Texas Bill Nukes Tenure

[MarathonRunner]

Surprised no one has posted this yet. It is already having negative effects in Texas: https://www.chronicle.com/article/tenure-and-dei-changes-loom-large-in-texas-here-are-3-takeaways-from-a-marathon-hearing

Julie McCormick Weng, an assistant professor of English at Texas State University, said colleagues are going on the job market because they fear pursuing a long-term career in a state that does not support tenure. The revised bill, Weng added, still sends a message that the Texas Legislature believes there is an issue at the state's colleges that requires state intervention.

The mere optics of this bill are already having a detrimental effect on our universities and their reputations," Weng said. "If any version of this bill is passed, I worry that it would result in a profound faculty exodus."

"We all want greater political diversity in higher education. Please do not eliminate" the protection of tenure.
Other faculty members said they had seen competitive candidates drop out of the hiring processes at Texas universities because of SB 18.

"People turn down jobs for lots of reasons, but from what these candidates told me, the uncertainty around tenure was a big factor in our failure to hire this year," said Daniel Brinks, chair of the government department at the University of Texas at Austin.

Brinks said he'd made job offers to six candidates for two faculty openings this year, and all six declined. Another professor in the department informed Brinks last week that he'd be leaving.

Seems that even the idea of revoking tenure is already having consequences when it comes to recruiting faculty. I certainty won't be looking at Texas when I'm on the market in the next two years, during my very competitive postdoc.

[dismalist]

Let me explain in a different way why abolition of tenure in Texas would not hurt Texas. The observations and complaints in the CHE quote may well be true, but are not evidence of a new equilibrium. There is the seen and the unseen to be considered.

The fundamental point is that at current working conditions there is excess supply of faculty. Working in a university is just too good. Proof is the reserve army of adjuncts in the humanities and social sciences and the vast number of post docs in the sciences. Many of these would take an academic job with worse working conditions than a tenured professorship but better than their current lot. Thus, Texas will not have trouble maintaining its public universities.

What is perhaps little appreciated is that more than 40% of degree granting institutions do not offer tenure, and even 25% of PhD granting non-profit institutions do not offer tenure. So not offering tenure is no big deal in the overall national market place.

If one takes the promises of leaving Texas and the explanations for not arriving in Texas seriously, one must recognize that this puts downward pressure on wages outside of Texas, too.

[FishProf]

Thus, Texas will not have trouble maintaining its public universities.

This is what I meant a few weeks back when I questioned whether economics had any soul.  No matter what happens, you respond with a flip "yup, that's the way markets work".

You above statement is, I suspect, wrong.  It may be true that Texas will not have trouble staffing its public universities.    You cannot say the quality will be maintained. 

[dismalist]

Thus, Texas will not have trouble maintaining its public universities.

This is what I meant a few weeks back when I questioned whether economics had any soul.  No matter what happens, you respond with a flip "yup, that's the way markets work".

You above statement is, I suspect, wrong.  It may be true that Texas will not have trouble staffing its public universities.    You cannot say the quality will be maintained.

It is not inhuman to try to figure out consequences that are unintended or unforeseen. If someone does something, it is seen. Only some reactions to that deed are seen. Many have to be posited, and then have to be checked if they actually occur.

Not all those adjuncts and post docs can be stupid. Just gotta find the right ones.

[clean]

IF you were a new graduate and had an offer from a school that offered a tenure track and one that did not, and the one that did not did not pay a premium, which offer would you accept?

IF you were tenured (or nearly so, but expected to earn tenure at your current place), would you apply for another job at a school that did not also offer a tenure track?  (Remembering the advice that IF you are up for tenure, THEN you are on the market as you will likely be very well prepared for the market, and you should KNOW that the offer of tenure is a good one (that the grass is not greener somewhere else.... that the offer of tenure is a good one).

IF you were at a place that did NOT offer a tenure track, and your contract renewed frequently, would you be on the market just as frequently (if for no other reason than your own financial security)?

IF you were employed on a regularly renewing contract, would you buy a house (borrowing a lot of money), or would you keep your 'roots in a pot' ready to transplant in a better garden?

Please provide counter examples illustrating how not even having a tenure track  for new hires (when there are other, longer employed people) with a different set of work conditions for people hired before 9/1/2023.

[dismalist]

Some new graduates, those who have not received TT offers, or don't value tenure, some post-docs, and some current adjuncts would surely take a non tenured position at current salaries, for their position would improve. Many already have. As I said above, 40%+ of institutions already do not offer tenure, including 25% of PhD granting institutions. No big deal.

Good people needn't move. This is predicated on a rational re-hire process, of course. But there is no reason not to expect it.

As academic work is so cool, there is excess supply of labor at current remuneration, of which tenure is a part. Therefore, remuneration can  fall.

[Parasaurolophus]

I would drop my non-TT job for a TT one in a heartbeat. I'd even take a somewhat lower salary. As it is, I don't know what my "salary" will be for the year until the add/drop date for the last semester in which I teach. That uncertainty is awful.

