A System Under Scrutiny

Knowles says there is constant criticism and review of the tenure system. As the problem appears to deepen in departments like English, there are signs that changes may be in the works.

"The recruitment and retention of junior Faculty is discussed often, and the past year is no exception," Knowles writes in an e-mail message. "As I announced at the full Faculty meeting in May, I expect that we shall return to these matters in the fall."

With the $2.1 billion capital campaign nearing completion, there is promise of many additional chairs to be filled across the FAS in the next few years. Harvard's departments have historically been smaller than those at comparable research universities, according to Buell, but the capital campaign is a step towards ameliorating the lack of tenured seats.

Buell also pointed out that junior Faculty used to stay for the full eight years, then could move on to a tenured spot at another University. The scarcity of these positions has forced Harvard to look at sweetening the time those junior Faculty spend at Harvard, thereby inducing them to stick around for the full length of their junior professorship.

"The Dean has been considering steps to make it more attractive to junior Faculty to stay here for longer, including the odds of getting promoted from within, increasing the time junior Faculty members could stay at Harvard at the junior faculty level, increasing the resources...that would be available to the junior faculty here," Buell says.

The departing Faculty members focused their criticism on the tenure process itself, which they say sometimes threatens to impede their academic work. First, they say, it is structurally almost impossible to win a full professorship from within the Harvard system, starting at rank of assistant professor.

Siegel says the expectation that an English assistant professor ought to be publishing a second book only five years after receiving a Ph.D. and be teaching successfully is asking too much. Assistant Professor of English Ann Pellegrini '86 writes in an e-mail message that the constant "gearing up for the job market" distracts Faculty members from "the teaching and writing they would far prefer to be doing."

Harvard would be better served, Masten says, if it made the process more explicit. He said that the secret letters full professors use to give their recommendation to Knowles should be eliminated so that there are no discrepancies between the public vote and the secret vote.

Evidence seems to show that Harvard has gained a poor reputation as employer because of its tenure system. Pheng Y. Cheah was offered an assistant professorship in English but chose to accept an untenured position with tenure track at Northwestern University, because she was worried about her ultimate job security. She says the departure of Siegel, along with Assistant Professors of English Joshua D. "Jed" Esty, William R. Handley and Pellegrini, this year reassured him that he had made the right decision.

"It was quite clear that junior Faculty are almost never tenured [at Harvard]," Cheah says. "The only attraction for junior Faculty seems to be the institutional 'brand name,' which the institution exploits as a selling point."

Like Harvard, most other universities do not grant tenure easily. But professors Cheah, Masten, and Brian Harper, who left the Harvard English department in 1995, says the other schools offer the prospect of tenure, sometimes at the associate professor level.

Despite the vocal critics of the tenure system, the majority of professors leave with a positive feeling toward Harvard. Senior Faculty members serve as advisers in their job searches, and the associate professors say they feel as if they are choosing to advance their careers, instead of being thrown out.

Williamson even views the tenure system as positive. "My view is that it's working right," he says. "Any process will have flaws but this one at least gives you the assurance of checks and balances."