Faculty Hiring Has Problems. That’s Nothing New.
When it comes to theories of institutional neutrality and free expression, two of the pillars of the “Chicago Trifecta” — the 1967 Kalven Report and the 2014 Chicago Principles — are well known. But the third, the so-called Shils Report (named after its primary author, the sociologist Edward Shils), has been given much less attention in recent years. That’s too bad, because the report’s recommendations are especially germane in the current moment of disciplinary self-reflection and soul-searching.
The Shils Report was originally published as “Report of the Committee on the Criteria of Academic Appointment” in The University of Chicago Record in December 1970. Edward Shils chaired the committee. The report emphasizes the university’s primary function to generate and disseminate knowledge, and the singular importance of merit and accomplishment as criteria for hiring, promotion, and tenure. It stresses the need for uniformity and equity in making such decisions. It alerts hiring committees to the dangers of “narrowing the range of intellectual interests” within academic departments, since this threatens the well-rounded training of students. And it champions excellence in teaching and embraces a variety of considerations for its evaluation.
The most immediate provocation for the Shils Report appears to have been the controversy surrounding the nonrenewal of a contract for an assistant professor named Marlene Dixon on January 7, 1969. Dixon taught in the sociology department at Chicago, which was also home to Shils. Dixon, a feminist and Marxist, was a very popular professor whose work was seen by students as being relevant to the times. Her dismissal prompted great student outrage. They saw her dismissal as politically motivated and demanded that her contract be renewed.
The students almost certainly used the Dixon dismissal as an opportunity to protest other 1960s causes such as America’s involvement in the Vietnam War, the lack of women on the Chicago faculty, the university’s Kalven Report-justified reluctance to engage with social-justice issues, and increasing gentrification of the institution’s Hyde Park neighborhood. Significantly, they also wanted more student say in the appointment and retention of professors. In fact, they made this their second great demand, alongside Dixon’s reappointment. These two demands were presented to President Edward H. Levi on January 17, 1969.
