1. Introduction: Changing Retirement Policies and Patterns in Higher Education (original) (raw)
Related papers
Issues Affecting the Professoriate in the 1990s
1994
This review of the literature examines five issues affecting college faculties in the 1990s and identifies various views on these issues while providing a general overview. A section on multiculturalism identifies it as one of the leading issues facing faculty. This section looks at views on the challenges of racial diversity; racial tension; and increased diversity by gender, cultural background, and disability. A section on organizational factors looks at administrative changes affecting faculty many of which are linked to fiscal considerations. This section covers views on the fiscal crisis, faculty attrition and status, merit pay, and the information explosion. A section on mission raises some broad issues about the mission of U.S. higher education and treats theoretical versus practical applications and university-industry alliances. A section on professional factors addresses approaches to faculty evaluation, staff development, and scholarly communication. The final section looks at personal factors such as burnout, worklife (culture and morale), and the perceived role of teaching. Closing remarks highlight the variety and speed of change in higher education and the consequent stress for faculty. This section also urges institutions to confront changes and tensions in defining and maintaining their mission. (Contains 104 references.) (JB)
The Academy Is Aging in Place: Assessing Alternatives for Modifying Institutions of Higher Education
The Gerontologist
Institutions of higher education employ a greater proportion of persons over 65 relative to the general labor force, and the median age of the professorate has now surpassed all other occupational groups. Such a novel demographic change in the academic workforce presents several unique challenges. Should institutions modify policies and programs that provide more opportunities for aging faculty to remain healthy and productive, or should efforts focus on facilitating retirement? How universities and colleges choose to retain or retire their aging faculty certainly has become a point for consideration. This forum presents what is known about the aging academic workforce and describes current institutional responses. The discussion then builds on the notion of aging in place, presenting a more holistic approach to the modification of institutional policies and programs that support continued faculty engagement as well as mutually agreeable retirements. In particular, institutions should consider making modifications that increase targeted health and wellness programs, expand retirement counseling services, and offer varied retirement pathway options as viable responses to the continued aging of the academic workforce.
No Longer Forced out: How One Institution Is Dealing with the End of Mandatory Retirement
1999
Why should academic institutions or their faculty care about the end of mandatory retirement for tenured faculty, which became effective in January 1994? From the perspective of an individual tenured faculty member who wants to continue her career beyond age seventy, the elimination is a welcome event. In the past, faculty members who wanted to remain active after reaching seventy had to negotiate their status with institutions that were under no legal obligation to allow them to continue. Now, however, tenured faculty members have the legal right to continue indefinitely in their tenured appointments. From the point of view of an academic institution, the elimination imposes two types of costs. First, to the extent that some faculty members at an institution postpone their retirements, the flow of new faculty into an institution will diminish. Fewer new hires means fewer faculty with fresh perspectives and ideas. Fewer new hires also reduces an institution's ability to diversify its faculty along gender, racial, and ethnic lines. And fewer new hires can make it difficult for an institution to shift faculty resources into exciting new areas of inquiry. Second, retirements generate funds for salary increases for continuing faculty, because most full professors are replaced by lower-paid assistant professors. The difference between the salary of a retiring full professor and that of his replacement can be distributed to other faculty members in the form of salary increases. Postponement of retirements at an institution reduces the amount of such funds available in a year, and the institution must either make up the difference with other funds or reduce the salary increase that it provides for its faculty.
Faculty Retirement Policies after the End of Mandatory Retirement
2001
As the average age of faculty members at colleges and universities in the United States continues to increase, retirement policies and programs in higher education are playing an increasingly important role in maintaining and enhancing the productivity of faculty members of all ages. This issue of Research Dialogue summarizes the results of a 2000 survey of higher education institutions regarding their programs and policies that affect faculty retirement. In addition to analyzing survey data regarding early retirement incentive arrangements and other programs designed to help faculty make the transition to retirement, the authors also review and discuss the experiences of the surveyed institutions following the elimination of mandatory retirement.
1997
This study examined retirement and other departure plans of full-and part-time faculty and staff in higher education institutions using data from the 1988 and 1993 National Studies of Postsecondary Faculty. Among the study's findings were: 22 percent of full-time and 38 percent of part-time faculty planned to leave their current position within the next three years; 57 percent of full-time faculty and staff planned to retire between the ages of 60 and 70; 28 percent of full-time faculty and staff indicated a willingness to take early retirement; and differences in retirement plans existed by gender, race/ethnicity, academic field, and type and control of institution. The study concluded that institutional policies such as early retirement incentives and part-time employment options may alter employees' retirement plans and behavior. Individual sections of the report detail the study's findings on: characteristics of full-time and part-time instructional faculty and staff; retirement and other separation and mobility plans; mobility to a job not in postsecondary education; expected retirement age or age when planning to leave postsecondary education; and interest in early retirement options. Appended are technical notes, standard error tables, and the survey questionnaires. (DB)
Center For Studies in Higher Education, 2007
This paper focuses on the present condition and future of the professoriate and is part of a long-term study on how the academic profession is changing, now more rapidly than at any time in memory. These dramatic shifts have led to a deep restructuring of academic appointments, work, and careers. The question now looming is whether the forces that have triggered academic restructuring will, in time, so transform the academic profession that its role-its unique contribution-is becoming ever more vulnerable to dangerous compromise. Whether the academic profession is able to negotiate successfully its role in the new era-to preserve core values and to ensure the indispensable contributions of the academy to society-remains to be seen. Whither the professoriate? As the academy spins into the new century, it enters also a new era, one in which the future of the American faculty is as unclear as at any time in the past. As we document in our recently published study, The American Faculty: The Restructuring of Academic Work and Careers, substantial transformation of the American academic profession has occurred in recent decades, since the brief interlude of "unrest" subsided circa 1970. 1 In its closing chapters, we interpret our empiricallybased findings and speculate about what lies ahead for the (thus far) indomitable, if somewhat rattled, academic profession.
Decline of Tenure for Higher Education Faculty: An Introduction
LABOR Online, 2016
For most college and university instructors in the United States today, teaching provides neither the job security nor income typically associated with middle class careers. That is because about 70 percent of all instructors are not eligible for tenure. Not everyone thinks that the decline of tenure is a problem. It's become commonplace to for critics of higher education to traffic in the myth that most tenured faculty are lazy and don't have to work very hard. Other criticisms of the tenure system are that it privileges research over teaching, stifles change, or is simply antiquated. These critics suggest that its abolition would increase faculty productivity and student learning, as well as reward good teachers. A look at the experience of college and university instructors who teach without the possibility of tenure suggests that whatever the problems with the tenure system, the new system replacing it is worse. The decline of faculty tenure coincides with the rise of the "gig economy" in the U.S.. As with so many different careers in the private sector that have been subcontracted out into temporary jobs in the last 30 years, instructors hired off the tenure track tend to have lower wages, worse benefits, less job stability, and fewer opportunities for promotion.