期刊目錄列表 - 67卷(2022) - 【教育科學研究期刊】67(2)六月刊(本期專題:高等教育人事制度的變革與展望)

(專題)留才攬才利器: 美國大學教師薪資制度的特色及其對臺灣的啟示 作者:國家教育研究院教育制度及政策研究中心劉秀曦、國立臺灣師範大學教育學系陳玉娟

卷期:67卷第2期
日期:2022年6月
頁碼:1-31
DOI:https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202206_67(2).0001

摘要:
薪資待遇不僅攸關大學教師個人的生活品質,也是學校教學和研究團隊能夠穩定運作之基礎,因此,大學教師薪資在高等教育研究領域中,向來都是備受關注的議題。本研究旨在探究臺灣大學教師薪資水準在全球之定位,並以美國為對象,剖析其大學教師薪資制度的主要特色,藉此理解作為一個能夠吸引全球人才的高等教育強國,其大學教師薪資制度有何值得臺灣參考和學習之處。為達成前述目的,本研究採用半結構式訪談和文件分析法,最後根據研究發現提出對國內大學教師薪資制度的六項啟示:一、臺灣之大學教師薪資具國內競爭力但全球競爭力有待提升;二、彈性薪資等方案具有成效,但經費來源不穩定影響其延續性;三、擴大差異化已成為主要國家大學教師薪資制度改革的共同趨勢;四、教師績效薪資應採取外加方式並建立公平的競爭機制;五、完善大學教師評鑑制度以作為績效薪資核發之基礎;六、建立「基本需求+差異化+績效表現」之薪資結構模式。

關鍵詞:大學教師薪資、美國、差異化、基本需求薪資、績效薪資

《詳全文》 檔名

參考文獻:
  1. 1111人力銀行(2017)。2016年度薪資調查報告。https://career.1111.com.tw/newsDetail.aspx?no=1612【1111Career (2017). 2016 annual salary survey report. https://career.1111.com.tw/newsDetail.aspx?no=1612】
  2. 立法院(2020)。教育部110年度單位預算評估報告。https://www.ly.gov.tw/Pages/List.aspx? nodeid=44183【Legislative Yuan. (2020). Evaluation report of unit budget for Ministry of Education. https://www.ly.gov.tw/Pages/List.aspx?nodeid=44183】
  3. 林芳伃、陳榮政(2020)。東南亞區域高等教育發展對我國人才交流政策之啟示。教育科學研究期刊,65(3),29-54。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202009_65(3).0002【Lin, F.-Y., & Chen, J.-C. (2020). Influence of Southeast Asia’s higher education development on Taiwan’s talent exchange policy. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 65(3), 29-54. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202009_65(3).0002】
  4. 國立臺灣師範大學(2017)。國立臺灣師範大師教職員待遇簡明表http://hr.ntnu.edu.tw/rules/r6-16.pdf【National Taiwan Normal University. (2017). Teacher salary schedule for public university and college. http://hr.ntnu.edu.tw/rules/r6-16.pdf
  5. 教育部(2018)。公立大專校院教師學術研究加給表。http://hr.ntnu.edu.tw/rules/r6-14.pdf【Ministry of Education. (2018). Academic research incentive schedule for teachers in public universities and colleges. http://hr.ntnu.edu.tw/rules/r6-14.pdf】
» 展開更多
中文APA引文格式劉秀曦、陳玉娟(2022)。留才攬才利器: 美國大學教師薪資制度的特色及其對我國的啟示。教育科學研究期刊,67(2),1-31。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202206_67(2).0001
APA FormatLiu, H.-H., & Chen, Y.-C. (2022). Methods of Facilitating the Recruitment and Retention of University Talent: The Features of University Faculty Compensation System in the United States and Its Implications for Taiwan. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 67(2), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202206_67(2).0001

Journal directory listing - Vol.67(2022) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【67(2)】June (Special Issue: Revolution and Prospect of Personnel System in Higher Education)

(Special Issue) Methods of Facilitating the Recruitment and Retention of University Talent: The Features of University Faculty Compensation System in the United States and Its Implications for Taiwan Author: Hsiu-Hsi Liu(Research Center for Educational System and Policy,National Academy for Educational Research),Yu-Chuan Chen(Department of Education,National Taiwan Normal University)

