A recent classroom discussion during one of my MBA classes got me thinking about the idea of tenured professors’ place amongst college and universities. Tenure can be obtained after a junior or assistant professor proves his or her worthiness through their work in research publications, teaching, or academic service amongst other criteria. If granted tenure, one acquires unlimited job security which so many of us can only dream about. Outside of extreme circumstances, a professor can hold onto their position for the duration of their lifetime as long as they meet the institutions minimal requirements for teaching, research, and service. How is it that such a generous job perk came to be? Tenure was initially introduced in the 19th century as a way to protect professors from exploring research topics that may have proved to be controversial; mainly those that interfered with religious principles. Tenure allowed for academics to pioneer research topics not previously considered, ensuring that research not become subject to conformity.
A doctrine designed to provide protection, tenure is now compromising the education of students, along with the reputation and mission of academic institutions. Lifetime job security can create an environment where professors may not be motivated to provide their best level of instruction. Inadequate instruction can lead to a decreased reputation for an institution which in turn could lead to a reduction in the number of applicants. If the schools are not receiving a large enough pool of applicants, than the acceptance requirements will be lessened which will further diminishing the reputation of the institution. Outside of the classroom, professors may not find the motivation to improve their department or curriculum because they don’t receive any additional financial compensation to do so. What develops is something known as the free rider problem. The biggest deterrents of the free rider problem would be their own self conscience, reputation, and pressure from other colleagues. Professors are willing to do the minimum because there are no severe consequences to do otherwise. This can lead to incompetent professors that think of their own self-interest instead of the education of the next generation. This idea is exemplified by a professor of physics that I read about from the University of California at Berkeley. After receiving his tenure in 1962, Charles Schwartz stopped work on physics and began researching the relationship between science and warfare. Mr. Schwartz was denied increased earnings, but his tenure allowed him to continue his work outside of physics.
Professors such as Mr. Schwartz create this free rider dilemma were they rely on their colleagues to maintain the department, and revamp or improve the curriculum to keep up with the times. This free rider problem also negatively impacts the junior or associate professors. Sometimes to allow themselves more research time, tenured professors delegate a majority of the teaching to the non-tenured professors. These non-tenured professors may feel inclined to comply with the wishes of their superiors in hopes that they will receive favorable consideration when their own name comes up for tenure. These “adjunct” professors may be taking on close to a full load of classes while being compensated at a fraction of what tenured professors make. This also means the students are receiving their education from far less experienced instructors. Some statistics estimate that with community colleges included, adjunct professors make up as much as 70% of the teaching force in the United States. Studies have also indicated that a 10% increase in part-time instructors leads to a 3% drop in graduation rates.
What can be done to correct some of the inefficiencies that can come about as a result of free riding professors? A possible suggestion is to consider short term-contracts with professors. For example, after a three or five year time period, the professor could be re-evaluated to see if the contract should be renewed; similar to being re-elected to office. Student evaluations should potentially play a larger role in determining the performance of a professor; after all they are the paying customers of the education. Additional peer evaluations should play a role in determining whether or not a professor is fulfilling the duties of his or her job. Critics may argue that tenure is what enables universities to attract and retain professors who may otherwise have considered other higher paying job opportunities. My answer to these critics is they need to put the interest of the students first, and protect the mission of the academic institutions. These institutions were formed to educate and to explore new academic boundaries. The current structure needs to be examined so that the goals of the instructors become congruent with the goals of the institutions they represent.
