BEEN DOING THAT SINCE THE SIXTIES
Tenure Backlash
Max McCoy, the lone journalism professor at Emporia State University, poses for a photo in front of the school's administration building Wednesday, Jan. 4, 2023, in Emporia, Kan. McCoy penned a column that began, “I may be fired for writing this” — before learning this would be his last year teaching at the school. “This is a purge,” he said. He said all the fired professors were “Democrats or liberal in our thinking.” (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)
HEATHER HOLLINGSWORTH
Sun, January 8, 2023
MISSION, Kan. (AP) — When Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick asked Texas colleges to disavow critical race theory, the University of Texas faculty approved a resolution defending their freedom to decide for themselves how to teach about race.
Patrick said he took it as a message to “go to hell.”
In turn, Patrick, a Republican, said it was time to consider holding the faculty accountable, by targeting one of the top perks of their jobs.
“Maybe we need to look at tenure,” Patrick said at a news conference in November.
It’s a sentiment being echoed by conservative officials in red states across the country. The indefinite academic appointments that come with tenure — the holy grail of university employment — have faced review from lawmakers or state oversight boards in at least half a dozen states, often presented as bids to rein in academics with liberal views.
Tenure advocates are bracing for the possibility of new threats as lawmakers return to statehouses around the country.
The trend reflects how conservative scrutiny of instruction related to race, gender and sexuality has extended from schools to higher education. But budget considerations also play a role. Tenured faculty numbers have been declining even in more liberal states. Universities are hiring more part-time, adjunct instructors amid declines in financial support from state governments.
Traditionally, tenured professors can be terminated only under extreme circumstances, such as professional misconduct or a financial emergency. Advocates for tenure say it is a crucial component of academic freedom — especially as controversy grows over scholarly discussions about history and identity.
Without tenure, faculty are “liable to play it safe when it comes time to have a classroom discussion about a difficult topic,” said Irene Mulvey, president of the American Association of University Professors.
But in difficult financial and political times, even tenured professors may not be guaranteed employment.
In Kansas, Emporia State University this fall cut 33 faculty — most of them tenured — using an emergency pandemic measure that allowed universities to bypass policies on staff terminations to balance budgets.
Max McCoy, Emporia State’s sole journalism professor, penned a column that began, “I may be fired for writing this” — before learning this would be his last year teaching at the school.
“This is a purge,” he said. He said all the fired professors were “Democrats or liberal in our thinking.”
University spokesperson Gwen Larson said individual professors were not targeted for dismissal. She said the cuts followed a review of how demand for academic programs is changing and “where we needed to move in the future.
Attacks on higher education have been fueled by a shift in how conservatives see colleges and universities, said Jeremy Young, of the free-expression group PEN America. The share of Republicans and independent-leaning Republicans who said higher education was having a negative effect on the country grew from 37% to 59% from 2015 to 2019 in Pew Research Center polling.
In Texas, university administrators are working behind the scenes to squash anticipated legislation that would target tenure, fearful it will hurt recruitment, said Jeff Blodgett, president of the Texas Conference of AAUP.
Some people already aren’t applying for university jobs because of the discussions, said Pat Heintzelman, president of the Texas Faculty Association.
In Florida, a federal judge in November blocked the “Stop-WOKE" Act, a law pushed by Gov. Ron DeSantis that restricts certain race-based conversations and analysis in colleges. The governor’s office is appealing the injunction. Compliance with the law would be part of the criteria for evaluating tenured professors under a review process that the university system’s Board of Governors is weighing.
“They’ve latched onto the idea that many totalitarian regimes have done over the years, which is if you can stop students from learning about ideas that a political party in power disagrees with, that is one way to stop those ideas from existing in the society at all,” said Andrew Gothard, president of United Faculty of Florida.
DeSantis, though, has questioned the argument that tenure provides academic freedom.
“If anything, it’s created more of an intellectual orthodoxy where people that have dissenting views, it's harder for them to be tenured in the first place," he said at a news conference in April.
In Louisiana, lawmakers set up a task force to study tenure with the Republican-backed resolution noting that students should be confident that courses are free of “political, ideological, religious, or antireligious indoctrination.” Professors raised concerns until they learned the task force’s members were mostly tenure supporters.
In Georgia, the state’s Board of Regents approved a policy that made it easier to remove tenured faculty who have had a negative performance review. Elsewhere, legislation to ban or restrict tenure also has been introduced in recent years in Iowa, South Carolina and Mississippi, but failed to win passage.
The pushback follows decades of declining rates of tenured faculty. According to the AAUP, 24% of faculty members held full-time tenured appointments in fall 2020, compared with 39% in fall 1987, the first year for which directly comparable information is available.
Part-time college instructors rarely receive benefits. They frequently must travel from campus to campus to cobble together a living.
“It’s a nightmare,” said Caprice Lawless, who wrote the “Adjunct Cookbook,” replete with recipes that poorly compensated Ph.D.s can cobble together with food pantry staples.
“I’ve taken Ph.D.s to foodbanks and watched them cry because they can’t get enough food for their family,” said Lawless, who said she served as a social worker of sorts before retiring two years ago from Front Range Community College in Westminster, Colorado.
The opposition to tenure has united conservatives for different reasons: Not all share the same concerns about “woke higher education,” said Marc Stein, a San Francisco State University history professor, who has written about the shift to part-time faculty.
“But,” he said, “if you attack the ‘wokeness’ of higher education and that leads to declining funding for higher education, then economic conservatives are happy.”
Tenure exploded after World War II when it helped with recruitment as the GI Bill sent enrollment soaring, said Sol Gittleman, a former provost of Tufts University who has written on the issue. Lately, the country has overproduced Ph.D.s, said Gittleman, who predicts tenure will largely disappear in the coming decades outside the top 100 colleges and universities.
“Critical race theory — that's an excuse,” he said. “If there was a shortage of faculty, you wouldn’t hear that.”
___
Associated Press writers Paul Weber in Austin, Texas, and Anthony Izaguirre in Tallahassee, Florida, contributed to this report. The Associated Press education team receives support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Federal judge hears arguments on state college campus surveys about freedom of thought
Ryan Dailey
Mon, January 9, 2023
A federal judge on Monday began hearing testimony in a trial over the constitutionality of a 2021 state law requiring colleges and universities to survey students and staff members about “intellectual freedom and viewpoint diversity” on campus.
The plaintiffs, including the United Faculty of Florida union and individual teachers and students, are challenging three parts of the law (HB 233). The first day of the trial before Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker focused heavily on a requirement that colleges and universities conduct the surveys.
The law required the State Board of Education and the university system’s Board of Governors, to select or create “objective, nonpartisan, and statistically valid” questionnaires to weigh the “extent to which competing ideas and perspectives are presented” on campuses. The surveys also are supposed to gauge how free students and staff feel to express ideas and are required to be conducted annually.
But the faculty members and other plaintiffs contend the surveys have the effect of chilling classroom speech.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs on Monday called Allan Lichtman, a history professor at American University in Washington, D.C., as their first witness. They questioned Lichtman about whether the law had the intent of discriminating against colleges and universities, with Lichtman arguing that the required surveys are “highly problematic.”
Lichtman was asked about statements by Gov. Ron DeSantis, who signed the bill, and Rep. Spencer Roach, a North Fort Myers Beach Republican who was a sponsor of the legislation. Roach, for example, wrote in a March 2021 Facebook post that the measure would protect free-speech rights and “stem the tide of Marxist indoctrination on university campuses.”
Lichtman pointed to what he described as a “willingness by decision-makers to assail what they perceive as liberal … ideology” at the schools.
The history professor also said the law includes “no restriction” on how the Legislature could use survey data, which is required to be published each September.
“This survey, in perpetuity, has a chilling effect,” Lichtman said.
But attorneys representing the state argued in a court filing before the trial that the surveys, and the overall law, do not contemplate any potential punishment for schools, students and staff members.
“Like a thermometer, the surveys are meant to be a diagnostic tool designed to take the temperature of taxpayer-funded campuses. The survey provisions presuppose no diagnosis, prescribe no course of treatment, and predict no future action or consequence,” lawyers for the state wrote in a Dec. 8 brief.
Though Lichtman repeatedly said the law does not specifically require that the surveys be anonymous or voluntary, a first round of surveys administered in April made clear that the identities of respondents would not be published and participation was optional.
Writing that the law is “simply not enforceable against individual students or professors,” lawyers for the state disputed the plaintiffs’ claims of chilled speech and asked Walker to reject any testimony “regarding any chilling or self-censorship” attributed to the measure.
The state’s lawyers also argued colleges and universities face no threat of lost funding because of the law.
“As they have done throughout this litigation, plaintiffs are sure to testify at trial that they fear future funding reductions to their institutions or programs as a result of HB 233. But plaintiffs will not elicit any testimony at trial regarding any proposed or actual funding cuts to any institution based on HB 233, nor will they point to any provision in HB 233 that contemplates any funding decisions,” the state’s lawyers wrote.
Also being challenged in the lawsuit are parts of the measure that prohibit colleges and universities from “shielding” students and staff from speech protected by the First Amendment and that allow students to record classroom lectures.
No comments:
Post a Comment