臺灣公立大學教師彈性薪資制之研究

The Study of Faculty Merit Pay System for Taiwanese Public Universities

黃曙東
Shu-Tung Huang


所屬期刊： 第8卷第1期 「教師培育與專業發展」
主編：輔仁大學師資培育中心教授
張德銳
系統編號： vol028_06
主題： 師資培育
出版年份： 2012
作者： 黃曙東
作者(英文)： Shu-Tung Huang
論文名稱： 臺灣公立大學教師彈性薪資制之研究
論文名稱(英文)： The Study of Faculty Merit Pay System for Taiwanese Public Universities
共同作者：
最高學歷：
校院名稱：
系所名稱：
語文別：
論文頁數： 32
中文關鍵字： 大學教師彈性薪資制;教師評鑑;教師薪資
英文關鍵字： the university faculty merit pay/performance-related pay system;faculty evaluation;faculty compensation
服務單位： 黎明技術學院資訊管理系助理教授
稿件字數： 19921
作者專長： 教育評鑑、經濟學、人力資源管理與發展
投稿日期： 2011/5/31
論文下載： pdf檔案icon
摘要(中文)： 本研究旨在建構一套臺灣公立大學教師彈性薪資制之實施內涵及其推動之策略。透過薪資激勵以強化大學教師素質進而提昇機構效能，自1980年代中期起即是各國政府高等教育最優先作為；教師彈性薪資制，意即透過教師評鑑產出具辯證力的評鑑結果，並據此與薪資、獎勵政策連接，讓教師薪資直接且實質地激勵教師效能的提昇。為達研究目的，本研究採專家訪談及德懷術等方法；首先經由文獻探討以瞭解大學教師彈性薪資制理論與各國推動實務；其次依據文獻探討結果草擬訪談大綱並據以進行11位專家之訪談；再者依據文獻探討與訪談結果草擬問卷初稿，再經由3位專家審查以定稿；最後邀請17位學者專家組成焦點團體小組，並施以3次德懷術之問卷調查，以確定我國公立大學教師彈性薪資制之實施內涵，包括獎勵範疇、經費來源、獎勵幅度與人數、推動的權責單位與設計流程等，以及有關政府與大學的建議策略與作為，以做為臺灣推動大學教師彈性薪資制之重要參考。
摘要(英文)： The purpose of this study was to construct the faculty merit pay system for Taiwanese public universities, and to create the strategies for utilizing the system to improve faculty quality by faculty evaluation and compensation systems. Salary awards from merit pay system appear to be an appropriate means of directing faculty better performances and their accountabilities; precisely, most governments have endeavored to implement merit pay system to enhance their higher institutions’ effectiveness since the mid-1980s.The research methods used experts’ interviewing and Delphi technique. First, the author interviewed eleven experts to form the questionnaires, and then asked three experts to ensure their validity. Second, the author invited seventeen specialists to panel a focus group, and then used the Delphi technique method for the group members to construct the merit pay system as well as to investigate how Taiwan’s public universities accurately implemented their systems and what problems existed; finally, based on the research outcomes, the conclusions and recommendations to governmental bodies and higher education institutes were presented.
