DOCUMENT RESUME ED 411 740 HE 030 515 Restructuring the University Reward System. TITLE INSTITUTION Sid W. Richardson Foundation, Fort Worth, TX. PUB DATE 1997-00-00 NOTE 52p. AVAILABLE FROM Sid W. Richardson Foundation, 309 Main Street, Fort Worth, TX 76102; phone: 817-336-0494; fax: 817-332-2176. PUB TYPE Reports Research (143) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC03 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Administrator Attitudes; *College Faculty; Colleges; Educational Improvement; Educational Quality; Faculty Development; *Faculty Evaluation; Faculty Promotion; Faculty Publishing; Higher Education; *Incentives; Models; *Publish or Perish Issue; Research; *Rewards; Teacher Attitudes; Teacher Effectiveness; Teacher Responsibility; *Teacher Role; Tenure; Universities ABSTRACT This report presents the results of two years of work by a 12-member task force which surveyed faculty and administrators at 51 universities regarding their opinions about the importance and stature of teaching as the central role of the university. Over 800 questionnaires were returned, with one from the provost at each institution and the rest from randomly selected faculty. The institutions were selected from those having membership in the National Association of State universities and Land-Grant Colleges and in the Teacher Education Council of State Colleges. The survey found that while the majority of respondents had gained rank and tenure, they considered the system of faculty rewards to be in need of change. There was general agreement that faculty were under pressure to do research and to publish in refereed academic journals in order to gain tenure and promotions. It was felt that there was less emphasis on excellence in teaching and professional service as the basis for earning rewards. Generally, it was seen that new tenure, promotion, and merit models must be developed and implemented. Appendices include a description of the Richardson Foundation Forum, a description of the Restructuring Task Force, and an explanation of the Differentiated Staffing Model. (JLS) ******************************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ******************************************************************************** I U.S. DEPARTMENT OP EDUCATION PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND Office or Educational Research and Improvement DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) HAS BEEN GRANTED BY This document has been reproduced as Sid W. Richardson received from the person or organization originating it. 0 Minor changes have been made to improve Foundation reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions staled in this docu 4: ment do not necessarily represent official TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES position or policy. OERI INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) Other reports sponsored by the Sid W. Richardson Foundation Forum The Professional Development School: A Commonsense Approach to Improving Education Principals for the Schools of Texas: A Seamless Web of Professional Development To order copies of this report, please complete and return the card on the inside back cover. To order the reports listed above, write, call, or fax: Sid W. Richardson Foundation 309 Main Street Fort Worth, Texas 76102-4088 817-336-0494 FAX 817-332-2176 © Copyright 1997 by Sid W. Richardson Foundation. All rights reserved. No part of this report may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means or stored on a database or retrieval system without the prior permission of the Sid W. Richardson Foundation, 309 Main Street, Fort Worth, Texas 76102-4088. e5 Printed on recycled paper "It is perhaps not too much to say that the ability of American higher education to respond adequately to the challenges of a new era can be measured by its progress in devising new and more appropriate means for recognizing and rewarding faculty performance." Blaine A. Brownell, Ph.D. Provost & Vice President for Academic Affairs University of North Texas Denton, Texas "The success of any collaborative project between schools and universities is dependent upon the key participants' being there' to communicate, collaborate, and build relationships based on trust. This requires a commitment on the part of universities to reward faculty members for getting out the schools. Without a rethinking of of the 'ivory towers' and actively working in the trenches the rewards system, those energetic faculty members who would help to facilitate positive change will not have the opportunity to make a lasting contribution." Melinda T. Cowart, Ed.D. Assistant Professor College of Education University of North Texas Denton, Texas "This report is 'must reading' for all administrators involved with decision-making within the university faculty reward system. Teacher educators' expertise and scholarship, as defined in ATE's Master Teacher Educator Standards, cannot be fully recognized in the restrictive tripartite system that now exists on most university campuses. This report substantiates the need to build on Boyer's work in Scholarship Reconsidered..., to overhaul an archaic reward system that devalues the scholarship of application in service." Margaret F. (Peggy) Ishler, Ed.D. 1996-97 President Association of Teacher Educators Chair, Department of Curriculum & Instruction University of Northern Iowa Cedar Falls, Iowa 4 "We need to create in universities strong reward systems where somewhat less research and more replication and implementation lead to the work of going out and doing, not just inventing. Too much emphasis is on the person who writes the research paper and not enough on the person who goes out and actually makes the change and has results." James Ketelsen Former Chief Executive Officer Tenneco, Inc. Houston, Texas "As we approach the twenty-first century, it is imperative that higher education reevaluate its role and mission in order to meet the demands of tomorrow. Assisting higher education in that process, the work of the Sid W. Richardson Foundation Forum Task Force has contributed to the discussions taking place on many campuses. "A notable recent contribution is this report, entitled Restructuring the University Reward System. The report reviews the current reward system that exists on most campuses and discusses its weaknesses based upon survey input from provosts, deans, and faculty. It is clear the higher education community is concerned that the current reward system offers the wrong incentives, yet there has been little movement to change. The time for change is now." John T. Montford Chancellor Texas Tech University and Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center Lubbock, Texas "At no other time in the history of higher education has the need for comprehensive, quantifiable performance indicators been higher. Funds and budgets continue to be limited, competition is increasing, and public demand for accountability remains strong. To respond, we, as proponents of higher education, must be able to develop and implement performance standards for faculty and administration that are meaningful and results-oriented. "Through discussion, debate, creativity, and studies