Attaining tenure is a goal of every faculty member. Indeed, at the beginning of every faculty member’s career, there is concern regarding the process of earning tenure. Many factors enter into the tenure decision, but most universities place weight on three primary factors: teaching effectiveness, research activity, and demonstration of service to the university and beyond. The relative importance of these three factors varies, but most universities expect “satisfactory” performance in all three areas. One of the historical reasons for faculty tenure is to protect academic freedom. Once tenure was attained, a faculty member’s academic freedom was considered safe. Recent developments in academia, however, are challenging the safety of both tenure and academic freedom. Some universities have implemented a post-tenure review process that subjects a faculty member to continuing, periodic review. Some argue that this process impedes a faculty member’s academic freedom. Since the university is considered “locked” into an agreement to retain a tenured faculty member, the faculty member has been under little obligation for further development, except for a self-imposed or professional obligation. The rationale behind post-tenure review is to demand a continuing responsibility of a faculty member to participate in faculty growth. The paper will gather and analyze accounting faculty perceptions regarding post-tenure
