臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

全球學術人才競逐態勢激烈與日遽增，亞太地區尤為其中之最。然而各地，特別是台灣地區，對教師留任重要性之認知相當有限。本研究因此冀望透過台灣高等教育師資境內與境外移動之意圖研究，建立我國大學教師移動之模型，藉以預測其未來之移動行為。
本研究係以貨幣與非貨幣因素，探討影響教師境內與境外移動之因果關係。研究對象為7所公、私立大學理學院與工學院1716位專任助理教授以上師資，有效問卷計333份，樣本回收率19.41%。
研究結果顯示，我國高等教育師資之境內移動傾向係受非貨幣因素影響，對任職學校工作環境、專業發展機會滿意度愈低，尤其是行政負擔愈繁重、研究水準愈低及學校對其職涯發展正面影響愈有限情況下，教師境內移動傾向愈高。相較境內移動傾向為非貨幣因素影響所致，境外移動傾向則係受貨幣性因素影響。對任職學校薪資合理性不滿意且重視邀約學校高薪資條件者，其境外移動傾向較高。境外移動偏好仍為大學，地區則以美國為首選，其他依次為新加坡、香港與中國大陸。有境外移動意圖之教師普遍認為，上述地區發展機會與薪資待遇均較台灣為優。

Despite the growing competition for academic talent around the world, specifically in the Asia-Pacific region, there is limited understanding of the importance of faculty retention, especially in Taiwan. This paper intends to explore a mobility model for Taiwanese faculty, using the faculty’s intention to leave as a predictor of their future local and international mobility.
It investigates how monetary and non-monetary factors influence the faculty members’ intention to move between institutions within Taiwan and abroad. The data needed for this study are collected from e-questionnaires mailed to the e-mail addresses of 1716 full-time faculty members in the science and engineering schools of 7 universities, and 333 useable questionnaires were returned, reflecting a 19.41% response rate.
The findings of this research work are as follows:
Non-monetary factors are determinants of the faculty members’ intention to change jobs. Those who are dissatisfied with their present job and opportunities for professional development, especially with the workload, administrative responsibility, research level, impact of institutions, are more likely to move to other institutions.
Monetary factors are, however, important determinants of cross-border mobility. Those who are dissatisfied with their salary scale and attach high importance to potential new positions are more inclined to work abroad. The first choice of institutions for faculty members in Taiwan comprises higher educational institutions in the United States, followed by higher educational institutions in Singapore, Hong Kong, and mainland China. In their opinion, career perspectives in the abovementioned countries are much more promising than in Taiwan.

第壹章 緒論1
第一節 研究背景與動機1
第二節 研究目的與問題3
第貳章 文獻探討與假說提出4
第一節 貨幣因素與高等教育師資移動5
第二節 非貨幣所得與高等教育師資移動10
第參章 研究內容與方法17
第一節 研究架構17
第二節 研究對象與程序18
第三節 研究變項衡量19
第四節 資料分析方法22
第肆章 實證分析23
第一節 樣本資料分析23
第二節 信度分析26
第三節 變項現況分析27
第四節 迴歸分析34
第伍章 結論與建議46
第一節 研究結論46
第二節 理論貢獻與管理意涵49
第三節 研究限制54
第四節 後續研究建議55
參考文獻 56
附錄 高等教育師資轉職傾向之探討網路問卷62

一、中文部分
聯合晚報（2006，7月1日）。不只是走了幾位教授而已。
賀桂芬（2006）。十年後孩子誰來教。商業週刊，971，80-103。
許癸鎣（2006）。念大學不值得驕傲。天下雜誌，360, 48-55.
日本東北大學頒「超群教授」特別獎金（2008）。教育部電子報，297。
陳碧芬（2008，7月6日）。中研院士疾呼：提高誘因吸引高級人才。中時電子報。
教育部（2008a）。各級學校概況。
教育部（2008b）。各級學校平均每位教師指導學生數—按專任教師計算。
教育部（2009a）。近十年大專校院學校數及學生數。
教育部（2009b）。大學校院教師年齡分配結構。
二、英文部分
Allison, P. D., & Long, J. S. (1987). Interuniversity mobility of academic scientists. American Sociological Review, 52(October), 643-652.
Amey, M. J. (1996). The institutional marketplace and faculty attrition. The NEA Education Journal, 23, 23-35.
Baldwin, R. G., & Blackburn, R. T. (1981). The academic career as a development process: Implications for a higher education. The Journal of Higher Education, 52(6), 598-614.
Benjamin, R. (1998). Looming deficits: Causes, consequences, and cures. Change, 30(2), 12-17.
Berberet, J. (2006). Seeking mutual benefit: Late–career faculty vitality and institutional mission enhancement. In G. M. Bataille & B. E. Brown (Eds.), Faculty career paths: Multiple routes to academic success and satisfaction (pp.114-115). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Bluedorn, A. C. (1982). The theories of turnover: Causes, effects, and meanings. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 1, 75-128.
Bowen, H. R., & Schuster J. H. (1986). American professors: A national resource imperiled. New York: Oxford University Press.
Breneman, D. W., & Youn, I. K. (1988). Academic labor markets and careers. Stanford Series on Education and Public Policy (eds.), Philadelphia, PA: The Falmer Press.
Burke, D. A. (1987). The academic marketplace in the 1980s: Appointment and termination of assistant professors. Review of Higher Education, 10(3), 199-214.
Caplow, T., & McGee, R. J. (1958). The academic marketplace. New York: Basic Books.
Carnevale, A. (1983). Human capital: A high yield corporate asset. Washington: American society for Training Directors.
Chan, K. C., Chen, C. R. & Steiner, T. L. (2002). Production in the finance literature, institutional reputation, and labor mobility in academia: A global perspective, Financial Management, 2002 (Winter), 131-156.
Ehrenberg, R., Kasper, H., & Rees, D. (1990). Faculty turnover at American colleges and universities: analyses of AAUP data (NBER working paper No. 3239). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economics Research.
Farber, A. C. (1975). A labor shortage model applied to the migration of college professors. The Journal of Human Resources, 10(4), 82-499.
Finkelstein, M. J. (1984). The American academic profession. A synthesis of social scientific inquiry since World War II. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.
Flowers, V. S., & Hughes, C. L. (1973). Why employees stay. Harvard Business review, July-August (4). 49-60.
Hagedorn, L. S. (1996) Wage equity and female faculty job satisfaction: The role of wage differentials in job satisfaction causal model. Research in Higher Education, 37(5), 569-598.
Harvard Graduate School of Education (2007, August 1). Tenure-track faculty job satisfaction survey highlights report. Cambridge, MA.: The Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education [COACH], Retrieved January 29, 2009, from Professional Development Collection database.
Hopkins, G. A. (2005). Faculty motivation: A view from the ivory tower. Academic Leader, 21(4), 4-5. Retrieved January 29, 2009, from Professional Development Collection database.
IMD, The IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook, 2008. Lausanne: Author.
Johnsrud, L. K., & Heck, R. H. (1998). Faculty worklife: Establishing benchmarks across Groups. Research in Higher Education, 39(5), 539-555.
Johnsrud, L. K. (2002). Measuring the quality of faculty and administrative worklife: Implications for college and university campuses. Research in Higher Education, 43(3), 379-395.
Johnsrud, L. K., & Rosser, V. J. (2002). Faculty members'' morale and their intention to leave: A multilevel explanation. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(4), 518-542.
Ladd, E. C. Jr., & Lipset, S. M. (1976). Survey of the social, political, and educational perspectives of American college and university faculty. National Institute of Education, Final Report, Vol. 1, University of Connecticut.
Lee, T. W., & Mowday, R. T. (1987).Voluntarily leaving an organization: An empirical investigation of Steers and Mowday''s Model of Turnover. The Academy of Management Journal, 30(4), 721-743.
Lincoln, J., & Kalleberg, A. (1990). Culture, control, and commitment: A study of work organization and work attitudes in the United States and Japan. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lindholm, J. (2003). Perceived organizational fit: Nurturing the minds, hearts, and personal ambitions of university faculty. Review of Higher Education, 27(1), 125-149.
Low pay in Poland leads to academic brain drain. (2008, April 26). Deutsche Welle.
O''Meara, K. A., Kaufman, R. R., & Kuntz, A. M. (2003).Faculty work in challenging times: Trends, consequences & implications. Liberal Education, 89(4), 16-23.
Matier, M. W. (1990). Retaining faculty: A tale of two campuses. Research in Higher Education, 31(1), 39-60.
Manger, T., & Eikeland, O.-J. (1990). Factors predicting staff''s intentions to leave the university. Higher Education, 19(3), 281-291.
McGee, G. W., & Ford R. C. (1987). Faculty research productivity and intention to change positions. The Review of Higher Education, 11(1), 1-16.
