No abstract

No abstract

This article examines several hypotheses about the structure and level of compensation for 103 property-liability chief executive officers (CEOs) from 1995 through 1997. The greater the level of firm risk and the larger the firm, the greater the use of incentive compensation. Insurers subject to more regulatory attention and those whose CEOs have greater stock ownership make less use of incentive compensation. There is some evidence that option grants and restricted stock awards provide CEOs with differing incentives. This article finds that corporate governance structures, managers' stock ownership, and regulatory attention are not adequate to prevent CEOs from receiving compensation levels in excess of what economic factors predict. Contrary to findings in prior studies, there is little evidence that use of incentive compensation or level of total compensation paid increases with insurer investment opportunities, as traditionally measured. Copyright The Journal of Risk and Insurance.

We articulate a theoretical perspective on student learning in interdisciplinary science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) contexts. Theoretical perspectives on thinking are extremely important in advancing research on learning due to the complexities inherent in the object of study. As Simon (2018) states, "studying students' thinking at a point in time is difficult. Understanding how it changes from one point in time to another is even more difficult" (p. 114). Our theoretical perspective foregrounds claim making and reasoning as practices that transcend the somewhat divergent epistemologies and practices of the individual STEM disciplines, yet provide a specific and operational focus for studies of student thinking in STEM-focused learning environments.1.1 | Student thinking as a basis for STEM education | STEM educationMost attempts at STEM education take one of three perspectives with respect to interactions amongst the disciplines (Kelley & Knowles, 2016). First, disciplinarylearning goals can be identified across the STEM areas, but with little or no effort to connect them across learning experiences. This isolated approach to STEM (or S-T-E-M) education is the farthest removed from our perspective. Second, STEM-learning experiences can be designed with attention to interdisciplinary connections, but one of the STEM areas receives dominant attention or serves as the area to which the other disciplines must be connected (

No abstract