Tenure requirements evaluated
SGA pushes for incentives for faculty to work with students

By Jonathan Sampson
Staff Reporter

Members of the Student Government Association said faculty’s tenure requirements need to include stronger incentives for involvement with students, but some faculty members said there isn’t an easy answer.

Academic Affairs Chairman Brian Casebolt said the largest tenure requirements are currently publishing and teaching, with nothing else. His committee wants to compose a piece of legislation on the issue to bring to the administration before the end of this semester.

He said students want a community feeling on campus, where administration, professors and students interact together on a level closer to what students currently experience at Frog Camp, a week-long camp that introduces new students to TCU. The problem, Casebolt said, is that professors currently have no motivation to do that.

“(A requirement) would give professors a justification and reason to actually do this stuff,” he said. “Not just because they want to, but because it will help them get tenure.”

Mike Sacken, educational foundations and administration department chairman, said broad tenure requirements are set by the Faculty and Staff Handbook, but more specific requirements are set by the department.

According to the handbook, faculty service is required and falls into two main categories: service within the university and off campus.

Nowell Donovan, Faculty Senate chairman and professor of geology, said tenure decisions begin with the faculty in each department and proceed upward through administration. Because of this format, he said that it would be difficult for administration to add a definite service requirement.

“The tenure decision is in essence not so much one of adding up the numbers,” Donovan said. “In part, it’s quantitative, but that won’t be the only thing that’s assessed.”

Joanne Green, associate professor of political science, said the real issue goes beyond tenure.

“The university encourages faculty to do service at the expense of other things,” she said. “And it’s not being rewarded.”

Sacken said there aren’t obvious answers, because if one requirement is added to the policy, something else will be devalued.

“I think (faculty’s) feelings would be divided and very difficult to predict,” he said.

Green said SGA is going about it in the wrong way if they simply want to add a requirement.

“Service counts already,” Green said. “The bigger issue is what kind of service and how does it count.”

Sacken said that while service is encouraged, it’s not currently a significant focus.

“If it’s not a significant aspect in the review for tenure; junior faculty can’t do it,” he said.

But Donovan said it’s important to understand that a faculty member’s primary responsibilities are teaching and research.

“The rest is enjoyable, but I don’t think that should qualify me for any special treatment for doing that,” he said. “I don’t think that service should, in and of itself, affect the tenure decision.”Sacken said that if service is going to be a requirement, it would be nice to know it counts.

“Faculty have to believe it matters,” he said. “And I think most don’t.”Casebolt said his committee is still in the exploratory stages of this idea.

“It’s a very gray area,” he said. “But (it’s) something that needs to be tackled at least one step at a time.”

Jonathan Sampson
j.m.sampson@student.tcu.edu