Tenure – (Bowen & Schuster, 1986; Tierney, 1996) « phd monkey

phd monkey An expedition through the forest of academia.


Tenure – (Bowen & Schuster, 1986; Tierney, 1996)

Bowen, H., Schuster, J. (1986). American professors: A national resource imperiled. New York: Oxford University Press, 243.

Tierney, W.G., Bensimon, E.M. (1996). Promotion and Tenure, Community and Socialization in Academe. Albany: SUNY.

Tierney, W.G. (ed.) (1998). The Responsive University: Restructuring for High Performance. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins Press.

The arguments against tenure include the perceived effect of institutional rigidity, protection of unproductive faculty, and stifled innovation. Critics charge that when an institution needs organization, or to relieve ineffective members of their ranks, or inject new creativity into a department that tenure is prohibitive. (Tierney, 1998).

The proponents of tenure counter that tenure can actually encourage innovation through the protection of academic freedom, that the university system cannot be shown to be less effective than the typical business, and that tenure does not prevent change but simply clarifies relationships and responsibilities (Bowen & Schuster, 1986; Tierney, 1996).

Filed under: Quotes Comments Off
Comments (0) Trackbacks (0)

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Trackbacks are disabled.