The Academic Profession: A Common Core, a Diversified Group or an Outdated Idea?

Full text

European Review, Vol. 18, Supplement no. 1, S1–S5
rAcademia Europæa 2010. The online version of this article is published within an Open Access environment
subject to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence hhttp://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ i. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be
obtained for commercial re-use.
doi:10.1017/S1062798709990287
The Academic Profession: A Common
Core, a Diversified Group or an
Outdated Idea?
ALESSANDRO CAVALLI* and ULRICH TEICHLER**
*Centre for Study and Research on Higher Education Systems, CIRSIS,
University of Pavia, 12, via Luino –27100 Pavia. Italy. E-mail:
alles_cavalli@hotmail.com; **International Centre for Higher Education
Research, INCHER, University of Kassel, Mo¨nchebergstrasse 17 – 34109
Kassel. Germany. E-mail: teichler@incher.uni-kassel.de
Major tensions affecting the academic profession
The academic profession is the ‘productive workforce’ of higher education institu-
tions and research institutes, the key organizations in society serving the generation,
preservation and dissemination of systematic knowledge. There is a general con-
sensus that the academic profession is highly important in a society often char-
acterized as a ‘knowledge society’, both in being responsible for the enhancement of
systematic general knowledge and in providing its apex for many professional areas.
Past analyses have shown that four major tensions have led to abundant
changes in and constant debates about the situation of the academic profession:
>First, systematic knowledge seems to have become increasingly
important for technological progress, economic growth, social wellbeing
and cultural enhancement, but this does not guarantee greater public
appreciation for or higher self-esteem within the academic profession.
On the contrary, academics often believe that in many respects they are
losers: they feel socially downgraded, feel that they are no longer the sole
carriers of systematic knowledge, lack appropriate conditions for their
work and the power to shape their environment, etc.
>Second, the academic profession tends to claim that progress of
systematic knowledge is most likely to be achieved if there is

‘academic freedom’, which might be interpreted both as the self-
determination of the academic profession in the choice of themes and
modes of inquiry and as the pursuit of knowledge not overshadowed
by constant pressure to guarantee efficiency and relevance. Yet, the
conditions for academic work seem to change dramatically every time
we observe contextual dynamics. For example, political priorities in
the economic and technological domains have enormous effects on the
academy, and trends towards worldwide interconnectedness funda-
mentally reshape higher education and research institutes, although the
academic profession was believed to be international, universalistic
and cosmopolitan well before these recent developments.
>Third, in many countries the academic profession has been historically
in a strong position to control the respective institutional settings.
‘University autonomy’ often has been viewed as a twin principle of
‘academic freedom’, whereby scholars with a strong voice within
universities or research institutes have tried to stabilize their own
institution when dealing with governments, ranging from ‘guardian
angels’ of academic freedom to intrusive forces of knowledge policies
(often combined with detailed administrative supervision or even control
of the organisation of the institutions). In recent years, research institutes
and institutions of higher education are increasingly controlled by a new
managerial class of institutional leaders who claim to be defendants of
‘institutional autonomy’ against external forces, but who also hold
enormous internal powers in order to guide academics in the name of
quality enhancement, increased societal relevance and efficiency gains.
>Fourth, the academic profession often claims to be a single entity with a
common core of values and ethics, as well as similar aspirations and views
regarding the quality of academic work. However, in most countries, the
profession seems to be divided between senior and the junior professionals
more strongly than any other profession. Juniors undergo a very long
phase of concurrent learning and academic work. High selectivity is
indicative for this phase and is often accompanied with short-term
contracts and not infrequently part-time employment. In many countries,
both institutional settings and symbols underscore that junior academics
can hardly consider themselves as full members of their profession.
Diversification of the academic profession – a timely theme
These issues have often been addressed in conferences aiming to take stock of
the situation and possibly recommend improvements. This also holds true for the
conference that led to this special issue of the European Review, namely the
S2 Alessandro Cavalli and Ulrich Teichler

