Serious question: If the whole point of tenure, historically, was to protect professors who express controversial views, why do so few tenured professors today express controversial views? What are some specific reasons? (I'm working on an article about this.)
-
Agree that premise of question is wrong. Point of tenure is to encourage risk-seeking in profs’ research, not their political activities.
All research in the behavioral and social sciences touches on political issues That's precisely why tenure was invented: there's no clear distinction between 'pure research' and 'policy applications', so censoring some policy suggestions always has blowback on 'pure research'
-
-
I admit ignorance of the history (though I am skeptical that one can say “precisely” why the system arose over time and many institutions). That said, in my field (physical science) it is more about academic freedom than political activism (which are separable).
-
So the initial inquiry be why do so few tenured profs "in behavioral and social sciences" expressing controversial views
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.