Vol.&No.:Vol. 67, No. 2
Date:June 2022
Pages:1-31
DOI:https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202206_67(2).0001

Abstract:
Research Motivation and Purpose
As the global competition for talent becomes increasingly fierce, competent authorities are now faced with the urgent need to select effective strategies for maximizing talent recruitment and retention. Although compensation level is not the only factor contributing to talent attraction, and a researcher’s income cannot fully reflect their academic value or social contributions, in today’s increasingly market-oriented higher education environment, salary increases are still regarded by many countries as a key policy instrument in the global competition for talent. Given that a number of well-known universities in the United States are listed in the World University Rankings and that Taiwan’s higher education and human resource management systems are mostly based on the American systems, this study analyzed the university faculty compensation system in the United States to glean possible insights for the Taiwanese system. Our findings can help Taiwanese universities and colleges improve the effectiveness of their strategies for talent recruitment and retention.
 
Literature Review
The purpose of the literature review was to identify current trends and problems through the collation and analysis of relevant data and documents. The review was divided into four parts:
1. We conducted an analysis of global trends in university faculty compensation systems, which revealed that countries often use attractive salaries or performance-based faculty compensation systems as a means of attracting talent.
2. To evaluate the global competitiveness of Taiwan’s university faculty compensation, we compared university faculty compensation in Taiwan with that in 14 other countries/regions. Our findings indicated that the annual salaries of university faculty members in Taiwan were lower than those in the other countries/regions examined. More specifically, the salaries of newly-employed faculty members in Taiwan were only higher than those in Malaysia and China, whereas the salaries of senior faculty members and the average salary in Taiwan were lower than those in China and only higher than those in Malaysia.
3. We analyzed the differences in university faculty compensation in the United States and Taiwan with respect to university affiliation (public or private), university type (educational or research), university location, academic field of faculty members, gender of faculty members, and job performance of faculty members.
4. We analyzed official government documents to assess the problems that have arisen since the introduction of the performance-based university faculty compensation system by Taiwan’s Ministry of Education.
 
Research Methods
Based on the collation and analysis of relevant documents and data in Taiwan and abroad, we summarized the characteristics of the university faculty compensation system in the United States and the problems with the university faculty compensation system in Taiwan, which were then used to draft an outline for subsequent interviews. Interviews are the most direct approach to collecting the opinions and suggestions of experts. The interview responses not only enabled us to verify the accuracy of our document analysis but also addressed the shortcomings of the findings from the literature review and document analysis.
 
Research Results
By integrating the findings from the literature review, document analysis, and interviews, we arrived at the following conclusions:
1. Being a university faculty member is still considered a high-paying career in Taiwan. Therefore, Taiwanese media are somewhat biased in their representation of university faculty members as having low salaries.
2. The greatest advantage of the Taiwanese faculty compensation system is its ability to provide faculty members with a stable livelihood.
3. Salary increases in Taiwan are based on seniority rather than job performance, which can easily lead to a lack of motivation and mediocre performance among faculty members.
4. The Ministry of Education is currently promoting a flexible compensation scheme, which may not receive additional support because of the lack of stable funding sources.
5. The most prominent characteristics of the university faculty compensation system in the United States are salary differentiation and meritocratic principles, both of which can inspire similar policies in Taiwan.
6. A performance-based university faculty compensation system in Taiwan should be implemented by offering additional incentives.
 
Implications
Based on the literature review, document analysis, and interview results, we identified the following implications for the university faculty compensation system in Taiwan:
1. Although the Taiwanese faculty compensation system is domestically competitive, it still has room for improvement with respect to its global competitiveness.
2. The flexible compensation scheme promoted by the Ministry of Education is effective, but more attention must be paid to maintaining the continuity of its funding sources.
3. Increasing salary differentiation is a common trend among the university faculty compensation systems of major countries.
4. A performance-based compensation system should be implemented through the provision additional incentives with a fair mechanism of competition.
5. The current evaluation system for university faculty members should be improved to serve as a basis for performance-based compensation.
6.     A “basic salary + differential + performance-based” compensation model should be established.

Keywords:university faculty compensation, United States, differentiation, need-based compensation, performance-based compensation