teaching undergraduate students compared to senior academics (52%). Meanwhile, senior academics devoted more time to teaching masters (19%) and doctoral students (22%) compared to their junior counterparts (14% and 6%, respectively). Figure 26 illustrates the data.

Figure 26: Proportion of time teaching students by grade 80%

Mean %

60%

69% 52%

40% 14%

20% 7%

22%

19% 6%

3%

2% 2%

2% 2%

Continuing professional education programmes

Other

0% Undergraduate Graduate/ Higher programmes Diploma programmes

Masters programmes

Junior [n = 642]

Doctoral programmes

Senior [n = 308]

Page 78


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Respondents from other HEIs spent, on average, over three-quarters (78%) of their time instructing undergraduate programmes, compared to their university colleagues who spent half their time teaching undergraduates (55%). Academics from the university sector spent a higher proportion of time teaching masters (20%) and doctoral programmes (15%) than their non-university sector counterparts. Figure 27 illustrates the data.

Figure 27: Proportion of time spent teaching students by institution 78%

80%

Mean %

60%

55%

40% 20% 20%

10%

7% 5%

15% 3%

2% 3%

1% 2%

Doctoral programmes

Continuing professional education programmes

Other

0% Undergraduate Graduate/ Higher programmes Diploma programmes

Masters programmes

University [n = 644]

Other HEIs [n = 306]

Page 79


The Academic Profession in Ireland

All academics were asked to indicate the average number of students that they taught at undergraduate and graduate levels. Within undergraduate programmes the average number of students taught was 176, at masters level 16, at graduate diploma/higher diploma nine and at doctoral level three. Table 33 presents the data.

Table 33: The approximate number of students you instruct at each of these levels (valid unweighted n=973) Proportion teaching number of students

Undergrad programmes Graduate/higher diploma programmes Masters programmes Doctoral programmes Continuing professional education programmes Other

Mean number of students

None

1-50

51100

101150

151200

201250

250+

8%

16%

23%

13%

12%

7%

20%

176

77%

19%

2%

1%

0%

0%

0%

9

46%

47%

5%

1%

0%

0%

0%

16

64%

36%

1%

0%

0%

0%

0%

3

86%

12%

2%

0%

0%

0%

0%

5

96%

3%

0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

2

The average number of students instructed is similar across all levels for males and females. Figure 28 illustrates the data.

Page 80


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Average number of students

Figure 28: Average number of students by gender 200

179 175

160 120 80 40

9

16

10

15

3

2

6

5

2

1

0 Undergraduate Graduate/ Higher programmes Diploma programmes

Masters programmes

Male [n = 468]

Doctoral programmes

Continuing professional education programmes

Other

Female [n = 416]

With reference to grade, the average number of students is broadly similar (Figure 25), although senior academics typically taught, on average, a notably higher number of undergraduate level students (194) relative to junior academics (171). Figure 29 illustrates the data.

Average number of students

Figure 29: Average number of students by grade 200

194 171

160 120 80 40

9

15

8

17 2

6

5

6

2

2

0 Undergraduate Graduate/ Higher programmes Diploma programmes

Masters programmes

Junior [n = 657]

Doctoral programmes

Continuing professional education programmes

Other

Senior [n = 319]

Page 81


The Academic Profession in Ireland

At institutional level, academics in the university sector taught on average a higher number of students (208) compared to those in the non-university sector (140). Figure 30 illustrates the data.

Average number of students

Figure 30: Average number of students by institution 240

208

200 160

140

120 80 40

12

21

6

10

5

1

6

5

2

2

0 Undergraduate Graduate/ Higher programmes Diploma programmes

Masters programmes

University [n = 664]

Doctoral programmes

Continuing professional education programmes

Other

Other HEIs [n = 312]

Page 82


The Academic Profession in Ireland

5.3

Teaching activities

Academics were asked to indicate the range of teaching activities that they engaged in as part of their teaching duties. Table 34 presents the data. Classroom teaching/lecturing was the main teaching activity (97%). Engaging with students through electronic communication (92%) was an important element of teaching, as was meeting students on an individual basis (88%) outside of scheduled class time. The development of course materials (90%) was also an important activity, while more than four out of five (84%) academics engaged in curricular and programme development. Project work (72%) and individualised instruction (72%) were also important features of the instructional process. The least common teaching activity was distance education (18%).

Table 34: During the current (or previous) academic year, have you been involved in any of the following teaching activities? (valid unweighted n=991) % yes Classroom teaching/lecturing

97%

Electronic communications (e-mail) with students

92%

Development of course material

90%

Face-to-face interaction with students outside of class

88%

Curriculum/programme development

84%

Individualised instruction

72%

Learning through projects/project groups

72%

Practice instruction/laboratory work

52%

Information and communications-based technology

49%

Distance education

18%

Valid unweighted n

991

Page 83


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The level of involvement did not differ significantly between genders (Ď&#x2021;2 = 11, df = 10, p = 0.296). Figure 31 illustrates the data.

Figure 31: Teaching activities and gender Percentage yes 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

98% 97%

Classroom teaching/lecturing

91% 94%

Electronic communications (e-mail) with students

89% 91%

Development of course material

87% 90%

Face-to-face interaction with students outside of class

83% 85%

Curriculum/programme development Learning through projects/project groups

72% 72%

Individualised instruction

70% 73% 54% 51%

Practice instruction/laboratory work

51% 49%

Information and communications based technology Distance education

100%

17% 20%

Male [n = 472]

Female [n = 422]

Page 84


The Academic Profession in Ireland

However, differences in teaching activities were statistically significant across grade (χ2 = 30, df = 10, p = 0.001). Junior grades were more likely to be involved with “Practice instruction/laboratory work” (54% v 45%) and “Information and communications-based technology” (52% v 40%), whereas those in senior grades were more likely to be involved in “Individualised instruction” (77% v 71%). Figure 32 illustrates the data.

Figure 32: Teaching activities and grade Percentage yes 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

98% 95%

Classroom teaching/lecturing

92% 91%

Electronic communications (e-mail) with students

91% 85%

Development of course material

88% 88%

Face-to-face interaction with students outside of class

84% 83%

Curriculum/programme development

72% 70%

Learning through projects/project groups

71% 77%

Individualised instruction

54%

Practice instruction/laboratory work

45% 52%

Information and communications based technology Distance education

100%

40% 18% 15%

Junior [n = 669]

Senior [n = 322]

Page 85


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Teaching activities were also found to be statistically significantly different between institutions (Ď&#x2021;2 = 48, df = 10, p < 0.001). Other HEI respondents were more likely to be involved in "Curriculum/programme development" (87% v 81%), "Project and group work" (77% v 67%), and "Practical and laboratory work" (59% v 46%). A higher

proportion

of

other

HEI

academics

employed

"Information

and

communications-based technology" (55% v 45%) as part of their teaching activities. Figure 33 illustrates the data. Figure 33: Teaching activities and institution Percentage yes 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

98% 97%

Classroom teaching/lecturing

92% 92%

Electronic communications (e-mail) with students

89% 90%

Development of course material

88% 88%

Face-to-face interaction with students outside of class

81% 87%

Curriculum/programme development

74% 70%

Individualised instruction

67%

Learning through projects/project groups

77% 46%

Practice instruction/laboratory work

59% 45%

Information and communications based technology Distance education

100%

55% 19% 16%

University [n = 673]

OtherHEI [n = 318]

Page 86


The Academic Profession in Ireland

5.4

Institutional expectations

Around two out of every five academics (41%) were of the view that management was not supportive of teaching activities, while almost one in three either agreed (30%) or strongly agreed (3%) that management was supportive of teaching activities. The data is illustrated in Figure 34.

Figure 34: Management and teaching – % agree or strongly agree that there is a supportive attitude of management towards teaching activities

All (n=865)

18%

Male (n=449)

19%

Female (n=403)

17%

Junior (n=578)

18%

Senior (n=287)

19%

University (n=599) Other HEI (n=266)

23%

24% 18%

22%

21%

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

32%

25%

29%

25%

30%

30%

26%

31%

23%

17%

27%

28%

24% 22%

30%

26%

34%

21%

Neither Disagree or Agree

Agree

3%

2% 4%

3% 2%

3% 2%

Strongly Agree

There was no statistically significant difference across gender (χ2 = 5, df = 4, p = 0.219) or grade (χ2 = 4, df = 4, p = 0.316) for views about the attitude of management towards teaching. However, there was a statistically significant difference across institution (χ2 = 15, df = 4, p = 0.004), with 36% of academics in other HEIs stating that they either agreed or strongly agreed that management was supportive towards teaching activities compared to 29% of academics in universities.

Page 87


The Academic Profession in Ireland

All academics were asked if their individual institutions had regulations in place with reference to their teaching commitments. The majority (85%) indicated there were institutional expectations around teaching hours. Over one-third of academics (38%) indicated that there were institutional expectations about the number of students in their class and the number of graduate students supervised. Table 35 presents the data.

Table 35: Does your institution set quantitative load targets or regulatory expectations for individual faculty for the following: (valid unweighted n=681)? % yes Number of hours spent teaching in the classroom

85%

Number of students in your class

38%

Number of graduate students to supervise

38%

Time set aside for individual student consultation

28%

Percentage of students passing examinations

11%

This was found to be statistically significantly different across gender (Ď&#x2021;2 = 11, df = 5, p = 0.045). Of note, a higher proportion of females indicated that their institution had set targets for graduate student supervision (41%). Figure 35 illustrates the data. Figure 35: Institutional expectations with reference to teaching and gender 100% 80%

87%

83%

%

60% 40% 36% 38%

41% 34%

32%

20%

24% 10% 11%

0% Number of hours Number of students Number of graduate spent teaching in the in your class students to supervise classroom

Male [n = 319]

Percentage of students passing examinations

Time set aside for individual student consultation

Female [n = 289]

Page 88


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A statistically significantly higher proportion of junior grade academics (Ď&#x2021;2 = 15, df = 5, p = 0.010) indicated that their institution had set targets for number of hours spent teaching in the classroom (87%). Figure 36 illustrates the data.

Figure 36: Institutional expectations with reference to teaching and grade 100% 80%

87% 76%

%

60% 40% 39% 36%

38% 38%

34% 27%

20% 11% 10% 0% Number of hours Number of students Number of graduate spent teaching in the in your class students to supervise classroom

Junior [n = 484]

Percentage of students passing examinations

Time set aside for individual student consultation

Senior [n = 197]

Page 89


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A statistically significantly higher proportion of academics from other HEIs (Ď&#x2021;2 = 143, df = 5, p <= 0.001) indicated that their institution had set targets for number of hours spent teaching in the classroom. Figure 37 illustrates the data. Figure 37: Institutional expectations with reference to teaching and institution 100% 96% 80% 71%

%

60% 40% 20%

44%

47% 35%

31%

31%

23% 13%

8%

0% Number of hours Number of students Number of graduate spent teaching in the in your class students to supervise classroom

University [n = 401]

Percentage of students passing examinations

Time set aside for individual student consultation

Other HEI [n = 280]

Page 90


The Academic Profession in Ireland

5.5

Teaching practices

Academics were asked about their instructional practices. Over half (58%) indicated that they had to teach basic skills to students due to their lack of prior knowledge. A high proportion (84%) emphasised practice-based approaches and international content (80%) in their teaching. Table 36 presents the data.

Table 36: Teaching practices: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements I spend more time than I would like teaching basic skills due to student deficiencies

In my teaching I emphasise practicebased knowledge and skills

In my courses I emphasise international perspectives or content

Strongly disagree

3%

1%

1%

Disagree

18%

3%

3%

Neither disagree nor agree

20%

12%

15%

Agree

35%

43%

46%

Strongly agree

23%

41%

34%

Valid unweighted n

966

955

931

Page 91


The Academic Profession in Ireland

For the responses to the statement “I spend more time than I would like teaching basic skills due to student deficiencies”, no statistically significant differences were observed across gender (χ2 = 7, df = 4, p = 0.138) or grade (χ2 = 5, df = 4, p = 0.218). Figure 38 presents the data.

Figure 38: I spend more time than I would like teaching basic skills due to student deficiencies

All (n=966) 3%

Male (n=467) 2%

17%

Female (n=409) 4%

6%

University (n=654)

5%

Other HEI (n=312) 1%

Strongly Disagree

21%

23% 22%

32%

34%

21% 19%

Disagree

35%

23%

21%

26%

36%

19%

17%

23%

35%

21%

18%

14%

35%

20%

19%

Junior (n=654) 3% Senior (n=312)

20%

18%

28%

38%

Neither Disagree or Agree

19%

Agree

Strongly Agree

Page 92


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to the statement “In my teaching I emphasise practice-based knowledge and skills” were observed to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 18, df = 4, p = 0.001), grade (χ2 = 16, df = 4, p = 0.002) and institution (χ2 = 33, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Of note, female academics were more likely to strongly agree with this statement (48%) when compared to male academics (35%), as were junior academics (44%) compared to senior academics (29%), and as were academics from other HEIs (49%) compared to academics from universities (34%). Figure 39 presents the data.

Figure 39: In my teaching I emphasise practice-based knowledge and skills

All (n=955) 3%

Male (n=459) 3%

15%

Female (n=408) 3% 10%

41%

35%

46% 39%

Junior (n=644) 3% 11% Senior (n=311)

4%

16%

University (n=649)

4%

16%

Other HEI (n=306) 2% 8%

Strongly Disagree

43%

12%

48%

44%

41% 50%

29%

34%

44% 49%

42%

Disagree

Neither Disagree or Agree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Page 93


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Finally, the responses to the statement “In my courses I emphasise international perspectives or content” were not found to be statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 4, df = 4, p = 0.371), yet they were for gender (χ2 = 21, df = 4, p <= 0.001) and institution (χ2 = 20, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Of particular note, a higher proportion of female academics strongly agreed with the statement (41%) compared to male academics (29%), as did university academics (40%) compared to academics from other HEIs (28%). Figure 40 presents the data.

Figure 40: In my courses I emphasise international perspectives or content

All (n=931)

Male (n=447)

3%

4%

Senior (n=305) 3%

5%

Strongly Disagree

34%

29%

48% 42%

15%

16% 13%

University (n=640) 2% 13% Other HEI (n=291)

46%

16%

5%

Female (n=404) 1%

Junior (n=626)

15%

19%

Disagree

41%

33%

47% 43%

40%

45%

40% 28%

47%

Neither Disagree or Agree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Page 94


The Academic Profession in Ireland

5.6

Role of research and service in teaching

Over four-fifths (82%) of academics used their research activities to inform their teaching, and two-thirds (66%) drew on their service experience. Table 37 presents the data.

Table 37: Informing teaching content: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements

My research activities inform my teaching

My service activities (services to clients and/or patients, unpaid consulting, public or voluntary services) inform my teaching

Strongly disagree

2%

4%

Disagree

7%

9%

Neither disagree nor agree

8%

22%

Agree

38%

34%

Strongly agree

44%

32%

Valid unweighted n

897

721

Page 95


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to the statement “My research activities inform my teaching” were not statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 1, df = 4, p = 0.895), yet they were across grade (χ2 = 23, df = 4, p <= 0.001) and institution (χ2 = 38, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Of particular note, 58% of senior academics strongly agreed with the statement compared to 40% of junior academics, while 51% of university academics strongly agreed with statement compared to 35% of academics from other HEIs. Figure 41 illustrates the data.

Figure 41: My research activities inform my teaching

All (n=897)

7%

8%

38%

44%

Male (n=429)

6%

8%

39%

44%

Female (n=388)

Junior (n=597)

6%

38%

9%

8%

9%

Senior (n=300) 2% 7%

University (n=640)

3% 6%

Other HEI (n=257)

11%

Strongly Disagree

46%

40%

40% 32%

58%

51%

37% 11%

Disagree

35%

40%

Neither Disagree or Agree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Page 96


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to the statement “My service activities (services to clients and/or patients, unpaid consulting, public or voluntary services) inform my teaching” were not statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 8, df = 4, p = 0.082), grade (χ2 = 5, df = 4, p = 0.227) or institution (χ2 = 2, df = 4, p = 0.653). Figure 42 illustrates the data.

Figure 42: My service activities (services to clients and/or patients, unpaid consulting, public or voluntary services) inform my teaching

All (n=721) 4% 9%

Male (n=356)

5%

Female (n=306) 2% 7%

21%

Junior (n=479) 4% 10% Senior (n=242) 2%6%

22% 25%

University (n=494) 3% 9%

24%

Other HEI (n=227) 4% 9%

20%

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

29%

32%

24%

11%

32%

34%

22%

35%

35%

32%

33%

31%

37%

31%

32%

32%

35%

Neither Disagree or Agree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Page 97


The Academic Profession in Ireland

5.7

Range of supports and facilities for teaching

Just over half of academics (53%) indicated that they were encouraged to improve their teaching in response to teaching evaluations. Three-fifths of academics (60%) felt that the institution provided adequate training courses to support their teaching. Table 38 presents the data.

Table 38: Informing teaching content: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements I am encouraged to improve my instructional skills in response to teaching evaluations

At my institution there are adequate training courses for enhancing teaching quality

Strongly disagree

6%

4%

Disagree

19%

16%

Neither disagree nor agree

21%

20%

Agree

40%

42%

Strongly agree

13%

18%

Valid unweighted n

944

968

Page 98


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to the statement “I am encouraged to improve my instructional skills in response to teaching evaluations” were not statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 5, df = 4, p = 0.225), but they were across gender (χ2 = 11, df = 4, p = 0.026) and institution (χ2 = 24, df = 4, p <= 0.001). With regard to gender, 16% of females strongly agreed with the statement compared to 10% of males. University academics were more likely to agree with the statement: 43% agreed and 16% strongly agreed, compared to 37% of other HEI academics that agreed and 10% that strongly agreed. Figure 43 illustrates the data.

Figure 43: I am encouraged to improve my instructional skills in response to teaching evaluations

All (n=944)

6%

Male (n=453)

8%

Female (n=404) 5%

Junior (n=637)

7%

Senior (n=307)

6%

University (n=651)

6%

Other HEI (n=293)

21%

19%

20%

40%

22%

18%

40%

21%

20%

40%

27%

16%

38%

43%

22%

14%

8%

25%

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

20%

Neither Disagree or Agree

10% 16%

41%

20%

13%

13% 12%

16% 37%

Agree

10%

Strongly Agree

Page 99


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to the statement “At my institution there are adequate training courses for enhancing teaching quality” were not statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 4, df = 4, p = 0.307), but they were across gender (χ2 = 22, df = 4, p <= 0.001) and institution (χ2 = 32, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Of note, 24% of female academics strongly agreed with the statement compared to 13% of male academics, 22% of university academics strongly agreed compared to 15% of other HEI academics. In addition, university academics were less likely to disagree with the statement: 11% disagreed and 3% strongly disagreed, compared to 21% of other HEI academics that disagreed and 7% that strongly disagreed. Figure 44 illustrates the data.

Figure 44: At my institution there are adequate training courses for enhancing teaching quality

All (n=968) 4%

Male (n=460)

5%

Female (n=416) 4%

Junior (n=654)

5%

Senior (n=314) 3% 12%

Other HEI (n=308)

7%

Strongly Disagree

22%

44%

21%

Disagree

18%

45%

22%

21%

19%

41%

19%

16%

13% 24%

43%

15%

14%

University (n=660) 3% 11%

42%

24%

16%

18%

42%

20%

16%

18%

Neither Disagree or Agree

40%

Agree

15%

Strongly Agree

Page 100


The Academic Profession in Ireland

All academics were asked to evaluate classrooms, technology for teaching and laboratories in their institutions. Over half of academics (57%) rated classroom as good or very good. Nearly two-thirds (64%) viewed technology for teaching positively. The majority of academics (60%) rated laboratories highly. Table 39 presents the data.

Table 39: Evaluation of classrooms, technology for teaching and laboratories Classrooms

Technology for teaching

Laboratories

Very poor

4%

3%

4%

Poor

13%

8%

12%

Fair

27%

25%

25%

Good

34%

38%

35%

Very good

23%

26%

25%

Valid unweighted n

1,017

1,011

624

Page 101


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The evaluation of classrooms was not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 3, df = 4, p = 0.460) or grade (χ2 = 6, df = 4, p = 0.189), but it was for institution (χ2 = 9, df = 4, p = 0.046). Of note, 25% of university academics said that classrooms were very good compared to 19% of other HEI academics. Figure 45 illustrates the data.

Figure 45: Evaluation of classrooms

All (n=1017) 4%

13%

27%

34%

23%

Male (n=471) 4%

13%

24%

38%

21%

Female (n=423) 3%

13%

Junior (n=687) 4%

12%

Senior (n=330) 2%

14%

University (n=691) 3% 12% Other HEI (n=326) 5%

14%

Very Poor

32%

29%

35%

26%

31%

31%

33%

27%

35%

27%

Poor

Fair

Good

23%

23% 23%

25% 19%

Very Good

Page 102


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The evaluation of technology for teaching was not found to be statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 4, df = 4, p = 0.328) or institution (χ2 = 2, df = 4, p = 0.736), but it was for gender (χ2 = 9, df = 4, p = 0.043). A slightly higher proportion of females (27%) relative to males (23%) stated that technology for teaching was very good, yet a notably higher proportion of males (42%) relative to females (34%) rated it as good. Figure 46 illustrates the data.

Figure 46: Evaluation of technology for teaching

All (n=1011) 3% 8%

Male (n=467) 4% 6%

38%

25%

42%

24%

Female (n=422) 3% 10%

Junior (n=682) 4% 7%

38%

28%

Other HEI (n=323) 4% 9%

Very Poor

38%

25%

Poor

Fair

Good

27%

22%

26%

38%

26%

23%

27%

38%

24%

Senior (n=329) 2% 10%

University (n=688) 3% 7%

34%

25%

26%

25%

Very Good

Page 103


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The evaluation of laboratories was not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 7, df = 4, p = 0.120), grade (χ2 = 3, df = 4, p = 0.512) or institution (χ2 = 8, df = 4, p = 0.067). Figure 47 illustrates the data.

Figure 47: Evaluation of laboratories

All (n=624) 4%

Male (n=303)

5%

12%

13%

25%

24%

Female (n=249) 3% 11%

24%

Junior (n=426) 4% 11%

25%

Senior (n=198) 5%

University (n=403) 4%

15%

14%

Other HEI (n=221) 4% 9%

Very Poor

35%

37% 32%

31%

33%

22%

37%

28%

Poor

Fair

Good

21% 30%

36%

23%

25%

24% 25%

27% 22%

Very Good

Page 104


The Academic Profession in Ireland

6.

Research

6.1

Introduction

This chapter examines the research activities engaged in by academics. Their involvement in collaborative research activities was assessed and their scholarly output over the previous three years was explored. Their involvement in various research funding initiatives and their attitudes to the research aspect of their work was examined.

6.2

Collaboration

Collaboration is regarded as a key element of academic research activity. Over half (53%) of academics indicated that they worked individually on research projects. Academics also engaged in collaborative projects at an international level (58%), as well as with colleagues from their own institutions (57%) and at other institutions in Ireland (54%). Table 40 presents the data.

Table 40: How would you characterise your research efforts undertaken during this (or the previous) academic year? Percentage responding yes Do you collaborate with international colleagues? (n=926) Do you have collaborators on any of your research projects within your current institution? (n=928) Do you collaborate with persons at other institutions in your country? (n=925) Are you working individually/without collaboration on any of your research projects? (n=929)

58% 57% 54% 53%

Page 105


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The proportions were statistically significantly different across gender for collaboration with others at other institutions (Ď&#x2021;2 = 5.8, df = 1, p = 0.016) and with international colleagues (Ď&#x2021;2 = 4.1 df = 1, p = 0.043), with males in both instances more likely to collaborate than their female counterparts. Figure 48 illustrates the data.

Figure 48: Collaborative activities by gender 100%

% Yes

80% 60% 40%

55%

52%

58%

57%

62%

58% 49%

55%

20% 0% Are you working Do you have collaborators Do you collaborate with Do you collaborate with individually/without on any of your research persons at other international colleagues? collaboration on any of projects within your institutions in your your research projects? current institution? country?

Male [n > =448]

Female [n > =416]

Page 106


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Senior academics were more likely to collaborate with international colleagues (χ2 = 84, df = 1, p <= 0.001), with colleagues in their own institution (χ2 = 40, df = 1, p = 0.001) and with colleagues from other national institutions (χ2 = 40, df 1 p = 0.001). Figure 49 illustrates the data.

Figure 49: Collaborative activities by grade 100% 80%

86%

% Yes

76%

73%

60% 40%

52%

54%

52%

48%

50%

20% 0% Are you working Do you have collaborators Do you collaborate with Do you collaborate with individually/without on any of your research persons at other international colleagues? collaboration on any of projects within your institutions in your your research projects? current institution? country?

Junior [n >= 614]

Senior [n > =310]

Page 107


The Academic Profession in Ireland

University academics were more likely to work individually on research projects than their colleagues in other HEIs (χ2 = 14.5, df = 1, p <= 0.001). University academics were also twice as likely to engage with international colleagues on research projects than their colleagues from other HEIs (χ2 = 150.5, df = 1 p <= 0.001). They were also more likely to collaborate with colleagues within their own institution (χ2 = 106.2, df = 1, p <= 0.001) and with colleagues from other institutions (χ2 = 30.5, df = 1, p <= 0.001). Figure 50 illustrates the data.

Figure 50: Collaborative research activities by institution 100%

% Yes

80% 76%

72%

60%

61%

58% 40%

45%

43%

38%

35%

20% 0%

Are you working Do you have collaborators Do you collaborate with Do you collaborate with individually/without on any of your research persons at other international colleagues? collaboration on any of projects within your institutions in your your research projects? current institution? country?

University [n > =660]

Other HEIs [n > =220]

Page 108


The Academic Profession in Ireland

6.3

Research focus

Over three-fifths of academics (63%) categorised their research activities as applied (based on achieving a score of 4 or 5). A similar proportion categorised their research as international in orientation, while over half (56%) were involved in multidisciplinary research (both based on achieving a score of 4 or 5). Just over half of academics (53%) indicated stated that their research was not commercially orientated. Table 41 illustrates the data.

Table 41: Research focus Socially orientated/ identified for the betterment of society

International in scope or orientation

One discipline

Basic/ theoreti cal

Applied/ practically orientated

Commercially orientated/ identified for technology transfer

Not at all

15%

11%

53%

20%

13%

24%

13%

2

16%

9%

17%

14%

9%

27%

14%

3

23%

17%

12%

19%

17%

21%

17%

4

25%

37%

12%

27%

31%

18%

28%

Very much Valid unweighted n

22%

26%

6%

19%

29%

10%

29%

839

866

830

846

845

851

853

Interdisciplinary

Page 109


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A statistically significantly higher proportion of males (53%) described their research as theoretical (Ď&#x2021;2 = 21.2, df = 4, p <= 0.001) compared to females (38%). Over onefifth of males (21%) viewed their research as being commercially orientated or intended for technology transfer (Ď&#x2021;2 = 25.1, df = 4, p <= 0.001), compared to 15% of females. Males (40%) were less likely to identify their research as socially orientated (Ď&#x2021;2 = 14.9, df = 4, p = 0.005) compared to over half of female colleagues (53%). The other descriptors with reference to research were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender. Figure 51 illustrates the proportion of respondents reporting a score of either 4 or 5 (i.e., a strong emphasis) for each of the various descriptors by gender.

Figure 51: Research focus by gender Score of 4 or 5 (very much) 0%

20%

40%

60% 63% 58%

International in scope or orientation

62% 66%

Applied/practically-oriented

56% 58%

Multi-/interdisciplinary

53%

Basic/theoretical

38% 40%

Socially-oriented/intended for the betterment of society

Based in one discipline

Commercially-oriented/intended for technology transfer

Male [n > =413]

80%

53% 28% 28% 21% 15% Female [n > =364]

Page 110


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A statistically significantly higher proportion of senior academics (53%) viewed their research as theoretically focussed (χ2 = 10.1, df = 4, p = 0.039), compared to their junior colleagues (44%). Over three-quarters of senior academics (77%) viewed their research as being international in scope or orientation (χ2 = 44.9, df = 4, p <= 0.001) compared to just over half (55%) of their junior colleagues. Over three-fifths of senior academics described their research as being multi-/interdisciplinary (χ2 = 11.1, df = 4, p = 0.026) compared to just over half (55%) of junior academics. Meanwhile, junior academics were more likely to report their research as being commercially orientated or intended for technology transfer (χ2 = 10.8, df = 4, p = 0.029). The other descriptors for emphasis of research were not found to be statistically significantly different across grade. Figure 52 illustrates the proportion of respondents reporting a score of either 4 or 5 (i.e., a strong emphasis) for each of the various descriptors by grade.

