85° Mostly Cloudy
See complete forecast
Copy and paste the link:
If there's post-tenure review then what's the point of tenure?
I had some tenured professors who were completely worthless as instructors. It was obvious they were bored with teaching and were just going through the motions.
If we are paying their salaries, then yes by all means. In any other profession, people with similiar responsibilities would understand that they are expected to recieve a performance review.
EVERYONE should be subject to a performance review with loss of your job as a possible outcome for the most serious cases. Only by this method can we insure that the best people are in the correct position.
Tenure means that you cannot be fired for the work you do or the ideas you espouse.
Tenure does not mean that you cannot be fired for being unproductive.
There are already procedures in place to fire unproductive faculty, they are just never enforced.
So enforce the procedures. Problem solved.
Absolutely. I have had the same experience as George_Brazillier above. There should be constant reviews of tenure, perhaps every five years. NO ONE should receive a job for life!
No one? What about the Supreme Court?
When Democrats are in charge, do they get to "review" Clarence Thomas? Who is doing the reviewing and what is the criteria?
I believe there should be a standard criteria for reviewing tenured professors. Some do become tenured, then just coast on their past accomplishments. It just can't be based on the same criteria it takes to make tenure.
Commenting has been disabled for this item.