University's motivation for having tenure-track positions Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Is it more difficult to score a Tenure Track position in the US when applying from outside?Leaving soft-money job for tenure track position that doesn't start until August: when to tell current advisor?What do I need to include in a tenure-track assistant professor job application cover letter?Research on career path after tenure denial?How to make good use of a small startup fund?Breaking into research oriented tenure-track positions from teaching trackTenure-track offer with other applications in progressI am non-tenured and have been offered a tenure-track position at my current university, but I don't want to stay here long term. What should I do?How is a tenure-track appointment in Sweden?What reference from current insitution is required/advisable for pre-tenure move?
Why did Bronn offer to be Tyrion Lannister's champion in trial by combat?
How to ask rejected full-time candidates to apply to teach individual courses?
Pointing to problems without suggesting solutions
why doesn't university give past final exams' answers
Twin's vs. Twins'
Marquee sign letters
Is there night in Alpha Complex?
Is honorific speech ever used in the first person?
How does TikZ render an arc?
Is a copyright notice with a non-existent name be invalid?
Understanding piped commands in GNU/Linux
calculator's angle answer for trig ratios that can work in more than 1 quadrant on the unit circle
Does the main washing effect of soap come from foam?
.bashrc alias for a command with fixed second parameter
Should man-made satellites feature an intelligent inverted "cow catcher"?
"Destructive power" carried by a B-52?
As a dual citizen, my US passport will expire one day after traveling to the US. Will this work?
Why does BitLocker not use RSA?
How does the body cool itself in a stillsuit?
How do I say "this must not happen"?
Searching extreme points of polyhedron
First paper to introduce the "principal-agent problem"
Random body shuffle every night—can we still function?
What does Sonny Burch mean by, "S.H.I.E.L.D. and HYDRA don't even exist anymore"?
University's motivation for having tenure-track positions
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?Is it more difficult to score a Tenure Track position in the US when applying from outside?Leaving soft-money job for tenure track position that doesn't start until August: when to tell current advisor?What do I need to include in a tenure-track assistant professor job application cover letter?Research on career path after tenure denial?How to make good use of a small startup fund?Breaking into research oriented tenure-track positions from teaching trackTenure-track offer with other applications in progressI am non-tenured and have been offered a tenure-track position at my current university, but I don't want to stay here long term. What should I do?How is a tenure-track appointment in Sweden?What reference from current insitution is required/advisable for pre-tenure move?
Suppose I used to hold a tenure-track math position at a R1 institution, but then I was denied tenure. Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared) and I would be more than happy to keep working under the same conditions and would work just as hard as I worked before tenure denial. The question is: what are the reasons why the department would not be happy to keep me (under the same conditions)?
Some hypotheses:
- Me working at the department is beneficial for the department at any given point of time. If this is true, then they should be OK with me remaining in my present position.
- Accepting someone for tenure-track is a calculated risk the department takes (because it can not judge purely from the post-doc record whether one is going to be a great researcher or not). Now that my tenure-track is over, they have figured out that I am not good enough and it is beneficial for them to kick me out.
- For an average person, the possibility of tenure is a strong motivator. It is beneficial for the department to have someone who has been promised tenure at any given point of time but it is not beneficial once the person knows they won't be given tenure. I am just a weirdo who happens not to care.
mathematics tenure-track
asked Apr 13 at 0:32
bye_bye_harvardbye_bye_harvard
823
|
show 7 more comments
Suppose I used to hold a tenure-track math position at a R1 institution, but then I was denied tenure. Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared) and I would be more than happy to keep working under the same conditions and would work just as hard as I worked before tenure denial. The question is: what are the reasons why the department would not be happy to keep me (under the same conditions)?
Some hypotheses:
- Me working at the department is beneficial for the department at any given point of time. If this is true, then they should be OK with me remaining in my present position.
- Accepting someone for tenure-track is a calculated risk the department takes (because it can not judge purely from the post-doc record whether one is going to be a great researcher or not). Now that my tenure-track is over, they have figured out that I am not good enough and it is beneficial for them to kick me out.
- For an average person, the possibility of tenure is a strong motivator. It is beneficial for the department to have someone who has been promised tenure at any given point of time but it is not beneficial once the person knows they won't be given tenure. I am just a weirdo who happens not to care.
mathematics tenure-track
asked Apr 13 at 0:32
bye_bye_harvardbye_bye_harvard
823
1
I think the answer is the second hypothesis, but I will leave it to one of the more senior faculty here to weigh in...
