Inclusively Recognizing Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurship Impact within Promotion and Tenure Considerations
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Norms around Faculty Promotion and Tenure
1.2. Pathways to a More Efficacious and Equitable P&T System in Academia
1.3. Recognizing Innovation and Entrepreneurship (I&E) as a Scholarly Path
1.4. The (De)valuing of Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurialism in Promotion and Tenure Considerations
2. Methodology
2.1. Research Questions
- To what extent is faculty members’ I&E activity valued?
- To what extent do relevant personnel feel able in evaluating faculty members’ I&E activity in promotion and tenure cases?
- To what degree is faculty members’ I&E activity a consideration in the evaluation of their work for awarding of promotion and tenure across various institutional organizations (e.g., departments and disciplines)?
- As reflected in policy?
- As reflected in practice?
- What I&E-related training, for faculty (including for underrepresented groups), postdoctoral researchers, and students, is offered at institutions?
2.2. Theoretical Frameworks: Value Creation and Human Capital
2.3. Methods
2.4. Limitations
3. Results
3.1. To What Extent Is Faculty Members’ I&E Activity Valued?
3.2. To What Extent Do Relevant Personnel Feel Able in Evaluating Faculty Members’ I&E Activity in Promotion and Tenure Cases?
3.3. To What Degree Is Faculty Members’ I&E Activity a Consideration in the Evaluation of Their Work for Awarding of Promotion and Tenure across Various Institutional Organizations (e.g., Departments and Disciplines), as Reflected in Policy?
3.4. To What Degree Is Faculty Members’ I&E Activity a Consideration in the Evaluation of Their Work for Awarding of Promotion and Tenure across Various Institutional Organizations (e.g., Departments and Disciplines), as Reflected in Practice?
3.5. What I&E-Related Training, for Faculty (Including for Underrepresented Groups), Postdoctoral Researchers, and Students, Is Offered at Institutions?
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions-Implications into Actions
- (1)
- Creation and implementation of practices and structures (including policy) to evaluate faculty I&E in P&T considerations, including I&E work with students;
- (2)
- Understanding of the realities and desires of faculty working across disciplines, the various forms that I&E may take per differences in discipline-influenced scholarship, and the nuance of evaluating I&E across ways of knowing and discipline-based cultures;
- (3)
- Training those involved in P&T decisions to evaluate faculty I&E, including faculty and administrators; and
- (4)
- Training faculty (especially from underrepresented groups) and students (undergraduates and graduate students alike) in participation in I&E activities.
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Clark, J.H.C.; Murri, K.; Nijhawan, V.; Blackwell, C.T.; Overton, D.; Ingram, S. The Innovation Impact of U.S. Universities: Ranking and Policy Conclusions. 2020. Available online: https://gwbcenter.imgix.net/Publications/Resources/gwbi-university-impact-report-ranks-exec-summary.pdf (accessed on 3 August 2021).
- Mintz, S. Why Higher Education Will Change|Inside Higher Ed. High. Ed. Gamma MOOCS beyond 2010. Available online: https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/higher-ed-gamma/why-higher-education-will-change (accessed on 3 August 2021).
- O’Meara, K. Inside the panopticon: Studying academic reward systems. In Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research; Smart, J.C., Paulsen, M.B., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2011; Volume 26. [Google Scholar]
- Park, T. Do Faculty Members Get What They Deserve?: A Review of the Literature Surrounding the Determinants of Salary, Promotion and Tenure. J. Profr. 2011, 6, 28–47. [Google Scholar]
- O’Meara, K.; Eatman, T.; Petersen, S. Advancing engaged scholarship in promotion and tenure: A roadmap and call for reform. Lib. Educ. 2015, 101, 52–57. [Google Scholar]
- Klein, J.T. Interdisciplinarity and Complexity: An Evolving Relationship*. Available online: http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A140447622/AONE?sid=lms (accessed on 3 December 2019).
- Durodoye, R.; Gumpertz, M.; Wilson, A.; Griffith, E.; Ahmad, S. Tenure and Promotion Outcomes at Four Large Land Grant Universities: Examining the Role of Gender, Race, and Academic Discipline. Res. High. Educ. 2020, 61, 628–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- U.S. Department of Education. Salary, Promotion, and Tenure Status of Minority and Women Faculty in U.S. Colleges and Universities; National Center for Education Statistics: Washington, DC, USA, 2000; p. 128.
