| Tenure is one of the most widely
debated issues regarding university education. Not only does the
subject of tenure involve faculty, but also greatly affects the
students. Although there are always two sides to any argument, I
feel that tenure is not living up to its end of the educational
bargain. Academic freedom, scholarly
integrity and prestige are among the top issues surrounding tenure;
however, non-tenured teachers are bearing the burden of teaching
more classes to more students for less money. On the other hand,
tenured faculty enjoy the freedoms and financial stability that
all teachers should experience. Many teachers are never given the
opportunity for tenure, while other more research-minded professors
who have tenure are forced to teach in order to maintain their status
as a researcher. Even though there are many advantages to a tenure-based
system, I believe that the negatives outweigh the positives for
faculty and students alike.
The University of California is just one of
the many educational institutions that exercises the use of tenure
in its teaching/researching policy. As Keith Yohn stated in his
article “Faculty
Perspectives: Academic Tenure Benefits the University,”
tenure in its ideal form is thought of as “a means to certain
ends; specifically: (1) Freedom of teaching and research and of
extramural activities, and (2) A sufficient degree of economic security
to make the profession attractive to men and women of ability.”
Although tenure is good in theory, as Keith Yohn suggests, I argue
that it is no longer serving its fundamental purpose in the educational
world. A system that only favors a certain group of educators is
not allowing academic freedom for everyone, but rather limiting
such freedoms to specific teachers and thus specific students.
Although tenure may favor some students and
faculty over others, it is not easy to attain tenure at the University
of California. As discussed in the
“Description of the Tenure and Faculty Review at the University
of California,” members of the committee on educational
policy wrote that receiving tenure is dependent on “four main
criteria: teaching, research and creative work; professional competence
and activity; and University and public service." While all
of the aforementioned principles are good for academic structure,
I believe that the main goals of tenure are no longer achieved.
I realize that teachers who have been published are not only extremely
knowledgeable about the subject but also gain prestige for the university
by writing such articles; however being educated and creative about
a subject does not guarantee excellent teaching skills. Still, the
process of gaining tenure is difficult and takes place over the
course of six or seven years once the instructor has been at the
University of California. The teachers have a maximum of eight years
to prove academic excellence and are reviewed every two years to
see if they are still on track. Tenure is an arduous procedure to
go through and ensures teachers who are published and well-researched
in their chosen field; however, once they have tenure, what is to
keep these teachers at a high level of instruction in an environment
where their employment is guaranteed?
Tenure-track professors are hired knowing that
they will be up for review by the board within the eight years that
they have to prove themselves, while those not hired for tenure-track
positions such as lecturers and part-time professors teach a greater
number of classes to a greater number of students class
size. UCLA and other universities have acknowledged such a phenomenon
but have continued to ignore it. Robert Chait, author of “The
Questions of Tenure,” was quoted as saying “The
most widespread transformation in faculty employment arrangements
has been on part-time and non-tenure track faculty.” The battle
between the permanent status of well-known researchers versus the
temporary and often underpaid instructors is a huge issue within
the economics of the university system. Research departments are
provided the majority of the grants and carry a higher significance
among University Regents, while the majority of the teaching is
done by lesser paid temporary teachers who are the first to be cut
in a time of budget crisis UCLA
Budget.
The California public school system as a whole
has suffered tremendously at the hands of budget cutters during
this time of economic downsizing. UCLA has cut classes, increased
out of state enrollment and cut huge percentages of departments
to try and make ends meet. Tenured faculty are protected from these
budget cuts because University budgets are drafted around paying
those who have the ultimate job security that tenure provides. However,
there is no rating of faculty members once they have received tenure.
How is it that budget cuts can claim the livelihoods of teachers
who are evaluated and at the same time have no concept of how tenured
professors are doing in their classrooms? In the article “Academic
Freedom and Tenure: A Faculty Perspective,” a group of
teachers from various colleges wrote mainly about the positives
of tenure; however, these educators mentioned an interesting point
in saying that “tenure shelters incompetent teachers and that
it prevents the flexibility needed to make cutbacks in response
to shrinking budgets." Not all teachers who receive tenure
are “incompetent,” but during a time of intense economic
scrutiny only the very best teachers should prevail.
While tenure may seem unfair and biased to many,
some educators and students still believe in its ideals. Issues
surrounding tenure such as academic freedom, absolute job security
and well-educated/researched professors is in theory the perfect
combination for the educational setting. In the article “Testing
Tenure” from the Cavalier Daily, it was quoted as saying
Most importantly, tenure allows both students
and faculty academic freedom that is sheltered from university
financial worries and politics. Without it, students would miss
out on some great learning experiences…Hiring contracted
faculty, instead of giving tenure to associate professors, serves
to discourage and weaken the academic institution because it devalues
the skill and years of hard work those professors bring to the
position.
Education should be free from economic trouble
and teachers should have the ability to teach controversial topics
to ensure well-rounded students; however it is idealistic to think
that a world free from budget crises and educational politics currently
exists. In the long run the teachers who have tenure will be teaching
the controversial and perhaps unpopular topics, while the non-tenured
professors will teach a safer side of education so that they will
be popular with the administration
and hopefully keep their jobs.
Faculty are not the only parties affected by
tenure. Students have huge influence on multiple issues involving
tenure. With the advent of student evaluations
for professors, tenure has been greatly impacted. Robert Haskell
wrote in “Academic
Freedom, Tenure, and Student Evaluation of Faculty: Galloping Polls
in the 21st Century” that “one study found that
at least one third of faculty respondent reported lowering their
grading standards and course level in response to their student
evaluation…Faculty were also in nearly universal agreement
that Student Evaluation of Faculty is important in promotion (86.6%)
and tenure (88.2%) reviews.” If the faculty is inflating [grades]
to gain popularity among students and ultimately administration,
then the system is evolving into a corrupt organization that will
affect the standard of education for the entire university.
In these times of educational challenge and
budget crises, tenure is a hot topic at the forefront of discussion.
Teachers who are anchored in the tenure system of security lack
the ambition and drive demonstrated by non-tenured educators who
are forced to refresh and renew continually to maintain the highest
level of excellence in their educational forum. Although tenure
is ideal in its purest form of academic freedom, job security and
financial stability, the injustice of the system lies within the
excellent teachers who will never reap the benefits of what tenure
has to offer. Professors are no longer teaching for their students
but are instead teaching for the administration that signs their
paychecks. I feel that the real injustice of stagnant tenured teachers
and fearful non-tenured teachers is in the education of the student.
UCLA is a prestigious university that is known for providing society
with some of the finest leaders and intellectual minds. So perhaps
the burning question is at what price are educators willing to compromise
the education of tomorrow’s future? What is the good in academic
freedom if it is not freedom for all?
Related Links
Kohn, Alexander. “Don’t Abolish
Tenure; But Make It Conditional.” The Scientist. 3
Oct. 1988. http://www.the-scientist.com/yr1988/oct/opinion2_p9_881003.html.
McKenzie, Richard B., “In Defense of Academic
Tenure.”
http://www.gsm.uci.edu/~mckenzie/tenure.html.
Moore, Melanie. & Trahan, Richard. “Tenure
Status and Grading Practices.” 1976.
http://www.csus.edu/psa/moore_trahan.html.
Parberry, Ian. “Academic Ranks.”
1995. http://hercule.csci.unt.edu/~ian/ranks.html.
“Seeing the forest for the trees in the
tenure debate.” Yale Daily News. 26 Mar. 1998.
http://yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=9986. |