Faculty Constitutions in the Ivory Tower: Exploring the Balance of Power between the Professoriate and the Administration

Matthew Woessner, Jessica Kehler

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The presumption that rules and institutional structures profoundly influence an organization's behavior is deeply rooted in the study of governance. Whereas social scientists have explored the link between institutional structure and political power at the national, state, and local level, there is virtually no quantitative research on how competing constitutional frameworks influence power in an academic setting. The researchers theorize that, given academics' relatively limited input into institutional decision making, faculty respondents will perceive they have greater influence when they exercise direct control over faculty representatives. Merging a database of academic constitutions with faculty survey responses from the North American Academic Survey (NAAS), the authors find that, even when controlling for institutional size, budget, and academic mission, some features of academic constitutions are strongly correlated with perceptions of faculty power. In general, more representative constitutions are strongly associated with faculty influence. However, contrary to the underlying theory, faculty employed at schools where an administrator is designated as the chair or president of the academic senate feel they are more influential than those that elect their own leader. The results suggest a new and potentially important line of inquiry for political researchers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)387-395
Number of pages9
JournalPS - Political Science and Politics
Volume51
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2018

Fingerprint

balance of power
constitution
quantitative research
senate
political power
social scientist
budget
president
leader
governance
decision making
school

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

@article{5d5439c839f846d5965041eaa7c8c724,
title = "Faculty Constitutions in the Ivory Tower: Exploring the Balance of Power between the Professoriate and the Administration",
abstract = "The presumption that rules and institutional structures profoundly influence an organization's behavior is deeply rooted in the study of governance. Whereas social scientists have explored the link between institutional structure and political power at the national, state, and local level, there is virtually no quantitative research on how competing constitutional frameworks influence power in an academic setting. The researchers theorize that, given academics' relatively limited input into institutional decision making, faculty respondents will perceive they have greater influence when they exercise direct control over faculty representatives. Merging a database of academic constitutions with faculty survey responses from the North American Academic Survey (NAAS), the authors find that, even when controlling for institutional size, budget, and academic mission, some features of academic constitutions are strongly correlated with perceptions of faculty power. In general, more representative constitutions are strongly associated with faculty influence. However, contrary to the underlying theory, faculty employed at schools where an administrator is designated as the chair or president of the academic senate feel they are more influential than those that elect their own leader. The results suggest a new and potentially important line of inquiry for political researchers.",
author = "Matthew Woessner and Jessica Kehler",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S1049096517002530",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "51",
pages = "387--395",
journal = "PS - Political Science and Politics",
issn = "1049-0965",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",

}

Faculty Constitutions in the Ivory Tower : Exploring the Balance of Power between the Professoriate and the Administration. / Woessner, Matthew; Kehler, Jessica.

In: PS - Political Science and Politics, Vol. 51, No. 2, 01.04.2018, p. 387-395.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Faculty Constitutions in the Ivory Tower

T2 - Exploring the Balance of Power between the Professoriate and the Administration

AU - Woessner, Matthew

AU - Kehler, Jessica

PY - 2018/4/1

Y1 - 2018/4/1

N2 - The presumption that rules and institutional structures profoundly influence an organization's behavior is deeply rooted in the study of governance. Whereas social scientists have explored the link between institutional structure and political power at the national, state, and local level, there is virtually no quantitative research on how competing constitutional frameworks influence power in an academic setting. The researchers theorize that, given academics' relatively limited input into institutional decision making, faculty respondents will perceive they have greater influence when they exercise direct control over faculty representatives. Merging a database of academic constitutions with faculty survey responses from the North American Academic Survey (NAAS), the authors find that, even when controlling for institutional size, budget, and academic mission, some features of academic constitutions are strongly correlated with perceptions of faculty power. In general, more representative constitutions are strongly associated with faculty influence. However, contrary to the underlying theory, faculty employed at schools where an administrator is designated as the chair or president of the academic senate feel they are more influential than those that elect their own leader. The results suggest a new and potentially important line of inquiry for political researchers.

AB - The presumption that rules and institutional structures profoundly influence an organization's behavior is deeply rooted in the study of governance. Whereas social scientists have explored the link between institutional structure and political power at the national, state, and local level, there is virtually no quantitative research on how competing constitutional frameworks influence power in an academic setting. The researchers theorize that, given academics' relatively limited input into institutional decision making, faculty respondents will perceive they have greater influence when they exercise direct control over faculty representatives. Merging a database of academic constitutions with faculty survey responses from the North American Academic Survey (NAAS), the authors find that, even when controlling for institutional size, budget, and academic mission, some features of academic constitutions are strongly correlated with perceptions of faculty power. In general, more representative constitutions are strongly associated with faculty influence. However, contrary to the underlying theory, faculty employed at schools where an administrator is designated as the chair or president of the academic senate feel they are more influential than those that elect their own leader. The results suggest a new and potentially important line of inquiry for political researchers.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044862437&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044862437&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S1049096517002530

DO - 10.1017/S1049096517002530

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85044862437

VL - 51

SP - 387

EP - 395

JO - PS - Political Science and Politics

JF - PS - Political Science and Politics

SN - 1049-0965

IS - 2

ER -