To keep or not to keep performance funding: Signals from stakeholders

Journal of Higher Education

Volumn 71, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 432-453

  Burke, Joseph C ^a   Modarresi, Shahpar ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034215204     PISSN: 00221546     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2000.11778844     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Afifi, A. A., & Clark, V. (1990). Computer-aided multivariate analysis. New York: Van Nostrand.
2. Albright, B. N. (1998). The transition from business as usual to funding for results: State efforts to integrate performance measures in the higher education budgetary process. Denver: State Higher Education Officers.
3. Banta, T. W., Rudolph, L. B., Van Dyke, J., & Fisher, H. S. (1996). Performance funding comes of age in Tennessee. Journal of Higher Education, 67, 23-45.
4. Bogue, E. G., & Brown, W. (1982). Performance incentives for state colleges. Harvard Business Review, 60, 23-128.
5. Burke, J. C. (1997). Performance funding indicators: Concerns, values, and models for two-and four-year colleges and universities. Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute.
6. Burke, J. C., & Modarresi, S. (1999). Performance funding and budgeting: Popularity and volatility - The third annual survey. Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute.
7. Burke, J. C., & Serban, A. M. (1998, Spring). Performance funding for public higher education: Fad or trend? New Directions in Institutional Research, no. 97. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8. Cruze-Castillo, J. G. S., Ganeshanandam, B. R., Mackay, G. S., Lawes, G. S., & Woolley, D. J. (1994). Application of canonical discriminant analysis in horticultural research. HortScience, 29, 1115-1119.
9. Ewell, P. T. (1994). Tennessee. In S. S. Ruppert (Ed.), Charting educational accountability: A source book on state-level performance indicators. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
10. Ewell, P. T. (1996). The current state-level assessment: Results of a national inventory. In G. H. Gaither (Ed.), Performance indicators in higher education: What works, what doesn't, and what's next? College Station: The Texas A&M University.
11. Johnsrud, L. K., & Heck, R. H. (1994). Identifying who will leave and who will stay. Journal for Higher Education Management, 10, 71-84.
12. Marshall, C., Mitchell, D., & Wirt, F. (1989). Culture and education policy in the American states. New York: The Faber Press.
13. Matthew, C., Lawoko, C. R. O., Korte C. J., & Smith, D. (1994). Application of canonical discriminant analysis, principal component analysis, and canonical correlation analysis as tools for evaluating differences in pasture botanical composition. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research, 37, 509-520.
14. Momen, B., & Zehr, J. P. (1998). Water classification by discriminant analyses of lake water chemistry and terrestrial characteristics. Ecological Applications, 8, 497-507.
15. Morrison, M. (1995.) Quality assurance in US higher education: A case study of Tennessee's performance funding program with learning points for the development of teaching quality assessment in UK higher education. Unpublished manuscript.
16. Rencher, A. C. (1992). Interpretation of canonical discriminant functions, canonical variates, and principal components. American Statistician, 46, 217-225.
17. Richardson, R. C. (1994). Effectiveness in undergraduate education: An analysis of state quality indicators. In S. S. Ruppert (Ed.), Charting higher education accountability: A source book on state-level performance indicators. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
18. Ruppert, S. S. (1998). The politics of remedy: State legislative views on higher education. Washington, DC: National Education Association.
19. SAS/STAT. (1992). SAS Institute Inc. SAS Campus Drive, Cary, NC, 27513.
20. Serban, A. M. (1997). Performance funding for public higher education: Views of critical stakeholders. In J. C. Burke, & A. M. Serban, Performance funding and budgeting for public higher education: Current status and future prospects.. Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute.
21. SPSS. (1988). SPSS-X advanced statistics guide. Second edition. Chicago: SPSS Inc.
22. Stein, R. B. (1996). Performance reporting/funding program: Missouri's efforts to integrate state and campus strategic planning. In G. H. Gaither (Ed.), Performance indicators in higher education: What works, what doesn't, and what's next. College Station: The Texas A&M University.
23. Stein, R. B., & Fajen, A. L. (1995). Missouri's funding for results initiative. In G. H. Gaither (Ed.), Assessing performance in an age of accountability: Case studies. New Directions for Higher Education, no. 91. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24. Trombley, W. (1996, Winter). Performance-based budgeting: South Carolina's new plan mired in detail and confusion. National CrossTalk, 1, 1.
25. Weslowsky, G. (1976). Multiple regression and analysis of variance. Toronto: John Wiley & Sons.
26. Williams, R. D. (1996). Performance funding. OATYC Journal, 22, 9-3.