Figure 52: Research focus by grade Score of 4 or 5 (very much) 0%

20%

40%

60% 64% 61%

Applied/practically-oriented

55% 61%

Multi-/interdisciplinary

55%

International in scope or orientation

77% 48% 44%

Socially-oriented/intended for the betterment of society

44%

Basic/theoretical

53% 28% 30%

Based in one discipline

Commercially-oriented/intended for technology transfer

80%

19% 14%

Junior [n > =536]

Senior [n >=294]

Page 111


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A statistically significantly higher proportion of university academics viewed their research as internationally orientated (χ2 = 83.3, df = 4 p <= 0.001), as being interdisciplinary (χ2 = 36.3, df = 4, p <= 0.001), as theoretically focussed (χ2 = 33.5, df = 4, p <= 0.001), and as socially orientated (χ2 = 15.1, df = 4, p = 0.004). A statistically significantly higher proportion of academics from other HEIs viewed their research as commercially focussed (χ2 = 13.8, df = 4, p = 0.008). The other descriptors for emphasis of research were not found to be statistically significantly different across institution. Figure 53 illustrates the proportion of respondents reporting a score of either 4 or 5 (i.e., a strong emphasis) for each of the various descriptors by institution.

Figure 53: Research orientation and institution Score of 4 or 5 (very much) 0%

20%

40%

43% 62% 66%

Applied/practically-oriented

62%

Multi-/interdisciplinary

47% 54%

Basic/theoretical

34% 50%

Socially-oriented/intended for the betterment of society

42% 29% 27%

Based in one discipline

University [n > =623]

80%

71%

International in scope or orientation

Commercially-oriented/intended for technology transfer

60%

14% 24% Other HEIs [n > =205]

Page 112


The Academic Profession in Ireland

6.4

Research activities

The majority of respondents (87%) were engaged in research activities, and over three-quarters (77%) prepared and wrote academic papers that contained research findings. Table 42 presents the data.

Table 42: Please indicate whether you have been involved in the following research activities during this or the previous academic year: (valid unweighted n=862) Percentage responding yes Conducting research

87%

Writing academic papers that contain research results or findings

77%

Preparing research projects (e.g., experimental research)

72%

Answering calls for proposals or writing research grants

55%

Acted as a co-applicant in research study

47%

Supervising a research team or a team of graduate research assistants

45%

Acted as a principal investigator in a research study

40%

Managing research contracts or budgets

39%

Purchased or selected equipment and research supplies

38%

Involvement in technology transfer

16%

Other

4%

Page 113


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A statistically significantly higher proportion of male respondents were active across all research activities (Ď&#x2021;2 = 141.8, df = 11, p <= 0.001). The biggest differences across genders were for the following: purchased or selected equipment and research supplies (50% males v 28% females); supervising a research team or a team of graduate research assistants (54% males v 37% females); and managing research contracts or budgets (48% males v 32% females). Figure 54 illustrates the data.

Figure 54: Research activities by gender Percentage yes 0%

20%

40%

82% 74% 75% 71%

Preparing research projects (e.g. experimental research)

58% 52%

Answering calls for proposals or writing research grants

54%

Supervising a research team or a team of graduate research assistants

37% 52% 43%

Acted as a co-applicant in research study

50%

Purchased or selected equipment and research supplies

28% 48%

Acted as a principal investigator in a research study

34% 48%

Managing research contracts or budgets

Male (n=419)

100%

83%

Writing academic papers that contain research results or findings

Other

80% 92%

Conducting research

Involvement in technology transfer

60%

32% 21% 11% 3% 5% Female (n=386)

Senior grade respondents were more involved than their junior counterparts across all research activities, with the results found to be statistically significantly different for

Page 114


The Academic Profession in Ireland

grade (Ď&#x2021;2 = 304.0, df = 11, p <= 0.001). The biggest differences across grade were for the following: managing research contracts or budgets (senior 64% v junior 31%); acting as a principal investigator in a research study (senior 62% v junior 32%); and supervising a research team or a team of graduate research assistants (senior 65% v junior 39%). Figure 55 illustrates the data.

Figure 55: Research activities by grade Percentage yes 0%

20%

40%

60%

80% 85% 92%

Conducting research

72%

Writing academic papers that contain research results or findings

91% 69%

Preparing research projects (e.g. experimental research)

80% 49%

Answering calls for proposals or writing research grants

71% 41%

Supervising a research team or a team of graduate research assistants

63% 39%

Acted as a co-applicant in research study

65% 33%

Purchased or selected equipment and research supplies

52% 32%

Acted as a principal investigator in a research study

62% 31%

Managing research contracts or budgets

Involvement in technology transfer

100%

64% 15% 20%

Other

Junior (n=554)

3% 4% Senior (n=308)

Page 115


The Academic Profession in Ireland

University academics were more involved than other HEI colleagues across all activities, with the results found to be statistically significantly different for institution (Ď&#x2021;2 = 499.5, df = 11, p <= 0.001). The biggest differences across institution were as follows: writing academic papers (91% university academics v 53% other HEI academics); answering calls for proposals or writing research grants (66% university academics v 35% other HEI academics); and managing research contracts or budgets (50% university academics v 21% other HEI academics). Figure 56 illustrates the data.

Figure 56: Research activities by institution Percentage yes 0%

20%

40%

60%

75% 91%

Writing academic papers that contain research results or findings

53% 78%

Preparing research projects (e.g. experimental research)

63% 66%

Answering calls for proposals or writing research grants

35% 56%

Supervising a research team or a team of graduate research assistants

31% 52%

Acted as a co-applicant in research study

Acted as a principal investigator in a research study

35% 50% 21% 48% 25% 43%

Managing research contracts or budgets

Involvement in technology transfer

Other

University (n=651)

100%

94%

Conducting research

Purchased or selected equipment and research supplies

80%

29% 16% 15% 4% 3% Other HEIs (n=211)

Page 116


The Academic Profession in Ireland

6.5

Range of scholarly outputs

Academics were asked to classify their scholarly outputs over the previous three years. The main outputs were journal articles, book chapters and papers presented at scholarly conferences. Table 43 illustrates the data.

Table 43: Scholarly outputs over the previous three years (valid unweighted n=893) Number None

1-5

6+

Mean number

Scholarly books you authored or co-authored

84%

16%

0%

0.2

Articles published in an academic book or journal

27%

47%

26%

4.7

Research reports/monographs written for a funded project

60%

35%

5%

1.3

Papers presented at a scholarly conference

23%

44%

33%

5.6

Professional articles written for a newspaper or magazine

71%

25%

5%

1.1

Patents secured on a process or invention

97%

3%

0%

0.1

Computer programs written for public use

95%

4%

1%

0.2

Artistic works performed or exhibited

95%

3%

1%

0.4

Videos or films produced

93%

7%

1%

0.2

Other

93%

6%

1%

0.3

Page 117


The Academic Profession in Ireland

On average, male respondents published more scholarly outputs than their female counterparts. Figure 57 illustrates the average number of outputs produced by gender.

Figure 57: Scholarly outputs by gender Average number of outputs 0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.9 3.7 1.6

Professional articles written for a newspaper or magazine

0.7 1.4 1.3

Research reports/monographs written for a funded project

0.5 0.3

Computer programs written for public use

0.3 0.0

Scholarly books you authored or co-authored

0.3 0.2

Videos or films produced

0.2 0.1

Scholarly books you edited or co-edited

0.2 0.2

Other

Male (n=401)

7.0

4.9

Articles published in an academic book or journal

Patents secured on a process or invention

6.0

6.4

Papers presented at a scholarly conference

Artistic works performed or exhibited

5.0

0.1 0.0 0.5 0.2 Female (n=391)

Page 118


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Scholarly outputs were in the main peer reviewed (47%), published internationally (39%) and co-authored with colleagues (29%). Table 44 presents the data.

Table 44: What percentage of your publications in the last three years were â&#x20AC;Ś

0% Published in a language different from the language of instruction at your current institution Co-authored with colleagues located in the country of your current employment Co-authored with colleagues located in other countries Published in a country other than your own Published electronically or online Peer-reviewed

Proportion of publications 1% 26% 51% 25% 50% 75%

75% 100%

Mean proportion of publications

90%

8%

1%

0%

1%

2%

35%

32%

8%

4%

21%

29%

53%

28%

9%

3%

6%

14%

28%

29%

6%

4%

32%

39%

42%

29%

6%

2%

1%

26%

18%

32%

4%

3%

43%

47%

Page 119


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A higher percentage of publications by male academics relative to females were peer reviewed (53% v 42%), published internationally (46% v 32%) and were published electronically/online (34% v 19%). In addition, a higher proportion of male academics relative to females indicated that their publications were co-authored with other colleagues both in Ireland (32% v 26%) and in other countries (18% v 11%). Figure 58 illustrates the data.

Figure 58: Range of publications by gender Mean percentage 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

53%

Peer-reviewed

42% 46%

Published in a country other than your own

32% 34%

Published electronically or on-line

19% 32%

Co-authored with colleagues located in the country of your current employment

26% 18%

Co-authored with colleagues located in other countries

11% Published in a language different from the language of instruction at your current institution

1% 3%

Male (n>=377)

Female (n>=300)

Page 120


The Academic Profession in Ireland

In comparison to junior academics, senior academics tended to produce a higher proportion of publications that were peer reviewed (67% v 41%), published internationally (61% v 31%), were co-authors with colleagues from their own country (40% v 25%) and were co-authored with international colleagues (22% v 12%). Figure 59 illustrates the data.

Figure 59: Range of publications by grade Mean percentage 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

41%

Peer-reviewed

67% 31%

Published in a country other than your own

61% 25%

Co-authored with colleagues located in the country of your current employment

40% 23%

Published electronically or on-line

34% Co-authored with colleagues located in other countries

12% 22%

Published in a language different from the language of instruction at your current institution

2% 2%

Junior (n>=468)

Senior (n>=259)

Page 121


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Compared to academics in other HEIs, a considerably larger percentage of publications from university sector respondents were peer reviewed (59% v 26%), published internationally (51% v 16%), co-authored with colleagues from Ireland (34% v 19%), and co-authored with international colleagues (19% v 6%). Figure 60 illustrates the data. Figure 60: Range of scholarly outputs by institution Mean percentage 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

59%

Peer-reviewed

26% 51%

Published in a country other than your own

16% 34%

Co-authored with colleagues located in the country of your current employment

19% 31%

Published electronically or on-line

16% 19%

Co-authored with colleagues located in other countries

6% Published in a language different from the language of instruction at your current institution

3% 1%

University (n>=555)

Other HEI (n>=166)

Page 122


The Academic Profession in Ireland

6.6

Research expectations

Over two-fifths of academics (44%) viewed management in their institution as supportive of research activities. Figure 61 illustrates the data.

Figure 61: Attitude of management towards research activities

All (n=856)

13%

19%

Male (n=446)

14%

19%

Female (n=398)

Junior (n=570) Senior (n=286)

University (n=595)

12%

14% 10%

9%

Other HEI (n=261)

Strongly Disagree

19%

24%

26% 23%

19% 18%

Disagree

35%

26%

34%

26%

7% 12%

38%

Neither Disagree or Agree

6% 10%

42%

23% 20%

8%

37%

17%

18%

18%

36%

12% 34%

Agree

2%

Strongly Agree

While there was no statistically significant difference across gender (χ2 = 4.5, df = 4, p = 0.343), the responses were statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 13.7, df = 4, p = 0.008) and institution (χ2 = 41.7, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Over half of senior academics (54%) agreed or strongly agreed that management had a supportive attitude towards research compared to 41% of junior academics. University academics (50%) were also more likely to agree than their other HEI colleagues (36%).

Page 123


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Academics were asked about research expectations within their institutions. Based on the combined results of those that agreed or strongly agreed, over two-thirds (72%) indicated that there was increased pressure to raise external funds, 59% perceived a greater emphasis on commercially orientated and interdisciplinary research (59%). The data is presented in Table 45.

Table 45: Research expectations Restrictions on the publication of results from my publiclyfunded research have increased since my first appointment

Restrictions on the publication of results from my privatelyfunded research have increased since my first appointment

External sponsors or clients have no influence over my research activities

The pressure to raise external research funds has increased since my first appointment

Interdisciplinary research is emphasised at my institution

My institution emphasises commercially -oriented or applied research

Strongly disagree

12%

10%

7%

2%

5%

4%

Disagree Neither disagree nor agree Agree

17%

14%

22%

5%

11%

7%

60%

67%

34%

21%

25%

31%

9%

7%

23%

32%

40%

39%

2%

2%

15%

40%

19%

20%

834

827

832

838

843

839

Strongly agree Valid unweighted n

Page 124


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The results corresponding to research expectations were found to be statistically significantly different across gender with regard to: increased restrictions on publishing results from publicly-funded research (χ2 = 13.7, df = 4, p = 0.008); increased restrictions on publishing results from privately funded research (χ2 = 11.4, df = 4, p = 0.023); an emphasis on interdisciplinary research at the respondent’s institution (χ2 = 13.1, df = 4, p = 0.011); and an emphasis on commercially orientated or applied research at the respondent’s institution (χ2 = 13.1, df = 4, p = 0.011). Figure 62 illustrates the proportion of respondents that either agreed or strongly agreed with each of the statements relating to research expectations by gender.

Figure 62: Research expectations by gender Proportion that agree or strongly agree 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

71%

The pressure to raise external research funds has increased since my first appointment

72% 62%

My institution emphasizes commercially-oriented or applied research

56% 54%

Interdisciplinary research is emphasized at my institution

63% 41%

External sponsors or clients have no influence over my research activities

36%

Restrictions on the publication of results from my publicly-funded research have increased since my first appointment

12%

Restrictions on the publication of results from my privately-funded research have increased since my first appointment

11%

Male (n=419)

11%

7%

Female (n=358)

Page 125


The Academic Profession in Ireland

6.7

Research funding

Academics were asked to identify the main sources of funding for their research over the last three years. An average of around two in five (39%) had received funding from their own institutions, and less than one-third (31%) had received research funding from national agencies. Approximately 13% received funding from Government agencies. Table 46 presents the data.

Table 46: In the current (or previous) academic year, what percentage of the funding for your research came from (valid unweighted n=564)?

0%

1% - 25%

26% 50%

51% 75%

75% 100%

Mean proportion of source of funding

38%

19%

8%

3%

32%

39%

54%

8%

8%

7%

23%

31%

78%

6%

6%

2%

8%

13%

86%

9%

2%

1%

2%

4%

86%

8%

3%

0%

3%

5%

86%

3%

4%

2%

5%

8%

Proportion of time spent on each group

Your own institution Public research funding agencies (e.g., HRB, IRCSET, IRCHSS) Government entities (e.g., Government departments, i.e., Health and Children, Education, etc.) Business firms or industry Private not-for-profit foundations/agencies Other

Page 126


The Academic Profession in Ireland

A higher proportion of females received funding from their own institution compared to their male colleagues (42% v 36%). A higher proportion of males had received funding from public research funding agencies (34% v 27%). Even though funding from business firms or industry was a relatively small proportion, males reported it as a higher proportion of their research income (7% v 2%). Figure 63 illustrates the data.

