Introduction

In the 1980s, the public voiced great concern about American faculty and their priorities. Parents, trustees, and legislators contended that faculty did not pay enough attention to undergraduate education and had distanced themselves from the central missions of their institutions in the pursuit of esoteric research (Brand 2000; Checkoway 2001). Some higher education commentators claimed that faculty work was disconnected from the larger purposes of American society and made suggestions for how to reconnect the two (Rice 1986), while others simply engaged in “faculty bashing” (Sykes 1988). At the same time, research on faculty satisfaction, retention, and morale showed that many faculty were under stress (Gmelch, Wilke, and Lovrich 1986; Sorcinelli 1992). Rising research expectations plagued the reward system of many institutions striving to improve their Carnegie classification (Aldersley 1995; Dey, Milem, and Berger 1997; Finnegan and Gamson 1996). Female faculty and faculty of color complained that much of the work they valued (e.g., teaching and service) was not rewarded at their institutions despite institutional rhetoric that suggested otherwise (Park 1996; Sax et al. 1996; Tierney and Bensimon 1996).  

KerryAnn O'Meara. 2006. Encouraging Multiple Forms of Scholarship in Faculty Reward Systems: Influence on Faculty Work Life. Planning for Higher Education. 34(2): 43–53.