Tenure: end it, or mend it?

More often tenure provides a lifetime of job security not to professors whose work requires protection, but to a significant minority of "deadwood" — individuals who are unproductive, out of date, or poor in their research, teaching or institutional commitment. In this sense, tenure can not only lead to academic freedom and intellectual excellence, but can also provide license without accountability and shield low-quality academics.

Ahem, is Arthur Levine talking about me? :)

So, what does Levine propose?

Since mandatory retirement is not possible, the length of tenure could be limited to a significant but finite number of years. A term of 30 years, for example, would ensure essential academic freedom and at the same time allow for the turnover that universities require to remain intellectually strong.Beyond that initial term, faculty and universities can together negotiate shorter-term contracts, modified assignments, or retirement.

Even 30 years is a little too long.

Given the six-year probationary period for tenure and promotion, we could then add another six for the next promotion, and thrown in another six years for beyond that final promotion.  And round that total number to twenty.  I say that tenure ought to be limited to a 20-year term.  And then negotiated short-term contracts.

The faculty union at my university, in its infinite wisdom (if there exists any) has a salary matrix with 32 or 33 steps (if I recall correctly, and I can't be bothered to read that insane bargaining agreement yet again!)  Imagine trying to convince them about the merits of a 20-year term for tenure!