TQM principles and their relevance to higher education: The question of tenure and post-tenure review

International Journal of Educational Management

Volumn 15, Issue 7, 2001, Pages 322-331

  Helms, Marilyn M ^a   Williams, Ashley B ^b   Nixon, Judy C ^c  

^a DALTON STATE COLLEGE   (United States)

^b NORTEL NETWORKS   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA   (United States)

Author keywords

Higher education; Teachers; TQM

Indexed keywords

EID: 31144474010     PISSN: 0951354X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/EUM0000000005932     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Alstete, J. (2000), “Post tenure faculty development: building a system of faculty improvement and appreciation”, ERIC Digest, 1 January, p. 4.
2. Antony, J.S. and Raveling, J.S. (1998), “A comparative analysis of tenure and faculty productivity: moving beyond traditional approaches”, ASHE Annual Meeting Paper, 1 November, p. 42.
3. Austin, A.E. and Baldwin, R.G. (1991), “Faculty collaboration: enhancing the quality of scholarship and teaching”, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, p. 7.
4. Bailey, D. and Bennett, J.V. (1996), “The realistic model of higher education”, Quality Progress, Vol. 29, pp. 77-9.
5. Barnard, J. (1999), “Using total quality principles in business courses: the effect on student evaluations”, Business Communication Quarterly, Vol. 62 No. 2, pp. 61-73.
6. Benjamin, E. (1995), “Five misconceptions about tenure”, Trusteeship, January-February, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 16-21.
7. Bernstein, D. and Edwards, R. (2001), “We need objective, rigorous peer review of teaching”, Chronicle of Higher Education, 5 January, p. 4.
8. Bonvillian, G. and Dennis, T. (1995), “Total quality management in higher education: opportunity and obstacles”, in Sims, S.J. and Sims, R.R. (Eds), TQM in Higher Education: Is it Working?, Greenwood Publishing Westport, CT.
9. Brownstein, A. (1999), ‘‘Report urges reform of tenure at colleges”, The Times Union, 12 January, p. A1.
10. Carlin, J.F. (1999), “Restoring sanity to an academic world gone mad”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 5 November, p. A76.
11. Chait, M.G. (1994), “Will American universities survive?”, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 13-16.
12. Chan, M. (2001), “Japanese universities shift away from positions with tenure”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 22 May, p. 8.
13. (The) Chronical of Higher Education (1997), “Point of view”, 4 April.
14. Coate, L.E. (1999), “Implementing total quality management in a university”, Strategies for Quality Improvement, 2nd ed., Dryden, New York, NY, pp. 591-628.
15. Conrad, R.B. and Trosch, L.A. (1998), “Renewable tenure”, Journal of Law and Education, October, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 551-71.
16. Costin, H. (1999), “Total quality management in higher education institutions”, Strategies for Quality Improvement, 2nd ed., Dryden, New York, NY, pp. 583-90.
17. Deming, W.E. (1989), Foundation for Management of Quality in the Western World, Perigee Books, New York, NY.
18. Engelkemeyer, S.W. (1995), “Engaging faculty in continuous improvement and change initiatives”, in Sims, S.J. and Sims, R.R. (Eds), Total Quality Management in Higher Education. Is it working? Why or Why Not? Greenwood Publishing, Westport, CT.
19. Evans, J.R. (1996), “What should higher education be teaching about quality?”, Quality Progress, Vol. 29, pp. 83-8.
20. Evans, J.R. and Lindsay, W.M. (1999), The Management and Control of Quality, 4th ed., South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati, OH.
21. Follo, E.J. (1995), “Creating peer support groups to achieve tenure and promotion”, CUPA Journal, Vol. 46 No. 1, Spring, pp. 15-20.
22. Gaither, N. (1996), Production and Operations Management, Duxbury Press, Cincinnati, OH, p. 7.
23. Grodsky, D. (2000), “Post-tenure evaluations criticized at UMSL”, The St. Louis Review, Vol. 30 No. 228, pp. 7, 12.
24. Guernsey, L. (1996), “Metropolitan state reviews tenure policy”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 43 No. 4, September, p. A13.
25. Harrington, H.J. (1987), “The quality improvement process”, Healthcare Forum, Vol. 30 No. 3, May/June, pp. 81-3.
26. Haworth, K. (1996), “Post-tenure reviews approved in Florida”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 43 No. 7, October, p. A15.
27. Huber, R.M. (1992), How Professors Play the Cat Guarding the Cream: Why We’re Paying More and Getting Less in Higher Education, George Mason University Press, Fairfax, VA.
28. Lawler, E.E., Mohrman, S.A. and Ledford, G.E. (1995), Creating High Performance Organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
29. Leatherman, A.J. (1996), “Tenure: an outmoded concept?”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 43 No. 3, August.
30. Leatherman, C. (2000), “Despite their gripes, professors are generally pleased with careers, poll finds”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 3 March, p. A19.
31. Licata, C.M. (1999), “Precepts for post-tenure reviews’’, Trusteeship, Vol. 7 No. 6, November/December, pp. 8-13.
32. Loope, D.R. (1995), Academic Tenure: Its Origins, Administration, and Importance, Staff Position Paper, South Carolina Commission on Higher Education, Columbia, SC, pp. 1-18.
33. Magner, D. (1996), “Minnesota regents change tenure policy for their law school”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 43 No. 12, November, p. A13.
34. Marchese, T. (1999), “TQM reaches academy”, Strategies for Quality Improvement, 2nd ed., Dryden, New York, NY, pp. 569-82.
35. Meisel, S. and Seltzer, J. (1995), “Rethinking management education: a TQM perspective”, Journal of Management Education, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 75-95
36. Mergen, E., Grant, D. and Widrick, S.M. (2000), “Quality management applied to higher education”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 345-52.
37. Miles, J. (1994), “A modest proposal … for saving university research from the budget butcher”, California Higher Education Policy Center Occasional Paper, pp. 94-102.
38. Miller, R.I. (1991), Applying the Deming Method of Higher Education, College and University Personnel Association, Washington, DC.
39. Moore, S. (1999), “Education: Gretchen M. Bataille, Provost at Washington State University, answers questions from public on tenure”, LA Times, 11 November, p. B5.
40. Orsini, J.N. (2000), “Profound education”, Total Quality Management, Vol. 11 Nos. 4-6, pp. 762-6.
41. Patel, A. (1999), “UTC faculty passes controversial tenure plan”, The Chattanooga Times, 7 May, p. B2.
42. Pearley, J.E. (1997), “Point of view: tenure remains vital to academic freedom”, Chronicle of Higher Education, 4 April, p. A48.
43. Pressley, D.S. (1999), “Board: power to fire bad profs should be part of reviews”, The Boston Herald, 29 April, p. O20.
44. Shank, M.D., Hayes, T. and Walker, M. (1995), “Understanding professional service expectations: do we know what our students expect in a quality education?”, Journal of Professional Services Marketing, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 71-87.
45. Shirk, J. and Miller, M. (1994), “Linking the faculty recognition process to teaching excellence”, Proceedings of the National Conference on Successful College Teaching, February, pp. 26-8.
46. Sullivan, L. (1986), “Quality function deployment”, Quality Progress, Vol. 19, pp. 39-50.
47. Taylor, L. and Murray, J. (1994), “Business administration faculty attitudes toward research and publishing: an interdisciplinary study”, Midwestern Business and Economic Review.
48. Tenure and Teaching in the University of North Carolina (1993), Board of Governors, Chapel Hill, NC, pp. 1-39.
49. Trower, C. (1999), “The trouble with tenure”, National Forum, Vol. 79 No. 1, Winter, pp. 24-9.
50. Vazzana, G., Bachmann, D. and Elfrink, J. (1997), “Does higher education practice what it teaches?”, Quality Progress, Vol. 30, pp. 67-70.
51. Wilson, R. (2001), “Northeastern U. proposal for post-tenure reviews goes too far, critics say”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, 27 April, p. 2.