next »

[nontrad_assoc]

I'm in a bind.  I have a colleague who is up for tenure this year. 

I like hu as a person.  We chat in the hallways and share common perspectives on administrative issues and whatnot. 

The problem is hu is not a good teacher, there have been student complaints every time hu was up for review, but hu has made no effort at improvement.  Hu gets extremely defensive (bordering on irrational) even when the dean discusses it with hu.  Hu's lack of work (not responding to students, consistently canceling classes and poor advisement) has meant more work for me.  I do not want this situation to continue for the next 20-30 years but the dept is short staffed and it is possible that the administration may not be able to fill the position right away, so I've heard rumors that they might give Hu tenure even though Hu doesn't "deserve" it.

I have tenure.  I am respected (I believe) for my opinion on these matters.  I want to speak out at the discussion of Hu's tenure against Hu getting it.  Am I morally obligated to discuss it with Hu first?  Do I keep my mouth shut and just vote no without explaining or trying to sway other colleagues (who may not know what a dud Hu is) to deny?

Any thoughts appreciated.  I don't want to be a snake in the grass but I can't imagine the conversation with Hu saying I'm not going to vote for hu as going well.

[glenwood]

Why on earth would you discuss this with your untenured colleague first? There is nothing that he or she can do about it now. That conversation can only cause suffering and has no potential to help anyone -- unless there is some last-minute thing that you haven't mentioned but which you're hoping your colleague will do. And if tenure is granted -- who knows? maybe everyone else thinks your colleague is fantastic and they end up convincing you, rather than the reverse -- this will make both your lives very unpleasant.

[larryc]

Wow, this is a tough one. Who is on the Tenure and Promotion Committee--or is this entirely an administrative decision?

[hegemony]

I certainly wouldn't discuss it first with your colleague -- what would it accomplish?  If he/she were capable of listening to suggestions for improvement, it would be obvious by now.  It will just cultivate ill-will.

Tenure is not a verdict on a person's niceness or general worth.  It's just a decision on whether they are suitable for a particular job.  From your description, it sounds clear that this is not the right profession for your colleague.  I suffered through a number of poor teacher along the way, and things had to get quite bad before anyone voiced any serious complaint.  So I suspect that your colleague is genuinely a very poor teacher.  Of course, you're in a better position to assess this (and you have).  You may also remember how utterly miserable it is trying to learn something from a terrible professor.  I don't think it's a service to education to prolong such a career, unfortunate as it is for the colleague.  But if he/she really wanted to do well in the job, listening to advice might have been the way to go.

[tuxedo_cat]

The problem is hu is not a good teacher, there have been student complaints every time hu was up for review, but hu has made no effort at improvement.  Hu gets extremely defensive (bordering on irrational) even when the dean discusses it with hu.  Hu's lack of work (not responding to students, consistently canceling classes and poor advisement) has meant more work for me.   

Do you work at a school where teaching is actually an important part of the requirements for tenure?  And is that spelled out clearly in the faculty handbook?  

If you have evidence and direct experience that this colleague has not made efforts to improve despite clear indications that such improvements were required for tenure, it is your responsibility both to your colleagues and especially to all your future students to report on what you know -- with details and evidence.  

I would advise you not to couch this in personal terms, however ("I am going to have to pick up the slack for this clown for the next 3 decades" grumble grumble) -- you will be more persuasive if you put this in the context of the quality of teaching that your institution aspires to provide, and that this colleague's lousy teaching will simply continue to be a disservice to these students, for decades.

Of course if you're a research intensive institution, you can still express the same concerns, and if your colleague has a strong publishing / grants record, it simply may not matter.

[ruralguy]

Base your decisions on evidence. If there is evidence of hu's teaching being poor (and consitently/uniformly poor) with evals, and recorded student complaints along the lines you mention, then you'd be justified in "speaking out", or at least emphasizing this evidence when the case is discussed.

If there is no real evidence, then I'd say nothing. Even if you believe the students, you put yourself in a bad situation for firing someone with no solid evidence.

If this person complains to you after he is denied, refer him to the chair.

If you aren't friends, but just friendly like minded colleagues, then don't worry about this so much. It sucks, be if the evidence shows he should be out, and he hasn't acted on this, then he's out.

Buy the way, if he's this bad, hasn't this come up for dept. discussion before now?

[ruralguy]

By the way, short staffed is better than poorly staffed...by A LOT.

Few people love teaching overloads (save for when payday comes around, assuming its a paid overload). However,
what people hate even more is a colleague who is constantly the subject of complaints.  It hurts in getting majors , it hurts overall dept. reputation, etc.

Assuming there is solid evidence, and what you say reflects reality, then I'd say a very very poor colleague is worse than useless, as he can actually turn away people from the dept.

[mirada]

I sympathize. A truly irresponsible and horrible teacher (as opposed to the common variety of dull and disengaged) can drag an entire program and everyone around them down.

If your colleague has a well-documented record of significant teaching problems and poor performance that does not meet your dept's written standards, by all means, speak out strongly.  If this is not documented or your institution does not have clear standards, then be very careful, as there may be very little you can do and your concerns can come off as just pissy hearsay and gossip. 

[nontrad_assoc]

Thank you all for the comments.

We are a teaching focused institution, so it is an important criteria for tenure.  Hu has been told (multiple times) that the student evaluations and complaints to the adminstration are something that hu has to work on.  There is (relatively) unbiased evidence that Hu is a poor teacher. and (to my knowledge although I haven't seen hu's most recent reviews yet) has made little to no improvement.

I will not say anything privately to Hu.

There is no anon forum to bring this up - other than a no vote.  The question is, what do I do when it gets back to Hu that I said something in the public meeting? Again, I think Hu believes that we are friends.

Our insitution is one where most people who make it to the tenure vote, do get it, so this isn't a scenario I've dealt with before.

[hegemony]

Do you mean that tenure-decision meetings at your place aren't confidential?  That's not a good situation, if so.  People should never be passing on the discussion at a tenure meeting.  For many of the reasons you mention and others as well.

If you're absolutely sure that someone from the meeting will pass on your comments to the person, I think you have two choices.  One is to remain mum and let the chips fall where they may.  Colleague may avoid you.  You can keep on being civil and amiable to Colleague.  If Colleague is on the way out, this may not matter for long.  If Colleague gets tenure anyway, you'll probably be more distant friends.

Alternatively, you could contact Colleague and say/write, "Chuck, I wanted you to know about what went down in the tenure meeting.  Of course you've been a great colleague and your work is really promising.  I especially liked that article on Ruritanian basketweaving -- very nice job on Zizek!  Any research school would be lucky to get you.  Unfortunately, of course the issue of teaching arose, and I know you've felt strongly that your teaching style is not something you're looking to change.  So on the issue of teaching I wasn't able to vote as favorably as I'd've liked to.  [Sage and sad nod.]  Sorry it went down this way, man."  Or the like.

[tuxedo_cat]

OP, you are very kind to be concerned about your interpersonal relations with this colleague and how s/he may feel if tenure is denied.  But that's pretty "small picture."  You can offer your sympathies if the person is denied tenure; if the colleague end up being tenured and knows that you spoke critically of their record, well, I suppose that may be awkward.  So make a good case and have allies in your department who can corroborate your completely legitimate concerns.

It sounds like this person is not merely a bad teacher, but actually refusing to fulfill basic requirements of the job.  The biggest flags are cancelling classes, refusing to take advising responsibilities seriously (and sooner or later a student will not graduate on time with that problem), and multiple -- multiple? -- reports to administration.  

And if this is how stubborn and unmoving and uncollegial your colleague is *without* tenure, can you imagine what s/he will be like once the protection of tenure is in place?  This colleague had choices to make professionally and has actively and repeatedly chosen to make ones that would make him/her a questionable candidate for tenure.  

[lizzy]

OP, you are very kind to be concerned about your interpersonal relations with this colleague and how s/he may feel if tenure is denied.  But that's pretty "small picture."  You can offer your sympathies if the person is denied tenure; if the colleague end up being tenured and knows that you spoke critically of their record, well, I suppose that may be awkward.  So make a good case and have allies in your department who can corroborate your completely legitimate concerns.

It sounds like this person is not merely a bad teacher, but actually refusing to fulfill basic requirements of the job.  The biggest flags are cancelling classes, refusing to take advising responsibilities seriously (and sooner or later a student will not graduate on time with that problem), and multiple -- multiple? -- reports to administration.  

And if this is how stubborn and unmoving and uncollegial your colleague is *without* tenure, can you imagine what s/he will be like once the protection of tenure is in place?  This colleague had choices to make professionally and has actively and repeatedly chosen to make ones that would make him/her a questionable candidate for tenure.  

This.

And, given your discussion here, I'm sure that you'll present your misgivings about your colleague in terms of job performance and expectations for tenure, rather than in a way that might get back to the person as a personal attack.

In any case, if I was in this position, I might practice a brief response to deliver if the person confronts me, something along the lines of "while I appreciate your [wit, analytical mind, talents at X, Y, and Z], your problems in the classroom mean that I could not in good conscience support you. Excuse me; I'm [on my way out, expecting a student, etc]."

[larryc]

If this person is such a poor teacher before tenure what will he be like after? I'd vote against him.

[msparticularity]

Our insitution is one where most people who make it to the tenure vote, do get it, so this isn't a scenario I've dealt with before.

So, given all that you've said, why wasn't this person non-renewed before now? Is this colleague in some field for which it would be enormously difficult to find a replacement, so there is pressure to retain him/her?

[prof_smartypants]

If this person is such a poor teacher before tenure what will he be like after? I'd vote against him.

This. I am also at a teaching-centered institution. We have colleagues who are marginal for tenure for crappy/nonexistant research or grants, but none for poor teaching. Your colleague should not get tenure.

It appears that your colleague doesn't belong at a teaching-focused school. Perhaps tenure denial would mean he or she would end up someplace that is a much better fit.