Mobley, W. H. (1982). Employee turnover: Causes, consequences, and control. MA: Addison–Wesley.
Moore, K. M., & Gardner, P. D. (1992). Faculty in a time of changes: Job satisfaction and career mobility. East Lansing: Michigan State University.
Nagowski, M. (2004). Associate professor turnover at America’s public and private institutions of higher education. ILR Collection, Student works, Cornell University.
Ong, L., & Mitchell, J. D. (2000). Professors and hamburgers: an international comparison of real academic salaries Applied Economies, 32(7), 869-876.
Pacheco, I., & Rumbley, L. E. (2008). Exploring academic salaries in a comparative context. International Higher Education, 52, 6-7.
Perna, L. W. (2001). Sex and race differences in faculty tenure and promotion. Research in Higher Education, 42(5), 541–567.
Plater, W. M. (1995). Future work: Faculty time in the 21st century. Change, 27(3), 23-33.
Polachek, S. W., & Horvath, F. (1977). A life cycle approach to migration: Analysis of the perspicacious peregrinator. In Ehrenberg, R.G. (Ed.), Research in labor economics (pp.103-149). Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press.
Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1973). Organizational, work, and personal factors in employee turnover and absenteeism. Psychological Bulletin, 80(2), 151-176.
Price, J. (1997). Handbook of organizational measurement. International Journal of Manpower, 18(4/5/6), 303-558.
Rice, R. E. & Austin, A. E. (1988). High faculty morale: What exemplary colleges do right, Change, 20(2), 51-58.
Rosenfeld, R.A., & Jones, J.A. (1988). Exit and re-entry in higher education. In D. Breneman and T. Youn (Eds.), Academic labor markets and careers (pp.74-97). NY: The Falmer Press, 1988.
Rosser, V. J. (2004). Faculty members’ intention to leave: A national study on their worklife and satisfaction. Research in Higher Education, 45(3), 285-309.
Schuster, J. H., & Wheeler, D. W. (1990). Enhancing faculty careers: Strategies for development and renewal. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Schuster, J. H., & Finkelstein, M. J. (2006). The American faculty: The restructuring of academic work and careers. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Scott, J. A., & Bereman, N. A. (1992). Competition versus collegiality: Academe’s dilemma for the 1990s. The Journal of Higher Education, 63(6), 684-698.
Smart, J. C. (1990). A causal model of faculty turnover intentions. Research in Higher Education, 31(5), 405-424.
Sorcinelli, M. D. (1994). Effective approaches to new faculty development. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72(5), 474-479.
Sjaastad, L. A. (1962). The Costs and Returns of Human Migration. The Journal of Political Economy, 70(5), Part 2: Investment in Human Beings), 80-93.
Stevens, P. A. (2004). Academic salaries in the UK and US. National Institute Economic Review, 190(1), 104-123.
Sutton, T. P., & Bergson, P. (2001).Faculty compensation systems: impact on the quality of higher education, Eric Digest, Eric Clearing House on Higher Education, Washington D.C.
Texas Higher Education Coordination Board (2001). Faculty turnover and retention: a summary of faculty exit survey at Texas public universities, health–related institutions, and technical colleges.
Trotman, C., & Brown, B. E. (2005). Faculty recruitment and retention: Concerns of early and mid-career faculty. Research Dialog, 86, TIAA-CREF Institute, University of North Carolina.
Universities and Colleges Employers Association (2005). Recruitment and retention in higher education. London: author.
Universities UK (2007). Talent wars–the international market for academic staff.
Wallin, D. L. (2003). Motivation and faculty development: A three-state study of presidential perceptions of faculty professional development needs. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 27(4), 317-335.
Walker, H. E. (1992). Faculty incentives for research. SRA Journal, 24(1), 9-23.
Weiler, W. C. (1985). Why do faculty members leave a university? Research in Higher Education, 23(3), 270-278.
Wergin, J. F. (2001). Beyond carrots and sticks: What really motivates faculty. Liberal Education, 87(1), 50-53. Retrieved January 29, 2009, from Professional Development Collection database.
Zhou, Y. & Volkwein, J. F. (2004). Examining the influences on faculty departure intentions: A comparison of tenured versus nontenured faculty at research universities using NSOPF-99. Research in Higher Education, 45(2), 139-176.
Xu, Y. J. (2008). Faculty turnover: Discipline-specific attention is warranted. Research in Higher Education, 40(1), 40-61.