Ending Mandatory Retirement for Tenured Faculty The Consequences for Higher Education (1991) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
APPENDIX A: DESCRIPTION OF STUDY METHODS
APPENDIX A: DESCRIPTION OF STUDY METHODS
Pages 113-121
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 113... ...
to understand how faculty and higher education institutions make retirement policies and personal retirement decisions. They included preliminary site visits, presentations from interested organizations, letters from administrators and faculty, case studies, and a review of faculty retirement laws.
|
From page 114... ...
. antlalscr~nmatlon law Law pertaining to tenure, dismissal, and evaluation Costs of retirement incentive programs Programs for retirees Analyses of data and literature Faculty data bases and faculty retirement research Aging and faculty perfonnance evaluation Benefit plans and retirement incentive programs .
|
From page 115... ...
In addition, the committee requested presentations from two other groups with special perspectives on faculty retirement policies and access to faculty retirement data: the American Association of Community and Junior Colleges and the Association of American Medical Schools. The committee found these presentations informative and helpful in identifying issues and · .
|
From page 116... ...
Committee staff drew a sample of 358 colleges and universities stratified by the six broad institutional classifications developed by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (see Appendix C for a more detailed discussion of the classifications)
|
From page 117... ...
Selections were based partly on exploratory site visits and letter survey responses, although not all case study institutions were part of the letter survey sample. Prior to each visit the committee asked the case study institution to provide the age distribution of its faculty, recent faculty retirement ages, data on faculty salaries by age, information on university or college retirement benefit policies, and, if relevant, retirement incentive programs and faculty evaluation policies.
|
From page 118... ...
The attendees were Jay Chronister, Center for the Study of Higher Education, University of Virginia Robert Dauffenbach, Office of Business and Economic Research, Oklahoma State University Alan Fechter, Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, National Research Council Michael Finn, Office of Scientific and Engineering Personnel, National Research Council Robert Jones, Institutional Planning Office, American Association of Medical Colleges Charlotte Kuh, Graduate Record Examination Board Robert McGinnis, Cornell Institute for Social and Economic Research On the basis of the workshop results, the committee undertook an analysis of available data bases on faculty age distributions and retirement ages. The committee also reviewed the research literature focusing on faculty
|
From page 119... ...
In two cases the university used its own model and data on its faculty age distribution, hiring pattems, and retirement behavior to project the effects of different assumptions about the proportion of faculty likely to work past age 70 if permitted to do so. In the third case the university provided faculty data and assumptions about the number of faculty likely to work past age 70, and staff analyzed the data using a model based on Biedenweg and Keenan (1989~.
|
From page 120... ...
The workshop on financial and legal issues gave committee members the opportunity to discuss legal and financial issues with experts in university finance, management, and governance. Workshop participants discussed pension plans, health benefits, retirement incentive programs, continued perquisites for retirees, and the effects of these programs on institutional budgets and faculty retirement decisions.
|
From page 121... ...
As part of its workshop on financial and legal issues, the committee commissioned two background papers: "Characteristics and Costs Related to the Provision of Incentive Early Retirement Plans for Faculty," by Jay Chronister of the University of Virginia, and "Looking Forward to Uncapping: A Pilot Inquiry into Costs of Faculty Retirement Benefits and Inducements," by James Mauch of the University of Pittsburgh. The committee marshalled and assessed information about the characteristics of higher education benefit plans, including pension programs, retirement health benefits, retirement incentive programs, and other retirement benefits, such as retirement planning assistance and perquisites for retirees.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.