At this time of year, a number of faculty hired a few years ago approach their "tenure time"—the date in the academic calendar where their tenure is approved, or not, by the Board of Trustees.
Old hands will remember a time in the thankfully distant past where the tenure process was vulnerable to political pressure and petty vendettas of personality. Some may recall its nadir which culminated in a dramatic standing room only Board of Trustees meeting and almost cost us a fine colleague. Over the years, our union leadership labored to reform the process to make it meaningful and to protect the faculty as well as the institution.
Recent hires have expressed the predictable concerns one might expect and have been reassured that the institution can now distinguish between those worth retaining and those not. Of course, this is also the result of reformed hiring processes as well.
Today the district is, of course, more risk averse than ever. One wonders about the lawsuit that might have been had Mathur and company prevailed that March evening and denied the tenure of that faculty member in question.
For the play-by-play of that unforgettable evening see: Mathur Goes After Jeff for Naming a Greenhouse (aka "Hello Mr. Chips"). Yes, it's all true. You can't make this stuff up though some would really like for us to forget it all. But we can't do that either. We're too academic. Plus, it's way too entertaining and instructive. Was the instructor almost denied tenure despite his excellent teaching record? Yes. As the then Chancellor Sampson said, "His teaching isn't the issue." Again, one wonders about the lawsuit that might have been.
Of course, even the reformed process is only as sound as the good faith of all its participants.
Let us know how it goes out there.
SEE ALSO:
• The infamous “greenhouse” affair, part 1 - Feb 29 2000
• The infamous “greenhouse” affair, part 2 - Mar 20 2000
• Tales of Snafuery - Sep 07 2006
• Some Mathurian tales of pettiness and ruthlessness - Jan 04 2000
*
17 comments:
At my college, as part of the decision-making process, the faculty member up for tenure is able to submit a portfolio of work, student letters, etc. for the Board to review as the Board is the entity ultimately legally responsible.
I think the tenure process in the community colleges varies widely. I'd be interested in knowing what exactly your district does and the strengths and weaknesses of the process you have.
I welcome seeing this topic on the blog.
Even the best processes can be undermined by a determined strong personality (with well-placed allies) who wants what wasn't got (the hiring of a friend) in the original hiring process. THAT lawsuit will be a doozy.
It's a better process than before but every process is only as good as the people involved.
One senses there's a larger story here...
The tenure review committee (made up of faculty members and a dean) is supposed to be the model of integrity. If you have a school who's dean keeps changing - this can be a problem. Add in a faculty member who is not above personal personality vendettas and well, a sad story.
Of course there IS a larger story...I hope people do the right thing. I don't know how some live with themselves....
A savvy person could easily compare the case of someone denied tenure with those who receive it -and the reasoning and evidence behind each decision to see what kind of mischief is afoot. People are certainly watching.
Is Carol Sobel still at work? Does anyone know how to contact her?
All practicing lawyers are listed on the state bar website, along with their contact info.
Carol's office is in Santa Monica.
Can you imagine a court case where tenured faculty with, uh, say OBVIOUS issues, are presented as evidence? Ha ha ha.
Of course the sad thing is that decent, hardworking people are drummed out while the imbalanced and poorly trained are kept on...
Let us know what happens!
Still amazed at the tales I hear about admin who know better but won't stand up to this kind of shit. There's a special place in hell, that's all I can say.
I think it's a very crowded place.
Bad people are doing bad things and other people who know better are letting them do them.
This will be an eyeopener for some of the trustees. I do hope they open their eyes.
Reading through the links to the old stories makes me pleased that the tenure process was reformed - but as some have pointed out, even a reformed process can be abused. This is especially true with, as you say, so many bullies around. Surely there can be some kind of appeal or redress before making such a grievance into a costly court case, yes? What roles if any do other play in this process? VP? President? Vice Chancellor? Chancellor?
Post a Comment