Why are top researchers paid so much while top teachers are recognized, if at all, with awards of little dollar value?

We wonder, could it somehow have to do with the research function being just a little more clearly defined as "public" good than the more personally-directed academic function, which may be seen by more as a "private" good? These authors go from here:

During your undergraduate studies you were introduced to several luminaries in your field who receive considerable attention from the news media and are often on the lecture circuit. They are well-known for their six-figure salaries and commanding positions in your discipline. So far, it’s all good. Except …

Unfortunately, the luminosity of the luminaries has nothing to do with their teaching prowess; it is entirely due to their scholarship. There is a thriving market for senior scholars in higher education -- a market that brings plenty of release time from teaching, along with high salaries and fame.

There is no corresponding market for world-class teachers. No one in higher education becomes famous or well-compensated for exceptional teaching. How could this happen, since the students, parents, and taxpayers (those who pay the bills) have only a passing interest in research, but an abiding and personal stake in high-quality teaching?

Before we address that question, it is important to note there are many social benefits to be derived from an efficient market for senior scholars; the existence of that market is not the problem. Only spite and envy would ban the market for scholars as some ill-conceived “fix” for the imbalance between teaching and research. The correct response is to learn why we have a market for scholars and no market for teachers.

The critical reason why one market exists and the other does not is the information available to potential employers. Potential employers of professors have sufficient information to judge scholarly productivity, but virtually no information that would allow them to judge teaching productivity.

Tomorrow's Professor Mailing List is one of the best lists we subscribe to, and not just because they occasionally republish some good SCUP faculty-related materials. The list describes itself as "desk-top faculty development, one hundred times a year." And it is.

A recent post to that website is Connie D. Foster's review from Planning for Higher Education of the book, Organizing Higher Education for Collaboration: A Guide for Campus Leaders by Adrianna J. Kezar and Jaime Lester. 

Foster's conclusion:

To create and sustain change means rethinking overall organizational structures, processes, and design as well as understanding the critical roles of mission, core values, and leadership skills. In The Courage to Lead: Transform Self, Transform Society, Brian Stanfield describes the journey of the organization. He states, "More and more, organizations are beginning to realize that they have to change their whole network in many dimensions-a process that has been called whole-system transformation. A first step in this wholistic change is transforming the organization's current worldview" (Stanfield 2000, p. 151). Organizing Higher Education for Collaboration is a book that can help a higher education institution rethink its worldview, a valuable exercise in these challenging times.

Lessons Learned: Reflections of a University President by William G. Bowen is a new book that may represent, at this point in time, reflections on a career in that role longer than nearly all future university presidents will have. Consider the words below, conveying the importance and value of a long presidential tenure.

If you decide to purchase this book, consider doing so here, so that SCUP can receive a small percentage of the sale—without increasing your price.

You can learn more about Bowen and the new book from this Inside Higher Ed interview:

Q: Toward the end of the book, you suggest that 8-10 years would be "a good target" for a president to accomplish an agenda. You served 16 years at Princeton, but these days, five- and six-year presidencies are increasingly the norm. Why do you suggest a bit longer as a target goal? Do you think something is lost when presidencies are shorter?

A: My experience is that more than five or six years is often needed to achieve important objectives. As I explain in Lessons Learned, building strength in the life sciences at Princeton was a major strategic objective, and it took us a decade or more to do what needed to be done: achieve clarity on the precise goals, recruit essential faculty leadership, plan for the construction of laboratory space, raise the large amounts of money required, and recruit additional faculty. We made several false starts (from which we learned important lessons), and it then took time to accumulate the necessary resources and recruit strong faculty leadership. Shorter-term presidencies also mean that searches are more frequent and that too much time is spent on transitions. But of course much depends on the age of a president (I was 38 when I became president of Princeton), on health, and a number of other factors that can be specific to the institution or the individual.

This article, Essential Student Affairs Services in a Campus Crisis, in ACUHO-I's Talking Stick magazine by James E. Brunson III, Michael Stang, and Angela Dreesen, is a chapter in the new book, Enough is Enough: A Student Affairs Persepective on Preparedness and Response to a Campus Shooting, from ACPA/NASPA.

A good article/chapter, helping to make the case that student services input and preparation must be a key part of any campus crisis or emergency response plan:

Conclusion

This chapter highlights essential services needed in response to a campus crisis. Specific roles, functions, and use of staff and resources in departments and officers such as housing and dining, student activities, and international student services are defined.

Additionally, partnerships between essential services departments and other campus units and community agencies are emphasized. Of course, all student affairs departments and professionals can be integral in crisis response, but thoughtful preplanning and preparation for thees units can greatly enhance student services during a campus crisis.

The entire book can be purchased here.

A couple of weeks ago we shared a good article on this topic with you. Now we share the existence of the book the article came from, by Harvey Kaiser and Eva Klein, who are well known among SCUPers. APPA describes Strategic Capital Development with these words: 

[It] presents a bold approach for planning capital investments from a strategic and long-range perspective. The authors combine their extensive higher education experience and expertise to improve capital planning and decision-making and to make a case for a new model that seeks to balance idealism with pragmatism. They define stewardship principles necessary to create and sustain a physical plant that is responsive to institutional strategies and functions, that remains attractive to faculty and students, and optimizes available resources.

...

The proposed comprehensive model is presented as a fully integrated set of methodologies to assess needs and develop a prioritized capital projects plan, integrated with a physical master plan. The authors include, and advocate, the concept of a strategic funding framework--a larger view of feasible and desirable capital funding for defined capital needs.