The USC Faculty Model.

Autor/inn/en	Linnell, Robert H.; Bottomley, Wayne N.
Titel	The USC Faculty Model.
Quelle	(1975), (61 Seiten)Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Academic Rank (Professional); Administrative Policy; Age; Cohort Analysis; College Faculty; Enrollment Projections; Equal Opportunities (Jobs); Faculty Evaluation; Faculty Promotion; Females; Higher Education; Long Range Planning; Models; Teacher Retirement; Teacher Salaries; Tenure; Trend Analysis; Universities + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Alter; Lebensalter; Kohortenanalyse; Fakultät; Equal opportunity; Equal opportunities; Job; Jobs; Chancengleichheit; Beruf; Weibliches Geschlecht; Hochschulbildung; Hochschulsystem; Hochschulwesen; Langfristige Planung; Analogiemodell; Lehrerbesoldung; Lehrervergütung; Amtszeit; Beschäftigungsdauer; Trendanalyse; University; Universität
Abstract	A description of the University of Southern California (USC) faculty model and some of the results obtained from using the model are presented. The model traces faculty cohorts from 1974 to 1984, under given policies of hiring, tenure, promotion, and retirement. The model takes into account resignations, deaths, anticipated enrollments, and costs. It produces data on anticipated faculty costs, tenure percentages, average age and age distribution, rank distributions, and openings. Its primary use is as a tool for policy analysis. Five explorations made with the model are explored: benign, conservative, and Draconian policies (reflecting "soft,""hard," and "very hard" environments); sensitivity analysis (showing that tenure policy, ranks of replacements, and resignation rates can have major impacts but that promotion policies for associate professors and early retirement schemes are, by themselves, not significant); equal employment opportunities (demonstrating that the rate at which females have to be hired to reach the level of the "availability pool" in 10 years exceeds the current availability pool levels); effect of changing faculty size (for determining appropriate strategies under conditions of growth and decline); and with schools other than USC. Extensive appendices describe the model in detail, discuss validation, present sample output, and show alternative methods of modeling faculty costs. (Author/PHR)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC