Notes from both sides of the market, part 8: tenure requirements

This post on tenure requirements at liberal arts colleges at Daily Nous reminded me of several important issues that we didn't touch on in our Job-Market Boot Camp: the importance of knowing a university's tenure requirements before accepting a job, and the importance of getting such terms in writing. Allow me to say a few things about both before opening things up for discussion.

One thing that the Daily Nous post drew attention to is just how different tenure requirements can be at otherwise "similar" universities. From what some of the commenters on that thread say, some liberal arts colleges expect about one peer-reviewed publication per year post-hire (more on this below). Some of these same colleges apparently also expect at least some articles to be in highly ranked journals. I saw more than a few people remark on social media that these requirements seem onerous, especially given how important teaching and service are at liberal colleges. I agree. My experience is that, depending on how high tenure requirements are, liberal arts colleges may be some of the most desirable but alternatively some of the most stressful jobs there are. Yes, of course, jobs at research institutions can presumably be stressful as heck too, given their high research tenure bar (more on this below as well). But at least at research institutions the focus is on one thing: research. At liberal arts colleges--at least those that require ample research for tenure--you really do have to "do it all": publish lots of articles, teach tons of classes, serve on lots of committees, do other service work, etc. It can be a real high order!

But these are only some schools. At Daily Nous, a few other commenters noted that their liberal arts schools have much lower research requirements for tenure--in some cases, expecting perhaps only a single peer-reviewed article post-hire. Indeed, on that note, like one of the commenters over there, I've personally known some people who have gotten tenure with only a publication or two post-hire. Long story short: tenure-standards can differ dramatically between otherwise "similar" schools--in ways that can very much affect not only one's likelihood of getting tenure, but also one's daily stress levels once in the job (something not to be underestimated, let me tell you!). This isn't just true of liberal arts colleges. It's true of research schools as well. Indeed, I've even heard through the grapevine that there are some R1 schools where people notoriously almost never get tenure, regardless of how good their research record seems. And, on that note, I've personally known a person who failed to get tenure at a school like that--someone who, from my perspective, has an exemplary research record (not mention other desirable qualities) but miraculously failed to get tenure.

Because not getting tenure is a very big deal (it is always possible to get another academic job, but by no means assured), these things should matter a great deal to job-candidates--and there are precautions job-candidates can take.

The first thing job-candidates can do is get very clear, both at the on-campus interview stage as well as in negotiations: get clear on precisely what the school's tenure requirements are. As some Daily Nous commenters wrote, at some institutions official tenure requirements are very vague--which can be dangerous, as at those institutions tenure requirements may unexpectedly shift higher (due to trends in faculty publishing, etc.).

A second, related thing candidates might do (though I am less sure about this one) is ask how often people have been denied tenure, and on what grounds. It is one thing for a department or institution to have tenure policies, for instance--and quite another to see how they shake out in practice.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly of all, get everything in writing. In most cases, anything you do or publish prior to getting hired will not count towards tenure (only things after you are hired do). In some cases, however, you can negotiate counting some of your previous work towards tenure. If you do, however, you must get it in writing--as I have heard of horror stories (including one in the Daily Nous thread) where verbal agreements were not respected.

Anyway, these are just a few of my thoughts. As these are important issues, it might be helpful to hear from readers with experience in these areas as well!

Comments

[2nd opinion]

I absolutely second this - it is crucial to get a sense of these requirements, if you're lucky enough to be deciding between job offers. I disagree on some of the details, though. I went on the market last year, after 3 years in a TT position. For what it's worth, out of four fly-outs (so beware, this is a small sample size), I asked every department head about past denied-tenure cases, where the denial had happened (did the department vote against them? did the dean or provost say no?), and why. No one seemed to think it was inappropriate, and everyone gave me really helpful information. Again FWIW, every fly-out I had told me that they would count all of my publications and at least 2 of my four years on the tenure track towards my tenure requirements - although a few places did say that I'd have to continue to prove "trajectory" while there. It's also worth saying, though, that 3 out of 4 department heads were explicitly unwilling to commit to tenure standards in writing - although they did all give me off the record senses of what the requirements would be.

[Tenured]

About committing in writing to tenure requirements. Of course it is a reasonable expectation. But not everything can be put in writing. Also, as soon as it is in writing, it is usually binding ON BOTH SIDES. So if it says, for example, three article are required, then one will be denied tenure without three article, even if they want you. The administration will hold the department to what is in writing. They almost have to for legal reason. Not because it will be wrong to make an exception, but because someone in another department who is being denied tenure will use it against the College to overturn their case. Second, someone can meet the formal requirements but still be a complete A@@hole. A department does not want to have to hire such a person. Unfortunately, this can sometimes lead to abuse on the part of departments, denying tenure to people with odd personalities and behaviors, though not A@@holes.