Tenure

Tenure guarantees that a faculty member can only be fired for a specific cause, allowing that faculty member to act without fear of losing their job because of interpersonal conflict. Ideally tenure should be awarded for a level of performance that will continue as a minimum; otherwise why commit to keeping the faculty member?  In that sense tenure should be awarded for behavior that is independent of the tenure decision.

In practice junior faculty work very hard when in tenure-track positions, seeking good teaching track records as well as a publication arc indicating a thriving research program. When I came through service had a bigger role to play in the process but its current import at my university (Elon) is debatable.

When I was tenure-track, I felt quite strongly that if I acted as if I wanted tenure then I would not be worthy of it. My strategy was to make myself indispensable (to some degree) through hard service work and to speak publicly but always constructively and courteously when I disagreed with administrators. With different administrators that could easily have back-fired but my assessment was that the ones who had input on my career would be shamed if they tried to penalize me for courteous and constructive dissent.

I've tried to continue to offer that kind of dissent post-tenure. How successfully, that is always a question that I wish I knew the answer to. I'm humble enough to realize that systematic changes are the result of the efforts of many people; one should never award credit for mere words spoken. I have been on the correct side of some issues that I do take pride in working on, for there is deep joy in being on the side of the angels in a conflict. There are so many gray areas in life that when you can identify an absolutely correct side of an issue it is important to embrace it.

Most recently I publicly chastised a trustee for improper behavior. Apparently that is not done very often. Had I not had tenure I would not have done so without the explicit support of my family members, as losing my income would have consequences for them.

When disagreeing with an administrator I usually follow the procedure advised in Matthew 18:  discussion in person first to not make the person lose face, then if needed with one or two witnesses to make them accountable, and then if still needed publicly if not open to private persuasion. I am open about my process and many administrators respond well to the avoidance of scapegoating.

There are many layers between me and a trustee however. After days of writing privately to explore my problem with the trustee's actions, I sent a series of three long emails to the faculty body developing my concerns about the trustee's actions, requested a faculty vote at a faculty meeting, and summarized my argument at the faculty meeting. (The resolution passed but not overwhelmingly.)

It's been a year or so and so far no retribution. We'll see.