10 ms·

Georgia’s University System Takes On Tenure

45 points by ausbah 5y ago

AlexandrB 5y ago
Seems like a logical next step in shifting power at universities to the administrative staff. In 50 years universities are going to look like technical institutes - all the teaching and research staff will be employees that can be fired on a whim.
hellbannedguy 5y ago
I always felt student input should be a huge factor in teacher dismissals. I felt my classmates were very fair with teachers. They didn't know the politics at the instition. They didn't dislike a teacher because the course work was difficult. They didn't like teachers who phoned their class in like an annoyance. They didn't like egotistical bullies which in my schools we all tenured teachers. (I wouldn't mind seeing huge changes to tenure.)
haspoken 5y ago
https://archive.is/0hhfM https://archive.is/0hhfM
theknocker 5y ago
Excuse me while I cry for a few hours because liberal college professors feel a chilling effect on their free speech.
mjburgess 5y ago
> Last month, the board published a draft policy that included a clause stating that a tenured professor could be removed for reasons “other than for cause,” which generated concern leading up to the approval of its final policy. > While that language is no longer in the approved policy, The controversial element was removed and the policy is now: you can be fired if you fail two annual reviews, make no progress against an improvement plan, and your performance may now also be judged on the performance of your students. Seems entirely reasonable. Accoutability cannot function with extreme 'tenure principles'/
- merpnderp 5y ago
  So this process has worked for over a century producing one of the best academic systems in the world, but is no longer viable in 2021 because it is no longer possible to function with accountability?
  - mchusma 5y ago
    I don't think tenure is the main cause of this, but I don't believe that the university system is in very good shape. It appears quite broken (massively increased costs and decreasing evidence of efficacy). About 40+ years ago it was unquestionable that going to a university was the right choice for the vast majority. Now, it is far from clear.
    - seibelj 5y ago
      Before the internet you needed a fully stocked library with excellent organization and archive retrieval, top quality professors who could (because of technology) teach at-most an auditorium full of people, and the ability to meet in person with other people knowledgable of the subject which previously required a centralized meeting place (the university). All of this is now provided with superior quality by the internet. Now the only advantage of a university is signaling where you got accepted, networking with similar people for future jobs, becoming socialized by a culture of university-types, and showing you have the discipline to jump through 4 years of fairly arbitrary hoops. There is value to this, but is it worth $200k+? Additionally, the cost of education is so high that students are customers now. Expelling too many students is simply infeasible given the enormous debt issued by universities for their massive capital expansions (buildings, gyms, stadiums), and huge bureaucracies. Students are dictating the terms of who and what is being taught, and schools must cater to it or risk reducing their flow of new applicants, which is the death-knell of so many smaller liberal arts schools in recent years. Tenure threatens the ability to shape the school to match customer expectations.
      - colinmhayes 5y ago
        > Now the only advantage of a university is signaling where you got accepted, networking with similar people for future jobs, becoming socialized by a culture of university-types, and showing you have the discipline to jump through 4 years of fairly arbitrary hoops. There is value to this, but is it worth $200k+? Yes this is absolutely worth 200k if you do it at the right school. Getting the signals and network is the only way to get a white collar job.
1cvmask 5y ago
Academic censorship has been around for a while. https://theintercept.com/2021/09/28/israel-palestine-unc-academic-freedom/ https://theintercept.com/2021/09/28/israel-palestine-unc-aca... https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-58765052 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-58765052 If you want academic freedom as a professor you can move to China so long as you don't cover China and the CCP.
- adolph 5y ago
  There is something to be said for migrating to where one's efforts and beliefs are compatible with the prevailing governance.
  - OJFord 5y ago
    How long before you start to wonder whether it really is still your own belief?
    - adolph 5y ago
      Vanlife
mensetmanusman 5y ago
This just means they got rid of the concept of tenure. Albeit, I have heard it argued that tenure is not as relevant in the modern era of social media and twitter mobs, because academia is turning into a monoculture of thought through self-censorship. It is understandable that the more diverse taxpaying public would start to question the purpose of protecting the views of a privileged elite class when they themselves don’t feel supported.
- threatofrain 5y ago
  Self censorship in this case means censure by professional colleagues. As opposed to censure by the executive class. Executives are far more sensitive to Twitter mobs than professional colleagues. The medical and legal profession also censures fellow practitioners who, regardless of their basis in scientific or factual thinking, bring infamy to the profession through recklessness or callousness to the wellbeing of others.
- shepardrtc 5y ago
  > privileged elite class Professors most certainly are not a "privileged elite class." They're research/teaching specialists. Your talking point sounds straight out of some right-wing website/tv channel.
  - mensetmanusman 5y ago
    Sorry, I should have added ‘’ around ‘privileged elite class’ to be more clear that it is certainly a label up for debate. Unfortunately, with the destruction of many jobs due to outsourcing and the shrinking middle class, there are a growing % (and number) of citizens who would consider tenured professors (and their surrounding bureaucracy) an elite institution that looks down on their way of life. Treading this carefully might be necessary since their voting power is growing.
  - amadeuspagel 5y ago
    > Professors most certainly are not a "privileged elite class." What is tenure if not a privilege? And if it isn't then what's the problem here? If tenure isn't something valuable then why are we discussing a story about it being taken away? EDIT: Just lol at the downvotes and the comments here. Lots of snark, personal attacks, but no one actually able to explain how tenure is not a privilege.
threatofrain 5y ago
> In a direct challenge to the hallowed tradition of tenure, Georgia’s public university system will now let its colleges’ administrations remove a tenured professor with little to no faculty input. > The Board of Regents on Wednesday approved the new policy, which is the only one of its kind in the country, according to the American Association of University Professors. > The Board of Regents, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, has maintained that the policy change will streamline the process of removing faculty members who do not adequately contribute to a university, and the 19-member board unanimously approved the new measure on Wednesday. > Previously, the process for removing tenured professors included a peer review process with other faculty. Now, professors at 25 of its 26 public universities can be removed after consecutively failing two annual reviews. If a professor also fails to complete an improvement plan after the reviews, then that alone would be justification for termination. https://www.usg.edu/regents/assets/regents/documents/board_meetings/Agenda_2021_10_12-13.pdf https://www.usg.edu/regents/assets/regents/documents/board_m...
Jabbles 5y ago
Is tenure similar to the inability to fire arbitrary employees in parts of Europe?
- 0des 5y ago
  Until this case, yes. From what I can gather, the goal of it is to allow for more abstract research that may draw criticism; a way to say "this person has been reliable and known reputable in this field for X time". Imagine a medical professor with tenure who wants to do research surrounding umbilical stem cells, or fetal research. Tenure, from my understanding, would give them some understanding or forgiveness for the controversial nature of their research topic.
  - lordnacho 5y ago
    Also to allow people to take risks that might not pay off. You try your new molecule, it doesn't cure cancer, you still have a job.
matthewdgreen 5y ago
I see a number of comments below hailing this as a good thing, one that will benefit students. These folks look at Universities as just another company and think this is normal. It is not. It is a terrible mistake and the GA system (and its students, and society) will be worse off for it. The notion of tenure wasn't developed to protect dead wood. It came about because historically it was often difficult to distinguish "fired for cause" from "fired for speaking out in ways that irritate the powers that be." The ability to fire people for cause is appropriate to businesses and startups, and even there we routinely hear about controversies where "for cause" is blurred together with "saying things that leadership didn't like." The tenure system was explicitly designed to prevent that, and yes, the "cost" of that system is that some dead wood will slip by -- but this has always been an acceptable cost. Our society relies on having a pool of people who cannot be easily silenced by their employers. We will suffer when those guarantees are weakened. On a personal note: I'm a tenured CS professor and make less than half (often significantly less) than what my colleagues in industry make, for a job that often requires longer hours and a lot of travel. I also have had some experience with having my speech restricted by the administration [1] under the guise of "violations of University policy". As a tenured faculty member I stay because there is no other job where I can speak about anything I want, even if sometimes I say dumb things. My colleagues in industry can't do this -- some of them tell me they are scared to even "like" Tweets that criticize their employer. That's messed up. To those folks who don't care about these broader arguments and think this decision is reasonable, that it "will improve faculty performance," even there you're wrong. If GA becomes the state that doesn't have tenure, all the best faculty will go to other states and/or to industry. Every state university already struggles to get top talent, and now GA has given themselves a huge hiring disadvantage. Whatever "productivity" benefits you might get from greater faculty control are going to be hugely outweighed by the fallout from this stupid (and obviously political) decision. The board of regents knows this, and they don't care. [1] https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/johns-hopkins-apologizes-for-yanking-profs-nsa-blog/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/johns-hopkin...
- steelframe 5y ago
  I didn't read your username at first, and about 3/4 of the way through I asked myself, "Wait, is this Matthew Green?" Just letting you know from here on out you'll never be to pull off a nom-de-plume.
causi 5y ago
The move is being criticized by many professors, politicians and advocates for academic freedom as a threat to tenure, which is intended to protect faculty from dismissal without just cause, allowing them to develop thoughts or ideas that may be unpopular. Reap what you sow. Universities have spent twenty years crushing unpopular opinions with free speech zones and hate-mob controlled speaking appointments. They've attacked the concept of due process by booting students at the slightest unsubstantiated accusation of racism or sexual assault. If this wasn't a disaster I'd be pissing myself laughing.
- roflc0ptic 5y ago
  Im not sure this is a good take - most of the things you’re describing are basically an increase of administrative power; so too is letting the admin fire tenured professors. The story here is really one of metastasis of university administration
  - causi 5y ago
    The story here is really one of metastasis of university administration Indeed it is, I agree. My point is professors have been happy to let administrators stomp all over the rights of students but suddenly diversity of thought and protecting dissident opinions is important now that it's the professors in the crosshairs. Don't get me wrong; this is a horrible development. It just comes with a tinge of poetic justice.
    - roflc0ptic 5y ago
      Ah, fair, think I misunderstood ya
boringg 5y ago
Of course this would happen in Georgia.
IndPhysiker 5y ago
I'm going a different way here since the important metric is that out of 5800 tenured faculy, only 1500 professors signed their petition (article did not specify tenured status of those who signed). As an academic, I have to say this is largely about preparing a way for new profs to reach tenure. With most departments having a set headcount, it has always been the case with aging profs to slow down their efforts and ride the train to emeritus status. That makes for frusterating roadblocks to one's career. In the sciences, these are becoming more far between as ambitious profs don't slow down as there is still ground to achieve more personally through accolades, industry and professional society awards, etc. Most of the aged profs I've worked with in the past 5 years are still cranking out PhD students and bringing in funding.
happyjack 5y ago
Another nail in the American University casket. I worked in academic research for 3 years, and GTFO. I still have a project here and there with a University, but I largely avoid them. While I do, in principle, agree with the tenure system, it's just not compatible with what the American University system has become. The system has two systems within it: 1. teach / train / attract students and charge large tuition for promises of them entering the workforce higher than their high school colleagues (and justify the price with parties and college football, new dorms, etc.) 2. perform high end research that is funded by Uncle Sam, in which the Universities' skim 40-120% overhead on (yes, OVER 100%) that pays the bills and keeps the lights on. Also pays for large admin salaries. Universities are corporations, and are "for profit." I'm not sure free inquiry, free speech, and the likes are compatible with making students feel safe / not offended so they can attract their tuition $, while also attracting $ from Uncle Sam and corporations for research.

