Advertisement

Advertisement

News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education

Serving Time: the 6-Year Rule

When she interviewed at the university, my friend Jill asked very few questions. During the first year, she found a mentor and worked on improving her teaching techniques. She received excellent reviews from the chair, her peers and even her students. Frequently described as “thoughtful” and “amusing,” a number of students followed her throughout the English sequence.

Inspired by her ability to take even dry subjects and make them seem lively and relevant, the chair began asking her to teach other courses in the humanities. By her fourth year, Jill was teaching a graduate course each semester, in addition to the “nuts and bolts” English courses in which she was an expert. Confident that she would be teaching at this Midwestern university for some time, Jill bought a house. Although it was no mansion, this duplex would allow her to keep her two dogs downstairs while she had a paying tenant upstairs. She loved the old-fashioned trim dividing the walls, the creaky wooden stairs, the octagon shaped window in the front room. She imagined that she would grow old here.

She had found her paradise. She had a job she loved, a campus that valued her, students that would stop her outside the Buehler’s Buy-Low to say hello, canine companionship and a group of close-knit friends. She belonged.

What happened in the sixth year of her employment was a shock. The chair of her department told her that although she had excellent reviews and the campus had no complaint about her work, she was being let go. Her initial three-year contract had lapsed into a yearly renewal; after this coming year, she would have no job. She had sat there, hands trembling, refusing to cry. She asked what had happened. The chair had said dryly, “Haven’t you heard of the six-year rule?” At home she found her faculty handbook and flipped to tenure. Buried on the fourth page of that section were the terms that would now crush her future:

“Tenure… is acquired de facto in the seventh year of a faculty member’s full-time service in the tenure-accumulating ranks, unless the faculty member receives notice during the sixth year that the seventh year of employment will be ‘terminal.’ Tenure de facto is automatic. It is conferred without a tenure review solely by reason of the faculty member’s appointment.”

Because Jill did not have a Ph.D., she was not eligible for tenure; indeed, she had never hoped for tenure. With this rule, she saw that the campus had never intended to keep her for any time; it was one thing to be renewed every year — it was another to find that for the administration she was a temporary employee, bound to be terminated.

She felt angry. She felt betrayed. She had built her life around her teaching schedule there. She had invested her time, her energy and her heart. Her reward was six years of paid work and a notice not to return.

Bitterly, she was moved to action, readying her résumé and making phone calls. By the time she had packed her office, she had a part-time job with another local university preparing high-schoolers for college. She ate at home every day, packing a thin sandwich to carry in her eight-year old car when she worked during the day. When her health insurance ran out, she simply prayed not to get sick. After her tenant upstairs moved out, she walked the floor, realizing that she did not even have six dollars to replace the ruined baseboard by the front door. The house where she had hoped to retire had suddenly become a luxury that she would surely lose.

I met Jill at the coffee shop she used to frequent. Although she sat in front of the bookshelves that day, there was no colorful ceramic mug of coffee on the wobbly table next to her chair. When I offered to buy her a cup of tea, she adamantly refused. Proud, she would rather sit thirsty than accept charity from another. We talked for hours. I could see how students and faculty would be drawn to her. She was unpretentious, thoughtful — even funny as she reflected on the process that has left her pocketbook empty and her soul disappointed.

I never felt awkward around her — even though I could see that, in effect, I was the enemy. The Midwestern university that had been her home for her formative teaching years was to be my newfound employer. In two months time, I would be walking those same halls, talking to the same faculty members, teaching the same population and answering to the same department chair.

Like her, I was hired as a non-tenure track instructor. Like her, I have only an M.A., and no Ph.D. Like her, I was not told of this limitation that would result in my shortened career there. If I thought this was bad, the worse news is that this “six-year” rule is enforced at universities all over the United States. Not only had Jill and I unwittingly become fixed-term instructors, but tens of thousands of non-tenured instructors all over the United States will find themselves on the street at the seven-year mark.

Initially I had been thrilled about the offer, and thought of this town as a place to retire. One of the reasons I had accepted a job there was not only because of the prestige of working for a university, but because the department chair and dean had gone out of their way to treat me with kindness before and during the interview.

