21, no. 3 (Spring 1990): 10-17 To the Editor Search

---

Table of Contents

Previous Article Next Article

No Works Cited

AMONG the benefits of the ADFL summer seminars is the opportunity for chairs to discuss common problems, to compare their situations with the experiences of chairs in other institutions. One of the issues recently raised in the course of this interchange was the question of the compensation and administrative support that chairs receive. During informal conversation at the 1988 summer seminars, some chairs were surprised to learn that there are institutions at which the position has absolutely no perquisites. Other seminar participants were equally surprised to learn that in many institutions chairs routinely receive monetary compensation and special support services (e.g., clerical assistance).

At its spring 1989 meeting, the ADFL Executive Committee discussed the apparent absence of compensation for chairs at some institutions and resolved to collect more systematic information by asking participants in the 1989 summer seminars to complete a short survey on the topic. Such a questionnaire was distributed at the June 1989 seminars in Georgia and California, and the findings are summarized in the following pages. Since the responses to the questionnaires report on departmental and institutional policies, the findings are frequently presented as the characteristics and practices of foreign language programs rather than as the experiences of individual chairs.

Of the 81 individuals participating in the 1989 summer seminars, 53 completed the questionnaire in sufficient detail for their responses to be included in the sample. Although the response rate is fairly high (65%), the total number of survey participants is small, representing only 5.5% of all 1988–89 ADFL members and 2% of all foreign language programs in the United States. Consequently, even though only statistically significant differences among subgroups are reported here, these results may have emerged by chance or because of biases in the sample. ¹ But while the findings are preliminary, their logical consistency suggests that a larger sample might yield similar results.

Characteristics of the Programs Included in the Sample

The foreign language programs included in the sample differ in a number of basic characteristics. Twenty-nine percent are located in the Northeast and 29% in the South, mostly in states on the Atlantic coast. Another 23% are in the Midwest, and the remaining 19% in Rocky Mountain and Pacific Coast states. Just over half of the departments (51%) are in universities with graduate programs (i.e., in graduate institutions), and 42% in baccalaureate institutions (i.e., in four-year institutions with an undergraduate focus). Only 8% of the programs are in two-year colleges; therefore, this sample subgroup (comprising 4 respondents) is far too small to yield reliable percentages. ²

Almost two-thirds of the foreign language programs included in the sample (64%) are in public institutions, while 36% are in private institutions. In addition, source of funding is closely linked to institutional type. Thus, 42% of the departments in the sample are in publicly funded graduate institutions, 26% are in private baccalaureate institutions, 15% are in public baccalaureate institutions, 9% are in privately funded graduate institutions, and 8% are in public two-year colleges. It is important to bear in mind this link between an institution's type and its source of funding during an evaluation of the survey's findings since this connection represents a serious bias in the sample.

The number of full-time faculty members teaching in the language programs included in the sample ranges from 3 to 45. On average there are 10, with 50% of the programs in the sample having 7 to 18 regular full-time faculty members. Only 10% have 25 or more full-time faculty members. The number of part-time faculty members ranges from 0 to 52. The average is 4.5, and 50% of the responding departments employ from 2 to 9 part-timers; only 10% employ 20 or more.

Almost one-third of the programs included in the sample (30%) are in an institution in which the faculty is represented by a union. Chairs are included in the bargaining unit in 61% of these institutions. Within the sample, union representation exists only in public institutions; none of the sampled programs in private institutions has union representation for the faculty. The absence of faculty unions at private institutions is typical of national patterns.

Almost two-thirds of the language programs in the sample (64%) are “collective programs,” responsible for all foreign language instruction at an institution. Another 31% are one of several language units at their institutions. When foreign language programs are organized into such “multiple language units,” each unit is responsible for instruction in a group of related languages (6 of the sampled departments are of this type) or for instruction in 1 foreign language or 2 (9 of the sampled departments belong in this category). Only 6% of the programs in the sample are divisions offering instruction in nonlanguage courses (e.g., philosophy, fine arts) as well as in foreign languages. The predominance of collective language programs in the sample is typical of national patterns. Divisions, however, are underrepresented, while multiple language units are overrepresented. Not surprisingly, the number of languages offered differs with the type of language program. ³ Collective programs each offer courses in 6.5 foreign languages, on average, with 42% of the programs responsible for instruction in 7 or more languages. Programs responsible for a language group or for 1 language or 2, in contrast, each offer courses in an average of 3.8 languages; 56% of these programs are responsible for 3 or fewer languages.