45 points by ausbah 5y ago

Seems like a logical next step in shifting power at universities to the administrative staff. In 50 years universities are going to look like technical institutes - all the teaching and research staff will be employees that can be fired on a whim.

hellbannedguy 5y ago

I always felt student input should be a huge factor in teacher dismissals. I felt my classmates were very fair with teachers. They didn't know the politics at the instition. They didn't dislike a teacher because the course work was difficult. They didn't like teachers who phoned their class in like an annoyance. They didn't like egotistical bullies which in my schools we all tenured teachers. (I wouldn't mind seeing huge changes to tenure.)

haspoken 5y ago

https://archive.is/0hhfM https://archive.is/0hhfM

theknocker 5y ago

Excuse me while I cry for a few hours because liberal college professors feel a chilling effect on their free speech.

mjburgess 5y ago

> Last month, the board published a draft policy that included a clause stating that a tenured professor could be removed for reasons “other than for cause,” which generated concern leading up to the approval of its final policy. > While that language is no longer in the approved policy, The controversial element was removed and the policy is now: you can be fired if you fail two annual reviews, make no progress against an improvement plan, and your performance may now also be judged on the performance of your students. Seems entirely reasonable. Accoutability cannot function with extreme 'tenure principles'/

merpnderp 5y ago
So this process has worked for over a century producing one of the best academic systems in the world, but is no longer viable in 2021 because it is no longer possible to function with accountability?
- mchusma 5y ago
  I don't think tenure is the main cause of this, but I don't believe that the university system is in very good shape. It appears quite broken (massively increased costs and decreasing evidence of efficacy). About 40+ years ago it was unquestionable that going to a university was the right choice for the vast majority. Now, it is far from clear.
  - seibelj 5y ago
    Before the internet you needed a fully stocked library with excellent organization and archive retrieval, top quality professors who could (because of technology) teach at-most an auditorium full of people, and the ability to meet in person with other people knowledgable of the subject which previously required a centralized meeting place (the university). All of this is now provided with superior quality by the internet. Now the only advantage of a university is signaling where you got accepted, networking with similar people for future jobs, becoming socialized by a culture of university-types, and showing you have the discipline to jump through 4 years of fairly arbitrary hoops. There is value to this, but is it worth $200k+? Additionally, the cost of education is so high that students are customers now. Expelling too many students is simply infeasible given the enormous debt issued by universities for their massive capital expansions (buildings, gyms, stadiums), and huge bureaucracies. Students are dictating the terms of who and what is being taught, and schools must cater to it or risk reducing their flow of new applicants, which is the death-knell of so many smaller liberal arts schools in recent years. Tenure threatens the ability to shape the school to match customer expectations.
    - colinmhayes 5y ago
      > Now the only advantage of a university is signaling where you got accepted, networking with similar people for future jobs, becoming socialized by a culture of university-types, and showing you have the discipline to jump through 4 years of fairly arbitrary hoops. There is value to this, but is it worth $200k+? Yes this is absolutely worth 200k if you do it at the right school. Getting the signals and network is the only way to get a white collar job.

