Why Tenure?
I don't work in academia, so the debate on tenure is something I don't understand. I am just putting up my thoughts for comments. I am missing out on something.
I thought tenure was supposed to protect academics from retribution for unpopular scholarship -- not a guaranteed life time job. Since academics only get tenure after they have created a body of work, to me something does not connect. It would seem that tenure would be more necessary early in a career when a person was not established. If such protection existed, would new scholars challenge the old lions more instead of citing them?
Personally, the thought of staying in one job sounds horrible. I want increased labor mobility. Give me the chance to move around rather than staying in one place.
When I worked in the newspaper, people who didn't move around were called "planks." That meant that they had been in the place so long that they had become part of the floor. It was a serious insult and usually led to a fist fight in the parking lot, or at least, a lot of cursing. (The language I have heard.)
I just finished The Race Beat about reporters and the Civil Rights Movement. In those days, reporters who moved around were respected as being able to land on their feet. A man who had five jobs in three years in the wire services was considered a fast thinker, not trouble.
Boy, do I wish I lived in expanding economy where labor was in short supply. With all the layoffs and uncertain employment facing many librarians, I don't think tenure is an broad based issue. If I am wrong, let me know.
2 comments:
Dear Jackie,
You always bring such a rich background to your posts and discusssions! I agree that the protection for intellectual risk would be welcome to young academics. There are several points about tenure, though, that I'd like to make.
1. You are right that tenure for law librarians is a very narrow group's interest. It's only available at most law schools to the director of the library -- that's a pretty small number of people in the law library population. I still think it's important for that small group, and I'll take that up later. But there are a few universities that offer tenure to the librarians at all levels. Those tenure rules tend to require publishing as well as quality work and service, perhaps also looking at teaching requirements. Those librarians tend to have time set aside for research and publishing -- it would only be fair.
2. Why is tenure important or good for the library directors. I am grateful for tenure, not just as a great deal (it is!), but because I am the point person to take the flak for the library. I think of myself as standing between the other law librarians and faculty, students or even staff. I am the one to make the unpopular decisions and argue for the long-term view, not the quick, easy answer. I am comfortable and empowered by my tenured position to make arguments and decisions that might be too dangerous to make if I weren't tenured. And I am responsible to use that empowerment for the long-term good of the law school and university.
3. About tenure AFTER a body of work is produced. My faculty looks at the body of scholarship as proof that the person is a serious scholar and a good bet for long-term scholarship. They are expected to continue doing scholarly work AFTER tenure. I felt a great sense of freedom after tenure, to pursue less certainly publishable research, and try out experiments in my teaching. I hope it works the same way for all my colleagues, that tenure gives a freedom to be more creative, not to stagnate.
I don't know about "planks." I have known some long-term folks who stay at the same job for years. Some do become sort of stagnant, but not all. The ones who stay engaged and keep reinventing themselves and learning new things are extremely valuable resources. They become the institutional memory of the organization.
Dear Jackie,
You always bring such a rich background to your posts and discusssions! I agree that the protection for intellectual risk would be welcome to young academics. There are several points about tenure, though, that I'd like to make.
1. You are right that tenure for law librarians is a very narrow group's interest. It's only available at most law schools to the director of the library -- that's a pretty small number of people in the law library population. I still think it's important for that small group, and I'll take that up later. But there are a few universities that offer tenure to the librarians at all levels. Those tenure rules tend to require publishing as well as quality work and service, perhaps also looking at teaching requirements. Those librarians tend to have time set aside for research and publishing -- it would only be fair.
2. Why is tenure important or good for the library directors. I am grateful for tenure, not just as a great deal (it is!), but because I am the point person to take the flak for the library. I think of myself as standing between the other law librarians and faculty, students or even staff. I am the one to make the unpopular decisions and argue for the long-term view, not the quick, easy answer. I am comfortable and empowered by my tenured position to make arguments and decisions that might be too dangerous to make if I weren't tenured. And I am responsible to use that empowerment for the long-term good of the law school and university.
3. About tenure AFTER a body of work is produced. My faculty looks at the body of scholarship as proof that the person is a serious scholar and a good bet for long-term scholarship. They are expected to continue doing scholarly work AFTER tenure. I felt a great sense of freedom after tenure, to pursue less certainly publishable research, and try out experiments in my teaching. I hope it works the same way for all my colleagues, that tenure gives a freedom to be more creative, not to stagnate.
I don't know about "planks." I have known some long-term folks who stay at the same job for years. Some do become sort of stagnant, but not all. The ones who stay engaged and keep reinventing themselves and learning new things are extremely valuable resources. They become the institutional memory of the organization.
Post a Comment