Tenure and Promotion Policies in Colleges and Universities: Confidentiality and Defamation in Peer Reviews

Clifford M. Koen
William P. Galle

---

DOI: 10.2190/7256-VEWK-YHY1-EMXQ

Abstract

One of the most noteworthy Supreme Court decisions in recent years for administrators in institutions of higher education is University of Pennsylvania v. EEOC. The Court held that colleges and universities may be forced to disclose confidential peer review records when accused of illegally denying tenure to a faculty member. This article reviews the results of a national survey of chief academic officers concerning the impact of the Supreme Court's decision on the tenure review process. A brief review of defamation law is provided. Implications for academic administrators and peer evaluators are discussed. Predictions by legal experts of dramatic changes in the peer review process have thus far become reality at only a few institutions (e.g., abolishing tenure). The policies and practices employed in tenure decisions by colleges and universities are reviewed. Analysis of the data indicates that most institutions have implemented few significant changes as a result of the Court's ruling.

---

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.