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