I spent 10 years of my life serving as a volunteer member of the University of Hawaii Board of Regents. I served as the chair of the board for two years and continued to serve despite working a demanding full-time job, battling breast cancer, and coping with aging parents. The only reason I would choose to spend my time with UH is because I believe that no institution will have a greater influence on the future of our Hawaii.
The last project I agreed to take on was to chair the task group that the board formed to evaluate tenure. Tenure is characterized as “the third rail” — a subject considered too controversial to even discuss. So I should not have been surprised at the level of vitriol, sensational headlines and misleading assertions that this discussion has generated.
One of my highest priorities has been to keep higher education accessible and affordable to residents of this state. Facts about UH’s finances that may surprise you:
1) About half of UH funding comes from taxpayer money; the other half comes from student tuition.
2) Payroll is the single largest fixed expense. As state funding or enrollment goes up or down over time, UH must balance its finances to avoid pushing tuition higher and pricing out its own residents — as has occurred in California and other places that have struggled to balance this equation.
We must invest our resources in a thoughtful and strategic manner, as these decisions today impact the quality of higher education in Hawaii for years to come.
Tenure was created for the purpose of protecting academic freedom. It was not an assurance of lifetime employment, but rather an assurance of academic due process and protection against arbitrary retribution. Today, the right to academic freedom remains critical, but tenure has evolved to serve as a recruiting tool that is evaluated along with salary and other perks.
Our Tenure Task Group was comprised of four board members, four UH administrators including a chancellor, vice chancellor, dean and vice president, as well as the head of the faculty union. All members, with the exception of the faculty union representative, agreed with the group’s three recommendations — not to eliminate tenure as the headlines have asserted — but to guide the future use of tenure at the university:
1) To require the tenure process to consider enrollment requirements, current resources and strategic priorities of the university;
2) To ensure that a balanced and fair review of tenured faculty occurs at least every five years; and
3) To modernize tenure classifications to be in line with peer institutions. Currently UH utilizes a complex classification system that exists nowhere else. It is also unique in that it gives tenure to people who do not instruct or conduct research.
The group recommended that these changes occur moving forward, and that they not affect existing tenured employees. The specific recommendation was that the administration begin formal discussions with the union around these three topics.
People who are threatened by change live in a vacuum. In today’s world, threats to the status quo are met with alarmist tactics aimed at getting people riled up. This has become an ugly business. I write this piece to lay down the facts and set aside the rhetoric to give this discussion the proper context. The people of Hawaii deserve nothing less.
Jan Naoe Sullivan is a former member of the University of Hawaii Board of Regents and is the chief operating officer of Oceanit.
