next »

[speech_chick]

I had my first telephone interview last Friday and I thought it went really well.  I asked the SC several questions, one of them being about the requirements and process for tenure. The woman conducting the interview told me that most people who apply for tenure are well-prepared and end up being tenured, however there have been some who were not promoted. I can't remember if she explicitly said or if I just assumed that the lack of promotion was financially driven. So tenured, but not promoted---a random thing or a cause for concern.

FWIW, if I do get invited for a campus visit I do plan on asking more about this, but would like some input from seasoned vets.

[busyslinky]

I think it is more frequent to be promoted without tenure than to be given tenure without promotion.  It does sound weird though, but may be more common than with what I am familiar.

It could be financial reasons for non-promotion, but the red flag is probably more with this person who responded to your question.  This is a question you would ask to the Dean or Chair at the school you will be visiting and interviewing.  Ask them this question directly, but don't mention or imply asking if it was for financial reasons.  Ask them how often it happens that someone gets tenure without promotion.  It would definitely be something for which I would want an answer.

Hopefully you get the interview.  Good luck.

[voxprincipalis]

This happens. It probably doesn't actually happen very often, but the potential for it happening is not uncommon. That is, many schools do not link tenure and promotion, so it is certainly possible for someone to end up with tenure but not achieve all levels of promotion. The criteria may be different.

With so little information, it's hard to guess why some profs at that school have not been promoted (and what does that mean? promotion to assoc. prof? full prof? there may be differences there). If there were some reason for that, especially some sort of institutional failure to mentor new professors, that might be a concern. But the fact that it has occurred is not inherently a red flag.

VP

[artsearch]

At my SLAC, tenure and promotion were in fact not linked. Generally, those coming up for tenure were advised NOT to concurrently apply for assoc. prof. rank, and the one or two who did during my decade plus there were slam dunk cases, as I recall. In my own case, I was ABD for 5 years at instructor rank, so it would have been crazy for me to presume a leap to associate after having been assistant for so short a time.

[histgeek]

It sounds like a concern to me, however you want to look at it.  Unlike some of the nuanced perspectives above, I'll give you a black-and-white example.  At my institution (a SLAC), there are at least two people who were tenured w/o promotion.  It is clearly a slap in the face (although perhaps deservedly).  I only know about one of these.  He came up for tenure with no publications.  (He claimed that no one told him he needed them!  That means either an appalling lack of awareness on his part, or an equally bad lack of mentoring.)  The department supported him; the admin denied him.  He threatened to sue.  So he got tenure, with the provision that he produce a significant publication within the next year.  Of course, nothing has been forthcoming for the last 7 yrs or so, and he doesn't uphold his teaching duties either.  He is a total slacker and an embarrassment to the department.  But they clearly feel as though they have to defend their decision, because they make all kinds of excuses for him.  He brings down the quality of the whole department.  Not a good place to be.  An institution should give tenure AND promotion to deserving people and, with just cause, turn others away.  Otherwise it seems to me that there are larger problems at the institution that you do not want to be a part of.  (PS Presumably to avoid the same mistake again, this department is now requiring some current jr. members to produce not just a book pre-tenure, but also several articles -- more than twice the requirement for said slacker.  The double standard is ridiculous.)  The word "dysfunctional" comes to mind.

Ask questions!

[larryc]

We have a weird system here where our administration is adamant that tenure and promotion to associate are not linked, they just happen to occur at the same time.  A few years back one of my colleagues was granted tenure and denied promotion. I really don't think this is anything to worry about, but keep your ears open on campus.

[creationrebel]

Wow, this is all news to me.  I thought tenure & promotion were automatically linked.  As they say, you learn something new every day.

The dept where I'm finishing my PhD is notoriously brutal when it comes to the tenure process, but it's one where tenure = promotion.  It's a fine place to study, or to be an associate/full prof, but I'd never want to be an assistant prof here.  It'd be like being in Abu-Ghraib.

[seniorscholar]

Many schools require that one be there a set number of years before being tenured -- the CUNY colleges, among them. On the other hand, someone who comes in with good publications and some experience elsewhere can be promoted to associate professor (with the pay raise) after two or three years.

[bigsky]

At my school they are not linked, you apply for tenure in the fall and promotion in the spring. Usually it is done in that order, sometimes spring then fall. It depends on the strength of the person's package during a given semester (e.g. a new pub or 2 in press). It is usually done in subsequent semesters but there have been cases when someone squeeked through tenure but delayed her promotion application until the following year when she had a stronger case.