1993 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty-   Data File User's Manual

October 1997

(NCES 97-466) Ordering information

Introduction

This manual provides guidance and documentation for users of the 1993 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF-93) restricted-use faculty data file and of the public-use institution data file. Information about the purpose of the study, the data collection instruments, the sample design, data collection and data processing procedures for NSOPF-93 are also contained in this manual.

 

1.1 Organization of the Data File User's Manual

This manual was prepared with the goal of providing NSOPF-93 analysts with the information necessary to use and to interpret NSOPF-93 data. Each chapter in this manual can be read as a stand-alone document.

Chapters 1 to 5 provide background to the study, information on questionnaire development, sampling and data collection and processing procedures. Users desiring more detailed and technical documentation on data collection procedures, sampling and variance estimation, unit and item nonresponse, validity and reliability, and poststratification should consult the 1993 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty: Methodology Report [NCES 97-467].

Analysts desiring a practical discussion about how to use the data files can skip to Chapters 6 and 7. Chapter 6 provides a guide to the data files and codebooks. Chapter 7 discusses issues of comparability between NSOPF-93, NSOPF-88, and other data sets.

 

1.2 Background: NSOPF-88

The 1988 National Survey of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF-88)—whose successor survey was renamed the National Study of Postsecondary Faculty—was the first comprehensive study of higher education instructional faculty conducted by the (NCES) since 1963. The National Endowment for the Humanities provided additional support. NSOPF-88 generated immediate interest in the higher education community because prior to the release of these data there had been very little comprehensive information available on this topic. The survey provided a national profile of faculty in two-year, four-year, doctoral-granting, and other public and private non-proprietary institutions. Information was gathered on the professional backgrounds, responsibilities, workloads, salaries, benefits, and attitudes of both full- and part-time instructional faculty. In addition, data were collected from institutional representatives and department-level respondents on such issues as faculty composition, new hires, departures and recruitment, retention, and tenure policies.

The 1988 study, conducted by SRI International, involved both field test and full-scale survey components. The field test targeted a sample of 105 non-proprietary two-year and four-year institutions, 235 faculty, and 91 department chairpersons (from 51 four-year institutions and a supplement of 40 two- year and four-year institutions). Ninety-one percent of the institutions participated in the field test by returning their faculty lists. Questionnaire responses were obtained from 80 percent of institutional representatives (two and four-year institutions, excluding specialized institutions), 86 percent of the department chairpersons (four-year institutions only), and 68 percent of the faculty (two-year and four- year institutions).

The NSOPF-88 field test was conducted from July through October of 1987. It was designed primarily to test the relative effectiveness of two alternative data collection strategies, to determine the most effective procedures for obtaining lists of faculty, and to examine the adequacy of the questionnaires. The results of the field test informed the design of the full-scale NSOPF-88 study. A brief synopsis of the field test procedures and results can be found in the National Survey of Instructional Staff: Field Test Methodology Report (U.S. Department of Education, : Washington, D.C., March 8, 1988).

The NSOPF-88 full-scale study had three components: an institution-level survey of 480 colleges and universities in the United States; a survey of 3,029 eligible department chairpersons (or their equivalents) within the participating institutions; and a survey of 11,013 eligible faculty members within the same participating institutions. Data were collected for these three surveys between December 1987 and October 1988. Non-proprietary higher education institutions (two-year, four-year, or advanced degree) were stratified by size and assigned to strata adapted from the higher education institution classification system developed by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.1 Institution size was defined by the number of full-time faculty. Within each stratum, institutions were randomly selected. Lists of faculty employed as of October 15, 1987 were requested from participating institutions, and of the 480 institutions selected, 449 (94 percent) agreed to participate and provided lists of their fall 1987 instructional faculty and department chairpersons. Within four-year institutions, faculty and department chairpersons were stratified by program area and selected; within two-year institutions, simple random samples of faculty and department chairpersons were selected; and within specialized institutions (religious, medical, etc.), only faculty were sampled. At all institutions, instructional faculty were stratified on the basis of employment status—full-time and part-time. Questionnaires that asked about activities during the 1987 fall term were mailed in 1988. Questionnaire responses were obtained from 424 institutions (88 percent), 2,427 department chairpersons (80 percent), and 8,383 instructional faculty (76 percent).

A discussion of the procedures and results of the 1988 full-scale study appears in 1988 National Survey of Postsecondary Faculty: Methodology Report (U.S. Department of Education, : Washington, D.C., May 18, 1990). Four analytical reports were also prepared using NSOPF-88 data: Faculty in Higher Education Institutions, 1988 [NCES 90-365]; Institutional Policies and Practices Regarding Faculty in Higher Education [NCES 90-333]; A Descriptive Report of Academic Departments in Higher Education Institutions [NCES 90-339]; and Profiles of Faculty in Higher Education Institutions, 1988 [NCES 91-389].

 

1.3 Background: NSOPF-93

Like its predecessor, NSOPF-93 was designed to provide a national profile of faculty in two-year, four- year (and above), doctoral-granting, public and private non-proprietary institutions, and to gather information on the backgrounds, responsibilities, workloads, salaries, benefits, and attitudes of both full- and part-time faculty. NSOPF-93 was conducted by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC), a social science research center at the University of Chicago. NSOPF-93 was sponsored by the (NCES), with additional support from two co-sponsoring agencies, the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF). NEH and NSF sponsored sample augmentations for both the field test and full-scale study, and provided support for the study in its entirety. The sample augmentations were designed to provide higher levels of precision for faculty overall and to provide oversamples of specific subgroups of faculty, particularly full-time females; black, non-Hispanics; Asian/Pacific Islanders; Hispanics; and faculty in the humanities.

The second cycle of the National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF-93) was conducted in response to a continuing need for data on faculty and other instructional personnel, all of whom directly affect the quality of education in postsecondary institutions. Faculties determine curriculum content, performance standards for students, and the quality of students' preparation for careers. In addition, faculty members perform research and development work upon which the nation's technological and economic advancement depend. For these reasons, it is essential to understand who they are; what they do; and whether, how, and why the nation's faculty are changing.

Data collected for the second cycle of NSOPF expand the current information base about faculty in several important ways. First, the data allow for comparisons to be made over time. Second, more detailed comparisons can be made because of the increase in both the institutional and faculty sample sizes. Third, these data examine critical issues surrounding faculty that have developed since the 1988 study. Fourth, to get a clearer and more accurate picture of faculty and instruction, NSOPF-93 expanded the definition of faculty to include both non-instructional faculty and non-faculty instructional personnel in higher education institutions. Henceforth, the term "faculty" will be used in its broadest sense to designate both non-instructional and instructional faculty and other instructional staff. Chapter 3 discusses the definitions of eligible faculty in greater detail.

 

1.4 NSOPF-93 Field Test

A field test of NSOPF-93 data collection instruments and survey procedures with a national probability sample of 136 institutions (54 core institutions, and 82 institutions selected to augment the core sample, funded by NSF) and 636 faculty was conducted between February and September 1992. The general purposes of the field test were to evaluate the adequacy of the faculty and institution questionnaires and to test key procedures to be used in the full-scale study.

Institutional cooperation was sought from all 136 institutions and a faculty list was solicited from each institution. The overall participation rate for faculty list collection was 89 percent (93 percent for the core sample and 87 percent for the augmented sample). The field test faculty sample consisted of 636 faculty selected from 53 participating core institutions. A total of 495 faculty participated, for a response rate of 82 percent. The institution survey was limited to the 120 participating institutions that had provided lists of faculty and/or confirmed their participation prior to September 1, 1992. Ninety four of these institutions responded to the institution questionnaire for a response rate of 78 percent (82 percent for the core institutions and 78 percent for the augmented sample).

The results of the field test informed the design of the full-scale study. A detailed discussion of the procedures and results of the 1992 field test appears in the 1992-93 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty Field Test Report (U.S. Department of Education, , Washington, D.C., February 1994 [NCES 93-390]).

 

1.5 NSOPF-93 Full-Scale Study

For the NSOPF-93 full-scale study, the sample sizes were increased from 480 institutions and 11,013 faculty (in 1988), to 974 institutions and 31,354 faculty. The larger sample sizes allowed for more detailed comparisons and higher levels of precision at both the institution and faculty levels. The sample was also augmented to provide data about faculty in the humanities; faculty in these disciplines were oversampled, as were black, non-Hispanic; Hispanic; Asian/Pacific Islander; and full-time female faculty. As in the 1988 study, the sample consisted of non-proprietary two- and four-year (and above) higher education institutions stratified by a modified Carnegie classification and by faculty size. Institutional recruitment for the full-scale study began in October, 1992, when recruitment packets were mailed to the Chief Administrative Officers of 789 institutions. A supplemental sample of 185 institutions was added to ensure adequate representation across all strata. Of the 974 institutions in the total sample, 12 were found to be ineligible. Of the 962 eligible institutions, 817 institutions (85 percent) agreed to participate in the study (i.e., to provide lists of faculty employed during the 1992 Fall Term, that is, the term in progress on October 15, 1992). The faculty sample was selected from these 817 institutions. In 1993, questionnaires that asked primarily about the 1992 Fall term were mailed to institutions and faculty. (Specific questionnaire items are discussed in Chapter 2.)

The target sample for the faculty survey consisted of 31,354 faculty selected from 817 participating institutions. Of these, 1,590 were found to be ineligible. Of the 29,764 eligible faculty, 25,780 (87 percent) completed questionnaires either by self-administration or by a computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI).

Institution questionnaires were mailed to institution representatives at all 962 eligible institutions, including those that did not supply a list of faculty. Of the eligible institutions, 872 (91 percent) completed an institution questionnaire.

A survey report summarizing key results from the faculty survey is available: Faculty and Instructional Staff: Who Are They and What Do They Do? [NCES 94-346]. Other reports based on data from the NSOPF-93 faculty survey include: Instructional Faculty and Staff in Higher Education Institutions: Fall 1987 and Fall 1992 [NCES 97-470] and Characteristics and Attitudes of Instructional Faculty and Staff in the Humanities [NCES 97-973]. Another report, Institutional Policies and Practices Regarding Faculty in Higher Education [NCES 97-080], is based on the NSOPF-93 institution survey. These and future publications will also be available on the Internet on NCES's World Wide Web site at: /.

 

1.6 Restricted-use Data File and Documentation

A restricted-use data file has been produced for the NSOPF-93 faculty component on magnetic tape and on CD-ROM. This data file user's manual accompanies the NSOPF-93 data files appearing on magnetic tape and on CD-ROM.

The restricted-use data file has been released through individual licensing agreements to analysts who require access to the complete NCES data files for their research. Users agree, under penalty of law, that they shall not release any information that may lead to disclosure of a respondent's identity. The restricted-use data file contains data for 25,780 respondents from 817 participating institutions.

 

1.7 Public-use Data Files and Documentation

Public-use institution and faculty data files are also available on diskette and CD-ROM. The institution file contains data from the 872 postsecondary institutions that completed an institution questionnaire.

The public-use faculty data file contains data for 25,780 respondents from 817 participating institutions. Because multi-level micro data carry some risk of statistical disclosure of institutional or individual identities, the faculty data were subjected to an extensive deductive disclosure analysis to determine which items, used alone, in conjunction with other key variables, or in conjunction with public external sources such as NCES's Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) files, have significant disclosure potential. To minimize the possible risk of disclosure of individual respondents in compliance with the National Education Statistics Act, Public Law 103-382 [20 USC 9001 et seq.], the Carl D. Perkins Vocational Education Act, and the Privacy Act of 1974 [5 U.S.C. 552a], variables found to pose significant disclosure risks were modified or suppressed to remove or to substantially reduce such risks.

 

1.8 Derived Variables

For NSOPF-93, a total of 36 institution-level and 107 faculty-level derived variables were created in order to simplify access to standard queries useful to analysts as well as to enhance substantive analysis. Since research questions frequently require independent or control variables, this set of derived variables has been carefully constructed and added to the faculty and institution data files. The faculty restricted- use file includes all 143 derived variables. The institution file contains only the 36 institution-level derived variables. The public-use faculty file contains selected derived variables that were found not to pose significant disclosure risks. Multiple sources of data were used to create institution-level derived variables including: the 1991-92 IPEDS, the Carnegie classification system, and NSOPF-93 sampling information. Documentation for all derived variables appears in Appendix G.

 

1.9 Electronic Codebooks on CD-ROM and Documentation

In addition to hardcopy codebooks that accompany the various releases of NSOPF-93 data, three NSOPF- 93 electronic codebooks (ECBs) are also available to users. One ECB consists of the public-use institution file, another consists of the restricted-use faculty data file, and the other consists of the faculty restricted-use file merged with the public-use institution file. The ECBs feature windows with unweighted frequencies and percentages. A README.TXT file on the CD-ROM describes how to install the ECBs. Extensive "help" files and menus explain ECB features.

The ECB combines the convenience, simplicity, and cost efficiencies of personal computers (PCs) with CD-ROM technology. ECBs permit users to search for variables based on key words and names. The ECB displays full question text and unweighted frequencies for each variable in order to assist users in deciding which data elements may be useful for their analyses. The ECB can also be used as a tool for selecting variables for subsequent analysis, writing SAS or SPSS-PC code for file construction of the designated variables, and for generating a codebook of the chosen set of variables. More detailed information on the features of the NSOPF-93 ECBs appears in Chapter 6 and in the ECB help files and menus on the CD-ROM.

 

1.10 Data Analysis System on CD-ROM and Documentation

A NSOPF-93 faculty Data Analysis System (DAS) is also available. The DAS provides a convenient, menu-driven system allowing researchers to produce tables of frequencies and crosstabulations and correlation matrices. The NSOPF-93 sample is not a simple random sample. Therefore, simple random sample techniques for estimating sampling error cannot be applied to these data. The DAS takes into account the complexity of the sampling procedures and calculates standard errors appropriate for such samples. DAS software provides all information necessary for a user to set up and run a variety of analyses. Each DAS is self-documenting, with weighted data distributions and full descriptions for each variable. The DAS allows users to select variables for rows, columns, and subgroups for tables from the list of available variables, many of which have been computed to simplify analysis. Continuous variables, such as income, can be recoded into categories for rows, column percentages, or subgroup definitions. Categorical variables, such as race, can be grouped or "lumped" in various ways for analysis. Table titles as well as variable labels can be edited by the user, and DAS output is compatible with most spreadsheet software. In addition to the table estimates, the DAS calculates proper standard errors and weighted sample sizes for these estimates. If the number of valid cases does not meet the minimum requirement based on NCES statistical standards, the DAS prints the message "low-N." Users can also define variables for use in a correlation matrix, which can be imported into standard statistical packages for more complex analysis. More detailed information on the features of the NSOPF-93 DAS appears in the "help" files and menus on the DAS/CD-ROM.

 

1.11 How to Obtain NSOPF-93 Products

Restricted-use faculty data are available at no charge on a restricted loan basis to organizations that obtain an approved licensing agreement from NCES. To request a licensing agreement, the individual and/or institution must provide the following information:

To obtain further details and a licensing agreement form please write to:

Data Security Officer
Statistical Standards and Services Group
U.S. Department of Education

1900 K Street NW, Suite 9000
Washington DC 20006

Individuals who obtain restricted-use faculty data after signing a licensing agreement with NCES can receive the following products on one CD-ROM: the NSOPF-88 and NSOPF-93 faculty data files; the NSOPF-93 institution data file; the NSOPF-93 faculty ECB, the 1993 merged faculty and institution ECB; the user's manual for the institution and restricted-use faculty data files; and the faculty and institution questionnaires.

For those individuals who do not wish to obtain a licensing agreement, a public-use faculty data file (which contains a reduced number of variables to avoid disclosure) can be ordered from the National Education Data Resource Center at (see address below). The public-use institution file can also be ordered from the National Education Data Resource Center. Individuals who order the public-use faculty file on CD-ROM will receive the NSOPF-93 public-use faculty and institution data files, the institution ECB, a user's guide for the public-use faculty and institution files, and the faculty and institutional questionnaires. The DAS can be accessed also through the Internet on NCES's World Wide Web site at //. DAS procedures can be performed over the World Wide Web.

Feedback and suggestions on the products and other features of NSOPF-93 are welcome. Please address your comments to:

Linda Zimbler
NSOPF Project Officer
U.S. Department of Education

1900 K Street NW, Room 8123
Washington DC 20006
E-mail: Linda.Zimbler@ed.gov .

 

Footnote

[1] See A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (Princeton, N.J., 1987).

 

PDF Download/view the full report in a PDF file.(2,782K)

HELP Help with PDF files

For more information about the content of this report, contact Linda Zimbler at Linda.Zimbler@ed.gov .