Teaching Loads

In 50% of the departments in the sample, the average teaching load is 5 to 8 courses a year; the median is 6. Chairs tend to have lighter teaching loads; their average is 4 courses a year, with 50% teaching from 2 to 6 courses. Thirteen chairs (26%) report teaching 2 courses a year, and 8 (16%) report teaching 4. As table 1 indicates, the sizes of the chair's and of the department's teaching loads increase together. Thus, in departments where the general teaching load is 2 to 5 courses, the chair teaches 3 courses a year, on average. In contrast, in departments where the general load is 7 to 9 courses, the chair teaches an average of 5.5 courses per year. The teaching loads of the chair and of the other faculty members vary with several departmental characteristics, but the chair's is consistently lower.

Recruitment and Terms of Chairs

In 62% of the language programs in the sample, chairs are recruited from within the department, while they are invariably recruited from outside the department in 8% of the cases. In the remainder, chairs are sometimes recruited from outside the department and sometimes from inside. For purposes of more detailed analysis, two groups were compared: programs that always recruit from within and those that recruit from outside, at least sometimes. The analysis revealed that some types of foreign language programs are more likely than others to recruit their chairs from inside the department. Programs with 8 to 14 regular fulltime faculty members almost always recruit their chairs from within the department (88% do), while both programs with smaller full-time faculties and those with larger ones do so less frequently. Of the larger programs, 40% to 60% recruit their chairs from outside the department, at least sometimes. In addition, 88% of the departments on campuses with faculty unions always recruit their chairs from within, compared with 51% of those on campuses without faculty unions. Finally, foreign language programs located in southern and midwestern states are more likely to recruit their chairs from outside the department than are those in other states. The percentages are 52% and 20%.

Chairs have formal terms of office in 61% of the foreign language programs in the sample. In 18% of the cases, chairs have informal terms, while in the remaining 22%, chairs have no term of office, formal or informal. Of the programs that always recruit chairs from within the department, 69% have formal terms of office for the position, compared with 47% of those that sometimes or always recruit chairs from the outside. Of the latter, 37% have no term of office, formal or informal, in contrast to 13% of the programs that always recruit from within the department. Further, language programs that grant the PhD are less likely to have terms of office for their chairs than are those granting no more than an MA or BA. Of the latter, 14% have no term of office, formal or informal, compared with 30% of the PhD programs. Finally, 31% of the foreign language departments in public institutions have no term of office for their chairs, compared with 5% of those in private institutions.

In 8% of the programs with formal or informal terms of office for their chairs, the terms are two years, in 66% three years, in 16% four years, and in 11% five years. A chair's term can be renewed more than once in 75% of the departments with terms for chairs and cannot be renewed in only one case. In the remaining 23%, the term can be renewed once.

For purposes of more detailed analysis, two types of departments were compared: those with two- or three-year terms (74%) and those with four- or five-year terms (26%). The comparisons revealed that the length of the terms varies with a number of departmental characteristics. Departments that offer courses in 7 or more languages are more likely to have four- or five-year terms of office for their chairs than are those that offer courses in fewer languages. The percentages are 54% and 12%. Further, departments with 8 or more part-time faculty members are more likely to have four- or five-year terms for their chairs than are departments with fewer part-time faculty members; 43% of the former have four- or five-year terms, compared with 17% of the latter. Finally, 38% of the collective programs in the sample have four- or five-year terms for their chairs, compared with 9% of the programs offering courses in a language group or in 1 foreign language or 2. These findings suggest that the length of a chair's term is determined by the complexity of the administration involved. Thus, collective programs responsible for instruction in a large number of diverse languages and employing large numbers of part-time faculty members are more likely to have four- or five-year terms than are departments with smaller faculties and teaching courses in a limited number of languages.