參考文獻： 丁房、劉匯琳（2009）。我國高校教師勞動力市場的薪酬分析。清華大學教育研究，30（3），71-77。
大學優秀教師下月起彈性薪資（2010年7月5日）。聯合晚報，4版。
日本文部科學省（2007）。教育指標的國際比較（平成19年版）（日文）。東京：日本國立印刷局。
李建忠（2001）。印度高校內部人力資源配置和管理。比較教育研究，12，6-10。
沙紅（2006）。新加坡高等教育：經驗與借鑒。教育發展研究，2006（7B），78-86。
汪雯（2008）。國外高校教師薪酬管理的特色與發展趨勢。現代管理科學，2008（1），111-113。
林淑端（2004）。我國國立大學教師待遇制度改進之研究。國立政治大學行政管理碩士論文，未出版，臺北市。
林瑩秋（2010）。教授大出走。商業周刊，1163，48-62。
張火燦、許宏明（2008）。國際一流大學經營成功關鍵因素及啟示。教育資料與研究雙月刊，81，77-94。
張軍（2010）。高校績效工資潛在問題及措施分析。經濟師，4，120-121。
教育部（2005）。國立大學教師彈性薪資制度專案小組會議報告。教育部文件。
教育部（2010）。延攬及留住大專校院特殊優秀人才實施彈性薪資方案。
陳永明（2007）。大學教師聘任的國際比較。比較教育研究，201，37-41。
陳至中（2009年11月9日）。教授薪資差大師難留、新秀難招。中國時報。
傅凰（2009）。日本大學的教師任用制度探析。黑龍江高教研究，2009（5），50-52。
黃曙東（2006）。我國技專校院學生學習成效評估機制之研究。彰化師範大學工業教育與技術學系博士論文，未出版，彰化縣。
黃鶴，馬香媛、陳曉虹（2008）。高校教師薪酬滿意度的調查與分析—以浙江省高等院校為樣本。浙江學刊，4，221-224。
楊朝祥（2002）。大專教師薪資制度與高教發展關係之探討。取自http://old.npf.org.tw/monthly/00203/theme-102.htm。
葉芷妘（2010年11月6日）。教部留才、28教授年薪加50萬。中時電子報。
葛新斌、姜英敏（2004）。日本大學教師評估制度改革動向分析。比較教育研究，2004（9），76-80。
董保誠（2009）。我國國立大學法人法立法原則及財政、人事之因應。載於臺灣大學（主編）之「大學法人化－發展國際一流大學及頂尖研究中心」會議紀錄（頁22-46）。台北市：臺大出版中心。
趙丹齡、張岩峰、汪雯、容宏、吳強（2004）。高校教師薪酬制度的國際比較研究。中國高教研究，2004，32-40。
蘇錦麗、黃曙東（2009）。美國大學教師評鑑制度之探討。教育政策論壇，12（2），1-44。
Akerlof, G. (1982). Labor contracts as partial gift exchange. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 97(4), 543-569.
Arreola, R. A. (1983). Establishing successful faculty evaluation and development programs. New Directions for Community Colleges, 11(1), 83-93.
Arreola, R. A. (2000). Developing a comprehensive faculty evaluation system (2nd ed.). Bolton, MA: Anker.
Atkinson, A., Burgess, S., Croxson, B., Gregg, P., Propper, C., Slater, H., & Wilson, D. (2009). Evaluating the impact of performance-related pay for teachers in England. Labour Economic, 16, 251-261.
Bacharach, S., & Conley, S. (1992). Performance appraisal in education: A strategy consideration. In L. E. Frase (Ed.), Teacher compensation and motivation (261-273). Lancaster, PA: Technomic Public.
Ballor, D. (2001). Pay for performance in public and private schools. Economics of Education Review, 20, 51-61.
Ballou, D., & Podgursky, M. (1993). Teachers’ attitudes toward merit pay: Examining conventional wisdom. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 47(1), 50-61.
Bannister, B. D., & Balkin, D. B. (1990). Performance evaluation and compensation feedback message: An integrated model. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63(June). British Psychological Society.
Belfield, C. R., & Heywood, J. S. (2008). Performance pay for teachers: Determinants and consequences. Economics of Education Review, 27, 243-252.
Callhoun, F. S., & Protheroe, N. J. (1983). Merit pay plans for teachers: Status and descriptions. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service.
Canadian Association of University Teachers (2008). CAUT policy: Policy statement on salary structure. Retrieved from http://www.caut.ca/pages.asp?page=665&lang+1.
Centra, J. A. (1979). Determining faculty effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Cohen, D. K., & Murnane, R. J. (1986). Merit pay and evaluation problem: Why most merit pay plan fail and few survive. Harvard Educational Review, 56, 1-17.
Condrey, S. E., & Kellough, J. E. (1993). Pay for performance in the public sector: Assessing the evidence. Public Productivity & Management Review, XVII(2), 113-127.
