The UNC System Board of Governors is calling for a more standardized and rigorous tenure review process, as concerns arise about the low number of faculty members who fail to meet expectations. During committee meetings on Wednesday, board members, faculty, and campus administrators engaged in tense discussions about tenure, which has become a contentious issue in higher education. Critics of tenure, particularly those on the political right, argue that it amounts to a “lifetime appointment.” However, tenured faculty can face dismissal for misconduct, financial difficulties at their institution, or program eliminations. Most institutions, including all UNC System universities that grant tenure, have a post-tenure review process in place. Faculty members who do not meet expectations can lose their tenure or be terminated.
The UNC Board of Governors implemented a policy and guidelines for post-tenure review in 1997, and they were updated in 2014 to ensure its rigorous application and encourage excellence among tenured faculty. According to a system report discussed on Wednesday, 742 tenured faculty members underwent performance reviews in the 2021-2022 academic year. Of those reviewed, 50% exceeded expectations, 47% met expectations, and only 2.96% did not meet expectations. The COVID-19 pandemic interrupted 15 reviews. Board members and UNC System President Peter Hans expressed suspicions about the unusually low percentage of faculty members not meeting expectations, casting doubt on the rigor of the processes at some universities. A 10-year analysis of post-tenure reviews across the system revealed a similarly low percentage of faculty members not meeting expectations (2.92%).
Hans emphasized the need for consistency and robustness in tenure review processes across campuses, stating that campuses with one or zero removals of faculty members after post-tenure review over a decade are not executing the process correctly. The report showed significant variation in the number of faculty members not meeting expectations across different campuses from 2012 to 2022. North Carolina State University had the highest number with 71, but it is also one of the largest schools in the UNC System. In contrast, UNC-Greensboro did not have a single faculty member fail to meet expectations during the same period.
Wade Maki, a philosophy professor at UNC-Greensboro and chair of the system’s faculty assembly, supported the concerns raised in the report, stating that different standards are being applied across institutions. Maki emphasized the importance of uniformity in the tenure review process at every institution. The Faculty Policies Workgroups, which include representatives from all 17 constituent institutions, are examining this issue and will present their policy recommendations to the full board in the fall.
Maki stated that part of the reform process involves rewarding faculty members who meet or exceed expectations, rather than solely sanctioning those who do not. The current post-tenure review policy lacks incentives for high-performing faculty. Maki’s group plans to suggest changes, such as awards for high-performing faculty, increased research leave time, or potential financial incentives. The goal is to strengthen the tenure process and instill confidence in it among the board, lawmakers, and the public. This is especially crucial in the current climate where tenure is under attack, particularly in southern states with Republican legislative majorities.
In addition to tenure review, the board members discussed incentivizing faculty retirement as a cost-saving measure. The UNC System has requested $16.8 million from the General Assembly to encourage faculty retirements, starting with schools that have historically faced enrollment challenges. The funding is currently tied up in budget negotiations. While the proposal gained support from faculty, university administrators, and board members, there was disagreement on how faculty considering retirement incentives were characterized. Some board members made negative remarks about faculty members who choose not to retire at an older age, comparing the situation to a “privileged nursing home.” Maki criticized these remarks as unhelpful and not conducive to productive discussions about the issue.
In conclusion, the UNC System Board of Governors is addressing concerns about the tenure review process and considering reforms to standardize and strengthen it. The board has identified the need for consistency and rigor across campuses, as well as incentives for high-performing faculty. The Faculty Policies Workgroups are examining this issue and will present their recommendations in the fall. Additionally, the board discussed incentivizing faculty retirement as a cost-saving measure, although there were differing opinions on how faculty members considering retirement were characterized.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
