next »

[drmink]

I thought I would ask this audience the best way to deal with the topic of tenure denial at an interview. Even if you don't directly mention it we all know that an assistant professor looking for a job in year six or seven is likely "damaged goods". I know there is a stigma associated with being denied tenure, and frankly any explanation is likely to be considered suspect. How would you suggest handling the topic, or at least deflecting attention away without being too dismissive?

I'm dealing with this myself, and although I truly am looking for a new challenge, I probably wouldn't if I was awarded tenure. In my particular case I received good external reviews, made it through the department and college, only to have a new provost deny my application. While the 20 second explanation said it was for teaching reviews, I think some of it was the provost's desire to establish their own standards. I guess I was the example.

Any guidance would be appreciated. I've struggled with finding a good way to avoid the topic, since I don't know any other appropriate way to address it.

[systeme_d_]

Ideally, the situation would be addressed in the letters of recommendation written by your chair, colleagues, and in this case, perhaps by your Dean as well.

[sibyl]

You are right that anything you say will be considered suspect.  Another way of saying it is that there is nothing you can say that will be above suspicion.  Therefore, the best approach is to give an explanation that puts the best face on it for you, while bending over backwards to avoid the appearance of whining.  If you were told you were denied tenure because your publications were not up to snuff, say that the institution is in the middle of changing publication expectations and didn't do a good job of communicating them to junior faculty.  (Do not say that you published more than some people who were the dean's buddies; that is too obviously sour grapes.)  If you were told you were denied tenure because of poor student evaluations, give them this reason but then explain why you think your evaluations actually show you to be a challenging teacher. 

Answer the question (don't evade), but keep it short.  They will then move on to the next question.

[dr_strangelove]

As system_d said, your letter writers should address this.

In my particular case I received good external reviews, made it through the department and college, only to have a new provost deny my application.

I would probably go with an answer along these lines, just stating the facts. I wouldn't try to address the provost's stated reasons---they're his or her reasons, not yours. If pressed, I would probably fall back on "You'll have to ask him," if I could think of a way to say it tactfully.

[onestep]

Ditto what dr_strangelove said.  Just state that you made it through the department and college and good good letters, but was denied by a new provost.  I'd then move on and say that you still feel very positive and look forward to continue developing your program of research and teaching.

My sense is that many would not see you as damaged goods as long as you're supported by your department and school.  You might even get a few sympathy points (solid faculty member, but unfairly trashed by an administrator). 

I'm sorry to hear about your tenure outcome and hope that you have good fortune on the market.

[svenc]

My sense is that many would not see you as damaged goods as long as you're supported by your department and school.  You might even get a few sympathy points (solid faculty member, but unfairly trashed by an administrator). 

I definitely agree that strong support from your current colleagues can go a long way toward mitigating concerns that you are "damaged goods" or otherwise unsuitable.

For what it's worth, I think the real prejudice around a tenure denial is not what it says about any specific candidate, but rather that the receiving department (or institution) is often concerned about the possible stigma that may arise from being seen as a place that hires folks who didn't get tenure elsewhere.

[offthemarket]

I'm sorry you have to deal with this.

Make no mistake, you will be seen as damaged goods despite the support of your department and dean.  But as svenc wrote, strong letters from your department (and Dean) can mitigate this, if they include specifics about your strengths and offer candid opinions about what happened.  It's there that they can say the provost is a crackpot and a disaster for the school, and perhaps suggest that it was a financially motivated move to get ride of a tenure-track line in a bad economic environment.

Ideally, the letter writers will specifically say what the official reason was (teaching reviews), and provide a clear argument how your teaching reviews were quite strong and that have been a good and cooperative campus citizen, so it's unclear what the provost was up to.

I was in your spot a couple years ago.  (I'm now at a better school, for what it's worth to you.)

When asked, I had ready a 30 second explanation. On all of my interviews it came up with the dean or the chair, or both.  But never anybody else.  I gave an account that was filled with facts and events and lacking any conjecture.  I said that I had strong support from my department and had a glowing previous review with no real suggestions for improvement.  I then said that the Dean (like the Provost in your situation) went against the recommendation with a claim that teaching reviews were inconsistent.  I then mentioned that my teaching scores were consistently in the top third of my department and college, and was never told about concerns about my teaching reviews since my first year at any level.  I said that my chair told me that the official explanation doesn't match the case history, and any explanation about the Dean's motives would be a story that I could just make up.  I said that I had my theories, but they all seemed pretty far fetched.  I said that I was still stunned by the denial even though it came months earlier, but I realize that it's practical to move on and look ahead.

In your situation, you could say that your tenure application was just fine all the the way through, and the Provost's official explanation just doesn't make sense to you, nor to your more immediate supervisors.  You can offer to freely answer any questions and invite them to call up anyone in your department - and if they take you seriously they'll do this.

[clean]

You are 'damaged'.  Im sorry to say that you now have "REJECT" stamped across your forehead.  You will have to deal with it on any interview you get.  All I can advise you is to remain positive.  Dont say anything bad about your current employer.  Even if your university was completely nuts and you gave the Sgt. Friday "Just the facts" answer, it will seem like you are the nutty one.  Follow the advice given above, and tell them that you received positive reviews and that the new provost seems to be moving the university in a different direction.

A word of caution, for lack of a better word, is that some departments and colleges seem to play a bit of politics.  They will not vote to deny their own people but hope/plan to let the college level or provost to do the dirty work for them.  I mention this so that you can prepare a response if that idea is introduced, or to give you a head's up to proactively address that issue if you can.

Good luck.

[joesephpeabody]

If you have any research grants that are ongoing, then it would make sense to steer the interview conversation in that direction. In my discipline, a "reject" with active research grant frequently has a foot up on a "newbie" with no money.

There are also elite university departments that have 10 - 15 year track records of not once granting tenure to their Assistant Professors, e.g., Princeton Chemistry Department. So it's all relative.

JP

[mccfan]

I got denied tenure. I worried about the damaged goods thing, but it didn't come to pass in my case. I did not mention the subject in my application letters, but my letter writers did.  That was the tactic that was recommended to me by everyone I asked.  And it helped that in my case, I had a unanimous departmental vote which was then vetoed by the dean of the college. When asked about it, people who had read my file said things like "we don't understand how the dean could deny tenure to someone with your record."  And I could say, "yes, I found it difficult to understand as well. Apparently the dean held the teaching award I won against me." I got three interviews and one offer within 3 months of receiving notification that I had been denied.

[nescio]

Yes, I agree: Asking a trusted colleague to address the inexplicable tenure denial in a warmly worded recommendation letter would probably be best.

BUT: I have to add my $.02 here about the tenure denial the OP is facing: Is this case completely over? Sounds to me like you have a very strong case, since you sailed through the first levels. Have you looked into appealing the Provost's decision? I would strongly urge you to find out if there are procedures in place at your university for an appeal (no, not a lawsuit, but a simple internal process). Find out what you can do about this before you give up! If you've got the department and the dean's support, you've got a strong case.

I faced something similar myself, and I did get tenure. I consulted a lawyer, learned all about the rules and regulations at my institution regarding tenure, drummed up support from colleagues across campus, and appealed everything. I was amazed at the number of people who were willing to help out and who wrote letters of my behalf. It can work!

[helpful]

I have heard that many tenure denials at universities with faculty unions has been overturned on appeal. The reason for this is that the grievance procedures in the university-union contracts are very explicit on the grounds that can be used by a university to deny tenure.

From the OP's story, it sounds like there is a case for such a grievance. Does your university have a faculty union and contract that spells out grievance/appeal procedures for such a case?

[drmink]

I appreciate all the helpful suggestions. I considered pursuing the appeal route, but it was suggested to me that it was futile, since it was perfectly within the provost's discretion to deny it based on their own interpretation of my record. Also, since the provost was new I fully expected someone to pay. It was me.

In retrospect, I probably should have since the provost was run off by the faculty in a "coup d'etat". However, hindsight is 20/20. I'm just trying to land on my feet somewhere else.

In another related question, how do you handle it with faculty members when they do the math? That seems to be more troublesome than the dean or chair, since they far out number the administrators. That one seems far more awkward to me.

[terpsichore]

Is it too late to appeal? It sounds like you have a strong case, especially if the provost who denied you tenure is gone.

[drmink]

Heck, they are still dealing with those souls who did it in my cohort. Actually, I think the train has come and gone. Plus, my university is imploding and I'd just as soon not be the last man standing.