Master's Theses

Document Type

Thesis - campus only access

Date of Award

Fall 1984

Degree Name

Education Specialist (Ed.S)

Department

Advanced Education Programs

Advisor

Bob L. Chalender

Abstract

Merit pay for teachers has become a very controversial issue during the past few years. A study of this issue was conducted to determine the attitude toward merit pay for teachers of Kansas public school administrators. A 27 item questionnaire was used for this study. The items were grouped into the following components: advantages, disadvantages, developmental aspects, monetary aspects, and criteria and evaluation aspects. Copies of this instrument were mailed to 120 randomly selected Kansas public school administrators. A total of 101 (84%) usable questionnaires were returned. Five independent variables were investigated in this study. They were: position, age, years of administrative experience, highest degree earned, and size of school district. The results of the survey indicated that Kansas public school administrators have a positive attitude toward merit pay for teachers. The independent variables that were investigated did not seem to affect the way the administrators viewed the topic of merit pay for teachers. The researcher tested 8 hypotheses. Hypothesis 6 and hypothesis 8 were rejected. Statistical tests were employed in 43 comparisons, and a t-test in one comparison with 6 comparisons or 14% being significant at the .05 level. The following comparisons were significant in hypothesis 6 at the .05 level: those who did and those who did not favor merit pay for the total instrument, advantages, disadvantages, and evaluation; and in hypothesis 8: the calculated mean for the total sample , the total questionnaire, and the theoretical mean. Comparisons which were significant at the .06 and .07 levels were identified. These were as follows: age of administrators for the evaluation component (see Table 1), administrative positions [or the disadvantages component (see Table 2), and administrative experience for the disadvantages component (see Table 3).

Comments

For questions contact ScholarsRepository@fhsu.edu

Rights

© 1984 Douglas Huxman

Download

Off Campus FHSU Users Click Here

Share

COinS