The post History of tenure appeared first on Higher Ed Professor.

Today is an exciting day as I’m so happy to announce my latest book will be published in early July. “How to Get Tenure: Strategies for Successfully Navigating the Process” will be published by Routledge. I can’t wait to get this book out there for people to read and I hope it will help demystify the tenure process. Over the next few weeks leading up to the launch, I will share more details about the book. In today’s post, I want to provide some details of the book and my motivations for writing it.

Book Description

Helping assistant professors and pre-tenure faculty balance competing obligations in teaching, research, and service, this comprehensive book explores the challenging path toward tenure. Drawing from research literature on faculty development, pedagogy, and psychology, How to Get Tenure covers topics such as productivity, research agendas, publication, service, and preparing a dossier. Whether read from beginning to end or used as a reference, this book provides clear, concrete, and accessible advice on the most effective and efficient strategies for navigating the inherent ambiguity of the tenure process, tackling the challenges and complexity of the tenure track, and building a strong case for tenure.

Book Review

“How to Get Tenure is a wise, generous, and informed book that will benefit not only pre-tenure faculty, but also all of those who support and evaluate them. I wish I had this book when I was undergoing the tenure process; I would have benefited enormously from both its practical recommendations and its clear presentation of what can seem like a byzantine, mysterious process to tenure candidates.”
―James M. Lang, Professor of English and Director of the D’Amour Center for Teaching Excellence, Assumption College

Table of Contents

Preface

Acknowledgements

eResources

Part I: Learning the Rules of the Road

Chapter 1: What is Tenure?

Chapter 2: The Basics of Productivity

Part II: Planning Your Route

Chapter 3: Scholarship and Academic Publishing

Chapter 4: Teaching

Chapter 5: Service

Part III: Arriving at the Destination

Chapter 6: Going Up for Tenure

Chapter 7: What’s Next

The post Exciting Announcement! appeared first on Higher Ed Professor.

If you’re going to write a book entitled How to Get Tenure, you are going to get a lot of comments about how tenure is ruining higher education. Even among faculty and certainly administrators, there is this sense that tenure is the cause of many of the problems facing higher education. While tenure is no doubt imperfect and I don’t need to rehash the criticisms here as they are well-known, there are numerous important aspects to tenure. In the excerpt below, I address these benefits and how they influence higher education.

The notion of protecting the creation of knowledge and the expression of ideas is at the heart of academic freedom. One of the most cited justifications for tenure is the increased protection it affords faculty. All aspects of faculty work are impacted by academic freedom including teaching, scholarship, service, and governance of the institution. In fact, in my own career, I have often found governance to be an area where academic freedom is most crucial. Whether in deciding the admission of a student from a wealthy family or disagreeing with an administrator over a policy matter, tenure gives me the protection to base my judgments on my own expertise without fearing reprisal.

Indeed, tenure has a major impact on the management, authority, and governance of higher education. While academic freedom gets much of the attention in debates over teaching and scholarship, the daily implications of tenure on the management of higher education are quite profound. In this context, tenure constrains the ability of administrators to make sweeping decisions, particularly those related to the academic mission of the university. Tenure does not give faculty absolute authority or power, but it does provide a balance against administrative decision making, or at least raises the costs of certain decisions (McPherson & Schapiro, 1999). Administrators simply cannot make decisions regarding faculty salaries, workloads, and termination without considering significant financial and political costs. These constraints on administrative authority change the behavior of both administrators and faculty. Administrators may decide the costs of a decision are not worth the price and instead focus on persuading faculty, or modifying a decision, to get faculty on board.

Tenured faculty can use their independence and voice to influence institutional decision making, which strengthens higher education (Link, Swann, & Bozeman, 2008). In addition, not only do faculty members constitute an institution’s primary intellectual capital, they are also one of its few appreciable assets (Gappa & Austin, 2010). As a result, tenure plays a critical role in attracting and retaining talented faculty members by providing a high level of job security. To be sure, tenured faculty can be dismissed and are not guaranteed a job for life. However, the causes of termination are clearly outlined and create a high bar to clear, including failing to perform duties, gross misconduct, and extreme financial problems with the institution. Only employees with very strong unions have the same level of job security as tenured faculty.

As you will no doubt discover if you have not already, tenure serves as a powerful motivator for influencing faculty behavior (Link et al., 2008; Ponjuan, Conley, & Trower, 2011). During the pre-tenure years, faculty feel consistent pressure to engage in activities that will be rewarded and evaluated as part of the tenure process (Baldwin, Dezure, Shaw, & Moretto, 2008). Although elements of the tenure process can perversely incentivize and encourage faculty to engage in work they otherwise may not choose, there can be no doubt the tenure encourages faculty performance and increases productivity (Bess, 1998). Even one of the most common critiques of tenure (that the lifetime contract promotes laziness and limits productivity) implies that the process of seeking tenure actually motivates faculty productivity. Without a doubt, faculty work includes many privileges and flexibility that workers in many other circumstances do not enjoy. Yet, the motivation provided by tenure ensures faculty productivity in ways that canbenefit both the individual and institution.