[dismalist]

I would drop my non-TT job for a TT one in a heartbeat. I'd even take a somewhat lower salary. As it is, I don't know what my "salary" will be for the year until the add/drop date for the last semester in which I teach. That uncertainty is awful.

That's perfectly OK, and consistent with what I've written.

It is important to realize that not everyone is like you or me or anyone else. People differ.

But again, what's crucial for Texas, given this national market, is that replacements for any of us are waiting in the wings.

[onthefringe]

As I said above, 40%+ of institutions already do not offer tenure, including 25% of PhD granting institutions.

Where are you getting these numbers? they are vastly different from what I've seen. Clearly the fraction of faculty on the tenure track is plummeting but it's hard for me to believe that 49% of US institutions don't offer tenure at all, and if you are including non US institutions this is an apples and oranges argument.

[dismalist]

As I said above, 40%+ of institutions already do not offer tenure, including 25% of PhD granting institutions.

Where are you getting these numbers? they are vastly different from what I've seen. Clearly the fraction of faculty on the tenure track is plummeting but it's hard for me to believe that 49% of US institutions don't offer tenure at all, and if you are including non US institutions this is an apples and oranges argument.

Just US. Not 49%, but 40%+, of which 25% of PhD granting institutions. Source = NCES https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_316.80.asp

[onthefringe]

As I said above, 40%+ of institutions already do not offer tenure, including 25% of PhD granting institutions.

Where are you getting these numbers? they are vastly different from what I've seen. Clearly the fraction of faculty on the tenure track is plummeting but it's hard for me to believe that 49% of US institutions don't offer tenure at all, and if you are including non US institutions this is an apples and oranges argument.

Just US. Not 49%, but 40%+, of which 25% of PhD granting institutions. Source = NCES https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_316.80.asp

Sorry, the "9" was a typo. I meant 40%.

Yeah, that chart says that 99.3% of public doctoral institutions offer (some of) their faculty tenure. It looks like 25% of  doctoral granting nonprofits don't and now I want a list because their definition of doctoral (20 doctoral degrees per year) could cover a wide range of institutions. And while apparently only 57.4% of all institutions don't offer tenure if you look at all the individual numbers it seems clear that this is largely driven by a lack of tenure at many two year institutions and almost all for profits.

[clean]

Given that the state legislature is only making policies for state supported institutions, then assumptions  (and data) about non profit places are not relevant.

From the link, If I read it correctly, 91.4 percent of public, 4 year institutions have a tenure system.  (That increases to 99.3 percent to doctoral granting institutions)
IF Texas public institutions want to eliminate that opportunity, then it looks to me that they would certainly be either unique or at a disadvantage in the 4 year, public institution market. 

[onthefringe]

Good people needn't move. This is predicated on a rational re-hire process, of course. But there is no reason not to expect it.

Even if they needn't, I anticipate many will because a) there's prestige in being at an institution that values you enough to give you tenure and b) many of them think tenure has inherent value and don't want to be in states that don't value it and c) if they move they get new startups and universities in states that still have tenure view this all as a perfect opportunity to poach high quality faculty from universities that are attacking higher education, academic freedom, and tenure.

[dismalist]

As I said above, 40%+ of institutions already do not offer tenure, including 25% of PhD granting institutions.

Where are you getting these numbers? they are vastly different from what I've seen. Clearly the fraction of faculty on the tenure track is plummeting but it's hard for me to believe that 49% of US institutions don't offer tenure at all, and if you are including non US institutions this is an apples and oranges argument.

Just US. Not 49%, but 40%+, of which 25% of PhD granting institutions. Source = NCES https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d22/tables/dt22_316.80.asp

Sorry, the "9" was a typo. I meant 40%.

Yeah, that chart says that 99.3% of public doctoral institutions offer (some of) their faculty tenure. It looks like 25% of  doctoral granting nonprofits don't and now I want a list because their definition of doctoral (20 doctoral degrees per year) could cover a wide range of institutions. And while apparently only 57.4% of all institutions don't offer tenure if you look at all the individual numbers it seems clear that this is largely driven by a lack of tenure at many two year institutions and almost all for profits.

I said 40+% of all institutions, and even 25% of non-profit PhD programs don't offer tenure. You make the list.

Seems to me that the 99.3% of publics offering tenure compared to 25% of non-profit doctorals is a property of the publics, not necessarily of the doctorals.

[dismalist]

Given that the state legislature is only making policies for state supported institutions, then assumptions  (and data) about non profit places are not relevant.

From the link, If I read it correctly, 91.4 percent of public, 4 year institutions have a tenure system.  (That increases to 99.3 percent to doctoral granting institutions)
IF Texas public institutions want to eliminate that opportunity, then it looks to me that they would certainly be either unique or at a disadvantage in the 4 year, public institution market.

The 4 year public market and the 4 year non-profit market are a single market.