| OCR Text |
Show The Tenure Study Committee, commissioned commis-sioned by the University to evaluate tenure and make recommendations about its retention, reten-tion, change or elimination should be releasing releas-ing its report shortly. Many things can and have been said about the tenure system, both pro and con, but there are some facts that must be clearly understood in debating the worth and necessity of the system. Many people who are campaigning to abolish tenure stress the point that imcompetence in teaching on a University level cannot be condoned and that tenure does protect incompetence. The supporters of this argument argu-ment plead that if the tenure system is abolished, then with it will also go the "feeble professor" who has lost his ability implement the dismissal. These procedures protect due process and the rights of all parties concerned. This new regulation and its attendant procedures simply make the repeated charge of tenure protecting incompetence incom-petence a phony charge and place the responsibility for action clearly where it belongs, upon the administrators, colleagues and students of an alleged incompetent. They must deal in facts, and they must take the necessary action. And Chapter IX, incompetent faculty members, then they are still teaching not because they are tenured but because their students, their fellow professors, their department chairman chair-man and their college dean lack the courage and dedication to good teaching to have them released. Granted it is not an easy job MM to teach. This is not necessarily so. We have no assurance that even if tenure is abolished, abol-ished, that the incompetent faculty member will be fired; and more importantly it is not true that tenure protects incompetency. Consider the following excerpts from a report entitled "Freedom: Tenure and Academic Aca-demic Incompetence," "Very few people arc aware that in June 1970, the Institutional Institu-tional Council of the University of Utah adopted regulations and procedures specif-; specif-; ically designed to terminate any tenured faculty member who is incompetent. BOARD OF REGENTS REGULATIONS Chapter IX Section 9. Termination of Appointments for Cause (1) Grounds for Dismissal Cause. A faculty member may be dismissed for adequate cause. Adequate Ade-quate cause is incompetence in the performance of his duties as a teacher and faculty member, or conduct which demonstrates that and by no means pleasant to tell a colleague - - and friend that he is no longer able to teach; but this does not release one from that responsibility and the elimination of the tenure system will not make it any easier. Without argument of incompetency being be-ing protected, the case for or against tenure should revolve around the continuing protection pro-tection of academic freedom "the freedom of the competent teacher or researcher to probe controversial issues and good complacent compla-cent minds into engagements which are often uncomfortable if not temporarily threatening." This argument drives at the core of the University and its maintainance as an oasis of freedom of expression, hopefully responsible respon-sible expression. It is essential that the University remain such an "oasis," free from the pressures of the community, legislature and student. The tenure system which does protect academic freedom and it must be retained. the faculty member lacks the ability or willingness to meet his responsibilities responsi-bilities to the university.... Section 9, is their invitation to do so." Therefore, if the University does have There follows, then under (2) Dismissal Procedures, a detail of the steps an administrator admini-strator (or anyone else who charges a tenured faculty member with incompetence) incompet-ence) must take to establish the fact and |
