Tenure Myths: Talking Points for Professionals

By Keith Hardeman, Westminster College

Myth #1: Tenure insures lifetime employment

Fact: Any number of reasons will suffice to revoke tenure. A financial exigency, or a finding of cause -- poor performance in carrying out assigned duties, poor teaching performance, excessive unexcused absences from class, absences from faculty meetings, low enrollment in classes, undocumented research, refusal to teach specified classes, unprofessional conduct, moral turpitude, drugs, conspicuous disregard of standards, willful failure to perform duties when they are lawful, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory -- are among the many factors which legitimately justify the release of a faculty member (Conrad & Trosch, 1998). 

Myth #2: Tenure causes professors to become complacent and less productive

Fact: Tenure-line faculty consistently outperform contingent faculty in teaching, professional development, and service to institution.

Tenure-line faculty vs. Full-time Contingent faculty -

Tenure-line faculty publish twice as much

Tenure-line faculty work 50 hours per week, Contingent work 46

Tenure-line faculty spend 3% more time toward teaching (Benjamin, 1997).

Full-time faculty vs. Part-time -

Full-time work 30-40 hours/week more at any one insitution

Full-time spend considerably more time teaching in the classroom

Full-time dedicate two to three times as much outside-of-class instruction to students.

Full-time faculty publish five to ten times more than part-time (Benjamin, 1997).

(Some of you asked me afterward about the differences between probationary and tenured faculty.  Benjamin does indicate that probationary faculty probably are a little more productive.  But we must also keep in mind that tenured faculty do pursue promotions, so the drop-off isn't all that significant.  At Westminster College where we have developmental post-tenure review, there is a portion of raises that are merit-related.  Our full professors are allowed to keep applying for promotion every six years as they did prior to attaining the full professor rank.  We label it as "significant merit increase."  I believe this keeps full professors productive.  And as Bill Burling pointed out to me at the end of the day, some professors may indeed "check out" of writing or college service, but they may then compensate by channeling the extra time they have into teaching, and therefore, they are still very productive.)

Myth #3: Most college faculty have or are in line to receive tenure

Fact: Part-time positions have increased by 43 percent in the U.S. since 1995. Full- and part-time faculty not on tenure track "now account for 65 percent of all faculty in degree-granting institutions" (Bradley, 2005).

*University of Missouri-Columbia’s tenure lines have been reduced by nearly 30% since 1995. During that same period, the school’s student population has risen by nearly 5000 (Adamson, 2005). 

Myth #4: Reducing or eliminating tenure saves money (and lowers tuition) without reducing instructional quality

Fact: Not only does tenure conclusively provide students with better instruction and more commitment to the institution, tenure is more cost-efficient than its lack of availability.

Problems with a majority of an insitution’s faculty as part-time:

1) Students likely suffer the consequences of reduced educational continuity.

2) Part-time faculty tend to not be as available for office hours and outside help.

3) Contingent faculty are less likely to attend faculty meetings or serve on faculty committees, both important components of faculty governance.

4) Since most part-time faculty are not evaluated on professional development, there is less incentive for research and writing, two exercises that obviously enhance one’s knowledge in a respective discipline.

5) Without faculty research notoriety, the institution (depending on its type) can suffer from a community relations standpoint.