Essay on "Tenure Has Become a Civil Service Style"

/>

Case law, such as Perry v. Sindermann [408 U.S. 593 (1972)], formalized and legally defined tenure (Hill, 2010). It provided legal guidelines for property and liberty rights of faculty. The most significant legal source regarding tenure is the American Association of University Professors (AAUP). AAUP has become the voice of professors in the legality of post-tenure review, even though it does not have legal authority.

Where institutions and administrators argue that tenure adds burden and creates mediocrity, others argue tenure is necessary for professional development of faculty to attract new students and other faculty members (Hill, 2010). Still others feel that tenure is being weakened by replacing full-time faculty with part-time faculty and more than half of full-time faculties are hired for non-tenure positions (Lasko, 2006). Some ethical dilemmas have occurred due to historical acceptance of some degree of misbehavior or incompetence among tenured professors because the costs of prevention outweigh the benefits. Professors have special obligations in communities where their profession is judged by their actions and words. With public pressure for accountability, some states have adopted post-tenure review polices for institutions of higher education.

Under Texas State law, the Education Code outlines polices for higher learning institutions to use in adopting their own post-tenure review policies (Sec. 51.942. Performance Evaluation of Tenured Faculty, 1998). The code requires faculty to be subject to evaluation process no more often than once a year and not less often than once every six years. The evaluation is required to be based on professional responsibility in teaching, research, service, patient care, and administration as well as include peer review. The evaluation is directed toward professional development and incorporates commonly recognized due process rights. This includes notice of the review, the manner of scope of the evaluation, opportunity to provide documentation during the process and before, (subject to disciplinary action on basis of evaluation conducted), notice of specific charges, and opportunity for hearing the charges.

The faculty member may be subject to revocation of tenure or other appropriate disciplinary action if incompetency, neglect of duty, or other good cause is determined to be present. Neglect of duty is defined as, "continuing or repeated substantial neglect of professional responsibilities" (Sec. 51.942. Performance Evaluation of Tenured Faculty, 1998). In case of subjectivity to termination on the basis of evaluation, the member must be given the opportunity for referral of the matter to a nonbinding alternative dispute resolution process… READ MORE