Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Qualitative Data Analysis:
The study by O'Meara provides us with something of a template for understanding the qualitative variables which can be identified and addressed. O'Meara's study recognizes the demand for a collection of thick descriptive data based on the experiences of those who face the subject on a first-hand basis. The study points to several key pedagogic and tenure-related issues in which the gathering of first-person accounts may provide us with a greater depth of insight into the primary research imperative. Accordingly, O'Meara reports that the study "explored beliefs held by faculty and administrators about post-tenure review and the factors that influenced beliefs within one state system. Values of autonomy and collegiality, career stage, and institutional history and context were found to influence beliefs about the purposes, processes, and outcomes of post-tenure review." (O'Meara, 178)
This promotes the use of an open-ended interview method, perhaps best executed as a case study contextualized by one or a few educational institutions. By focusing on one university and gathering interviews with professors, administrators and even with students, it will be possible to build a substantial body of qualitative data on how post-tenure review is experienced. By drawing a...
This should help to reveal some distinction between the myths and truths of post-tenure review.
Validity:
Ensuring validity in the convergence of these methods will require the identification of both a control and an experimental population. These populations might best be yielded from two universities of similar geographical, economic and academic disposition as well as of similar scale and scope. By conducting side by side the combined quantitative and qualitative methods described above in a university where post-tenure review is in effect and one in which it is not, it will be possible to detect both the realistic and experiential distinctions between the two institutions. This, in turn, should allow for the assessment of the claims legitimizing post-tenure review.
Works Cited:
Creswell, J.W. & Plano-Clark, V.L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Sage Publications.
O'Meara. (2004). Beliefs about Post-tenure Review.
Wood & Des Jarlais. (2006) When Post-tenure Review Policy and Practice Diverge.
Works Cited:
Creswell, J.W. & Plano-Clark, V.L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Sage Publications.
O'Meara. (2004). Beliefs about Post-tenure Review.
Wood & Des Jarlais. (2006) When Post-tenure Review Policy and Practice Diverge.
This wide array of data strands could then be manipulated to measure the veracity of the philosophical claims informing our qualitative argument. Envisioned Analysis: 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
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