By Gerson Moreno-Riano, October 31, 2008 in Uncategorized
Today, thousands of American children will go out and try to bag some candy. Armed with pillowcases (at least this is the way I did it when I was a child) and either store bought or homemade costumes, children will go from house to house asking for candy and, in some cases, acting like Oliver: "Please, sir, can I have some more?"
At this same time, hundreds of faculty throughout America are undergoing one of the venerable traditions of higher education- the tenure process. This may truly be a question of "trick" or "treat." Ideally, the tenure process is supposed to be a treat- a time in which candidates grow and mature as well as demonstrate all that they can contribute to an institution. It is also a time in which institutions of higher learning reach out to candidates and improve them through various collaborative initiatives and direct guidance.
But, alas, most tenure processes are often tricks and not treats. The dreaded stories one often hears about tenure are all too common. Often, tenure is much like Halloween. It is a time in which candidates must wear a number of costumes to ensure they acquire the great piece of candy called "tenure."
Just what costumes (perhaps a better word would be character traits) are most essential for this process? I would like to suggest to any candidate out there that there are three essential dispositions that must be continually deployed during this process: gentleness, meekness, and prudence (as Aristotle called it- practical intelligence). It goes without saying, of course, that candidates must meet all of the "hard" requirements of most tenure processes: excellent teaching, research, and service. But in my experience sitting on a number of rank and tenure committee meetings, the most successful candidates are the ones who are able to embody and practice the three virtues mentioned above.
Gentleness- no candidate should ever give him/herself over to a rash and abrasive attitude and manner of living. One's colleagues are first one's colleagues and then, second, they are one's friends or acquaintances. One's attitudes, words, actions, should always be characterized by a gentility that is often all too uncommon in today's academy. Abrasive behavior is never forgotten and often can come back to haunt a candidate much like Scrooge's ghost from Christmas past.
Meekness- candidates should always demonstrate and practice the ability to be confident yet be humble, to be strong yet admit areas of further development, to be open to criticism and correction. Meekness is not weakness. It is strength under fire. The tenure process is stressful and it is crucial for candidates to demonstrate and model the virtue of humble confidence.
Both of the above virtues often contribute much to one of those things that all tenure committees love for a candidate to have- collegiality.
The last virtue is perhaps the most important- prudence. Prudence dictates that one act at the right time, with the right intention, with the right feeling, and in the right manner. It takes time to develop and practice prudence. And while this may be the case, no candidate can ever have too much of it. The tenure process, in its best form, will demand that a candidate continually walk the line at all times. And for such a fiery test, prudence is perhaps one of the chief virtues needed for a successful tenure process.
Whether one's tenure process is a "trick" or a "treat," gentleness, meekness, and prudence along with excellent accomplishments position any candidate for success. And even if the process leads to a bad outcome (due to a faulty process or vicious colleagues), one can at least walk away with one's integrity intact.
Lee Trepanier on Nov 10, 2008 at 9:42 am
Gentleness today is often referred to as collegiality, which I would argue is the essential component in the tenure process. The ability to “get along” with your colleagues is particularly crucial in academia because of the nature of tenure being life-time: do you really want to have a half-baked paranoid with anger-control issues down the hallway from you for thirty years? Of course, the issue of collegiality can be used as a smoke-screen for ideological and methodological purges; but most professors are fairly reasonable at discerning the value of collegiality for their department.
Strangely I think the research-oriented institutions in some sense have a fairer process with respect to tenure by requiring a certain number of publications in a period of time. The subjective factors of collegiality become irrelevant and perhaps they should be at such an institution, where professors act more as business entrepreneurs than colleagues of a particular department.