T financial constraints on U.S. colleges and universities in recent years have forced students to cope with fewer options and larger classes. One limited survey in 1992 reported that more colleges and universities than in an earlier study were simultaneously increasing the size of classes, reducing the number of full-time faculty, and increasing teaching loads. Class sizes were growing most rapidly in introductory and lower-division courses. In addition to economies in the classroom, academic administrators have tried other ways to deal with the dollar gap. Some have deferred maintenance. Others have raised tuition and fees. A number of institutions report that they have been tightening budgets for some non-student-funded undergraduate activities. Nevertheless, while making savings in some areas, administrators have as a class greatly proliferated, putting a new strain on institutional budgets. One set of statistics shows that between 1975 and 1990, college and university enrollments rose 10 percent, the number of full-time faculty members increased 21 percent, and administrative positions grew 42 percent. On most campuses senior administrators are served by a growing number of minions called “associate,” “vice,” “deputy,” “assistant,” and “assistants to” in dealing with academic, research, administrative, graduate, student, athletic, public relations, development, business, and alumni matters. To be sure, there is a greater need for administrative involvement in record keeping, financial aid, fundraising, compliance with state and federal government regulations, and expanding student and faculty services. Faculty show little interest in taking on any of these tasks. Indeed, they constantly complain of being overburdened with administrative responsibilities as it is. As a consequence of the growing demand for more middle-level administrative personnel, fewer than one-third of those presently employed in higher education are directly engaged in educating—two-thirds are administering or assisting those administering. According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, there was a rapid and significant growth in nonteaching employees in institutions of higher learning between 1975 and 1985. It is worth noting, however, that over the same period enrollment grew by 9.5 percent, so that in 1985 there were fewer full-time faculty per student in American institutions of higher learning than in 1975. The steady drift toward fewer full-time faculty per student has continued into the 1990s in both public and private institutions. The trend in administrative bloat has been uninterrupted. There are, for example, more specialists involved in public relations and marketing. One study shows that between 1985 and 1990, other professionals grew by 28 percent, executives by 14 percent, and faculty by less than 9 percent. Between 1985 and 1990, institutions of higher learning hired about twice as many nonteaching staff members as faculty members. In the 1980s, at some large research universities such as the University of Pennsylvania and Ohio State University, nonteaching professionals increased by over 100 percent. One cannot help but note the irony in the fact that at a time when colleges and universities were most loudly marketing themselves as institutions particularly committed to teaching, the proportion of employees who actually taught was steadily decreasing. The question that needs to be asked, of course, is: how much administrative growth was truly necessary during this period?
Read full abstract
Jun 30, 2022
Rima Dutta + 1
Open Access
