Tenure Standards in Political Science Departments: Results from a Survey of Department Chairs

Abstract

This article presents the results from a survey of political science department chairs regarding the tenure procedures and standards at their colleges or universities. The findings reveal that only a small fraction of the colleges and universities in the United States refuse to offer tenure or are attempting to limit tenure. We also find general agreement regarding the standards for evaluating teaching and service and that research expectations vary according to the highest degree offered by a department.

So You Want Tenure? Factors Affecting Tenure Decisions in Political Science Departments

“…The data used to measure the variables in this analysis come from Rothgeb and Burger's (2009) (yes ϭ 1, no ϭ 0) and whether the department had a positive recommendation for tenure reversed by higher college or university authorities in the previous five years (yes ϭ 1, no ϭ 0).…”

Editors' Perceptions of Ethical and Managerial Problems in Political Science Journals

“…During the last few years expectations for scholars having published work to obtain a faculty appointment have risen. Many institutions below the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching classification for researchdesignated universities also expect a body of published work for faculty to earn tenure; this is well documented for political science departments by Rothgeb and Burger (2009). The relatively long review process at many of our journals, discussed in more detail, adds further pressure on scholars seeking new positions or tenure to earn any publications.…”

When Tenure Protects the Incompetent: Results from a Survey of Department Chairs

“…Systematic research by Katz (1973), Kawar (1983), and Park and Riggs (1993) indicates that these were the criteria used for assessing faculty performance at every institution investigated, and an examination of American Association of University Professors (AAUP) documents reveals that these have been the accepted standards for evaluating faculty for nearly a century (AAUP 1915;2009). 2 As many readers know, the possible connection between tenure and incompetence is among the most contentious issues in higher education. Controversies associated with this subject have prompted many institutions to tighten the procedures and standards they use in making tenure decisions, to implement posttenure reviews, and to consider time limits on grants of tenure (see Goodman 1994;Kelley 2000;Turner 1997;Whicker 1997;Wood and Des Jarlais 2006).…”

“…The research to date has done little to clarify the matter, for it has dealt with such matters as how posttenure reviews are structured (Goodman 1994;Wood and Des Jarlais 2006); the use of external review letters in tenure cases (Schlozman 1998); whether the materials used in tenure reviews can predict successful academic careers (Lewis 1980); how well peer reviews, student evaluations, and portfolios measure teaching (Boyer 1990;Algozzine et al 2004;Kelly-Woessner and Woessner 2006;Kohut, Burnap, and Yon 2007;Langbein 1994;Yon, Burnap, and Kohut 2002); the standards differing types of departments use in tenure decisions (Rothgeb and Burger 2009); and what variables are associated with the denial of tenure and with promotions in political science departments (Hesli, Lee, and Mitchell 2012;Marshall and Rothgeb 2011). This absence of research regarding when tenure protects the incompetent leaves a serious gap in our understanding of an important professional issue.…”