I was a "research assistant" for several years and my senior colleagues were "staff scientists". I think you'll need some evidence to support the claim that research assistants are being considered administrators because I really doubt that.
Most universities only distinguish between "academic" positions and "staff" positions.
At most universities, "Academic" positions are something rather specific: usually only the faculty proper, Ph.D.-holding researchers, and maybe a few other student-facing roles (e.g., librarians).
Here is my quick two-part litmus test that's probably pretty accurate for most universities. Assuming you don't know for certain that you are in the "academic" or "staff" bucket, consider these two questions:
0. Are you a Ph.D. student with some funny title like "research assistant"? You are a student. You are not "staff". You are not "academic". You are a student.
1. Do you hold a Ph.D. AND listed as a co-PI on grants? If yes, you're most likely in an "academic" role. If not, you're most likely in a "staff" role (unless you're working with someone who has a shitload of clout).
What happens often in reporting is that "academic" and "staff" numbers are reported, and we assume "staff = administrative".
See the Stanford numbers, for example. Notice how there's no category for "non-administrative non-academic staff". You're either a member of the "academic" group or you're an "other", and the "other" group is not broken out into "administrative" and "not administrative".
Hopefully, this helps. It's all rather confusing and political and, in many cases, institution-specific :)
shrug I was just responding to the GP with 10 'academic staff' and 70 'administrative staff'. It's not like every professor has 7 secretaries there. Every university divides things differently. I was just pointing out that the 10/70 is not what it looks like at first, or rather, what some people here seen to think. (at least, I think - I'm not GP, maybe they actually do have 7 secretaries each).
