Tenure controversy in Georgia

Athens, GA – 2011: General view of the chapel on the University of Georgia campus.

College Images via Getty Images

Political decisions are often confused by harsh compromises and the law of unintended consequences. This is now illustrated in Georgia. The University System of Georgia, a governing body of the state’s 28 public colleges and universities, has new regulations for faculty review that affects faculties, the National American Association of University Professors (AAUP), and even the Foundation for Individual Rights in the State Education (FIRE) in the arms. What is the whole Brouhaha about?

First, what are the arguments for and against an academic tenure? On the positive side, the tenure increases the ability and willingness of lecturers to respond to follow-up questions – it is a tool to support freedom of expression – the very basic first principle of post-Enlightenment higher education. This is also a valuable side effect for the faculty – the creation of job security in a society in which jobs are constantly being created and destroyed.

But tenure has costs – sometimes substantial. It creates enormous fixed costs for universities, making it difficult for them to reallocate resources for alternative uses when academic demand changes. In a time of declining enrollment, it can contribute to the financial downfall of institutions. Also, some professors get lazy and do little work after they are hired, making them less effective.

Permanent professors now teach less than half the classes of American college students. Expensive teachers (teachers with permanent teachers) have been replaced by cheaper assistants, doctoral students, etc. The registrations are decreasing. The faculties’ bargaining power has decreased. There is a growing administrative bureaucracy in many schools and teachers are increasingly seen as a nuisance rather than a key partner in shared governance.

Then there are the professors’ worries: the “birth defect”. Many freshmen were born in 2003 – when the number of babies was fewer than 43 years earlier, in 1960, during the Golden Age of American higher education. Foreign students are immigrating less, partly because of the pandemic and stricter government restrictions, and partly because of increasing competition from improved universities in other countries. And the value proposition of going to college seems undermined – too many students end up in debt and underemployed. Studying is riskier than it used to be. Finally, the political atmosphere around college support has cooled significantly, especially in relatively conservative states like Georgia. Polls show that public support for colleges has diminished significantly, I think because the awakened progressivism in many universities is not doing well with the public.

Today (October 14), the entire Georgia Board of Regents is expected to adopt a new post-term review policy. The AAUP claims that the new policy “almost certainly undermines academic freedom”. They claim that the burden of proof of continued employment will be shifted from the university to the faculty member, who must now claim the continued employment. In addition, the criteria for evaluating faculty performance are expanded to include student success – does the faculty member in question contribute to the students’ ultimate academic and possibly postgraduate career success?

I have a family who graduated from multiple Georgia Schools, and one is now even attending one. I’m not sure if the right tenure policy for the University of Georgia flagship campus or Georgia Tech, both institutions with high research support and expectations, is the same as Georgia College or Kennesaw State University with a slightly different one academic mission. Are state coordination bodies an instrument for increasing efficiency and reducing unnecessary duplication or are they obstacles to innovation, obstacles to competition and expensive annoyances?

In some states the answer for some faculties is to encourage full union formation. Personally, I believe the potential effectiveness of this weapon is very limited, as the ultimate financial problems underlying the faculty’s declining role cannot be resolved by a union – unions, for example, cannot effectively negotiate higher taxes or government support.

I am a faculty member whose contrary views have upset governors and other powerful policies for whom the tenure offered peace of mind and job security. But if I were to predict what American higher education will be like in about 20 years, I would say that if the term is not dead, it is life support.

My latest book is Restoring the Promise: Higher Education in America.