Have you ever had a class with an elderly prof who may have been a great academic around the time you were born but now mumbles incoherently while reading his or her notes verbatim?
Then again, have you ever rolled your eyes as an ancient-looking prof shuffled into the room—only to plunge into an atmosphere of stimulating debate and fascinating stories?
Under a mandatory retirement policy like the one recently overturned at the University of Prince Edward Island, both professors would be sent packing.
UPEI was recently forced to abandon a policy requiring all staff members to retire at age 65.
The goal of the policy—“facilitating workplace renewal”—is legitimate, but must be pursued in a more nuanced way.
Everyone ages differently. No one wins when a geriatric professor is hauled up in front of a class to teach a curriculum last overhauled in 1975. But some experienced professors personify the phrase “older and wiser.”
The UPEI policy erred in failing to distinguish between school faculties. An elderly professor of genetics or computer science may be a bit out of touch with the times by definition. But for a professor of medieval history, the syllabus may not have greatly changed since his or her career began.
A mandatory retirement policy also deprives some people of the chance to achieve lifelong ambitions. Some people may not reach the pinnacle of their profession until their fifties or sixties. Some academics don’t even get doctorates until late middle age. Assigning a professor’s career an arbitrary expiration date is discriminatory.
Universities should evaluate older professors the same way provincial governments evaluate older drivers. Review their performance.
If an elderly professor is no longer capable of giving coherent lectures, show them the door.
But if, at 80 years old, a professor can still impart useful information and provoke stimulating discussion, don’t deprive students of an experienced professor.