News

After Court Restores Research Funding, Trump Still Has Paths to Target Harvard

News

‘Honestly, I’m Fine with It’: Eliot Residents Settle In to the Inn as Renovations Begin

News

He Represented Paul Toner. Now, He’s the Fundraising Frontrunner in Cambridge’s Municipal Elections.

News

Harvard College Laundry Prices Increase by 25 Cents

News

DOJ Sues Boston and Mayor Michelle Wu ’07 Over Sanctuary City Policy

Questions for Damrosch

Letters

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

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.

Tags