Getting Tenure

There are many unsolved mysteries in the world of academia.

Is human behavior governed by nature or nurture?

Is there a biochemical fountain of youth?

Is there a secret to getting tenure at Harvard?

The simplest reply to the last question may be, "Yes. Answer the first two."

There's no question that in order to be tenured in Harvard's Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS), faculty members must do ground-breaking research.

But beyond that, the tenure system is a murky and complicated process that can take more than two years to complete once funding for a new position is in place.

The complexity stems from both the number of people and the number of steps involved in tenure decisions.

Although the tenure procedure begins on the departmental level, a candidate's file must make its way up to the highest echelons of the FAS and the University before an offer can even be made.

President Neil L. Rudenstine makes all tenure decisions, having been advised by an ad hoc committee of outside experts and Harvard faculty members from outside the candidate's department.

The ad hoc committee makes recommendations based on a candidate's dossier and the advice of four faculty members from the department.

Teaching and Tenure

Conventional wisdom among students says that fantastic teachers who devote too much time to their teaching will never get tenure.

Administrators, though, say that while research excellence is the primary consideration, teaching ability is seen as "key" and is increasingly receiving "major emphasis" in tenure considerations.

"I think teaching is being considered to a greater extent now than it once was," says Lawrence Buell, dean for undergraduate education. "It takes a while for perception to catch up to reality."

He notes that teaching skills began to receive more weight during the 1971 to 1991 administration of former President Derek C. Bok.

Assistant Dean for Academic Planning and Equal Employment Officer Joseph J. McCarthy says that the trend has continued during the last four years, under the direction of President Neil L. Rudenstine and Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles.

"Historically, [the tenure process] was very much weighted toward scholarship," McCarthy says. "The ad hoc process as it's set up brings in a number of outside experts. They are not able to talk about a person's teaching."

"It isn't completely level, but there's much more emphasis on good teaching...now than there has been in the past," he adds.

The teaching evaluation that is included in a tenure candidate's dossier is more extensive than in the past.

Buell, who is described by some as a "hawk" on teaching during the tenure process, says that he is not the only advocate for good instructors.

"I see myself as having been asked to serve as a pedagogical conscience," Buell says. "But I'm not the only member of academic deans that feels committed to the importance of teaching or ventures remarks about that part of the dossier."

"In every one of the approximately half dozen of the ad hoc meetings in which I've been involved, the subject of teaching has come up," he adds.

As a general rule, administrators say they do not tenure those who neglect research for teaching or vice-versa.

"Superb teaching is not alone enough for tenure in a major research university," Knowles says. "Stellar scholarship is not alone enough."

"Happily, superb scholarship and uplifting teaching often go hand and hand. The person who is creative and imaginative and inspiring in scholarly terms is often infectious in teaching concerns," he adds.

Buell also stresses the complementary nature of research and teaching.

"I want to see Harvard hire...as many people that exhibit that symbiosis as possible," Buell says. "I think there are many more [at Harvard] than one thinks about."

Demystifying the Process

FAS administrators pride themselves on the quality of Harvard's faculty and often credit the rigorous and thorough tenure system with assembling this group of scholars.

"We are looking always for the leading person," says Carol J. Thompson, associate dean for academic affairs. "You might say we are more risk-averse than some institutions."

"One of the reasons we are very cautious is that our faculty generally spend 35 years here," she adds of Harvard's ability to hire and keep outstanding scholars.

The tenure process at Harvard certainly reflects that caution. While it draws praise for it's care and thoroughness, it is also criticized by many as ponderous and complex.

"The Harvard process is very, very slow," says Leo Damrosch, chair of the English and American Literature and Language department. "The upshot...is it takes close to two years to get an offer made. All of the humanities are frustrated by that."

"It's not that any piece of the process is bad," Damrosch explains. "It's nobody's fault, but it can be a problem in recruiting."

The elaborate process of tenuring a professor begins when a department gets permission from Knowles to conduct a search, says Marjorie Garber, associate dean of the FAS for affirmative action.

From that point, the position is advertised and the department makes up a short list of candidates. Those on the short list may or may not have expressed interest in the position.

Next, the candidate is usually invited to Harvard to give a lecture, which department faculty and students can attend. (These lectures are frequently not well publicized to students, although some departments make a practice of notifying undergraduates of upcoming lectures, administrators say.)

Then, leading scholars outside the University are asked to write "blind letters," which assess all of the candidates on the short list without being told which is currently being favored.

When a minimum of twelve "blind letters" have been gathered, the senior faculty of the department vote on the recommendation.

If the candidate gets the department's nod, a dossier or "case statement" is prepared, which serves as a collection of a candidate's work and recommendations.

