News
Harvard Grad Union Agrees To Bargain Without Ground Rules
News
Harvard Chabad Petitions to Change City Zoning Laws
News
Kestenbaum Files Opposition to Harvard’s Request for Documents
News
Harvard Agrees to a 1-Year $6 Million PILOT Agreement With the City of Cambridge
News
HUA Election Will Feature No Referenda or Survey Questions
In a December news article and in his letter to The Crimson (Jan. 12), Department of English chair Leo Damrosch has chosen repeatedly to invoke age as a factor in my tenure consideration. As much as I have appreciated Prof. Damrosch's strong support, I have found this discussion of age in a tenure case perplexing.
If I were someone planning to continue as a member of the Harvard community, I would want to ask the following questions about Prof. Damrosch's comments:
If 33 (for example) is too young, what is the Age of Tenurability at Harvard?
What relation does the requirement of age in tenure cases bear to the University's non-discrimination statement?
Are there other undisclosed criteria Harvard uses in making determinations of tenure--as opposed to, or supplementing, the record of scholarly work and teaching?
What effect will the use of age as a factor in tenure cases have on Harvard's ability to attract and retain talented junior faculty, and thus on undergraduate and graduate education?
If Harvard considers "youth" to be a risk, why does the University continue to employ a relatively young junior faculty? Why, specifically, is the English department currently looking to hire a new junior faculty member straight out of graduate school?
Is the discourse of youth/age here short-hand for, or distraction from, other issues in this case? --Jeffrey Masten, Gardner Cowles Associate Professor in the Humanities
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.