– Dawn
Apr 13 at 0:42
2
In the situation you described, even if the department were happy to keep you as an untenured faculty member, they couldn't do so. In my university, the Regents' Bylaws say that, if we kept a tenure-track assistant professor in that position longer than 7 years, then (s)he would automatically have tenure, whether or not tenure was "awarded". (Department and college administrators whose negligence led to such "de facto tenure" would be in very hot water.)
– Andreas Blass
Apr 13 at 0:58
20
I think you're missing opportunity cost. Suppose they had a choice between keeping you at your current salary, and firing you and hiring someone new at the same salary (or likely less). You've already demonstrated that you do not meet the standards expected of a tenured faculty member. The new person might eventually do so. Doesn't that seem like an easy decision?
– Nate Eldredge
Apr 13 at 1:25
7
Just out of curiosity, you were an assistant professor in math at Harvard and this is an honest question you had?
– user2705196
Apr 13 at 4:11
5
There's a paradox here. Quoting: "Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared)" and "why the department would not be happy to keep me".
– Szabolcs
Apr 13 at 9:26
|
show 7 more comments
Suppose I used to hold a tenure-track math position at a R1 institution, but then I was denied tenure. Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared) and I would be more than happy to keep working under the same conditions and would work just as hard as I worked before tenure denial. The question is: what are the reasons why the department would not be happy to keep me (under the same conditions)?
Some hypotheses:
- Me working at the department is beneficial for the department at any given point of time. If this is true, then they should be OK with me remaining in my present position.
- Accepting someone for tenure-track is a calculated risk the department takes (because it can not judge purely from the post-doc record whether one is going to be a great researcher or not). Now that my tenure-track is over, they have figured out that I am not good enough and it is beneficial for them to kick me out.
- For an average person, the possibility of tenure is a strong motivator. It is beneficial for the department to have someone who has been promised tenure at any given point of time but it is not beneficial once the person knows they won't be given tenure. I am just a weirdo who happens not to care.
mathematics tenure-track
asked Apr 13 at 0:32
bye_bye_harvardbye_bye_harvard
823
Suppose I used to hold a tenure-track math position at a R1 institution, but then I was denied tenure. Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared) and I would be more than happy to keep working under the same conditions and would work just as hard as I worked before tenure denial. The question is: what are the reasons why the department would not be happy to keep me (under the same conditions)?
Some hypotheses:
- Me working at the department is beneficial for the department at any given point of time. If this is true, then they should be OK with me remaining in my present position.
- Accepting someone for tenure-track is a calculated risk the department takes (because it can not judge purely from the post-doc record whether one is going to be a great researcher or not). Now that my tenure-track is over, they have figured out that I am not good enough and it is beneficial for them to kick me out.
- For an average person, the possibility of tenure is a strong motivator. It is beneficial for the department to have someone who has been promised tenure at any given point of time but it is not beneficial once the person knows they won't be given tenure. I am just a weirdo who happens not to care.
mathematics tenure-track
mathematics tenure-track
asked Apr 13 at 0:32
bye_bye_harvardbye_bye_harvard
823
asked Apr 13 at 0:32
bye_bye_harvardbye_bye_harvard
823
asked Apr 13 at 0:32
bye_bye_harvardbye_bye_harvard
823
asked Apr 13 at 0:32
bye_bye_harvardbye_bye_harvard
823
asked Apr 13 at 0:32
bye_bye_harvardbye_bye_harvard
823
823
1
I think the answer is the second hypothesis, but I will leave it to one of the more senior faculty here to weigh in...
– Dawn
Apr 13 at 0:42
2
In the situation you described, even if the department were happy to keep you as an untenured faculty member, they couldn't do so. In my university, the Regents' Bylaws say that, if we kept a tenure-track assistant professor in that position longer than 7 years, then (s)he would automatically have tenure, whether or not tenure was "awarded". (Department and college administrators whose negligence led to such "de facto tenure" would be in very hot water.)
– Andreas Blass
Apr 13 at 0:58
20
I think you're missing opportunity cost. Suppose they had a choice between keeping you at your current salary, and firing you and hiring someone new at the same salary (or likely less). You've already demonstrated that you do not meet the standards expected of a tenured faculty member. The new person might eventually do so. Doesn't that seem like an easy decision?
– Nate Eldredge
Apr 13 at 1:25
7
Just out of curiosity, you were an assistant professor in math at Harvard and this is an honest question you had?
– user2705196
Apr 13 at 4:11
5
There's a paradox here. Quoting: "Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared)" and "why the department would not be happy to keep me".
