Should tenure for college professors be abolished?

[sakky]

<p>

What a sitting senator does is vastly different from what a government professor does. You might learn something, but you would not achieve a vast knowledge of the principles of American government since the founding fathers, the legislative debates which occurred throughout that period, the ins and outs of campaign finance, the changing role of outside interests in the legislative process, etc. Instead, you’d get to hear about the bill that was voted on last week. You would essentially be learning current events, which would quickly be out of date and stale, and in a few years your degree would be meaningless. When you suggest that what a practitioner does is the same as what an analyst does, you just make yourselves look silly.

</p>

<p>Actually, what I’m ‘suggesting’ is that, frankly, most current poli-sci undergrads right now don’t really learn, as you say, the “vast knowledge of the principles of American government since the founding fathers, the legislative debates which occurred throughout that period, the ins and outs of campaign finance, the changing role of outside interests in the legislative process, etc”. Let’s be perfectly honest: the vast majority of poli-sci undergrads are not going to become professional political scientists, and never had the intention of doing so. Even from a top poli-sci department such as Berkeley, the [vast</a> majority](<a href=“https://career.berkeley.edu/Major2006/PolSci.stm]vast”>https://career.berkeley.edu/Major2006/PolSci.stm) of students pursue careers that have little to do with political science; indeed, apparently some become store manages at Abercrombie & Fitch or work sales at Macy’s.</p>

<p>[Salman</a> Khan](<a href=“http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303640104577440513369994278.html]Salman”>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303640104577440513369994278.html) said it best when he said that the vast majority of undergrads are in college primarily to garner a decent job or perhaps as a stepping stone for grad school after which they hope to garner a decent job, and therefore need the bachelor’s degree as a ‘credential’ - a credential that (according to Khan) universities generally spend only 5-10% of their costs to directly provide, with the rest being devoted to activities such as research that, frankly, are ancillary to the goals of most undergraduates. </p>

<p>Therefore while a sitting Senator may not be able to provide the deep theoretical knowledge in political science that you mentioned, most undergraduates don’t really want that. But what they might want is the entree to an actual job or networking contacts that a Senator might provide. For example, a Senator can surely provide access to internships, perhaps unpaid, within his own Senate Office. Or perhaps he can serve as a connection to other Senators and politicians who might have such open internship opportunities. Either way, I would argue that he would probably provide an experience that is more aligned with the true goals of most poli-sci majors.</p>