A Post-Tenure Review System That Is Good Personnel Policy: Is It Possible?

Abstract

The recent implementation of post-tenure review programs at many American universities is an interesting and controversial trend. Some of these systems are "developmental" and unthreatening while others are "summative" and can lead to the dismissal of under-performing faculty members.  This paper argues that because of the unique nature of academic labor markets, summative review systems may not be appropriate for most universities. By weakening the institution of tenure, summative post-tenure review systems decrease academic freedom.  They also reduce efficiency within universities by discouraging collegiality and collaboration.  We propose that universities in need of systems of post-tenure review establish "developmental" programs that do not threaten academic freedom or weaken the institution of tenure. These systems give faculty members a chance to critically evaluate past performance and motivate them to develop professionally.  A developmental post-tenure review system recently adopted at Illinois Wesleyan University is presented as an example.