The trouble with tenure

When Peter Singer joined the University faculty last year, his appointment as a tenured professor ensured that he could voice his controversial views on euthanasia without fear of censorship.

But the venerable system of tenure — which dates back to the Middle Ages — has recently come under attack from some critics who have raised questions about its place in academia.

Last month, Boston University released a 10-page report drafted by its Tenure Discussion Group — a 10-person faculty committee directed by Provost Dennis Berkey — proposing a series of reforms to its tenure system.

The report recommends clarifying tenured professors' responsibilities, such as the number of days they are physically on campus, the amount of time they spend teaching and their expected levels of academic achievement.

It also proposes revisions to how tenured professors are evaluated. The report suggests the implementation of yearly meetings and procedures for working with those professors who are deemed deficient.

A faculty-wide assembly at BU to formally review the report is slated for Nov. 15.

BU is not the only academic institution that has been the setting for discussions about tenure. Nationwide, several prominent colleges and universities increasingly have emphasized the importance of professors' work in the classroom, in addition to their progress in the library or laboratory.

Nevertheless, officials and faculty at Princeton said in interviews during the last two weeks that the University's tenure system is not likely to undergo substantial changes — at least not in the near future.

In fact, President of the University Board of Trustees Robert Rawson '66 said the trustees have not discussed revising tenure at the University since he joined the board in 1992.

Many academics view tenure as vital to any university. Experts say that tenure enables professors to express controversial views without fearing rebuke or even dismissal.

"The main reason for tenure is to protect academic freedom," said Robert Kreiser, associate secretary of the American Association of University Professors' Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure.

Some believe, however, that tenure — both before and after a faculty member earns it — sometimes encourages professors to focus too much on research and not enough on teaching.

Get the best of ‘the Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Critics argue that the amount of research typically required for tenure appointment limits the time those striving to achieve tenure can spend in the classroom. They add that once professors are tenured many no longer spend adequate time on campus teaching and advising students.

"A major disadvantage in the present system is the pressure it puts on young academics beginning in their careers [to publish their work]," Singer said. "More weight should be given to excellence in teaching."

Indeed, some universities have tried to accommodate those professors who opt to focus on instruction rather than research. The University of California has modified its system to include two separate tenure tracks — one for research professors and another for "clinical professors" who specialize in teaching.

But Singer said many research-oriented professors still spend a significant amount of time with students. He said his teaching responsibilities account for a substantial portion of his time during the four days per week he is on campus. The remainder of his week is devoted to coordinating activities for the University's Center for Human Values and conducting research.

"There is an expectation that I will continue to publish [work] like I have in the past," he said, adding that while this may be true, there is no requirement about how much research he must publish.

Some experts say this "expectation" for post-tenure research is not enough to prevent some professors from becoming less productive in terms of research. Others argue that to place quotas on the amount of research tenured professors must publish likens professors to factory workers who are paid according to their quantity of output.

"There is an anti-intellectual reservoir that is gleeful at the idea that professors will have to work in measurable quantities," said Joan Scott, head of the AAUP's Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure and a social science professor at the Institute for Advanced Study. "It's the quality of the work, not the weight of the output," she added.

While tenure's place in higher education is far from endangered, Scott said she believes BU's report is significant because the institution is the first major research university to propose such extensive modifications to the tenure system.

Scott emphasized, however, that in the past — particularly under past BU president John Silber — the university's faculty and administrators characteristically have questioned the tenure system.

"My sense is that Princeton is not BU," Scott said. "[Tenure] has enabled Princeton to keep very distinguished professors and to permit the kinds of innovative thinking and scholarship that comes with a tenured faculty."

Kreiser agreed.

"There is no real reason to reconsider the importance and place tenure at a university like Princeton."