合衆国における教師報償制度 : 制度構造と形成過程分析(II 研究報告)

スポンサーリンク

概要

• 論文の詳細を見る

• The aim of the article is to analyze the dynamics of the teacher incentive system through examination of the background, structure, and formative process. The teacher incentive system is a system in which ties between teachers' accountability and some benefits result in pursuit of excellence in instruction. This system has been implemented twice (in the 1920's and the 1950's), but neither trial lasted long. There were also big waves of educational reform in 1980's that can be seen as the third trial to introduce merit pay to the teacher salary system. In Utah, a teacher incentive system was organized in 1984. Utah teacher incentive system has two characteristics. One is that it is compound. There are four components-merit pay, career ladder, job enlargement, and extended contract days. Utah school teachers weren't in a serious educational crisis such as teacher shortage or decline in the level of academic attainment of their students. It was the governor and legislators who gave this legislative reform a forward push. They intended to introduce merit pay into the teacher salary system. Though the Utah Teacher Association was against merit pay, they couldn't influence the legislative process. The governor and the legislators did take teachers' opposition against merit pay into consideration and coupled merit pay with extended contract days, which teachers would support. The other is that it is decentralized. The role of the State educational Agency is only to approve each district plan according to the guideline. It doesn't have so much authority. Career Ladder Planning Commissions in each local school districts plan and administer their systems. They are made of representatives of teachers, school administrators, parents, and school boards. About half of the commission members are teachers on average. These two characteristics are significant in the formative process. Many local commissions maximize extended contract days fund and minimize the merit pay fund. In addition, many commissions distribute the merit pay fund to almost all teachers. Thus, the merit pay component becomes less competitive. Decentralization and teacher participation make such a change possible. As a result, merit pay doesn't work out effectively as a teacher incentive. Merit pay is competitive, performance-based pay in itself. The teacher incentive system should be professional-development-oriented. But as a whole, the teacher incentive system in Utah has gotten support from teachers. The function of the system has changed throughout its whole framework, because it is flexible. Many other states change their teacher incentive system into school incentive or non-monetary compensation, too. They pursue less competitive and more profes sional-development-oriented plans. Whatever types they choose, decentralization is important to keep the system flexible.

• 日本教育行政学会の論文
• 1996-09-27

著者

• 中田 康彦

  一橋大学大学院

関連論文

• 1980年代以降の合衆国の教育改革における教師報償政策の位置 : NCLB法への経緯と成果主義の現在
• 教育基本法改正問題と「人間像」 : 教育改革におけるナショナリズム(シンポジウムII 現代教育の「人間像」を問う : 教育改革と公教育の再構築,発表要旨)
• 教育条件整備法制研究の方法論的課題(2)
• 教育条件整備法制研究の方法論的課題 : 教育法学における制度論の構築に向けて (1)
• アメリカ教師奨励制度における教師の専門的自律性
• キャリアラダー制度の研究 : テキサス州の事例を中心に
• (4)米国教員給与制度の理論的背景 : 公務員・民間部門における人事管理論の検討を中心に(アメリカ)(教員給与の政策と制度改革に関する比較研究-日本,アメリカ,イギリス-)
• (1)アメリカ教員給与研究の課題(アメリカ)(教員給与の政策と制度改革に関する比較研究-日本,アメリカ,イギリス-)
• 合衆国における教師報償制度 : 制度構造と形成過程分析(II 研究報告)

スポンサーリンク