Advertisement

Research in Higher Education

, Volume 46, Issue 5, pp 479–510 | Cite as

Encouraging multiple forms of scholarship in faculty reward systems: Does It Make a Difference?

  • Kerry Ann O’Meara
Article

Abstract

This article presents findings from a national study of Chief Academic Officers of 4-year institutions on the impact of policy efforts to encourage multiple forms of scholarship in faculty roles and rewards. The extent of reform, kinds of reform and influence of initiating reform is examined in four areas: expectations for faculty evaluation, the faculty evaluation process, promotion and tenure outcomes, and institutional effectiveness. The findings are also examined by institutional type. Findings from this study show that campuses that initiated policy reforms to encourage multiple forms of scholarship were significantly more likely than their counterparts to report that teaching scholarship and engagement counted more for faculty evaluation, to report a broader set of criteria used to assess scholarship, and report a higher percentage of tenure and promotion cases that emphasized their work in these areas. In addition, CAOs at campuses that initiated reforms reported a greater congruence between faculty priorities and institutional mission, and greater improvement in attention to undergraduate learning over the last decade.

Keywords

broader definition of scholarship reform in faculty evaluation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aldersley, S. F. 1995Upward drift is alive and well: Research/doctoral model still attractive to institutionsChange275056Google Scholar
  2. Austenson, R. A. (1997). Faculty relations and professional development: Best practices for the chief academic officer. In: Martin, J., Samels, J., and Associates (eds.), First Among Equals: The Role of the Chief Academic Officer. The Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  3. Baldwin, R. G. 1990Faculty career stages and implications for professional developmentSchuster, J. H.Wheeler, D. W. eds. Enhancing Faculty Careers: Strategies for Development and RenewalJossey-BassSan Francisco, CA2040Google Scholar
  4. Berberet, J. 1999The professorate and institutional citizenship: Toward a scholarship of serviceLiberal Education853339Google Scholar
  5. Boice, R. (1992). The New Faculty Member. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  6. Boyer, E. 1990Scholarship ReconsideredCarnegie Foundation for the Advancement of TeachingPrincetonGoogle Scholar
  7. Braskamp, L. 2003Fostering Student Development Through Faculty Development: A National Survey of Chief Academic Officers at Church-related CollegesLoyola UniversityChicago, ILGoogle Scholar
  8. Braxton, J. M. and Hargens, L. L. (1996). Variation among academic disciplines: Analytical frameworks and research. In Smart, J. C. (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research, Agathon Press, New York, Vol. II, pp. 1–46Google Scholar
  9. Braxton, J., Luckey, W., Holland, P. 2002Institutionalizing a Broader View of Scholarship Through Boyer’s Four DomainsJossey-BassNew JerseyGoogle Scholar
  10. Chait, R. 2002Why tenure? Why now?Chait, R. eds. The Questions of TenureHarvard University PressCambridge, MA631Google Scholar
  11. Clark, B. R. 1987The Academic life: Small Worlds, Different WorldsThe Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of TeachingNew YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Creamer, E. (1998). Assessing faculty publication productivity: Issues of equity. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 26 (2). Washington, DC: George Washington UniversityGoogle Scholar
  13. Dey, E. L., Milem, J. F., Berger, J. B. 1997Changing patterns of publication productivity: Accumulative advantage or institutional isomorphism?Sociology of Education70308323Google Scholar
  14. Diamond, R. M. (1993). Instituting change in faculty reward systems. In: Diamond R. M., and Adam B. E. (eds.), Recognizing Faculty Work: Reward Systems for the Year 2000. New Directions for Higher Education, No 81. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 13–22Google Scholar
  15. Diamond, R. M. 1999Aligning Faculty Rewards with Institutional Mission: Statements, Policies, and GuidelinesAnkerBolton, MAGoogle Scholar
  16. Diamond, R., Adam, B. 1997Changing Priorities at Research Universities: 1991–1996Center for Instructional Development, Syracuse UniversitySyracuse, NYGoogle Scholar
  17. Driscoll, A., Lynton, E. 1999Making Outreach Visible: A Guide to Documenting Professional Service and OutreachAmerican Association for Higher EducationWashington, DCGoogle Scholar
  18. Finnegan, D. E., Gamson, Z. F. 1996Disciplinary adaptations to research culture in comprehensive institutionsReview of Higher Education19141177Google Scholar
  19. Fowler, F. 1993Survey Research Methods (2nd ed.)SageCaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  20. Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T., Maeroff, G. I. 1997Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the ProfessorateJossey-BassSan FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  21. Huber, M. 1998Community College Faculty: Attitudes and Trends, 1997National center for postsecondary improvementStanford, CAGoogle Scholar
  22. Huber, M. 2002Faculty evaluation and the development of academic careersCarol, Colbeck eds. Evaluating Faculty PerformanceJossey-BassSan FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  23. Hutchings, P., Shulman, L. 1999The scholarship of teaching: New elaborations, new developmentsChange311115Google Scholar
  24. Kezar, A. 2000Higher education research at the millennium: Still trees without fruit?The Review of Higher Education23443468Google Scholar
  25. Lynton, E. 1995Making the Case for Professional ServiceAmerican Association for Higher EducationWashington, DCGoogle Scholar
  26. Martin J., Samels J., and Associates. (eds.) (1997). First Among Equals: The Role of the Chief Academic Officer. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  27. Morphew, C. C. 2002A rose by any other name: Which colleges became universitiesReview of Higher Education25207224Google Scholar
  28. O’Meara, K. (1997). Rewarding Faculty Professional Service, Working paper #19. Boston: New England Resource for Higher EducationGoogle Scholar
  29. O’Meara, K. A. 2001Scholarship unbound: Assessing service as scholarship for Promotion and tenureAltbach, P. eds. Studies in Higher Education Dissertation SeriesRoutledge FalmerNYGoogle Scholar
  30. O’Meara, K. (2005a). Encouraging Multiple Forms of Scholarship in Faculty Work-Life. Amherst, MA: Unpublished manuscriptGoogle Scholar
  31. O’Meara, K. (2005b). Effects of encouraging multiple forms of scholarship nationwide and across institutional types. In O’Meara, K. and Rice, R. E. (eds.), Faculty Priorities Reconsidered: Rewarding Multiple Forms of Scholarship. Jossey-Bass, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  32. Park, S. 1996Research, teaching, and service: Why shouldn’t women’s work count?The Journal of Higher Education674684Google Scholar
  33. Prince, G. S.,Jr. 2000A liberal arts college perspectiveEhrlich, T. eds. Civic Responsibility and Higher EducationOryx PressPhoenix, AZ249262Google Scholar
  34. Rice, R. E. 1996Making a Place for the New American ScholarAmerican Association for Higher EducationWashington, DCGoogle Scholar
  35. Rice, R. E., Sorcinelli, M. 2002Can the tenure process be improved?Chait, R. eds. The Questions of TenureHarvard University PressCambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  36. Rice, E., Sorcinelli, M., and Austin, A. E. (2000). Heeding new voices Academic careers for a new generation. New Pathways Working Paper Series inquiry #7, Washington DC, American Association for Higher EducationGoogle Scholar
  37. Ruscio, K. P. 1987The distinctive scholarship of the selective liberal arts collegeJournal of Higher Education58205222Google Scholar
  38. Tierney, W. G., Bensimon, E. M. 1996Promotion and Tenure: Community and Socialization in AcademeState University of New York PressAlbanyGoogle Scholar
  39. Tierney, W. G., and Rhoads, R. A. (1993). Enhancing promotion, tenure and beyond: Faculty socialization as a cultural process. ASHE ERIC Higher Education Report No. 6Google Scholar
  40. Ward K., and Wolf-Wendel L. (2004). Academic life and motherhood: Variations by institutional type. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Portland, OregonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Assistant Professor of Higher EducationUniversity of MassachusettsAmherstUSA
  2. 2.Assistant Professor of Higher EducationUniversity of Massachusetts AmherstAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations