The purpose of this thesis is to explore the salary levels of college faculty.

Not available / text

No description available.

This research sought to answer the question:"To what extent is the merit pay system at a state-supported university consistent with selected tenets of operant conditioning?" The population for this study consisted of one state-supported institution of higher education in the Commonwealth of Virginia that has a merit pay system. Nine department chairmen and six faculty members (two per academic rank--assistant, associate, and full professors) from the nine departments were randomly selected and interviewed. Two structured interview schedules were developed by the investigator to elicit the characteristics and perceptions of the current merit pay system in order to assess the extent to which the six tenets of operant conditioning were being applied in the merit pay system. In analyzing and presenting the results, the findings were presented according to general salary policy, demographic data and salary information, and the objectives of the study. The major findings of this study were: 1. The University does have a merit pay policy stated in the Faculty Handbook, but the investigator did not find evidence of a systematic procedure for determining faculty salary increases. 2. The department chairmen were better informed of the merit pay policy and procedures than the faculty members. In fact, faculty members were not familiar with the procedure for allocating merit increases. 3. A merit pay system was preferred by the majority of the department chairmen and faculty members over alternative salary policies. 4. The merit pay system at the University was not consistent with selected tenets of operant conditioning. 5. There were a limited number of rewards other than merit pay at the university that the department chairmen and faculty members believed were important. Some of the rewards that they considered important were tenure, promotion, reduced load, travel money, graduate or student assistant, release time, and good teaching schedules. Some rewards they desired to have at the University were parking space, free tuition for family, sabbatical leave, travel money, and release time. / Ed. D.

Zhang Yanfeng. / Thesis submitted in: November 2004. / Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 144-147). / Abstracts in English and Chinese. / Abstract --- p.i / Acknowledgement --- p.iii / List of Tables and Figures --- p.v / Chapter Chapter 1 --- Introduction --- p.1 / Chapter Chapter 2 --- Pay-by-position System: Incentive Reform at the Case University / Chapter 2.1 --- Background of the Pay-by-position Scheme --- p.6 / Chapter 2.2 --- Chronology of the Incentive Change --- p.9 / Chapter 2.3 --- Institutional Characteristics of the Pay-by-position System --- p.11 / Chapter 2.4 --- Summary --- p.16 / Chapter Chapter 3 --- Analytical Framework and Literature Review / Chapter 3.1 --- A Brief Introduction to the Theory of Tournament --- p.21 / Chapter 3.2 --- A Simple Model of Homogeneous Two-contestant Tournament --- p.22 / Chapter 3.3 --- Implications under Multi-contestant and Multi-position-level Situation --- p.26 / Chapter 3.4 --- Status Quo of Existing Research --- p.28 / Chapter 3.5 --- Summary --- p.30 / Chapter Chapter 4 --- Empirical Models and Hypotheses / Chapter 4.1 --- Measurement of Key Variables --- p.33 / Chapter 4.2 --- Incentive Effect on Teaching --- p.41 / Chapter 4.3 --- Incentive Effect on Research --- p.48 / Chapter 4.4 --- Sorting Role of the Pay-by-position System --- p.54 / Chapter 4.5 --- Summary --- p.56 / Chapter Chapter 5 --- Data Presentation and a Preliminary Analysis / Chapter 5.1 --- Survey and Data Processing --- p.57 / Chapter 5.2 --- Description of Data --- p.61 / Chapter 5.3 --- A Preliminary Probe into Data --- p.68 / Chapter 5.4 --- Summary --- p.74 / Chapter Chapter 6 --- Empirical Analysis and Estimation results / Chapter 6.1 --- Incentive Effect on Teaching - Evidence from the Full Instructor Sample --- p.99 / Chapter 6.2 --- Incentive Effect on Research - Evidence from the Selected Sample of Responsible Professors --- p.106 / Chapter 6.3 --- Sorting Role of the Pay-by-position System - Ordered Probit Estimation --- p.114 / Chapter 6.4 --- Summary --- p.116 / Chapter Chapter 7 --- Conclusion --- p.140 / References --- p.144

This study seeks to determine the institutional uses of the formula system in twenty-two public four-year institutions of higher education in Texas. The study is limited to the areas of faculty salaries and departmental operating expenses. Particular effort is made to determine whether the methods used by the various institutions in allocating funds to academic departments are based upon the number of semester hours taught by each department and therefore upon the amount of funds the departments produce under the state formula system.