Months later when they made me an offer, I had presented them with an awkward situation — I had already accepted an interview with a community college on the East coast. Both the dean and department chair told me that if I did decide in favor of their university, they would simply reimburse the other campus for any expenses already paid out. At the time, I was impressed. These administrators didn’t even know the folks at this small community college. Yet, they were taking the high road. Considering the impact of my decision on another, they had sought to make it right. It was a heady moment for this applicant. It made my decision very easy. Go with the campus that takes care of their own.

Now, I feel cautious. Yes, even though I have been asked on no less than 13 other interviews since I signed a three-year contract with the Midwestern university, I have decided to stick with my original decision. In August, 2005, I will be there, working to teach freshmen- and sophomore-level English composition.

Before I found out about the “six-year rule,” I’ll admit that my attitude was noticeably different. I had planned to decorate my shared office: posters for the walls, a rug for the floor, a bookcase for my favorite texts. I had also surfed the house-for-sale sites online, frequently printing out “zero percent down for first homebuyers” and “low down for first-time qualifiers” advertisements. I had investigated the town with a fervor that I had never felt for my own town. I had three historic books on the area and loads of sites bookmarked that described the small zoo, the combination science and art museum, the used book store, the mall, the weather — everything.

I really thought of this move as my last in education. After six years of adjuncting in California, I was finally going to make a home in the Midwest. With the terrific reviews I had always received, I was convinced that I would be renewed until retirement; this stability would allow me to develop as an instructor and really work at retaining students year after year. The idea of a place to really contribute (and to retire) made me smile.

Now I think of this university as a place that I will park myself for three years. I have been forewarned by colleagues not to wait until the axe falls to move on — but to start looking at the end of each academic year. To turn down no offers to interview, to take every chance to make my résumé look good, but not to stick my neck out for the campus that will provide me with only a limited chance to teach.

It’s a sad turn of events. Yes, I will teach as well as I can, but I will not be thinking of aligning myself with a particular pedagogy, with a carefully chosen mentor, with one lucky student population. In effect, I will be an adjunct again — gauging time spent on each project or assignment, time spent with each student during an office hour, minimizing preparation time when I can, and most importantly, always thinking of where I will work next. The rolling contract system has ensured that knowledgeable, qualified (even inspired) instructors such as my friend Jill and myself will not find a home in the university system.

I understand that in 1940, the American Association of University Professors and the Association of American Colleges were thinking of keeping instructors from being strung along when the associations adopted the policy that set up six-year rules. In a superficial way, I understand that non-tenured instructors would be judged on merit at the end of their probationary period (although my friend was given no such review). I applaud the concept of tenure; someday, too, I will have the security, the freedom to teach as I see fit, to interject the controversial opinion now and then, to really give all that I have to one campus, knowing that I will be rewarded with a career lifespan of support.

Of course, this will not happen for me in the university system proper; instead, I will be shopping at community colleges for a long-term position. Should I be able to afford a Ph.D. at some time, I may consider the university system again; perhaps not.

Some have suggested that the tenure system be abolished. I don’t agree. But “de facto tenure” was created 60 years ago to protect contract employees from abuse. The idea was to force the university system to actually give tenure to long-term instructors who had served good time and produced viable results. Now, with a bulging market of a hundred applicants (even thousands) for each full-time teaching position, universities no longer hire on contract with the idea of giving tenure later. Instead, they lure desperate non-Ph.D.s with an initial three-year contract with the vague promise of renewal year after year.

Part of my argument is with the university administrators who allow this “six-year term” information to be buried in 157-page documents rather than having it clearly stipulated in the job description. I know from experience that there are a few faculty members on hiring committees who feel poorly about deceiving inexperienced university candidates. In an online forum, one departmental secretary confessed that she felt “like part of a conspiracy” when the chair specifically told her not to inform potential candidates of this term limit.

A staff member I know in Human Resources confided that she “could almost feel an audible exhale” when she lifted stacks of six-year term faculty from the “active” file cabinets to the archives. She says that she feels badly, but knows there is nothing she can do. “These are people, you know,” she told the student assistant whose job was to load files into cardboard boxes to be filed in an almost-abandoned building a mile away.

Information breeds responsibility. But then, I’m an instructor who withholds nothing in my syllabus. On the first day of class, students know exactly what is expected of them and how to earn a winning grade. They even know how many minutes into the class hour constitutes a tardy, as well as a bi-monthly accounting spelling out what their in-class grade is and how they achieved that. It’s also clear to my students how the essays count — exactly how they count — into their final grade. Although I may parcel out assignments in English composition, I do not hold back on information about how my students are expected to perform. Though it means lots of thought, working and reworking of syllabi (and an extra sheet of paper), I believe that assisting adults in making solid decisions involves informing them rather than letting them stumble across the information when it is too late to do anything to influence the outcome. But then, that’s just how I work.

Flawless reviews and gushing letters of recommendation may suggest that others find my techniques (and underlying belief system) appropriate for higher education. The good news is that this budding file-folder will ensure that I continue to work in academia — wherever I am valued.

Perhaps I am naive in my evaluation. But I know there is a heart out there somewhere. In tapping it, I ask that the American Association of University Professors consider abolishing or rewriting the “six-year rule.” Let’s stop the creation of a roaming, transient “third-class” of full-time adjuncts and return to the meaning of “de facto tenure” — protecting our professors rather than allowing them to be abused.

Shari Wilson is the pseudonym of an adjunct at several colleges in California. In the fall, she will join the ranks of untenured full-time instructors at a university in the Midwest where she will stay, of course, no more than six years.

Got something to say?


Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Advertisement

Comments

Though the abuse is real, the remedy would be counter-productive. The anonymous instructor who learned belatedly that she would not be rehired indefinitely on one-year contracts is clearly a victim of the department’s and university’s policy of obfuscating the terms of employment. She was given a three-year contract and, after that, one-year reappointments but apparently never told that her lack of a PhD disqualified her from guaranteed, long-term employment. That’s an injustice. However, it does not follow that the six-year rule on tenure is at fault. Without the de facto tenure rule, there would be no countervailing force opposing the transformation of the professoriate into a part-time, contingent labor force and, consequently, fewer protections for academic freedom at our universities.

The anonymous, idealistic teacher must have been naive and was certainly misled, but we shouldn’t draw the wrong moral from her experience. Teachers need more tenure-track (tenurable) jobs and greater candor from their employers.

Charles Ross, University of Hartford

Charles Ross, at 9:07 am EDT on June 22, 2005

I agree with the above comment. We must try to preserve and hopefully expand tenure track positions, at the very least because it creates a strong counter to the diminishing role of faculty and faculty governance at many institutions. (Tenured faculty can “take on” administrations and genuinely participate in college governance.) The greater problem underlying the problem presented in the article may well be the terminal degree issue. Hiring faculty with a Masters and with no reasonable likelihood of acquiring the advanced degree, is more than an economic expedient (although it may be that as well). It is a repudiation of traditional academic standards, a signal that the administration does not hold the scholarship or expertise of instructors in high regard, and a “power move.” By reducing the level of professional certification of faculty, a college moves a step closer to being able to treat its “employees” as interchangeable “units of labor.” The, to me, obvious effect of such policies—a reduction of the applicant pool (those with the higher qualifications will not apply)—carries little weight, because merit itself has already been discounted. Warm bodies who can use a textbook and manage a course are all that are required.

John, Professor of Political Science and Anthropology at Heidelberg College, at 10:19 am EDT on June 22, 2005

Permanent non-tenure track positions

I recently taught for two years at a university as a full-time associate lecturer. This was a yearly renewable position, but one individual (who had not gotten her doctorate from the university) was able to attain permanent status in this position. I’m not sure of the details, except that it was not considered tenure, and she was not considered faculty, but it did have permanent status. They will soon be considering permanent status for another lecturer, who did receive her doctorate there. I’m not sure if they’ve changed the rules on Ph.D.s from the university not being eligible for permanent status there (that’s what they told me) or granted an exception for her.

This is a different situation since these are Ph.D.s rather than M.S.s/M.A.s, but with some similarities. I was never told of a 6-year rule. How common are permanent non-tenure track positions?

M.R., at 11:18 am EDT on June 22, 2005

Addendum

I appreciate the comments that have appeared thus far. It does shed some light on the thinking that might have preceeded the campus’ actions. I still think that “de facto” tenure served a different purpose 60 years ago; today it seems to encourage this transient (and thereby less effective) population of instructors.

I’d like to add that I chatted with my friend Jill just this morning and she confided that when she was interviewed by the dean of Arts & Sciences at the university in the Midwest, he actually told her that she could be renewed and “work this job until retirement.” This particular dean is, of course, no longer there, but his faulty promise gave my friend hope. This, of course, was the basis of her decision to take the position and later buy a house. Interesting? I think so.

