Faculty Tenure in Higher Education: Challenges and Reform

Introduction

The higher education system in the United States is dominated by the tenure process, which has continued to be a source of controversy when examining American education. The controversy associated with tenure within higher education is attributable to the belief that the process generates complacent professionals who are more interested in attending conferences and producing unreadable research than in teaching (McPherson & Schapiro, n.d.). Such professionals do not focus on teaching and generating practical insights, which is crucial in higher education. Therefore, this issue requires the identification of suitable measures to address it in order to enhance the quality of higher education in the country. Doing so begins with examining the background of the tenure process and the challenges associated with it.

Background of the Tenure Process

The tenure process is one of the dominant features of higher education in the United States. It can be described as a basic concept through which faculty members who have served a sufficient period of apprenticeship should enjoy security in their positions and can only be removed for reasonably adequate cause (Cameron, 2010). The tenure system was entrenched within America's higher education system to develop a contractual relationship between a college or university and its professors — a relationship enforceable in a court of law. In essence, the tenure process was adopted to protect faculty members from the opinions or wishes of the academic institution's administration, students, and broader faculty.

While the practice of ensuring the safety and job security of scholars in their academic pursuits can be traced back to as early as 1158, significant changes to the tenure system in the United States took place in the aftermath of the Second World War. As returning soldiers descended upon American universities and colleges, these institutions expanded rapidly while facing a severe shortage of professors. As a result, higher education institutions began offering formal tenure to professors in order to overcome the problem of a scholar shortage, which in turn contributed to an increase in tenure issuances. In the 1950s, the government compelled many state employees to take loyalty oaths, which meant that tenure was not a safeguard from termination in such instances. During this period, professors were increasingly dismissed on the basis of their political views (Savage, n.d.). However, governmental interference in professors' political views diminished in the 1960s as professors supported the anti-war movement (Cameron, 2010).

The tenure system's landscape changed significantly in 1972 following the Supreme Court's decisions in Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth and Perry v. Sindermann. In these cases, the Court ruled that if the employment of a tenured professor is terminated, he or she is entitled to due process. This entails the right to appear individually at a hearing, the right to evaluate evidence and respond to allegations, and the right to legal counsel (Cameron, 2010). In the 1980s and 1990s, some colleges and universities attempted to reassess the tenure process as a group of tenured professors — hired to teach the baby-boom generation — neared retirement. Regardless of these and other attempts at reform, tenured faculty members are not required to retire on the basis of age, and tenure remains an important feature of modern higher education.

Current State of the Tenure Process

As previously noted, the tenure process remains an important aspect of today's higher education system. In recent years, however, the process has generated considerable controversy regarding its effectiveness in enhancing educational quality while protecting faculty members. Young professors and administrators have continued to criticize this process as the number of tenure issuances and tenured positions in higher education continues to decrease significantly. Young professors and administrators oppose the tenure process on the premise that it represents an unfair hindrance to full-time or tenured employment, because tenured scholars often remain in their positions well past typical retirement age. They also argue that tenured positions are progressively more difficult to obtain and that the criteria for hiring professors into such positions are unclear. In essence, the tenure system is frequently regarded as irrational and inequitable because of its loosely defined hiring criteria. College and university administrators, meanwhile, criticize the tenure process on the premise that maintaining a tenured faculty is very expensive (Cameron, 2010).

McPherson and Schapiro (n.d.) state that controversies and criticisms regarding the tenure system largely focus on concerns about the productivity and teaching commitment of tenured faculty. Some critics have argued that tenure contributes to the emergence of a complacent faculty — one more interested in producing unreadable research and attending conferences than in focusing on teaching and developing practical insights. Tenured professors are perceived as less invested in teaching because they no longer face the same incentives to build and maintain a long-term professional reputation.

The challenge associated with the tenure process in America's higher education system also emerges from concerns about the steady increase in the costs of higher education. These concerns center on the value that students and taxpayers receive from supporting public institutions of higher learning. They persist despite the fact that many college and university professors view the tenure process as a system that provides vital benefits to higher learning institutions and society. Some professors argue that the tenure process is the principal reason for the success of the higher education system in the United States (Savage, n.d.). Benefits cited by proponents include turning faculty members into institutional stakeholders, providing incentives for maintaining high standards, and improving educational contributions and outcomes (Savage, n.d.). Nonetheless, many of these same professors concede that the tenure process is not without flaws and that certain features need to be addressed to enhance the overall higher education system.

Conclusion

One of the most important features of the United States higher education system is the tenure process, which was adopted to protect academic freedom and provide other guarantees to professors. However, this process has become increasingly controversial over the years on the premise that it largely focuses on protecting the interests of professors at the expense of the interests of students and college or university administrators. Since the real problem is not tenure itself but rather the way it is applied, the current challenges can be addressed through the creation of teaching-intensive tenure-track positions and the adoption of a renewable limited tenure model with built-in accountability measures.

References

Asbill et al. (2016, August 25). Debating the effectiveness and necessity of tenure in pharmacy education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 80(6). Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5023986/

Bernstein, S. & Kezar, A. (2016, June 29). Is it time to eliminate tenure for professors? Retrieved November 16, 2016, from http://theconversation.com/is-it-time-to-eliminate-tenure-for-professors-59959

Cameron, M. (2010). Faculty tenure in academe: The evolution, benefits, and implications of an important tradition. Journal of Student Affairs at New York University, 6, 1–9.

McPherson, M. & Schapiro, M. O. (n.d.). Tenure issues in higher education. Retrieved from EDUCAUSE website:

Savage, J. E. (n.d.). The role of tenure in higher education. Retrieved from Brown University website: http://cs.brown.edu/~jes/papers/tenure.html