A FACULTY IN TRANSITION: A 24-YEAR STUDY OF THE JMU FACULTY

A FACULTY IN TRANSITION:
A 24-YEAR STUDY OF THE JMU FACULTY
January 2010
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1
Research Questions ....................................................................................................................................1
Methodology ........................................................................................................... 2
Results ...................................................................................................................... 3
Demographics..............................................................................................................................................3
Compensation............................................................................................................................................15
Faculty Resources......................................................................................................................................20
Summary................................................................................................................ 24
A Faculty in Transition
Page i
Executive Summary
OIR has collected and reported data on faculty since 1986. The purpose of this study of
instructional faculty has been designed to explore the ways the JMU faculty have changed since 1986
and provide useful information to the university community. As a result of these analyses, several
important trends are noteworthy.
 The number of full-time faculty has grown at a higher rate than increases in students. The
percentage of faculty with tenure has decreased from 62 percent in 1997-98 to 50 percent in
2009-10. Since 1997-98 the number of FTE students per full-time faculty decreased by 3.5.
 The percentage of faculty holding the terminal degree increased from 70 percent in 1986 to
78 percent in 2009, but is down from the high of 84 percent in 2002. The percentage of
terminal degreed female faculty increased from 51 percent in 1986 to 74 percent in 2009.
 The JMU faculty is more likely to have come to JMU in the last five years. Thirty-six percent
of faculty has five years or less experience at JMU. This compares with 32 percent in 1990.
The median years of JMU experience declined from 11.0 in 1990 to 8.0 in 2009. Faculty with
26 or more years of experience has increased from 5.5 percent in 1990 to 8.3 percent in
2009. Sixty-four percent of JMU faculty began their employment during the Rose presidency
(1998 to present). Six were hired during the Miller presidency.
 Fifty-four percent of new tenure-track assistant professors are still employed by JMU after
seven years. Although the percentage has varied from year to year, no discernable trends in
faculty retention have been observed for this type of faculty.
 The annual percentage changes in the average JMU faculty salary since 1986-87 have varied
significantly, normally in response to the Commonwealth’s budget situation. The percentage
change ranged from 10.1 percent in 1989-90 to –1.8 percent in 1992-93. Annual percentage
changes in total compensation (salary + fringe benefits) ranged from 10.8 percent in 1989-90
to –4.0 percent in 1991-92. In 2008-09 and 2009-10 total compensation was -0.8 percent and
-0.2 percent, respectively. In 2009-10 benefits accounted for 33.7 percent of total
compensation, up from 27.2 percent in 2002-03. This primarily reflects increasing medical
costs borne by the Commonwealth.
th
 The Commonwealth committed itself to raising faculty salaries to the 60 percentile of
similar institutions. JMU’s faculty salary peer group was revised in 2007. The new peer group
consists of 10 private institutions and 15 public. All of the institutions have an
undergraduate profile, as categorized by the Carnegie Foundation, as either “More Selective”
or “Selective.” The average salary is approximately $75,800 and the 60th percentile is
approximately $79,200. The 60th percentile is $11,600 higher than JMU’s current average.
 There has been a concerted effort to reduce JMU’s student-to-faculty ratio to increase
student and faculty interaction. The fall 2009 ratio, 16.0:1, is the lowest in the last 18 years
(16.2 in 2006), down from 19.2:1 in 1997. The percentage of total fall credit hours taught by
full-time faculty was approximately 78 percent.
A Faculty in Transition
Page ii
A Faculty in Transition
Page iii
A Faculty in Transition
Introduction
James Madison University is a very dynamic institution that has experienced significant changes in
many areas in the past 24 years. The on-campus headcount increased from 9,757 in 1986 to 18,232
in 2009. Additional majors were added or expanded. Additional faculty have been added to meet
enrollment demands for the new or expanded majors.
The Office of Institutional Research (OIR) is responsible for collecting and reporting data on JMU’s
faculty to the Commonwealth of Virginia (SCHEV) and the federal government (IPEDS) along with
organizations such as the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and the College
and University Professional Association (CUPA). In 1986 OIR created an electronic database of
faculty to facilitate the analyses of faculty data and respond faster to various internal and external
constituencies. Demographic changes occur slowly, so it is important to review long-term
demographic data to discover meaningful change. This database continues to be an invaluable
warehouse of information about faculty and enables an exploration of long-term changes in the
faculty.
University Planning & Analysis annually reviews the changes in JMU’s faculty to shed light on trends
that may affect policy and help senior administrators to understand better the needs of JMU’s
faculty. This is the tenth report in this series and covers the period fall 1986 to fall 2009.
Research Questions
While there are many questions that could be asked about the changes in JMU’s faculty, three
primary research questions are addressed in this study.
1.
How have faculty demographics (percent tenured, percent with terminal degree,
race/ethnicity, gender, etc.) changed since 1986?
2.
How well have faculty salaries and compensation kept up with inflation?
3.
How are faculty resources allocated for instruction?
A Faculty in Transition
Page 1
Methodology
The Office of Institutional Research has reported salary statistics to the Commonwealth of Virginia
(SCHEV), the federal government (IPEDS), and selected outside organizations (AAUP, CUPA)
since the early 1970s. Beginning in 1986 these data have been stored in electronic databases. This 24year collection of official JMU data is an invaluable resource for analyzing the changes in JMU’s
faculty and uncovering trends. The data are electronically stored in Microsoft Access® tables.
Standard queries and reports were developed in Access® to analyze the data for this report. While it
is recognized that many librarians are considered to be faculty and can obtain tenure, standard
definitions of faculty for national data collections do not include them in the definition of
instructional faculty. Therefore, librarians are not included in this study.