If anything, I hope a little consciousness-raising will encourage adjuncts breaking into full-time work to not only read the contract offered, (which my friend and I both did) but also to request a copy of the faculty handbook before making a commitment. This in itself would give the applicant the information necessary to make a life-changing decision about his or her career. And if we’re lucky, there may be some administrators and human resource staff who may rethink the direction of keeping new hires in the dark to satisfy the need for a low-maintenance pool of hardworking full-timers.

Shari Wilson, Instructor at Northern California, at 11:50 am EDT on June 22, 2005

Ask an attorney if their little “conspiracy” doesn’t violate employment law. If you can’t sue them you can embarrass the university into including the 6-year notice into the initial letter of appointment. There are always tenured faculty members eager to expose administrative malfeasance such as this, or you can have your faculty senate pass a resolution on the matter.

At my own university, they’re pretty up front about such things, but only, I suspect, because they fear lawsuits. We have gotten around such stipulations by officially hiring lecturers at 80% of full-time (while putting in full time work!). As part-time faculty, they could be hired indefinitely on a year to year basis and, at least at my department, such individuals have worked here 20 years or more without problems.

Universities are becoming large multi-tiered operations — adjunct/part-time/temporary faculty are the most cost effective way of delivering introductory courses; graduate assistants are better compensated by far but they are expected, as a whole, to support the external funding enterprise. New tenure track faculty, at least in the sciences, engineering, and medicine, are expected to pay for much of their salary through overhead associated with external funding. The enterprise of higher education becomes increasingly cynical and profit-driven, an organism consumed with its own growth and power, ravenous for funds (from students, the government, private industry, alumni) and “education” is whatever needs to go on in the lecture halls to keep the processing moving forward.

Bob, at 12:51 pm EDT on June 22, 2005

Thanks for the enlightenment. I’m currently being considered for my first full-time appointment at a university. I will be sure to read the fine print.

JM, at 2:05 pm EDT on June 22, 2005

“6 year rule”

The de facto tenure rule does not require that anyone be let go after six (or seven) years of service. AAUP policy states that, “for full-time faculty, the probationary period should not exceed seven years, and those who are reappointed beyond seven years should be recognized as having the protections that would accrue with tenure—termination only for adequate cause and with due process.” There is no degree requirement inherent in the rule; many institutions do, in fact, recognize the tenure of faculty who do not have the terminal degree.

In a recent policy statement on contingent faculty (which includes full-time non-tenure-track faculty), the AAUP strongly encouraged institutions to expand their concept of tenure, to include the full range of teaching and research positions required to serve the institutions’ needs: “Just as there are different emphases in the range of faculty appointments in research universities, comprehensive universities, liberal arts colleges, and community colleges, all of which define tenurable faculty work, so too there may be different models for tenurable faculty work within a single institution.” As a corollary, the policy statement urged that “Faculty and administrators should exercise great care in recruiting and appointing new faculty, for any position, to ensure that new faculty may have some prospect of eventually achieving tenure.” The AAUP cautions institutions that “churning” new faculty members every six years is neither required nor recommended in AAUP policies, as this practice does not serve students or faculty well.

[The policy statement on contingent faculty referenced above can be found at http://www.aaup.org/statements/SpchState/Statements/contingent.htm]

Ruth Flower, Director, Public Policy and Communications at AAUP, at 2:19 pm EDT on June 22, 2005

For the last three years I’ve been a full-time non-tenure-track instructor at a state university in the west. These instructorships are renewable indefinitely, but are housed in a program, not a department (we currently have only two tenured or tenure-track professors, among forty-odd full-time employees). I would imagine that full-time instructors housed in a department would be subject to churning in a way that we are not. But we still have endured poor pay and low prestige, which translates into less-than-stellar working conditions.

Smusher, at 7:17 pm EDT on June 22, 2005

Now This I Like!

I was just online and found this posting for a state college in the Midwest.

POSITION: Composition & Rhetoric Faculty (Tenure Track)

QUALIFICATIONS: Master’s degree or equivalent in English with an emphasis in composition and rhetoric or closely related field required; Doctorate in composition and rhetoric is preferred. Doctorate required for promotion and tenure.