"I was asked to provide student evaluations of my courses," says Professor of the History of Science Mario Biagioli, who joined Harvard's faculty this fall.

Biagioli said most of his case statement was completed by the department.

The inch-think dossiers must contain a statement of departmental need, letters from every senior faculty member in the department, a description of the search procedure and reports on the scholastic achievements and teaching skills of the candidate.

The dossiers then go to the nine FAS deans who deal with academic affairs and undergraduate education. This group verifies that all the necessary information has been compiled.

Occasionally, a department will have difficulty assembling enough information, especially for the report on teaching.

Some universities, especially those in different countries, may not have student evaluations (such as the CUE guide). When this happens, the departments must do some extra legwork to complete the dossier satisfactorily.

"We sometimes try to get the department to provide solid information on the teaching record [by] making inquiries among their contacts," Buell says. "It does vary--the results that we get if no formal procedure for evaluation exists."

However, even the rating systems for universities in the U.S. vary "in terms of how much comparison information you get," Buell says, adding that he prefers the CUE to many systems used by other schools.

Once the dossier is complete, Knowles appoints an ad hoc committee consisting of two Harvard professors and three outside specialists. Rudenstine chairs all ad hoc tenure committees.

The committee advises Rudenstine, who makes the ultimate decision about appointments. Each tenure can easily take seven hours of Rudenstine's time, Knowles says.

Harvard's tenure process is unique in that the University president devotes so much time to each appointment, Knowles says.

Another unusual characteristic of Harvard's tenure system is that the great majority of faculty members are recruited from other schools.

More than 80 percent of faculty members are recruited from other schools, although approximately a third of all those who receive tenure have taught at Harvard at some time, according to McCarthy.

Administrators emphasize that Harvard is not a "tenure-track institution."

Students' Concerns

Although there is no formal role for students in the current tenure process, administrators say student input is considered in the teaching section of the dossier.

"The students need to do their part by engaging in the [CUE] process," Thompson says. "They should be filling out their CUE guide forms at the end of every course. We get that information as part of the dossier."

"I think there are roles students can play and do play [in the tenure process]," Garber says, explaining that for junior faculty dossiers, "the CUE guide is vitally important."

Garber, who has been a member of several ad hoc committees, says she would also encourage students to attend the lectures given by candidates and be "emboldened to say 'that didn't work for me' [or] 'that was a terrific lecture.'"

Buell says student attendance at guest lectures could benefit both the candidate and the students, making the visit to campus a "happier event--more welcoming, diverse."

"It would encourage [a] broad base of mutual exposure and a more informal decision making process," he says. "Our students can be our very best recruiters."

Lastly, Thompson suggests that students write letters to the department of any junior faculty member they have found particularly inspiring.

"Students can write letters...to say, 'I've had a wonderful experience with this particular teacher,'" she says. "You can be sure that when that department is putting that candidate forward, they're going to say 'we've received letters from students.'"

Although all administrators mention the opportunity for student input, none of Harvard's administrators advocated giving students a formalized role or vote.Crimson File PhotoNEIL L. RUDENSTINE

Assistant Dean for Academic Planning and Equal Employment Officer Joseph J. McCarthy says that the trend has continued during the last four years, under the direction of President Neil L. Rudenstine and Dean of the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles.

"Historically, [the tenure process] was very much weighted toward scholarship," McCarthy says. "The ad hoc process as it's set up brings in a number of outside experts. They are not able to talk about a person's teaching."

"It isn't completely level, but there's much more emphasis on good teaching...now than there has been in the past," he adds.

The teaching evaluation that is included in a tenure candidate's dossier is more extensive than in the past.

Buell, who is described by some as a "hawk" on teaching during the tenure process, says that he is not the only advocate for good instructors.

"I see myself as having been asked to serve as a pedagogical conscience," Buell says. "But I'm not the only member of academic deans that feels committed to the importance of teaching or ventures remarks about that part of the dossier."

"In every one of the approximately half dozen of the ad hoc meetings in which I've been involved, the subject of teaching has come up," he adds.

As a general rule, administrators say they do not tenure those who neglect research for teaching or vice-versa.

"Superb teaching is not alone enough for tenure in a major research university," Knowles says. "Stellar scholarship is not alone enough."

"Happily, superb scholarship and uplifting teaching often go hand and hand. The person who is creative and imaginative and inspiring in scholarly terms is often infectious in teaching concerns," he adds.

Buell also stresses the complementary nature of research and teaching.

"I want to see Harvard hire...as many people that exhibit that symbiosis as possible," Buell says. "I think there are many more [at Harvard] than one thinks about."

Demystifying the Process

FAS administrators pride themselves on the quality of Harvard's faculty and often credit the rigorous and thorough tenure system with assembling this group of scholars.

