Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate • Hacker News Board

Re: Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate

#91

Post by thebooktocome » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 8:27 PM UTC

natpalmer1776 wrote: post #73

bsder wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tenure matters if you happen to be teaching American history and have a bunch of people who want you fired because you had the temerity to talk about slavery. Tenure matters if you happen to be teaching English literature and have a bunch of people who want you fired because you have the temerity to point out that Chaucer's characters have the symptoms of syphilis. Tenure matters if you happen to be teaching biology…

I'm tired of responding to folks caught up on the wrong shit, so here's what I should have said in the first place: In my personal experience I've seen or heard of more professors espousing their personal views as fact than most online and academic discourse would have otherwise led me to believe possible. I think removing tenure is a net loss for research because professors now have to worry about politically motiva…

In the real world of academia, CRT is a legal theory, not a biological one.

Re: Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate

#92

Post by ajford » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 8:29 PM UTC

So as a Texan I'm on the fence here.

I wasn't directly involved (as a student and TA), but spent a fair while in academia, and was rather close personal friends with a number of adjunct professors, tenure-track profs, post-docs, and grad students. I was looking at staying in academics so I had many long discussions about the state of things (at least at the time, about a decade ago).

There was a lot of concern in the field about how tenure was an incentive and a solid goal to strive for, but it left much for the administration to abuse. Between the politics and bureaucracy and constant jockeying for tenure track, it made it hard to focus on the students. Since you had to "play the game" or get cut or tossed out, that forced non-tenure profs to spend time outside of teaching. Then you had the shitty profs that just wanted that tenure protection so they could avoid teaching and just do their own personal research. And since it was so easy to cut adjuncts, they had little to no bargaining position and were often given shitty pay. So I'm all for ditching Tenure or otherwise reworking that pile of garbage.

But on the other hand, I don't trust anything coming out of the TX lege right now. Especially if it's got Dan Patrick excited. They're trying their hardest to create an authoritarian theocracy using the same playbook as DeSantis, and this seems like another step in controlling education in Texas to paint the narrative they want.

Re: Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate

#93

Post by 542458 » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 8:31 PM UTC

PuppyTailWags wrote: post #66

notch898c wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would think a top performer would like least the tenure system, as they're in demand but their job outlook stunted by (perhaps numerical minority) crusty elements that can't be supplanted.

I would disagree but only, specifically, academia's already broken system. Tenure takes the heat off an academic such that they can deeply, deeply study a system. Academia's still stuck in lines-of-code style measuring sticks of performance so the rush to tenure is often pumping out salami slices worth of papers to secure future funds.

The thing that I don’t understand is that:

* Academics say publish or perish is terrible and produces warped incentives.

* Academics say they need tenure to protect senior researchers from the publish or perish system.

* But academics seem to be the ones building grant and advancement systems that enforce “publish or perish”.

I don’t get it - it certainly sounds like tenure mostly protects senior academics from systems they built themselves. If publish or perish is so bad why don’t senior members of departments build advancement opportunities that don’t rely on impact factor? Cynically, it almost feels like tenure is enforcing publish or perish, because those with tenure set the rules and the current system protects those who are tenured.

Furthermore, I don’t see why the sort of “deep study” research that the idealized tenured researcher does would need special protection. If the researcher has a track record of success surely the department would tolerate a brief lull in publications while they work on their Magnum Opus? Private industry frequently does multi-year deep research projects without the need for tenure systems.

Re: Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate

#94

Post by tombert » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 8:31 PM UTC

natpalmer1776 wrote: post #73

bsder wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tenure matters if you happen to be teaching American history and have a bunch of people who want you fired because you had the temerity to talk about slavery. Tenure matters if you happen to be teaching English literature and have a bunch of people who want you fired because you have the temerity to point out that Chaucer's characters have the symptoms of syphilis. Tenure matters if you happen to be teaching biology…

I'm tired of responding to folks caught up on the wrong shit, so here's what I should have said in the first place: In my personal experience I've seen or heard of more professors espousing their personal views as fact than most online and academic discourse would have otherwise led me to believe possible. I think removing tenure is a net loss for research because professors now have to worry about politically motiva…

> actively retaliate against students who try to stand up for their faith.

Outside of chain emails and the movie "God's Not Dead", has this really happened? Anecdata, but when I took an intro to philosophy course my professor was pretty open to religious people talking about their justification for stuff. For that matter, I took a "religious ethics" class, which spent a not-insignificant time talking about Christian ethics (in addition to a lot of other popular religions). It was actually a pretty interesting class.

This was at a public school, evidently.

Re: Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate

#95

Post by Beldin » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 8:32 PM UTC

wlesieutre wrote: post #55

edrxty wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Getting rid of tenure is fine but they'll need to pay much more to stay competitive. The calculous is fairly simple. Tenure track and then have an easy work life but less money, or go to industry and make lots of money but work more. Nothing wrong with either but if you get rid of the upsides to academia expect to replace them with something. That's just how market economies work. The issue isn't stem so much as the…

> Tenure track and then have an easy work life That doesn't match the experience of anyone I know in academia , when you want an easy work life you quit and move to the private sector

This.

A friend remarked one benefit of moving to industry (aside higher pay and more job security(1)) was the reduced hours - no longer always continuing to work after leaving the office.

(1) job security after tenure isn't magical compared to industry around here; before tenure, job security is more or less a guaranteed "haha nope."

So on average, industry has far better job security.

Re: Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate

#96

Post by e40 » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 8:32 PM UTC

orange_joe wrote: post #9

I’m skeptical that tenure is good for students, I knew so many teachers that just didn’t much care for their work and probably would have been fired if not for tenure. I understand the arguments in favor of tenure, particularly when it comes to recruitment, but given the bloated pipeline into academia, I’m not sure they hold.

Agreed. It was a path to teaching 1 or 2 classes a year and doing whatever they wanted. I was at UC Berkeley in the 80's, if it matters.

Re: Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate

#97

Post by ghufran_syed » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 8:34 PM UTC

tombert wrote: post #35

satysin wrote: post #4

So the Texas Senate just passed a bill that makes it more likely that Texas faculty hires will be from a smaller and no doubt lower quality pool of candidates? Why take a job without the possibility of tenure vs anywhere else in the US that has the option available to you?

Not college, but my wife is wrapping up her teaching certification soon. We have both considered moving to Florida (we both have family that live there), but there is no chance in hell that we are moving to Florida and teaching; the infamous "Don't Say Gay" bill is so broad and idiotic (and she would be teaching biology ), that Florida is a complete non-starter for us since neither of us really have any desire to be…

Can you help me understand what aspect of teaching biology in grades k through 3 would be against the provisions of the law in Florida? I studied biology to age 16 in England (“o-levels”) and don’t recall anything even up to that age that would be covered under this law?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Parental_Rights_in_E...

Re: Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate

#98

Post by xmddmx » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 8:34 PM UTC

Tenure is to Academia as Venture Capital is to Entreprenureship. You give resources (money, which buys time, office space, equipment, support staff...) to a bunch of promising individuals, hoping that some of them will do amazing things, but knowing most of them will not.

Re: Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate

#99

Post by moab » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 8:34 PM UTC

ok_dad wrote: post #77

orange_joe wrote: post #9

I’m skeptical that tenure is good for students, I knew so many teachers that just didn’t much care for their work and probably would have been fired if not for tenure. I understand the arguments in favor of tenure, particularly when it comes to recruitment, but given the bloated pipeline into academia, I’m not sure they hold.

Tenured researchers shouldn't be teaching, IMO. They can be doing research full-time, and leave teaching to those who care to teach. I, personally, dislike research, but I would love to become a CompSci professor and teach the next generation of software developers and technologists. The problem is, I do NOT want to do research. Give me a Master's in CS with some sort of "teaching extension" on it and I'll go teach a…

You don't know what you're talking about. Research and teaching at the upper-division level can and should be two sides of the same coin.

Re: Ban on Tenure for New Faculty Hires Passes Texas Senate

#100

Post by all2 » Fri, Apr 21, 2023, 8:36 PM UTC

wyager wrote: post #46

all2 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if we started an institution that automated most of the admin, hired and based admissions on pure skill/ability/talent? It seems to me that something so simple couldn't possibly work...

> hired and based admissions on pure skill/ability/talent This would be great, but I will present without comment the fact that lots of large universities are suddenly getting rid of standardized-test-based admissions, which is by far the best way that we know how to do ability-based admissions. You must understand the dynamics behind that decision to understand why it isn't currently legally/institutionally feasible…

> You must understand the dynamics behind that decision to understand why it isn't currently legally/institutionally feasible to have merit-based admission.

Is this for any institution of higher learning? Or just public institutions (ie, institutions that receive public/federal money)?