A trivial pursuit? Information technology and the tenure track

Campus-Wide Information Systems

Volumn 17, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 113-119

  Hattendorf Westney, Lynn C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Higher education; Information technology; Job promotion; Journal publishing; Librarians; Tenure

Indexed keywords

EID: 84986145211     PISSN: 10650741     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1108/10650740010350684     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Bauman, N. (1999), “Promotion and tenure guidelines for work with technology of the CCCC committee on computers and composition”, College Composition & Communication, Vol. 51 No. 1, pp. 139-42.
2. Buchanan, W. (1996), “A survey of creative endeavor criteria for promotion and tenure of ET faculty”, Journal of Engineering Technology, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 30-6.
3. Butler, HOD (1995), “Research into the reward system of scholarship: where does scholarly electronic publishing get you?”, in Gruesome, A. (Ed.), Filling the Pipeline and Paying the Piper, Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium: Scholarly Publishing on the Electronic Networks, Association of Research Libraries, Washington, DC.
4. Cartwright, G.P. (1994), “Information technology: considerations for tenure and promotion”, Change, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 26-8.
5. Crabb, D. (1999), “Is information technology work force adequate?”, Chicago Sun-Times, September 29, p. 73.
6. Cronin, B. and Overfelt, K. (1995), “E-journals and tenure”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 46 No. 9, pp. 700-3.
7. Dewey, B.I. (1998), “Beyond the information arcade (TM): next generation collaborations for learning and teaching at the University of Iowa”, Eric Document Reproduction Service ED 428659.
8. Freeman, P. (1999), The Supply of Information Technology Workers in the United States, Computing Research Association, Washington, DC.
9. Guernsey, L. (1997), “Scholars who work with technology fear they suffer in tenure reviews”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 43 No. 39, pp. A21-A22.
10. Harter, S.P. (1998), “Scholarly communication and electronic journals: an impact study”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 49 No. 6, pp. 507-16.
11. Katz, R.N. and Rudy, J.A. (1999), “Information technology in higher education: assessing its impact and planning for the future”, New Directions for Institutional Research, No. 102, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA
12. Katz, S.R. (1997), “One department's guidelines for evaluating computer-related work”, Kairos: A Journal for Teachers of Writing in Webbed Environments, Vol. 2 No. 1 (http://english.ttu.edu/kairos).
13. Kling, R. and McKim, G. (1999), “Scholarly publishing and the continuum of electronic publishing”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 50 No. 10, pp. 890-906.
14. Langston, L. (1996), “Scholarly communication and electronic publication: implications for research, advancement, and promotion”, ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 403892 (http://www.library.ucsb.edu/untangle/).
15. Lawson, K.G. and Pelzer, N.L. (1999), “Assessing technology-based projects for promotion and/or tenure in ARL academic libraries”, College and Research Libraries, Vol. 60 No. 5, pp. 464-76.
16. Leidner, D.E. and Jarvenpaa, S.L. (1995), “The use of information technology to enhance management school education: a theoretical view”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19 No. 3, September, pp. 265-91.
17. Lowry, A.K. (1994), “The information arcade at the University of Iowa”, Cause/Effect, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 38-44.
18. McCollum, K. (1999), “Colleges urged to use technology to ‘promote lifelong learning’ ”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 46 No. 5, p. A39.
19. Neely, T.Y. (1999), “The impact of electronic publications on promotion and tenure decisions”, Leading Ideas (http://www.arl.org/diversity/leading/issue10/neely.html), Vol. 10, pp. 1-6.
20. Patterson, D., Snyder, L. and Ullman, J. (1999), Best Practices Memo: Evaluating Computer Scientists and Engineers for Promotion and Tenure, Computing Research Association (http://www.cra.org/reports/tenure_review.html).
21. Schmidt, S. et al. (1999), “Ad hoc committee on information technology in political science” (http://www.public.iastate.edu/-sws/apsa%20guidelines/itguidelines.htm), pp. 1-4.
22. Seminoff, N.E. and Wepner, S.B. (1995), “Are technology-based projects valued as scholarship for tenure and promotion?”, Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp, 5-10.
23. Seminoff, N.E. and Wepner, S.B. (1997), “What should we know about technology-based projects for tenure and promotion?”, Journal of Research in Computing in Education, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 67-82
24. Speier, C et al., (1999), “Faculty perceptions of electronic journals as scholarly communication: a question of prestige and legitimacy”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Vol. 50 No. 6, pp. 537-43.
25. Tal, K (1999), “Divisions between old and young professors could be dangerous to academe”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 46 No. 6, p. B3.
26. University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) (1999), Peer Review Workshop, 8 June, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.
27. Wilson, R. (1999), “Computer scientists flee academe for industry's greener pastures”, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 46 No. 5, pp. A16-A17.
28. Wolcott, L.L. (1997), “Tenure, promotion, and distance teaching: a study of faculty rewards and incentives”, Eric Document Reproduction Service ED 413861.