From 2012 to 2014, Scott Leutenegger, chair of the University of Denver’s computer-science department, led the institution’s Faculty Senate through its early discussions of post-tenure review. His account of some key moments has been edited for length and clarity. —As told to Audrey Williams June
•
I was chair of the Faculty Senate’s personnel committee before I became president. At that time, there were numerous faculty members who were pushing for post-tenure review in what I viewed as a punitive fashion. Some of them were angry at colleagues that they didn’t perceive as being productive and wanted a way to get rid of them. I thought it was fairly draconian, but it started a conversation.
When I became senate president, the board joined in along the same lines. So I was getting the message from the very top and from fellow faculty. When I talked to the provost, he wanted to help faculty members become more productive, rather than just weed out deadwood. From the very start, there was a philosophy of how can we use this to improve faculty performance and honor the faculty life cycle?
The University of Denver is instituting a program focused not on punitive measures but on helping professors develop their skills.
When I stepped down as senate president, post-tenure review hadn’t gelled yet. There was more discussion, and the language was transformed from post-tenure review to faculty development. As you can imagine, when you have 800 faculty members, if you try to change anything there are concerns. And if you don’t change anything, there are concerns.
Some faculty were adamant that what we have is a wimpy policy. Another concern is completely the opposite — that anytime you give a tool to administrators, they can abuse it. I do think that could happen, I just don’t think it’s likely. After working with the board members, I would call them enlightened. Some faculty members think, who are they to tell me what I’m supposed to do? I definitely understand that thinking when it comes to your academic discipline, but as a university evolves and careers evolve there needs to be a way to guide people back to the path if they’ve strayed too far.
I don’t have a lot of faith that state institutions would be able to pull this off if their state legislature is one of those screaming for the need for post-tenure review. I think any private institution could, and should, do something like this and think about how to make sure faculty get what they need to be a productive member of the professoriate. The most important people in terms of determining the education of the students are the faculty.
Audrey Williams June is a senior reporter who writes about the academic workplace, faculty pay, and work-life balance in academe. Contact her at audrey.june@chronicle.com, or follow her on Twitter @chronaudrey.
