Committee proposes flexible tenure, seeks feedback

Updated 4:00 PM September 28, 2005

Committee proposes flexible tenure, seeks feedback

By Laurel Thomas Gnagey

A committee appointed by the provost recommends changes to the policies governing tenure review that will allow units to extend or shorten the probationary timeline, as appropriate for the discipline and individual, in response to changing needs.

In specific, the Committee to Consider a More Flexible Tenure Probationary Period proposes changing Regents' Bylaw 5.09 to extend the maximum probationary period from eight to 10 years. It also calls for the provost or chancellors (in the case of U-M-Flint and U-M-Dearborn) to have oversight of the policies of individual schools and colleges to ensure that they have well defined, clear criteria for decisions about accelerating or postponing tenure review.

Former Associate Provost and current Dean of the Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies Janet Weiss says the extension will allow schools and colleges to set a presumptive time for the tenure review—as they do now, with most providing six years, some five or seven—and then build flexibility into the probationary period for those who need extra time or who wish to speed up the process.

"We recognize that different schools and colleges carry out tenure rules in ways that meet their needs, so our committee's recommendations seek to allow that continued autonomy, while establishing some guidelines that are responsive to the realities of academic life today," says Weiss, who co-chairs the committee.

The committee, she says, recognized that the world has changed since the University's current tenure practices were adopted more than 60 years ago. The new realities include both professional and personal challenges facing today's academics. They include:

• Joint appointments wherein faculty members experience more than the usual pressure to meet the academic expectations of two or more groups of colleagues and students. Some schools and colleges discourage joint appointments before tenure for this very reason, but the committee report says if such appointments are appropriate for the faculty members' interests and career plans, efforts should be made to provide more time for their tenure process.

• Publication challenges caused by a reduction in the number of scholarly monographs and the changing make-up of those publications that make it harder for new faculty members in disciplines where publishing is essential to get something accepted. The migration of many journals to electronic form can result in much faster publication and recognition in some fields, while increased delays from submission to publication in hard copy for many prestigious journals in other fields can result in many years before an assistant professor's research reaches the discipline. "When untenured faculty respond to these delays by pursuing publication in less rigorous or prestigious outlets, simply to speed up the process, that serves neither the faculty nor the discipline well," the committee report states.

• Funding limitations being felt by junior faculty members as research dollars in the sciences, biomedical sciences and engineering increasingly are directed to larger, multi-investigator projects. The report states it may take more time for untenured faculty members to establish collaborations to compete successfully for funding.

• Career paths of individuals vary, such that some assistant professors come to the University as new PhDs who do not have the same advantage as those who begin their careers as postdoctoral fellows, as assistant professors at other institutions, or as researchers in industry or government. Those faculty members with 2-3 years or more of postdoctoral work under their belts have established their research or scholarship careers, and many already have published. They may be ready to be reviewed for tenure more quickly.

• Mentoring of new faculty members is inconsistent across the University, with some receiving considerable help and advice, others little or none.

• Family circumstances vary but new faculty members often are faced with responsibilities of young children, partners or parents who are seriously ill or dependents with significant disabilities.

Although the University previously adopted policies to allow women faculty members to step off the tenure track for child birth, dependent care, health concerns and other personal emergencies, many did not take advantage of the opportunities, says Dr. Lori Pierce, associate provost for academic and faculty affairs and professor in the Department of Radiation Oncology.

Some of this may be attributed to their lack of knowledge about the policies, Pierce says, but in many cases it was out of a fear of discrimination in future tenure and promotion decisions.

"With the changes we are recommending to the tenure policy, all faculty with these needs will be eligible to step off the tenure track to take care of personal issues without fear of repercussion," Pierce says. "While we have evidence showing women faculty members are particularly burdened with these issues, many men can benefit from policies that recognize and make adjustments for family life."

Perhaps the most important reason flexibility matters, the report says, is the intense competition from other universities to attract the brightest and best.

"If the University of Michigan is to continue to compete for the best research and academic minds, we must be responsive to these changing times in academia, and to the needs of contemporary faculty members," says LSA Dean Terrence J. McDonald, co-chair of the committee.

"It's important to note, however, that our recommendations are not intended to erode the tenure process or to usurp academic freedom. It is not our intent that fewer or more faculty will be promoted to tenure positions at the University," McDonald says. "Rather, we are calling for an adjustment of our current policies toward a more flexible timeline to meet changing realities."

The committee also recommends establishing a part-time tenure-track appointment, allowing years of service to be counted proportionately to the appointment fraction of the faculty member. This would allow a full-time faculty member to shift to a part-time appointment and remain a contributing member of the faculty, while marching on toward tenure.

The Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs (SACUA) asked questions Sept. 19 of Committee to Consider a More Flexible Tenure Probationary Period member Kenneth Adams. A number of members expressed concern about some aspects of the longer probationary period, particularly the provisions for part-time faculty.

"It gets harder and harder to make tough decisions about someone who has been around for a long time," said Jens Zorn, professor of physics.

SACUA and the Senate Assembly are in the process of reviewing the document and will provide more detailed feedback in the coming weeks.

The full report is available online at: http://www.provost.umich.edu/reports/flexible_tenure/contents.html.

Interested individuals can review the recommendations and comment using the link on the first page of the report.

Committee proposes flexible tenure, seeks feedback

More Stories