Figure 63: Sources of research funding by gender Mean percentage 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

36%

Your own institution

42% 34%

Public research funding agencies (e.g. HRB, IRCSET, IRCHSS)

Government entities (e.g. Government Departments i.e Health and Children, Education etc.)

Business firms or industry

27% 12% 13% 7% 2%

Private not-for-profit foundations/agencies

4% 6%

Other

7% 10%

Male (n=343)

Female (n=263)

Page 127


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Junior academics reported a higher proportion of funding coming from their own institution relative to their senior counterparts (41% v 29%), while senior academics reported a higher proportion coming from public research funding agencies (40% v 27%). Figure 64 illustrates the data.

Figure 64: Sources of research funding by grade Mean percentage 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

44%

Your own institution

29% 27%

Public research funding agencies (e.g. HRB, IRCSET, IRCHSS)

Government entities (e.g. Government Departments i.e Health and Children, Education etc.)

Private not-for-profit foundations/agencies

40% 12% 14% 6% 4%

Business firms or industry

4% 4%

Other

8% 8%

Junior (n=377)

Senior (n=263)

Page 128


The Academic Profession in Ireland

University academics reported a higher proportion of funding coming from public research funding agencies relative to other HEI academics (36% v 18%), while other HEI academics reported a higher proportion coming from their own institution (49% v 35%). Figure 65 illustrates the data.

Figure 65: Sources of research funding by institution Mean percentage 0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

36%

Public research funding agencies (e.g. HRB, IRCSET, IRCHSS)

18% 35%

Your own institution

49% Government entities (e.g. Government Departments i.e Health and Children, Education etc.)

Private not-for-profit foundations/agencies

13% 13% 5% 6%

Business firms or industry

4% 5%

Other

7% 10%

University (n=525)

Other HEI (n=115)

Page 129


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.

Governance and management of higher education institutions

7.1

Introduction

This chapter examines the attitudes of academics to the governance and management of their higher education institutions. Their involvement in decision-making at school/department, college and university was assessed. Their experience of evaluation across teaching, research and administration was explored. Their attitudes towards governance, management and institutional practices were also examined.

7.2

Influence on academic policies

Over three-quarters of academics (83%) felt that they were personally influential (a little, somewhat or very influential) at school or departmental level. Almost half (47%) indicated that they had no influence at college/faculty level, and almost threequarters (74%) stated that they were not influential at institutional level. Table 47 presents the data.

Table 47: How influential are you, personally, in helping to shape key academic policies? At the level of the school/department or similar unit

At the level of the faculty/college or similar unit

At the institutional level

Not at all influential

16%

47%

74%

A little influential

30%

31%

16%

Somewhat influential

35%

18%

8%

Very influential

18%

5%

2%

Valid unweighted n

875

870

872

Page 130


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses for level of influence relating to the school/department (Ď&#x2021;2 = 8.4, df = 3, p = 0.039) and faculty/college (Ď&#x2021;2 = 13.2, df = 3, p = 0.004) were found to be statistically significantly different across gender. Male respondents (58%) indicated that they were somewhat or very influential in shaping academic policies at school/department level compared to just less than half (49%) of their female colleagues. Just over one in four males (26%) indicated that they were somewhat or very influential in shaping academic policies at faculty/college level compared to just one in five (20%) of their female colleagues. The responses for level of influence relating to the institutional level were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (Ď&#x2021;2 = 3.8, df = 3, p = 0.289). Figure 66 illustrates the proportion of respondents that reported being somewhat or very influential for each of the statements split by gender.

Figure 66: Level of influence by gender

% somewhat or very influential

80%

60% 58% 40%

49%

26%

20%

20% 10%

10%

0% At the level of the school/department or similar unit

At the level of the faculty/college or similar unit

Male [n > =453]

At the institutional level

Female [n > =404]

Page 131


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses for level of influence relating to the school/department (Ď&#x2021;2 = 101.8, df = 3, p <= 0.001), faculty/college (Ď&#x2021;2 = 85.6, df = 3, p <= 0.001) and institutional level (Ď&#x2021;2 = 55.0, df = 3, p <= 0.001) were all found to be statistically significantly different across grade. Over three-quarters of academics (76%) holding senior grades viewed themselves as being personally influential (either somewhat or very influential) at department/school level compared to just under half (47%) of junior academics. Meanwhile, 43% of senior academics perceived influence at faculty/college level compared to 17% of their junior colleagues. One in five (22%) of senior academics considered that they were influential at the institutional level, compared to just 6% of junior academics. Figure 67 illustrates the proportion of respondents that reported being somewhat or very influential for each of the statements split by grade.

Figure 67: Level of influence by grade

% somewhat or very influential

80% 76% 60%

40%

47% 43%

20%

22% 17% 6%

0% At the level of the school/department or similar unit

At the level of the faculty/college or similar unit

Junior [n >= 582]

At the institutional level

Senior [n > =288]

Page 132


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Levels of influence relating to the school/department (χ2 = 7.4, df = 3, p = 0.061), faculty/college (χ2 = 4.0, df = 3, p = 0.257) and institutional level (χ2 = 5.8, df = 3, p = 0.124) were not found to be statistically significantly different across institution. Figure 68 illustrates the proportion of respondents that reported being somewhat or very influential for each of the statements split by institution.

Figure 68: Level of influence by institution

% somewhat or very influential

80%

60% 56% 51% 40%

20%

23%

22% 10%

10%

0% At the level of the school/department or similar unit

At the level of the faculty/college or similar unit

University [n > =605]

At the institutional level

Other HEIs [n > =263]

Page 133


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.3

Primary decision makers

All academics were asked to identify the primary decision makers with reference to different areas of activity in their institutions. These included academic appointments and promotions, teaching, research, budgetary matters, senior administrative appointments and international links.

7.3.1

Academic appointments and promotions

In relation to faculty appointments, one-third of academics (33%) were of the view that Heads of School/Department were influential. Institutional managers were also identified by one in three academics as important decision makers. Two in five academics (44%) viewed institutional managers as being influential with reference to promotions while over one-third (36%) attributed influence to faculty/college committees. Table 48 presents the data.

Table 48: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions

Choosing new faculty

Making faculty promotion and tenure decisions

Government or external stakeholders

2%

2%

Institutional managers

33%

44%

Head of school/department

33%

16%

Faculty/college committees/board

29%

36%

Individual academics

2%

1%

Students

<1%

0%

Valid unweighted n

851

849

Page 134


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Choosing new faculty” were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 7.5, df = 5, p = 0.188). Figure 69 illustrates the data.

Figure 69: Appointment of new faculty by gender 60% 50% 40%

35%

%

31%

33% 34%

31% 27%

30% 20% 10%

2% 3%

3% 2%

<1% 0%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Male (n=442)

Individual academics

Students

Female (n=396)

Page 135


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Choosing new faculty” were statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 50.4, df = 5, p <= 0.001). Of particular note, 38% of junior academics cited institutional managers as having primary influence over this compared to just 14% of senior academics. Almost half of senior academics (44%) cited faculty/college committees/boards as having the primary influence compared to one-quarter (25%) of junior academics. Figure 70 illustrates the data.

Figure 70: Appointment of new faculty by grade 60% 50%

44% 38%

38%

40% %

32% 30%

25%

20%

14%

10% 3%

2% 3%

<1%

<1% 0%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Junior (n=563)

Individual academics

Students

Senior (n=288)

Page 136


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Choosing new faculty” were statistically significantly different across institution (χ2 = 197.8, df = 5, p <= 0.001). Of particular note, over half of other HEI academics (54%) cited institutional managers as having the primary influence over choosing new faculty compared to just 15% of university academics. Figure 71 illustrates the data.

Figure 71: Appointment of new faculty by institution 60%

54%

50%

44%

40%

36%

%

30% 30% 20%

15% 11%

10% 1%

4%

4% 0%

0% <1%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College committees/ Department boards

University (n=590)

Individual academics

Students

Other HEI (n=261)

Page 137


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Making faculty promotion and tenure decisions” were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 2.9, df = 4, p = 0.583). Figure 72 illustrates the data.

Figure 72: Faculty promotion tenure decision by gender 70% 60% 46%

50%

43% 38%

40% %

34%

30% 17% 16%

20% 10%

2% 2%

1% 1%

0% 0%

Individual academics

Students

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Male (n=439)

Female (n=397)

Page 138


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Making faculty promotion and tenure decisionsâ&#x20AC;? were statistically significantly different across grade (Ď&#x2021;2 = 48.6, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Almost half of junior academics (49%) cited institutional managers as having primary influence over promotion and tenure decisions compared to just over one-quarter of senior academics (28%). Over half of senior academics (57%) cited faculty/college committees/boards as having the primary influence compared to 30% of junior academics. Figure 73 illustrates the data.

Figure 73: Faculty promotion tenure decision by grade 70% 57%

60% 49%

50%

%

40%

18%

20% 10%

30%

28%

30%

12% 3% <1%

1% <1%

0% 0%

Individual academics

Students

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Junior (n=563)

Senior (n=286)

Page 139


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Making faculty promotion and tenure decisionsâ&#x20AC;? were statistically significantly different across institution (Ď&#x2021;2 = 193.6, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Of particular note, 64% of other HEI academics cited institutional managers as having primary influence over this compared to just 28% of university academics. Over half of university academics (57%) cited faculty/college committees/boards as having the primary influence compared to 12% of academics from other HEIs. Figure 74 illustrates the data.

Figure 74: Faculty promotion tenure decision by institution 70%

64% 57%

60% 50%

%

40% 28%

30%

19%

20%

14%

10% 1%

12%

4%

1% 1%

0% 0%

Individual academics

Students

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

University (n=584)

Other HEI (n=265)

Page 140


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.3.2

Academic programmes

Respondents were asked to identify decision makers with reference to academic programmes. With reference to admission standards, over one-third of academics (38%) were of the view that institutional managers were the most influential in this area. Over one-quarter (29%) viewed faculty/college committees as also being influential. Over half (51%) viewed the faculty/college committees as having the primary influence with reference to the approval of academic programmes. Table 49 presents the data.

Table 49: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions Setting admission standards for undergraduate students

Approving new academic programmes

Government or external stakeholders

14%

6%

Institutional managers

38%

28%

Head of school/department

16%

13%

Faculty/college committees/board

29%

51%

Individual academics

2%

1%

Students

1%

0%

Valid unweighted n

834

849

Page 141


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Setting admission standards for undergraduate students” were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 5.6, df = 5, p = 0.342). Figure 75 illustrates the data.

Figure 75: Admission standards and gender 60% 50% 38%

40%

40%

%

32% 27%

30% 20% 13%

16% 15%

15%

10% 2% 2%

<1% 2%

Individual academics

Students

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Male (n=435)

Female (n=386)

Page 142


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Setting admission standards for undergraduate studentsâ&#x20AC;? were statistically significantly different across grade (Ď&#x2021;2 = 14.2, df = 5, p = 0.014). Of particular note, 41% of junior academics cited institutional managers as having primary influence over this compared to 31% of senior academics, while 39% of senior academics cited faculty/college committees/boards as having primary influence compared to 27% of junior academics. Figure 76 illustrates the data.

Figure 76: Admission standards and grade 60% 50% 41%

39%

40% %

31% 27%

30% 20%

13%

16%

15%

13%

10% 2% 1%

1% 1%

Individual academics

Students

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Junior (n=553)

Senior (n=281)

Page 143


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Setting admission standards for undergraduate studentsâ&#x20AC;? were statistically significantly different across institution (Ď&#x2021;2 = 76.5, df = 5, p <= 0.001). Over half of other HEI academics (51%) cited institutional managers as having primary influence over this compared to just 28% of university academics, while 40% of university academics cited faculty/college committees/boards as having the primary influence compared to 17% of those from other HEIs. Figure 77 illustrates the data.

Figure 77: Admission standards and institution 60% 51% 50% 40%

%

40% 28%

30% 20%

19% 15%

17%

13%

12% 10%

2%

1%

1% 1%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

University (n=575)

Individual academics

Students

Other HEI (n=259)

Page 144


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Approving new academic programmes” were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 2.7, df = 4, p = 0.603). Figure 78 illustrates the data.

Figure 78: Approval of new academic programmes by gender 70% 60%

53%

50%

50%

%

40% 30% 28%

30% 20% 10%

12% 14% 5% 7% 1% 1%

0% 0%

Individual academics

Students

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Male (n=439)

Female (n=397)

Page 145


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Approving new academic programmesâ&#x20AC;? were found to be statistically significantly different across grade (Ď&#x2021;2 = 35.4, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Nearly one-third of junior academics (32%) cited institutional managers as having primary influence over this compared to less than one in five (17%) senior academics. Over two thirds of senior academics (69%) cited faculty/college committees/boards as having primary influence compared to 46% of junior academics. Figure 79 illustrates the data.

Figure 79: Approval of new academic programmes by grade 69%

70% 60% 46%

50% 40% %

32% 30% 17%

20% 10%

14%

8%

11%

2%

1% 1%

0% 0%

Individual academics

Students

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Junior (n=565)

Senior (n=284)

Page 146


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Approving new academic programmesâ&#x20AC;? were statistically significantly different across institution (Ď&#x2021;2 = 140.2, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Over two fifths of university academics (41%) cited institutional managers as having primary influence over the approval of new programmes compared to less than one in five of other HEI academics (17%). Over two-thirds of other HEI academics (67%) cited faculty/college committees/boards as having the primary influence compared to onethird of university academics (33%). Figure 80 illustrates the data.

Figure 80: Approval of new academic programmes by institution 67%

70% 60% 50% 41% 40% %

33%

30% 17%

20%

13% 13%

13%

10% 1%

1% 0%

0% 0%

Individual academics

Students

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

University (n=584)

Other HEI (n=265)

Page 147


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.3.3

Teaching

The majority of academics (58%) viewed the Head of School/Department as having the primary influence in relation to the allocation of teaching workload. Table 50 presents the data.

Table 50: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions Determining the overall teaching load of faculty

Evaluating teaching

Government or external stakeholders

9%

1%

Institutional managers

21%

15%

Head of school / department

58%

23%

Faculty / college committees / board

9%

17%

Individual academics

3%

27%

Students

0%

16%

Valid unweighted n

847

827

Page 148


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Determining the overall teaching load of faculty” were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 0.5, df = 4, p = 0.973). Figure 81 illustrates the data.