– Szabolcs
Apr 13 at 9:26
|
show 7 more comments
1
I think the answer is the second hypothesis, but I will leave it to one of the more senior faculty here to weigh in...
– Dawn
Apr 13 at 0:42
2
In the situation you described, even if the department were happy to keep you as an untenured faculty member, they couldn't do so. In my university, the Regents' Bylaws say that, if we kept a tenure-track assistant professor in that position longer than 7 years, then (s)he would automatically have tenure, whether or not tenure was "awarded". (Department and college administrators whose negligence led to such "de facto tenure" would be in very hot water.)
– Andreas Blass
Apr 13 at 0:58
20
I think you're missing opportunity cost. Suppose they had a choice between keeping you at your current salary, and firing you and hiring someone new at the same salary (or likely less). You've already demonstrated that you do not meet the standards expected of a tenured faculty member. The new person might eventually do so. Doesn't that seem like an easy decision?
– Nate Eldredge
Apr 13 at 1:25
7
Just out of curiosity, you were an assistant professor in math at Harvard and this is an honest question you had?
– user2705196
Apr 13 at 4:11
5
There's a paradox here. Quoting: "Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared)" and "why the department would not be happy to keep me".
– Szabolcs
Apr 13 at 9:26
1
1
I think the answer is the second hypothesis, but I will leave it to one of the more senior faculty here to weigh in...
– Dawn
Apr 13 at 0:42
I think the answer is the second hypothesis, but I will leave it to one of the more senior faculty here to weigh in...
– Dawn
Apr 13 at 0:42
2
2
In the situation you described, even if the department were happy to keep you as an untenured faculty member, they couldn't do so. In my university, the Regents' Bylaws say that, if we kept a tenure-track assistant professor in that position longer than 7 years, then (s)he would automatically have tenure, whether or not tenure was "awarded". (Department and college administrators whose negligence led to such "de facto tenure" would be in very hot water.)
– Andreas Blass
Apr 13 at 0:58
In the situation you described, even if the department were happy to keep you as an untenured faculty member, they couldn't do so. In my university, the Regents' Bylaws say that, if we kept a tenure-track assistant professor in that position longer than 7 years, then (s)he would automatically have tenure, whether or not tenure was "awarded". (Department and college administrators whose negligence led to such "de facto tenure" would be in very hot water.)
– Andreas Blass
Apr 13 at 0:58
20
20
I think you're missing opportunity cost. Suppose they had a choice between keeping you at your current salary, and firing you and hiring someone new at the same salary (or likely less). You've already demonstrated that you do not meet the standards expected of a tenured faculty member. The new person might eventually do so. Doesn't that seem like an easy decision?
– Nate Eldredge
Apr 13 at 1:25
I think you're missing opportunity cost. Suppose they had a choice between keeping you at your current salary, and firing you and hiring someone new at the same salary (or likely less). You've already demonstrated that you do not meet the standards expected of a tenured faculty member. The new person might eventually do so. Doesn't that seem like an easy decision?
– Nate Eldredge
Apr 13 at 1:25
7
7
Just out of curiosity, you were an assistant professor in math at Harvard and this is an honest question you had?
– user2705196
Apr 13 at 4:11
Just out of curiosity, you were an assistant professor in math at Harvard and this is an honest question you had?
– user2705196
Apr 13 at 4:11
5
5
There's a paradox here. Quoting: "Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared)" and "why the department would not be happy to keep me".
– Szabolcs
Apr 13 at 9:26
There's a paradox here. Quoting: "Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared)" and "why the department would not be happy to keep me".
– Szabolcs
Apr 13 at 9:26
|
show 7 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
In most jobs in industry, new employees go through a probationary period during which they can be let go (fired) for poor performance without the protections and benefits that more experienced employees might get. If a new employee isn't working out, then they'll be let go during this probationary period.
In higher education in the US, the (customarily at most 7 years long) tenure track is an extremely long probationary period tied with policies that (in the name of academic freedom) give tenured faculty very strong protection against being fired or laid off.
When a tenure-track professor is denied tenure, the university has decided that they're not doing well enough in the job to justify a lifetime commitment from the institution. There are significant costs associated with recruiting a replacement, as well as significant consequences for the morale of other junior faculty, so these decisions aren't made lightly.
Allowing a tenure track faculty member to continue as non-tenured faculty member after you've denied them tenure has problems. In addition to lowering the morale of other tenured and tenure-track faculty, it runs afoul of the guidelines for tenure promulgated by the American Association of Union Professors (AAUP) that say that tenure must be granted after seven years of service.
