Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
| Autor/inn/en | Wood, Peter H.; Wood, Jane H. |
|---|---|
| Titel | Annual Merit Pay and the Evaluation and Improvement of College Faculty: Problems, Solutions, and More Problems. |
| Quelle | (1988), (34 Seiten) |
| Beigaben | Tabellen |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; Monographie |
| Schlagwörter | Tagungsbericht; College Faculty; Higher Education; Incentives; Merit Pay; Motivation; Positive Reinforcement; Questionnaires; Recognition (Achievement); Records (Forms); Teacher Employment; Teacher Evaluation; Teacher Salaries |
| Abstract | Merit pay is discussed in three sections, focusing on: (1) an approach to the measurement of the merit of college teachers that avoids much of the subjectivity and potential favoritism that has caused other merit systems to fail, the procedure which evolved over a period of years, and a review of its evolution; (2) results of several surveys of opinions on merit pay; and (3) tentative conclusions. A discussion of the departmental merit system looks at the university and the department, the trial years, and the activity-points merit system. Survey results indicate that most pre-service teachers favor annual merit pay if the evaluation is completely fair. The most common justification for merit pay reflects the positions of equity or fairness and motivation or incentive effects. Forty-two percent of surveyed faculty agreed that they were satisfied with the department's merit system in 1987. The great majority of 85 merit procedures reviewed require faculty to provide documentation of their activities to a committee which allocates merit according to more-or-less clear guidelines. The most common justifications for merit pay systems suggest that annual merit pay would increase equity and productivity. Potential disadvantages include those associated with invalid or very subjective evaluation and inappropriate intrusion of extrinsic rewards into systems dominated by intrinsic rewards and self-directed activities. A copy of the Faculty Merit Reporting Form is attached. Contains 15 references. (SM) |
| Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |
| Update | 2004/1/01 |
Literaturbeschaffung und Bestandsnachweise in Bibliotheken prüfen
Permalink als QR-Code
Inhalt auf sozialen Plattformen teilen (nur vorhanden, wenn Javascript eingeschaltet ist)
Teile diese Seite:
