Post-Tenure Faculty Evaluation in Community Colleges: Anomaly or Reality? Innovation Abstracts, Volume VI, Number 29

A study was conducted to investigate the current status of post-tenure faculty evaluation in the community college. Questionnaires were mailed to 1,290 tenured and non-tenured faculty and 421 administrators at 9 community colleges. Study findings, based on a 50.1% response rate, included the followi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInnovation Abstracts Vol. 6; no. 29
Main Author Licata, Christine M
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published National Institute for Staff and Organizational Development, EDB 348, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 26.10.1984
Subjects
College Faculty
Community Colleges
Evaluation Criteria
Faculty Evaluation
Personnel Policy
Surveys
Tenured Faculty
Two Year Colleges
Online AccessGet more information

Cover

More Information
Summary:A study was conducted to investigate the current status of post-tenure faculty evaluation in the community college. Questionnaires were mailed to 1,290 tenured and non-tenured faculty and 421 administrators at 9 community colleges. Study findings, based on a 50.1% response rate, included the following: (1) 77% of the respondents indicated that formal post-tenure evaluation existed at their institution; (2) 56.8% of the administrators and 45.9% of the faculty worked at institutions where the primary stated purpose of post-tenure evaluation was faculty development and improvement; (3) 59.1% of the administrators and 49.6% of the faculty reported that the primary stated purpose, as well as their own preferred purpose for pre-tenure evaluation, was to provide information for personnel decisions; (4) classroom effectiveness and contributions to department/division were the criteria receiving the most emphasis in the post-tenure evaluation process; (5) respondents tended to disagree that criteria used to evaluate tenured faculty and non-tenured faculty should differ; (6) both faculty and administrators strongly agreed that there should be multiple sources of input in evaluations; and (7) 50.2% of the respondents indicated that post-tenure evaluation results were shared with faculty members, who were then personally responsible for correcting weaknesses. Major study recommendations and conclusions are included. (LAL)