It should be noted that the tenure system is in a significant decline in the US. More and more, teaching and research work is being done by people in non-tenure-track positions and the number of tenured faculty is declining.
answered Apr 13 at 0:59
Brian BorchersBrian Borchers
29.5k354108
2
thank you for your answer. So the answer is essentially "There is pressure from the society to give tenure to people who have worked for the department for 7 years." Do I understand correctly?
– bye_bye_harvard
Apr 13 at 1:04
2
The tenure system is something that was created and maintained by universities and their faculty. I don’t think that the rest of society has had much to say about it, although some politicians have certainly argued that it should be abolished.
– Brian Borchers
Apr 13 at 1:26
I interpret this as "At some universities, local employment laws and/or university policies require giving tenure to anyone who works for the university for 7 years."
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:06
add a comment |
It is a strategy to avoid the Peter Principle, similar to the military's up-or-out policy.
In particular, there are only so many slots for professors (tenured or otherwise). They want to allocate those slots to the best candidates as possible. Mathematically, there is some quality threshold Q', and they want to give only to candidates with Q > Q'. Now if your Q is less than Q', letting you go will allow them to bring in someone else whose quality may be greater than Q', which improves the department (or your replacement may also have Q < Q', in which case they'll get let go also and try again). In other words -- by not offering tenure, the university is taking the gamble that they can find someone better to fill the spot long-term.
Further, I suspect it is also true that Q is not static, but changes (decreases) after a tenure decision is made.
answered Apr 13 at 3:48
cag51cag51
18.9k93971
add a comment |
There might be exceptions to this but in general universities have rules that faculty can only be employed without tenure for a number of years, so you can only stay for so long after being denied tenure.
It is also true that many times the denial of tenure is not meant to "fire" you, but to say "you are not ready". I know several cases where the denial of tenure included "you are not ready" language, and clearly implied that the candidate would apply for tenure again.
As others have mentioned, these decisions are not taken lightly, and there are usually avenues for appeal.
answered Apr 13 at 5:05
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
3,5031421
the candidate would apply for tenure again — In most American universities, a candidate can only apply for tenure again if the first application for tenure was early—at least a year before the (usually 6th year) deadline— and early tenure applications are discouraged and rare.
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:10
I don't doubt that's the case. But I also know several where it is fairly standard to apply for tenure by the fourth year, and the rules allow for six.
– Martin Argerami
Apr 13 at 14:56
add a comment |
It benefits the department to have more tenured faculty. The dean cares about nothing except the budget, and wishes the entire faculty were adjuncts. I know of a case where the dean, who was trained as an engineer, decided that the only useful math was applied math and decimated the math department, which then created a war between the math department and the dean, who then re-decimated the department. Half the math faculty were tenured, and that was the only way a (sort of) viable math department survived.
The war on tenure has been brutal, and we're losing. If your department kept you, that's another foot of lost ground.
answered Apr 13 at 12:47
B. GoddardB. Goddard
5,04421118
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "415"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f128033%2funiversitys-motivation-for-having-tenure-track-positions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
In most jobs in industry, new employees go through a probationary period during which they can be let go (fired) for poor performance without the protections and benefits that more experienced employees might get. If a new employee isn't working out, then they'll be let go during this probationary period.
In higher education in the US, the (customarily at most 7 years long) tenure track is an extremely long probationary period tied with policies that (in the name of academic freedom) give tenured faculty very strong protection against being fired or laid off.
When a tenure-track professor is denied tenure, the university has decided that they're not doing well enough in the job to justify a lifetime commitment from the institution. There are significant costs associated with recruiting a replacement, as well as significant consequences for the morale of other junior faculty, so these decisions aren't made lightly.
Allowing a tenure track faculty member to continue as non-tenured faculty member after you've denied them tenure has problems. In addition to lowering the morale of other tenured and tenure-track faculty, it runs afoul of the guidelines for tenure promulgated by the American Association of Union Professors (AAUP) that say that tenure must be granted after seven years of service.
It should be noted that the tenure system is in a significant decline in the US. More and more, teaching and research work is being done by people in non-tenure-track positions and the number of tenured faculty is declining.
answered Apr 13 at 0:59
Brian BorchersBrian Borchers
29.5k354108
2
thank you for your answer. So the answer is essentially "There is pressure from the society to give tenure to people who have worked for the department for 7 years." Do I understand correctly?
– bye_bye_harvard
Apr 13 at 1:04
2
The tenure system is something that was created and maintained by universities and their faculty. I don’t think that the rest of society has had much to say about it, although some politicians have certainly argued that it should be abolished.