Figure 81: Primary influence on teaching allocation by gender 80% 70% 57% 59%

60%

%

50% 40% 30%

22% 21%

20% 10%

10% 9%

9% 9%

3% 3%

0% 0%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Male (n=437)

Individual academics

Students

Female (n=397)

Page 149


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Determining the overall teaching load of faculty” were found to be statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 35.4, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Over two-thirds of senior academics (67%) indicated that the head of school/department had the primary influence over the allocation of teaching workload. Figure 82 illustrates the data.

Figure 82: Primary influence on teaching allocation by grade 80% 67%

70% 56%

60%

%

50% 40% 30%

24%

20% 10%

9% 7%

11%

8%

12% 2% 4%

0% 0%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College committees/ Department boards

Junior (n=565)

Individual academics

Students

Senior (n=282)

Page 150


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Determining the overall teaching load of faculty” were statistically significantly different across institution (χ2 = 191.2, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Of particular note, 71% of university academics cited the head of school/department as having primary influence over this compared to just 43% of other HEI academics. Figure 83 illustrates the data.

Figure 83: Primary influence on teaching allocation by institution 80%

71%

70% 60%

%

50%

43%

40%

33%

30% 20% 20%

13%

11%

10%

4%

<1%

4%

1%

0% 0%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College committees/ Department boards

University (n=585)

Individual academics

Students

Other HEI (n=262)

Page 151


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.3.4

Research priorities

All academics were asked about the primary decision makers in relation to setting internal research priorities. There were mixed views about this area: over one-quarter (28%) attributed this role to institutional managers, while the same proportion viewed the Head of School/Department (28%) and one-quarter (25%) identified individual academics as influential in setting internal research priorities. Table 51 presents the data.

Table 51: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions Setting internal research priorities

Evaluating research

Government or external stakeholders

2%

9%

Institutional managers

28%

23%

Head of school/department

28%

16%

Faculty/college committees/board

17%

24%

Individual academics

25%

28%

Students

<1%

0%

Valid unweighted n

832

797

Page 152


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Setting internal research priorities” were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 6.2, df = 5, p 0.284). Figure 84 illustrates the data.

Figure 84: Setting internal research priorities and gender 40% 30% 30%

26%

27%

28%

28%

%

22% 20%

17% 17%

10% 1% 2%

<1% 0%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Male (n=428)

Individual academics

Students

Female (n=391)

Page 153


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Setting internal research priorities” were not found to be statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 9.2, df = 5, p = 0.102). Figure 85 illustrates the data.

Figure 85: Setting internal research priorities and grade 40% 30%

29%

30%

28% 26%

24%

23% %

20% 20%

16%

10% 2% 2%

0% <1%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Junior (n=549)

Individual academics

Students

Senior (n=283)

Page 154


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Setting internal research prioritiesâ&#x20AC;? were statistically significantly different across institution (Ď&#x2021;2 = 40.4, df = 5, p <= 0.001). Over one-quarter of university academics (30%) cited individual academics as having primary influence over this compared to less than one in five of other HEI academics (19%). Over onethird of other HEI academics (36%) cited institutional managers as having primary influence compared to 22% of university academics. Figure 86 illustrates the data.

Figure 86: Setting internal research priorities and institution 40%

36% 32%

30%

30% 25% %

22%

21% 19%

20% 12% 10% 2% 2%

<1% 0%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

University (n=579)

Individual academics

Students

Other HEI (n=253)

Page 155


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.3.5

Budget priorities

Almost half of academics (44%) viewed institutional managers as being responsible for determining budget priorities. Over one-third (36%) attributed this responsibility to the faculty/college committee/Board. Table 52 presents the data.

Table 52: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions Determining budget priorities Government or external stakeholders

2%

Institutional managers

44%

Head of school/department

16%

Faculty/college committees/board

36%

Individual academics

1%

Students

0%

Valid unweighted n

849

The responses to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Determining budget prioritiesâ&#x20AC;? were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (Ď&#x2021;2 = 0.7, df = 4, p = 0.957). Figure 87 illustrates the data. Figure 87: Budget priorities and gender 70% 60% 46%

50%

43% 38%

40% %

34%

30% 17% 16%

20% 10%

2% 2%

1% 1%

0% 0%

Individual academics

Students

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College committees/ Department boards

Male (n=439)

Female (n=397)

Page 156


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Determining budget priorities” were statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 9.9, df = 4, p = 0.042). Nearly half of junior academics (49%) viewed institutional managers as having primary influence over this area compared to just over one-quarter of senior academics (28%). Figure 88 illustrates the data.

Figure 88: Budget priorities and grade 70% 57%

60% 49%

50%

%

40%

18%

20% 10%

30%

28%

30%

12% 3% 2%

1% <1%

0% 0%

Individual academics

Students

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College committees/ Department boards

Junior (n=563)

Senior (n=286)

Page 157


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Determining budget prioritiesâ&#x20AC;? were statistically significantly different across institution (Ď&#x2021;2 = 74.4, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Almost two-thirds of other HEI academics (64%) cited institutional managers as having primary influence over this compared to a just over one-quarter of university academics (28%). Figure 89 illustrates the data.

Figure 89: Budget priorities and institution 70%

64% 57%

60% 50%

%

40% 28%

30%

19%

20%

14%

10%

12%

4% 1%

1%

1%

0%

0%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

University (n=584)

Individual academics

Students

Other HEI (n=265)

Page 158


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.3.6

International links

Almost half of academics (47%) viewed individual academics as being responsible for developing international links. One-quarter (25%) were of the view that institutional managers were responsible for this area. Table 53 presents the data.

Table 53: At your institution, please identify the group that has the primary influence on each of the following decisions Establishing international linkages Government or external stakeholders

1%

Institutional managers

25%

Head of school / department

16%

Faculty / college committees / board

10%

Individual academics

47%

Students

<1%

Valid unweighted n

825

Page 159


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Establishing international linkages” were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 10.0, df = 5, p = 0.076). Figure 90 illustrates the data. Figure 90: International linkages and gender 70% 60% 48% 47%

%

50% 40% 28%

30%

23%

20% 10%

14%

18% 12% 8%

1% <1%

<1% 0%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Male (n=432)

Individual academics

Students

Female (n=380)

However, the responses to “Establishing international linkages” were statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 19.6, df = 5, p = 0.001). Over half of senior academics (59%) attributed this role to individual academics. Figure 91 illustrates the data. Figure 91: International linkages and grade 70% 59%

60% 50%

44%

%

40% 28%

30%

16%

20%

16% 15% 11% 9%

10% 1% 1%

0% 1%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

Junior (n=544)

Individual academics

Students

Senior (n=281)

Page 160


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to â&#x20AC;&#x153;Establishing international linkagesâ&#x20AC;? were statistically significantly different across institution (Ď&#x2021;2 = 126.2, df = 5, p <= 0.001). Over three-fifths of university academics (63%) viewed individual academics as having responsibility for this compared to over one-quarter (28%) of other HEI academics. Over two in five other HEI academics (41%) cited institutional managers as having primary influence compared to 13% of university academics. Figure 92 illustrates the data.

Figure 92: International linkages and institution 70%

63%

60% 50% 41% %

40% 28%

30% 19% 20%

13%

13%

10% 11%

10% <1% 2%

<1% 0%

0% Government or external stakeholders

Institutional managers

Head of School/ Faculty/College Department committees/ boards

University (n=572)

Individual academics

Students

Other HEI (n=253)

Page 161


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.4

Evaluation processes

Academics were asked to identify the main evaluators of their teaching, research and administrative performance.

7.4.1

Teaching

All academics were asked about who evaluated their teaching. The majority (82%) identified students as being the main evaluators of their teaching, while over half (56%) viewed individual academics as performing this role. Table 54 presents the data.

Table 54: Who is regularly evaluating your teaching (valid unweighted n=838)? All valid respondents Your students

82%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

56%

External reviewers

35%

The head of your school/department

42%

Your peers in your school/department

28%

Senior administrative staff at your institution

8%

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

6%

No one at or outside my institution

10%

Page 162


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Who is regularly evaluating your teaching” were found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 27.0, df = 8, p = 0.001). Over three in five female academics (63%) reported that self-assessment was a regular part of evaluation in their teaching role compared to less than half of male academics (48%). Figure 93 illustrates the data.

Figure 93: Evaluation of teaching role by gender Proportion yes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 80%

Your students

85% 48%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

63% 44%

The head of your school/department

40% 32%

External reviewers

36% 29%

Your peers in your school/department

Senior administrative staff at your institution

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

26% 8% 8% 6% 7%

No one at or outside my institution

Male (n=431)

11% 10%

Female (n=394)

Page 163


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Who is regularly evaluating your teaching” were also found to be statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 15.7, df = 8, p = 0.047). Over half of junior academics (59%) reported that they engaged in self-assessment as a regular part of their teaching role compared to 46% of senior academics. Figure 94 illustrates the data.

Figure 94: Evaluation of teaching role by grade Proportion yes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 82%

Your students

83% 59%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

46% 42%

The head of your school/department

42% 36%

External reviewers

31% 29%

Your peers in your school/department

Senior administrative staff at your institution

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

24% 8% 5% 7% 5%

No one at or outside my institution

Junior (n=564)

10% 10%

Senior (n=274)

Page 164


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Who is regularly evaluating your teaching” were found to be statistically significantly different across institution (χ2 = 53.2, df = 8, p <= 0.001). A higher proportion of university academics (88%) reported that students played a regular role in the evaluation of their teaching compared to three-quarters of other HEI academics (75%). Figure 95 illustrates the data.

Figure 95: Evaluation of teaching role by institution Proportion yes 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 88%

Your students

75% 56%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

56% 44%

The head of your school/department

39% 34%

External reviewers

35% 31%

Your peers in your school/department

Senior administrative staff at your institution

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

No one at or outside my institution

24% 8% 7% 7% 5% 6%

University (n=582)

16%

Other HEI (n=256)

Page 165


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.4.2

Research

All academics were asked if their research performance was evaluated on a regular basis. Over half (57%) identified external reviewers as evaluators, over two-fifths (41%) viewed themselves as being the main assessors and over one-third (39%) viewed the Head of School/Department as having a role. Table 55 presents the data.

Table 55: Who is regularly evaluating your research (valid unweighted n=690)? All valid respondents External reviewers

57%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

41%

The head of your school/department

39%

Your peers in your school/department

30%

Senior administrative staff at your institution

14%

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

13%

Your students

6%

No one at or outside my institution

16%

Page 166


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Who is regularly evaluating your research” were not found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 9.5, df = 8, p = 0.300). Figure 96 illustrates the data.

Figure 96: Evaluation of research by gender Proportion yes 0%

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 60%

External reviewers

54% 39%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

44% 38%

The head of your school/department

39% 32%

Your peers in your school/department

28% 14%

Senior administrative staff at your institution

13% 10%

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

Your students

15% 5% 5%

No one at or outside my institution

Male (n=386)

17% 14%

Female (n=346)

Page 167


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Who is regularly evaluating your research” were found to be statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 39.8, df = 8, p <= 0.001). Over two thirds of senior academics (70%) identified external reviewers as playing a role in the evaluation of their research compared to over half of junior academics (52%). In contrast,

one-third

of

junior

academics

(33%)

identified

peers

in

their

school/department as playing a role in evaluating their research compared to 21% of senior academics. Figure 97 illustrates the data.

Figure 97: Evaluation of research by grade Proportion yes 0%

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 52%

External reviewers

70% 43%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

36% 39%

The head of your school/department

39% 33%

Your peers in your school/department

21% 12%

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

14% 11%

Senior administrative staff at your institution

Your students

20% 7% 4%

No one at or outside my institution

Junior (n=475)

16% 14%

Senior (n=267)

Page 168


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Who is regularly evaluating your research” were also found to be statistically significantly different across institution (χ2 = 147.4, df = 8, p <= 0.001). Two-thirds of university academics (66%) identified external reviewers as playing a role in evaluating their research compared to 39% of other HEI academics. Figure 98 illustrates the data.

Figure 98: Evaluation of research by institution Proportion yes 0%

10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 66%

External reviewers

39% 45%

The head of your school/department

27% 41%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

42% 34%

Your peers in your school/department

Senior administrative staff at your institution

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

Your students

22% 18% 5% 16% 7% 5% 7%

No one at or outside my institution

University (n=572)

10% 26%

Other HEI (n=170)

Page 169


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.4.3

Administration

In relation to the administrative aspects of their role, three-fifths of academics (60%) identified the Head of School/Department as having responsibility for this area. Almost one-third (32%) indicated that such evaluation was self-assessed and onequarter identified peers (25%) as playing a role in this area. Table 56 presents the data.

Table 56: Who is regularly evaluating the administrative aspects of your work (valid unweighted n=701)? All valid respondents The head of your school/department

60%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

32%

Your peers in your school/department

25%

Senior administrative staff at your institution

23%

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

10%

External reviewers

10%

Your students

9%

No one at or outside my institution

23%

Page 170


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Who is regularly evaluating the administrative aspects of your work” were found to be statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 19.9, df = 8, p = 0.011). Over one-third female academics (36%) cited self-assessment as a main form of evaluation for the administrative aspects of their work compared to over one-quarter (27%) of male academics. Figure 99 illustrates the data.

Figure 99: Evaluation of administrative role by gender Proportion yes 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

28% 23% 27%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

36% 25%

Senior administrative staff at your institution

Your students

No one at or outside my institution

Male (n=384)

70%

60%

Your peers in your school/department

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

60%

61%

The head of your school/department

External reviewers

50%

20% 10% 11% 9% 11% 7% 11% 20% 26%

Female (n=336)

Page 171


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Who is regularly evaluating the administrative aspects of your work” were not found to be statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 14.7, df = 8, p = 0.066). Figure 100 illustrates the data.

Figure 100: Evaluation of administrative role by grade Proportion yes 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

60%

70% 62%

The head of your school/department

55% 33%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

26% 26%

Your peers in your school/department

25% 20%

Senior administrative staff at your institution

29% 11%

External reviewers

10% 10%

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

Your students

50%

10% 10% 6%

No one at or outside my institution

Junior (n=480)

23% 22%

Senior (n=251)

Page 172


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The responses to “Who is regularly evaluating the administrative aspects of your work” were found to be statistically significantly different across institution (χ2 = 30.5, df = 8, p< = 0.001). Over one-quarter (26%) of university academics identified senior administrative staff at their institution as regularly evaluating the administrative aspects of their work, compared to less than one in five of other HEI academics (17%). Figure 101 illustrates the data.

