# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1947_S220
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

218 SEMINARIES AND COLLEGES

sag

The introduction of full ranking provisions into an existing
situation which has for a century recognized only two ranks (Pro-
fessor-Assistant Professor) will be characterized by formidable
problems. Almost any plan to accomplish the change will also
involve some inequities. It is necessary, however, to recognize
that problems are involved in any change and to strive for co-
operative and objective consideration of solutions for such prob-
lems if there is to be any real hope of effecting significant im-
provement in the operation of our schools.

Proper and effective methods of applying a system of ranking
to the present members of teaching staffs have been a source of
much concern to your Board, It might seem proper to establish
all called members of present staffs at the highest level. However,
such a plan would perpetuate certain inequities now current in so
far as relatively inexperienced men would be ranked the equal of
those with extensive service and attainments. Such a plan would
also eliminate automatically any possibility of future advance by any
persons now on Synod’s staff of teachers. In addition, it would
defeat at the very outset the advantages of flexibility in size of
staff, tenure, and salary inherent in the ranking proposals by
immediately filling all professorships and leaving no room for staff
additions, status changes, or salary increases for quite some time
to come, except through the creation of still more teaching posi-
tions at a given school.

Your Board gave consideration to the possibility of formulating
a plan for filling the positions or a basis of age considerations or
of length of service.

It is felt that the system could not properly be introduced on
the basis of arbitrary age classifications. There is no apparent
reason to assume a direct correlation between chronological age
and exceptional ability or merit in a given profession. Nor are
advanced years a valid criterion of academic competence or teach-
ing ability. The question of chronological age is, in fact, largely
irrelevant in matters related to establishing criteria for ranking
classifications.

Nor is there reason to accept advanced degrees as an exclusive
guarantee of teaching ability, of valuable service rendered, or of
outstanding achievements in the Church's cause.

The experience of maturity and the products of scholarship
are both recognized as desirable and as having great potential
merit, but it would seem proper to include additional vital factors
in consideration of such importance to the Church, the schools,
and the individuals concerned.