State-level post-tenure review policies

Innovative Higher Education

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 1999, Pages 17-24

  Miller, Margaret A ^b   Miller, Peg ^a  

^a American Association for Higher Education   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0037778521     PISSN: 07425627     EISSN: 15731758     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/B:IHIE.0000008142.86209.e9     Document Type: Review

References (8)

1. American Association of University Professors. Improving teaching: Tenure is not the problem, it's the solution. 〈http://www.igc.apc.org/aaup/ fnebwart.htm〉, Table 3.
2. Commission on the Future of Higher Education in Virginia (1994). Making connections: Matching Virginia higher education's strengths with the Commonwealth's needs. Richmond, n.d., 4.
3. Gaston, P. (1995, July 13). Faulkner & affirmative action.
4. Hofstader, R. (1966). Anti-intellectualism in American life. New York: Random House.
5. Leatherman, C. (1998, June 26). AAUP offers guidance on post-tenure reviews. Chronicle of Higher Education, A14.
6. Miller, M.A. (1994). Pressures to measure faculty work. In J. Wergin (Ed.), Analyzing Faculty Workload (5-6). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7. Post-tenure review: An AAUP response. 〈http://www.igc.apc.org/aaup/ postten.htm〉.
8. Schmidt, P. (1998, June 19). Governors want fundamental changes in colleges, question place of tenure. Chronicle of Higher Education, A38.