WORK IS SUPPOSED TO BE WHAT WE DO BETWEEN MEETINGS. Munger's First Law of Time Allocation is challenged by a small Inside Higher Ed committee. Some of this stuff defies parody.

In liberal arts colleges, advising, club sponsorships, determination of academic policy and the execution of that policy require deep commitments of time from faculty. Many tasks, such as organizing pre-law advising or guiding students through graduate applications — assignments many large universities fill with a staff member — are elements of service for faculty at smaller colleges. Organizational realities may encourage this on the one hand, but on the other, there may also be better student outcomes in having a teacher-scholar actively engaged in these roles.

Catch that "teacher-scholar?" What ever happened to the term "professor?" One cannot profess without understanding the academic conversation, and participating in it. "Teacher-scholar" sounds like the same kind of coverup "student-athlete" all too often is.

Many faculty feel pulled in multiple directions by trying to balance teaching and scholarship, but most recognize that both elements of the academic life offer unique rewards. Too often, the rewards for service are overlooked. In service roles a faculty member can utilize and continue to hone valuable skills such as organization, leadership, policy development, writing, critical thinking and analytical ability. Many, if not all, of these skills are used in the classroom and in research, but the results are often different when they are applied in service. An excellent writer who has labored through years of graduate school may well be appreciated by her students and by peers in her scholarly field, but her carefully crafted prose may also serve all her faculty colleagues, as well as current and future students, when she drafts important policies while serving on the Academic Planning Committee.

Come off it. All too often that drafting is an exercise in posturing in which assorted very smart people niggle over approximately nothing simply to impress others in the room. And all too often comparative advantages are revealed -- the campus politicians might not be the most active researchers. Among Real Guys, the posturing could be characterized as a pissing contest, but this is the academy, which is a hostile environment for Real Guys. (If I just trashed my G rating, so be it!)

How important is institutional service, and does service truly improve educational outcomes? It is possible to imagine a college where faculty have no service role. Issues such as college governance, curriculum development, determining degree requirements, participating in resource allocation decisions, playing a role in admissions, participating in tenure and promotion decisions could be left to professional academic administrators while the faculty role would simply be to teach and do research.

Thus, as with so much else, a trade-off. On one hand, the so-called "professional academic administrators" (depressingly many of whom are therapeutic thumb-suckers, failed scholars, and political hacks) can pre-empt the faculty functions completely. Or headquarters can declare an emergency and create a special faculty task force stocked with campus politicians of the wannabe kind to bypass a faculty governance system dominated by campus politicians and posturing nigglers. On the other hand, people who take their research and teaching seriously have to spend some time protecting the true function of the university from the barbarians and time-servers.

We believe, however, that active faculty participation in institutional governance is not only the historic right of the faculty, but also improves educational outcomes. Such faculty involvement is critical even when it’s painful.

On this, we agree. Faculty may be employees, but faculty are the management. The dean and provost and president exist to make the faculty look good.