In the wake of Amy Bishop's calm killing of her colleagues, lots of academic types are seriously questioning what has been an under-the-radar discussion for a long time: why is tenure necessary in our modern age? And why is the process seemingly so potentially unfair, unjust, and hazardous...not to mention time-consuming and stressful?
Story in Chronicle of Higher Education on the Bishop shootings: http://chronicle.com/article/The-Fatal-Meeting-Death/64295/
As a former journalist and creature of the business world and current PhD candidate trying to get a job, I wonder who tenure benefits? The scholar who survives the five-year obstacle course riddled with political maneuvering who then gains the right never to be fired unless something truly unlawful or grievous occurs? The students who, while the tenure process is underway, suffer a distracted, disinterested, and sometimes downright hostile professor who then may become relieved and equally uninvested in students' progress once he or she gains tenure? The university that demands all sorts of arbitrary proof that the scholar is actually a scholar (scholarly publications only, please) AND a teacher (your students best love you!), AND a good service member of the university community (can't say no to that "request" for Honesty Committee service!) and then judges the professor on how high he or she has jumped through these hoops in order to "approve" tenure?
I just don't get it. I didn't get it before I entered the system of higher education and I sure don't get it now. In fact, even though I am sitting on the cusp (or the abyss, if you will), wondering if I will even GET a job as a professor, I don't support the idea of tenure, regardless of how transparent the process may be at certain schools. Why shouldn't we, as teachers and scholars, be culpable and responsible to our students first, then our scholarship, then our service to the university community and the broader community - at all times?! Not just for the five years the tenure gauntlet takes? Why not require professors to continue being good teachers while encouraging creative and productive scholarship and service? What is so scary about eliminating tenure? Productive and worthy teachers and scholars will still be employed, will they not?
What is so wrong with transitioning higher education to a merit-based system where individuals must show consistency and regular growth (like anyone in any job that is NOT higher education), instead of going 150mph for five years and then slamming on the brakes? Which approach seems healthier for the professor and more beneficial to the students? Or do we in the academy even really CARE about maintaining a healthy and happy professoriate and a smart and encouraged student body?
