Believing Is Seeing: The Influence of Beliefs and Expectations on Posttenure Review in One State System

O’Meara, Kerry Ann

doi:10.1353/rhe.2003.0041

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 417 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Goodwin and Sauer 1995;Plucker 1988), a few have looked at the influences of salary structure (Hearn 1999) or personal beliefs and expectations (O'Meara 2003). Fewer still have attempted to integrate individual and organisational factors (e.g.…”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet besides institutional rules, there are rules and conventions within disciplines that determine which research, teaching and service efforts are more valued and recognised than others (Becher 1987;Braxton and Hargens 1996;Lodahl and Gordon 1972). A tension, then, may exist between those that are valued at institutional and departmental levels (Alpert 1985;Colbeck 1998) as well as between those that are individually and organisationally valued (Blackburn and Lawrence 1995;Bono and Judge 2003;O'Meara 2003). Thus, to fully understand their influences, standards of values and rewards must be examined not just at the institutional level but at departmental and disciplinary levels as well.…”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating faculty work: expectations and standards of faculty performance in research universities

Hardré

Cox

2009

Research Papers in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Expectations and the way they are communicated can influence employees' motivation and performance. Previous research has demonstrated individual effects of workplace climate and individual differences on faculty productivity. The present study focused on the characteristics of institutional performance standards, evaluation processes and performance-responsive measures of academic departments in research universities, as articulated in institutional and departmental annual evaluation and promotion-tenure specifications. The faculty performance evaluation standards and review processes of 62 academic departments in 23 research universities in 13 US states were examined for clarity, consistency and performance-relevant elements. These characteristics were analysed through the lens of theories demonstrated as influential by previous workplace research. The similarities and differences of faculty performance standards, and the explicit and implicit messages they communicate, are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating faculty work: expectations and standards of faculty performance in research universities

Hardré

Cox

2009

Research Papers in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first theme relates to outcomes. In two studies administrators and faculty deemed post-tenure review successful after initial implementation if (1) it was not overly intrusive, (2) it encouraged retirement for unproductive faculty qualifying for it, and (3) it was conducted in such a way as to promote faculty development and growth-the latter involved providing resources for it (O'Meara, 2003(O'Meara, , 2004a.…”

Section: Post-tenure Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This research is consistent with Licata and Morreale's finding (1997) that faculty resistance to post-tenure review is often related to a belief that the review can threaten established faculty values and institutional mores. O'Meara (2003O'Meara ( , 2004a explored beliefs held by faculty and administrators about post-tenure review and the factors that influenced beliefs in one public state system. Values of autonomy and collegiality, career stage, institutional history, and other contextual issues were found to influence beliefs about the purposes, processes, and outcomes of post-tenure review.…”

Section: Post-tenure Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sense making as a theory has been used to explore a variety of topics bearing on faculty work life: graduate student socialization in entrepreneurial departments (Mendoza, 2007), faculty experiences of post-tenure review (O'Meara, 2003(O'Meara, , 2004a, academic unit reorganization (Mills, Bettis, Miller, and Nolan, 2005), faculty responses to presidential succession (Bensimon, 1991), faculty understandings of and reactions to financial stress (Neumann, 1995), among others. Mills, Bettis, Miller, and Nolan (2005) used sense making and social identity theory to understand faculty members' experiences of academic unit reorganization, finding that the meaning that faculty made of campus change was influenced by the language used to describe the change (through changes in policies and changes in academic departments) and the connection faculty felt personally to a new or old department.…”

Section: Epistemicmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

2008

ASHE Higher Education Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Setting the StageM UCH HAS BEEN SAID over the last two decades about American college and university faculty. For the 1990s in particular, a maelstrom of critique from trustees, legislators, the popular press, faculty unions, and policymakers addressed needs for "reform" in how faculty are recruited, socialized, and rewarded throughout their careers. What has followed has been much quieter, however. Efforts have been made to redefine scholarship in reward systems, to implement post-tenure review systems, and to make the system fairer for women and minority faculty. How faculty go about their work has changed fundamentally with increasing use of technology, and faculty have become more involved in what Boyer (1990), Rice (1996), and have called the scholarships of teaching and community engagement (see also Hutchings and Shulman, 1999). Additionally, the composition of the American faculty has begun to change as more women and faculty of color have joined the professoriate, though many still find glass ceilings hindering career advancement-at times ceilings that appear made of Plexiglas (Terosky, Phifer, and Neumann, 2008). Admittedly, American higher education leaders and policymakers have not done away with the tenure system; that said, dramatic increases in part-time and non-tenure-track appointments has rendered the tenure system as less relevant to increasing numbers of academics (Schuster and Finkelstein, 2006).What is the history of the rhetoric, policy reform, and research on faculty over the last two decades, and what is missing in the dialogue? The purpose of this volume is to review and synthesize the literature on the American higher education faculty over the last fifteen to twenty years. As career-long students Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) •

show abstract

17: How Post-Tenure Review Can Support the Teaching Development of Senior Faculty

Sorcinelli

Shih

Ouellett

et al. 2007

To Improve the Academy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A keyquestion thatcampuses face astheydevelop andimplement post-tenure reviewpolicies is how to blendthe concepts of accountability and renewal. This chapter examines a[acuity development initiative linked toa post-tenure review policy at a research-intensive university. It describes thegoals, processes, andoutcomes of a five-year studyof theprogram, extending research onpost-tenure review and itspotential forpositive faculty development.

show abstract

Believing Is Seeing: The Influence of Beliefs and Expectations on Posttenure Review in One State System

Cited by 11 publications

References 417 publications

Evaluating faculty work: expectations and standards of faculty performance in research universities

Evaluating faculty work: expectations and standards of faculty performance in research universities

Table of Contents

17: How Post-Tenure Review Can Support the Teaching Development of Senior Faculty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About