Can someone please tell me what “insubordination” means in a higher-education setting? It’s a word I keep hearing these days in connection with faculty, usually as a potential reason for revoking tenure. But I don’t really know what it means.
Oh, I understand the definition well enough. To be insubordinate means to disobey a direct order. It’s an offense most often associated with military and police organizations, which have strict hierarchies and in which unquestioning obedience may literally be the difference between life and death.
But most colleges and universities do not have that kind of strict hierarchy. Regardless of position, we typically call each other by first names, chat in the hallway, go out to lunch together. (I believe in the military that would be known as “fraternization.” Is that typically seen as a potential reason for removing administrators?) Nor are the issues that we deal with on a regular basis usually matters of life and death — even though a casual observer might think so, from the way some of us act.
And how often do administrators give faculty members direct orders, anyway? I’m talking about administrators who want to have any real influence with and get any real cooperation from faculty, at institutions where the concept of academic freedom is taken seriously.
Sure, there are things we all have to do, policies we all have to follow, however onerous. In 26 years of teaching, I’ve never taken roll after the first couple of weeks — until this semester. A new federal, end-of-term reporting requirement (for financial-aid purposes) means that I now have to take roll every class period. I hate it. But I do it.
I suppose that refusing to comply with the new requirement could at some point become insubordination, if my department chair came to me repeatedly and told me I needed to do it, and then the dean called me in and told me to do it, and I still refused. Yes, that would be insubordination.
But what if an administrator “ordered” me to change a student-athlete’s grade, fairly and properly assigned, and I refused? What if the administration “ordered” me to stop writing about issues that make them uncomfortable, and I continued? Not that either of those things would ever happen at my institution, but what if? Would that be insubordination?
No. Proper exercise of our academic freedom as faculty members is never insubordination, even if someone tries to prevent us from exercising that freedom through intimidation. In both of the above cases, a higher law applies — higher, that is, than the law imposed by a narrow-minded and short-sighted administrator.
Here are some other behaviors that, in my view, do not qualify as insubordination, although some administrators may attempt to lump them together under that heading:
• Disagreeing with an administrator, even vocally, is not insubordination. Faculty members, and especially tenured faculty members, have a right to express their disagreements with administrators. Even a disagreement that escalated into shouting and name-calling, although perhaps inappropriate and certainly not reflecting well on either party, would not be insubordination. (Violence is another matter. It’s still not insubordination, but physical assault is another very good reason to revoke tenure.)
• Antipathy toward a particular administrator, or toward administrators in general, is not insubordination. As long as faculty members ultimately do the basic things they’re required to do, they’re allowed to dislike anyone they want as much as they want. They’re even allowed to express that dislike, within the bounds of law and human decency, and to call for change by writing letters, filing complaints, circulating petitions, blogging on a private Web site, etc.
• A simple failure to follow policy is not insubordination. It’s a failure to follow policy. Often it’s merely an oversight. Other times, the faculty member has gotten away with it for years because no one has been paying attention. Such offenses are common and can usually be dealt with quietly between the faculty member and his or her chair. Repeated refusal to acquiesce, as I said above, may over time become insubordination. But not initially.
• General laziness and sloppiness — not showing up for classes, not returning papers, blowing off office hours — is not insubordination. Then again, failure to do one’s job for long enough is, in itself, a valid reason to revoke tenure.
Unfortunately, “insubordination” has become a catch-all phrase for administrators unhappy with faculty behaviors that they might not actually be able to control. It can also become an all-purpose threat that administrators use to try to keep faculty members in line: “You may have tenure, but I can still fire you for insubordination!”
Well, maybe. But only if the behavior is actual, honest-to-goodness insubordination, which, as I believe I’ve demonstrated, is pretty rare. For that reason, good administrators avoid using the term too much — just as they avoid giving too many direct orders.
Follow On Hiring through your favorite RSS reader: