Becoming a Teacher Scholar: The Perils and Promise of Meeting the Promotion and Tenure Requirements in a Business School

Abstract

Many business schools continue to use contribution in teaching, research, and service as measures of faculty performance. There has been a long tradition of thinking of faculty as making their research contribution within a specific subdiscipline. We call these teaching and discipline scholars (TDS). However a growing number of faculty who, although they teach in a subdiscipline, are choosing to make their research contribution in the teaching and learning area. We call these persons teaching and learning scholars (TLS). A major hurdle facing TLS candidates is a promotion and tenure (P&T) system primarily designed for teaching and discipline scholars. This article takes a granular look at the typical P&T system within business schools. It proposes a way of thinking about what is typically meant by teaching ability and how it might be measured. It then discusses what is meant by research, how this definition might be applied to measure the output of TLSs and the special challenges for TLSs in having their research accepted as part of their P&T portfolio. Suggestions are provided for how the TLS may navigate the P&T process in light of these challenges.

Keywords

promotion and tenure teaching research research on teaching and learning academic publications business school

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abernethy

A. M.

Padgett

(2011). A decade of scholarship in marketing education. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(3), 326-336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475311420240

Academy of Management Learning and Education Journal. (2008). Teaching and learning in higher education: Reference list and journal database. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(1), 139-142. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2008.31413873

Academy of Management Learning and Education Journal. (2017). From the editors: Establishing methodological rigor in quantitative management learning and education research: The role of design, statistical methods, and reporting standards. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 16(2), 73-192. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2017.0079

Aguinis

Shapiro

D. L.

Antonacopoulougnosis

E. P.

Cummings

T. G.

(2014). Scholarly impact: A pluralist conceptualization. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 13(4), 623-639. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2014.0121

Aguinis

Suárez-González

Lannelongue

Joo

(2012). Scholarly impact revisited. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(2), 105-132. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2011.0088

Anderson

L. W.

Krathwohl

D. R.

(Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

Anderson

(2007). Contingent and marginalised? Academic development and part-time teachers. International Journal for Academic Development, 12(2), 111-121. https://doi.org/10.1080/13601440701604914

Arbaugh

J. B.

(2008). From the editor: Starting the long march to legitimacy. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(1), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2008.31413858

Arbaugh

J. B.

(2016). Where are the dedicated scholars of management learning and education? Management Learning, 47(2), 230-240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507615595773

10.

Arbaugh

J. B.

Bielinska-Kwapisz

(2016). Delineating research forums for business and management education scholars: The business and management education influence index. Journal of Education for Business, 91(6), 295-302. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2016.1197877

11.

Arbaugh

J. B.

Hwang

(2015). What are the 100 most cited articles in business and management education research, and what do they tell us? Organization Management Journal, 12(3), 154-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/15416518.2015.1073135

12.

Argyris

(2002). Double-loop learning, teaching, and research. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1(2), 206-218. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2002.8509400

13.

Asarta

C. J.

Bento

Fornaciari

C. J.

Dean

K. L.

Arbaugh

B. J.

Hwang

(2018). The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Changing the dominant narrative about (and in) research institutions. Journal of Management Education, 42(6), 731-748. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918777271

14.

Asarta

C. J.

Fornaciari

C. J.

Arbaugh

J. B.

Bento

Lund Dean

Hwang

(2017). Key institutions in business and management education research. Journal of Education for Business, 92(5), 220-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2017.1339660

15.

Bacon

D. R.

(2016). Progress in the legitimacy of business and management education research: Rejoinder to “identifying research topic development in business and management education research using legitimation code theory.” Journal of Management Education, 40(6), 700-704. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916655447

16.

Barney

C. E.

(2019). The absence of teaching how to teach during the business management PhD programme: A call to action. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 56(1), 121-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2017.1372300

17.

Beatty

J. E.

Leigh

J. S. A.

(2010). Taking stock of management education: A comparison of three management education journals. Journal of Management Education, 34(3), 367-392. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562909344325

18.

Bernstein

D. J.

(2008). Peer review and evaluation of the intellectual work of teaching. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 40(2), 48-51. https://doi.org/10.3200/CHNG.40.2.48-51

19.

Bernstein

J. L.

(2018). Unifying SoTL methodology: Internal and external validity. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 6(2), 115-126. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.6.2.9

20.

Boring

Ottoboni

Stark

P. B.

(2016, January 7). Student evaluations of teaching (mostly) do not measure teaching effectiveness. ScienceOpen. https://www.scienceopen.com/document?vid=818d8ec0-5908-47d8-86b4-5dc38f04b23e.

21.

Boyer

E. L.

(1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

22.

Boysen

G. A.

Kelly

Raesly

Holly

Casner

R. W.

(2014). The (mis)interpretation of teaching evaluations by college faculty and administrators. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(6), 641-656. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.860950

23.

Bridgman

Bell

(2016). Seeing and being seen as a management learning and education scholar: Rejoinder to “Identifying research topic development in business and management education research using legitimation code theory.” Journal of Management Education, 40(6), 692-699. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916662103

24.

Brightman

Nargundkar

(2013). Implementing comprehensive teacher training in business doctoral programs. Decision Science Journal of Innovative Education, 11(4), 297-304. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12013

25.

Bruner

J. S.

(1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21-32.

26.

Chalmers

(2011). Progress and challenges to the recognition and reward of the scholarship of teaching in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(1), 25-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.536970

27.

Charlier

S. D.

Brown

K. G.

Rynes

S. L.

(2011). Teaching evidence-based management in MBA programs: What evidence is there? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(2), 222- 236. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.10.2.zqr222

28.

Chen

Gong

Lin

Zhang

Zhou

(2015). Assessing junior faculty research productivity in the IS field: Recommendations for promotion and tenure standards for Asian schools. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 36(19), 357-368. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03619

29.

Clayson

D. E.

(2009). Student evaluations of teaching: Are they related to what students learn? A meta-analysis and review of the literature. Journal of Marketing Education, 31(1), 16-30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475308324086

30.

Crimmins

Florin

Nash

(2017). Three pathways to support the professional and career development of casual academics. International Journal for Academic Development, 22(2), 144-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2016.1263962

31.

Currie

R. R.

Pandher

(2013). Management education journals: Rank and tier by active scholars. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 12(2), 194-218. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0184

32.

Dean

K. L.

Forray

J. M.

(2018). On positioning, domains, and readerships: Some thoughts on management education journals. Journal of Management Education, 42(6), 695-703. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562918803133

33.

Dehler

Beatty

Leigh

(2010). From “good teaching” to “scholarly teaching”: Legitimizing management education and learning scholarship. In Wankel

DeFillippi

(Eds.), Being and becoming a management education scholar (pp. 95-118). Information Age Publishing.

34.

Dennis

A. R.

Valacich

J. S.

Fuller

M. A.

Schneider

(2006). Research standards for promotion and tenure in information systems. MIS Quarterly, 30(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148714

35.

Devlin

Samarawickrema

(2010). The criteria of effective teaching in a changing higher education context. Higher education Research & Development, 20(2), 111-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360903244398

36.

Dewey

(1933). How we think. Dover.

37.

Divan

Ludwig

Matthews

Motley

Tomljenovic-Berube

(2017). Survey of research approaches utilized in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning publications. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 5(2), 16-29. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.2.3

38.

Dolan

E. L.

Elliott

S. L.

Henderson

Curran-Everett

St. John

Ortiz

P. A.

(2018). Evaluating discipline-based education research for promotion and tenure. Innovations in Higher Education, 43(1), 31-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-017-9406-y

39.

Dugan

R. G.

Kellaris

J. J.

(2015). How marketing academics view A level journals: Psychological insights into differences between published and striving authors. Marketing Education Review, 25(3), 245-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2015.1044860

40.

Eisenhardt

K. M.

Graebner

M. E.

(2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25-32. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2007.24160888

41.

Emery

C. R.

Kramer

T. R.

Tian

R. G.

(2003). Return to academic standards: A critique of student evaluations of teaching effectiveness. Quality Assurance in Education, 11(1), 37-46. https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880310462074

42.

Fanghanel

McGowan

McConnell

Potter

Locke

Healey

(2015). Literature review: Defining and supporting the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL): A sector-wide study. York, Higher Education Academy.

43.

Fosnot

C. T.

(2005). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.

44.

Gallos

J. V.

(2008). Charting a new course for the scholarship of management teaching and learning future directions: Powerful opportunities, a hopeful future. Journal of Management Education, 32(5), 535-540. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562908324357

45.

Gibbs

(2016). The international context of teacher preparation: Rejoinder to “Isn’t it time we did something about the lack of teaching preparation in business doctoral programs?” Journal of Management Education, 40(5), 533-537. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916630769

46.

Gioia

D. A.

Corley

K. G.

(2002). Being good versus looking good: Business school rankings and the circean transformation from substance to image. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1(1), 107-120. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2002.7373729

47.

Gravestock

Gregor-Greenleaf

(2008). Overview of tenure and promotion policies across Canada. Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto.

48.

Hardré

Cox

(2009). Evaluating faculty work: Expectations and standards of faculty performance in research universities. Research Papers in Education, 24(4), 383-419. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671520802348590

49.

Hitt

M. A.

Greer

C. R.

(2012). The value of research and its evaluation in business schools: Killing the goose that laid the golden egg? Journal of Management Inquiry, 21(2), 236-240. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492611428721

50.

Hwang

Arbaugh

J. B.

Bento

R. F.

Asarta

C. J.

Fornaciari

C. J.

(2019). What causes a business and management education article to be cited: Article, author, or journal? International Journal of Management Education, 17(1), 139-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2019.01.005

51.

Jaeger

A. J.

Thornton

C. H.

(2006). Neither honor nor compensation: Faculty and public service. Educational Policy, 20(2), 345-366. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904805284050

52.

Jonker

Hicks

(2014). Teaching loads and research outputs of Ontario university faculty members: Implications for productivity and differentiation. Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.

53.

Kanuka

(2011). Keeping the scholarship in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 5(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2011.050103

54.

Kolb

D. A.

(2015). Experiential learning (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.

55.

Lapoule

Lynch

(2018). The case study method: exploring the link between teaching and research. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 40(5), 485-500. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2018.1496515

56.

(2016). On the call for action: Rejoinder to “Isn’t it time we did something about the lack of teaching preparation in business doctoral programs?” Journal of Management Education, 40(5), 528-532. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916640009

57.

Leigh

J. S. A.

Beatty

J. E.

(2008, August). But where can I publish that? Understanding the management education Scholarship of Teaching and Learning domain [Paper presentation]. Academy of Management, Anaheim, CA.

58.

Lewicki

R. J.

Bailey

(2016). A deeper dig: Rejoinder to “Isn’t it time we did something about the lack of teaching preparation in business doctoral programs?” Journal of Management Education, 40(5), 516-523. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562916644835

59.

Ling

(2020). Emerging methods and paradigms in scholarship and education research. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1001-8

60.

Mamiseishvili

Miller

M. T.

Lee

(2016). Beyond teaching and research: Faculty perceptions of service roles at research universities. Innovation in Higher Education, 41(4), 273-285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-015-9354-3

61.

Marx

R. D.

Garcia

J. E.

Butterfield

D. A.

Kappen

J. A.

Baldwin

T. T.

(2016). Isn’t it time we did something about the lack of teaching preparation in business doctoral programs? Journal of Management Education, 40(5), 489-515. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562915616430

62.

McKinney

(Ed.). (2013). The scholarship of teaching and learning in and across the disciplines. Indiana University Press.

63.

Miller-Young

J. E.

Yeo

Manarin

(2018). Challenges to disciplinary knowing and identity: Experiences of scholars in a SoTL development program. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 12(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2018.120103

64.

Parker

(2008). Comparing research and teaching in university promotion criteria. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(3), 237-251. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2008.00393.x

65.

Pearce

J. L.

Huang

(2012). The decreasing value of our research to management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(2), 247-262. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2011.0554

66.

Piaget

(1970). Main trends in psychology. George Allen & Unwin.

67.

Priem

Taraborelli

Groth

Neylon

(2010). Altmetrics: A manifesto. http://altmetrics.org/manifesto

68.

Pritchard

Woolard

(2010). Psychology for the classroom: Constructivism and social learning. Routledge.

69.

Rousseau

D. M.

(2012). Designing a better business school: Channeling Herbert Simon, addressing the critics, and developing actionable knowledge for professionalizing managers. Journal of Management Studies, 49(3), 600-618. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2011.01041.x

70.

Rynes

S. L.

Brown

K. G.

(2011). Where are we in the “Long march to legitimacy?” Assessing scholarship in management learning and education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(4), 561-582. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2009.0084

71.

Sangster

(2015). You cannot judge a book by its cover: The problems with journal rankings. Accounting Education, 24(3), 175-186. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639284.2015.1055929

72.

Schön

(1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. Jossey-Bass.

73.

Spooren

Brockx

Mortelmans

(2013). On the validity of student evaluation of teaching: The state of the art. Review of Educational Research, 83(4), 598-642. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313496870

74.

Stark

P. B.

Freishtat

(2014, September 29). An evaluation of course evaluations. ScienceOpen. https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-EDU.AOFRQA.v1

75.

Sugimoto

C. R.

Work

Larivière

Haustein

(2017). Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(9), 2037-2062. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23833

76.

Tight

(2018a). Higher education journals: Their characteristics and contribution. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(3), 607-619. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1389858

77.

Tight

(2018b). Tracking the scholarship of teaching and learning. Policy Reviews in Higher Education, 2(1), 61-78. https://doi.org/10.1080/23322969.2017.1390690

78.

Trochim

W. M. K.

(2006). The research methods knowledge base. https://socialresearchmethods.net/kb/contents.php

79.

University of Michigan (2018). Faculty promotion guidelines. https://www.provost.umich.edu/faculty/promotion_guidelines/procedures.html

80.

University of South Carolina. (2019). Criteria and procedures for promotion and tenure. Marketing Department, The Darla Moore School of Business. https://www.sc.edu/about/offices_and_divisions/provost/docs/tenure/unit_criteria_tenure/marketing.pdf

81.

University of Texas. (2018). Course rating averages. https://utexas.app.box.com/v/pt-18-19-course-rating-average

82.

Vander Kloet

Frake-Mistak

McGinn

M. K.

Caldecott

Aspenlieder

E. D.

Beres

J. L.

Fukuzawa

Cassidy

Gill

. (2017). Conditions for Contingent instructors engaged in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(2), Article 9. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1145714.pdf

83.

Vardi

Quin

. (2011). Promotion and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(1), 39-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.536971

84.

Vithal

(2018). Growing a scholarship of teaching and learning institutionally. Studies in Higher Education, 43(3), 468-483. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1180350

85.

Vygotsky

L. S.

(1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

86.

Whetten

D. A.

(2008). Introducing AMLE’s special section on learning and education research databases. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(1), 138. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2008.31413872

87.

Wright

P. M.

(2015). Rethinking “contribution.” Journal of Management, 41(3), 765-768. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315569497

88.

Wright

P. M.

(2017). Making great theories. Journal of Management Studies, 54(3), 384-390. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12240

89.

Youn

T. I. K.

Price

T. M.

(2009). Learning from the experience of others: The evolution of faculty tenure and promotion rules in comprehensive institutions. Journal of Higher Education, 80(2), 204-237. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2009.11772139