This wide array of data strands could then be manipulated to measure the veracity of the philosophical claims informing our qualitative argument.
The analysis which is envisioned as a way to address the available datasets is provided for by Creswell & Plano-Clark (2007), who denote that data-mixing is a valuable way to determine whether or not variables possess meaningful relationships with one another. According to the text by Creswell & Plano-Clark, "by mixing the datasets, the researcher provides a better understanding of the problem than if either dataset had been used alone . . .there are three ways in which mixing occurs: merging or converging the two datasets by actually bringing them together, connecting the two datasets by having one build on the other, or embedding one dataset within the other so that one type of data provides a supportive role for the other dataset." (Cresswell & Plano-Clark, 7)
For the purposes of our envisioned analysis, its seems appropriate to use convergence as a way of mixing two distinct data sets. These would be the data sets derived from a university with post-tenure review practices in place and one without these practices in place. Convergence would allow a comparative analysis of the experience of educators and the performance of students in either of the two educational contexts.
The envisioned analysis must also include a method for establishing relationships between the independent variable -- which is identified as the presence of post-tenure review -- and any number of possibly relevant dependent variables. It is thus that we envision using 'triangulation' in order to approach different possible relationships between data. Thusly, we can hope better observe possible connections between post-tenure review and such variables as student enthusiasm, student success and student aptitude as well as such variables as professional morale, sense of academic freedom, sense of job security and sense of occupational satisfaction. .
The implication of triangulation to our particular study is that this method may be used to draw connections between otherwise seemingly unrelated variables through a method of literature review and the cross-checking of formal relationships within our converged datasets. This would allow us to respond to or confirm criticism of the post-tenure review policy as it relates to the intended and real outcomes in the context of academic performance.
Ensuring the validity of the research endeavor will hinge largely on the degree to which the sample settings selected are categorically similar in all regards beyond the independent variable. That is to say that the presence or absence of post-tenure review must be isolated as the most distinguishing feature between the two selected universities. Any divergence between the two...
Particularly, it is important to select to universities that are widely perceived as being on the same academic tier. Divergences in student performance between pupils at an Ivy League University vs. those at a local community college are likely to be based on a wide array of factors beyond the policies relating to educator tenure. Thus, two universities of a common level of accreditation, with similar staff and student population sizes, in a shared geographic context and possessing similar tuitions and academic performance measures must be used as a way of maintaining the internal validity of the study.
With respect to achieving an external validity to the study, the connection which may be drawn between the presence or absence of post-tenure review and the measure of educator job contentment may be viewed as having potentially universal implications. However, in order to deduce this, it will be necessary to identify the above-noted specificities relating to the selected contexts of examination such as tuition, scholarly performance and student enrollment. Any conclusions drawn in the context of this study may be applied in such similar contexts with an expected external validity. But ultimately, this validity will not apply to a wider diversity of educational contexts until a greater set of samples is achieved.
The primary challenge to reliability is the intent to use the personal report of professional educators to collect dependent variable data. Namely, there is always a danger that educators may provide false report for reasons of political pressure or fear of reprisal. It is thus that anonymity will be considered a preeminent feature of the study. The data collection methods are conducted in private, with only a single respondent and researchers present. Researchers will not include any biographical information in recording responses. Moreover, none of the researchers present during the administration of the survey will handle data records thereafter. Analysis will be conducted by a separate research team so as to prevent any fear on the part of participants that researcher knowledge will endanger the privacy of responses. The assurance of anonymity and privacy should ensure that respondents feel free and comfortable to express their genuine feelings toward post-tenure review as it relates to job contentment.
Cozby. (2009). Studying Behavior. Mayfield Publishing.
Creswell, J.W. & Plano-Clark, V.L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Sage Publications.
Euben, D.R. (2005). Post-Tenure Review Blues? Legal Watch, 91(6), 70. Online at http://www.jstor.org/pss/40252874
O'Meara, K.A. (2004). Beliefs about Post-Tenure Review: The Influence of Autonomy, Collegiality, Career Stage, and Institutional Context. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(2).
Wood, M. & Des Jarlais, C. (2006). When Post-Tenure Review Policy and Practice Diverge: Making the Case for Congruence. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(4), 562-588.…
This denotes that different perceptions of tenure are produced by different statuses and tenure opportunities amongst personnel. The present research question is designed to yield a discussion on how these differing perceptions may impact the effectiveness of an organization. This will require examination of matters such as the impact of hierarchy and the quality differentials between tenured or tenure-track professors and part-time, non-tenure track or adjunct professors. 5. Does tenure
For each selected school, there will be three groups of which quota sampling will be employed to achieve equal number of respondents. The three groups would be the faculty members, student administrators, and students. Respondents will once again be randomly-selected from the list that we shall be acquiring from the university. Instrumentation A questionnaire shall be devised by the researcher in order to gather opinion and understand attitudes on post-tenure review.
However, some identifying information is necessary to evaluate the length of time the subject has spent at an institution, their department, professors' publishing records, and other issues that arise when conducting the review process of professors and evaluating teaching records. Additionally, if subjects are considered to have been given a negative post-tenure review by faculty members or students, the professors might have an alternative view they wish to share with
Tenure The Wood and De Jarlais study of 2006 set out to accomplish three objectives. Those three objectives as stated by the study were to: (1) to provide assurance to the University and its constituents that professional resources and particular areas of expertise are being used to the best advantage; (2) to provide for the systematic recognition of excellence and develop incentives for superior performance; and (3) to provide means for
Indeed, regardless of how the discussion is framed, this power struggle between administrators and educators remains a constant and relevant force. Still, some research comes to support this idea that tenure helps to promote inequality across certain lines. For instance, Evans et al. (2008) remark on the gender and race lines that permeate the educational hierarchy. According to Evans et al., "sixteen percent of faculty in undergraduate and graduate
Through a bevy of research articles and scholarly journal research pieces, the authors of the present survey instrument have established their credentials by producing an exhaustive and multi-dimensional discussion on a highly-charged issue. Their qualifications are therefore preceded by an established status as experts in the field and as unbiased sources for discourse. It is thus that the survey instrument produced here is used to measure responses in two participating