Tenure Debate Team Project-1

Concluding Remarks

Our solution appears to alleviate the key concerns associated with tenure while promoting the considerable advantages. Proponents of tenure have long cited increased academic freedom and stability as key elements in improving the quality of education. Without academic freedom professors would be unable to teach controversial material, thus limiting independent thought in the classroom. Without stability, professors would always have "one eye on the door", forever wary of being fired. The proposed solution does not only guarantee these two critical elements, but increases their effectiveness by allowing faculty to choose their level of commitment.

Opponents criticize tenure's inflexibility, the "seven year rule", possible discriminatory practices, and the inability to fire a tenured professor. Our solution alleviates each of these criticisms. The new program is inherently flexible through its multi-level structure which allows multiple career paths. The multiple career paths eliminates the seven year rule due to a performance based review rather than a time based review. The periodic performance reviews also allow the administration the opportunity to constantly monitor discriminatory practices. The various levels of the program create the ability to downgrade a professor's status without complete removal of the professor. Thus, all the major criticisms are succinctly handled.

Ironically, the political struggle between faculty and administrators is detrimental to the people whom education is supposed to help, the students. If the faculty and administration can achieve harmony, then the true benefactor of the reorganization would inevitably be the students.

Introduction and Background
The Current Tenure Situation in America
Advantages and Disadvantages of Tenure
Possible Solutions
Concluding Remarks
References and Related Links

Last Modified 12/6/96 -- Jon A. Preston