Not available / text

This study provides a detailed description of full-time faculty salary and fringe benefits in US public community colleges by state and by 2005 Carnegie basic classification type for the academic year 2003-2004. This classification is used to analyze data from the National Center for Education Statistics' Integrated Postsecondary Educational Data System (IPEDS). Further analysis clusters states into the following groupings: states with/without collective bargaining agreements, states with/without local appropriations, large megastates versus nonmegastates (using the methodology developed by Grapevine at Illinois State University), and the impact of California on the nation's salaries and fringe benefits. The analysis showed high level of variation of salaries paid by the type of community college (rural, suburban, and urban serving) in the US. The nation's average salary for full-time faculty was $52,598. Rural serving small institutions faculty salary was $18,754 or 45 % less than the nation's average. Salaries in colleges with collective bargaining agreement were higher than in colleges without collective bargaining agreements. Faculty teaching in suburban serving colleges with local taxation had the highest salaries, $61,822 within colleges with access to local support. Suburban serving multiple colleges in megastates had the highest faculty salary average, $64,540 as compared to $42,263 for rural serving colleges in non-megastates. California may be a state with a very high cost of living; however, that does not diminish the fact that community college faculty are among the highest paid faculty in the nation. Colleges with collective bargaining agreements, with local appropriations, and in megastates, tended to have better benefits packages for their faculty. This study includes recommendations for further research, including a recommendation that a quantitative statistical analysis be undertaken to show statistical significance in salaries and fringe benefits among collective and non-collective bargaining states, a study addressing the faculty and leadership challenges that community colleges will be facing soon should be done, and that a similar study be done that includes tribal colleges.

The purpose of this study was to analyze the differences in the criteria utilized and the criteria desired by various types of institutions for granting appointment, reappointment, merit salary increases, promotion in rank, and tenure, and to propose criteria based upon this analysis. This study reveals that institutions differ according to the criteria which they utilize and desire for appointment, reappointment, merit salary increases, promotion in rank, and tenure. For example, two-year and four-year private colleges and universities consider age, health, personal appearance, and religious activities while two-year and four-year public colleges and universities disregard religious activities and place little emphasis on age, health, and personal appearance. In addition, four-year public and private institutions stress more than two-year public and private colleges degrees from prestigious universities, research, publications, and the Ph.D. in English. Furthermore, four-year private schools give more attention than four-year public institutions to student evaluations, classroom visitations, curriculum development, academic advisement, and supervision of student activities The study also reveals that as four-year public institutions increase in size, their interest in research and publications increases proportionally.

Gendered organizational conditions create the context for persisting differences between men and women in the workplace. Within, higher education, this manifests as a salary gap between male and female faculty members. The academic capitalistic policy environment creates the conditions for increasing competition for external funding, especially in the areas of research and science and engineering. The change in the academic climate may sustain or intensify the gendering of universities as organizations. Universities with the highest level of research activity were chosen for this study and formed the 130 public institution sample. This study used fixed effects panel regression analysis to explore the relationship between the faculty gender salary gap and institutional emphasis on research as well as science and engineering. In addition, the relationship between institutional emphasis and the faculty gender salary gap was explored over time with the inclusion of a time trend and temporal interaction terms. Results showed that the higher the percentage of female faculty members, the greater the faculty gender salary gap for assistant professors. In addition, science and engineering emphasis over time had a significant impact on the professor salary gap with a decreasing effect both at the mean and one standard deviation above the mean, but with an increasing effect on the salary gap for institutions one standard deviation below the mean. When taking action to increase gender equity, it is important for universities to recognize that the faculty gender salary gap occurs in an organizational context impacted by institutional-level conditions.