So I'm probably not understanding something here. If a Prof applies for tenure and is turned down, they then have to leave? That's quite a commitment request.
ISU Lawsuit - Sex Discrimination
- Thread starter harimad
- Start date
Sounds like marriage and dating. If you ask your gf to marry you and she says no, can't stick around for the most part.
These two comments are contradictory. Her own department that denied her was also faculty who didn't protect their own.
Most business schools have an initial 3 year contract for tenure track faculty. You go up for a third year review at the beginning of your third year. If you aren't making satisfactory progress, you are given a terminal 4th year to find a new job. If you are making satisfactory progress, you get another 3 year contract. You go up for tenure in the 6th year. If you don't get it, then you get a terminal 7th year to find a new job.
The terminal years are needed because of the timing of the job market. For example, you wouldn't find out about the denial tenure until around April. But in marketing, the job market for tenure track positions starting in Fall 2018 (for example) actually begins in the summer of 2017. So you simply wouldn't have time to find a new tenure track position for Fall 2017 if you didn't find out you were denied until April 2017.
You may be able to stay at the school as a Instructor/Lecturer/Clinical Assistant, but that would be with a big pay cut and an increased teaching load. Most would prefer to look for another tenure track position at a different school.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Piling on, in History, if you don't get tenure at that first job, there's rarely a second opportunity. We let you finish the last year on your contract and we say goodbye.
I certainly can't blame her for fighting for her career, especially if it was a flawed process for whatever reason.
I was busy getting tenure (in marketing no less), so lurked for many years so as not to get dragged into stupid arguments with stupid frog people about Obama getting a dog breed that would be unbecoming of the office of the President.
So far this thread has been good at not rushing to judgment. I hope that continues.
Keep in mind that there are two sides to every story. The Petition is drafted to be persuasive for the plaintiff and may not be entirely accurate. You won't learn much more once the Answer is filed by the State. We will see how this is settled, or if it goes to trial. Until then, I wouldn't rush to judgment. That's general advice I wished every person adhered to in today's quick-to-judge, social media frenzy world.
Keep in mind that there are two sides to every story. The Petition is drafted to be persuasive for the plaintiff and may not be entirely accurate. You won't learn much more once the Answer is filed by the State. We will see how this is settled, or if it goes to trial. Until then, I wouldn't rush to judgment. That's general advice I wished every person adhered to in today's quick-to-judge, social media frenzy world.
Most often, the resolution is to go "down" a level in school profile in your discipline and start their process from mid-stream, i.e. another 3-year rotation. So, she will mostly likely "drop down" to a Miami of Ohio, or something similar, brush up on her social skills and come up for tenure there after the three years. It's a black mark on her record certainly, but not career fatal necessarily. Without the lawsuit, she just gets knocked down the prestige ladder a rung, probably and suffers a three to four year setback. Not a big, deal except for the fact that a LOT of academics are very interested in the prestige of their role and the institutions, lol. The lawsuit is a huge red flag for future employers, so she better win.
As I was finishing 20 years ago, I wasn't relishing the prospect of the P/T treadmill, so I went to the private sector and haven't looked back.
Just went back and looked and I actually took one of her classes as a night class, MKT 447, consumer behavior. Shows you how memorable she was... She showed multiple Tedtalks each class... Very interesting teaching style (or lack there of)... Got a B in the class. While she may have a case and she was a victim of sex discrimination, I am glad she is not teaching at Iowa State anymore.
Yes, they have to leave. Most universities give them 1 semester of transition, but after that they are gone. And it is a tremendous blow to their career.
I remember having a Marketing class with her but can't for the life of me remember a single thing about it other than that she was very monotonous and not exactly motivational.
Having said that, lecturing is only a portion of gaining tenure and it's quite possible that she did not deserve to be denied.
Having said that, lecturing is only a portion of gaining tenure and it's quite possible that she did not deserve to be denied.
The process to grant someone essentially lifetime employment if they want it (I know that is oversimplified) should be exhaustive. It is a huge step. IMO.
"Lifetime employment" simply means that we do not have to re-apply for our jobs every year, as we do while we are on the tenure-track. How many people in the private sector have to re-apply for their jobs every year?
Once tenured, a professor is not "hired for life." Any tenured professor can be fired for a variety of reasons, just like in the private sector. Tenure is a much welcomed security blanket that further guarantees academic freedom, but it is not an absolute guarantee of employment.
When I was employed in the private sector, I applied for my job every day. Dont get the job done on a daily basis for a week or or mess up a good contract and you are shown the door in places I was at. I would have been ecstatic to have the whole year nailed down.
I'm totally ignorant of the process and legal proceedings. But it seems like the burden of proof is on the University to prove that Discrimination did not occur in cases like these rather then Discrimination did occur.
She may very well have a case and was discriminated against but the appearance of these sex discrimination cases is that the accuser was denied a job/promotion and they are using whatever means to get compensation even if discrimination did or did not really occur since the burden of proof is on the University/organization.
Tenure is not an absolute guarantee of permanent employment. Part of the idea behind it is to give faculty academic freedom to research "unpopular" topics. However, tenured faculty can be (and are) terminated. Typically it would be for things like gross misconduct or academic dishonesty, and requires documentation from the administration. They can't be fired on a whim simply because someone doesn't like them or their social or political or religious beliefs, such as can happen in the private sector.
Another tactic for removing tenured faculty who are not carrying their weight (so to speak) is to make their job so unpleasant (smaller office, heavier teaching load, limiting access to support staff, minimal raises, no promotions) that they leave of their own volition. And yeah, sometimes you're just stuck with them.
Seems like the opposite of how it should work. Presumption of guilt and proving innocence.
