東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back to Search results for [ null ]

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

The Impacts of Performance Funding on the Faculty Experience : = Viewing Faculty as Street-level Bureaucrats or Passive Recipients.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	The Impacts of Performance Funding on the Faculty Experience :/
Reminder of title:	Viewing Faculty as Street-level Bureaucrats or Passive Recipients.
Author:	Jenkins, Brandon M.
Description:	1 online resource (143 pages)
Notes:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-09, Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International82-09A.
Subject:	Educational administration. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28400066click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798582522768

The Impacts of Performance Funding on the Faculty Experience : = Viewing Faculty as Street-level Bureaucrats or Passive Recipients.
Jenkins, Brandon M.

The Impacts of Performance Funding on the Faculty Experience :Viewing Faculty as Street-level Bureaucrats or Passive Recipients. - 1 online resource (143 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-09, Section: A.

Thesis (Ed.D.)--East Carolina University, 2020.

Includes bibliographical references

This comparative case study examined how performance funding programs shape the faculty experiences at two North Carolina Community Colleges. Using Principal-Agent Theory, Street-Level Bureaucracy, and Bottom-Up Policy Perspective as theoretical frameworks, six themes and four subthemes emerged from semi-structured interviews of twenty community college faculty members. The study revealed that (1) faculty experiences are shaped according to the institutions' overall capacity and response to performance funding; (2) the awareness of faculty regarding performance funding is dependent upon the institutions' efforts to share information; and (3) depending upon the institution, faculty can be seen as both street-level bureaucrats and passive recipients of performance funding initiatives. While performance funding programs can result in the Principal-Agent dynamic, Bottom-Up Policy Perspective, and street-level bureaucracy, each of these is dependent upon the sharing of information. Institutional efforts to improve performance often negate the demands on faculty time and fail to include faculty in decision making processes. Furthermore, institutional budget concerns take precedence and create greater problems than those of performance funding. Finally, key practical implications for community colleges and educational systems are that (1) information regarding performance funding and any subsequent budgetary allotments should be readily available to all faculty; (2) institutional initiatives and response mechanisms aimed at improving performance should be inclusive of the entire faculty body; (3) significant attention should be given to the conditions that lead to the weakening of academic standards; and (4) educational systems should examine performance funding systems while weighing the capability of all institutions to effectively respond.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2023

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798582522768Subjects--Topical Terms:

2122799
Educational administration.
Subjects--Index Terms:

Performance funding programsIndex Terms--Genre/Form:

542853
Electronic books.

The Impacts of Performance Funding on the Faculty Experience : = Viewing Faculty as Street-level Bureaucrats or Passive Recipients.
LDR:03394nmm a2200421K 4500 001 2357194
005 20230622065013.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 241011s2020 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798582522768
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI28400066
035 $a AAI28400066
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Jenkins, Brandon M. $3 3697726
245 1 4 $a The Impacts of Performance Funding on the Faculty Experience : $b Viewing Faculty as Street-level Bureaucrats or Passive Recipients.
264 0 $c 2020
300 $a 1 online resource (143 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 82-09, Section: A.
500 $a Advisor: Siegel, David.
502 $a Thesis (Ed.D.)--East Carolina University, 2020.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a This comparative case study examined how performance funding programs shape the faculty experiences at two North Carolina Community Colleges. Using Principal-Agent Theory, Street-Level Bureaucracy, and Bottom-Up Policy Perspective as theoretical frameworks, six themes and four subthemes emerged from semi-structured interviews of twenty community college faculty members. The study revealed that (1) faculty experiences are shaped according to the institutions' overall capacity and response to performance funding; (2) the awareness of faculty regarding performance funding is dependent upon the institutions' efforts to share information; and (3) depending upon the institution, faculty can be seen as both street-level bureaucrats and passive recipients of performance funding initiatives. While performance funding programs can result in the Principal-Agent dynamic, Bottom-Up Policy Perspective, and street-level bureaucracy, each of these is dependent upon the sharing of information. Institutional efforts to improve performance often negate the demands on faculty time and fail to include faculty in decision making processes. Furthermore, institutional budget concerns take precedence and create greater problems than those of performance funding. Finally, key practical implications for community colleges and educational systems are that (1) information regarding performance funding and any subsequent budgetary allotments should be readily available to all faculty; (2) institutional initiatives and response mechanisms aimed at improving performance should be inclusive of the entire faculty body; (3) significant attention should be given to the conditions that lead to the weakening of academic standards; and (4) educational systems should examine performance funding systems while weighing the capability of all institutions to effectively respond.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2023
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Educational administration. $3 2122799
650 4 $a Educational evaluation. $3 526425
650 4 $a Community college education. $3 2122836
650 4 $a Education finance. $3 3172165
653 $a Performance funding programs
653 $a North Carolina
653 $a Principal-Agent Theory
653 $a Street-Level Bureaucracy
653 $a Bottom-Up Policy Perspective
653 $a College faculty members
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 lcsh $3 542853
690 $a 0277
690 $a 0443
690 $a 0514
690 $a 0275
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 783688
710 2 $a East Carolina University. $3 1019505
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 82-09A.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=28400066 $z click for full text (PQDT)