conference undertaken in Torino (Italy) in March 2009. However, the Torino
conference also addressed an issue not sufficiently taken into account on pre-
vious similar occasions, namely whether the academic profession becomes more
diverse in the process of expansion of the higher education and research system,
and if so, to what extent such a process of diversification is beneficial or detri-
mental for this system.
The conference intended to advance the state of knowledge about such
themes as:
>the professional identity or identities of the academic profession;
>the range of employment and remuneration conditions of university
professors;
>the varied resources and the differences of academic performance;
>the impact of the various managerial and evaluative practices on the
academic profession;
>the growing differences between countries or the converging trends
within Europe with respect to the academic profession.
Findings of comparative analyses
In the aforementioned debates, we often hear and read sweeping statements about
the conditions, views and activities of the academic profession. However, only a
few analyses address this profession systematically. Notably, little is known
about the extent to which the views and activities of the academic profession
vary or are similar across countries.
Two comparative questionnaire surveys exist, however, that help to understand
how scholars perceive their role and situation and how they describe their views and
activities. The first study was initiated around 1990 by the Carnegie Foundation for
the Advancement of Teaching (Princeton, NJ). In 1992, representative surveys were
undertaken in 14 countries, including Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Russia
and the United Kingdom. The second study, ‘The Changing Academic Profession
(CAP)’, was initiated around 2005 by various scholars under the leadership of
William K. Cummings (George Washington University, Washington, DC). In
2007–2008, about 30,000 academics were surveyed in 18 countries, including
Finland, Germany, Italy, Norway, Portugal and the United Kingdom.
The Torino conference in March 2009 seized the opportunity to reflect on the
preliminary data analysis and the first results of the second survey, which at the
time had not been widely distributed. Has the academic profession really chan-
ged as much as the public debates suggest (change with respect to issues such as
increasing managerial power, increased expectations that higher education
institutions and research institutions should produce visibly relevant results, or
The Academic Profession S3

growing internationalisation and ‘globalisation’)? Six of the ten presentations
drew from the CAP study and (in part) from the preceding comparative study.
Initiative and support for the conference
Comprising excellent scholars from all disciplines across Europe, the Academia
Europaea aims to further our knowledge and understanding of the impact of
policy and organization on the development of science and scholarship, and,
conversely, on the needs of science and scholarship for suitable political and
administrative conditions to achieve improvement. In this spirit, symposia have
been organized since the mid-1990s that have allowed experts to take stock of
our systematic knowledge base regarding the issues at hand and to help develop
concepts for future improvement.
In 2004, the Academia Europaea formed the expert group on ‘Higher Edu-
cation, Research and Culture in European Society’ (HERCULES) in order to put
initiatives for the reflection about the academic profession on a more regular and
stable basis and to undertake analyses and prepare policy statements when and
where needed. The HERCULES group, among others, succeeded in making
symposia on the situation of higher education and research a regular feature of
visible activities of the Academia Europaea.
The Academia Europaea had already invited experts to reflect on the state of
the academic profession before the results of the Carnegie study were made
public. This symposium was held in May 1996 at the Erasmus University
Rotterdam (the Netherlands) and led to the book Inside Academia: New Challenges
for the Academic Profession (Peter A. M. Maassen and Frans A. van Vught (eds);
Utrecht: De Tijdstrom, 1996). The proceedings of other conferences initiated by the
Academia Europaea, partly in cooperation with the International Academy
of Education, were published as Goals and Purposes of Higher Education in the
21st Century (Arnold Burgen (ed.); London, and Bristol, PA: Jessica Kingsley
Publishers, 1996); The Impact of Electronic Publishing on the Academic Com-
munity (Ian Butterworth (ed.); London: Portland Press, 1998); Lifelong Learning:
Policy and Research (Albert Tuijnman and Tom Schuller (eds); London: Portland
Press, 1999); Virtual University? Educational Environments of the Future (Henk J.
van der Molen (ed.); London: Portland Press, 2001); Excellence in Higher Edu-
cation (Erik de Corte (ed.); London: Portland Press, 2003); The Formative Years of
Higher Education (Ulrich Teichler (ed.); London: Portland Press, 2006); Quality
Assessment for Higher Education in Europe (Alessandro Cavalli (ed.); London:
Portland Press, 2007); The University and the Market (Lars Engwall and Denis
Weare (eds), London: Portland Press, 2008).
In 2009, the Compagnia di San Paolo supported for the second time a symposium
of this series as well as a subsequent publication. David Coates, supported by
S4 Alessandro Cavalli and Ulrich Teichler

Theresa McGovern, coordinated the activities on behalf of the Academia Europaea.
Alessandro Cavalli (Centre for Study andResearchonHigherEducationSystems,
CIRSIS, University of Pavia, Italy) and Ulrich Teichler (International Centre for
Higher Education Research, INCHER, University of Kassel, Germany) developed
the conceptual framework. Alessandro Cavalli hosted the symposium in cooperation
with the Accademia delle Scienze, Torino, on 26–28 March 2009. Ulrich Teichler
coordinated the preparation of the publication, with the support of Christiane
Rittgerott and Dagmar Mann (Kassel). The editors of this special issue are
grateful to all persons who supported the symposium and the preparation of the
publication, to our colleagues in the HERCULES group of the Academia
Europaea for the support in the planning of the symposium, as well as to Theo
D’haen in supporting this special issue of the European Review in many respects.
Alessandro Cavalli
Ulrich Teichler
The Academic Profession S5