To commemorate the fifth-year anniversary of being denied tenure, the Official Blog Wife and I have joint essays in the Chronicle of Higher Education today on the aftereffects of that decision.  For most people who are denied tenure, the costs are financial, familial and emotional.  In my own idiosyncratic case, I was fortunate enough to be spared the first two of the three, which allowed this to be a "controlled case" focusing solely on the emotional legacy. 

My big takeaway:

Indulging in "What happened?" musings is inevitable—indeed, most social scientists are trained to search for underlying causes. But a good social scientist must also be wary of overdetermined outcomes. There is always the element of chance to any outcome. Get 20 tenured academics in a room, and that stochastic element explodes. After five years, I've grown comfortable with the idea that there is a limit to how much I will ever know about what happened. But it took nearly all five of those years to reach this point.

To be blunt, my wife's essay is much better than mine, and is chock-full of embarrassing anecdotes like this one: 

My husband is one of the most confident people I know. This is both attractive and exasperating. We once had a disagreement about the meaning of a word. When I read the dictionary definition to him, he said the dictionary was wrong. The rabbi who married us compared him to Jacob in her sermon, saying, "Jacob argued with God."

So read all of her esaay, if nothing else. My only regret is that the Chronicle did not post her full tagline, which should have read, "Erika Drezner is a social worker and coordinator of teen services at the Asperger’s Association of New England.  She has learned over time that when arguing with Dan she is right all of the time."

Posted By Daniel W. Drezner

Among the most popular New York Times articles of the past 24 hours (not to mention my Twitter feed) is this Christopher Shea essay about tenure.  Shea reviews two recent books by university professors who are so bold as to suggest abolishing the institution. 

After reading the essay, however, I must conclude that the reason it's so popular is that the only people who read the New York Times on Labor Day weekend are academics and their relatives. 

Here's the part where Shea lost me -- the opening paragraphs:    

In tough economic times, it’s easy to gin up anger against elites. The bashing of bankers is already so robust that the economist William Easterly has compared it, with perhaps a touch of hyperbole, to genocidal racism. But in recent months, a more unlikely privileged group has found itself in the cross hairs: tenured ­professors.

At a time when nearly one in 10 American workers is unemployed, here’s a crew (the complaint goes) who are guaranteed jobs for life, teach only a few hours a week, routinely get entire years off, dump grading duties onto graduate students and produce “research” on subjects like “Rednecks, Queers and Country Music” or “The Whatness of Books.” Or maybe they stop doing research altogether (who’s going to stop them?), dropping their workweek to a manageable dozen hours or so, all while making $100,000 or more a year. Ready to grab that pitchfork yet?

That sketch — relayed on numerous blogs and op-ed pages — is exaggerated, but no one who has observed the academic world could call it entirely false. And it’s a vision that has caught on with an American public worried about how to foot the bill for it all (emphasis added)

OK, here's my question:  where is the evidence for this public ire?  Compared to bankers, politicians, or American Muslims, where exactly is the outpouring of outrage against tenured radicals? 

I'll tell you where the evidence ain't -- Shea's essay.  His review of the two books is perfectly adequate, but there is zero evidence beyond that stray reference to "numerous blogs and op-ed pages."  One of those op-eds, of course, was by one of the book authors he reviews, however, so I don't think it could count.

As a tenured professor who's recent scholarly output could be accused of trending towards the whimsical, I should be a Big Target for this kind of attack.  I ain't seeing it, however.  Maybe this is because I'm ridiculously out of touch, but compared with the other groups listed above, academics have not faced much public scorn. 

Indeed, if anything, the past few years should have been an "easy test" for hostility towards tenure, as hard times should have triggered a massive outpouring of support for this kind of higher education reform.  Again, however, I see no evidence for such a groundswell. 

I'm going to file this under Jack Shafer's "Bogus Trends" watch and enjoy the rest of my Labor Day.  I suggest you do the same. 

 

What I learned about my profession from this New York Times front-pager by Patricia Cohen
  1. My profession is graying really fast. 
  2. It's much, much tougher to get a tenure-track/tenured job than it used to be.
  3. Many older professors entered the academy because they wanted to change the world through teaching and social action -- plus they liked the lifestyle.  Many younger professors entered the academy because they want to change the world through sophisticated, ground-breaking research -- plus they like the lifestyle. 
  4. Many older professors think they're "down" with their younger colleagues; many younger professors wish their older and less productive esteemed colleagues would stop bloviating at faculty meetings retire.
This paragraph was particularly interesting:
Wisconsin is part of the state’s university’s system, for example, but it receives only 18 percent of its total budget from the Legislature. The rest comes from donations, foundations, federal research grants and corporations. Mr. Wright and Mr. Olneck worry how constantly having a hand out — particularly to corporations — may affect attitudes and policies. Mr. Olneck mentioned the long list of labs and classrooms named after companies like Halliburton, Pillsbury and Ford Motor Company.
I understand the concern, but Mr. Wright and Mr. Olneck know that foundations like MacArthur or Koch have their own ideological agendas, right? 

Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.

Read More