Monetary Compensation Received by Chairs

Of the chairs responding to the survey, 26% receive no compensation for their administrative duties; the remaining 74% receive some compensation. The compensation can take any number of forms, judging by the survey responses. The answers to this question proved difficult to code because the information provided was not always as clear or detailed as would have been desirable. Nonetheless, three major types of compensation could be identified:

As the figures indicate, just over half the chairs get monetary stipends, most frequently between $1,000 and $2,500. Another third receive 10- or 11-month contracts rather than the usual 9-month contracts. In this arrangement, a chair's monthly salary may be increased by one- or two-ninths of its regular amount or may be supplemented by a summer salary equivalent to one- or two-ninths of the regular annual salary. Finally, a small group of chairs receive monetary stipends in addition to 10- or 11-month contracts. More detailed analysis made use of the three. major groups outlined above. ⁴

Table 2 indicates that institutional type affects whether chairs get compensation; graduate institutions are more likely to compensate chairs than are baccalaureate or two-year institutions. The type of compensation received also varies with the institutional type. Of the chairs at baccalaureate institutions receiving compensation, 85% receive monetary stipends, compared with 27% of those at graduate institutions. Of the latter, most have 10- or 11-month contracts, with 4 chairs receiving monetary stipends in addition. The relation between monetary compensation and the highest degree granted by a language program is much like that between compensation and the institutional type. Table 3 indicates that chairs in departments granting no more than a BA degree are much less likely to receive compensation than are those in departments granting graduate degrees. The type of compensation received differs less clearly with the degree granted than it does with the institutional type, but the pattern is the same: two-thirds of the chairs in BA-granting departments receive monetary stipends, compared with one-third of those in PhD-granting departments. Most of the latter have 10- or 11-month contracts.

All chairs in foreign language programs with 15 or more regular full-time faculty members receive some monetary compensation, while less than two-thirds of those in departments with smaller full-time faculties receive compensation. Table 4 indicates that faculty size also affects the type of compensation received. When chairs of programs with 14 or fewer full-time faculty members receive compensation, it is predominantly in the form of monetary stipends. Chairs in departments with larger full-time faculties, in contrast, generally receive 10- or 11-month contracts; some receive monetary stipends in addition. The number of part-time faculty members employed by a language program does not affect whether or not the chair receives compensation but does affect the type of compensation. The pattern is the same as for the number of full-time faculty members: the greater the number of part-time faculty members in a department, the more likely the chair is to receive a 10- or 11-month contract and the less likely to receive a monetary stipend.

The number of languages offered by a department has some effect on the compensation the chair receives. Table 5 indicates that chairs of foreign language programs offering courses in 4 or more languages are more likely to receive monetary compensation than are those heading programs offering instruction in fewer languages. The compensation of chairs heading departments offering 7 or more languages differs from that of chairs whose departments offer fewer languages. If chairs in departments offering courses in no more than 6 languages are compensated, they receive monetary stipends. Chairs in departments offering 7 or more languages, in contrast, are most likely to have 10- or 11-month contracts, with 4 of the 9 who have contracts receiving monetary stipends in addition.

These findings suggest that whether or not chairs receive compensation is dependent on the degree of administrative responsibility they assume and the type of institution in which they teach. Graduate institutions granting MAs and PhDs in foreign languages provide compensation in most cases. So do departments with the administrative burden of numerous regular full-time faculty members and of courses in 4 or more languages. In addition, chairs heading large departments (i.e., those with 15 or more full-time faculty members and courses in 7 or more languages) in graduate institutions generally receive compensation in the form of 10- or 11-month contracts. Chairs in smaller departments granting less advanced degrees generally receive monetary stipends of less than $5,000.

Assistance Given to Chairs

The survey administered at the 1989 ADFL summer seminars asked chairs whether their programs provided three types of assistance: clerical support, special office and telephone facilities, and support for their research activities. The vast majority (85%) responded that clerical support is routinely provided; only 8% of the programs in the sample provide no clerical support, and 7% provide it sometimes. The last two groups were combined for purposes of more detailed analysis. The first numerical column of table 6, which summarizes the findings, reveals that foreign language programs in graduate institutions are more likely to provide clerical support than are those in baccalaureate institutions. Similarly, departments granting MA and PhD degrees are more likely to provide clerical support than those granting the BA (92% vs. 73%). Departments with 7 or fewer regular full-time faculty members are less likely to provide clerical support than are those with larger full-time faculties. Departments with very few part-time faculty members (i.e., 3 or fewer) are also less likely to provide clerical support for their chairs than are those with larger numbers of part-timers (71% vs. 91%). In short, larger foreign language programs responsible for both graduate- and undergraduate-degree programs are more likely to provide clerical support than are small departments in baccalaureate institutions. Nonetheless, even in the latter, more than two-thirds of the chairs in the sample report receiving clerical support.