1cvmask 5y ago

Academic censorship has been around for a while. https://theintercept.com/2021/09/28/israel-palestine-unc-academic-freedom/ https://theintercept.com/2021/09/28/israel-palestine-unc-aca... https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-58765052 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-bristol-58765052 If you want academic freedom as a professor you can move to China so long as you don't cover China and the CCP.

adolph 5y ago
There is something to be said for migrating to where one's efforts and beliefs are compatible with the prevailing governance.
- OJFord 5y ago
  How long before you start to wonder whether it really is still your own belief?
  - adolph 5y ago
    Vanlife

mensetmanusman 5y ago

This just means they got rid of the concept of tenure. Albeit, I have heard it argued that tenure is not as relevant in the modern era of social media and twitter mobs, because academia is turning into a monoculture of thought through self-censorship. It is understandable that the more diverse taxpaying public would start to question the purpose of protecting the views of a privileged elite class when they themselves don’t feel supported.

threatofrain 5y ago
Self censorship in this case means censure by professional colleagues. As opposed to censure by the executive class. Executives are far more sensitive to Twitter mobs than professional colleagues. The medical and legal profession also censures fellow practitioners who, regardless of their basis in scientific or factual thinking, bring infamy to the profession through recklessness or callousness to the wellbeing of others.
shepardrtc 5y ago
> privileged elite class Professors most certainly are not a "privileged elite class." They're research/teaching specialists. Your talking point sounds straight out of some right-wing website/tv channel.
- mensetmanusman 5y ago
  Sorry, I should have added ‘’ around ‘privileged elite class’ to be more clear that it is certainly a label up for debate. Unfortunately, with the destruction of many jobs due to outsourcing and the shrinking middle class, there are a growing % (and number) of citizens who would consider tenured professors (and their surrounding bureaucracy) an elite institution that looks down on their way of life. Treading this carefully might be necessary since their voting power is growing.
- amadeuspagel 5y ago
  > Professors most certainly are not a "privileged elite class." What is tenure if not a privilege? And if it isn't then what's the problem here? If tenure isn't something valuable then why are we discussing a story about it being taken away? EDIT: Just lol at the downvotes and the comments here. Lots of snark, personal attacks, but no one actually able to explain how tenure is not a privilege.

threatofrain 5y ago

> In a direct challenge to the hallowed tradition of tenure, Georgia’s public university system will now let its colleges’ administrations remove a tenured professor with little to no faculty input. > The Board of Regents on Wednesday approved the new policy, which is the only one of its kind in the country, according to the American Association of University Professors. > The Board of Regents, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment, has maintained that the policy change will streamline the process of removing faculty members who do not adequately contribute to a university, and the 19-member board unanimously approved the new measure on Wednesday. > Previously, the process for removing tenured professors included a peer review process with other faculty. Now, professors at 25 of its 26 public universities can be removed after consecutively failing two annual reviews. If a professor also fails to complete an improvement plan after the reviews, then that alone would be justification for termination. https://www.usg.edu/regents/assets/regents/documents/board_meetings/Agenda_2021_10_12-13.pdf https://www.usg.edu/regents/assets/regents/documents/board_m...

Jabbles 5y ago

Is tenure similar to the inability to fire arbitrary employees in parts of Europe?

