Date: Sun, 18 Apr 1999 15:44:31
-0700 (PDT)
From: N Christopher Phillips
To: gilkey
Subject: Comments on post tenure review
Dear Peter,
Here are some brief comments on how I think post tenure review should
function.
-
(1) Post tenure review decisions are made from "raw data", that is, data
that requires knowledge of the expectations of the field to properly understand.
They therefore need to be made by people who understand that data, that
is, people in the department. Anything else will lead to arbitrariness
and will also impose an unnecessarily large workload on the people charged
with doing the review.
-
(2) Another reason for doing post tenure review in the department is that
(at least as suggested by experience in the math department) the department
will have a much better mechanism for ensuring that the post tenure review
committee (or whatever) is actually appropriately staffed. There is much
less likely to be the problem of shortage of candidates that we already
experience with the DAC, FPC, Senate, etc. This happens not only because
the department is (at least in our case) better at seeing that its committees
actually have people serving on them, but also because the workload of
a departmental committee is much smaller than that of a committee covering
a broader area would be.
-
(3) The form of the salary connection ($2000 of "off budget" money awarded
directly by the committee) is unworkable at any level of post tenure review
committee. I have explained elsewhere some of the problems I see, and other
people have brought up other problems. The most sensible solution I can
think of is that salary increases resulting from post tenure review should
be treated, to the extent possible, by the same mechanisms that other salary
increases are treated. I am sure there are problems with existing mechanisms,
but as far as I can tell it works at least moderately well. I think the
proposal (in both Draft A and Draft B) is going to lead to quite nasty
problems.
---Chris
Message ends. Some related relevant web pages are: