News
News Flash: Memory Shop and Anime Zakka to Open in Harvard Square
News
Harvard Researchers Develop AI-Driven Framework To Study Social Interactions, A Step Forward for Autism Research
News
Harvard Innovation Labs Announces 25 President’s Innovation Challenge Finalists
News
Graduate Student Council To Vote on Meeting Attendance Policy
News
Pop Hits and Politics: At Yardfest, Students Dance to Bedingfield and a Student Band Condemns Trump
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.