West Virginia University professors would be graded on their diversity and social justice efforts under a proposal that would let administrators fire educators, including those with tenure, who come up short.
Professors at the public research university in Morgantown have until Friday to offer feedback on an “equity-minded” revision of the school’s guidelines for faculty appointments, evaluations, promotions and tenure.
The document must then pass a faculty senate vote on Dec. 5 and get the approval of WVU President Gordon Gee to take effect in January.
“Procedurally, a lot of folks are concerned that a bad review from one administrator could get them fired,” said R. Scott Crichlow, a WVU associate professor of political science and faculty senator. “A lot of this proposal is putting the cart before the horse because departments haven’t defined the diversity requirements yet.”
WVU currently evaluates professors for tenured positions based on their teaching, research and service work.
The proposed revision would add “expanded diversity, equity and inclusion criteria” to the service portion of the evaluation for all tenured faculty, according to Shauna Johnson, WVU director of news communications.
It would let a department chair or faculty committee recommend the firing of any tenured professor they rate as “unsatisfactory” under the expanded criteria.
“While non-continuation of tenured faculty is extremely rare, accounting for less than 1% of cases, it is important that faculty understand how the process works and the criteria for making such decisions,” Ms. Johnson said.
The draft document says work that satisfies the expanded criteria would include “contributions to recruiting, advising, retaining, and graduating students from historically under-represented groups.”
They would also include “curriculum development related to supporting a diverse student body such as modules on cultural competence and classroom activities that support inclusivity and diversity.”
Under the proposed new guidelines, administrators would place “unsatisfactory” tenured faculty on an improvement plan.
If the professors failed to improve to a “satisfactory” rating within a year, an administrator can recommend their firing.
The guidelines would also empower administrators to fire professors earning “unsatisfactory” ratings on two out of three consecutive reviews.
The proposal has sparked protests from several free speech advocates and academics who say it goes too far.
“Making tenured faculty subject to termination based on the whims of department chairs and faculty committees will end tenure at WVU as we know it,” said Jeremy C. Young, director of free expression for the nonpartisan free speech advocacy group PEN America, which opposes the proposal.
In the U.S., tenure has traditionally offered professors protection against being censured or targeted for political reasons.
Aaron Terr, a campus rights advocate at the nonpartisan Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, said the WVU proposal would weaken such protections.
“If these protections are so weak that a university can easily get rid of faculty for illegitimate reasons, such as objections to their views or research, that defeats the purpose of tenure,” Mr. Terr said in an email.
The proposed revision also incorporates the WVU Code of Conduct into tenure decisions. The code says faculty must “avoid conduct that reflects adversely on the image of the university” and “respect the decisions” of administrators.
Jonathan Zimmerman, a professor in the history of education at the University of Pennsylvania, said he doesn’t trust administrators to judge such matters “in a fair and even-handed manner.”
“Those are moving targets, of course, and it’s easy to imagine a power-hungry president or dean weaponizing them against any kind of dissent,” Mr. Zimmerman said.
WVU officials insist professors have been actively involved in the revision process, however.
According to Ms. Johnson, a faculty committee representing all departments began meeting weekly in February 2021 to recommend updates to the tenure document.
A new introduction to the document calls it a “moral imperative” for WVU to promote diversity, equity and inclusion in tenure decisions.
“WVU also seeks to achieve national and international impact and is committed to equal opportunity, affirmative action, social justice and the elimination of discrimination and harassment,” the revised document states.
Howard Fields III, an adjunct professor of ethics at the University of Missouri, praised the language and called it “highly unlikely” that tenured faculty would be fired over it.
“An argument can be made that organizations only assess what truly matters to them,” Mr. Fields said. “Too often, diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice theories are plastered in pamphlets and on websites with little to no attempt to hold themselves or others accountable for implementation.”
If the revision passes, WVU will join the University System of Georgia in allowing administrators to fire tenured faculty. Last year, Georgia gave the green light for that to happen during post-tenure reviews without faculty input, sparking an ongoing investigation by the American Association of University Professors.
Officials in Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas and Florida have initiated reviews of tenure practices in their states.
The University of California, Los Angeles and Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis have added diversity, equity and inclusion criteria to their tenure qualifications and post-tenure review processes.
Neither school has taken the extra step of creating a process to fire tenured faculty as part of a diversity-based expansion of hiring standards — and WVU officials say they are not aware of other colleges that have done so.
Many colleges already have post-tenure review processes that can lead to academic probation and dismissal for professors who are incompetent or pose some danger to their campus.
The WVU proposal would make that process more subjective, according to retired political scientist Robert A. Heineman, a department chair for more than 16 years at Alfred University in New York.
“The importance of tenure is the freedom to think and speak independently and an ‘unsatisfactory’ standard threatens that right,” Mr. Heineman said. “It would be far better for the legislature and the schools to institute certain objective across-board standards — course load, publication goals, advising load, community service, grant funding obtained — that apply to everyone.”
* Article from: The Washington Times