Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Beginning in March 2020, higher education institutions transitioned to virtual learning as the government implemented shutdowns and restrictions to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Simultaneously, many institutions of higher education offered COVID-19 tenure clock extensions. Guided by an intersectional-barriers-to-tenure framework, the authors analyzed 35 BIPOC faculty responses at US research-intensive institutions about whether they used a COVID-19 tenure clock extension and their perspectives of them. We identified three salient themes: (1) BIPOC faculty decisions to take an extension were influenced by perceptions of being tenure eligible and receipt of institutional affirmation for their performance; (2) a one-year extension is helpful and stressful; and (3) a one-year tenure extension is inadequate and a potentially punitive solution. Several BIPOC academics questioned the value of extensions. Therefore, the authors suggest ways that institutional leaders can enact critical procedural justice to be F.A.I.R in tenure reviews: (1) Focus on equitable policies and implementation; (2) Affirm BIPOC faculty dignity and professional realities; (3) Invite critically conscious BIPOC faculty to conversations about P and (4) Rely on intersectional evidence about BIPOC faculty experiences.
Ward et al. (Thu,) studied this question.