A Faculty in Transition
Page 2
Results
Demographics
Change occurs, but often it cannot be understood unless one considers several years of data. Many
important changes in the demographics of JMU’s instructional faculty have occurred since 1986.
This section displays tables and graphs that highlight these changes. Tables 1 and 2 display
information about the number of faculty and tenure status. Tables 3 and 4 display information about
the number of faculty who have terminal degrees.
Table 1
Full-Time Instructional Faculty by Tenure Status and Per Student
Year
1986-87
1987-88
1988-89
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Change
1
Number
Faculty
Tenured
Assistant
Professor
Tenured
Associate
Professor
Tenured
Professor
Tenured
Total
Percent
Tenured
Regular
Session
FTES
450
451
470
471
472
477
492
508
520
528
559
581
617
640
675
685
704
721
749
795
831
854
897
906
456
36
30
35
31
26
28
26
24
18
15
16
11
10
11
6
7
7
6
5
3
3
4
4
3
(33)
127
134
126
124
136
130
127
141
139
139
145
140
142
135
133
128
123
131
141
122
162
170
181
192
65
134
137
153
163
175
184
182
183
200
210
212
207
199
209
203
210
220
212
216
231
244
248
254
261
127
297
301
314
318
337
342
335
348
357
364
373
358
351
355
342
345
350
349
362
356
409
422
439
456
159
66%
67%
67%
68%
71%
72%
68%
69%
69%
69%
67%
62%
57%
55%
51%
50%
50%
48%
48%
45%
49%
49%
49%
50%
(16%)
9,297
9,617
10,123
10,365
10,423
10,620
10,720
10,711
10,869
11,087
12,119
12,877
13,539
13,697
13,823
14,094
14,458
14,732
14,857
15,462
15,869
16,114
16,794
116,897
7,600
FTE
Students
per FT
Faculty
20.7
21.3
21.5
22.0
22.1
22.3
21.8
21.1
20.9
21.0
21.7
22.2
21.9
21.4
20.5
20.6
20.5
20.4
19.8
19.4
19.1
18.9
18.7
18.7
(2.0)
Estimated
A Faculty in Transition
Page 3
Table 1 shows that the number of faculty more than doubled between 1986 and 2009. The number
of full-time equivalent students (FTES) increased by 82 percent and the number of FTE faculty per
FTES decreased. The fall 2009 student-to-faculty ratio is 16.0 to 1, the lowest since 1986. The
percentage of faculty with tenure increased from 66 percent in 1986 to 72 percent in 1991. By fall
2005 the percentage of faculty with tenure had steadily decreased to 45. In 2009 the percentage of
tenured faculty was 50 percent. As shown in Table 2, the percent of faculty tenured varies by college
from 35 percent in Education to a high of 65 percent in Visual and Performing Arts.
Table 2
Number of Full-Time Instructional Faculty and Tenure Status by College, Fall 2009
Number Tenured By Rank
College
Arts & Letters
Business
Education
Science & Mathematics
Integrated Science & Technology
Visual & Performing Arts
Other
Total
A Faculty in Transition
Number
Faculty
248
124
55
138
218
86
37
906
Assistant
Professor
Associate
Professor
Professor
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
3
53
26
8
36
35
28
6
192
60
42
11
41
73
28
6
261
Total
114
69
19
78
108
56
12
456
Percent
Tenured
46%
56%
35%
57%
50%
65%
32%
50%
Page 4
Table 3
Number and Percentage of Faculty Holding Terminal Degree
Number of Faculty
Year
1986-87
1987-88
1988-89
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Change
Male
331
332
337
333
330
335
342
348
349
354
369
378
394
402
422
426
436
438
444
465
472
479
488
494
163
Female
119
119
133
138
142
142
150
160
171
174
190
203
223
238
253
259
268
283
305
330
359
375
409
412
293
Number With
Terminal Degree
Male
Female
256
256
265
268
272
282
285
295
299
305
312
330
341
350
359
366
381
376
379
391
389
400
400
407
151
61
63
72
76
80
93
105
116
120
131
137
165
178
179
189
199
207
215
229
246
268
282
300
303
242
Percentage
Terminal Degree
Male
77%
77%
79%
80%
82%
84%
83%
85%
86%
86%
85%
87%
87%
87%
85%
86%
87%
86%
85%
84%
82%
84%
82%
82%
5%
Total
Percentage
Holding
Terminal
Degree
Female
51%
53%
54%
55%
56%
65%
70%
73%
70%
75%
72%
81%
80%
75%
75%
77%
77%
76%
75%
75%
75%
75%
73%
74%
23%
70%
71%
72%
73%
75%
79%
79%
81%
81%
83%
80%
85%
84%
83%
81%
82%
84%
82%
81%
80%
79%
80%
78%
78%
8%
The percentage of faculty with a terminal degree increased by eight percent between 1986 and 2009,
but the fall 2009 percentage (78) is the lowest since 1992. The major change in the faculty has been
the dramatic increase in female faculty. Since 1986:
 Females increased by 246 percent while males increased by 49 percent.
 Females with a terminal degree increased by 397 percent while males increased by 59
percent.
A Faculty in Transition
Page 5

The percentage of females with a terminal degree increased by 23 percent while males
increased by five percent. The percentage gap in terminal degrees between males and females
decreased from 26 percent to eight percent.