Figure 101: Evaluation of administrative role by institution Proportion yes 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

60%

70% 62%

The head of your school/department

57% 31%

Yourself (formal self-assessment)

33% 28%

Your peers in your school/department

22% 26%

Senior administrative staff at your institution

17% 11%

Members of other schools/departments at your institution

9% 10%

External reviewers

Your students

50%

10% 7%

No one at or outside my institution

University (n=536)

12% 18% 29%

Other HEI (n=195)

Page 173


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.5

Governance and management

Academics were asked about their attitudes towards governance and management within their organisations, particularly with reference to institutional mission; management approaches; collegiality; communication; and institutional practices with reference to recruitment and funding.

7.5.1

Institutional mission

Almost half of academics (48%) either agreed or strongly agreed that the institution’s mission was strongly emphasised. Figure 102 illustrates the data.

Figure 102: There is a strong emphasis on the institution's mission

All (n=862)

7%

16%

Male (n=445)

7%

17%

Female (n=404)

7%

16%

Junior (n=573)

7%

Senior (n=289)

7%

University (n=596) 4% Other HEI (n=266)

10%

Strongly Disagree

39%

30%

19%

Disagree

11%

37%

31%

8%

44%

30%

14%

7%

39%

28%

26%

13%

37%

32%

17%

9%

11%

11%

41% 29%

Neither Disagree or Agree

36%

Agree

6%

Strongly Agree

The responses were not statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 5.3, df = 4, p = 0.261) or grade (χ2 = 6.5, df = 4, p = 0.165), but they were for institution (χ2 = 20.1, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Over half (52%) of university academics either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement compared to 42% of other HEI academics.

Page 174


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.5.2

Managerial approaches

Academics were asked about managerial approaches within their institutions. Over three-quarters (77%) either agreed or strongly agreed that there was a top-down management style in their institutions. Over three-quarters (76%) agreed or strongly agreed that the administrative processes were cumbersome. Over one-third (39%) agreed or strongly agreed that there was a strong performance orientation within their institutions. Table 57 presents the data.

Table 57: Please indicate your level of agreement or disagreement with the following statements that relate to relationships and governance at your institution There is a top-down management style

There is a strong performance orientation

There is a cumbersome administrative process

Strongly disagree

2%

12%

1%

Disagree

6%

17%

7%

Neither disagree or agree

15%

32%

16%

Agree

36%

31%

37%

Strongly agree

41%

8%

39%

Valid unweighted n

863

863

862

Page 175


The Academic Profession in Ireland

With regard to the statement “There is a top-down management style”, the responses were statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 11.9, df = 4, p = 0.018). A higher proportion of male academics (79%) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement compared to 73% of females. The results were not statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 4.1, df = 4, p = 0.396) or institution (χ2 = 4.0, df = 4, p = 0.413). Figure 103 illustrates the data.

Figure 103: There is a top-down management style

All (n=863) 2% 6%

Male (n=447) 2%5% Female (n=404) 3% 7%

Junior (n=576) 3% 6% Senior (n=287) 2% 7%

University (n=600) 2% 7% Other HEI (n=263) 2%5%

Strongly Disagree

15%

15%

13%

16% 15%

Disagree

45%

34%

35%

38%

16%

16%

41%

36%

39%

37%

46%

33%

41%

34%

40%

38%

Neither Disagree or Agree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Page 176


The Academic Profession in Ireland

For the statement “There is a strong performance orientation”, the results were statistically significantly different across both gender (χ2 = 21.4, df = 4, p <= 0.001) and institution (χ2 = 133.7, df = 4, p <= 0.001), but not across grade (χ2 = 8.4, df = 4, p = 0.077). Over two-fifths (45%) of females either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement compared to one-third of males (33%). In addition, over half of university academics (55%) either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement compared to less than one-fifth of other HEI academics (19%). Figure 104 illustrates the data.

Figure 104: There is a strong performance orientation

All (n=863)

Male (n=447) Female (n=403)

Junior (n=576) Senior (n=287)

University (n=598)

12%

20%

15%

Other HEI (n=265)

Strongly Disagree

11% 19%

Disagree

35%

31%

27% 25%

Neither Disagree or Agree

6% 10%

31%

32%

14%

9%

8%

27%

33%

18%

13%

31%

32%

15%

8%

6%

32%

17%

33%

42% 38%

Agree

7% 12%

13% 17%

2%

Strongly Agree

Page 177


The Academic Profession in Ireland

For the statement “There is a cumbersome administrative process”, the results were not statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 1.3, df = 4, p = 0.860), although they were for both grade (χ2 = 11.3, df = 4, p = 0.023) and institution (χ2 = 14.3, df = 4, p = 0.006). Four in five senior academics (80%) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement compared to just less than three quarters (74%) of junior academics. A higher proportion of university academics (79%) agreed or strongly agreed compared to 72% of other HEI academics. Figure 105 illustrates the data.

Figure 105: There is a cumbersome administrative process

All (n=862) 1% 7%

16%

37%

39%

Male (n=446) 1% 7%

15%

37%

39%

Female (n=403) 1% 7%

17%

Junior (n=573) 1% 8%

17%

Senior (n=289) 2%6%

12%

University (n=597) 1%6%

14%

Other HEI (n=265) 1% 9%

Strongly Disagree

18%

Disagree

37%

38%

38%

36% 47%

33%

35%

44% 33%

39%

Neither Disagree or Agree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Page 178


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Academics were asked their views about the performance of top-level management within their institutions. Over half of academics (51%) either disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that top-level management provided competent leadership in their institution. Figure 106 presents the data.

Figure 106: Top-level management are providing competent leadership

All (n=864)

Male (n=447) Female (n=404)

24%

24%

Senior (n=287)

24%

Other HEI (n=266)

Strongly Disagree

19% 29%

Disagree

22% 27%

29%

Junior (n=577)

University (n=598)

25%

28% 18%

24%

27%

28%

25% 23%

23%

3%

22%

3%

23%

3%

21% 25%

24%

28%

25%

22%

29%

20%

Neither Disagree or Agree

Agree

20%

2% 5%

4% 2%

Strongly Agree

The results for the above statement were statistically significantly different across gender (Ď&#x2021;2 = 11.9, df = 4, p = 0.018) and institution (Ď&#x2021;2 = 19.1, df = 4, p = 0.001), but were not statistically significantly different across grade (Ď&#x2021;2 = 5.3, df = 4, p = 0.254). Over half of males (53%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement compared to 47% of females. There were higher levels of disagreement among other HEI academics (59%) compared to (44%) of university academics.

Page 179


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.5.3

Communication and collegiality

Academics were asked about communication processes between management and academics in their institutions. They were also asked about collegiality in decisionmaking processes. Almost two-thirds (63%) of respondents disagreed that communication between management and staff was good. Over half (56%) indicated a lack of collegiality in decision-making processes. Table 58 presents the data.

Table 58: Communication and collegiality between management and academics There is good communication between management and academics

There is collegiality in decision-making processes

Strongly disagree

29%

26%

Disagree

34%

30%

Neither disagree or agree

18%

26%

Agree

19%

16%

Strongly agree

1%

2%

Valid unweighted n

864

862

Page 180


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The results for the statement “There is good communication between management and academics” were statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 9.9, df = 4, p = 0.043). A higher proportion of males (65%) viewed communication between management and staff as not good compared to 60% of females. The results for the statement were not statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 6.7, df = 4, p = 0.154) or institution (χ2 = 3.2, df = 4, p = 0.525). Figure 107 illustrates the data.

Figure 107: There is good communication between management and academics

All (n=864)

Male (n=447)

29%

26%

Junior (n=575)

27%

University (n=600) Other HEI (n=264)

Strongly Disagree

34%

31%

Female (n=404)

Senior (n=289)

34%

35%

28% 30%

Disagree

18%

17% 18%

34%

31%

35% 32%

Neither Disagree or Agree

17% 20%

1%

<1% 2%

18%

1%

14%

20%

<1%

18%

18%

2%

17%

20%

1%

19%

35%

19%

Agree

Strongly Agree

Page 181


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The results for the statement “There is collegiality in decision making processes” were statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 22.8, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Over three-fifths of males (62%) disagreed or strongly disagreed with the view that there was collegiality in decision making processes compared to just over half of females (52%). The results were not statistically significantly different across grade (χ2 = 2.1, df = 4, p = 0.725) or institution (χ2 = 2.3, df = 4, p = 0.677). Figure 108 illustrates the data.

Figure 108: There is collegiality in decision-making processes

All (n=862)

26%

Male (n=447) Female (n=402)

Junior (n=574) Senior (n=288)

University (n=600) Other HEI (n=262)

Strongly Disagree

30%

32% 20%

25% 28%

24% 28%

Disagree

26%

30%

23% 29%

32%

30% 32%

32% 29%

Neither Disagree or Agree

16%

14% 1% 16%

26% 24%

2%

16% 14%

4%

2% 2%

25%

16%

2%

26%

15%

3%

Agree

Strongly Agree

Page 182


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Over two-fifths of academics (43%) indicated that they were not kept informed about what was going on in their institution. Over half of academics (59%) either agreed or strongly agreed with the view that the lack of academic staff involvement in decisionmaking was a real problem within institutions. Table 59 presents the data.

Table 59: Levels of information and participation in decision making I am kept informed with what is going on at this institution

Lack of academic staff involvement in decisionmaking is a real problem

Strongly disagree

18%

5%

Disagree

25%

12%

Neither disagree or agree

23%

23%

Agree

30%

37%

Strongly agree

3%

22%

Valid unweighted n

865

865

Page 183


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The results for the statement “I am kept informed with what is going on at this institution” were not statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 4.2, df = 4, p = 0.381), grade (χ2 = 3.7, df = 4, p = 0.450) or institution (χ2 = 4.5, df = 4, p = 0.347). Figure 109 illustrates the data.

Figure 109: I am kept informed with what is going on at this institution

All (n=865)

18%

25%

Male (n=450)

19%

25%

Female (n=402)

17%

26%

Junior (n=578)

17%

26%

Senior (n=287)

University (n=600)

22%

25%

16%

Other HEI (n=265)

Strongly Disagree

22%

21%

Disagree

26%

30%

23%

29%

25%

32%

21%

23% 24%

Neither Disagree or Agree

Agree

4%

3%

29%

4%

28%

22%

2%

31%

32%

24%

3%

3% 4%

Strongly Agree

Page 184


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The results for the statement “Lack of academic staff involvement in decision making is a real problem” were not statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 0.2, df = 4, p = 0.996), grade (χ2 = 4.4, df = 4, p = 0.355) or institution (χ2 = 1.2, df = 4, p = 0.884). Figure 110 illustrates the data.

Figure 110: Lack of academic staff involvement in decision making is a real problem

All (n=865)

5%

12%

23%

37%

22%

Male (n=449)

5%

12%

23%

37%

22%

Female (n=403)

5%

12%

24%

38%

21%

Junior (n=579) 5%

12%

25%

37%

21%

Senior (n=286)

7%

University (n=599) 5% Other HEI (n=266)

6%

Strongly Disagree

13%

13% 12%

Disagree

18%

23%

38%

24%

38%

21%

23%

37%

22%

Neither Disagree or Agree

Agree

Strongly Agree

Page 185


The Academic Profession in Ireland

There were mixed views concerning the role that students should play in determining policies that affect them. Just over two in five (41%) academics either agreed or strongly agreed that students should have a greater say, while just over one-quarter (26%) either disagreed or strongly disagreed. Figure 111 illustrates the data.

Figure 111: Students should have a stronger voice in determining policy affecting them

All (n=863) 4%

Male (n=449)

5%

22%

24%

Female (n=401) 3%

20%

Junior (n=577) 3%

21%

Senior (n=286)

5%

University (n=598) 4% Other HEI (n=265) 3%

Strongly Disagree

34%

34%

37% 30%

7% 24%

Neither Disagree or Agree

7%

31%

37% 30%

6% 7%

37% 39%

23%

Disagree

40%

32%

26%

21%

28%

7%

37%

Agree

5% 9%

Strongly Agree

The results for the above statement were statistically significantly different across gender (Ď&#x2021;2 = 18.2, df = 4, p = 0.001), grade (Ď&#x2021;2 = 12.5, df = 4, p = 0.014) and institution (Ď&#x2021;2 = 10.8, df = 4, p = 0.029). A higher proportion of females (47%) either agreed or strongly agreed with the statement compared to 34% of male academics. Over two-fifths of junior academics (44%) either agreed or strongly agreed compared to over one-quarter of senior academics (30%). A higher proportion of other HEI academics (46%) either agreed or strongly agreed compared to 36% of university academics.

Page 186


The Academic Profession in Ireland

7.5.4

Personnel decisions

All academics were asked about the appointments process in their institutions with reference to research, teaching, the work of colleagues and experience of work outside of academia. There were mixed views with reference to the emphasis placed on the quality of research when making personnel decisions. Around two in five academics (40%) believed that there was a very low level of emphasis (score of 1 (not at all) or 2) on the quality of research when making personnel decisions. One in three (33%) believed that there was a relatively strong emphasis on this aspect (score of 4 or 5 (very much)). In relation to the quality of teaching, over half of respondents (55%) believed that this was not prioritised. The majority of academics (54%) were of the view that the work of colleagues was not taken into account.

Almost half (49%) of respondents were of the view that

experience outside the academy was not taken into account. Table 60 presents the data.

Table 60: Personnel decisions

Considering the research quality when making personnel decisions

Considering the teaching quality when making personnel decisions

Considering the practical relevance/ applicability of the work of colleagues when making personnel decisions

Not at all

21%

28%

24%

18%

2

19%

27%

30%

32%

3

27%

29%

31%

28%

4

23%

14%

13%

18%

Very much

10%

2%

3%

5%

Valid unweighted n

804

802

796

799

Recruiting academics who have work experience outside of academia

Page 187


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The results for the statement “Considering the research quality when making personnel decisions” were not statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 8.3, df = 4, p = 0.080), although they were across grade (χ2 = 11.2, df = 4, p = 0.025) and institution (χ2 = 116.3, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Over two-fifths of senor academics (42%) viewed research quality as an important element of personnel decisions compared to less than one-third of junior academics (30%). A higher proportion of university academics (46%) viewed quality research as an important component of personnel decisions compared to 16% of other HEI academics. Figure 112 illustrates the data.

Figure 112: Considering the research quality when making personnel decisions

All (n=804)

21%

Male (n=421)

20%

Female (n=370)

21%

Junior (n=522) Senior (n=282)

University (n=561) Other HEI (n=243)

19%

16%

14%

10%

29%

24%

27%

17% 34%

31% 27%

23%

2

3

4

8% 12%

21%

28%

20%

Not at all

24%

27%

19%

10%

22%

27%

23%

23%

23%

27%

9% 13%

15% 13%

3%

Very much

Page 188


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The results for the statement “Considering the teaching quality when making personnel decisions” were not statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 3.5, df = 4, p = 0.483) and grade (χ2 = 6.0, df = 4, p = 0.197), although they were statistically significantly different across institution (χ2 = 33.6, df = 4, p <= 0.001). A higher proportion of academics from HEIs other than universities (58%) were of the view that teaching quality was not considered important in the selection process compared to 53% of university academics. Figure 113 illustrates the data.

Figure 113: Considering the teaching quality when making personnel decisions

All (n=802)

28%

Male (n=423)

28%

Female (n=366)

27%

Junior (n=522) Senior (n=280)

University (n=559) Other HEI (n=243)

29%

27%

26%

29%

31%

25%

30%

26%

29%

25%

31%

24%

31%

33%

20%

Not at all

26%

21%

37%

2

3

4

14%

2%

14%

2%

14%

3%

13% 2% 18%

14% 15%

2%

3% 2%

Very much

Page 189


The Academic Profession in Ireland

The results for the statement “Recruiting academics who have work experience outside of academia” were not statistically significantly different across gender (χ2 = 8.6, df = 4, p = 0.072), yet they were for grade (χ2 = 14.6, df = 4, p = 0.006) and institution (χ2 = 38.7, df = 4, p <= 0.001). Twice as many junior academics (26%) felt that experience outside of academia was taken into account compared to 13% of senior academics. One-third (33%) of other HEI academics recorded viewed it as important compared to 14% of university academics. Figure 114 illustrates the data.

Figure 114: Recruiting academics who have work experience outside of academia

All (n=799)

Male (n=421)

18%

32%

21%

Female (n=365)

15%

Junior (n=519)

17%

28%

32%

18%

28%

31%

5%

15%

5%

28%

22%

4%

26%

21%

5%

31%

Senior (n=280)

20%

34%

33%

9% 4%

University (n=554)

19%

37%

30%

12% 3%

Other HEI (n=245)

17%

26%

Not at all

2

25%

3

4

26%

7%

Very much

Page 190


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Bibliography Baldwin, R.G., Lunceford, C.J., and Vanderlinden, K.E. (2005). Faculty in the Middle Years: Illuminating an Overlooked Phase of Academic Life, The Review of Higher Education 29, (1), 97-118.

Bexley, E., James, R., and Arkoundis, S. (2011). The Australian academic profession in transition: Addressing the challenge of reconceptualising academic work and regenerating the academic workforce. Commissioned report prepared for the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Centre for the Study of Higher Education, The University of Melbourne.

Bielby, D.D., and Bielby, W.T. (1992). I Will Follow Him: Family Ties, Gender Role Beliefs, and Reluctance to Relocate for a Better Job, American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1241-67.

Branch, D. (2003). Gender and Career Dynamics within a Segmented Professional Labor Market: The Case of Law Academia in Social Forces, 81(4), 1201-1266.

Burt, R.S. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Harvard University Press.

Byrne, D., and McCoy, S. (2013). "Identifying and Explaining Hidden Disadvantage within the Non-Manual Group in Higher Education Access" in Birkelund, G.E. (ed.). Class and Stratification Analysis Comparative Social Research, 30, 293-315.

Clancy, P. (2008). The non-university sector in Irish Higher Education, in Taylor, J.S., Brites Ferreira, J., de Lourdes Machado, M., Santiago, R., (eds.). Non University Higher Education in Europe. Springer, 123-47.

Clancy, P., with Goastellec, G. (2007). Exploring Access and Equity in Higher Education: Policy and Performance in Comparative Perspective, Higher Education Quarterly, 21 (2), 136-154.

Page 191


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Clancy, P. (2003). The vocationalisation of higher education: the evolution of policy in the Republic of Ireland, International Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 11 (1) 62-82.

Clancy, P. (2001). College Entry in Focus: A Fourth National Survey of Access to Higher Education. Dublin: Higher Education Authority.

Clancy, P., and Wall, J. (2000). Social Background of Higher Education Entrants. Dublin: Higher Education Authority.

Clancy, P. (1999). Barriers to Entering Higher Education, in Dooney, T. and Ward, N. (eds.) Irish Education for the 21st Century. Dublin, Oak Tree Press.

Clancy, P. (1999). Non-Official Higher Education in the Republic of Ireland, in Tsaussis, D.G., (ed.). Non-Official Higher Education in the European Union. Gutenberg, Athens.

Clancy, P., and Kehoe, D. (1999). Financing Third Level Students in Ireland, European Journal of Education, 34 (1), 43-58.

Clancy, P. (1999). Participation of Mature Students in Ireland, in Flemming, T., Collins, T., and Coolahan, J. (eds.) Higher Education: The Challenge of Lifelong Learning. Maynooth, Centre for Educational Policy Studies.

Clancy, P. (1998). Changing Priorities in Higher Education Programmes in Ireland, in Gellert, C. (ed.), Innovation and Adaptation in European Higher Education. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Clancy, P. (1996). Pathways to Mass Higher Education in the Republic of Ireland, European Journal of Education, 31 (3) 355-370.

Clancy, P. (1993). Goal Enlargement and Diversification: The Evolution of the Binary System, in Ireland, in Gellert, C (ed.). Higher Education in Europe. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Page 192


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Clancy, P. (1991). Numerical Expansion and Contracting Autonomy in Irish Higher Education, Higher Education Policy, 4 (4), 30-36.

Clancy, P. (1990). Higher Education, Growth, Diversification and Selectivity, in Mulholland, J. and Keogh, D (eds.), Education in Ireland, For What and for Whom? Cork, Hibernian University Press.

Clancy, P (1989) Research on Higher Education in Ireland, Western European Education, 21 (1), 6-16.

Clancy, P. (1989). The Evolution of Policy in Third Level Education, in Mulcahy, D.G., and O’Sullivan, D. (eds.). Irish Educational Policy: Process and Substance. Dublin, Institute of Public Administration.

Clarke, M. (2015). Creating a supportive working environment in European higher education. Brussels: Education International.

Clarke, M., Drennan, J., Hyde, A., Politis, Y. (2015). Academics’ perceptions of their professional contexts, in Fumasoli, T., Goastellec, G., Kehm, B.M. (eds.). Academic Careers in Europe: Trends, Challenges, Perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer. p.117130.

Clarke, M., and Killeavy, M. (2013). Pre-service Teacher Education Policy and Practice in an Economic Recession: Perspectives from the Republic of Ireland, In: Stephenson, J., and Ling, L., (eds.). Economic Challenges to Teacher Education in Difficult Economic Times: International Perspectives. London: Routledge. pp.113126.

Cleary, L., Graham, C., Jeanneau, C., and O’Sullivan, Í. (2009). Responding to the Writing Development Needs of Irish Higher Education Students: a Case Study. AisheJ: The All-Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 1:1, 4, 14.16.

Page 193


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Coate, K., and Mac Labhrainn, I. (2009). Irish higher education and the knowledge economy. International perspectives on the governance of higher education, 198-216.

Coolahan, J. (1981). Irish Education: History and Structure. IPA, 1981.

Cullinan, J., Flannery, D., Walsh, S., and McCoy, S. (2013). Distance Effects, Social Class and the Decision to Participate in Higher Education in Ireland, Economic and Social Review, 44 (1), 19-51.

Davies, G.K. (2010). Report of the SIF Evaluation. Dublin: HEA, available online at http://www.hea.ie/files/files/file/FINAL%2025%20Jan.pdf.

Darmody M., Smyth E., Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Connell P., Williams J., and Ryan B. (2004). EUROSTUDENT Survey II Report on the Social and Living Conditions of Higher Education Students in Ireland. HEA: Dublin.

Delaney, A., and Healy, T. (2014). We need to talk about higher education. NERI Working Paper Series. Nevin Economic Research Institute, Dublin.

Delaney, L., Bernard, A., Harmon, C., Ryan, M. (2007). EUROSTUDENT Survey III Report on the Social and Living Conditions of Higher Education Students in Ireland. HEA: Dublin.

Deem, R. (2006). Changing research perspectives on the management of higher education: can research permeate the activities of manager-academics? Higher Education Quarterly, 60 (3), 203-228.

Department of Education and Science. (2007). A Value for Money Assessment of Programmes

managed

by

the

Teacher

Education

Section.

http://www.education.ie/servlet/blobservlet/vfm_review_tes_programmes.pdf.

Department of Education. (2002). Report of the Points Commission.

Page 194


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Department of Employment, Trade and Enterprise. (2006). Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation 2007-2013. Dublin: Government of Ireland Publications.

Department of Enterprise and Innovation. (2011). Report of the Research Prioritisation Steering Group.

Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. (2010). Public Service Agreement 2010-2014 (Croke Park Agreement). http://per.gov.ie/croke-park-agreement/, (last accessed 20-11-2-2012).

Devine, D., Grummell, B., and Lynch, K. (2011). Crafting the elastic self? Gender and identities in senior management in Irish education, Gender, Work and Organisation, 18 (6), 631-649.

Dobrow, S.R., and Higgins, M.C. (2005). Developmental networks and professional identity: A longitudinal study, Career Development International, 10 (6/7), 567-583.

Drennan, J., Clarke, M., Hyde, A., and Politis, Y. (2013). The Research Function of the Academic Profession in Europe, in Teichler, U., and Hohle, E.A., (eds.). The work situation of the academic profession in Europe: Findings of a survey in twelve countries, pp. 109-137.

Enders, J., and De Weert, E. (2004). The International Attractiveness of the Academic Workplace in Europe. Frankfurt/Main: Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft (GEW).

EUROSTUDENT Survey. (2010). EUROSTUDENT Survey IV Report on the Social and Living Conditions of Higher Education Students in Ireland. HEA: Dublin.

Fitzpatrick, N., and Harvey, J. (eds.). (2011). Designing Together: Effective Strategies for Creating a Collaborative Curriculum to Support Academic Professional Development. Dublin: DIT.

Page 195


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Flemming, T., Collins, T., and Coolahan, J. (eds.). (1999). Higher Education: The Challenge of Lifelong Learning. Maynooth, Centre for Educational Policy Studies.

Forfas. (2008). Towards a Framework for Researcher Careers. Dublin: Advisory Council for Science, Technology and Innovation.

Forfás and HEA. (2009). Research Strengths in Ireland – a bibliometric study of the public research base. Dublin.

French, N. (2010). The Discourses of Higher Education in Ireland: Religion, Nationalism and Economic Development.

Dublin

Institute

of

Technology

ARROW@DIT (accessed at http://arrow.dit.ie/aaschmedart/75/ 3 March 2015).

Freudenberg, B., and Samarkovski, L. (2014). Enthusiasm and the Effective Modern Academic, Australian Universities Review, 56 (1), 22-31.

Gleeson, J., and Ó Donnabháin, D. (2009). Strategic planning and accountability in Irish education, Irish Educational Studies, 28, 27-46.

Government of Ireland. (2007). National Development Plan 2007-2013 Transforming Ireland: A Better Quality of Life for All. Dublin: the Stationery Office.

Government of Ireland. (2011). Estimates for Public Services and Summary Public Capital Programme. Dublin: the Stationery Office.

Government of Ireland. (2011). Comprehensive Expenditure Report. 2012-14. Dublin: the Stationery Office.

Government of Ireland. (2012). Revised Book of Estimates. Dublin: the Stationery Office.

Government of Ireland. (2012). Student Grant Scheme Statutory Instruments S.I. No. 189 of 2012. Dublin: the Stationery Office.

Page 196


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Grant Thornton. (2014). A changing landscape: Review of the financial health of the Irish higher education sector. Dublin.

Grummell, B., Devine, D., and Lynch, K. (2009). The care-less manager: gender, care and new managerialism in higher education, Gender and Education, 21, 191-208.

Grummell, B., Devine, D., and Lynch, K. (2009). Appointing Senior Managers in Education Homosociability, Local Logics and Authenticity in the Selection Process, Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 37, 329-349.

Harmon D., and Foubert, O. (2013). EUROSTUDENT SURVEY V Report on the Social and Living Conditions of Higher Education Students in Ireland. Dublin: HEA.

Hazelkorn, E., and Harkin, S. (2014). Restructuring Irish Higher Education through Collaboration and Merger, in Curaj, A., Georghiou, L., Casingena Harper, J., Pricopie, R., and Egron-Polak. E. Mergers and Alliances in Higher Education: International Practice and Emerging Opportunities. Springer.

Hazelkorn, E. (2014). Reflections on a Decade of Global Rankings: what weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve learned and outstanding issues, European Journal of Education, 49 (1).

Hazelkorn, E. (2012). Restructuring the Higher Education Landscape, University World News, No. 240.

Hazelkorn, E. (2011). Building a World-Class System in Irelandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Financial Crisis, International Higher Education, Issue 64. Center for International Higher Education [CIHE], Boston College, Boston.

Higher Education Authority. (2014). Higher Education System Performance First Report 2014-2016 Volume II Institutional and Sectoral Profiles 2011-12. Report of the Higher Education Authority. Dublin: HEA.

Page 197


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Higher Education Authority. (2013a). Report to the Minister for Education and Skills on system re-configuration, inter-institutional collaboration and system governance in Irish Higher Education. Dublin: HEA.

Higher Education Authority. (2013b). Review of Funding Model for Higher Education Institutions: Consultation Document; Completing the Landscape Process for Irish Higher Education. Dublin: HEA.

Higher Education Authority. (2013c). Towards a Performance evaluation framework: Profiling Irish higher education. Dublin: HEA.

HEA. (2012a). A Proposed Reconfiguration of the Irish System of Higher Education; Report prepared by an International Expert Panel for the Higher Education Authority of Ireland. Dublin: HEA.

Higher Education Authority. (2012b). Report of the International Review Panel on the Structure of Initial Teacher Education Provision in Ireland: Review conducted on behalf of the Department of Education and Skills. Dublin: Higher Education Authority.

Higher Education Authority. (2012c). Review of Funding Model for Higher Education Institutions: Consultation document. Dublin: Higher Education Authority.

Higher Education Authority. (2012d). Review of the Provision of Creative Arts Programmes in Dublin. Dublin: Higher Education Authority.

Higher Education Authority. (2012e). Towards a Future Higher Education Landscape, including Process and Criteria for Designation as a Technological University and Guidelines on Regional Clusters. Dublin: Higher Education Authority.

Higher Education Authority. (2011). Sustainability Report. Dublin: HEA.

Higher Education Authority. (2011). Revised Employment Control Framework for the Higher Education Sector. Dublin: HEA. Page 198


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Higher Education Authority. (2011). Regional Clusters, Consolidation Leading to Mergers, Strategic Dialogue. Dublin: HEA.

