----

##  Post Tenure Faculty Development: Building a System of Faculty                   Improvement and Appreciation. ERIC Digest.                                   

Despite the continuing changes in higher education and an increasing            number of alternatives to tenure today, tenured faculty are the                 largest cohort of faculty in colleges and universities. The U. S.               Department of Education, in a national study of postsecondary                   faculty (National Center, 1993), found that 92.8% of all                        institutional types award tenure and that 51.3% of all faculty were             tenured or on a tenure track. The uncapping of the mandatory                    retirement age, the still widespread awarding of tenure, and the                prolonged life span of the professoriat have all combined to                    increase the number of tenured faculty. This situation is of concern            as a variety of external forces affect higher education, including              increased use of information technology, globalization of the                   curriculum, decreasing government support, changing accreditation               requirements, continued diversification in student demographics, and            negative public perceptions about the tenure system. What will                  happen as these external influences affect changes in the                       institutional missions and how the outcomes from higher education               are evaluated? The answer could be a negative confrontation as a                result of the increasing age and knowledge gap, or a positive                   learning experience for both generations. Posttenure faculty                    development is one way to address this challenge. WHAT IS FACULTY             DEVELOPMENT TODAY?Several definitions of faculty development are            found in the literature. "Faculty development" is a phrase that has             both a broad and a narrow definition. Broadly, it covers a wide                 range of activities that have as their overall goal the improvement             of student learning. More narrowly, the phrase is aimed at helping              faculty members improve their competence as teachers and                        scholars (Eble & McKeachie, 1985). Faculty development programs vary            in their purpose, but they are commonly designed to enhance personal            and professional development, instructional development, and/or                 organizational development. Professional development involves                   promoting faculty growth and enabling faculty members to obtain and             enhance job-related skills, knowledge, and awareness. Instructional             development involves the preparation of learning materials, styles              of instruction, and updating courses. Organizational development                focuses on creating an effective institutional atmosphere in which              faculty and faculty development personnel can implement new                     practices for teaching and learning (Gaff, 1975). Personal                      development efforts involve a more holistic approach to help faculty            members enhance interpersonal skills, promote wellness, and assist              with career planning (Graf, Albright, & Wheeler, 1992). Curriculum              development is another component that overlaps with each of the                 preceding areas; it involves the development of additional scholarly            and teaching competencies, creation of new instructional materials,             and the development of new communication and organizational                     patterns (Bergquist & Phillips, 1975; Eble & McKeachie, 1985). Based            on these definitions, posttenure faculty development involves those             activities that seek to improve student learning, teaching,                     scholarship, and service in higher education by developing personal,            instructional, organizational, and curricular aspects of faculty                members who have earned tenure. WHAT TYPES OF POSTTENURE FACULTY              DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS HAVE

BEEN ESTABLISHED?Posttenure faculty            development can be classified as optional, required, or jointly                 sponsored by several institutions. Optional programs can be                     stand-alone programs or part of a comprehensive faculty development             system at an institution. Optional strategies include award programs            specifically designed to encourage and motivate tenured faculty,                fellowship programs, teaching projects, writing projects, teaching              partnerships, workshops, seminars, and development plans. Faculty               development plans can be optional or required of all faculty, and               methods are available to help motivate tenured faculty for full                 participation in this process and reward them accordingly. Optional             programs have had positive outcomes, including increased faculty                performance and student retention, at several                                   institutions. 
Required posttenure faculty development is usually              part of a formal posttenure review system. Such systems are becoming            more common today as the public calls for increased accountability              and performance from postsecondary faculty (Licata & Morreale,                  1997). This approach has the advantage of institution-supported                 consequences for nonperformance by the tenured faculty. The                     development component can be required in all reviews or "triggered"             by specific outcomes of a faculty member's evaluation. The                      development process in these cases normally involves the creation of            a faculty development plan, which usually includes specific                     objectives for teaching, research, and service in a stated time                 period, along with a follow-up mechanism to ensure performance. The             American Association of University Professors (1997) recently issued            a statement admitting that posttenure review is becoming a reality              and that such systems should be designed to support professional                development of and responsibility by the faculty in their                       duties. 
A comprehensive posttenure faculty development program can            require a significant institutional investment, but one institution             is not required to fund the entire program. Jointly sponsored                   programs, perhaps cosponsored with other institutions or                        professional associations, can be effective and relatively low                  cost. HOW CAN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES BE DESIGNED TO IMPROVE                   AND

