The Academic Career as a Developmental Process

Baldwin, Roger G.; Blackburn, Robert T.

doi:10.1080/00221546.1981.11778133

Cited by 90 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Faculty careers can be conceptualized as including early, mid-career, and senior faculty periods (Baldwin & Blackburn, 1981;Boice, 1992;Finkelstein & LaCelle-Peterson, 1993;Menges, 1996;Rice, Sorcinelli, & Austin, 2000;Sorcinelli, 1992;Sorcinelli & Austin, 1992). Some authors incorporate the graduate school period, including the teaching assistant experience, as part of the early career period (Anderson, 1998;Anderson & Swazey, 1998;Golde, 1997Golde, , 1998Golde & Dore, 2000, 2001Nyquist & Sprague, 1992;Sprague & Nyquist, 1991).…”

Section: Graduate Education As Socialization To the Academic Careermentioning

confidence: 98%

Preparing the Next Generation of Faculty: Graduate School as Socialization to the Academic Career

Austin¹

2002

The Journal of Higher Education

898

859

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The long anticipated retirement of significant numbers of senior faculty members is occurring at a time when societal expectations of academic institutions are expanding. Parents, employers, and legislators are interested in the quality of teaching provided by colleges and universities. Learning outcomes are emphasized, including traditional subject matter expertise and skills as well as abilities to use technology effectively, integrate and apply knowledge, and solve openended problems. Legislators and community leaders call for greater attention by faculty members to apply knowledge to solve societal problems. These same constituencies expect university research to aid local and regional economic development. All of these expectations take place for the most part within tight financial constraints. Without doubt, the individuals replacing retiring faculty members must demonstrate a wider array of talents than their predecessors, as well as higher levels of productivity (Fairweather

show abstract

Section: Graduate Education As Socialization To the Academic Careermentioning

confidence: 98%

Preparing the Next Generation of Faculty: Graduate School as Socialization to the Academic Career

Austin¹

2002

The Journal of Higher Education

898

859

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, lower-ranked faculty members are more likely to participate in community service than tenured faculty members (Antonio et al 2000), but full professors participate in internal forms of service (e.g. serving on university and department committees) more than junior faculty (Austin and Gamson 1983;Baldwin and Blackburn 1981;Finkelstein 1984); and this type of service is not considered engagement because it does not involve external audiences.…”

Section: Definitions and Empirical Findingsmentioning

confidence: 98%

An Examination of the Factors that Shape the Engagement of Faculty Members and Academic Staff

Lunsford

Omae

2011

Innov High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we discuss some of the factors that influence how faculty members and academic staff at Michigan State University connect their scholarly activities to external audiences. Logistic regression was used to analyze data collected using an institutional-wide survey. Findings reveal that appointment type, discipline, and demographic attributes influence the type of engaged activities-teaching, research, and service-in which faculty members and academic staff are involved. We discuss the implications for practice and research.

show abstract

“…Landino and Owen 1988;Levitan and Ray 1992;McKeachie 1979) while others have been grounded in a life-cycle development model (e.g. Baldwin and Blackburn 1981;Goodwin and Sauer 1995;Hu and Gill 2000). Differences in faculty priorities have been identified across the career trajectory (Boice 1992;Levin and Stephan 1989;Walker 2002) and studies have investigated personal differences and life circumstances, such as self-efficacy for research and teaching (Bailey 1999) and the often competitive and stressful environment of the research university (Serow 2000;Serow and Demry 1999).…”

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

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

The Academic Career as a Developmental Process

Cited by 90 publications

References 16 publications

Preparing the Next Generation of Faculty: Graduate School as Socialization to the Academic Career

Preparing the Next Generation of Faculty: Graduate School as Socialization to the Academic Career

An Examination of the Factors that Shape the Engagement of Faculty Members and Academic Staff

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About