Association of American Colleges and Universities, April 2001

prepared by Cathleen Fleck, AAC&U

Abstract

A surge in faculty retirements may soon hit many of our campuses. However, the uncapping of mandatory faculty retirement in 1993, institutional policies, personal choices, and the nation's economy make precise predictions of faculty retirement trends difficult. Nevertheless, with the retirement of the aging professoriate, the possibilities are promising for the introduction of educational innovations and fresh outlooks on campuses and strategic hiring of new faculty could encourage an influx of new, innovative approaches to teaching and learning.

In 1986, amendments to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act allowed postsecondary institutions to enforce mandatory retirement for their faculty at the age of 70. Following a review of this legislation in the early 1990s, Congress allowed the amendments to expire on December 31, 1993. The elimination of the forced retirement of faculty took place just as a large number of faculty hired in the boom from the early 1960s-early 1970s was reaching traditional retirement age. Will these professors remain in their posts into their 70s and 80s? Will a wave of retirements empty the upper ranks of faculty and administrators in the near future? How could these retirements open the doors to improved learning for undergraduates?

There are several reasons for the professoriate's graying: massive hiring in the 1960s, little growth in total faculty size, slow faculty turnover, good health care, and declining rate of retirement. Several studies have determined that the average age of American professors is rising.

• A 1999 survey reported that 32% of the nation's full-time faculty were 55 or older (among 33,785 faculty at 378 colleges and universities), compared with 24% in 1989. In the same decade, the number of college professors who were under 45 had fallen from 41% to 34%.
• The Faculty Retirement Survey (see below) indicates that in 1977 the median age of faculty at four-year institutions was 40; in 1996 it was 48.
• Analysis of full-time faculty members at University of North Carolina from 1982-1998 found the average age of faculty rose from 46.5 to 49.

As the faculty "bulge" from the "60s near traditional retirement age, there have been predictions of high faculty turnover in the next decade. Yet the 1993 uncapping of mandatory retirement made far less certain the exact timing of those retirements.

The economists Orley Ashenfelter and David Card, analyzed information from about 16,000 faculty, age 50 or over, from the mid 1980s to 1996. The authors state: "... reductions [in retirement rates at and after 70] have led to a marked increase in the fraction of faculty who continue working into their seventies" and "suggest that a sizeable fraction of the cohort of college and university professors currently entering their sixties will remain employed into their mid-seventies." The decreases in retirement rates after 70 were consistent across types of institutions and across the disciplines of the individuals. The authors' review of mandatory to post-mandatory retirement periods shows that well over the majority of faculty - 75% - retired before reaching 70. They estimate that about 40% of faculty at private research universities will remain employed until 70, compared with 25% at public research universities, and under 25% at doctoral, comprehensive, and liberal arts schools.

A graying professoriate does not necessarily equate with declining performance; studies show no evidence of a decrease in faculty performance because of age. Indeed, older tenured faculty often can focus more on their students as the importance of establishing themselves in their fields has diminished. There is much to gain by bringing them into the discussion of an emphasis on student learning and analysis of student learning outcomes. Some institutions have created new policies to evaluate job performance of tenured professors and provided development funds for those who are interested in improving performance. Drexel University's voluntary program, as one example, helps professors improve teaching and rewards them for their efforts. Here is an important opportunity to plan for the improvement of student outcomes. A vibrant university needs a mix of faculty at various ages and life cycles of research, training, teaching, service, and interaction with students to thrive.

Given the difficulty of predicting retirement decisions, institutions are actively offering retirement incentives. A 1999 TIAA-CREF survey found that 81% of colleges and universities were offering early retirement packages. Some offer phased retirement options or include occasional teaching, office or lounge use, parking spaces, library privileges, etc. in retirement agreements. The top reasons colleges cited for creating early retirement policies were to cut costs, manage faculty performance, and increase flexibility in hiring. In these ways, they begin to control the pace of retirement at their institutions.

Institutions could use retirements as an opportunity for the strategic hiring of new faculty who put the highest priority on student learning. The opportunities are rich for college administrators to establish supportive tenure and promotion policies for these new faculty that reflect and support new priorities, encourage new ways of thinking, and sustain teaching excellence. Campus cultures that focus on teaching and student learning should also be promoted in graduate schools, where future faculty are educated. Graduate programs often have a sole emphasis on research; they neglect to teach their graduates how to teach and how to lead diverse students to learn.

Retirements of senior faculty in the postsecondary educational system may also provide:

• Money for new tenure-track positions as high-salary older faculty are replaced by junior faculty.
• Faculty who are more comfortable with technology and who can teach through it and about it in classrooms full of students who have grown up using sophisticated technologies.
• Diversity among new faculty that reflects the diversity of the student body.
• A chance to diversify their course offerings and update outdated curricula.
• New faculty voices and leadership that will focus and "modernize" departments to prepare students better in today's world.
• Fresh ideas in pedagogy to meet the changing needs and preparations of students.
• A means to remain at the frontiers of rapidly changing fields by shifting faculty resources into new areas of inquiry.

One main concern about the aging faculty is the possibility of a leadership crisis resulting from the exodus of high-level, experienced faculty and administrators. Many of these people have worked their way up through the ranks and know how to do anything from handling a promotion case to applying for a grant. For instance, recent data about community colleges, most of which were founded in the 1960s and 70s, suggest that about 45% of two-year college presidents will retire in the next six years and 34% in the next seven-ten years. Furthermore, the next rung of community college administrators are approaching retirement age almost as fast as the presidents. Some are calling for new graduate leadership programs, which once were more common, to help prepare the next generation of leaders. Others point out that the universities have a responsibility to seek out and nurture younger faculty demonstrating leadership interest. Because community colleges have become so important to our higher education system, they, in addition to other postsecondary institutions, should be encouraged to cast widely and seek forward-thinking leaders to promote student learning through liberal education.

In conclusion, the graying of faculty means that many are near retirement age and that a large percentage of faculty will be retiring in the next decades. This could be a unique opportunity to hire new, innovative faculty even as remaining older faculty are developed anew as mentors and respected educators.