"We are looking always for the leading person," says Carol J. Thompson, associate dean for academic affairs. "You might say we are more risk-averse than some institutions."

"One of the reasons we are very cautious is that our faculty generally spend 35 years here," she adds of Harvard's ability to hire and keep outstanding scholars.

The tenure process at Harvard certainly reflects that caution. While it draws praise for it's care and thoroughness, it is also criticized by many as ponderous and complex.

"The Harvard process is very, very slow," says Leo Damrosch, chair of the English and American Literature and Language department. "The upshot...is it takes close to two years to get an offer made. All of the humanities are frustrated by that."

"It's not that any piece of the process is bad," Damrosch explains. "It's nobody's fault, but it can be a problem in recruiting."

The elaborate process of tenuring a professor begins when a department gets permission from Knowles to conduct a search, says Marjorie Garber, associate dean of the FAS for affirmative action.

From that point, the position is advertised and the department makes up a short list of candidates. Those on the short list may or may not have expressed interest in the position.

Next, the candidate is usually invited to Harvard to give a lecture, which department faculty and students can attend. (These lectures are frequently not well publicized to students, although some departments make a practice of notifying undergraduates of upcoming lectures, administrators say.)

Then, leading scholars outside the University are asked to write "blind letters," which assess all of the candidates on the short list without being told which is currently being favored.

When a minimum of twelve "blind letters" have been gathered, the senior faculty of the department vote on the recommendation.

If the candidate gets the department's nod, a dossier or "case statement" is prepared, which serves as a collection of a candidate's work and recommendations.

"I was asked to provide student evaluations of my courses," says Professor of the History of Science Mario Biagioli, who joined Harvard's faculty this fall.

Biagioli said most of his case statement was completed by the department.

The inch-think dossiers must contain a statement of departmental need, letters from every senior faculty member in the department, a description of the search procedure and reports on the scholastic achievements and teaching skills of the candidate.

The dossiers then go to the nine FAS deans who deal with academic affairs and undergraduate education. This group verifies that all the necessary information has been compiled.

Occasionally, a department will have difficulty assembling enough information, especially for the report on teaching.

Some universities, especially those in different countries, may not have student evaluations (such as the CUE guide). When this happens, the departments must do some extra legwork to complete the dossier satisfactorily.

"We sometimes try to get the department to provide solid information on the teaching record [by] making inquiries among their contacts," Buell says. "It does vary--the results that we get if no formal procedure for evaluation exists."

However, even the rating systems for universities in the U.S. vary "in terms of how much comparison information you get," Buell says, adding that he prefers the CUE to many systems used by other schools.

Once the dossier is complete, Knowles appoints an ad hoc committee consisting of two Harvard professors and three outside specialists. Rudenstine chairs all ad hoc tenure committees.

The committee advises Rudenstine, who makes the ultimate decision about appointments. Each tenure can easily take seven hours of Rudenstine's time, Knowles says.

Harvard's tenure process is unique in that the University president devotes so much time to each appointment, Knowles says.

Another unusual characteristic of Harvard's tenure system is that the great majority of faculty members are recruited from other schools.

More than 80 percent of faculty members are recruited from other schools, although approximately a third of all those who receive tenure have taught at Harvard at some time, according to McCarthy.

Administrators emphasize that Harvard is not a "tenure-track institution."

Students' Concerns

Although there is no formal role for students in the current tenure process, administrators say student input is considered in the teaching section of the dossier.

"The students need to do their part by engaging in the [CUE] process," Thompson says. "They should be filling out their CUE guide forms at the end of every course. We get that information as part of the dossier."

"I think there are roles students can play and do play [in the tenure process]," Garber says, explaining that for junior faculty dossiers, "the CUE guide is vitally important."

Garber, who has been a member of several ad hoc committees, says she would also encourage students to attend the lectures given by candidates and be "emboldened to say 'that didn't work for me' [or] 'that was a terrific lecture.'"

Buell says student attendance at guest lectures could benefit both the candidate and the students, making the visit to campus a "happier event--more welcoming, diverse."

"It would encourage [a] broad base of mutual exposure and a more informal decision making process," he says. "Our students can be our very best recruiters."

Lastly, Thompson suggests that students write letters to the department of any junior faculty member they have found particularly inspiring.

"Students can write letters...to say, 'I've had a wonderful experience with this particular teacher,'" she says. "You can be sure that when that department is putting that candidate forward, they're going to say 'we've received letters from students.'"

Although all administrators mention the opportunity for student input, none of Harvard's administrators advocated giving students a formalized role or vote.Crimson File PhotoNEIL L. RUDENSTINE