OCR Text |
Show Art prof's case significant, requires serious study The appeal by assistant professor of art Earl Jones presents some interesting questions of great significance to the development and growth of the University. Jones' dismissal by the Art Department tenured faculty members-or the recommendation not to renew his contract nor grant tenure-has been a subject of campus discussion. On the immediate question of Jones retention or dismissal, we do not have adequate information to make a judgement. We have heard pro and con arguments lot ot conflicting stories, too much emotionalism and too many bigoted viewpoints. The Chronicle commends the Tenure Advisory Committee for the fair way it is going about finding out the facts of the situation. The committee, in addition to holding hearings to give students an opportunity to express their views, has flown in three people, art department professors of other universities or art gallery directors to evaluate Jones' work. (One reason given by the art department for its recommendation not to renew Jones' contract was that the quality of his professional work was not up to the standards.) We are also glad that there are students on the University's Tenure Advisory Committee since student representation when evaluating Faculty is essential. After all, it is the students who are effected directly by a good or poor teacher. A decision to hire or fire a professor is one that requires rational thinking and adequate, accurate information. We are confident that the Tenure Advisory Committee's decision will be based on these criteria. A vote against Jones will not be a rubber stamp of the Department of Art nor a refusal to respond to student concern. In any tenure decision involving a professor of unpopular (to 'The Establishment") views, charges are sure to be raised that the professor's political views were the "real" reason for his dismissal, but in Jones' appeal before the University Tenure Advisory Committee, we believe that objective criteria relating to his teaching and art will be the basis of judgement. "Publish or perish" doctrines are often derided by students whose professors are sometimes too busy with research and writing to do an adequate job of teaching. But without a happy medium between teaching and research, does a professor's teaching degenerate into irrelevent or outdated knowledge? This is one of the difficult questions facing the Tenure Advisory Committee if it finds through numerous evaluations that Jones' work is below par. Another question is the amount of weight that should be given to the evaluation and wishes of a departmental chairman. When the chairman has the responsibility for the quality of his department, is it unfair when another individual or organization steps in critical orcontroversial decisions and negates his judgement? How much authority should a departmental chairman have? Could a University continue to obtain qualified professors to serve as departmental chairman if their decisions were negated and they serve merely as executors of University decisions or as puppets? Of course, the central question, that of tenure, is also a moot area to many members of the University community Many students believe that professors should not be enured, that is guaranteed of a job regardless of how well hey now fulfill the duties of that job. Others insist tha Jreedom'5 ' M PrfeSSOr's acade These are three major questions involved in the Jones' decision. They are not easy ones to answer and their answers may not be popular ones, but in the Jones' case they will be made rationally, carefully and with fuM consideration to student interests and long-range rowth ! and development of the University. yrowtn |