- Social Sciences Feminist Network Research Interest Group. The Burden of Invisible Work in Academia: Social Inequalities and Time Use in Five University Departments. Humboldt J. Soc. Relat. 2017, 39, 228–245. [Google Scholar]
- Matthew, P.A. Written/Unwritten: Diversity and the Hidden Truths of Tenure; University of North Carolina Press: Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 2016; ISBN 978-1-4696-2773-1. [Google Scholar]
- Gunier, L. The Tyranny of Meritocracy: Democratizing Higher Education in AMERICA; Beacon Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Ong, M.; Smith, J.M.; Ko, L.T. Counterspaces for women of color in STEM higher education: Marginal and central spaces for persistence and success. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2017, 55, 206–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kolavalli, C. Strengthening knowledge creation and research in entrepreneurship: Inclusion matters. SSRN Electron. J. 2021, 3793768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zambrana, R.E.; Wingfield, A.H.; Lapeyrouse, L.M.; Dávila, B.A.; Hoagland, T.L.; Valdez, R.B. Blatant, subtle, and insidious: URM faculty perceptions of discriminatory practices in predominantly white institutions. Sociol. Inq. 2017, 87, 207–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schimanski, L.A.; Alperin, J.P. The evaluation of scholarship in academic promotion and tenure processes: Past, present, and future. F1000Research 2018, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fisher, K.; Sitomer, A.; Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Koretsky, M. Using social network analysis to develop relational expertise for an instructional change initiative. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2019, 6, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mendoza, P.; Ocal, S.D.; Wang, Z.; Zhou, E. Faculty norms and university/industry linkages in STEMM. Stud. High. Educ. 2020, 45, 1474–1487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Genshaft, J.; Wickert, J.; Gray-Little, B.; Hanson, K.; Marchase, R.; Schiffer, P.E.; Tanner, R.M. Consideration of technology transfer in tenure and promotion. Technol. Innov. 2016, 17, 197–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bouwma-Gearhart, J. Teaching Professional Development of Science and Engineering Professors at a Research-Extensive University: Motivations, Meaningfulness, Obstacles, and Effects; University of Wisconsin-Madison: Madison, WI, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Sitomer, A.; Fisher, K.; Smith, C.; Koretsky, M. Studying organizational change: Rigorous attention to complex systems via a multi-theoretical research model. In Proceedings of the 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings, New Orleans, LO, USA, 26 June 2016; p. 25945. [Google Scholar]
- Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Carter, R.; Mundorff, K. A call for promoting faculty innovation & entrepreneurship. Chg Mag. High. Learn. 2021, 53, 18–24. [Google Scholar]
- Sheridan, J.; Savoy, J.N.; Kaatz, A.; Lee, Y.-G.; Filut, A.; Carnes, M. Write more articles, get more grants: The impact of department climate on faculty research productivity. J. Womens Health 2017, 26, 587–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Niles, M.T.; Schimanski, L.A.; McKiernan, E.C.; Alperin, J.P. Why we publish where we do: Faculty publishing values and their relationship to review, promotion and tenure expectations. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0228914. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kezar, A.; Lester, J.; Carducci, R.; Gallant, T.B.; McGavin, M.C. Where are the faculty leaders? Strategies and advice for reversing current trends. Lib. Educ. 2007, 93, 14–21. [Google Scholar]
- Cora-Bramble, D.; Zhang, K.; Castillo-Page, L. Minority faculty members’ resilience and academic productivity: Are they related? Acad. Med. 2010, 85, 1492–1498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- DiMaggio, P.J.; Powell, W.W. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. Am. Sociol. Rev. 1983, 48, 147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bourdieu, P.; Nice, R. Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste; Taylor & Francis Group: London, UK, 2010; ISBN 978-1-135-87316-5. [Google Scholar]
- Stensaker, B.; Dahl Norgard, J. Innovation and isomorphism: A case-study of university identity struggle 1969–1999. High. Educ. 2001, 42, 473–492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sahlin, K.; Wedlin, L. Circulating ideas: Imitation, translation and editing. In The SAGE Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism; Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Suddaby, R., Sahlin-Andersson, K., Eds.; SAGE: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2008; pp. 218–242. ISBN 978-1-4739-7114-1. [Google Scholar]
- Klein, J.T.; Falk-Krzesinski, H.J. Interdisciplinary and collaborative work: Framing promotion and tenure practices and policies. Res. Policy 2017, 46, 1055–1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calás, M.B.; Smircich, L.; Bourne, K.A. Extending the boundaries: Reframing “entrepreneurship as social change” through feminist perspectives. Acad. Manag. Rev. 2009, 34, 552–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Slaughter, S.; Rhoades, G.; Fainholc, B. Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Can. J. High. Educ. 2005, 35, 127. [Google Scholar]
- McClure, K.R. Building the innovative and entrepreneurial university: An institutional case study of administrative academic capitalism. J. High. Educ. 2016, 87, 516–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rooksby, J.H.; Pusser, B. Learning to litigate: University patents in the knowledge economy. Acad. Capital. Age Glob. 2014, 2014, 74–93. [Google Scholar]
- McDevitt, V.; Mendez-Hinds, J.; Winwood, D.; Nijhawan, V.; Sherer, T.; Ritter, J.; Sanberg, P. More than money: The exponential impact of academic technology transfer. Technol. Innov. 2014, 16, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Stevens, A.J.; Johnson, G.A.; Sanberg, P.R. The role of patents and commercialization in the tenure and promotion process. Technol. Innov. 2011, 13, 241–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gonzales, L.D.; Núñez, A.M. The ranking regime and the production of knowledge: Implications for academia. Educ. Policy Anal. Arch. 2014, 22, 31. [Google Scholar]
- Fechner, H.; Shapanka, M.S. Closing diversity gaps in innovation: Gender, race, and income disparities in patenting and commercialization of inventions. Technol. Innov. 2018, 19, 727–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Beaudry, C.; Lariviere, V. Which gender gap? Factors affecting researchers’ scientific impact in science and medicine. Res. Policy 2016, 45, 1790–1817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Comedy, Y.L.; Dougherty, E.L. Breaking barriers: Female inventors blazing a path forward. Technol. Innov. 2018, 19, 751–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Couch, S.; Estabrooks, L.B.; Skukauskaite, A. Addressing the gender gap among patent holders through invention education policies. Technol. Innov. 2018, 19, 735–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, W.W.; Murray, F.; Stuart, T.E. Gender differences in patenting in the academic life sciences. Science 2006, 313, 665–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- National Research Council. Gender Differences at Critical Transitions in the Careers of Science, Engineering, and Mathematics Faculty; The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, & Medicine: Washington, DC, USA, 2010; ISBN 978-0-309-11463-9. [Google Scholar]
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, & Medicine. Promising Practices for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Opening Doors; The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, & Medicine: Washington, DC, USA, 2020; ISBN 978-0-309-49824-1. [Google Scholar]
- National Commission on Innovation & Competitiveness Frontiers. Competing in the Next Economy: The New Age of Innovation; Compete Council on Competitiveness: Washington, DC, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Hunt, V.; Prince, S.; Dixon-Fyle, S.; Yee, L. Delivering through Diversity; McKinsey & Company: New York, NY, USA, 2018; p. 42. [Google Scholar]
- Demirkan, H.; Spohrer, J. T-shaped innovators: Identifying the right talent to support service innovation. Res. Technol. Manag. 2015, 58, 12–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuratko, D.F. The emergence of entrepreneurship education: Development, trends, and challenges. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2005, 29, 577–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Choi, Y.; Lenhart, C.; Villanueva, I.; Nadelson, L.; Soto, E. Undergraduate students becoming engineers: The affordances of university-based makerspaces. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hora, M.; Newman, R.; Hemp, R.; Brandon, J.; Wu, Y. Reframing student employability: From commodifying the self to supporting student, worker, and societal well-being. Change Mag. High. Learn. 2020, 52, 37–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lenhart, C.; Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Keszler, D.; Giordan, J.; Carter, R.; Dolgos, M. STEM graduate students’ development at the intersection of research, leadership, and innovation. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 2021, in press. [Google Scholar]
- National Research Council. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-0-309-31683-5. [Google Scholar]
- Haltiwanger, J.; Jarmin, R.S.; Miranda, J. Who creates jobs? Small versus large versus young. Rev. Econ. Stat. 2013, 95, 347–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hayter, C.S.; Lubynsky, R.; Maroulis, S. Who is the academic entrepreneur? The role of graduate students in the development of university spinoffs. J. Technol. Transf. 2017, 42, 1237–1254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lautz, L.; Mccay, D.; Driscoll, C.; Glas, R.; Gutchess, K.; Johnson, A.; Millard, G. Preparing graduate students for STEM careers outside academia. Eos 2018, 99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- NSF Survey of Doctorate Recipients. Available online: https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/srvydoctoratework/ (accessed on 17 April 2020).
- Sanberg, P.R.; Gharib, M.; Harker, P.T.; Kaler, E.W.; Marchase, R.B.; Sands, T.D.; Arshadi, N.; Sarkar, S. Changing the academic culture: Valuing patents and commercialization toward tenure and career advancement. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 6542–6547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mendoza, P.; Berger, J.B. Academic capitalism and academic culture: A case study. Educ. Policy Anal. Arch. 2008, 16, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Etzkowitz, H.; Leydesdorff, L. The Triple Helix—University-industry-government relations: A laboratory for knowledge based economic development. EASST Rev. 1995, 14, 14–19. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson, M.S.; Ronning, E.A.; Vries, R.D.; Martinson, B.C. Extending the Mertonian norms: Scientists’ subscription to norms of research. J. High. Educ. 2010, 81, 366–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lach, S.; Schankerman, M. Incentives and invention in universities. RAND J. Econ. 2008, 39, 403–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siegel, D.S.; Waldman, D.A.; Atwater, L.E.; Link, A.N. Commercial knowledge transfers from universities to firms: Improving the effectiveness of university–industry collaboration. J. High Technol. Manag. Res. 2003, 14, 111–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Renault, C. Academic capitalism and university incentives for faculty entrepreneurship. J. Technol. Transf. 2006, 31, 227–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gumport, P.J. Universities and knowledge: Restructuring the city of intellect. Pek. Univ. Educ. Rev 2004, 4, 54–65. [Google Scholar]
- Shane, S. Encouraging university entrepreneurship? The effect of the Bayh-Dole Act on university patenting in the United States. J. Bus. Ventur. 2004, 19, 127–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azoulay, P.; Ding, W.; Stuart, T. The impact of academic patenting on the rate, quality and direction of (public) research output. J. Ind. Econ. 2009, 57, 637–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mendoza, P. The Role of Context in Academic Capitalism: The Industry-Friendly Department Case. J. High. Educ. 2012, 83, 26–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Welsh, R.; Glenna, L.; Lacy, W.; Biscotti, D. Close enough but not too far: Assessing the effects of university–industry research relationships and the rise of academic capitalism. Res. Policy 2008, 37, 1854–1864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merton, R.K. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1973; ISBN 978-0-226-52092-6. [Google Scholar]
- Macuare, K.; Kubisen, S. Highlights from the fifth annual conference of the national academy of inventors. Technol. Innov. 2017, 18, 229–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zarya, V. Female Founders Got 2% of Venture Capital Dollars in 2017. Fortune, 31 January 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Howe, S.A.; Juhas, M.C.; Herbers, J.M. Academic Women: Overlooked Entrepreneurs. Available online: https://www.aacu.org/publications-research/periodicals/academic-women-overlooked-entrepreneurs (accessed on 20 July 2021).
- Stephan, P.E.; El-Ganainy, A. The entrepreneurial puzzle: Explaining the gender gap. J. Technol. Transf. 2007, 32, 475–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nelson, T. The Academic Entrepreneurship of Women Faculty in STEM: A Meta-Synthesis; ARC Network: A STEM Equity Brain Trust. 2020. Available online: https://equityinstem.org/wp-content/uploads/Nelson-VVS.pdf (accessed on 3 August 2021).
- Blume-Kohout, M.E. Understanding the Gender Gap In STEM Fields Entrepreneurship; U.S. Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy: Washington, DC, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Lenz, A.; Ivanovitch, J. The interplay of postsecondary science educators’ problems of practice and competencies: Informing better intervention designs. J. Biol. Educ. 2018, 52, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Adumat, S. Fostering successful interdisciplinary postsecondary faculty collaborations. Int. J. Univ. Teach. Fac. Dev. 2011, 53, 207. [Google Scholar]
- Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Collins, J. What We Know About Data Driven Decision-Making In Higher Education: Informing Educational Policy and Practice. In Proceedings of the International Academic Conferences, Madrid, Spain, 6–9 October 2015; International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences: Florence, Italy, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Miller, L. A Theoretical Framework for Value Creation: A Multidimensional Strategy/Model for Improving Social Economic Performance. J. Creat. Value 2016, 2, 257–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weber, M. The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, 1st ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1947. [Google Scholar]
- Becker, G.S. Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Gillies, D. Human Capital Theory in Education. In Encyclopedia of Educational Philosophy and Theory; Peters, M., Ed.; Springer: Singapore, 2015; pp. 1–5. ISBN 978-981-287-532-7. [Google Scholar]
- Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research. Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. 2017. Available online: https://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/ (accessed on 20 July 2021).
- Cochran, W.G. Sampling Techniques, 3rd ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Moore, D.S.; Notz, W.I.; Notz, W. Statistics: Concepts and Controversies; Macmillan: New York, NY, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Sousa, V.D.; Zauszniewski, J.A.; Musil, C.M. How to determine whether a convenience sample represents the population. Appl. Nurs. Res. ANR 2004, 17, 130–133. [Google Scholar]
- Herbers, J.M.; Metcalf, H.E.; Williams, R.L. Identity-Based Harassment; Emerging Research Workshop: Naperville, IL, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine. Re-Envisioning Promotion and Advancement for STEM Faculty Aligning Incentives with Values. Available online: https://www.nationalacademies.org/event/10-17-2019/re-envisioning-promotion-and-advancement-for-stem-faculty-aligning-incentives-with-values (accessed on 17 April 2020).
- Marx, M.; Hsu, D.H. Revisiting the Entrepreneurial Commercialization of Academic Science: Evidence from “Twin” Discoveries; Working Paper Series; National Bureau of Economic Research: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, Y.; Yang, Z.; Liu, L.; Wang, X. Gender bias in patenting process. J. Informetr. 2020, 14, 101046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosser, S.V. The gender gap in patenting: Is technology transfer a feminist issue? NWSA J. 2009, 21, 65–84. [Google Scholar]
- Intemann, K. Why diversity matters: Understanding and applying the diversity component of the national science foundation’s broader impacts criterion. Soc. Epistemol. 2009, 23, 249–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leydesdorff, L.; Etzkowitz, H. Emergence of a triple helix of university—industry—government relations. Sci. Public Policy 1996, 23, 279–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Berman, E.P. Creating the Market University; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2012; ISBN 978-0-691-14708-6. [Google Scholar]
- Murray, F. The role of academic inventors in entrepreneurial firms: Sharing the laboratory life. Res. Policy 2004, 33, 643–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Powell, W.W.; White, D.R.; Koput, K.W.; Owen-Smith, J. Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. Am. J. Sociol. 2005, 110, 1132–1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Evans, J.A. Industry induces academic science to know less about more. Am. J. Sociol. 2010, 116, 389–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bess, J.L.; Dee, J.R. Bridging the Divide between Faculty and Administration: A Guide to Understanding Conflict in the Academy; Routledge: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Moss-Racusin, C.A.; Dovidio, J.F.; Brescoll, V.L.; Graham, M.J.; Handelsman, J. Science faculty’s subtle gender biases favor male students. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2012, 109, 16474–16479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Uhlmann, E.L.; Cohen, G.L. Constructed criteria: Redefining merit to justify discrimination. Psychol. Sci. 2005, 16, 474–480. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Uhlmann, E.L.; Cohen, G.L. “I think it, therefore it’s true”: Effects of self-perceived objectivity on hiring discrimination. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 2007, 104, 207–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aguirre, A., Jr. Diversity as interest-convergence in academia: A critical race theory story. Soc. Identities 2010, 16, 763–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quan, G.M.; Corbo, J.C.; Finkelstein, N.D.; Pawlak, A.; Falkenberg, K.; Geanious, C.; Ngai, C.; Smith, C.; Wise, S.; Pilgrim, M.E.; et al. Designing for institutional transformation: Six principles for department-level interventions. Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 2019, 15, 010141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hewitt, K.; Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Kitada, H.; Mason, R.; Kayes, L. Introductory biology in social context: The effects of an issues-based laboratory course on biology student motivation. CBE-Life Sci. Educ. 2019, 18, ar30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dinwoodie, D.L.; Criswell, C.; Tallman, R.; Wilburn, P.; Petrie, N.; Quinn, L.; McGuire, J.; Campbell, M.; McEvoy, L. Transformational Change: An Ecosystem Approach. Center for Creative Leadership. 2014. Available online: https://nature-wise.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/TransformationalChange.pdf (accessed on 20 July 2021).
- Carter, R.; Mundorff, K.; Risien, J.; Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Bratsch-Prince, D.; Brown, S.; Campbell, A.; Hartman, J.; Hasemann, C.; Hollenbeck, P.; et al. Inclusive recognition of innovation & entrepreneurship impact. Science 2021, in press. [Google Scholar]
Types of Institutions | Total Representatives per Institution Type | Total Institution Type Responded/Contacted |
---|---|---|
Doctoral universities/very high research activity (R1) | 57 | 46/121 |
Doctoral universities/high research activity (R2) | 14 | 13/36 |
Master’s colleges and universities-large (Ml) | 32 | 23/119 |
Baccalaureate colleges (BC) | 19 | 16/87 |
Tribal colleges (TC) | 0 | 0/11 |
Medical schools and centers (MS) | 1 | 1/3 |
Totals | 123 | 99/377 |
Institution Type | HBCU Responses/Contacted | HSI Responses/Contacted | I-Corps-Affiliated Responses/Contacted |
---|---|---|---|
Doc univ very high (R1) | 0/0 | 4/8 | 41/69 |
Doc univ high (R2) | 2/8 | 3/7 | 10/22 |
Master’s-large (ML) | 2/9 | 1/25 | 0/2 |
Baccalaureate (BC) | 2/6 | 0/1 | 0/0 |
Med. schools and centers (MS) | 0/0 | 0/2 | 0/1 |
Totals | 6/23 | 8/43 | 51/94 |
Discipline Area | Applied/Pro. Science | Formal Sciences | Natural Sciences | Social Sciences | Humanities |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Applied/ professional sciences | 0.3029 0.582052 | 0.0411 0.839323 | 15.1784 <0.000098 | 26.4176 <0.00001 | |
Formal sciences | 0.3029 0.582052 | 0.1223 0.726578 | 11.2191 <0.00081 | 21.2993 <0.00001 | |
Natural sciences | 0.0411 0.839323 | 0.1223 0.726578 | 13.7529 <0.000209 | 24.625 <0.00001 | |
Social sciences | 15.1784 <0.000098 | 11.2191 <0.00081 | 13.7529 <0.000209 | 1.95 0.162587 | |
Humanities | 26.4176 <0.00001 | 21.2993 <0.00001 | 24.625 <0.00001 | 1.95 0.162587 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Bouwma-Gearhart, J.; Lenhart, C.; Carter, R.; Mundorff, K.; Cho, H.; Knoch, J. Inclusively Recognizing Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurship Impact within Promotion and Tenure Considerations. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021, 7, 182. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030182
Bouwma-Gearhart J, Lenhart C, Carter R, Mundorff K, Cho H, Knoch J. Inclusively Recognizing Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurship Impact within Promotion and Tenure Considerations. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2021; 7(3):182. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030182
Chicago/Turabian StyleBouwma-Gearhart, Jana, Cindy Lenhart, Rich Carter, Karl Mundorff, Holly Cho, and Jessica Knoch. 2021. "Inclusively Recognizing Faculty Innovation and Entrepreneurship Impact within Promotion and Tenure Considerations" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 7, no. 3: 182. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030182