– Brian Borchers
Apr 13 at 1:26
I interpret this as "At some universities, local employment laws and/or university policies require giving tenure to anyone who works for the university for 7 years."
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:06
add a comment |
In most jobs in industry, new employees go through a probationary period during which they can be let go (fired) for poor performance without the protections and benefits that more experienced employees might get. If a new employee isn't working out, then they'll be let go during this probationary period.
In higher education in the US, the (customarily at most 7 years long) tenure track is an extremely long probationary period tied with policies that (in the name of academic freedom) give tenured faculty very strong protection against being fired or laid off.
When a tenure-track professor is denied tenure, the university has decided that they're not doing well enough in the job to justify a lifetime commitment from the institution. There are significant costs associated with recruiting a replacement, as well as significant consequences for the morale of other junior faculty, so these decisions aren't made lightly.
Allowing a tenure track faculty member to continue as non-tenured faculty member after you've denied them tenure has problems. In addition to lowering the morale of other tenured and tenure-track faculty, it runs afoul of the guidelines for tenure promulgated by the American Association of Union Professors (AAUP) that say that tenure must be granted after seven years of service.
It should be noted that the tenure system is in a significant decline in the US. More and more, teaching and research work is being done by people in non-tenure-track positions and the number of tenured faculty is declining.
answered Apr 13 at 0:59
Brian BorchersBrian Borchers
29.5k354108
2
thank you for your answer. So the answer is essentially "There is pressure from the society to give tenure to people who have worked for the department for 7 years." Do I understand correctly?
– bye_bye_harvard
Apr 13 at 1:04
2
The tenure system is something that was created and maintained by universities and their faculty. I don’t think that the rest of society has had much to say about it, although some politicians have certainly argued that it should be abolished.
– Brian Borchers
Apr 13 at 1:26
I interpret this as "At some universities, local employment laws and/or university policies require giving tenure to anyone who works for the university for 7 years."
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:06
add a comment |
In most jobs in industry, new employees go through a probationary period during which they can be let go (fired) for poor performance without the protections and benefits that more experienced employees might get. If a new employee isn't working out, then they'll be let go during this probationary period.
In higher education in the US, the (customarily at most 7 years long) tenure track is an extremely long probationary period tied with policies that (in the name of academic freedom) give tenured faculty very strong protection against being fired or laid off.
When a tenure-track professor is denied tenure, the university has decided that they're not doing well enough in the job to justify a lifetime commitment from the institution. There are significant costs associated with recruiting a replacement, as well as significant consequences for the morale of other junior faculty, so these decisions aren't made lightly.
Allowing a tenure track faculty member to continue as non-tenured faculty member after you've denied them tenure has problems. In addition to lowering the morale of other tenured and tenure-track faculty, it runs afoul of the guidelines for tenure promulgated by the American Association of Union Professors (AAUP) that say that tenure must be granted after seven years of service.
It should be noted that the tenure system is in a significant decline in the US. More and more, teaching and research work is being done by people in non-tenure-track positions and the number of tenured faculty is declining.
answered Apr 13 at 0:59
Brian BorchersBrian Borchers
29.5k354108
In most jobs in industry, new employees go through a probationary period during which they can be let go (fired) for poor performance without the protections and benefits that more experienced employees might get. If a new employee isn't working out, then they'll be let go during this probationary period.
In higher education in the US, the (customarily at most 7 years long) tenure track is an extremely long probationary period tied with policies that (in the name of academic freedom) give tenured faculty very strong protection against being fired or laid off.
When a tenure-track professor is denied tenure, the university has decided that they're not doing well enough in the job to justify a lifetime commitment from the institution. There are significant costs associated with recruiting a replacement, as well as significant consequences for the morale of other junior faculty, so these decisions aren't made lightly.
Allowing a tenure track faculty member to continue as non-tenured faculty member after you've denied them tenure has problems. In addition to lowering the morale of other tenured and tenure-track faculty, it runs afoul of the guidelines for tenure promulgated by the American Association of Union Professors (AAUP) that say that tenure must be granted after seven years of service.
It should be noted that the tenure system is in a significant decline in the US. More and more, teaching and research work is being done by people in non-tenure-track positions and the number of tenured faculty is declining.
answered Apr 13 at 0:59
Brian BorchersBrian Borchers
29.5k354108
answered Apr 13 at 0:59
Brian BorchersBrian Borchers
29.5k354108
answered Apr 13 at 0:59
Brian BorchersBrian Borchers
29.5k354108
answered Apr 13 at 0:59
Brian BorchersBrian Borchers
29.5k354108
29.5k354108
2
thank you for your answer. So the answer is essentially "There is pressure from the society to give tenure to people who have worked for the department for 7 years." Do I understand correctly?
