No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Political Science and Post-Tenure Review
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
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.'](https://static.cambridge.org/content/id/urn%3Acambridge.org%3Aid%3Aarticle%3AS1049096500061047/resource/name/firstPage-S1049096500061047a.jpg)
- Type
- News
- Information
- 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
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