0des 5y ago
Until this case, yes. From what I can gather, the goal of it is to allow for more abstract research that may draw criticism; a way to say "this person has been reliable and known reputable in this field for X time". Imagine a medical professor with tenure who wants to do research surrounding umbilical stem cells, or fetal research. Tenure, from my understanding, would give them some understanding or forgiveness for the controversial nature of their research topic.
- lordnacho 5y ago
  Also to allow people to take risks that might not pay off. You try your new molecule, it doesn't cure cancer, you still have a job.

matthewdgreen 5y ago

I see a number of comments below hailing this as a good thing, one that will benefit students. These folks look at Universities as just another company and think this is normal. It is not. It is a terrible mistake and the GA system (and its students, and society) will be worse off for it. The notion of tenure wasn't developed to protect dead wood. It came about because historically it was often difficult to distinguish "fired for cause" from "fired for speaking out in ways that irritate the powers that be." The ability to fire people for cause is appropriate to businesses and startups, and even there we routinely hear about controversies where "for cause" is blurred together with "saying things that leadership didn't like." The tenure system was explicitly designed to prevent that, and yes, the "cost" of that system is that some dead wood will slip by -- but this has always been an acceptable cost. Our society relies on having a pool of people who cannot be easily silenced by their employers. We will suffer when those guarantees are weakened. On a personal note: I'm a tenured CS professor and make less than half (often significantly less) than what my colleagues in industry make, for a job that often requires longer hours and a lot of travel. I also have had some experience with having my speech restricted by the administration [1] under the guise of "violations of University policy". As a tenured faculty member I stay because there is no other job where I can speak about anything I want, even if sometimes I say dumb things. My colleagues in industry can't do this -- some of them tell me they are scared to even "like" Tweets that criticize their employer. That's messed up. To those folks who don't care about these broader arguments and think this decision is reasonable, that it "will improve faculty performance," even there you're wrong. If GA becomes the state that doesn't have tenure, all the best faculty will go to other states and/or to industry. Every state university already struggles to get top talent, and now GA has given themselves a huge hiring disadvantage. Whatever "productivity" benefits you might get from greater faculty control are going to be hugely outweighed by the fallout from this stupid (and obviously political) decision. The board of regents knows this, and they don't care. [1] https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/johns-hopkins-apologizes-for-yanking-profs-nsa-blog/ https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/johns-hopkin...

steelframe 5y ago
I didn't read your username at first, and about 3/4 of the way through I asked myself, "Wait, is this Matthew Green?" Just letting you know from here on out you'll never be to pull off a nom-de-plume.

causi 5y ago

The move is being criticized by many professors, politicians and advocates for academic freedom as a threat to tenure, which is intended to protect faculty from dismissal without just cause, allowing them to develop thoughts or ideas that may be unpopular. Reap what you sow. Universities have spent twenty years crushing unpopular opinions with free speech zones and hate-mob controlled speaking appointments. They've attacked the concept of due process by booting students at the slightest unsubstantiated accusation of racism or sexual assault. If this wasn't a disaster I'd be pissing myself laughing.

roflc0ptic 5y ago
Im not sure this is a good take - most of the things you’re describing are basically an increase of administrative power; so too is letting the admin fire tenured professors. The story here is really one of metastasis of university administration
- causi 5y ago
  The story here is really one of metastasis of university administration Indeed it is, I agree. My point is professors have been happy to let administrators stomp all over the rights of students but suddenly diversity of thought and protecting dissident opinions is important now that it's the professors in the crosshairs. Don't get me wrong; this is a horrible development. It just comes with a tinge of poetic justice.
  - roflc0ptic 5y ago
    Ah, fair, think I misunderstood ya

boringg 5y ago

Of course this would happen in Georgia.

IndPhysiker 5y ago

I'm going a different way here since the important metric is that out of 5800 tenured faculy, only 1500 professors signed their petition (article did not specify tenured status of those who signed). As an academic, I have to say this is largely about preparing a way for new profs to reach tenure. With most departments having a set headcount, it has always been the case with aging profs to slow down their efforts and ride the train to emeritus status. That makes for frusterating roadblocks to one's career. In the sciences, these are becoming more far between as ambitious profs don't slow down as there is still ground to achieve more personally through accolades, industry and professional society awards, etc. Most of the aged profs I've worked with in the past 5 years are still cranking out PhD students and bringing in funding.

happyjack 5y ago

Another nail in the American University casket. I worked in academic research for 3 years, and GTFO. I still have a project here and there with a University, but I largely avoid them. While I do, in principle, agree with the tenure system, it's just not compatible with what the American University system has become. The system has two systems within it: 1. teach / train / attract students and charge large tuition for promises of them entering the workforce higher than their high school colleagues (and justify the price with parties and college football, new dorms, etc.) 2. perform high end research that is funded by Uncle Sam, in which the Universities' skim 40-120% overhead on (yes, OVER 100%) that pays the bills and keeps the lights on. Also pays for large admin salaries. Universities are corporations, and are "for profit." I'm not sure free inquiry, free speech, and the likes are compatible with making students feel safe / not offended so they can attract their tuition $, while also attracting $ from Uncle Sam and corporations for research.