3 Replies to “Tenure”

  1. Making common cause about this with someone who gives really bad quick non-arguments isn’t exactly going to help you against this fan revolt Brian. Tenure is a big deal and the protections it offers are important. Actual cases of “tenure abuse” are more important than possible cases and there are workable mechanisms in place for dealing with actual cases.

  2. Brian (if I may)—

    I’m an interested interloper on your T&Rs page and find it to be intriguing to say the least. Your efforts here are near-Herculean given your other responsibilities. I appreciate them. BTW I read your criticism of Williamson and found it to be incisive and measured. Though I’m no expert on these matters by any means your article helped me catch up on this issue of luminosity. I especially appreciated your careful separation of your claims from being an underpinning of foundationalism. And congratulations on this as lead article in the AJ.

    May I chime in on the tenure issue? I agree with you. Several years ago post-tenure review was instituted in the University of Wisconsin System. Of course we “old-schoolers” were extrememly dubious of it. As it works out, however, it has endangered no one at all who is doing the job, no matter how minimally as long as it gets done. But the mere threat of facing post-tenure review has also resulted in (not forced, mind you) the retirement of many ineffective faculty who have outlived their usefulness by many years. And some of these were colleagues and friends of mine who, while I respected them as such, I knew had slipped in their roles as instuctors and scholars. It’s not a job to teach students at the university/college—it’s a privilege, honor, and a calling. Tenure protects the means by which we can sustain excellence as professors—it should not protect ones who merely want to hold on to a “job”.

Comments are closed.