Why is the University of Chicago so Free? The Role of Term Limits

by Liberty and Power

Courtesy of Ralph Luker and Erin O'Connor comes a rare bit of good news in higher education. They note that the University of Chicago has held out as haven of free inquiry in higher education. The University of Chicago's Faculty Handbook sets the tone:

"The mission of the university is the discovery, improvement, and dissemination of knowledge. Its domain of inquiry and scrutiny includes all aspects and all values of society. A university faithful to its mission will provide enduring challenges to social values, policies, practices, and institutions. By design and by effect, it is the institution which creates discontent with the existing social arrangements and proposes new ones. In brief, a good university, like Socrates, will be upsetting."

Luker and O'Connor, however, neglect to mention the probably the most important reason for the relative freedom at the University of Chicago: term limits for academic administrators. Because of term limits, the University has precluded domination by the professional administrative class of bean counters who now dominate higher education. With rare exceptions, career administrations in higher education have little appreciation for the traditions of open debate and intellectual diversity. In an small way, the Alabama Scholars Association has worked to implement the policy of term limits in our state's public colleges and universities.

comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:

David T. Beito - 4/5/2004

I am not sure whther they apply to the provost but they to all the academic deans. I think Charles Nuckolls knows this.

I think that the expectation would be that adminstrators would be recruited from within. I doubt many career types would take such a position, however. Under a term limited administration, (and least as we propose), the administrator would receive a small increment (much like a chair does now) not the kind of six figure salary which is typical fare for the professionals. Also, a five year limit would not provide the kind of job security that would attract the professional types (even if they typically move on in even before the limit is reached).

Jonathan Dresner - 4/4/2004

Term limits may be a necessary, but not sufficient, condition to prevent administrators from becoming oppressive, and it does nothing to sheild us from "bean counters." As it stands now, the half-life of high-level administrators is.... what? Any administrator with a career orientation will be moving after about five years anyway (too short and you don't have any "reforms" or "progress" to boast about; longer than that and you're "settling down" instead of "growing professionally"). The tendency of these careerist "hired guns" to come in, "shake things up" then move on is at least as disruptive to institutional life as administrators who never do anything productive except promote their friends....

Steven Horwitz - 4/4/2004

In addition to Robert's question, I'd add that I'd like to know if said administrators are hired from within or the outside. One of the nice things at my place is that all 3 associate deans and the Big Dean in Academic Affairs are members of the faculty, with 3 year terms. Historically, we've had a self-imposed rule of no more than two 3-year terms. That seems to work well.

Robert L. Campbell - 4/4/2004

David,

How widely do the term limits apply at the University of Chicago? "Academic administrator" normally means deans, provosts, and the like--but it doesn't include Chief Financial Officers, and it may not include VP for Student Affairs.

Robert