While the pursuit of tenure certainly influences faculty behavior, the decision to award tenure has a profound financial impact on a college or university. Literally, granting someone tenure commits the institution to a multimillion dollar obligation. For example, after an assistant professor is promoted and tenured, they may reasonably be expected to work for the next 35 years. With a salary of $80,300, benefits at 35%, and a 3.5% annual increase, the financial commitment by an institution is $7.2 million in current dollars (Trower, 2012). During the pre-tenure years, it can be helpful to remember the implication of tenure for the institution. Simply as good stewards of the institution, we would all want our presidents and provosts to give careful consideration to the decision to spend more than $7 million worth of institutional resources. All of the hoops, stress, and requirements of the tenure process at a fundamental level are about ensuring that everyone involved in the decision to grant tenure has evaluated the tenure candidate, and also that they have thoroughly considered the fiduciary responsibility of making a sound investment.

At the same time, tenure provides a merit award for high levels of faculty productivity. This is one of the significant differences between tenure in higher education and tenure as it appears in other settings such as K-12 education. Tenure in higher education requires a level of productivity above satisfactory job performance and longevity. Regardless of whether tenure in a given situation is focused on scholarship or teaching, the tenure review process will ensure that pre-tenure faculty have achieved substantial performance and productivity to justify tenure. Thus, tenure serves as a major reward for sustained and significant merit during service as an assistant professor.

As you move along the path to tenure, remembering the various aspects of this unique career construct can provide helpful context for the process that you are undergoing. When you think about the commitment that the institution is making to you as well as the productivity that you will demonstrate during the pre-tenure years (McPherson & Winston, 1983), the overall process of going up for tenure hopefully makes a little more sense. The various stages of review; the expectations across scholarship, teaching, and service; and the required number of years of service all are justified by the rewards that stem from being granted tenure.

The post Why we have tenure in higher education appeared first on Higher Ed Professor.

There are two primary ways to categorize types of faculty service (Fear & Sandmann, 1995; O’Meara, Terosky, & Neumann, 2008; Ward, 2003). First, there are service activities that take place on campus at the departmental, school, or institutional level. These local activities tend to focus on operations necessary to getting things done on campus. Second, professional service activities include those with professional organizations, scholarly journals, and other activities that support the work of the discipline. In today’s post, I want to share the two types of service that are critical for higher education and playing the important role as academic citizen.

Institutional Service

Institutional service may take the form of anything from committee meetings with an ad hoc faculty group to deal with some issue in your department to regular standing committees for admissions or curriculum. In addition, you will be expected to attend regularly scheduled faculty meetings monthly or less frequently depending on the department.

In addition to committee work and meetings, institutional service also requires service with students, particularly if you teach undergraduates. You will receive many requests for letters of recommendation, or you may be asked to serve as an advisor for a student organization.

Remember: At the end of the day, the primary purpose of institutional service is to keep the trains running on time.

Someone needs to meet with prospective students, organize seminar series, help with assessment, and represent the department on the strategic planning committee.

Professional Service

For professional service, you use your scholarly expertise to support the operations of your discipline in activities ranging from peer review to work with scholarly organizations.

These entities require faculty to support their work, and ask them to serve as presidents, on awards committees, or chair sessions at professional meetings.

Professional service, in particular, can significantly benefit your tenure case. It may support your scholarship or build a network of colleagues and institutions across the country. This can advance your career, helping you meet potential external reviewers or find research collaborators.

A strong professional network also increases the visibility of your scholarly work and contributes to establishing your national reputation, a valuable currency in the tenure process.

Professional service typically occurs in two forums.

Organizationally, the work of your discipline takes place in a scholarly professional association. You may become active within a broader discipline-based organization such as the American Sociological Association, the American Educational Research Association, or the American Chemical Society. Or you may find yourself in one or more specialized fields or disciplines that have their own associations.

In either case, these professional associations will prove a significant vehicle for your professional service. Service in professional associations include opportunities such as serving in officer and board positions, joining association committees, and assisting with annual meetings as part of the program committee or in various smaller roles as part of a conference.

Beyond service in professional associations, you will be called to share your expertise as a reviewer for journals, conference, grants, and publishers.

Peer review is vital to the academic publishing process and to improving the quality of work published (Lee, Sugimoto, Zhang, & Cronin, 2013).

Reviewing can keep you up to date on recent research and trends in the field. Also, as top journals request your services, your reviewing activities can increasingly evidence your expertise.

However, you must keep reviewing activities in check with your other responsibilities, as they can eat up time. And unlike departmental colleagues, editors have no idea about the other activities demanding your time.

As a result, you alone are in the position to know if you can accept a review assignment or if you are overloaded and should decline it.

In addition to reviewing responsibilities, you may serve on the editorial board of a journal in your field. The responsibilities of editorial boards vary tremendously by journal, but with a limited workload serving on one can help you learn about the work in your field and make connections with senior colleagues on the board.

As you can see, professional service can often be tied to networking and publishing (Boice, 2000). Thus, this type of service not only benefits you by showcasing your active citizenship in your discipline, but it can also support your scholarly work.

