192). This begs for an empirical objective analysis of performance.
Constructivism
In a constructivist approach, which was essentially that used by O'Meara (2004), the more open-ended and subject-driven the research is, the better (Creswell 2009, pp. 8). This approach leads to very clear results given the scope of questioning and sampling used by O'Meara (2004); focusing on the perceived benefits of post-tenure review on faculty performance amongst a group of individuals (faculty and administration) who in this case were well-aligned in their perspective would necessarily lead to conclusive results according to this worldview. A similar analysis of public and student views on the topic, however, would likely lead to very different results, and this worldview inherently lacks appropriate structures for synthesizing such disparate conclusions in an objective manner.
Advocacy/Participation
This worldview has specific bearings on certain aspects of the study's finding's. O'Meara (2004) specific concerns concerning the effects of post-tenure review on the autonomy and collegiate atmosphere of their position; beliefs that political pressures and suspicion of colleagues would be introduced were a major factor in negative feelings toward the implementation of post-tenure review practices (pp. 196). The advocacy worldview is essentially geared towards rooting out the imbalances that skew knowledge production and acquisition within a society, and this would certainly apply to the faculty's perceived risks in regard to post-tenure review. At the same time, as with the contructivist view, a study...
On the one hand, t is easily argued that all that really matters in the issue are the practical outcomes -- post-tenure review is meant to improve faculty performance, and pragmatism would therefore hold that it is a good practice if it succeeds in this, and useless if it doesn't (O'Meara 2004, pp. 179-82; Creswell 2009, pp. 10). This is abundantly clear, but there is little to no agreement amongst various groups as to the actual practical effects of post-tenure review. This study showed that faculty consistently believe they are doing exemplary work, and thus that post-tenure review will have no effect (O'Meara 2004). Student groups and certain administrators (not in this study) have established a need for greater accountability in tenured faculty, and advocate the use of post-tenure reviews for this purpose. An empirical study of the practice's actual effects would be necessary before a true pragmatic conclusion could be drawn regarding post-tenure review.
Conclusion
This makes it clear that no single worldview is adequate in addressing this issue. There is a need for advocacy and the inclusiveness of the constructivist approach, but given the disparity in views ultimately an empirical (i.e. postpositivist) and pragmatic determination will need to be made. An understanding of each of these four worldviews and their perspectives on the post-tenure review is necessary to a…