– bye_bye_harvard
Apr 13 at 1:04
2
The tenure system is something that was created and maintained by universities and their faculty. I don’t think that the rest of society has had much to say about it, although some politicians have certainly argued that it should be abolished.
– Brian Borchers
Apr 13 at 1:26
I interpret this as "At some universities, local employment laws and/or university policies require giving tenure to anyone who works for the university for 7 years."
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:06
add a comment |
2
thank you for your answer. So the answer is essentially "There is pressure from the society to give tenure to people who have worked for the department for 7 years." Do I understand correctly?
– bye_bye_harvard
Apr 13 at 1:04
2
The tenure system is something that was created and maintained by universities and their faculty. I don’t think that the rest of society has had much to say about it, although some politicians have certainly argued that it should be abolished.
– Brian Borchers
Apr 13 at 1:26
I interpret this as "At some universities, local employment laws and/or university policies require giving tenure to anyone who works for the university for 7 years."
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:06
2
2
thank you for your answer. So the answer is essentially "There is pressure from the society to give tenure to people who have worked for the department for 7 years." Do I understand correctly?
– bye_bye_harvard
Apr 13 at 1:04
thank you for your answer. So the answer is essentially "There is pressure from the society to give tenure to people who have worked for the department for 7 years." Do I understand correctly?
– bye_bye_harvard
Apr 13 at 1:04
2
2
The tenure system is something that was created and maintained by universities and their faculty. I don’t think that the rest of society has had much to say about it, although some politicians have certainly argued that it should be abolished.
– Brian Borchers
Apr 13 at 1:26
The tenure system is something that was created and maintained by universities and their faculty. I don’t think that the rest of society has had much to say about it, although some politicians have certainly argued that it should be abolished.
– Brian Borchers
Apr 13 at 1:26
I interpret this as "At some universities, local employment laws and/or university policies require giving tenure to anyone who works for the university for 7 years."
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:06
I interpret this as "At some universities, local employment laws and/or university policies require giving tenure to anyone who works for the university for 7 years."
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:06
add a comment |
It is a strategy to avoid the Peter Principle, similar to the military's up-or-out policy.
In particular, there are only so many slots for professors (tenured or otherwise). They want to allocate those slots to the best candidates as possible. Mathematically, there is some quality threshold Q', and they want to give only to candidates with Q > Q'. Now if your Q is less than Q', letting you go will allow them to bring in someone else whose quality may be greater than Q', which improves the department (or your replacement may also have Q < Q', in which case they'll get let go also and try again). In other words -- by not offering tenure, the university is taking the gamble that they can find someone better to fill the spot long-term.
Further, I suspect it is also true that Q is not static, but changes (decreases) after a tenure decision is made.
answered Apr 13 at 3:48
cag51cag51
18.9k93971
add a comment |
It is a strategy to avoid the Peter Principle, similar to the military's up-or-out policy.
In particular, there are only so many slots for professors (tenured or otherwise). They want to allocate those slots to the best candidates as possible. Mathematically, there is some quality threshold Q', and they want to give only to candidates with Q > Q'. Now if your Q is less than Q', letting you go will allow them to bring in someone else whose quality may be greater than Q', which improves the department (or your replacement may also have Q < Q', in which case they'll get let go also and try again). In other words -- by not offering tenure, the university is taking the gamble that they can find someone better to fill the spot long-term.
Further, I suspect it is also true that Q is not static, but changes (decreases) after a tenure decision is made.
answered Apr 13 at 3:48
cag51cag51
18.9k93971
add a comment |
It is a strategy to avoid the Peter Principle, similar to the military's up-or-out policy.
In particular, there are only so many slots for professors (tenured or otherwise). They want to allocate those slots to the best candidates as possible. Mathematically, there is some quality threshold Q', and they want to give only to candidates with Q > Q'. Now if your Q is less than Q', letting you go will allow them to bring in someone else whose quality may be greater than Q', which improves the department (or your replacement may also have Q < Q', in which case they'll get let go also and try again). In other words -- by not offering tenure, the university is taking the gamble that they can find someone better to fill the spot long-term.
Further, I suspect it is also true that Q is not static, but changes (decreases) after a tenure decision is made.
answered Apr 13 at 3:48
cag51cag51
18.9k93971
It is a strategy to avoid the Peter Principle, similar to the military's up-or-out policy.
