The number of tenure cases up for review this year fell sharply as revisions to the tenure review process came into effect this semester. Last year, there were 23 cases up for review, but this year there are only seven or eight, wrote Dean of the Faculty Kevin McLaughlin P'12 in an email to The Herald. Previously, the University had averaged about 15 cases per year over the last five years, according to data from the Office of the Dean of the Faculty.
The shift in the number of cases is directly related to the option given to junior faculty members to extend their first contracts by one year, one of the changes approved in the new tenure regulations, McLaughlin said.
Junior faculty members who have been with the University for three years and would be up for review for a contract renewal under the old policies now have the option to wait an extra year before their case is evaluated by their department and the administration. Assistant professors can now choose either a three or four-year contract before they are first reviewed by the University, allowing them to extend an assistant professorship from seven years to eight years before they are reviewed for tenure.
Though both the offer of extension and other tenure changes were met with considerable debate, almost everybody took the extension, said Peter Shank, chair of the Faculty Executive Committee and professor of medical science. "I think the overall solution is a good one," he said.
James Hays, assistant professor of computer science, said his department was not "keen" on extending the tenure clock. After meeting with other junior faculty members in his department, Hays is concerned that the changes are an attempt to lower the tenure rate.
"It is the place of the senior faculty to decide about tenure," Hays said, adding that he was puzzled junior faculty members were asked to provide input on the issue when they had not been here as long.
When Mark Dean, assistant professor of economics, decided to extend his contract by a year, he said,"it didn't seem like there was any downside to doing so." For economists, publication timelines are often much longer than for life sciences, he said, so a four-year initial contract is better than a three-year one.
"There are some mixed feelings," McLaughlin said. But he added that it takes many professors the extra year in order to provide strong evidence of their teaching and research. The optional extra year "is not a fundamental change in the way we evaluate junior faculty for tenure," he said.
Most junior faculty members just wanted to clarify the criteria for a tenure track following the changes, McLaughlin said. McLaughlin, Shank and several administrators met with junior faculty members to discuss the tenure changes since their approval.
Though the administration and the departments can provide guidelines regarding the quantity of work that is required to build a strong resume, it is difficult to be clear about the overall quality needed to receive tenure, McLaughlin said. With the external review of a reviewed professor's work, there is no automatic formula to become tenured, he said.
Because the University has high expectations for students, the administration should also have high expectations for faculty members, McLaughlin said. He added that the changes are meant to emphasize teaching and research. "We are committed to the teaching part, and we are not compromising on that," he said.
As these changes have just begun to affect faculty members, "I don't think it's clear what will happen yet," Shank said, though he said he hopes the tenure changes will not affect the level of teaching.
One of Brown's strengths is the lack of barriers between students and professors, Shank said. "It would be tragic if Brown lost its emphasis on teaching students."