Higher Education Authority. (2011). National Strategy for Higher Education to 2030. Dublin: HEA.

Higher Education Authority. (2010). A Study of Progression in Irish Higher Education. Dublin: HEA.

Higher Education Authority. (2010). Proposal to incorporate a fee adjustment in the core grant allocations to the universities. Dublin: HEA.

Higher Education Authority. (2004). The Programme for Research in Third Level Institutes (PRTLI) Impact Assessment Vol. I. Report by the International Assessment Committee. Dublin: Higher Education Authority. Hyde, A., Clarke, M., and Drennan, J. (2012). The changing role of academics and the rise of managerialism, in The Academic Profession in Europe â&#x20AC;&#x201C; New Tasks and New Challenges. London: Springer.

Hinfelaar, M. (2012). Emerging higher education strategy in Ireland: amalgamate or perish, Higher Education Management and Policy, 24 (1), 1-16.

Hyland, A. (2012). A Review of the Structure of Initial Teacher Education Provision in Ireland. Background Report for the International Review team. Dublin: Higher Education Authority.

Hyland, A. (2011). Entry to Higher Education in Ireland in the 21st Century. Discussion Paper for the NCCA/HEA: Dublin.

Hyland, A., and Milne, K. (eds). (1992). Irish Educational Documents. Volume 2. A selection of extracts from documents relating to the history of education from 1922 to 1991 in the Irish Free State and Republic of Ireland. CICE, Dublin.

Page 199


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Ibarra, H., Kilduff, M., and Tsai, W. (2005). Zooming in and out: Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research, Organization Science, 16 (4), 359-371.

International Monetary Fund. (2010). Programme of Financial Support for Ireland. External Relations Department IMF. http://www.imf.org/external/country/irl/index.htm (accessed 20 November 2014).

Irish Survey of Student Engagement (ISSE). (2013). Implementation of the 2013 National Pilot Project. Dublin.

Kenny, A. (2009). The dynamics of human capital and the world of work: towards a common

market

in

contemporary

tertiary

education.

Level

3,

(7).

http://arrow.dit.ie/cserart/28/ (last accessed 2 March 2014).

Kenny, A. (2006). The emergence of quality assurance in Irish higher education: a review of European and national policy and description of the Dublin Institute of Technology practice. Level 3, (4). http://arrow.dit.ie/cserart/28/ (last accessed 3 December 2014).

Kuh, G.D., and Whitt, E.J. (1986). The invisible tapestry: Culture in American colleges and universities (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, No. 1). Washington, DC: The George Washington University.

Lalor, K. (2010). The same, but different: Salary scales, progression arrangements and duties in Institutes of Technology (IoTs) and Universities, Administration, 58 (3), 79-105.

Loxley, A., Seery, A., and Walsh, J. (2014) Higher Education in Ireland: Practices, Policies and Possibilities. Basingstoke, Palgrave MacMillan.

Page 200


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Loxley, A. (2014). Measures & Metrics and Academic Labour, in Loxley, A., Seery, A., and Walsh, J. Higher Education in Ireland: Practices, Policies and Possibilities. Basingstoke, Palgrave MacMillan, 123-145.

Loxley, A., and Seery, A. (2012). The role of the professional doctorate in Ireland from the student perspective, Studies in Higher Education, 37 (1), 3-17.

Lynch, K., Grummell, B., and Devine, D. (2012). New Managerialism in Education: Gender, Commercialisation and Carelessness. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Lynch, K. (2011). International league tables and rankings in higher education: an appraisal, in Elliott, I., Murphy, M., Payeur, A., and Duval, R. (eds). Mutations de l'enseignement supĂŠrieur et internationalisation. Brussels: De Boeck, 19-44.

Lynch, K., (2010). Lessons for higher education: the university as a site of activism, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 31, 575-590.

Lynch, K., and Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Riordan, C. (1998). Inequality in Higher Education: A Study of Class Barriers, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 19 (4), 445-478.

Lynch, K., (1997). Women in Management in Irish Education, in Wilson, M. (ed.). Women in Educational Management: A European Perspective. London: Paul Chapman, 108-135.

Lynch, K. (1997). A Profile of Mature Students in Higher Education and An Analysis of Equality Issues, in Morris, R. (ed). Mature Students in Higher Education. Higher Education Authority Equality, Cork, 79-116.

McCoy, S., and Byrne, D. (2011). The Sooner the Better I Could Get Out of There: Barriers to Higher Education Access in Ireland, Irish Educational Studies, 30 (2), 141-157.

McCoy, S., Calvert, E., Smyth, E., and Darmody, M. (2010). Study on the Costs of Participating in Higher Education. HEA, Dublin. Page 201


The Academic Profession in Ireland

McCoy, S., and Smyth, E. (2011). Higher Education Expansion and Differentiation in the Republic of Ireland, Higher Education, 61 (3), 243-260.

McGuinness, S., Bergin, A., Kelly, E., McCoy, S., Smyth, E., and Timoney, K. (2012). A Study of Future Demand for Higher Education in Ireland. ESRI Research Series 30.

McGuire, D., Collins, M.L., and Garavan, T.N. (2003). Tackling social exclusion at third level: a profile of participants on access programmes, Irish Educational Studies, 22 (1), 41-68.

Mendoza, P. (2007). Academic capitalism and doctoral student socialization: a case study, The Journal of Higher Education, 78 (1), 71-96.

Mittelstrass, J. (2010). The Future of the University, European Review, 18, Supplement no. 1: S181-S189.

Moore, S., Murphy, M., and Murray, R. (2010). Increasing Academic Output and Supporting Equality of Career Opportunity in Universities: Can Writers' Retreats Play a Role? The Journal of Faculty Development, 24 (3).

Moore, S., Carr, P., Crehan, M., Crowley, J., Flynn, D., Morgan, P., and Shannon, P. (2006). Keeping Students At University: The Retention Debate at Third-Level. Interesource Group Publishing, Dublin.

Morgan, M., Flanagan, R., and Kellaghan, T. (2001). A Study of Non-Completion in Undergraduate University Courses. Educational Research Centre: Dublin.

Murphy, P. (1998). Journal quality assessment for performance based funding. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 23, 25-31.

Murray, R., and Cunningham, E. (2011). Managing researcher development: â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;drastic transitionâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;? Studies in Higher Education, 36 (7), 831-845. Page 202


The Academic Profession in Ireland

O Carroll, C. The Irish Times, April 23, 2012.

O'Connell, P.J., McCoy, S., and Clancy, D. (2006). Who went to College? SocioEconomic Inequality in Entry to Higher Education in the Republic of Ireland in 2004, Higher Education Quarterly, 60 (4), 312-332.

Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Connor, M., and Chantler, A. (2011). The LIN Project within the Context of the Strategic Innovation Fund, in Fitzpatrick, N., and Harvey, J. (eds.). Designing Together: Effective Strategies for Creating a Collaborative Curriculum to Support Academic Professional Development. Dublin: DIT, 16-30.

O'Connor, P. (2014). Understanding Success: A Case Study of Gendered Change in the Professoriate, Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 36 (2), 212224.

O'Connor, P. (2014). Management and Gender in Higher Education. Manchester: MUP (distribution by Palgrave MacMillan in US).

O'Connor, P., and Carvalho, T. (2014). Different or Similar: Constructions of Leadership by Senior Managers in Irish and Portuguese Universities, Studies in Higher Education, 6, 1-28.

O'Connor, P., and Goransson, A. (2015). Constructing or Rejecting the Notion of Other in Senior University Management: The Cases of Ireland and Sweden, Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 43 (2), 323-340.

O'Connor, P., Carvalho, T., and White, K. (2014). The experiences of Senior Positional Leaders in Australian, Irish and Portuguese Universities: Universal or Contingent? Higher Education Research and Development Special Issue on Leadership, 33 (1), 1-14.

Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Connor,

P.,

and

White,

K.

(2012).

Similarities

and

differences

in

Collegiality/Managerialism in Irish and Australian Universities, Gender and Page 203


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Education, 27 (3), 903-920.

O'Connor, P. (2013). A standard career?, in Bagilhole, B., and White, K. (eds.). Generation and Gender in Academia. Palgrave MacMillan, 23-45.

O'Connor, P. (2012). Irish Universities: Male Dominated? Limits and Possibilities for Change? Equality, Diversion and Inclusion: An International Journal, 31 (1), 83-96.

O'Connor, P. (2012). Reflections on the Public Intellectual's Role in a Gendered Society, in Corcoran, M.P., (ed.). Reflections on Crisis: The Role of the Public Intellectual. Dublin: Royal Irish Academy, 55-73.

O'Connor, P. (2011). Where do women fit in university senior management? An analytical typology of cross national organisational cultures, in Bagilhole, B., and White, K. (eds). Gender, Power and Management: A Cross Cultural Analysis of Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, 168-191.

O'Connor, P. (2010). Gender and Organisational Culture at Senior Management Level: Limits and Possibilities for Change?, in Harford, J., and Rush, C. (eds). Women and Higher Education in Ireland 1850-2010. Have Women made a Difference? Oxford: Peter Lang, 139-162.

O'Connor, P. (2010). Is Senior Management in Irish Universities male dominated? What are the implications? Irish Journal of Sociology, 18 (1), 1-21.

O'Connor, P. (2008). The Elephant in the Corner: Gender and Policies related to Higher Education, Administration, 56 (1), 85-110.

O GrĂĄda, A., NĂ­ Laoire, C., Boylan, G., Connolly, L., Linehan, C. (2013). Through the Glass Ceiling: Career Progression Programme and Strategy for Female Academics and Researchers. UCC: Cork.

O Neill, G., Moore, S., McMullin, B., (2005). Emerging Issues in the Practice of University Learning and Teaching, AISHE, Dublin. Page 204


The Academic Profession in Ireland

O Sullivan, D. (2005). Cultural Politics and Irish Education Since the 1950s: Policy Paradigms and Power. IPA: Dublin.

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (1991). Review of National Policies for Education, Ireland. Paris: OECD.

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2011). Economic Surveys Ireland. Paris: OECD. http://www.oecd.org/eco/48861848.pdf (last accessed 27-12-2012).

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2004). Review of Higher Education in Ireland. Paris: OECD.

Osborne, R D. (1996). Higher Education in Ireland: North and South. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Park, E. (2013). From academic self-governance to executive university management: institutional governance in the eyes of academics in Europe, in Teichler, U., and Hohle, E.A., (eds.). The work situation of the academic profession in Europe: Findings of a survey in twelve countries, 183-204.

Podolny, J.M., and Baron, J.N. (1997). Relationships and resources: Social networks and mobility in the workplace. American Sociological Review, 16, 18-21.

Robinson, D. (2006). The Status of Higher Education Teaching Personnel in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States, Educational International.

Rogers, J K. (2000). Temps: The Many Faces of the Changing Workplace. ILR Press.

Rosenfeld, R.A., and Jones, J.A. (1987). Patterns and Effects of Geographic Mobility for Academic Women and Men, Journal of Higher Education, 58, 493-515.

Page 205


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Seery, A. (2012). Knowledge and the University, in Walsh, B. (ed.). Degrees of Nonsense. Dublin, Glasnevin Press, 130-144.

Seery, A. (2008). Slavoj Zizek's dialectics of ideology and the discourses of Irish education, Irish Educational Studies, 27: 133-146.

Shattock, M. (2013). University Governance, Leadership and Management in a Decade of Diversification and Uncertainty, Higher Education Quarterly, 67, 217-233, doi: 10.1111/hequ.12017.

Skilbeck, M. (2001). The university challenged: a review of international trends and issues with particular reference to Ireland. Dublin: Higher Education Authority.

Slowey, M., Kozina, E., and Tan, E. (2014). Voices of Academics in Irish Higher Education Perspectives on Professional Development, AISHE: Dublin.

Slowey, M. (2013). Practicing what they preach? Academics' views on professional development. Emerging Issues III-From Capacity Building to Sustainability, All Ireland Society for Higher Education (AISHE).

Slowey, M. (2012). New Knowledge â&#x20AC;&#x201C; New Learning? Curriculum Change in Higher Education and Academic Engagement in the Bologna Process in Ireland. Handbook of Research on Didactic Strategies and Technologies for Education: Incorporating Advancements, 530-540, IGI Global.

Slowey, M. (2009). Higher Education in the broader educational landscape â&#x20AC;&#x201C; widening the perspective on equity and access in Ireland, Journal Of Adult & Continuing Education, 15 (2), 204-219.

Sweitzer, V. (2009). Towards a Theory of Doctoral Student Professional Identity Development: A Developmental Networks Approach. The Journal of Higher Education, 80 (1), 2-30.

Tierney, W.G., and Rhoads, R.A. (1993). Enhancing promotion, tenure and beyond: Page 206


The Academic Profession in Ireland

Faculty socialization as a cultural process. Washington, DC: The George Washington University.

Trice, H.M. (1993). Occupational sub-cultures in the workplace. New York: IRL Press.

Trowler, P., and Knight, P.T. (2000). Coming to know in higher education: Theorising faculty entry into new work contexts. Higher Education Research and Development. 19 (1), 27-42.

Walsh, B. (2012). Degrees of Nonsense. Glasnevin Press, Dublin.

Walsh, J. (2014). A Contemporary History of Irish Higher Education, 1980-2011, in Loxley, A., Seery, A., and Walsh, J. (eds.). Higher education in Ireland: practices, policies and possibilities. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 33-54.

Walsh, J. (2014). The Hunt Report and higher education policy in the Republic of Ireland: â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;an international solution to an Irish problem? Studies in Higher Education, ID: 881350 DOI:10.10.

Walsh, J. (2013). The problem of Trinity College Dublin: a historical perspective on rationalisation in higher education in Ireland, Irish Educational Studies, DOI 10.1080/03323315.2013.867095.

Walsh, J. (2011). A quiet revolution â&#x20AC;&#x201C; international influence, domestic elites and the transformation of higher technical education in Ireland 1959-72, Irish Educational Studies, 30 (3), 365-381.

White, T. (2001). Investing in People: Higher Education in Ireland from 1960 to 2000, Institute of Public Administration: Dublin.

Page 207


The-Academic-Profession-in Ireland-2015-Cover-AW_Layout 1 08/05/2015 15:06 Page 1

University College Dublin An Colテ。iste Ollscoile, Baile テ》ha Cliath

The Academic Profession in Ireland

University College Dublin An Colテ。iste Ollscoile, Baile テ》ha Cliath

University College Dublin Belfield Dublin 4 Ireland

ISBN 978-1-905254-92-7

The Academic Profession in Ireland Marie Clarke, Jonathan Drennan, David Harmon, Abbey Hyde and Yurgos Politis


The Academic Profession in Ireland - May 2015