Table 4
Number and Percentage of Faculty Holding Terminal Degree by College, Fall 2008
Number of Faculty
with Terminal
Degree
Male
Female
Number of
Faculty
Male
Female
College
Arts & Letters
Business
Education
Science &
Mathematics
Integrated Science
& Technology
Visual &
Performing Arts
Other
Total
Percentage
Holding
Terminal
Degree
Percentage
Terminal Degree
Male
Female
141
88
10
86
107
36
45
52
111
68
8
82
81
20
35
41
79%
77%
80%
95%
76%
56%
78%
79%
77%
71%
78%
89%
102
116
89
80
87%
69%
78%
53
33
39
32
74%
97%
83%
14
494
23
412
10
407
14
303
71%
82%
61%
74%
65%
78%
Percentage of Faculty with Terminal Degree by Gender
90%
85%
Percentage
80%
75%
70%
65%
60%
55%
2008-09
2007-08
2006-07
2005-06
2004-05
2003-04
2002-03
2001-02
2000-01
1999-00
1998-99
1997-98
1996-97
1995-96
1994-95
1993-94
1992-93
1991-92
1990-91
1989-90
1988-89
1987-88
1986-87
50%
Year
Male
A Faculty in Transition
Female
Total Percentage
Page 6
Tables 5 and 6 display the changes in gender and ethnic distributions. Table 7 displays the changes
in the number of 10- and 12-month faculty. Tables 8, 9, and 10 display information about years of
employment and age of the faculty.
Table 5
Changes in Gender and Ethnic Origin, Instructional Faculty
16
20
21
22
27
27
26
642
671
702
731
742
766
766
12
11
12
11
11
13
14
0
0
3
13
20
35
27
Percent NonCaucasian
Unknown
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
Hispanic
26
19
25
25
24
28
28
Caucasian
39%
41%
42%
43%
44%
46%
45%
Asian
Female
283
305
330
359
375
409
412
American
Indian
438
444
465
472
479
488
494
AfricanAmerican
721
749
795
831
854
897
906
Ethnicity (excluding non-resident aliens)
Percent
Female
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Male
Fall
Faculty Total
Gender
9%
8%
8%
7%
7%
8%
8%
The percentage of faculty
holding the terminal
degree increased from 70
percent in 1986 to 78
percent in 2009. The year
with
the
highest
percentage of terminaldegreed
instructional
faculty was 1997 (85
percent). The percentage
of faculty with the
terminal degree ranges
from 89 percent in
Science & Mathematics to
71 percent in Business.
A Faculty in Transition
Page 7
NonResident
Alien
Unknown
0
0
0
1
5
6
2
4
201 101 48 193 7 3 2 1 11
4
0
2
16
5
2
9
138 86 52
1
0
7
119 0 5
6
86 53 33
2
0
2
73 1 5
3
37 906
248 124 55 14 494
57% 71% 18% 23
412
43%
29%
82%
3
28
3%
4%
2%
0
1
0%
0%
0%
0
26
2%
5%
4%
31 766
81% 81% 87% 0 14
3% 2% 4% 0
27
4%
3%
0%
3
44
6%
4%
4%
218 47% 53%
4%
0%
2%
89% 0% 1%
4%
138 62% 38%
1%
0%
5%
86% 0% 4%
4%
86 62% 38%
2%
0%
2%
85% 1% 6%
3%
37 906
38% 55%
62%
45%
8%
3%
0%
0%
0%
3%
84% 85%
0% 2%
0%
3%
8%
5%
Hispanic
American
Indian
8
5
1
8
Asian
AfricanAmerican
107
36
45
116
Female
141 88 10 102 Male
248 124 55 218 Faculty
Total
College
Arts & Letters
Business
Education
Integrated Science
& Technology
Science &
Mathematics
Visual &
Performing Arts
Other
Total
Arts & Letters
Business
Education &
Psychology
Integrated Science
& Technology
Science &
Mathematics
Visual &
Performing Arts
Other
Total
Caucasian
Table 6
Gender and Ethnic Origin, Instructional Faculty, Fall 2009
The JMU faculty is less ethnically diverse than in 2003, but there is greater gender diversity. The
percentage of non-Caucasian faculty decreased from nine percent in 2003 to eight percent in 2009.
During the same time period the percentage of female faculty increased from 39 to 45 percent.
In 1987 the months in which department heads were contractually employed increased from 10 to
12 months. As shown in Table 7, in 1987 seven percent of all instructional faculty were employed 12
months. By 2008 this had changed to 11 percent. Between 1987 and 2008 the percentage of faculty
on 10-month contracts increased by 88 percent while 12-month faculty increased by 203 percent.
A Faculty in Transition
Page 8
Table 7
10- and 12-Month Instructional Faculty
Instructor
/Lecturer
450
424
438
433
435
441
455
470
478
489
520
549
588
596
631
638
652
663
680
716
741
755
797
0
18
26
28
27
31
32
27
30
28
27
26
23
30
28
32
34
37
42
45
47
48
52
1
10
7
10
11
7
5
6
8
7
8
4
3
4
6
4
8
8
6
12
16
16
19
0
1
2
3
2
1
2
3
1
2
2
2
3
10
9
10
10
11
17
14
15
14
11
2
4
4
2
1
2
2
2
3
2
2
0
0
0
1
1
0
2
4
8
12
11
18
3
33
39
43
41
41
41
38
42
39
39
32
29
44
44
47
52
58
69
79
90
89
100
214
77
207
58
279
153
103
65
803
353
55
55
19
18
13
13
16
14
103
100
Percent of
Total
Assistant
Professor
38
40
39
41
35
37
42
37
31
27
35
39
46
51
56
67
67
74
85
103
110
107
116
Total
Associate
Professor
126
119
130
117
110
114
132
128
129
129
136
153
178
188
218
206
218
224
232
237
239
253
266
Professor
Instructor
/Lecturer
149
142
137
137
140
134
130
145
146
150
163
173
184
174
177
180
173
181
185
179
186
190
202
Total
Assistant
Professor
137
123
132
138
150
156
151
160
172
183
186
184
180
183
180
185
194
184
178
197
206
205
213
Professor
Fall
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Change
12-Month
Associate
Professor
10-Month
1%
7%
8%
9%
9%
9%
8%
7%
8%
7%
7%
6%
5%
7%
7%
7%
7%
8%
9%
10%
11%
11%
11%
11%
10%
In the last 10 years an influx of new faculty resulted from many senior faculty retiring and an
increase in new positions for enrollment growth. When compared with 1990-91, the profile of the
faculty years in service at JMU has changed. In 1990 32.3 percent of the faculty had five years or less
experience. The average number of years at JMU was 12 (median=11.0). In 2009 36.6 percent had
five years or less experience and the average for all faculty was 10 (median=8) years. Sixty-four
percent of the faculty was hired since Linwood Rose became JMU’s President in 1998. As shown in
Table 10, the median age of the faculty has increased from 44 to 48.
A Faculty in Transition
Page 9
Table 8
Years Employed at JMU, Fall 1990 and Fall 2009
Years
Employed
New
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
31+
Average Years
Median Years
Max Years Service
Average Age
Median Age
Oldest
Youngest
Total
A Faculty in Transition
1990-91
Percent of Total
33
121
72
83
88
53
19
7
11.6
11
32
46.5
44
72
25
476
6.9%
25.4%
15.1%
17.4%
18.5%
11.1%
4.0%
1.5%
2009-10
49
283
199
169
81
50
27
48
10.6
8
44
47.8
48
75
26
906
Percent of Total
5.4%
31.2%
22.0%
18.7%
8.9%
5.5%
3.0%
5.3%
Page 10
New
1-5
6-10
11-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
31+
Total
Average Years
Median Years
Max Years
Average Age
Median Age
Oldest
Pct 5 Years or
Less
5
27
8
10
3
0
0
2
55
7.0
4
33
47
46
67
58.2%
10
64
54
55
23
7
4
7
224
10.0
9
39
49
50
73
33.0%
6
44
27
22
11
11
5
12
138
11.9
9
44
48
45
73
36.2%
5
22
27
10
8
5
2
7
86
11.3
8
41
49
47
70
31.4%
2
7
9
6
4
3
0
0
31
9.5
9
24
45
40
63
29.0%
49
283
199
169
81
50
27
48
906
10.2
8
44
48
48
75
36.6%
Percent
Grand Total
Other
Visual &
Performing Arts
Science &
Math
6
31
24
22
16
12
6
7
124
12.2
11
34
49
49
73
29.8%
Integrated
Science and
Technology
15
88
50
44
16
12
10
13
248
10.1
8
44
46
43
75
41.5%
Education
Business
Years
Employed
Arts & Letters
Table 9
Years Employed at JMU and Average Age by College, Fall 2009
5%
31%
22%
19%
9%
6%
3%
5%
100%
Table 9 compares for fall 2009 the average and median years at JMU and average and median ages
by college. The faculty has less JMU experience than 15 years ago. The median number of years at
JMU varies from four in the College of Education to 11 in the College of Business. The median
years at JMU for all faculty decreased from 11 in 1990 to eight in 2009. The median age of the
faculty (both new and continuing) increased from 44 years in 1990 to 48 in 2009. In 1990 the oldest
faculty member was 72 compared to 75 in 2009. In 1990 the longest service for a faculty member
was 32 years while it was 44 in 2009.
The chart on page 9 displays the changes in the distribution of JMU experience between 1990 and
2009. In 1990 5.5 percent of the faculty had 26 or more years of experience at JMU compared to 8.3
percent in 2009. In fall 2009 the years employed ranged from zero to 43. Age ranged from 26 to 75.
Sixty-two percent of the faculty began their JMU employment during Dr. Rose’s presidency. In 2009
the average age of newly hired faculty was 36.4 years.
A Faculty in Transition
Page 11
Table 10
Average and Median Age, Years of Service: 1986-87 – 2009-10
Year
Headcount
1986-87
1987-88
1988-89
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Change
459
457
477
476
476
482
495
508
520
528
559
581
617
640
675
685
704
721
749
795
831
854
897
906
447
Average
JMU Years
Median
JMU Years
9.9
10.5
10.6
11.2
11.6
12.0
11.1
11.5
12.0
12.1
11.8
11.2
10.3
10.4
9.9
10.1
10.3
10.2
9.9
10.0
10.1
10.2
10.2
10.6
0.7
10
10
10
11
11
12
10
10
10
11
10
9
7
7
6
6
6
6
7
7
8
8
8
8
(2)
Average
Age
44.4
44.9
45.3
45.7
46.5
46.8
46.3
46.7
47.2
47.5
47.5
47.3
46.9
47.2
46.8
47.2
47.7
47.5
47.1
47.2
47.3
47.5
47.5
47.8
3.4
Median
Age
44
44
45
45
44
47
46
46
47
48
48
48
47
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
47
48
48
4
Average
Age of
New
Faculty
38.0
35.3
37.0
34.8
39.8
35.7
38.3
38.5
38.4
37.7
38.7
38.4
39.4
38.7
37.7
39.1
37.1
38.3
38.0
38.5
38.1
40.4
38.2
36.4
(1.6)
Each year JMU hires new faculty to replace faculty who retire or leave JMU, as well as to
accommodate enrollment growth. A frequently asked question is how many new assistant tenuretrack professors tend to remain at JMU? Has this increased or decreased? Table 11 displays the
number of new tenure-track assistant professors hired since 1986. Between 1986 and 2001, 54
percent of those hired were employed seven years later. It appears that between the third and fourth
years the highest percentage of tenure-track faculty leave JMU. Once a faculty member has earned
tenure, however, he/she tends to remain at JMU. For example, of the 111 faculty hired between
1986 and 1999 that were employed after seven years, 99 (89 percent) were employed after 10 years at
JMU.
A Faculty in Transition
Page 12
Table 11 shows that the percentage of new tenure-track faculty who are still employed after seven
years varies from year to year, but it appears that new tenure-track faculty remain at JMU at rates
similar to earlier years.
Table 11
Retention of New Tenure Track Assistant Professors
Fall
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Percent
Retained
Begin
1
Year
2
Years
3
Years
4
Years
5
Years
6
Years
13
12
11
10
10
9
8
8
8
13
8
13
7
7
11
7
12
1
10
16
14
12
12
9
6
5
5
19
18
18
35
32
30
24
24
22
40
37
34
29
26
29
25
28
25
26
25
17
31
28
21
13
18
63%
7
22
21
14
21
29
22
2
18
2
20
8
24
2
58%
47
11
9
26
24
23
11
1
25
25
8
9
12
12
67%
60
4
9
12
13
26
4
10
14
17
9
7
4
10
58%
38
7
8
5
10
17
7
9
5
12
6
8
8
10
65%
46
11
1
8
14
15
11
12
9
15
6
7
11
10
75%
45
9
7
12
1
16
10
7
12
13
5
6
11
8
6
8
6
12
10
13
10
6
12
62%
86
5
10
6
12
3
62%
38
8
5
10
7
12
17
6
10
7
Percent
Years Remaining
14
13
16
16
66%
64%
22
25
26
23
32
34
54%
70%
55%
86%
90%
92%
94%
38
482
A Faculty in Transition
95%
88%
74%
74%
54%
Page 13
One measure of faculty qualifications is the percentage that has earned a terminal degree in their
field. Table 12 displays the number of new faculty and the percentage with a terminal degree by
rank. A small percentage of instructors have a terminal degree. Seventy-six percent of new assistant
professors held a terminal degree when hired while 91 percent of new professors and 93 percent of
associate professors held the terminal degree. The overall percentage of new faculty with a terminal
degree ranges from a low of 38 percent in 1991 to a high of 81 percent in 2003.
18
10
17
10
9
17
23
10
8
16
15
13
13
6
10
12
7
9
17
14
18
12
11
5
298
A Faculty in Transition
6%
0%
0%
0%
0%
6%
17%
10%
25%
19%
20%
23%
23%
0%
10%
27%
29%
44%
35%
7%
0%
33%
27%
0%
14%
22
17
22
13
17
14
38
20
24
37
34
44
62
42
57
36
41
51
54
42
47
40
46
41
861
68%
82%
73%
85%
53%
79%
76%
80%
75%
86%
79%
91%
84%
71%
63%
69%
83%
84%
79%
88%
68%
83%
65%
63%
76%
7
3
5
2
3
1
3
7
3
6
10
12
10
7
13
11
1
2
5
0
5
7
5
0
128
100%
100%
80%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
90%
83%
90%
86%
92%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
0%
93%
4
1
2
2
4
0
4
4
3
3
1
3
4
3
1
2
1
1
5
6
2
5
4
3
68
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0%
33%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
80%
100%
67%
91%
51
31
46
27
33
32
68
41
38
62
60
72
89
58
81
61
50
63
81
62
72
64
66
49
1,355
Percent
Terminal
Total
New
Percent
Terminal
Total
New
Percent
Terminal
Total
New
Percent
Terminal
Total
New
Percent
Terminal
Fall
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
All
Years
Total New
Table 12
New Terminal Degreed Instructional Faculty
53%
58%
48%
56%
48%
38%
59%
68%
68%
71%
65%
75%
76%
67%
62%
68%
76%
81%
74%
71%
56%
75%
64%
57%
65%
Page 14
Compensation
The tables and graphs in this section focus on faculty compensation since 1986. Table 13 displays
the average salary by rank by year as reported to the American Association of University Professors
(AAUP). Table 14 displays total compensation (salary + benefits) since 1986. Table 15 shows the
percent increases for continuing faculty.
Table 13
Average Salary by Rank
Year
1986-87
1987-88
1988-89
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Change
Pct Change
Professor
39,389
42,499
46,235
50,261
51,698
50,829
50,958
52,135
55,254
56,991
59,158
62,312
66,342
70,206
72,223
72,325
71,690
73,066
77,648
80,204
83,810
87,587
87,417
87,731
48,342
123%
Associate
Professor
33,818
36,420
39,246
42,935
44,177
43,791
43,650
44,674
47,439
48,235
49,899
53,371
55,943
58,818
59,695
59,153
58,312
59,758
62,798
66,051
67,847
68,984
69,216
67,790
33,972
100%
Assistant
Professor
29,341
31,052
33,435
36,917
37,768
36,596
35,296
36,558
39,017
40,415
40,711
43,038
44,418
46,009
46,518
46,376
46,620
47,852
50,559
53,561
54,823
56,994
56,278
57,646
28,305
96%
Instructor
All Ranks
21,555
23,547
25,607
27,943
29,398
28,603
29,113
28,506
30,866
31,180
32,069
33,604
34,622
36,407
39,359
39,531
39,601
41,483
42,936
44,301
46,210
48,982
49,188
49,758
28,203
130%
33,225
35,647
38,724
42,618
44,329
43,576
42,800
44,086
47,286
48,857
49,979
52,519
54,394
56,859
57,407
57,349
57,077
58,030
60,731
63,684
65,550
68,192
67,606
68,073
34,848
104%
Percent
Change
-7.3%
8.6%
10.1%
4.0%
-1.7%
-1.8%
3.0%
7.3%
3.3%
2.3%
5.1%
3.6%
4.5%
1.0%
-0.1%
-0.5%
1.7%
4.7%
4.9%
2.9%
4.0%
-0.9%
0.7%
Continuing assistant professors had greater percentage salary increases than professors and associate
professors in all but three years since 1986. Although professors have the highest average salary and
compensation, their overall percentage increases tended to be smaller than associate or assistant
professors. Professors are not eligible for salary increases associated with promotion to a new rank
A Faculty in Transition
Page 15
as are assistant and associate professors. Benefits as a percentage of total compensation have
increased by nearly 10 percent since 1996-97.
Table 14
Average Compensation by Rank
Year
1986-87
1987-88
1988-89
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Change
Percent
Change
Associate Assistant
Professor Professor Professor Instructor
49,019
52,772
57,153
62,410
65,579
63,107
62,784
64,594
68,010
70,286
72,818
77,058
82,737
88,083
91,232
91,288
88,978
93,048
99,966
104,833
110,440
115,560
115,359
114,768
66,749
136%
A Faculty in Transition
42,281
45,464
48,790
53,820
56,530
54,723
54,367
55,995
59,039
60,351
62,219
66,706
70,425
74,515
76,248
75,730
74,325
77,559
82,550
87,061
90,992
92,800
93,066
90,589
48,308
114%
36,874
38,999
41,802
46,581
48,729
45,909
44,698
46,615
49,295
49,902
51,343
54,563
56,646
59,096
60,248
60,337
60,802
63,350
67,825
72,017
75,117
78,240
77,347
78,401
40,527
110%
27,428
29,924
32,355
35,746
38,503
36,747
37,443
37,108
39,675
39,982
41,139
43,357
44,959
47,557
51,548
51,985
52,242
55,542
58,452
60,692
64,592
68,441
68,715
68,878
41,450
151%
All
Ranks
41,564
44,525
48,146
53,358
56,677
54,418
53,359
55,291
58,822
60,974
62,178
65,641
68,535
72,113
73,399
73,447
72,589
75,355
79,907
84,039
88,185
91,892
91,160
90,988
49,424
119%
Percent
Change
-7.1%
8.1%
10.8%
6.2%
-4.0%
-1.9%
3.6%
6.4%
3.7%
2.0%
5.6%
4.4%
5.2%
1.8%
0.7%
-1.7%
3.8%
6.0%
5.2%
4.9%
4.2%
-0.8%
-0.2%
Benefits
As
Percent
Of
Salary
25.1
24.9
24.3
25.2
27.9
24.9
24.7
25.4
24.4
24.8
24.4
25.0
26.0
26.8
27.9
28.1
27.2
29.9
31.6
32.0
34.5
34.7
34.8
33.7
8.6
Page 16
Table 15
Percent Salary Increases for Continuing1 Faculty
Fall
Professor
1986-87
1987-88
1988-89
1989-90
1990-91
1991-92
1992-93
1993-94
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
Average
Increase
11.74
7.10
9.80
9.01
3.21
0.54
0.57
2.30
3.35
2.88
4.15
5.89
6.05
5.63
2.24
0.60
0.30
2.31
7.49
5.44
3.97
4.52
0.12
0.15
4.14
Associate
Professor
11.81
8.60
10.20
10.02
3.78
1.47
0.38
3.00
3.95
3.98
4.62
7.23
6.75
6.73
3.64
1.11
0.18
4.10
7.30
7.97
5.09
5.61
0.64
0.61
4.95
Assistant
Professor
11.95
9.40
11.80
11.59
4.49
0.81
0.31
3.03
4.59
4.80
5.49
7.59
7.51
7.38
4.32
1.55
0.52
5.35
7.36
8.25
5.59
5.76
1.55
1.33
5.51
Instructor
10.32
9.70
12.60
14.54
3.84
1.69
0.33
3.52
5.06
9.28
5.28
7.06
8.35
7.21
5.27
0.79
1.09
6.44
5.71
5.48
4.81
5.41
0.79
0.84
5.64
Total
11.75
8.30
10.40
10.18
3.69
0.94
0.46
2.72
3.85
3.76
4.59
6.69
6.65
6.43
3.29
0.99
0.36
3.87
7.27
6.88
4.75
5.20
0.68
0.65
4.76
1 These are faculty who were employed the previous year. Faculty who were promoted were analyzed as if they were in
the previous rank. For example, an associate professor that was promoted to professor was analyzed as an associate
professor with the new salary.
A Faculty in Transition
Page 17
In July 2007 the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia (SCHEV) negotiated a new faculty
salary peer group with each institution. The purpose of the faculty peer group is to establish a basis
upon which funds can be allocated for faculty salaries that enable the institutions to compete for
high-quality faculty. The Commonwealth’s objective is to fund faculty salaries at the 60th percentile
of a national group. The previous peer group was established in 1997.
Table 16 displays the new peer institutions and some comparable statistics, including the 2008-09
faculty salary average. The new peer group consists of 10 private and 15 public institutions. Each
institution has an undergraduate profile, as categorized by the Carnegie Foundation, as either “More
Selective” or “Selective.” The average salary in 2008-09 was approximately $75,800 and the 60th
percentile was approximately $79,200. The 60th percentile is approximately $11,600 higher than
JMU’s current average. JMU ranked 18th in this list. This means that additional dollars would need to
be allocated by the General Assembly over the next several years to bring JMU’s average to the 60th
percentile. This could be a challenge given the current state of the economy. In 2008-09 and 2009-10
salary increases were not given to any Virginia employees. Unfortunately, this trend is likely to
continue for another year or two.
A Faculty in Transition
Page 18
Table 16
Summary of AAUP Faculty Salary Data as Published in Academe
New Faculty Peer Group (In Thousands Of Dollars), 2008-09
Institution
Boston College
St. John's University-New York
Hofstra University
Loyola Marymount University
Rowan University
Fairfield University
Marquette University
Texas Christian University
The University of Alabama
Bloomsburg University of PA
Baylor University
Duquesne University
Miami University-Oxford
Ohio University-Main Campus
UNC-Wilmington
Appalachian State University
Gonzaga University
James Madison University
Illinois State University
University of Northern Iowa
Western Washington University
College of Charleston
Eastern Illinois University
University of Wisconsin-La
Crosse
Truman State University
University of Wisconsin-Eau
Claire
Average
60th Percentile
JMU Distance from 60th
percentile
A Faculty in Transition
State
Control
Headcount
6-Year
Grad
Rate
Student- Average
Faculty Salary,
Ratio
08-09
MA
NY
NY
CA
NJ
CT
WI
TX
AL
PA
TX
PA
OH
OH
NC
NC
WA
VA
IL
IA
WA
SC
IL
WI
Private
Private
Private
Private
Public
Private
Private
Private
Public
Public
Private
Private
Public
Public
Public
Public
Private
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
14,621
20,096
12,490
8,977
10,091
5,024
11,516
8,668
25,544
8,745
14,174
10,296
15,968
21,089
12,180
15,871
6,873
17,918
20,274
12,692
15,871
11,316
12,179
14,276
91
64
58
75
63
80
70
68
58
62
71
74
69
82
62
62
78
80
58
65
64
58
61
62
13.1
17.1
14.1
13.1
12.1
13.1
15.1
14.1
19.1
21.1
16.1
15.1
16.1
19.1
18.1
17.1
12.1
16.1
14.1
16.1
19.1
13.1
16.1
24.1
107.6
98.7
96.2
92.5
86.0
85.9
81.9
79.9
78.4
75.5
75.4
74.7
73.1
72.1
71.6
70.3
70.1
67.6
66.8
65.5
65.5
64.7
63.7
59.9
MO
WI
Public
Public
5,920
10,854
66
62
16.1
24.1
59.6
58.7
75.8
79.2
11.6
Page 19
Faculty Resources
Table 17 displays the changes in faculty FTE (summer, fall, spring and total) since 1994-95. The
FTEF grew by 78 percent. The FTEF for the fall and spring terms are virtually identical even
though historically spring headcounts are approximately five percent lower than fall.
Table 17 also displays the number of degrees conferred and the ratio of FTE faculty to total degrees
conferred. This ratio is one of JMU’s measures in the Institutional Performance Standards (IPS), a
series of measures developed by SCHEV to determine whether the higher education institutions in
Virginia are to be certified to receive additional autonomy in areas such as capital building projects,
procurement, and personnel. The certification process was developed in the last few years as part of
the “The Restructured Higher Education Financial and Administrative Operations Act.” Click on
the link below to read a description of the Act on the Secretary of Education’s website.
http://www.education.virginia.gov/Initiatives/HigherEducation/Restructuring.cfm
Table 18 displays four measures of faculty resources and use. Each measure is described and
analyzed below.
 The “Student-To-Faculty Ratio” is calculated by dividing the full-time equivalent
students (15 credits per undergraduate and 12 per graduate student) by the full-time
equivalent faculty (FTEF). This is not a measure of average class size. Since 1991 the
ratio has varied from 19.2 in 1997 to 16.0 in 2008 and 2009.
 The “Total Student Credit Hours per Full-Time Equivalent Faculty” figures represent
the total number of credit hours taught divided by the total FTE faculty. This number
has varied from 284.8 in 1997 to 236.4 in 2009.
 The “Percent of Total Fall Credit Hours Taught by Full-Time Faculty” seeks to explore
the distribution of total effort between full-time and part-time faculty. The percent
ranged from 80.9 in 2004 to 77.1 in 1993. It was 78.3 percent in 2008.
 The “Percent of Lower Division Student Course Enrollments Taught by Full-Time
Faculty” figures are calculated by section and subsection. Individualized instruction is
not included. Section is defined as an organized course offered for credit and not a
subsection such as a laboratory or discussion session. Sections also include mass
sections. For example, a Biology 130 lecture is typically taught by one faculty member,
but is listed in the schedule of classes as four sections to assign students to labs. The
section analysis combines the lab sections, counting them as one lecture section. So, the
same Biology 130 course has four subsections. The percent for sections ranged from
76.4 to 64.3 (2004). The percent for subsections ranged from 82.9 percent to 64.9 (2006).
A Faculty in Transition
Page 20
Table 17
Faculty FTE (FT and PT) and Degrees Conferred, 1994-95 to 2008-09
Academic
Year
Summer
FTEF
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
Percentage
Change
108.9
102.2
109.0
111.9
127.3
123.9
122.3
131.2
131.7
141.0
151.8
161.2
163.2
164.2
174.1
59.9
Fall
FTEF
611.5
609.3
652.5
687.2
744.3
764.6
822.4
824.3
855.8
880.3
910.6
968.6
1,009.0
1,033.7
1,092.3
78.6
Spring
FTEF
612.7
601.2
644.9
694.8
742.3
763.0
821.0
836.3
855.0
871.9
909.0
957.2
1,010.8
1,033.8
1,102.4
79.9
FTEF
Total
Degrees
Conferred
666.5
656.3
703.2
747.0
806.9
825.8
882.8
895.9
921.3
946.6
985.7
1,043.5
1,091.5
1,115.9
1,184.4
77.7
2,685
2,666
2,571
2,738
2,906
3,472
3,384
3,435
3,474
3,685
3,778
4,027
4,034
4,143
4,334
61.4
FTES/
Degrees
Ratio
4.0
4.1
3.7
3.7
3.6
4.2
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.9
3.8
3.9
3.7
3.7
3.7
Faculty FTE, 1994-95 to 2007-08
1200
1994-95
1995-96
1996-97
1997-98
1998-99
1999-00
2000-01
2001-02
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Summer FTEF
A Faculty in Transition
Fall FTEF
Spring FTEF
FTEF Total
Page 21
The Division of Academic Affairs analyses faculty resource use by department and college.
