Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-r5zm4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T14:48:27.618Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Two Perspectives on Tenure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Denny E. Pilant
Affiliation:
Southwest Missouri State University
Brian A. Ellison
Affiliation:
Southwest Missouri State University

Extract

Here, two college professors explore the dilemma of tenure, and ultimately argue for a change in the way tenure is promoted and perceived within the academy. One professor—an associate dean and former department head—has over 35 years of experience with the academy and has observed the best and worst aspects of tenure. The other, currently teaching his third semester of classes, has a perspective on tenure based more on expectations than experience. The perspectives differ, but at the same time provide insight into the two sides of tenure—one that views tenure as a public good needed to protect academic freedom and the other which sees it as a menace that protects incompetence.

As a young professor, I was a vocal opponent of the Vietnam War at a university in very conservative section of the Midwest. My public stand against the war was criticized on local radio, television, and in the newspaper. In that Midwestern city, the war could be seen in two ways: through the eyes of the patriotic American or those of the traitor. The community made clear its attitude toward opposition to the war. Being an untenured assistant professor, I was most fortunate that the department head and academic dean were devoted defenders of academic freedom. If these academic administrators had not held their respective positions during the Vietnam War, there is no doubt my contract would have expired without renewal.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Association of University Professors. 1990. Policy Documents and Reports. Washington, D.C.: The American Association of University Professors.Google Scholar
Chait, Richard. 1982. Beyond Traditional Tenure. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Huer, Jon. 1991. Tenure for Socrates: A Study in the Betrayal of the American Professor. New York: Bergin and Garvey.Google Scholar
Leo, John. 1996. “No Books Please; We're Students.” U.S. News & World Report. September 16, p. 24.Google Scholar
Leonard, David. 1996. “Tenure: An Idea Whose Time Has Gone.” Business Week. October 21, p. A11.Google Scholar
Licata, Christine M. 1986. Post-Tenure Faculty Evaluation: Threat or Opportunity? Washington D.C.: Association for the Study of Higher Education.Google Scholar
Magner, Denise K. 1996. “Minnesota Regents' Proposals Would Effectively Abolish Tenure, Faculty Leaders Say.” The Chronicle of Higher Education, September 20, p. A11.Google Scholar
Magner, Denise K. 1996. A Perilous Time for Tenure. The Chronicle of Higher Education. May 17, p. A21.Google Scholar
Miller, Richard I. 1987. Evaluating Faculty for Promotion and Tenure. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Pelikan, Jaroslav. 1992. The Idea of the University: A Reexamination. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Tierney, William G. and Bensimon, Estela Mara. 1996. Promotion and Tenure: Community and Socialization in Academe. SUNY Series on Frontiers in Education. Abany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Wiesenfeld, Kurt. 1996. “Making the Grade.” Newsweek. June 17, p. 6.Google Scholar
Yarmolinsky, Adam. 1996. Tenure: Permanence and Change. Change, May-June, p. 16.Google Scholar