I’m impressed. Now if every university and college would follow suit!

Shari Wilson, Instructor at in Northern California, at 9:58 pm EDT on June 23, 2005

permenent contract

M.R. asks “How common are permanent non-tenure track positions?” Of course they are universal outside North America — tenure doesn’t exist in most of the rest of the world, and in Britain and Australasia tenure was abolished years ago (1988, in UK). We are better off without it.

Are many people complaining? No. We have permanent contracts and a range of fellowships and fixed term deals. All transparent. We can be fired “in the last instance” but this is rare, unless you work in a Dept. that comes up on the Provost’s radar screen, or you commit a terrible betise. We get pensions and benefits. Some stay in a job for life, others move around. The transition from temporary to permanent is ’softer’, there are four or five grades instead of three, and generally more positions/student, since the use of adjuncts is not as high (at least in my experience in two British universities and an elite Australian one, vs. a large Research 1 in the USA where we got grad students and adjuncts to do 50% of our teaching).

I am not at all in favor of cost-cutting admininstrators underminging tenure to save money and serve their market-oriented institutions, but my equal time in and out of the USA system, with and without tenure, leads me to conclude that the tenure system produces just too many tragedies, is too exclusionary, too controlled by individuals that have tenure themselves, and it is socially unjust to thousands of contractual employees. I know so many people brought to their knees just by being on the wrong side of it. It continues to exist for reasons of academic ‘freedom’ that only affect a tiny percentage of controversial academics, and doesn’t protect the majority of the untenured at all. Pierre Bourdieu would have pinned it as a classic example of self-serving symbolic hierarchy, as it was in France.

The secretive application of a six-year rule for instructors is just one aspect of a flawed system.

SP, at 3:39 pm EDT on June 26, 2005

Sometimes

Fortunately, my department has always been up front with our policy — but the union has cut it to a four year rule. I’ve already put in four years, and another person three years. Fortunately, the lack of PhD’s in my field means the department hasn’t been able to hire the needed tenure track people, so both of us were renewed for next year.

I’ll be trying for a tenure track position with my Masters again the coming year, would even shoot for the PhD if I could put the right package together. But, that’s how it goes when you find what you want to be when you grow up after you’re forty-something!

I’d love to stay and teach — these have been the most rewarding four years of my life.

rpl, Instructor, at 3:02 pm EDT on June 27, 2005

broken verbal promises

I also was told orally by a provost that a visiting 3-year contract would be made into a tenure-track one when I completed the Ph.D. After he left, I was basically screwed over and told no way it would happen. Luckily, I did get a tenure-track offer, and then miraculously, my home school offered to give me a tenure track job. I knew better and left. Moral: it must be in writing

amr, at 7:56 pm EDT on July 25, 2005

Advertisement

 Jobs Related to Serving Time: the 6-Year Rule

or search for jobs directly.

Associate Dean for Planning
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Senior Human Resources Generalist
New York University

NYU’s prestigious Leonard N. Stern School of Business has a challenging opportunity for a Senior Human Resources ... see job

Job Developer
Baltimore City Community College

The Job Developer is responsible for identifying job opportunities and placement assistance to students, implementing WIA ... see job

Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the College
Mary Baldwin College

Mary Baldwin College provides an opportunity for a seasoned academic leader to build upon the solid foundation of tradition ... see job

Dean, School of Arts & Sciences
Concordia University — CA

The dean is responsible for planning, assessment, budgeting, curriculum, instruction, evaluation and professional development ... see job

Dean, Student Support Services
North Orange County Community College District

NORTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Dean, Student Support Services Job #FCM975 THE POSITION ... see job

Dean of Academic Affairs
Hillsborough Community College

Hillsborough Community College is a public, comprehensive multi-campus, state-supported community college located in the ... see job

Assoc Dean & Prof
Medical University of South Carolina

In the historic, coastal city of Charleston, the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC) offers a wide range of ... see job

Dean – Physical Education
North Orange County Community College District

DEAN – PHYSICAL EDUCATION Job #FCM997 STARTING DATE January 2, 2009 BASIC FUNCTION Under the direction of the Chief ... see job

Dean — Instruction & Student Services
North Orange County Community College District

North Orange County Community College District EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY DEAN — INSTRUCTION & STUDENT SERVICES SCHOOL OF ... see job