In particular, there are only so many slots for professors (tenured or otherwise). They want to allocate those slots to the best candidates as possible. Mathematically, there is some quality threshold Q', and they want to give only to candidates with Q > Q'. Now if your Q is less than Q', letting you go will allow them to bring in someone else whose quality may be greater than Q', which improves the department (or your replacement may also have Q < Q', in which case they'll get let go also and try again). In other words -- by not offering tenure, the university is taking the gamble that they can find someone better to fill the spot long-term.
Further, I suspect it is also true that Q is not static, but changes (decreases) after a tenure decision is made.
answered Apr 13 at 3:48
cag51cag51
18.9k93971
edited Apr 13 at 3:55
answered Apr 13 at 3:48
cag51cag51
18.9k93971
answered Apr 13 at 3:48
cag51cag51
18.9k93971
answered Apr 13 at 3:48
cag51cag51
18.9k93971
18.9k93971
add a comment |
add a comment |
There might be exceptions to this but in general universities have rules that faculty can only be employed without tenure for a number of years, so you can only stay for so long after being denied tenure.
It is also true that many times the denial of tenure is not meant to "fire" you, but to say "you are not ready". I know several cases where the denial of tenure included "you are not ready" language, and clearly implied that the candidate would apply for tenure again.
As others have mentioned, these decisions are not taken lightly, and there are usually avenues for appeal.
answered Apr 13 at 5:05
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
3,5031421
the candidate would apply for tenure again — In most American universities, a candidate can only apply for tenure again if the first application for tenure was early—at least a year before the (usually 6th year) deadline— and early tenure applications are discouraged and rare.
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:10
I don't doubt that's the case. But I also know several where it is fairly standard to apply for tenure by the fourth year, and the rules allow for six.
– Martin Argerami
Apr 13 at 14:56
add a comment |
There might be exceptions to this but in general universities have rules that faculty can only be employed without tenure for a number of years, so you can only stay for so long after being denied tenure.
It is also true that many times the denial of tenure is not meant to "fire" you, but to say "you are not ready". I know several cases where the denial of tenure included "you are not ready" language, and clearly implied that the candidate would apply for tenure again.
As others have mentioned, these decisions are not taken lightly, and there are usually avenues for appeal.
answered Apr 13 at 5:05
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
3,5031421
the candidate would apply for tenure again — In most American universities, a candidate can only apply for tenure again if the first application for tenure was early—at least a year before the (usually 6th year) deadline— and early tenure applications are discouraged and rare.
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:10
I don't doubt that's the case. But I also know several where it is fairly standard to apply for tenure by the fourth year, and the rules allow for six.
– Martin Argerami
Apr 13 at 14:56
add a comment |
There might be exceptions to this but in general universities have rules that faculty can only be employed without tenure for a number of years, so you can only stay for so long after being denied tenure.
It is also true that many times the denial of tenure is not meant to "fire" you, but to say "you are not ready". I know several cases where the denial of tenure included "you are not ready" language, and clearly implied that the candidate would apply for tenure again.
As others have mentioned, these decisions are not taken lightly, and there are usually avenues for appeal.
answered Apr 13 at 5:05
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
3,5031421
There might be exceptions to this but in general universities have rules that faculty can only be employed without tenure for a number of years, so you can only stay for so long after being denied tenure.
It is also true that many times the denial of tenure is not meant to "fire" you, but to say "you are not ready". I know several cases where the denial of tenure included "you are not ready" language, and clearly implied that the candidate would apply for tenure again.
As others have mentioned, these decisions are not taken lightly, and there are usually avenues for appeal.
answered Apr 13 at 5:05
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
3,5031421
answered Apr 13 at 5:05
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
3,5031421
answered Apr 13 at 5:05
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
3,5031421
answered Apr 13 at 5:05
Martin ArgeramiMartin Argerami
3,5031421
3,5031421
the candidate would apply for tenure again — In most American universities, a candidate can only apply for tenure again if the first application for tenure was early—at least a year before the (usually 6th year) deadline— and early tenure applications are discouraged and rare.
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:10
I don't doubt that's the case. But I also know several where it is fairly standard to apply for tenure by the fourth year, and the rules allow for six.
– Martin Argerami
Apr 13 at 14:56
add a comment |
the candidate would apply for tenure again — In most American universities, a candidate can only apply for tenure again if the first application for tenure was early—at least a year before the (usually 6th year) deadline— and early tenure applications are discouraged and rare.
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:10
I don't doubt that's the case. But I also know several where it is fairly standard to apply for tenure by the fourth year, and the rules allow for six.