like this one, I am confident we will find the answers for which we are searching." Barry B. Thompson, Ph.D. Chancellor The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS LETTER PREFACE iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Public Challenge 1 A Call for Change 1 Task Force Investigation 2 Design of the Survey 2 Survey Finds Desire for Change 4 Perceptions of Importance Differ 4 Suggestions for Change 6 Summary 7 THE COMPLETE REPORT Background 10 The Invisible Professor 10 Reward System Favors Research 10 Impacts of Current System 11 The Context for Change 13 The National Study 14 Guiding Questions 14 Descriptive and Narrative Data Analyses 15 Investigative Design 15 Discussion of Findings 17 The Challenge 25 Barriers to Change 25 Support and Resources 26 The Challenge to Restructure 27 Suggested Models 28 Conclusion 29 REFERENCES 31 APPENDIXES A. The Sid W. Richardson Foundation Forum 35 B. Manuscript Authors 37 C. The Sid W. Richardson Restructuring Task Force 38 D. Differentiated Staffing Model 40 E. Acknowledgments 41 TABLES 1. Organizational Design of Survey 3 2. Total Institutions and Respondents Involved in Survey 3 3. Respondent Personal and Institution Demographics 15 4. More Frequent Respondent Written Suggestions 16 5. Activities in Which Faculty Spend Time 16 FIGURES 1. Mail-Out and Return Comparisons 3 4 2. Percent of Respondents Tenured 4 3. Professorial Rank of Faculty Surveyed 4. Factors Critical in the Evaluation Process 5 5. Distribution of Financial Support 6 and Resource Expenditures 6. Percentage of Faculty Responses for Selected Items 6 7. Percentage Suggesting Overall Changes to the Current Reward System 7 8. Percentage Suggesting Merit Pay and Salary Increases 7 9. Percentage Suggesting Increased Emphasis 7 on Teaching 10. Comparisons of Attitudes Toward Pressure to Perform 17 11. Percent of Respondents Satisfied With Current Reward System 17 12. Perceptions Relating to Activities Concerning Faculty Duties (Expressed as Means to the Whole Number) 18 13. Factors Important When Evaluating 20 Faculty Performance (Expressed as Means) 14. Perceptions Among Provosts, Deans, and 22 Faculty Regarding Current Reward Systems 23 15. Preferences for Type of Faculty Reward SID W. RICHARDSON FOUNDATION 309 Main Street Fort Worth, Texas 76102 817/336-0494 Dear Friend of Education: In the minds of most of us, the university is a place where our sons and daughters enroll to benefit from the intellectual interaction with able, stimulating faculty and enthusiastic peers to learn, to grow, to prepare for a productive life. Too often, we and our students are disappointed by the quality of the teaching and learning that takes place. The emphasis on the research part of the university mission seems to have minimized the role of teaching, with negative effect on student learning. The Sid W. Richardson Foundation Forum Task Force on Restructuring the University Reward System has confirmed this impression. In a survey of 156 universities, the task force determined that faculty do not perceive excellent teaching or service to their professions as being as important as research in influencing decisions on promotion, tenure, or merit pay. Because we believe that these perceptions, their origins, and their impact on the future are of interest to every person concerned about higher education, we have prepared a report on the task force's survey. The report also suggests a method for differentiating faculty roles that could serve as a model for universities across the country. The report that follows presents the results of almost two years of work by the twelve-member task force, assisted by numerous other individuals and organizations. We express our appreciation to all of them, but especially to Dr. Frances van Tassell, chair of the task force, who provided outstanding leadership and devoted endless hours to the development of this report. We hope the report will stimulate further discussion and action to improve one of our nation's most valuable our universities. assets Valleau Wilkie, Jr. Executive Director Sid W. Richardson Foundation PREFACE Societal expectations change as societies continually evolve. Public and political outcry call for change in practices in various segments of society. A significant area of contemporary public interest involves how universities reward faculty with tenure, promotion, and merit pay. Practices which once were deemed effective and appropriate currently appear obsolete and less than adequate. Consequently, higher education is being challenged to be more accountable to societal demands. The Sid W. Richardson Foundation Forum recognized the need for change and, thus, initiated several task forces. Among those appointed was the Task Force on Restructuring the University Reward System, which was commissioned to (1) research the status of how universities reward faculty in tenure, promotion, and merit decisions, and (2) to suggest appropriate changes to prevailing reward system structures. A chair was appointed and vested with the responsibilities of assembling a task force and concluding a report. Membership of the Restructuring Task Force included persons from business, industry, public schools, professional associations, and universities. Such diversity ensured broad and in-depth perspectives regarding appropriate measures for rewarding faculty who are productive in various accomplishments, and ensured that all constituents of the educational arena were sufficiently represented. This task force met monthly for two years, first in deliberation and study of prevailing practices and requisite calls for change, then in preparation and finalization of the report. Individual members contributed various perspectives and understandings of how universities recognize faculty productivity. Members external to educational circles expressed concern that faculty productivity had little impact on the public served by the university. As a result of this concern, task force members conducted a nationwide survey to determine current practices and perspectives regarding university reward system structures. The national survey was conducted, which resulted in over 800 questionnaires being returned by a representative sample of university administration and faculty. Responses were analyzed, with a focus on current practices and respondents' suggestions for change. The task force then deliberated appropriate recommendations for change in procedures and practices which would be representative of public and political demands, as well as suggestions made by respondents. Possible barriers to recommended changes and necessary components of the change process were subsequently acknowledged. iii The work of the late Ernest Boyer had significant impact on deliberations of this task force. Boyer's previous national survey guided the work of the task force and provided substantial background information. Acknowledgment and appreciation are noted for Boyer's many contributions to education. His leadership historically exemplifies the commitment necessary to enact the changes suggested by this task force. Frances van Tassell, Ed.D. Chair, Task Force on Restructuring the University Reward System Sid W. Richardson Foundation Forum .10 iv