Questions about the relative distribution of resources and their use should be directed to the office
of the Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Table 18
Measures of Faculty Resources and Use Fall 1991 to Fall 2009
Fall
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Change
since 1991
Student-toFaculty
Ratio
Total
Student
Credit Hours
per FullTime
Equivalent
Faculty
Percentage of
Total Fall
Credit Hours
Taught by
Full-Time
Faculty
Percentage of
Lower Division
Student Course
Enrollments
Taught by
Full-Time
Faculty
Section/
Subsection
18.9 : 1
18.3 : 1
18.2 : 1
18.3 : 1
18.8 : 1
19.1 : 1
19.2 : 1
18.8 : 1
18.3 : 1
17.5 : 1
17.5 : 1
17.4 : 1
17.3 : 1
16.8 : 1
16.6 : 1
16.2 : 1
16.4 : 1
16.0 : 1
16.0 : 1
(2.9 : 1)
281.2
271.6
270.2
271.5
279.0
283.7
284.8
279.8
272.0
260.3
263.3
257.7
258.3
250.6
247.1
240.8
242.7
237.1
236.4
(44.8)
78.5%
79.5%
77.7%
77.1%
79.6%
79.5%
78.2%
79.6%
79.8%
78.6%
80.1%
80.7%
79.9%
80.9%
80.0%
80.2%
79.8%
79.4%
78.3%
(0.2%)
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
75.9% / 82.9%
74.3% / 77.5%
76.4% / 75.3%
75.7% / 75.2%
73.7% / 75.2%
75.8% / 70.9%
71.0% / 82.4%
73.0% / 70.8%
64.3% / 65.9%
71.1% / 65.4%
70.7% / 64.9%
70.3% / 69.9%
68.7% / 67.7%
66.1% / 67.6%
2(8.9%) / (15.3%)
Regular
Session (Fall
+ Spring)
FTE
Students
10,620
10,720
10,711
10,869
11,087
12,119
12,877
13,539
13,697
13,823
14,094
14,496
14,732
14,857
15,462
15,869
16,115
16,794
216,897
6,457
Beginning with fall 1996, Student-To-Faculty Ratios are calculated by the methodology used
between 1991 and 1995 and will vary slightly from the annual statistical summaries published by the
Office of Institutional Research. The revised methodology was adopted by the Academic Council to
satisfy SCHEV definitions.
2
Estimated and approved by SCHEV, July 2009
A Faculty in Transition
Page 22
There have been some subtle changes in how faculty resources have been employed since 1991. The
student-to-faculty ratio is not an indicator of class size, but is a measure of the typical number of
students he/she will work with in an instructional activity. The ratio has declined by 2.9 since 1991, a
major accomplishment by the senior administration in securing and allocating additional funding for
instructional faculty. While full-time faculty teach the vast majority of credit hours, full-time faculty
are less likely than in 1996 to teach lower division sections and subsections.
A Faculty in Transition
Page 23
Summary
This study of instructional faculty was designed to explore the ways the JMU faculty have changed
since 1986 and provide useful information to the university community. As a result of these
analyses, several important trends are noteworthy.
 The number of full-time faculty has grown at a higher rate than increases in students. The
percentage of faculty with tenure has decreased from 62 percent in 1997-98 to 50 percent in
2009-10. Since 1997-98 the number of FTE students per full-time faculty decreased by 3.5.
 The percentage of faculty holding the terminal degree increased from 70 percent in 1986 to
78 percent in 2009, but is down from the high of 84 percent in 2002. The percentage of
terminal degreed female faculty increased from 51 percent in 1986 to 74 percent in 2009.
 The JMU faculty is more likely to have come to JMU in the last five years. Thirty-six percent
of faculty has five years or less experience at JMU. This compares with 32 percent in 1990.
The median years of JMU experience declined from 11.0 in 1990 to 8.0 in 2009. Faculty with
26 or more years of experience has increased from 5.5 percent in 1990 to 8.3 percent in
2009. Sixty-four percent of JMU faculty began their employment during the Rose presidency
(1998 to present). Six were hired during the Miller presidency.
 Fifty-four percent of new tenure-track assistant professors are still employed by JMU after
seven years. Although the percentage has varied from year to year, no discernable trends in
faculty retention have been observed for this type of faculty.
 Annual percentage changes in the average JMU faculty salary since 1986-87 ranged from
10.1 percent in 1989-90 to –1.8 percent in 1992-93. Annual percentage changes in total
compensation (salary + fringe benefits) ranged from 10.8 percent in 1989-90 to –4.0 percent
in 1991-92. In 2008-09 and 2009-10 total compensation was -0.8 percent and -0.2 percent,
respectively. In 2009-10 benefits accounted for 33.7 percent of total compensation, up from
27.2 percent in 2002-03. This primarily reflects increasing medical costs borne by the
Commonwealth.
 JMU’s faculty salary peer group was revised in 2007. The new peer group consists of 10
private institutions and 15 public. All of the institutions have an undergraduate profile, as
categorized by the Carnegie Foundation, as either “More Selective” or “Selective.” The
average salary is approximately $75,800 and the 60th percentile is approximately $79,200.
The 60th percentile is approximately $11,600 higher than JMU’s current average.
 The most recent student-to-faculty ratio, 16.0:1 is the lowest in the last 18 years (16.2 in
2006), down from 19.2:1 in 1997. The percentage of total fall credit hours taught by full-time
faculty was approximately 78 percent.
OIR will continue to update this report annually to provide an ongoing summary of changes in
JMU’s faculty. Questions about this study can be directed to the JMU Office of Institutional
Research at (540) 568-6830 or [email protected].
A Faculty in Transition
Page 24