HIGHER EDUCATIONACCOUNTABILITY AND TENURE

WHEREAS, taxpayer-supported colleges and universities have a basic obligation to answer to public authorities¾ to government officials and boards of trustees, as well as to students and their families, the media and the general public; and

WHEREAS, the American Federation of Teachers in 1997 designated college accountability, along with opportunity and quality, as one of the union's three overarching First Principles of excellence in higher education; and

WHEREAS, institutional accountability procedures should flow out of an institution-wide goal-setting process, conducted in a collegial manner involving all employees; and

WHEREAS, the best employee evaluation procedures provide positive incentives that enable employees to marshal their best efforts to meet college objectives and continually improve their contribution; and

WHEREAS, the tenure system, far from being an impediment to accountability, is the cornerstone of accountability and institutional excellence. The tenure system ensures that the college's academic program is framed and supervised by faculty members who have undergone an often arduous, multi-year probationary period during which their work is continually evaluated and they are subject to dismissal. Once tenure is achieved, the due-process protections offered by tenure enable colleges and universities to be places where students and scholars can explore and debate complex, even controversial, issues without fear of reprisal; and

WHEREAS, it is a little-understood fact that tenured faculty are among the most evaluated employees in the United States, facing evaluation by the department director and/or dean, often on an annual or biennial basis. These evaluations routinely include classroom observations by managers of peers and a review of student evaluations. Professors are often required to present extensive documentation about their curricular and committee work and relevant research interests, if applicable; and

WHEREAS, tenured faculty members are also evaluated, when they seek, among other things, promotions, merit pay (at institutions that use that system), preferred class assignments, professional development funding, sabbaticals and research grants, and when faculty members offer research for publication:

RESOLVED, that the AFT recognize and embrace the concept of accountability in higher education; and

RESOLVED, that accountability must be addressed, first, at the institutional level. All components of the institutional workforce, including the higher education union, should work together periodically to develop clear, broadly supported institutional objectives, goals and strategies. Once objectives are set, institutions should establish procedures for communicating them regularly to institutional employees, public officials and the general public. The specific criteria that will be used to evaluate success should also be disseminated, as well as data on successes and failures; and

RESOLVED, that the criteria for evaluating the accountability of the institution's employees should flow directly from the institutional objectives. Evaluation systems should be designed to motivate and support the employees and offer ample opportunities for professional development; and

RESOLVED, that the tenure system must be defended in order to ensure that the institution’s curriculum, teaching, research and other academic programs are framed by trained and motivated professionals who possess a deep, lasting commitment to the institution; and

RESOLVED, that opportunities for new faculty to gain tenure and move through the academic and professional ranks must not only continue to be provided, they must be increased. The overreliance on nontenure-track and part-time faculty, which is exploitative, should be ended. At the same time, the wages, working conditions and evaluation criteria faced by nontenure-track faculty should be strengthened greatly to enable such faculty to function more effectively; and

RESOLVED, that the AFT must continue to counter the myth that tenured faculty are untouchable or unaccountable, when they are in fact subject to multiple forms of evaluation throughout their careers; and

RESOLVED, no new form of evaluation should be implemented at an institution unless it fits into a constructive evaluation strategy. Additional forms of faculty and staff review may be acceptable only if they enhance 'not simply add to' what is already in place and only if they are found to be truly cost effective in terms of money, time and effort.