As the Academy’s Blueprint Advisory Board develops the academic program for the future U.S. Public Service Academy, certain controversial issues continue to arise again and again. One of the most contentious topics to date has been the idea of faculty tenure.
Should the Academy embrace tenure as part of the faculty hiring process, or should it pursue a different model? Instead of tenure, for example, the Academy could offer three or six-year renewable contracts.
Here are some of the arguments to consider when evaluating this issue:
Pro Tenure
– Tenure safeguards academic freedom, which is particularly important at an institution created by Congress.
– Tenure provides a non-monetary benefit to prospective faculty members, making a faculty position more desirable without increasing the cost of the position.
– Offering tenure makes the position more attractive, thus ensuring that top-quality candidates will apply. Many new Ph.D.s, particularly those from top programs, will not even consider applying for a position that is not on the tenure track.
Anti-Tenure
– Tenure is an anachronism does not meet the needs of an adaptive, 21st century college. It artificially binds the hands of administrators and can saddle the college with poor performing faculty members.
– Tenure in itself does not protect academic freedom — there are many ways to preserve academic freedom without using the tenure process.
– Tenure creates “haves” and “have nots” on a faculty, which can undermine morale and collegiality.
The NEA’s Higher Education division has compiled a collection of resources that are useful when evaluating this very important issue. Click here to see their thorough article list.
As always, we’d love to hear your thoughts on this topic. Which arguments do you find most compelling? Feel free to leave a comment below.
Mel responded on 02 May 2007 at 3:01 pm #
I attend a school with no tenure (Olin College) and we have had no trouble attracting top faculty. Lack of tenure tends to attract risk-takers that believe passionately in the mission of a school rather than those simply looking for a comfortable position. Those are the types of people you want - and need - building your institution. (Lack of accreditation tends to do the same thing for students; the ones you’ll get applying to such a risky place will be the ones who believe so strongly in the school that they’ll come despite - or even because - of that risk. These are the folks that will have the courage to take similar risks and lead similar changes in the future.)
As for safeguarding academic freedom: I believe that lack of tenure builds great trust within the community that one’s ideas will be respected and that one will be supported by colleagues, administration, and students because they care about you as a person, and not because the structure of tenure guarantees it.
I see the continual examination of no-tenure (5-7 year contracts) promoting discussion among groups and people that might otherwise take each other’s presence for granted, and self-reflection amongst the faculty as to whether a place is still (after 5-6 years) the right place for them to be; I see this as a potentially beneficial growth factor both for the faculty member gaining new experiences and for the college which will be gaining many fresh perspectives and new excitement from the field. It does, however, take a great deal of time and effort to review contracts every 5 years, and the process would have to be designed to impact a professor’s normal workload as little as possible.
Dr. Michael W. Popejoy, Ph.D. responded on 09 Aug 2007 at 1:21 am #
I have spent nearly 20 years as a contract professor (no tenure available) and I have mixed feelings about tenure. Without tenure, a professor can be the victim of a purge or other inhouse politics with a dean or other powerful or power-hungry administrator. I even wrote a story about the problems of no tenure appointments that was published in ASPA’s journal Public Voices titled: The Dean and the Princess: Why Tenure Matters. Of course it was fiction or it was true with just the names changed to protect the various “unindicted
co-conspirators.” In one position, I thought naively that a substantial portfolio of work and positive student evaluations would protect me from a purge, but it did not–I left before being terminated–although termination is just a non-renewal decision of the contract at the end of the contract period–you are not fired, you are just non-renewed.
Today, I continue to work in a contract position as a full professor and program director, and I continue to be at the mercy of a number of academic administrators who are not academics–they do not even possess terminal degrees. So, this year, I am trying for a tenure-track position in the hope that I can avoid the politics, at least after the tenure decision is made, and carry on with my academic career relatively free of the coups so common in contract professor positions.
However, in addressing the issue of the professor who stops producing after tenure is awarded, I must admit that I am a strong supporter of post tenure review. But, post tenure review must be carefully managed to prevent the same office politics entering into the decision to retain or terminate a professor after tenure. Anyone who believes that office politics and personalities do not impact academia simply have never worked in academia. And I do believe that tenure can protect controversial work–there are simply some areas of research or other public work that would never be done without tenure protection.
Some institutions are experimenting with academic appointments that are either teaching intensive or research intensive, both avenues toward tenure, and a post tenure process that ensures continued productivity through the years of a professor’s career. Also, long term contracts–those that exceed five years or more can be attractive to established professors who may not want to endure the scrutiny of tenure decisions, yet, contribute excellent work in teaching and writing to their discipline.
It seems that academia can have it both ways if a sensible policy is followed and fairness prevails. But, fairness cannot be guaranteed since not every academic administrator in every academic institution is known for fairness. Once a professor is tenured or provided with a long term contract, then the clash of personalities and the senseless office politics will not interfere substantially with a professor’s career. I am now seeking that kind of insulation–not freedom from peer review for publishing the work–but insulation from the pettiness that exists in virtually all organizations. The Dean and the Princess know why tenure matters.