Danielson, C., & McGreal, T. L. (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Desander, M. K. (2000). Teacher evaluation and merit pay: Legal consideration, practice concerns. Journal of Personnel Evaluation, 14(4), 307-317.
Dorsey, D. W. (1997). Managerial merit pay allocation: An analysis of alternative judgment models using regression and fuzzy expert system techniques. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida, Florida.
Erez, A., LePine, J., & Elms, H. (2002). Effects of rotated leadership and peer evaluation on the function and effectiveness of self-managed teams: A quasi-experiment. Personnel Psychology, 55, 929-948.
Frase, L. E. (Ed.) (1992). Teacher compensation and motivation. Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing .
Grant, H. (1998). Academic contests? Merit pay in Canadian Universities. Relations Industrial, 53, 647-666.
Hansen, W. L. (1992). Salaries and salary determination. In B. R. Clark & G. R. Neave (Eds.), Encyclopedia of higher education Vol. 2: Analytical perspectives (pp. 1476-1483). Oxford/New York, NY: Pergamon.
Hanushek, E. (2005). Economic outcomes and school quality. Paris: International Institute of Educational Planning. Retrieved from http://edpro.stanford.edu/Hanushek/admin/pages/files/uploads/quality.IIEP.pdf.
Harder, J. (1991). Equity theory versus expectancy theory: The case of major league baseball free agents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(3), 458-464.
Harm, J., & Reiley, K. (2002). Testing inter-temporal substitution, implicit contracts and hours restriction models of the labor market using micro data. American Economic Review, September, 94-101.
Harris, D. C. (2007). The promises and pitfalls of alternative teacher compensation approaches. Retrieved from http://www.greatlakescenter.org/docs/Policy_Briefs/Harris_Merit%20Pay.pdf.
Heneman, R. (1990). Merit pay research. In G. R. Ferris, & K. M. Rowland (Eds.), Research in personnel and human resources management, 8, 203-262. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Heneman, R., Fisher, M., & Dixon, K. (2001). Reward and organizational systems alignments: An expert system. Compensation and Benefits Review, Nov./Dec., 18-28.
Hofstede, G. H. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London, England: MacGraw-Hill.
Ingvarson, L., Kleinhenz, E., & Wilkinson, J. (2007). Research on performance pay for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/D477C6A5-C8EF-4074-8619-FF43059445F8/16287/ACERPerformancePaypaperMar07.pdf.
Johnson, S. M. (1986). Merit pay for teachers: What motivates, what matters. Educational Administration Quarterly, 22(3), 54-79.
Kanter, M. E. (1987). From status to contribution: Some organizational implications of the changing basis for pay. Personnel, Jan., 12-37.
Kirst, M. W. (July, 1990). Accountability: Implications for state and local policymakers. Policy Perspectives Series. Washington, DC: Information Services, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
Kubler, J., & Lennon, M. C. (2007). Association of Commonwealth Universities 2006-07 academic staff salary survey. Australia: Association of Commonwealth Universities.
Lawler, E. E. (2000). Reward excellence: Pay strategies for the new economy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lissy, W. E., & Morgenstern, M. L. (1995). Merit raises remain popular. Compensation and Benefits Review, 27(2), 9-20.
Mawdsley, R. D. (1998). Legal issues relating to higher education personnel handbooks. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education. 11, 231-241.
Mawhinney, T., & Gowen, C. (1990). Gain sharing and the law of effect as the matching law: A theoretical framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 11, 61-75.
McEvoy, G. M. (1990). Public sector managers’ reactions to appraisals by subordinates. Public Personnel Management, 19, 201-212.
Milanowski, A. T., & Heneman III, H. G. (2001). Assessment of teacher reactions to a Standards-based teacher evaluation system: A pilot study. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 15(3), 193-212.
Miles, C. L. D. (1997). Community college faculty pay for performance: A case study. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Texas at Austin, TX.
Milkovich, G. T., & Newman, J. (1999). Compensation (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
Milkovich, G. T., & Wigdor, A. W. (1991). Pay for performance: Evaluating performance appraisal and merit pay. Washington, D.C.: National Research Council.
