Higher Ed Utah

A bill was introduced last week in the legislature eliminating the practice of granting tenure to Utah faculty. From reading about this issue in the media, I believe the intent is in giving schools the flexibility to eliminate “dead wood” among the faculty by making room for younger, harder working professionals.

As a former legislator, it seems there is a negative image of tenure that is perpetuated by misinformation; the stereotype about tenured faculty is that it unfairly rewards lazy faculty. Some believe that at one time in a tenured professor’s career they worked hard, got rewarded by colleagues, were guaranteed employment for life and are now living large at the expense of tax payers. The first inclination is to equate this to the business world; after all, what business person would give tenure to their employees?

In Utah, tenure must be earned and is not automatic. Being on “tenure-track” means the faculty member is not yet tenured but is eligible to be reviewed for tenure at some point.  There is no guarantee that the individual will receive tenure but he or she has the opportunity to go “up” for tenure.  Many faculty will never have that opportunity, as they are hired, for example, to do research only or teaching only, rather than to undertake the full scope of work that is expected of  tenure eligible faculty. Our schools will only grant tenure after annual reviews. After that, the tenure status faculty must be successful for a period of five to seven years before being granted tenure.  According to Regents policy, each school must have a post tenure review process where faculty are evaluated by their peers, students, and administrators every three to four years. In Utah, less than half of faculty have earned tenure status. Tenure is a positive tradition in higher education. Historically, it has protected faculty who study and advocate controversial points of view.

Society needs ways to protect what some might consider a dissonant voice. However probably more important is to protect the right of faculty to discover new ways of understanding how the economic system operates, how to use genetic research to improve medicine, etc.  Faculty conducting cutting-edge research often disrupt the economic status of strong, politically connected corporations and economic interest groups. Society must protect the right of faculty to provide “disruptive technologies” that will dramatically change the world.

In my opinion, tenure must be maintained for the betterment of society by protecting the voices of people who look at the world differently than the status quo. Additionally, if Utah is the only state in the Union to eliminate tenure, our ability to attract and retain quality faculty at our institutions would be seriously diminished. The brain drain would be substantial. Utah would become the home of second rate faculty, second rate institutions, and consequently second rate students. Utah can’t afford to be the low cost, low quality higher education state!

The debate over tenure will be interesting to watch as it is not an easy concept to defend if you are not familiar with what it completely entails.  You might be one who feels tenure gives special status to a subgroup of public employees. However, at the end of the day Utah needs tenure to protect the voice of the minority, to be protected from undue political and economic pressures, and to remain competitive for the best and the brightest.