Carnegie Foundation National Survey of Higher Education, Faculty Sample (1984)
SummaryIn 1984 the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching commissioned Opinion Research Corporation to design and execute national surveys of faculty and undergraduates in colleges and universities throughout the United States. The objectives of the studies were both to identify any new developments in higher education that had transpired since the 1975 1976 surveys, and to track any movement in trends or practices discovered in previous research. Additionally the surveys were planned to complement other research efforts being sponsored by the Carnegie Foundation.
The ARDA has added three additional variables to the original data set to enhance the users' experience on our site.
Data FileCases: 5057
Weight Variable: WEIGHT
Weighting procedures were employed to adjust for (1) differential non-response among nonrespondents and institutions; (2) adjust for the different rates at which four-year and two-year institutions were selected; (3) adjust the faculty and undergraduate weighted totals.
Data CollectionApril 2-June 15, 1984
Collection ProceduresMail questionnaires were sent to the approximately 10,000 faculty members in the sample. A subsequent mailing of reminder/thank you postcards and duplicate questionnaires were also sent to respondents. Finally, a telephone follow-up was conducted to attempt collection of attitudes and demographic characteristics from those not responding to the initial mail survey.
Sampling ProceduresA two-stage stratified random sample design was used for the 1984 Carnegie Foundation surveys. The first stage sample consisted of institutions of higher education in the continental United States. The universe of colleges and universities included institutions in the nine 1976 Carnegie Classifications. Any institution that ceased operation since 1976 or was outside of the continental United Stated was removed from the universe. Institutions were selected with probability proportionate to size.
The second stage of sampling consisted of the selection of individual faculty members and undergraduates from the institutions chosen in the first stage of sampling. All of the lists used were sampled in a systematic random fashion that resulted in ren faculty replicates across the institutions in the study. Of the 9,968 faculty sampled, a total of 5,057 (50.7%) returned completed questionnaires.