Former Harvard University President and current University Professor Lawrence H. Summers will soon return to Harvard from his influential position as Director of the National Economic Council. Weathering criticism of Harvard’s tenure policy, which may have played a role in Summers’s return, the University ought to be applauded for the demonstration of its steadfastness to its policy: Any professors who are away from the University for more than two years must give up their tenure and later reapply for it upon their return, if they wish. By setting strict limits on who is considered tenured faculty, Harvard is simply affirming the academic truth that professors’ foremost obligations are to teach students and be active within the research community.

Harvard’s tenure policy has been under criticism since President Obama emphasized the integral role of Summers’s counsel in avoiding a deeper recession. That Summers may be returning to Harvard in order to keep his tenure, instead of serving the country at a high level, could lead some to believe the policy deserves reexamination.

However, it would be disingenuous for an academic institution devoted to teaching and research to employ a professor who is involved in neither for a significant period of time. Making an exception for Summers would not only create a poor precedent, but would also contradict Harvard’s guiding principles of quality teaching and expansive research.

As such, any speculation on the myriad possible reasons for Summers’s return ought to matter little when one considers that Harvard will benefit enormously from his presence on campus—it has been hinted that Summers will teach at the Harvard Kennedy School.

Harvard is blessed with many former public servants, whose practical backgrounds elevate Harvard from simply an intellectual environment to one that acts in the world. Summers’ influence as a public figure can hardly be overstated, as he helped frame the $787 billion stimulus package and oversaw the bailout of the auto industry. Therefore, it is perhaps equally difficult to overstate Harvard’s gain at retrieving a person of Summers’ experience and expertise.

Nonetheless, there are circumstances in which tenured professors serving a higher cause are unable or unwilling to return within two years. In the hope that public service is not discouraged, the administrators and faculty who reevaluate these professors for tenure upon their return should take into account professors’ contribution to the common welfare.

Furthermore, any recommendations for lengthening the number of years of permissible absence are likely misinterpreting the point of tenure. Tenure is not meant to provide permanent job security for those no longer active at Harvard. It exists to ensure professors of their job security so they can freely speak and conduct research.

With the reasons for his departure from the capital still unclear, Professor Summers extends his reputation for controversy into the new decade. Regardless, what ought to remain decidedly uncontroversial is the University’s laudable tenure policy.