Summary Notes on "Reform from Within: Lesson for Academic Administrators," (Chapter 11 (pp. 195-207) in Faculty Work and Public Trust: Restoring the Value of Teaching and Public Service in American Academic Life) by J.  S. Fairweather (The Pennsylvania State University), Allyn & Bacon, 1996, 249 pages. Summarized by Rick Reis in Tomorrow's Academy (TP Msg. #307, to subscribe, send e-mail to Majordomo@lists.stanford.edu and type 

"subscribe tomorrows-professor"), referred by Rich Griffin

Summarized from TP Msg. #307 by Rick Reis (reis@stanford.edu) by J. T. P. Yao, 4/13/01

"Neither legislation to impose standard teaching workloads nor the current faculty reward systems confront the main barrier to reform, namely the individual nature of faculty rewards based on a limited definition of performance. … Faculty within an institution, a department, or a program are required to follow the same behavioral pattern as other faculty to receive promotion, tenure, and high pay. Missing in this approach to faculty rewards is any concept of group responsibility or of the importance to quality assessment of student-related outcome measures. … The primacy of research and publishing in faculty rewards … indicates that the performance is judged by limited criteria. …"

"Some concept of group is required to free faculty from pursuing identical behaviors. … Adopting group-centered values, or at least enhancing their relevance in faculty evaluations, requires recognizing the value of the role an individual plays in the group. … I am advocating a new reward system for faculty, one which encourages teaching and service as well as research and scholarship, includes group as well as individual achievement, and recognizes that faculty are not the only constituency that counts in academic institutions."

"Unless faculty and administrators develop and implement acceptable standards for assessing student performance, determining faculty effectiveness in activities other than research, and evaluating the fit between institutional outcomes and societal needs, then legislatures, federal agencies, and even nonprofit entities may impose such standards. I believe it much preferable for academic leaders to develop solutions to these problems from within. ..."

[Readers who are interested in this book are encouraged to read the original version in its entirety. Other summary notes on faculty reward systems are available on the Internet at http://lohman.tamu.edu under the heading "Summaries of Papers ..."]