|
|
|
The views expressed on this page are
solely
those of the author and do not
necessarily represent the views of County
News Online
|
|
The image by Tony Fischer is licensed under CC BY 2.0
Higher Ed Dive
Iowa lawmakers advance bills that would kill tenure at public universities
Hallie Busta
Feb. 16, 2021
Dive Brief:
Two bills advancing through Iowa's legislature would end the system of tenure at the state's three public universities.
House and Senate committees have recommended the passage of separate
but nearly identical versions of the proposed legislation, both of
which call for prohibiting "the establishment or continuation of a
tenure system" at the University of Iowa, Iowa State University and the
University of Northern Iowa.
This isn't Iowa's first run at ending tenure, and other states,
including Kansas, have recently attempted to weaken such protections.
Dive Insight:
The legislative text of both measures states colleges may terminate any
employee for reasons other than "just cause, program discontinuance,
and financial exigency." Those are the three conditions under which the
American Association of University Professors says administrators can
lay off tenured faculty.
Faculty, the bills continue, shall be employed at the discretion of
deans and the president "as necessary to carry out the academic duties
and responsibilities of the college." This runs counter to typical
shared governance principles for removing tenured faculty.
They also call for the universities to "adopt a written statement"
spelling out their employee agreements, annual performance reviews,
"minimum standards of good practice" and standards for review and
discipline of faculty members. Schools' policies around dismissal for
cause, program discontinuance and financial exigency would also be
included.
Tenure is largely viewed as a protected status that allows faculty
members to conduct their work without being beholden to outside
entities.
Eliminating tenure takes away "the kind of safeguards that allow for
the presumption of continued employment," said Mark Criley, program
officer in the department of academic freedom, tenure and governance at
AAUP. "That means that faculty will constantly need to be thinking
about the way that the administration, the board and legislators are
responding to the way they carry out their duty. And that's inimical to
academic freedom."
Several Iowa industry groups and board of regents lobbyists have
opposed the measures, according to local media reports. They wouldn't
apply to faculty members whose contracts began before July 1, 2021, but
they would affect renewals on or after that date.
This is the third time in nearly as many years that Iowa's lawmakers
have moved to end tenure at the state's universities, The Gazette
reported. The latest attempt follows a policy change by the Kansas
board of regents earlier this year that would give the state's public
colleges an alternative option for terminating tenured employees that
doesn't require a declaration of financial exigency.
AAUP is investigating a number of schools over changes made as a result
of pandemic-related budget pressures that could pose a threat to tenure
and other aspects of shared governance.
Josh Lehman, a spokesperson for the Iowa Board of Regents, wrote in an
email Tuesday that it opposes the bills. "Tenure allows our
institutions to recruit and retain the best faculty to teach, do
research and provide service to advance the institutional missions of
Iowa's public universities," Lehman wrote.
Demetri Morgan, a higher education professor at Loyola University
Chicago, said the GOP's nationwide recalibration following this
election cycle could result in such challenges to colleges in
conservative states going further than they have in the past. "These
attacks on tenure are a low-hanging fruit," Morgan said.
Whereas the policy change in Kansas appeared to try to give schools a
way to address financial concerns, while also disrupting tenure, he
said, the situation in Iowa is different: "This one, for me at least,
reads as much more partisan, much more openly politically performative
and less rooted in an economic or financial emergency."
Read this and other stories at Higher Ed Dive
|
|
|
|