Of the foreign language programs surveyed, 65% have special office and telephone facilities for their chairs, 6% have office facilities only, and 4% have telephone facilities only. Neither telephone nor office facilities are provided in 26% of the departments. For purposes of more detailed analysis, the two small groups providing either telephone or office facilities were combined with the group providing neither. The second numerical column of table 6 indicates that whether chairs receive office and telephone facilities varies with the number of regular full-time faculty members and with the number of languages in which courses are offered. As each number increases, so does the likelihood that chairs receive office and telephone facilities. ⁵ More than three-quarters of departments offering courses in 7 or more languages and with at least 15 full-time faculty members have special office and telephone facilities for their chairs. Such facilities are more frequently provided, therefore, in departments where chairs must manage complex curricula and large faculties.

Just over half of the language programs sampled (51%) provide no research support for their chairs, 29% provide it sometimes, and 20% always provide it. For the purposes of more detailed analysis, two groups were compared; those providing no research support (51%) and those providing it at least some of the time (49%). The provision of support for research activities is unrelated to most of the departmental characteristics under consideration; only geographic location appears to make a difference. ⁶ Most departments in northeastern and southern states sometimes provide research support for their chairs, while few departments located in other parts of the country do.

As one might expect, departments providing certain types of support are more likely to provide other types of support. Approximately six-tenths of the foreign language programs in the sample provide clerical support for their chairs as well as special office and telephone facilities. Further, of the departments providing clerical support, 68% also have special office and telephone facilities for their chairs, compared with 43% of the 7 departments that do not always provide clerical support. Over half of the latter (57%) provide neither office nor telephone facilities. The majority of departments with special office and telephone facilities for chairs (56%) sometimes provide research support, while only 23% of departments without telephone or office facilities provide research support of any kind.

The above findings indicate that foreign language programs generally provide clerical support and special office and telephone facilities for their chairs. In addition, close to half of the programs in the sample sometimes provide research support, with one-fifth providing it consistently. Three chairs said that they also receive funds to attend conferences, and one reported receiving a sabbatical. There is some evidence that these findings might be different had the survey questions been articulated differently. Although it is undoubtedly true that most chairs receive monetary compensation as well as clerical support services, some of the comments made at the end of the questionnaire indicate that both are inadequate. Had chairs been asked whether support services were adequate, therefore, rather than just whether they existed, a different picture might have emerged. Further, the survey responses do not indicate whether chairs receive compensation and support services as a matter of institutional policy or as a result of special arrangements between individual chairs and their departments or deans.

Uniformity of Support Provided to Chairs

Most of the foreign language chairs responding to the survey claimed that chairs of all departments at their institutions were generally accorded the same perquisites. Thirty-four percent of the respondents indicated that the same support was provided to all chairs in their institutions, while 42% said that the support was usually the same. In only 24% of the institutions included in the sample does the support appear to differ from department to department. For purposes of more detailed analysis, this last group was compared with institutions in which the support that chairs receive is usually or always the same. Whether chairs receive uniform support at an institution differs with the geographic area. Institutions in the Rocky Mountain and Pacific Coast states are less likely to provide uniform support for all chairs than are institutions in other states; the percentages are 50% and 82%. In addition, private institutions are somewhat less likely to provide uniform support for all chairs than are public institutions (63% vs. 84%).

Other Aspects of Compensation and Support for Chairs

The last question in the survey asked respondents for “general comments about the perquisites that should be or are provided to department chairs in your institution or in the foreign languages generally.” Of the 53 chairs completing the survey, 19 (36%) responded to this open-ended question, and most of them named additional types of support that they believed chairs should receive:

Six responses dealt with other topics, some not closely related to the subject of the survey. Of these comments, two were too general to be put in a specific category.

Conclusion: Typical Compensation and Administrative Support

The typical chair of a foreign language program, as described in the survey findings summarized in the previous pages, receives several types of administrative support to compensate for the extra work entailed in running a department. First, foreign language chairs consistently have a lighter teaching load than do the other faculty members in the department; on average, chairs teach 2 or 3 fewer courses a year. Second, chairs typically have special office and telephone facilities at their disposal, as well as clerical assistance. Special help for research activities is generally not available, however. In addition to support services, foreign language chairs typically receive some monetary compensation. Its form varies with the institutional type and with the number of regular full-time faculty members in a department. Chairs in baccalaureate institutions typically receive monetary stipends of $5,000 or less, while those in graduate institutions are more likely to have I0- or 11-month contracts. Similarly, chairs in departments with 7 or fewer full-time faculty members generally receive monetary stipends, while those in charge of departments with 15 or more full-time faculty members typically have 10- or 11-month contracts.

The preceding discussion has suggested that the job of being a chair in a department with complex administrative demands is distinctive in a number of respects. There are two key dimensions underlying administrative complexity in language programs: having a large number of regular full-time faculty members (i.e., 15 or more) and offering courses in 7 or more foreign languages. A less essential dimension of complexity is having a large number of part-time faculty members (i.e., 8 or more). Collective language programs, responsible for all foreign language instruction at an institution, are more likely to have these characteristics of complexity than are programs responsible for only one aspect of an institution's foreign language offerings. Consequently, chairs of collective programs frequently receive the same compensation and support as do chairs of complex programs. Departments with complex administrative demands tend to have four- or five-year terms for their chairs, rather than the two- or three-year terms typical of other language departments. Further, chairs in departments with complex administrative demands are more likely to be compensated for their work, usually in the form of 10- or 11-month contracts. These chairs are also more likely to have special office and telephone facilities. Although chairs of complex language programs also receive clerical support, they are not distinctive in this respect.

The findings about departments with complex administrative demands highlight an important difference between many foreign language departments and departments in other disciplines. Most college and university departments, whether scientific or humanistic, are responsible for courses in only one field. Although the field may be complex, with many subfields, the department responsible for it must offer only one set of introductory courses and one set of advanced courses, especially at the undergraduate level. Many foreign language departments, in contrast, provide instruction in several different languages and must, therefore, offer multiple sets of introductory and advanced courses. As a result, the administrative task facing foreign language chairs is considerably more complex than it is in other disciplines. When this factor is considered, it seems only logical that chairs of foreign language programs should receive greater support and compensation than do chairs of other humanities or science departments. Unfortunately, the criteria for compensating chairs rarely involve the complexity of the administrative task at hand, focusing instead on matters less germane to foreign language programs (e.g., the number of buildings supervised, the size of the department).

The author is Director of Research at the Modern Language Association.

Notes

¹ Although statistically significant and insignificant differences are presented in table 6, the text clearly identifies the findings that are significant.

² Because of rounding, the percentages presented in the text and in the tables may not add up to 100%. The number of cases may vary from table to table because nonresponses to questions have been eliminated.

³ For the sample as a whole, 50% offer courses in 4 to 7 foreign languages; the median is 5.

⁴ The three categories are arranged to reflect increasing compensation. The 10- or 11-month contract is considered greater than the monetary stipend because it is assumed that a chair earns no less than $40,000 a year; therefore, the salary would be increased by at least $4,444 in a 10-month contract and by at least $8,888 in an 11-month contract. Even if a chair receives $30,000 in annual salary, the $3,333 extra then received with a 10-month contract exceeds the sum paid to 75% of the chairs receiving a monetary stipend.

⁵ Departments with 3 or fewer part-time faculty members are less likely to offer their chairs special telephone and office facilities than are departments with larger numbers of part-time faculty members. The percentages are 47% and 73%. Chairs in two-year colleges appear much less likely than those in four-year institutions to have special office and telephone facilities. This finding is not dealt with here because the number of two-year institutions in the sample is too small to yield reliable percentages.

⁶ Although the number of languages offered by a department appears to affect whether the chair receives research assistance, no sensible pattern emerges.

© 1990 by the Association of Departments of Foreign Languages. All Rights Reserved.

ADFL Bulletin 21, no. 3 (Spring 1990): 10-17

---

Table of Contents

Previous Article Next Article

No Works Cited