Leiter Reports: A Philosophy Blog

News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.

  1. J.P. Loo's avatar
  2. Sebastian Sunday Grève's avatar
  3. Giovanni Molteni Tagliabue's avatar
  4. Fabien Muller's avatar
  7. Saul Smilansky's avatar

Should Faculty Up for Tenure Apply for Jobs Elsewhere? (Leiter)

Brian Leiter

MOVING TO FRONT FROM YESTERDAY TO ENCOURAGE MORE COMMENTS

A tenure-track faculty member at a good department recently wrote to me, reporting that a tenured colleague elsewhere thought "it was standard to go on the job market the year that one was up for tenure whatever one thought of one’s chances":

His reasons [for saying this]: the
unpleasantness of hanging around and the advantages of giving oneself
more shots at the market if one gets denied tenure, the potential
pressure on one’s home institution created by an outside offer, and the
general increase in visibility. He also claimed that one should apply
only to roughly peer institutions to avoid
indicating a lack of confidence. I have heard similar things from others.
But I did just want to get your opinion. Does all the above sound right
to you? One further question: should one only apply for tenured
positions because applying for tenure-track positions also gives the
wrong signal that one is not confident?

I am curious what philosophers with experience think about this.  My impression is that junior faculty up for tenure, especially though not exclusively at departments where tenure is often denied, do usually make a selective search that same year, applying for both tenure-track and tenured posts at "peer" departments in a very capacious sense of peer (e.g., someone up for tenure at one of the very top departments might apply for tenure-track jobs at any of the top 20-30 PhD-granting departments).  But I am not really confident that my impression is accurate.  Input from others would no doubt be helpful to many junior faculty who face this question.  Non-anonymous posts will be be preferred, as usual, though substantive and well-informed anonymous posts may also be approved.  Please post only once, as comments may take awhile to appear.  (As readers may have inferred from the dearth of postings lately, things are a bit hectic currently.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

8 responses to “Should Faculty Up for Tenure Apply for Jobs Elsewhere? (Leiter)”

  1. Bradley Monton

    When I was up for tenure at University of Kentucky a couple years ago, I didn't apply elsewhere, because I was confident I was going to get tenure there (and I did). What I _did_ do was apply for jobs the _following_ year. A benefit of going on the market then is that I had found out who had written me good external letters, and I was able to ask them to be references when I went on the market.

    I've heard rumors that it's hard to switch jobs shortly after one has gotten tenure, but in talking with people, looking at the JFP, and so on, I don't think that's actually the case. (At least, it's not any harder to switch jobs then that at other stages of one's career…)

    Reply
  2. Ralph Wedgwood

    Unless one has reason to believe that there is effectively no chance of one's being denied tenure, I really can't see why anyone who is coming up for tenure wouldn't apply for positions elsewhere.

    Being denied tenure is a sufficiently horrible experience in itself, as everyone who has had the experience will testify (if indeed they can be induced to relive the memory of it …). But the blow is at least softened if one quickly gets a comparable or better position elsewhere. If one does apply for positions elsewhere, then even if one is in fact promoted to tenure, the worst that will have happened is simply that one has wasted a little time mailing off some applications, having some interviews, and giving some job talks, for positions that one turns out ultimately (given information that was not available earlier) not to want. On the other hand, if one is denied tenure, then having applied for outside jobs obviously optimizes one's chances of getting a good position elsewhere in reasonably short order, and so minimizing the inevitable horribleness of the experience that one will have to endure.

    In short, I am surprised that this is regarded as an open question at all. Everyone who isn't for all intents and purposes certain that they will get tenure should apply for outside jobs. What reason could there be not to?

    As for the question of which outside jobs to apply for, that presumably depends on the probability that one assigns to the event of one's being denied tenure. The lower the probability that one assigns to that event, the more selective one can afford to be in one's applications. At all events, it is safe to say that no one who has been denied tenure once would ever want to have to come up for tenure again, if they can possibly avoid it. So this obviously provides a reason for anyone in this situation to apply only for tenured positions (or permanent positions in the UK or the like), so long as it is reasonably probable that this strategy will result in one's having a tenured (or permanent) position within the course of the academic year.

