Reward systems and NSF University Research Centers: The impact of tenure on university scientists' valuation of applied and commercially relevant research

Journal of Higher Education

Volumn 78, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 51-70

  Boardman, P Craig ^a   Ponomariov, Branco L ^b  

^a GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33947232831     PISSN: 00221546     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/jhe.2007.0000     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. Arreola, R. A., Theall, M., & Aleamoni, L. M. (2003, April). Beyond scholarship: Recognizing the multiple roles of the professoriate. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
2. Barrett, L. A. (1992, April). Implementing an institutional change model for rewarding teaching at research-oriented universities. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Meeting, San Francisco, CA.
3. Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
4. Bozeman, B. (1993). Peer review and evaluation of R&D impacts. In B. Bozeman & J. Melkers (Eds.), Evaluating R&D impacts: Methods and practice (pp. 79-98). Boston: Kluwer.
5. Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: A review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29(4-5), 627-655.
6. Bozeman, B., & Boardman, P. C. (2003). Managing the new multipurpose, multidiscipline university research centers: Institutional innovation in the academic community. Washington, DC: IBM Endowment for the Business of Government.
7. Bozeman, B., & Boardman, P. C. (2004a). Developing technology for industry: Role strain among academic faculty in university research centers. Paper presented at the 24th annual Babson Kauffman Entrepreneurship Research Conference (BKERC), Glasgow, Scotland.
8. Bozeman, B., & Boardman, P. C. (2004b). The NSF engineering research centers and the university-industry research revolution: A brief history featuring an interview with Erich Bloch. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 29(3-4), 365-375.
9. Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists' collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 33(4), 599-616.
10. Braxton, J. M., & Bayer, A. E. (1986). Assessing faculty scholarly performance. In J. W. Creswell (Ed.), Measuring faculty research performance: New directions for institutional research (Vol. 50, pp. 25-42). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
11. Braxton, J. M., & Del Favero, M. (2002). Evaluating scholarship performance: Traditional and emergent assessment templates. New Directions for Institutional Research, 114, 19-31.
12. Braxton, J. M., Luckey, W., & Heiland, P. (2002). Institutionalizing a broader view of scholarship through Boyer's four domains (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report). Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education.
13. Brooks, H. (1978). Problem of research priorities. Daedalus, 107(2), 171-190.
14. Community-Campus Partnerships for Health. (2005). Linking scholarship and communities. Report of the Commission on Community-Engaged Scholarship in the Health Professions. Seattle, WA: Author.
15. Diamond, R. M. (1993). Instituting change in the faculty reward system. New Directions for Higher Education, 81, 13-22.
16. Diamond, R. M. (1999). Aligning faculty rewards with institutional mission: Statements, policies, and guidelines. Boston: Anker.
17. Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method (2nd ed.). New York: J. Wiley.
18. DiMaggio, P. J. (1988). Interest and agency in institutional theory. In L. G. Zucker (Ed.), Institutional patterns and organizations: Culture and environment (pp. 3-21). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
19. Dooris, M. J., & Fairweather, J. S. (1992, October/November). The organization of academic research: Faculty behavior and perceptions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Minneapolis, MN.
20. Etzkowitz, H. (1998). The norms of entrepreneurial science: Cognitive effects of the new university-industry linkages. Research Policy, 27(8), 823-833.
21. Etzkowitz, H. (2001). The second academic revolution and the rise of entrepreneurial science. IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, 20(2), 18-29.
22. Etzkowitz, H., & Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The dynamics of innovation: From national systems and "Mode 2" to a triple helix of university-industry-government relations. Research Policy, 29(2), 109-123.
23. Fenker, R. M. (1975). Evaluation of university faculty and administrators: Case study. Journal of Higher Education, 46(6), 665-686.
24. Friedman, R. S., & Friedman, R. C. (1985). Organized research units in academe revisited. In B. W. Mar, W. T. Newell, & B. O. Saxberg (Eds.), Managing high technology: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 75-91). Amsterdam: North Holland-Elsevier.
25. Geisler, E. (1989). University-industry relations: A review of major issues. In A. N. Link & G. Tassey (Eds.), Cooperative research and development: The industry-university-government relationship (pp. 43-64). Boston: Kluwer.
26. Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T., & Maeroff, G. I. (1997). Scholarship assessed: Evaluation of the professoriate (Special report, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27. Keohane, N. O. (1993). The mission of the research university. Daedalus, 122(4), 101-125.
28. Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston: Little, Brown.
29. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30. Levy, S. G. (1968). Inferential statistics in the behavioral sciences. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
31. Lin, A. C. (1998). Bridging positivist and interpretivist approaches to qualitative methods. Policy Studies Journal, 26(1), 162-180.
32. Merton, R. K., & Storer, N. W. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33. Morris, N. (2002). Tower power: Academics' commitment to the wealth creation mission. Industry & Higher Education, 16(6), 337-349.
34. Mowery, D. (2001). The changing role of universities in the 21st century us R&D system. AAAS Science and Technology Policy Yearbook, 253-271.
35. Nora, A., & Olivas, M. A. (1988). Faculty attitudes toward industrial-research on campus. Research in Higher Education, 29(2), 125-147.
36. Porter, A. L., & Rossini, F. A. (1985). Peer-review of interdisciplinary research proposals. Science Technology & Human Values, 52, 33-38.
37. Pratt, D. D. (1997). Reconceptualizing the evaluation of teaching in higher education. Higher Education, 34(1), 23-44.
38. Preston. L. (2004). Mentoring young faculty for success: Rewarding and encouraging involvement in cross-disciplinary research. Paper presented at the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Engineering Research Council Summit.
39. Rosenberg, N., & Nelson, R. R. (1994). American universities and technical advance in industry. Research Policy, 23(3), 323-348.
40. Serow, R. C. (2000). Research and teaching at a research university. Higher Education, 40(4), 449-463.
41. Shapiro, E. (1978). The effects on teaching of changes in relative rewards for research and teaching. Research in Higher Education, 9(1), 43-64.
42. Schulman, L. S., & Hutchings, P. (1998). About the scholarship of teaching and learning. Menlo Park, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
43. Siegel, D. S., Waldman, D. A., Atwater, L. E. & Link, A. N. (2003). Commercial knowledge transfers from universities to firms: Improving the effectiveness of university-industry collaboration. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 14, 111-133.
44. Stokes, D. E. (1997). Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
45. True, J. L., Baumgartner, F. R., & Jones, B. D. (1999). Explaining stability and change in American policymaking: The punctuated equilibrium model. In P. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 97-115). Boulder: Westview.
46. Wolverton, M. (1998). Treading the tenure-track tightrope: Finding balance between research excellence and quality teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 23(1), 61-79.