Saw this linked on Zorn's twitter. Interesting, and very detailed: she even posts redacted versions of her external review letters.
http://jenniferdiascrophd.com/blog/
Tenure denial blog
-
The chick already had tenure! Why the hell did she switch jobs from Associate to Assistant?
Ok, I read more. My sense is that she left Kentucky for personal reasons to go to DC.
I can understand that. DC probably has more going on than Lexington.
But the record is pretty slim at AU. 2 articles, a couple book chapters and an edited volume.
That should be good enough for many LACs and your average directional. But isn't AU a PhD program? Even if it's just a MA program that's weak sauce.
I hope she's happy nowv and that her blog can help the masses
-
Yes, they have a PhD program, but it's very small and undistinguished and the focus historically has been undergrad and to a degree the $-making MA program. They have always had some faculty that are solid researchers anyway because of location. In recent years because of a change in their focus and the buyer's market they have evolved somewhat.
During her time the research-focus increased. We don't know what she was told she needed to do when she got there. I think the standard changed during that period, a time when she had two kids. It was a case of bad timing. I know people there and the case was divisive. She had support from senior faculty who were more teaching-focused.
The chick already had tenure! Why the hell did she switch jobs from Associate to Assistant?
Ok, I read more. My sense is that she left Kentucky for personal reasons to go to DC.
I can understand that. DC probably has more going on than Lexington.
But the record is pretty slim at AU. 2 articles, a couple book chapters and an edited volume.
That should be good enough for many LACs and your average directional. But isn't AU a PhD program? Even if it's just a MA program that's weak sauce.
I hope she's happy nowv and that her blog can help the masses -
One of the commenters said that when they were denied tenure, they complained and raised a big stink, and the administration overturned. I find this practice very common.
Maybe the squeaky wheel just gets the grease?
Wonder why she didn't complain, threaten to sue, etc.
Or maybe those folks actually were wronged by unethical people in their department, and the administration had to step in and overturn.
-
I hadn't seen tenure materials before, so thanks for sharing.
Reading the external letters makes me wonder how much they count for. Only one writer seems to point out stuff like co-authored book with advisor as grad student and periods of low productivity, and then offer a caveat-laden critique. The others seem fully in favor of tenuring her...
Can anyone with some experience reading/evaluating tenure letters offer their input here?
-
I hadn't seen tenure materials before, so thanks for sharing.
Reading the external letters makes me wonder how much they count for. Only one writer seems to point out stuff like co-authored book with advisor as grad student and periods of low productivity, and then offer a caveat-laden critique. The others seem fully in favor of tenuring her...
Can anyone with some experience reading/evaluating tenure letters offer their input here?This is pretty classic. The department clearly didn't want to tenure her (given low productivity) so they probably highlighted Reviewer #2 in the report to the administration.
If they wanted to tenure her, they would have just dismissed R2 as not knowing what he/she is talking about, and sent the file up.
-
^this.
If you remember the Finkelstein escapade. He published his outside letters from Walt and Mearsmear. They were positive.
The university hated Norm cause he is a psycho. And they rejected the glowing letters.
I don't know Jenny, but for all you kids out there: BE NICE. MAKE THE TENURED PEOPLE LIKE YOU.
You can go back to being your ass self after tenure
-
Important to remember that letters are endogenous to the preferences of the people getting them, in many cases. If they want to get good letters, they usually can. If they want to get bad ones, ditto.
Do some people just ask senior people in the field whom they don't know without regard for (or knowledge of) how they are likely to come down? Sometimes. Are letters sometimes "surprises" because those getting the letters are clueless or the reviewer had a bad week? Yes.
But do letters matter? In my R1 experience, usually they don't. Most letters are positive. I have also seen people survive two bad letters out of six when they got to choose three reviewers! I know of other cases like this at my friend's departments. Conversely, you can have all good letters and get dinged.
Letters are usually a pretext.