Tenure in Contemporary Higher Education: Protecting Academic Freedom or Promoting Academic Negligence?

Articulāte Volume 3 Article 7 1998 Tenure in Contemporary Higher Education: Protecting Academic Freedom or Promoting Academic Negligence? Andrew Murphy Denison University Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.denison.edu/articulate Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Recommended Citation Murphy, Andrew (1998) "Tenure in Contemporary Higher Education: Protecting Academic Freedom or Promoting Academic Negligence?," Articulāte: Vol. 3 , Article 7. Available at: http://digitalcommons.denison.edu/articulate/vol3/iss1/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Denison Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articulāte by an authorized editor of Denison Digital Commons. TENURE IN CONTEMPORARY HIGHER EDUCATION: PROTECTING ACADEMIC fREEDOM OR PROMOTING ACADEMIC NEGLIGENCE? BY ANDREW MuRPHY '98 The politics of academic tenure is an issue which, in the 1990s, is working its way into the conscious of the academic mind. Its significance stems from the fact that the tenure process, and the resulting decisions, affects not only educators, but also students, university communities, and society at large. According to one junior professor, "tenure, at its inception, was meant to protect the academic freedom of university teachers" (Epstien 43). We must ask today, however, in the midst of many tenure-related disputes and discussions in the popular and scholarly media, just how valid tenure is in today's educational system and, more importantly, what positions institutions of higher learning should take on related issues in the future. Those in favor of the practice claim that Academic tenure has been justified historically by the ostensible necessity of protecting "academic freedom." In particular, it was argued to be necessary, purportedly in the interest of the unfettered search for knowledge and truth, to protect the faculty member and, perhaps more importantly, the employing institution from attack by partisan or parochial political, social and religious interests. (Dresch 68) This goal, in and of itself, is an understandably noble pursuit. Tenure is important because it "secures academic freedom and freedom of speech at the PC university of the '90s," says Richard Berthold, an associate professor at the University of New Mexico, "I say things in class that would get me fired without tenure" (Blair 2). Clearly, there is a need for such protection in academia, a world based on ideas and knowledge. If the tenure process dealt solely with these issues, it would unquestioningly remain a beneficial practice. The tenure process is an intricate and complicated one, however, and one which does much more than merely protect the rights of educators as a whole. Critics argue that "fundamentally ... [tenure practices] served to concentrate power within institutions in the hands of the [already] tenured faculty, which collectively and virtually independently controlled the award of tenure, not infrequently to ends contradictory to the ostensibly claimed protection of academic freedom in the search for truth" (Dresch 68). This concentration of power allows those select few with tenure to control who. has, and does not have, a voice within academic institutions. Such a state would not even present a major problem if the group of tenured individuals were representative of the teaching faculty as a whole-with proportional numbers of women and minority groups-or of the student population. This, however, is not the case, as the majority of those holding tenure are older white males-a group which many refer to as the "old boy network." As Journalism Scholar Larissa Grunig states, "With more women faculty members now than ever before, this situation of women encountering special difficulties in shattering the glass ceiling of academia has major implications" (93). Also of concern is the "lack of women who are tenured or who have attained the rank of full professor" and the "imbalance between female faculty and female students" (Grunig 94). Thus, a main problem with the current tenure system is its effect on the careers of female educators. According to the New York Times Magazine, "In the male-run world of American colleges and universities ... 88 percent of presidents, provosts and chancellars ... 87 percent of full professors, [and] 77 percent of trustees [are men]" (Matthews 47). While such statistics may not cause alarm in some, they are simply not consistent with to the number of women in the work force or in academic institutions. According to Psychology Today, "unemployment rates for women with Ph.D.s are two to five times high than for men ... [and] Even if women do get an academic Andrew Murphy is a senior English (literature) and communication double major from Columbus, Ohio. He is a past winnn- ofthe Robert T. Wilson Award for Scholarly writing and a former editor ofThe Bullsheet. He also works at the Reading and Writing Center in the LRC. Articulate· 1998 42 Andrew Murphy job, they are likely to be assigned a lower rank and ity berween male and female professors, tenure has salary than their male counterparts" (McLeod 14). also inhibited research in women's studies and femiThis assertion is supported by an experiment in which nism because junior facul ty women are encouraged "heads of departments were sent identical resumes to avoid publishing in these areas for 'fear of being with either a male or female name. The 'male name' denied tenure. One senior scholar in feminist studapplicants were judged as meriting the rank of asso- ies at Stanford "frequently urged younger colleagues ciate professor, while the same resumes from 'female' to 'play the game' and not publish on women until applicants caused them to be rated as suitable for the their careers were assured" (Sternhell 95) . Such adlower rank of assistant professor" (McLeod 14). vice is validated by examples of women being denied Though such an isolated experiment could be con- tenure because of their focus on women's issues. sidered unrepresentative of academia as a whole, pub- Stanford's Estele Freedman was told she did not relished evidence suggests otherwise. ceive tenure because her "teaching and scholarship According to an article in journalism Quarterly: were too narrowly focused on women" (Sternhell96The older men who make [tenure and pro- 7), and Diana Paul, a Chinese Buddhism scholar, was motion] choices still don't feel comfortable denied tenure because her book, WOmen in Buddhism, with women. This is not considered overt dis- caused the university to claim she belonged in crimination; it is usually very subtle and of- women's studies, not religious studies (Sternhell97) . ten unconscious: those doing the choosing Though the cases involving these women are would never consider themselves to be dis- both shocking and disturbing, they are not isolated criminating against women. They are simply incidents. Columbia University serves as a first exfo (...truncated)