Under the present system an academic in a tenure-track position may receive continuous tenure after a probationary period that can last six years. During this time he or she will undergo a number of pre-tenure reviews. The achievement of continuous tenure does not mean the end of personnel reviews. To the contrary, those with traditional tenure are evaluated annually by their departmental executive officers and in cases of promotion the reviews are more farreaching. It is not the principle of regular reviews for those with traditional tenure that is objectionable.
Regular reviews done constructively can benefit all involved.
The present proposal is characterized by a stunning vagueness as to what standards can be employed in those five-year evaluations and by whom and with what exact effect. Proponents of new tenure have three main arguments. They claim traditional tenure thwarts accountability, gives unique job protection to one group, and is not necessary. Let us scrutinize each claim in turn. Faculty are now also answerable to the national and in some cases international standards of their respective disciplines in tenure, promotion and dismissal procedures.