– Martin Argerami
Apr 13 at 14:56
the candidate would apply for tenure again — In most American universities, a candidate can only apply for tenure again if the first application for tenure was early—at least a year before the (usually 6th year) deadline— and early tenure applications are discouraged and rare.
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:10
the candidate would apply for tenure again — In most American universities, a candidate can only apply for tenure again if the first application for tenure was early—at least a year before the (usually 6th year) deadline— and early tenure applications are discouraged and rare.
– JeffE
Apr 13 at 14:10
I don't doubt that's the case. But I also know several where it is fairly standard to apply for tenure by the fourth year, and the rules allow for six.
– Martin Argerami
Apr 13 at 14:56
I don't doubt that's the case. But I also know several where it is fairly standard to apply for tenure by the fourth year, and the rules allow for six.
– Martin Argerami
Apr 13 at 14:56
add a comment |
It benefits the department to have more tenured faculty. The dean cares about nothing except the budget, and wishes the entire faculty were adjuncts. I know of a case where the dean, who was trained as an engineer, decided that the only useful math was applied math and decimated the math department, which then created a war between the math department and the dean, who then re-decimated the department. Half the math faculty were tenured, and that was the only way a (sort of) viable math department survived.
The war on tenure has been brutal, and we're losing. If your department kept you, that's another foot of lost ground.
answered Apr 13 at 12:47
B. GoddardB. Goddard
5,04421118
add a comment |
It benefits the department to have more tenured faculty. The dean cares about nothing except the budget, and wishes the entire faculty were adjuncts. I know of a case where the dean, who was trained as an engineer, decided that the only useful math was applied math and decimated the math department, which then created a war between the math department and the dean, who then re-decimated the department. Half the math faculty were tenured, and that was the only way a (sort of) viable math department survived.
The war on tenure has been brutal, and we're losing. If your department kept you, that's another foot of lost ground.
answered Apr 13 at 12:47
B. GoddardB. Goddard
5,04421118
add a comment |
It benefits the department to have more tenured faculty. The dean cares about nothing except the budget, and wishes the entire faculty were adjuncts. I know of a case where the dean, who was trained as an engineer, decided that the only useful math was applied math and decimated the math department, which then created a war between the math department and the dean, who then re-decimated the department. Half the math faculty were tenured, and that was the only way a (sort of) viable math department survived.
The war on tenure has been brutal, and we're losing. If your department kept you, that's another foot of lost ground.
answered Apr 13 at 12:47
B. GoddardB. Goddard
5,04421118
It benefits the department to have more tenured faculty. The dean cares about nothing except the budget, and wishes the entire faculty were adjuncts. I know of a case where the dean, who was trained as an engineer, decided that the only useful math was applied math and decimated the math department, which then created a war between the math department and the dean, who then re-decimated the department. Half the math faculty were tenured, and that was the only way a (sort of) viable math department survived.
The war on tenure has been brutal, and we're losing. If your department kept you, that's another foot of lost ground.
answered Apr 13 at 12:47
B. GoddardB. Goddard
5,04421118
answered Apr 13 at 12:47
B. GoddardB. Goddard
5,04421118
answered Apr 13 at 12:47
B. GoddardB. Goddard
5,04421118
answered Apr 13 at 12:47
B. GoddardB. Goddard
5,04421118
5,04421118
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Academia Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2facademia.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f128033%2funiversitys-motivation-for-having-tenure-track-positions%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
I think the answer is the second hypothesis, but I will leave it to one of the more senior faculty here to weigh in...
– Dawn
Apr 13 at 0:42
2
In the situation you described, even if the department were happy to keep you as an untenured faculty member, they couldn't do so. In my university, the Regents' Bylaws say that, if we kept a tenure-track assistant professor in that position longer than 7 years, then (s)he would automatically have tenure, whether or not tenure was "awarded". (Department and college administrators whose negligence led to such "de facto tenure" would be in very hot water.)
– Andreas Blass
Apr 13 at 0:58
20
I think you're missing opportunity cost. Suppose they had a choice between keeping you at your current salary, and firing you and hiring someone new at the same salary (or likely less). You've already demonstrated that you do not meet the standards expected of a tenured faculty member. The new person might eventually do so. Doesn't that seem like an easy decision?
– Nate Eldredge
Apr 13 at 1:25
7
Just out of curiosity, you were an assistant professor in math at Harvard and this is an honest question you had?
– user2705196
Apr 13 at 4:11
5
There's a paradox here. Quoting: "Assume I do not care about job security (and never cared)" and "why the department would not be happy to keep me".
– Szabolcs
Apr 13 at 9:26