For reals? No, really, for reals?
I’ve been pointed to this column at CHE. I am just plain gobsmacked. The column is bad enough; the comments are worse.
Nobody stole “Edwina’s” job. It was not her job. And honestly, “we were the same on paper”?? How does anybody know that? Oh, right. Because “Edwina” said so.
Give me a break. Even if every part of this story is true, there was no theft of a job. There were a lot of things that were wrong, but not that.
- “Patricia” did not tell “Edwina” up front that she was applying for the job. This is really not ok. Especially if they were friends. Just not ok. But more on that later.
- “Edwina’s” colleagues and “boss” told her a lot of things that faculty on every campus tell an inside candidate. She doesn’t mention whether any of them were on the search committee. People not on the search committee should STFU, and not act as if they know anything about the search. It isn’t any of their business. Talking out of your ass to a colleague you want to keep and getting her hopes up? unethical and stupid. If these colleagues were on the search committee, they behaved very unethically. And stupidly.
- Did I mention that the first rule of Search Committee is that you don’t talk about Search Committee? That’s because it’s both unethical and stupid. Why? because no search committee has the last say. Even if the administration agrees with the search committee’s choice, searches get cancelled, postponed, etc. You don’t promise what you can’t deliver, and you don’t imply to a candidate that you can deliver something unless you have it in writing. Period.
- “Edwina” talked to the students about this? Do I even have to explain this?
I would feel betrayed by Patricia, too. Really.
But honestly, who thinks that because she is “gunning for that job,” she has a right to expect that someone who “is the same on paper,” someone who has an equal need for that job, should just step back because the job “was mine to lose”?? First, it’s just not realistic. Second, neither is the idea that, if this one friend had not applied, she was guaranteed the job.
Also? how do you “keep your prospects under wraps”?? Unless that means, “I didn’t tell anybody that people were unethically giving me inside information [that turned out to be false]”
Moreover, who thinks that pursuing a T-T version of a one-year position you already have is a “master plan”. FFS, isn’t that what we are supposed to do in that situation, unless the job sucks? How much of a secret did she think this was?
And really, what kind of rinky-dink operation wouldn’t let an inside candidate know when they were bringing someone to campus for an interview?
It’s really too bad that the CHE chose to publish this essay. It doesn’t make anybody look good, especially “Edwina.”
To her, all I can say is, “For Reals”?
UPDATE: I meant to say something about this in the original post, but forgot. Can I just say that I have never seen a one-year position in which a person can excel AND publish SEVEN good, peer-reviewed articles in that one year. I know some pretty shit-hot scholars in jobs with teaching loads meant to support research, and few of them publish that many articles in a year (in part because they are working on books, but still — SEVEN??)