Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-xq9c7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T06:03:18.419Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Political Science and Post-Tenure Review

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Michael A. Kelley
Michael A. Kelley*
Affiliation:
University of Central Arkansas
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
News
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , June 2000 , pp. 233 - 236
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 2000

References

Aitkens, Maggi. 1996. “The Trials and Tribulations of Tenure.” Minnesota (July/August): 38–45.Google Scholar
American Association of State Colleges and Universities. 1999. Facing Change: Building the Faculty of the Future. Washington DC: American Association of State Colleges and Universities.Google Scholar
American Association of University Professors. 1995. Policy Documents and Reports. Washington, DC: American Association of University Professors.Google Scholar
American Association of University Professors. 1997. Defending Tenure: A Guide for the Friends of Academic Freedom. Washington, DC: American Association of University Professors.Google Scholar
American Association of University Professors. 1998. “Post-Tenure Review: An AAUP Response.” Academe 84(5): 61–67.Google Scholar
American Political Science Association. 1997–1998. APSA Survey of Political Science Departments. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.Google Scholar
Arden, Eugene. 1995. “Is Tenure Obsolete: An Opinion and a Survey.” Academe 81(1): 38–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bilik, Laurie J., and Blum, Mark C. 1989. “ Deja Vu All Over Again: Initiatives in Academic Management.” Academe 75(1):10–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deming, W. Edwards. 1986. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Finkin, Matthew W. 1996. “A Comment on the Industrial Analogy.” In The Case for Tenure, ed. Finkin, Matthew. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Finkin, Matthew W. 1997. “The Assault on Faculty Independence.” Academe 83(4): 16–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, Madeleine J. 1994. “The Review of Tenured Faculty at a Research University: Outcomes and Appraisals.” The Review of Higher Education 18(1): 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Clint, and Kelley, Michael A.. 1998. “Productivity and Competence: Post-Tenure Review in American Universities.” Issues in Accounting Education 13(1): 747–59.Google Scholar
Lenz, Timothy O. 1997. “The New ‘U.’” PS: Political Science and Politics 30(March): 11–14.Google Scholar
Licata, Christine M. 1998. “Post-Tenure Review: At the Crossroads of Accountability and Opportunity.” AAHE Bulletin 50(10): 3–6.Google Scholar
Licata, Christine M., and Morreale, Joseph C. 1997. Post-Tenure Review: Policies, Practices, and Precautions. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.Google Scholar
Richardson, William D., and Rickman, Dana K. 1998. “Democracy's Quarrel with the Academy: A View from the Ramparts.” Policy Studies Review 15(4): 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rollin, Roger. 1989. “There Is No Business Like Education.” Academe 75(1): 14–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Alstyne, W. 1971. “Tenure: A Summary, Explanation, and a Defense.” AAUP Bulletin 57(3): 328–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waugh, William Jr. 1998. “Conflicting Values and Cultures: The Managerial Threat to University Governance.” Policy Studies Review 15(4): 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whicker, Marcia Lynn. 1997. “An Economic Perspective of Academic Tenure.” PS: Political Science and Politics 30(March): 21–25.Google Scholar
Zumeta, William. 1998. “Public Accountability to the State in the Late Twentieth Century: Time for a Rethinking.” Policy Studies Review 15(4): 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar