Of late, we have witnessed a spate of state legislators file bills to alter or eliminate faculty tenure at public research universities. This started with unbridled attacks on faculty tenure in Wisconsin and more recently in both Missouri and Iowa. It is worth exploring the reasons behind this trend and what we, as university representatives, can do to dispel the misconceptions regarding tenure.  In Iowa and North Carolina, bills have been filed to make sure that future tenure-track faculty will have to identify their political affiliations, ostensibly to make sure that there is balance of viewpoints in the faculty ranks in academia. To me, these are symptomatic of the on-going attack on academic freedom that we have enjoyed since the research universities came into being in this country.

All fields of research involve creativity and are typically unbiased since they ultimately are searching for what we call universal truth. For this to occur, we must allow researchers to go into all areas of investigation unfettered. Since the beginning of modern civilization, and scientific renaissance, universities and their scientists and engineers have been looked upon as unbiased arbiters of all prevalent ideas. Rulers, both benevolent and malevolent, have depended on university folks to investigate claims made by common folk. In some cases, scientists had to give their lives for speaking the truth. Those kinds of repercussions led university faculty in this country to ask for protection of academic freedom through a process called tenure. Tenure was a concept rooted in providing a probationary period for faculty to show their academic worth. However, even when tenure is obtained faculty must be certain that their work should not only be of value to the society and the institution they work for, but also be able to criticize when inconsistencies arise without fear of professional repercussions. It is not a job security issue, but more a privilege to work on all aspects of research, if they are valuable to the society. To apply a litmus test to what kind of research one can engage in would defeat the very lofty ideals a university aspires to.

In these modern times, when we have such polarization of political views among the public, it should be anticipated that any work coming out of a university will have its supporters and detractors. However, if faculty do their work without regard to who the audience is, then the results of their work is simply an evaluation of the truth.  The concept of tenure is attacked from many sides, the politicians, students, administrators and other faculty. The very institution of a University is under attack these days because of a perverse anti-intellectualism that has taken root in the civil society. To a large extent, the universities themselves are at fault for this because of their ivory tower mentalities that have alienated them from the common citizens. Nevertheless,  the university is still the only unbiased arbiter of ideas in the present society.

How do we make ourselves relevant in this post-truth world, when facts are twisted into “fake” news when they do not comport with the views of one side or the other?  First and foremost, university researchers are not very good at communicating their ideas to the public.  The output of research (generally funded by tax payer dollars) should not be shrouded in secrecy, but rather open to the public at large.  This has been a problem since peer-reviewed research output tends to be controlled by large publishing houses which limit their easy availability; this has caused angst among the legislators who apportion money towards the conduct of such research. Secondly, public trust in funded research is shaken by isolated, but highly publicized cases of research misconduct and other issues. Universities should be prepared to not only sanction such individuals, but also assure the public that tenure is not a license to bend scientific facts. Thirdly, a just and fair amount of job security should be defended as part of the non-monetary compensation just as it is for civil servants, especially in this era of social media communications which involve, in many cases egregious cases of assault on moral character without due process.

So, to conclude this blog, my plea is that academic freedom and tenure should be defended at all costs if our university faculty must be productive partners in the civil society and be successful in their quest for scientific truth and creative activities that benefit the public at large. I exhort my administrative colleagues to be wary of attacks on this fundamental principle and be prepared to defend it, when needed.