Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
| Autor/in | Ogletree, Earl J. |
|---|---|
| Titel | A Survey of Administrators' Opinions of Merit Pay. |
| Quelle | (1985), (22 Seiten) |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; Monographie |
| Schlagwörter | Elementary Secondary Education; Evaluation Criteria; Job Performance; Merit Pay; Teacher Effectiveness; Teacher Salaries; Illinois (Chicago) |
| Abstract | "A Nation at Risk" (1983) recommended that teacher salaries and promotions should be based on merit evaluation, not merely on experience and education, as is the current practice. Problems arise because of varying merit pay definitions and difficulties involved with judging teacher effectiveness. Researchers have found that developing objective performance measures and maintaining the necessary recordkeeping systems have proved too difficult, expensive, and time-consuming to be practical. Merit pay can also breed destructive competition and create serious morale problems. Researchers have found little evidence that merit pay promotes teaching excellence; the best way to reward superior teachers may be to give them autonomy, expanded responsibilities, and professional development opportunities. This study surveys the opinions of Chicago and Illinois educators concerning merit pay. Data were obtained via a nonnormative survey, using a 50-item forced-choice and open-ended questionnaire mailed to 250 Illinois school administrators and teachers. Responses were received from 80 teachers and 25 administrators. Overall results show that respondents' positions had the greatest influence on responses. Although 58 percent of the total sample and 67 percent of teachers rejected merit pay plans, 60 percent of administrators favored them. The majority of the sample (67 percent) felt that merit pay could not be awarded objectively. The sample also favored multiple evauators over single evaluator assessment. Both groups favored merit plans with significant teacher input on developing criteria and valued intrinsic reward alternatives. Included are nine references. (MLH) |
| Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |
Literaturbeschaffung und Bestandsnachweise in Bibliotheken prüfen
Permalink als QR-Code
Inhalt auf sozialen Plattformen teilen (nur vorhanden, wenn Javascript eingeschaltet ist)
Teile diese Seite:
