next »

[klyer]

I have been a member of a hiring committee that was formed to hire a new faculty member.  After the committee reviewed the received applications several candidates were invited for interview.  There are two components to the interview process: one is the face-to-face interview including a math problem teaching demonstration, the other is a written test that each interviewee takes after the face-to-face interview.  All the written tests for the past eight years or so have had the same format and in some cases very similar questions if not exactly the same.  With the current/recent hiring process the written test has been very similar to the previous ones.  

In one of the many stages of the hiring process I came to discover that the wife of a full time math faculty member (“John Doe”) of the department was an applicant for the new position.  Although John Doe is not a member of the hiring committee, he has served on many previous hiring committees, whereby he had access to the written test questions.  It would unthinkable that John Doe would not show the past written test questions to his wife.  What I am saying is that there is a definitely reasonable suspicion that John Doe’s wife might have had access to highly sensitive information that would have given her totally unfair advantage over other candidates.  No other candidate had access to previous test questions.  

My problem is this:

1.   If John Doe’s wife gets hired, then what am I to do with all my understanding of the situation as described?  

2.   Should I publicly raise the fact that John Doe’s wife has most probably benefited from an unfair and unequal advantage over other candidates?  

3.   Should I write a formal letter to the president of the college alerting him to this very likely possibility?

4.   How would publicizing the issue affect my relationship with John Doe and other members of the department?

5.   What can I do now?  What are my options?

Thank you for your answer.

[daniel_von_flanagan]

You are the only person in the department who knows that this applicant is the wife of one of your colleagues?  How does that happen, does she have some kind of Jedi mind powers?

Your interview process is ridiculous.  Seriously, you give a math test to your applicants?  I am embarrassed on your behalf just thinking about it. - DvF

[embitteredhistorian]

I have been a member of a hiring committee that was formed to hire a new faculty member.  After the committee reviewed the received applications several candidates were invited for interview.  There are two components to the interview process: one is the face-to-face interview including a math problem teaching demonstration, the other is a written test that each interviewee takes after the face-to-face interview.  All the written tests for the past eight years or so have had the same format and in some cases very similar questions if not exactly the same.  With the current/recent hiring process the written test has been very similar to the previous ones.  

In one of the many stages of the hiring process I came to discover that the wife of a full time math faculty member (“John Doe”) of the department was an applicant for the new position.  Although John Doe is not a member of the hiring committee, he has served on many previous hiring committees, whereby he had access to the written test questions.  It would unthinkable that John Doe would not show the past written test questions to his wife.  What I am saying is that there is a definitely reasonable suspicion that John Doe’s wife might have had access to highly sensitive information that would have given her totally unfair advantage over other candidates.  No other candidate had access to previous test questions.  

My problem is this:

1.   If John Doe’s wife gets hired, then what am I to do with all my understanding of the situation as described?  

2.   Should I publicly raise the fact that John Doe’s wife has most probably benefited from an unfair and unequal advantage over other candidates?  

3.   Should I write a formal letter to the president of the college alerting him to this very likely possibility?

4.   How would publicizing the issue affect my relationship with John Doe and other members of the department?

5.   What can I do now?  What are my options?

Thank you for your answer.

Welcome to academia. I have seen a spouse serve on the search committees interviewing his/her spouse. You absolutely should raise the inequality of this situation publicly (starting with the head of the SC, then working upwards to the president of the university, then to the media if no one cares), but it might turn you into a pariah or create real enemies. The right thing to do is often the unpopular thing.

[totoro]

If you always ask the same questions are you sure that no other candidates have gotten help? Perhaps from people who have already been hired who would like their friends to be hired?

I've never heard of this component in an interview process anywhere. I would have thought having a PhD exempted someone form doing more exams...

[voxprincipalis]

In one of the many stages of the hiring process I came to discover that the wife of a full time math faculty member (“John Doe”) of the department was an applicant for the new position.  

1. John Doe ought to have disclosed this at the time. Is there a reason to think that the two of them are somehow in collusion to keep this a secret? Do they think people will never figure out that Jane Doe is John Doe's wife? Does no one in your department know the wife of a longstanding faculty member?

2. At which stage of the hiring process did you discover this, and what stage are you in now? The best time to say something would have been the minute you found out. Hanging on to the information for use at a later time of your choosing is sketchy.

Although John Doe is not a member of the hiring committee, he has served on many previous hiring committees, whereby he had access to the written test questions.  It would unthinkable that John Doe would not show the past written test questions to his wife.

3. Why is this "unthinkable"? Some people do actually maintain good ethical personal/professional boundaries. Now, you may say that John Doe is not this kind of person, in which case the problem is with John Doe, not his wife.

What I am saying is that there is a definitely reasonable suspicion that John Doe’s wife might have had access to highly sensitive information that would have given her totally unfair advantage over other candidates.  

4. Dude, how hard is this exam?

No other candidate had access to previous test questions.  

5. ... that you know of.

1.   If John Doe’s wife gets hired, then what am I to do with all my understanding of the situation as described?  

6. As above, the best time to discuss this would have been the minute you found out. The second best time is now.

2.   Should I publicly raise the fact that John Doe’s wife has most probably benefited from an unfair and unequal advantage over other candidates?  

3.   Should I write a formal letter to the president of the college alerting him to this very likely possibility?

7. Good God. Are you trying to cause a scandal or resolve a potential hiring problem? Satisfying your sense that the search has been conducted ethically should not include your putting on a cape and trumpeting the situation to the heavens. That smacks of you wanting to punish someone, which is not your job. Discuss the information with the next level up (in this case, presumably the SC chair) and let that person handle it.

4.   How would publicizing the issue affect my relationship with John Doe and other members of the department?

8. How do you think? He will come to your house and hurt you badly.

VP

[hiringchair]

What I am saying is that there is a definitely reasonable suspicion that John Doe’s wife might have had access to highly sensitive information that would have given her totally unfair advantage over other candidates.  No other candidate had access to previous test questions. 

If this is all you've got, you've got nothing.  Until or unless you have a smoking gun here I'd suggest STFU.

And why are you giving an exam to PhDs?

hc

[afm_man]

In one of the many stages of the hiring process I came to discover that the wife of a full time math faculty member (“John Doe”) of the department was an applicant for the new position.  Although John Doe is not a member of the hiring committee, he has served on many previous hiring committees, whereby he had access to the written test questions.  It would unthinkable that John Doe would not show the past written test questions to his wife.  What I am saying is that there is a definitely reasonable suspicion that John Doe’s wife might have had access to highly sensitive information that would have given her totally unfair advantage over other candidates.  No other candidate had access to previous test questions.  

I don't get the problem.  Is it just because the candidate is related to someone else in your department?  Sounds like you did not know they were related when you made offers for the campus visit so the candidate was one of your top people.  Then, only after you found out they were related you got peeved. 

Making accusations that someone gave information is walking on shaky ground if you have no REAL evidence.  You are most likely the one who will come out with egg on their face.

I don't think the current faculty member has a duty to broadcast that their spouse is applying (I would call that a bit unethical).  Again, I think things sound like they worked as they should.  Even though this is a 2-body problem, the candidates application stood out (at least to you) without influence.

I agree with others, the test is silly.  I would turn my efforts to fighting against this test as a part of the process.  However, I have given very similar exams in subsequent classes and it was clear that students had shared earlier ones.  Want to know who I blame?  ME! 

Maybe you guys as a search committee should turn yourselves in to the provost since you are at least partially responsible.  Oh wait, we still don't know if this actually occurred.

[zuzu_]

Yes, the exam sounds stupid.

And even if for whatever reason you have to give this exam, I can't imagine that it's a crucial factor in your hiring decision.

[anon99]

I also think the exam is odd.  I have never heard of that.  Why not just make a new exam that all the candidates can take? 

I also don't understand how no one else on the SC knows this perosn is the spouse of a current faculty member.

[madhatter]

This sounds like a community college interview. They like doing the standardized interview questions, the written exam, the whole bit. CC interviews tend to fetishize "fairness" in the interview process. I think the restrictions they impose actually create more of an illusion of fairness than the actual thing (cf. the TSA's airport security theater).

[klyer]

Thank you all for your answers, some impassioned, others piercing, but all great!

The place I work is a community college, not a research institution.  The minimum requirement for the position is a Master's Degree, although PhDs also apply.  

The written test, although disliked by some of you, elicits surprising revelation about the candidates.  You'd be surprised to find out how little many candidates, including PhDs, know of what they are being hired for.  The purpose of the written test as understood by the hiring committee is to distinguish the candidates along what we informally call "the Knowledge Scale".  The written test is only one of many metrics used in the interview process.  In the past we've hired people who did worse than other candidates on the written test.  But the test, silly or not, does have an important function.

It turns out that candidate Jane's last name is not the same as John Doe's.  For this reason I had no idea who Jane was until someone tipped me about her and I verified through public records that indeed candidate Jane and faculty member John are spouses.  By the time I got to know about this relationship, Jane was already invited for an interview.  BTW, I did not vote for her, others on the committee who (I found out) knew her voted for her.  I considered candidate Jane less qualified than others, and was bothered as to why some other committee members wanted to interview her.  

We just concluded the interviews and the committee recommended to the president two candidates for hire, one of them Jane (for whom again I did not vote as I found her lacking in many respects in comparison to other much better qualified candidates).  I did not dare to broach this relationship issue during the deliberations as I was not sure what the fallout would be.  That's why it's a dilemma.  What do I do now?

[lurquita]

Thank you all for your answers, some impassioned, others piercing, but all great!

The place I work is a community college, not a research institution.  The minimum requirement for the position is a Master's Degree, although PhDs also apply.  

The written test, although disliked by some of you, elicits surprising revelation about the candidates.  You'd be surprised to find out how little many candidates, including PhDs, know of what they are being hired for.  The purpose of the written test as understood by the hiring committee is to distinguish the candidates along what we informally call "the Knowledge Scale".  The written test is only one of many metrics used in the interview process.  In the past we've hired people who did worse than other candidates on the written test.  But the test, silly or not, does have an important function.

It turns out that candidate Jane's last name is not the same as John Doe's.  For this reason I had no idea who Jane was until someone tipped me about her and I verified through public records that indeed candidate Jane and faculty member John are spouses.  By the time I got to know about this relationship, Jane was already invited for an interview.  BTW, I did not vote for her, others on the committee who (I found out) knew her voted for her.  I considered candidate Jane less qualified than others, and was bothered as to why some other committee members wanted to interview her.  

We just concluded the interviews and the committee recommended to the president two candidates for hire, one of them Jane (for whom again I did not vote as I found her lacking in many respects in comparison to other much better qualified candidates).  I did not dare to broach this relationship issue during the deliberations as I was not sure what the fallout would be.  That's why it's a dilemma.  What do I do now?

Um...

Shut your cake hole?

Put a sock in it?

Cork it, man, cork it?

Let sleeping dogs lie?

Zip zip zippity zip it?

Or, if one through five don't ring your chimes, you could always take option six:

Self-righteously and at full throttle, make sure that everyone knows about this grave travesty of justice.  Even if "Jane Doe" gets hired, make sure that the news of her alleged perfidious collusion with her husband is common knowledge.

:)

Lurqui

[der_gadfly]

Your interview process is ridiculous.  Seriously, you give a math test to your applicants?  I am embarrassed on your behalf just thinking about it. - DvF

I CHIME to this part, then in retrospect, in light of the explanation, I see some sense in it.  However, as a candidate, I would be somewhat put off by being given a test with no review session, no graded homework, and probably knowing that I would not get to see my grade or see where the rest of the 'class' did.....

[thurston]

Your interview process is ridiculous.  Seriously, you give a math test to your applicants?  I am embarrassed on your behalf just thinking about it. - DvF

I CHIME to this part, then in retrospect, in light of the explanation, I see some sense in it.  However, as a candidate, I would be somewhat put off by being given a test with no review session, no graded homework, and probably knowing that I would not get to see my grade or see where the rest of the 'class' did.....

Perhaps they could have faculty in the room texting and asking irrelevant questions, too. Oh, wait, sorry...different thread.

[spork]

If you don't have tenure, do nothing.

If you do have tenure, is this the hill you want to possibly die on? Do other members of the search committee know that Jane is John's wife?  If not, why didn't you inform them when you found out, if you think this could be a breach of ethics?  


It was a dark and stormy night . . .