Session Information
22 SES 04 C, Academic Work and Professional Development
Paper Session
Contribution
Academic work is a growing field of higher education research. As Tight (2003: 153) points out, “understanding the nature of academic work is critical if we are to understand higher education.” This is particularly true if we take into account some of the effects of the “global academic revolution” (Altbach et al., 2010), especially as regards the redefinition of faculty work as a “meta-profession” that extends beyond areas of scholarly expertise (Arreola et al., 2003), the growing emphasis on performativity and accountability, and the emergence of an instrumental workplace culture (Morley, 2003). These factors may threaten academic freedom and increase individualism and competition, which may promote conflict, incivility, and the erosion of collegial relationships (see Twale & De Luca, 2008). Unless institutions invest strategically in “the intellectual capital of the institution” though promoting faculty well-being and the quality of the academic workplace, faculty morale and professional growth are at stake (Gapa et al., 2007).
The way individuals construe professional identities and operate their roles in complex settings depends on how they perceive and position themselves in relation to institutional cultures (Bergquist & Pawlak, 2008). Therefore, it is important to ask: to what extent do personal perspectives of ideal academic life match perceived institutional priorities, and how does that affect job satisfaction? This was the main research question of the case study here reported, which was conducted in 2009/2010 at the University of Minho (Portugal), a research-teaching institution that has faced substantial changes in recent years, as a result of the Bologna Process and other transnational trends.
The study investigates faculty views of academic life in five domains: areas of academic activity (teaching, research, management, and service); evaluation of teaching and research; factors affecting career promotion; academic leadership; working atmosphere and interpersonal relationships. Its objectives are: (1) To identify faculty perceptions of the institutional culture (values and priorities) as regards the domains above; (2) To compare those perceptions with personal perspectives on how that culture should be in the same domains; (3) To identify perceptions of job satisfaction in the same domains; (4) To gain insight into of how professional identities are construed in the academic milieu; (5) To promote reflection and debate on academic life, with a focus on how perceived tensions and paradoxes may affect faculty morale and professional growth.
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
Arreola, R., Theall, M. & Aleamoni, L. (2003). Beyond scholarship: recognizing the multiple roles of the professoriate. Paper presented at the 2003 Annual Meting of AERA, Chicago, IL. Available at http://wwwcedanet.com/meta. Bergquist, W. & Pawlak, K. (2008). Engaging the six cultures of the academy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Gapa, J. M., Austin, A. E. & Trice, A. G. (2007). Rethinking faculty work: Higher educations’ strategic imperative. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Morley, L. (2003). Quality and power in higher education. Maidenhead: SRHE & OUP. Tight, M. (2003). Researching higher education. Buckingham: Open University Press. Twale, D. & DeLuca, B. (2008). Faculty incivility – The rise of the academic bully culture and what to do about it. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.