"When you're hired at Berkeley, if you meet thestandards for tenure at Berkeley, you have aposition," says Patti L. Owen, manager of academicpersonnel at Berkeley. "You're hired into aposition with the expectation that you will gettenure."

Sixty-seven percent of the tenured faculty atBerkeley come from internal promotions. AtHarvard, that number is between 35 and 40 percent.

To identify the best available person, Harvardplaces tenure candidates on an unranked "shortlist" of about five leading scholars, usually at acomparable stage in their careers.

Candidates on the short list are typicallyinvited to Harvard to give a lecture or adepartmental seminar, and to respond to questions.Later, leading outside scholars are asked toevaluate the candidates on the short list, bothabsolutely and comparatively.

Unlike at other institutions, the letterrequesting outside evaluations is "blind" becauseit does not indicate if a particular individual onthe list is actually under serious consideration.It simply asks respondents to evaluate all of theindividuals on the list.

The major difference between Harvard and otherinstitutions is that while other universities,such as Princeton, use the outside evaluationssimply as a measuring stick, Harvard my actuallyoffer tenure to an outside scholar who appears inseveral blind letter responses, rather than itsown internal candidate.

"Every case for promotion of a junior facultymembers is considered on its own merits," saysKatherine T. Rohrer, associate dean of faculty atPrinceton.

Harvard is also unusual because it forms an adhoc committee of experts both from within Harvardand from other universities meets to adviseRudenstine about the particular tenurerecommendation.

At Princeton, by contrast, the same committeeevaluates all tenure cases, creating "realcontinuity from decision to decision," Rohrersays.

Princeton does not release statistics on thepercentage of tenured faculty who came frominternal promotions, but it is often considered tobe as difficult to receive tenure there as atHarvard.

"People realize that the odds are againstgaining tenure at Princeton," Rohrer says. "At thesame time, I hope that our junior faculty membersrealize that being in a place likePrinceton...offers a higher level of opportunityand resources than being a junior faculty memberat a place where tenure is easier to get."

Shortchanged?

But critics of Harvard's system say reasonablechances of promotion are necessary in addition togood resources.

Henry S. Rosovsky, former dean of the Faculty,once made a statement that recent tenure denialssuch as Masten's seem to disprove.

"The undergraduates are here for four years,the faculty is here for life, and the institutionis here forever," Rosovsky said.