Mondy, R. W., & Noe, R. M. (2005). Human resource management (9th ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Prentice Hall.
National Education Association. (1984). Merit pay: Promises and facts. Washington, DC: Author.
Negro, L. G. (1981). Attitudes of federal employees toward performance appraisal and merit pay: Implications for CRSA implementation. Public Administration Review, 4, 84-86.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2007). Education at a glance. Paris, France: Author.
Ostroff, C. (1993). Rater perceptions, satisfaction and performance ratings. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66, 345-356.
Prentice, G., Burgess, S., & Propper, C. (2007). Performance pay in the public sector: A review of the issues and evidence. London, England: Office of Manpower Economics.
Robinson, D. (2006). The status of higher education teaching personnel in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Retrieved from http://www.ei-ie.org/highereducation/file/(2006)%20The%20Status%20of%20Higher%20Education%20Teaching%20Personnel%20in%20Australia,%20Canada,%20New%20Zealand,%20the%20UK%20and%20the%20USA%20en.pdf.
Robison, G. E. (1984). Concerns in education. Arlington, VA: Educational Research Service Inc.
Rumbley, L. E., Pacheco, I. F., & Altbach, P. G. (2008). International comparison of academic salaries: An exploratory study. Retrieved from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/soe/cihe/salary_report.pdf
Sadowski, M., & Miller, E. (1996). New ideas like collective incentives and skill-based pay raise the same old questions. The Harvard Education Letter, 12(1), 3-5.
Scheer, L., Kumar, N., & Steenkamp, J. (2003) Reactions to perceived inequity in U.S. and Dutch inter-organizational relationships. Academic of Management Journal, 46(3), 303-316.
Schulz, E. R., & Tanguay, D. M. (2006). Merit pay in a public higher education institution: Questions of impact and attitudes. Public Personnel Management, 35(1), 71-88.
Scriven, M. (1981). Summative teacher evaluation. In J. Millman (Ed.), Handbook of teacher evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation Thesaurus (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Scriven, M. (1994). Duties of the teacher. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 8(2), 151-184.
Scriven, M. (2005, May). Critical issues in faculty evaluation: valid data and the validity of practice. Paper presented at the AERA/SIGFTED symposium report. Retrieved from www.aera.net/uploadedFiles/SIGs/Faculty_Teaching_Evaluation_and _Develop_(42)/Newsletters/IEFD_Jan06.pdf.
Shoppemyer, M. (1993). The culture of higher education . In E. Bo & D.M. Gilford (Eds.), Understanding the many faces of the culture of higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Shulman, L. S., & Hutchings, P. (1999). The scholarship of teaching: New elaborations, new developments. Change Magazine, Sep. -Oct., 11-15. Retrieved from http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/publications/sub.asp?key=452&subkey=613.
Siblani, M. (1997). Perceptions of faculty members of the merit pay system at an urban, midwestern research university. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Wayne State University, MI.
Soar, R. S., Medley, D. M., & Coker, H. (1983). Teacher evaluation: A critique of currently used methods. Phi Delta Kappa, 65, 239-246.
Studies in Innovation, Research and Education. (2005). The role of academics in the Bologna process. Norway: NIFU STEP Working paper No. 15.
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Pullin, D. (1998). Achieving legal viability in personnel evaluations. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 11, 215-230.
University Grants Commissions (2006). Annual report 2006. Retrieved from http://www.ugc.ac.in.
Walker, A., & Dimmok, C. (2000). One size fits all? Teachers appraisal in a Chinese culture. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 14(2), 155-178.
Westwood, R. I., & Kirkbribe, P. S. (1998). International strategies of corporate culture change: Emulation, consumption, and hybridist. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 11(6), 554-577.
World Bank (2008). 2005 International comparison program: Table of final results. Washington, DC: The Author.
Young, I. P., Delli, D. A., & Johnson, L. (1999). Student evaluation of faculty: Effects of purpose on pattern. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 13(2), 179-190.