ABSTRACT
Researchers cost more as research has a wider market than teaching, which only has local value. Because in the academic labor market information is imperfect, quality and value are not always traded at their true market value. Faculty who have interests in addition to teaching are less likely to be overbearing pedants who too closely monitor the academic achievements of students. Many academics believe that their leveled career trajectory is due to a passing buyer’s market. The academic labor market is complicated and inelastic. Status competition and the pursuit of money leads institutions of higher learning to compete for faculty and students. There are few favorable signs from the academic labor market to motivate faculty. The academic marketplace operates in such a way that teaching is at most a marginal consideration in the assessment of individuals; one is as likely to be rewarded for one’s pedigree or for the prestige one brings to a campus.