    Reply
  3. Mark van Roojen

    I did and at the advice of my department chair who was a supporter of my getting tenure. Our department politics at the time were a bit unhappy (old history now – this was 8 years ago), so it was prudent to have options if I needed them. Because I was not in the mood to deal with a serious job search and relatively confident even given the uncertain politics, I only applied for a few jobs. I would not hold it against a junior collegue who applied out when s/he came up for tenure, and I think no reasonable person would hold it against a junior colleague. But in most instances I would hope that we could give a strong person coming up assurances that might allow him/her to rest content without applying for jobs.

    Reply
  4. Anonymous

    What if you're going up for early tenure at an institution where the denial of early tenure means that you can still go up at the regular time? Is the advice the same?

    How does the timing work? Wouldn’t you get a job offer before hearing whether you’ve gotten all the approvals for tenure?

    How does getting a job offer put pressure on your institution to grant you tenure? Would the administration ever go against, say, a college-level T&P committee that voted against granting someone tenure and give that person tenure anyway?

    Reply
  5. Anonymous

    I know of more than one case where the person sought an offer elsewhere,
    with no intention of accepting it, simply as a ploy to encourage their institution to grant tenure.
    I find this unethical. (I find it similarly unethical for a tenured person to seek an offer
    elsewhere, with no intention of accepting it, merely to get a raise.)

    It would certainly seem reasonable for the tenure candidate to apply to jobs that he/she
    would take if denied tenure. However, it does not seem particularly healthy for the
    field to have tenure candidates crowd out younger job candidates from the precious
    few interview slots and fly out chances. That might prevent some younger candidates
    from even getting a chance.

    Reply
  6. John McCumber

    I strongly believe that people up for tenure should apply for jobs elsewhere, and I have always been a bit surprised when younger colleagues worry about this.

    The main reason for not applying seems to be the message it would send to the home institution: that you are not confident of your chances. But many home institutions don't think you should be confident of your chances anyway. It makes them feel like pushovers.

    And anyone who has been around this business knows that there are plenty of tenure denials which don't have much to do with merit, or even with philosophy. Maybe some higher administrator hates the philosophy department. Maybe there are unpublicized budget cuts in the works. Why should a department resent it when a junior professor guards against such things?

    Bad departmental politics are certainly one reason to apply elsewhere–but if you are a junior professor, how do you know whether the politics are bad? Junior colleagues are often shielded from nastiness at the higher levels, and rightly so. Better to err by suspecting bad politics where they are not than the reverse.

    In any case, why does your home department even have to know you are applying elsewhere? That's not required at senior levels, where all sorts of feelers and discussions take place before the home department is notified. By the time you come up for tenure you can usually get letters from people at other institutions, and it would be a serious breech (though it does happen occasionally) for someone from a school to which you have applied to inform your home department.

    And finally: applying around gets your vita in front of people. If you have a good vita, why not take the opportunity? It may lead to a lot of things besides jobs, and is in your best interests. Any Chair or senior figure who tells you not to do it does not have your interests at heart.

    Reply
  7. Eric Winsberg

    I agree with everything John McCumber said. In response to the first anonymous comment: I came up for tenure early, and hence did not apply for other jobs that year. Of course, if my case had been deferred, I _certainly_ would have applied the following year. The timing, at least at my institution (which from talking to friends was reasonably common) was as follows: My department voted on my case in October, before the first deadlines for job applications. At my institution, I was informed of the result of this vote, but I have heard of some where this is not the case. The college T&P committee voted my case in December, and the result of this vote was known to me only by word of mouth. In mid-January, the dean made his recommendation, and the result of the T&P committee became public. This was around the time that fly-outs for jobs would be taking place. Actually tenure was not granted, though, until June. I was always told that the process once the application leaves the Dean's office without any hiccups is merely a formality, but of course stranger things have happened.

    Reply
  8. anon

    "The main reason for not applying seems to be the message it would send to the home institution: that you are not confident of your chances. But many home institutions don't think you should be confident of your chances anyway. It makes them feel like pushovers."

    There's another reason, although it might seem strange in some quarters. Some of us are expected to be quite loyal to our current universities and departments, so loyal that we wouldn't want a job anywhere else. The interest in another job could be seen by the current department as an a lack of commitment to them that could affect how they view the tenure case.

    It makes no sense. The stakes are so much higher for you than for them. However, some senior people who are very passionate about their institutions do have this attitude.

    Reply

Designed with WordPress