ATTITUDES OF NURSE-FACULTY TOWARD POST-TENURE PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS.
Contributors: Boston College.
Published: 1989
Number of pages: 224
Subjects: Health Sciences, Nursing.; Education, Administration.; Education, Higher.
Description: Non-tenured faculty receive feedback on their work in their annual evaluations for reappointment. Tenured faculty, however, do not usually receive evaluations and feedback except when seeking merit award or promotion. This lack of feedback may foster decreased productivity in teaching, service, and scholarship in post-tenure years. Feedback on work at fixed time intervals, through post-tenure performance evaluations, can enhance faculty productivity and overall institutional accomplishments.

This survey study examined the attitudes of faculty teaching in baccalaureate and higher degree programs in nursing toward post-tenure performance evaluations. A random nationwide sample of 248 nurse-faculty participated in this study.

Participants completed a 4-part questionnaire encompassing demographic information, perceived productivity in teaching, service, and scholarship, attitude toward post-tenure evaluations, and internal motivation. Multiple statistical analyses were carried out. Of 4 stated hypotheses, only 1 null hypothesis was accepted. Attitude toward post-tenure performance evaluations was not significantly related to tenure status, perceived productivity in teaching, service, or scholarship, internal motivation, age, years of teaching experience, sex, educational preparation, rank, administrative role, program levels offered in current school, or existence of a post-tenure evaluation system.

Faculty clearly stated that they want feedback on their work, the opportunity to define future objectives, and to have a post-tenure evaluation system in their own schools. Faculty are, however, concerned about the potential risk, for example to academic freedom, that may exist in such an evaluation system.

The recommendations from this study are that: parent colleges accept the idea of and implement a post-tenure evaluation system; faculty be fully involved in the design of the system; specific grievance procedures be identified; rewards and recognition for productive faculty be identified; re-evaluation of the system be carried out after one full cycle of implementation; expectations for faculty productivity be clearly identified; faculty workloads be examined to identify the best means to carry out the tripartite role; supportive resources be established; and further research be conducted on the effects of post-tenure evaluations.
Notes: Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 50-07, Section: B, page: 2850.

Thesis (PH.D.)--BOSTON COLLEGE, 1989.

School code: 0016.