Validity and integrity in research and practice

Validity and Integrity

In the field of higher education, post tenure review has become a common way of reviewing the overall performance of tenured faculty. Yet, many critics will claim that this is an attack on the independent spirit of the tenure system itself. To determine which viewpoint is most accurate requires that you examine a number of different variables of the post tenure system to include: the effectiveness and validity of post tenure review. This will be accomplished though a mixed method design, examining important ethical principals and integrity. Together, these different elements will tell you how effective the post tenure review system is in the field of higher education.

Post tenure review is often viewed to be unpopular with faculty. This is because the administration uses this as way to promote some type of accountability and motivate faculty. While, politicians view post tenure review as a way to improve the overall standards of higher education. In the articles Post-tenure Review and Beliefs About Post-tenure Review; it highlights the various ways that post tenure review is popular / unpopular. These would include: late career / mid career faculty being resistant to such reviews, the need to incorporate objectives / challenges for the staff, deans / department heads require more flexibility in regards to the contributions of late career faculty and feedback from staff about post tenure review effectiveness. Together these different areas highlight the mixed signals that post tenure review is receiving from faculty across the country. (O'Meara, 2004, pp. 395 -- 415)

To determine how perceptions can be changed the article Post Tenure Review uses the mixed method design. This is when you are examining the overall quality of the sample (design quality) to determine the quality of the results (interpretive rigor). (Creswell & Plano-Clark, 2008, pp. 273 -- 294) in the study conducted by the article, they sampled a number of faculty from around the country and at different stages of their careers. This allowed the design quality to be high and the interpretive rigor to be consistent. As a result, they found that the faculty at various colleges / universities around the country responded most favorably to post tenure review when it improved academic standards at the institution. Yet, beyond this issue the overall areas of divisiveness remained. The consistency of the results shows that the quality of the sample taken is accurate in identifying what factors affect perceptions. (Wood & Johnson, 2004, pp. 395 -- 415)

While the mixed method design has shown the results to be accurate, for any kind of education policy to be effective requires that it addresses the issues of: ethics and integrity. In this particular case, post tenure review can be effective when it listens to the ideas of staff and helps them to see this as a tool for improvement. To effectively achieve this objective, requires comparing the study using the Ethics Code of Psychologists which says, "Psychologists are committed to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of behavior and people's understanding of themselves." (Cozby, 2009, p. 53) Under this core principal, post tenure review is being used in an ethically and honest way. This is because it is helping to influence perceptions, about how to improve the overall quality of education at a particular institution.