Of course, there are other activities that may be considered service at your institution that also support your discipline and leverage your professional expertise.

Consulting work, paid or unpaid, enables you to share your expertise with groups outside your institution.

Public education and sharing of expertise is another area of service. A scientist may visit a high school to share her research, for example, or a business professor may give a talk at a lunch about the state of the local economy; these are examples of how faculty share their scholarly expertise and experience with the public.

These activities, although they may be related, do not fall neatly into teaching or research categories, and thus are typically considered service. Like most service these activities, in appropriate moderation, can support the case for consideration as a strong, productive, well-rounded academic citizen.

(This post originally appeared in How to Get Tenure:  Strategies for Successfully Navigating the Process)

The post Types of Academic Service for Faculty appeared first on Higher Ed Professor.

In today’s accountability climate, institutional leaders create and rely on data- driven decisions to promote the success of their institutions. Much of this data collection is delegated to internal stakeholders, such as faculty members, to obtain and systematically report. I along with two graduate students have a new book chapter coming out on the faculty perspectives on the use of data in higher education. In today’s post, I want to share what we see as the five challenges facing higher education in the area of faculty and data strategy.

Shifting Institutional Data Practices

To meet the demands of accountability, accreditation requires evidence of continuous improvement, especially regarding student learning outcomes, through faculty-driven assessment. The production of data on student learning outcomes relies heavily on the efforts of faculty members, who are left feeling that reporting this data increases their workload with little perceivable benefit. Faculty’s lack of clarity on the benefit of these data serves as a root cause of much of the skepticism that attends institutionally solicited data.

Challenge 1: Definition of “Data”

The word “data” can mean many things at different levels of an institution. Thus, one common challenge is the lack of a clear, institution-wide definition of the term. Faculty and their institutions may not share the same view of the importance of various data. What faculty view as important data may differ from the data valued by their institutions. At times, data solicited from faculty by their institution can feel irrelevant and be frustrating to produce. Data managers should consider the clarity and potentially negative perception of data-related terms when creating and communicating a data strategy plan or process with faculty.

Challenge 2: Where Does the Data Go?

When faculty members are asked to report analytics about their courses or students, for instance, they are all too often left out of the loop on the findings and end use of the data. Therefore, producing data can at times feel like tossing work into an abyss, causing faculty to question why they should contribute to such efforts in the first place. To help mitigate this issue, institutional leaders must work purposefully to secure faculty buy-in for the data their institution seeks and ensure that faculty are included in final reporting distributions.

Challenge 3: Perceived Harms of Data

Along the same lines as Challenge 2, a lack of clarity as to the process, purpose, and benefits of data collection may cause faculty to wonder how data can hurt or help them. Faculty reactions to both of these questions can be problematic. If driven by fear, faculty may be hesitant to participate willingly in data collection, drag their feet on fulfilling reporting requirements, or express skepticism and frustration about the value of the data. If driven by perceived benefit, however, faculty may be inclined to produce potentially suspect data that could paint them or their work in a positive light. For example, if an institution wants to see more summative growth in student learning at end-of-course exams, a faculty member may grade less harshly on such an exam for fear that lower grades would reflect poorly on her teaching performance. To counteract such unintended and negative outcomes, institu- tions should clearly convey how the data that faculty are tasked with produ- cing will be used (and not used) as part of the data strategy process.

Challenge 4: Technology

Typically, institutions today employ online systems or software to help streamline and automate data usage. Often these systems integrate with other institutional systems already in regular use; however, at times they stand alone and necessitate a unique process for data collection. As with all technology, there is a learning curve involved in using data collection software effectively. Therefore, in addition to needing to report data metrics, faculty are tasked with learning software programs that they may only use infrequently. To combat this challenge, institutional leaders and data managers must consider the learning curve inherent to their data collection systems and help faculty get up to speed as quickly as possible.

Challenge 5: Overreliance on Quantitative Data

Much of the data solicited by institutional leaders and external stakeholders is traditionally “grounded in quantitative measurements that emphasize percentages and benchmarks because they are easy to collect, interpret and dis- tribute” (Contreras-McGavin & Kezar, 2007, p. 70). Accountability systems often require measurable (i.e., numeric) metrics to prove success. However, not all the work that faculty do to aid student learning can be captured with a number. Nor can all classroom learning be represented—much less analyzed—quantitatively. Qualitative measures, such as firsthand student accounts of coursework or reflections on institutional curricula, may be useful for a more holistic understanding of student learning successes and shortcomings.

In sum, it is important to note that faculty of all ranks and positions face challenges with data. Those described above, rooted in the all too common uncertainty and lack of clarity surrounding the use and purpose of data, can be experienced by faculty in any role. Institutions can alleviate much faculty stress concerning data through carefully crafted communication and education, as well as purposeful efforts to include faculty voices when determining what types of data are valued.

This post is an excerpt from Faculty Perspectives in Data Strategy in Colleges and Universities: From Understanding to Implementation edited by Kristina Powers (Routledge, 2019).

The post 5 Challenges with faculty and data strategy appeared first on Higher Ed Professor.