NOTE: This item is not available outside the Texas A&M University network. Texas A&M affiliated users who are off campus can access the item through NetID and password authentication or by using TAMU VPN. Non-affiliated individuals should request a copy through their local library's interlibrary loan service.
An analysis of agricultural education faculty compensation systems
MetadataShow full item record
The American Federation of Teachers (2001) noted that to ensure all students are successful, teacher salaries must be commensurate with teacher performance. Studies, however, have shown this is not occurring. In order to recruit, retain, and reward the best agricultural education faculty, research on this topic is needed to ensure faculty are compensated fairly and compensation systems are aligned with merit, motivation, performance, retention, environmental and financial needs of educators. The purpose of this descriptive and correlational research was to examine agricultural education faculty perceptions of faculty compensation levels and compensation practices. Systematic sampling procedures were used to identify participants (N=196) for the study. 154 post-secondary agricultural education faculty members participated in the study. Faculty compensation level scores and compensation practice scores were computed and compared to personal characteristics. Over 60% of participants indicated their compensation level was too low. Overall, faculty compensation level scores tended to be negative. Faculty compensation level scores tended to increase when: faculty perceived interdepartmental salary to be fair; faculty perceived salary by rank to be similar at their university; faculty perceived internal equity of salaries at their department across rank; and faculty perceived salary by rank to be similar at other universities. Overall, faculty compensation practice scores tended to be negative. Faculty compensation practice scores tended to be higher when: yearly evaluations were conducted; counteroffers were considered; interdepartmental salary was fair; salary by rank was fair; and merit based pay systems were used. Recommendations for pay for performance are provided. Faculty members with low compensation level scores may also want to consider other employment opportunities, ask for a raise, or garner counteroffers. Recommendations for ensuring internal and external equity of salaries are provided. Administrators should not wait for problems to occur before attempting to align compensation practices with employee needs and performance. Failure to ensure internally and externally fair wages may result in increased frustration, low job satisfaction, and demotivation at best, and job-hopping, counteroffer hunting, resentment, and disruptions in the workplace at worse.
DescriptionDue to the character of the original source materials and the nature of batch digitization, quality control issues may be present in this document. Please report any quality issues you encounter to firstname.lastname@example.org, referencing the URI of the item.
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 112-119).
Issued also on microfiche from Lange Micrographics.
Wicks, Aaron-Marie (2002). An analysis of agricultural education faculty compensation systems. Master's thesis, Texas A&M University. Available electronically from
Request Open Access
This item and its contents are restricted. If this is your thesis or dissertation, you can make it open-access. This will allow all visitors to view the contents of the thesis.