APPRECIATE TENURED FACULTY?Faculty development strategies            differ according to institutional type and stated mission. Faculty              development programs are more successful if they seek out                       participation and input from a variety of faculty members (including            tenured professors) and consult them in planning decisions (Nelson &            Siegel, 1980; Sorcinelli, 1988). Administrators and faculty leaders             should clearly define the objectives of the program and what kinds              of development (professional, instructional, curricular,                        organizational) will be emphasized. Department chairs are also a key            component of effective faculty development because they are on the              front line in handling faculty development plans, travel approvals,             course evaluations, and complaints from students. In planning                   programs, faculty developers should study all aspects of the                    institution, including its culture, academic programs, committee                systems, administrative hierarchy, and organizational structure;                they should seek support from the administration. It can be helpful             to map out development activities for faculty at different stages of            their careers using a template to ensure that the multiple roles                faculty must perform are supported. After reviewing the literature,             collecting information on process and outcomes from institutions,               and reading discussions about these issues, this author recommends              that a comprehensive posttenure faculty development system not be               formally linked to a posttenure review process so as to separate the            evaluative and development components, helping to ensure more                   effective participation and allowing faculty to set higher                      achievement goals. An overall model of development programs for                 tenured faculty should consider the institution's mission, and                  should consist of optional, jointly sponsored, and required                     components. Once development plans for tenured faculty are                      implemented, proper supervision and evaluation are important to                 continuously improve and maintain quality. One method of                        accomplishing it is benchmarking, which analyzes institutional                  faculty development practices and outcomes with selected peers to               determine the best practices and potential areas for improvement in             an institution. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS OF CHOOSING TO DEVELOP              TENURED FACULTY?Some view tenure as one of the potential                    weaknesses that tradition-bound institutions like colleges and                  universities must overcome. Instead of eliminating tenure as some               institutions are doing, creating and implementing development                   strategies that enable faculty to improve and feel appreciated is a             more viable choice. Research has shown that tenured faculty members             have many strengths compared with their junior colleagues and that              they are more likely to participate in faculty development programs.            Whether an institution chooses to implement a required development              component as part of a posttenure review system, a series of                    optional programs, or some combination, it is important that the                strategy go beyond a one-time solution and quick cure. 
For some               faculty members, however, reasonable efforts at bringing renewal                will not be successful. For those individuals--and to help ensure               the effective development of those tenured faculty who want to                  continue to grow and learn--the institution should consider other               alternatives. Those institutions with a formal posttenure review                process already have the mechanism in place to accomplish the proper            weeding or termination of nondeveloping faculty. In some colleges               and universities, another alternative is an early retirement or                 phased-retirement policy. This strategy, in combination with                    effective administrative leadership that points out other                       consequences for remaining full time and nonproductive, can help                motivate some faculty to make the proper choice. 
Posttenure                   faculty development strategies will continue to grow and change as              higher education systems are transformed by new technology, new                 types of students, and new approaches to college teaching,                      scholarship, and service. Institutions with effective posttenure                faculty development strategies will be better able to compete and               thrive than those that do not assist their tenured faculty to                   continually develop and meet new                                                challenges. REFERENCESNational Center for Education                       Statistics. (1993). National study of postsecondary faculty.                    Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved January 1,              1999, from the World wide Web: http://nces.ed.gov/ 
Eble, K. E., &             McKeachie, W. J. (1985).  Improving undergraduate education through             faculty development: An analysis of effective programs and                      practices. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 
Gaff, J. G. (1975). Toward             faculty renewal. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 
Graf, D. L.,                     Albright, M. J., & Wheeler, D. W. (1992, Fall). Faculty                         development's role in improving undergraduate education.  New                   Directions for Teaching and Learning, 51, 101-109. 
Bregquist, W.              H., & Phillips, S. R. (1975). Components of an effective faculty                development program. Journal of Higher Education, 46,                           177-211. 
Licata, C. M., & Morreale, J. C. (1997). Post-tenure                 review: Policies, practices, precautions, new pathways. In Faculty              careers and employment for the 21st century. Washington, DC:                    American Association for Higher Education. 
American Association of            University Professors. (1997).  Standards for good practice in                  post-tenure review [Online], 1-13. Available:                                   www.igc.apc.org/aaup/postten.htm 
Nelson, W. C., & Siegal, M.                  E. (1980). Effective approaches to faculty development. Washington,             DC: Association of American Colleges. 
Soricinelli, M. D. (1988).              Encouraging excellence: Long-range planning for faculty development.            In E. C. Wadsworth (Ed.), A handbook for new                                    practitioners (pp.27-34). Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press. 
ERIC              digests are in the public domain and may be freely reproduced. This             project has been funded in part with Federal funds from the U.S.                Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and                     Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under the contract number            RR-93-002008. The content of this publication does not necessarily              reflect the views or policies of  the U.S. Department of Education              nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or                        organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.                      **Title:** Post Tenure Faculty Development: Building a System of Faculty                   Improvement and Appreciation. ERIC Digest.                                   **Note:** Prepared in cooperation with Jossey-Bass Publishers. Based on a                 full-length report in the ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report series,             27-4.                                                                        **Document Type:** Information Analyses---ERIC Information Analysis Products (IAPs) (071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in Full Text (073); **Available From:** ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, One Dupont Circle, N.W.,                Suite 630, Washington, DC 20036-1183. Tel: 800-773-3742 (Toll Free);            Fax: 202-452-1844; Web site: http://www.eriche.org.                          **Descriptors:** Aging in Academia, College Faculty,  Faculty Development,  Faculty              Evaluation, Higher Education, Individual Development, Seniority,                Teacher Evaluation,  Tenure,  Tenured Faculty, Work Life Expectancy          **Identifiers:** ERIC Digests                                                                 
###
[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]