If I understand the pretty substandard reporting I see here and (especially confusingly) here, what they are saying is this:
While we’ve been told that she shot her brother and it was ruled an accident, we now find that (apparently) she shot the shotgun into the wall, shot her brother, shot a third time into the ceiling, then ran outside and (for unclear reasons) wound up in an armed standoff with police at a local business in Braintree. She pointed her shotgun at a bystander, was ordered to drop the gun, did not do so, and was physically disarmed by a heroic police officer from behind. AFTER killing her brother in an incident involving three shots.
It’s a perk that doesn’t cost the university anything. A university that didn’t offer tenure would have to pay more to attract the same talent.
The protection of tenure isn’t absolute. A tenured professor can still be fired for a variety of reasons – improper behavior toward students, failing to show up to teach, etc. It just protects the professor from being fired for being obnoxious or controversial.
Originally, tenure was in place so that professors could pursue politically/socially risky research without fear of losing their job. It was there to protect “academic freedom”.
This may still be needed in some controversial fields, but I don’t think there are many biologists who would be at risk of being fired for the subject or nature of their research. The quality? Sure, but that’s a different beast and not meant to be protected by tenure.
Now, it is basically as Hamster King says. A university without a tenure system would have a hard time attracting top talent. Of course, they said the same thing about open access journals and some of those are doing quite well.
Indeed… This article says her position paid $66,000 a year. That seems pretty low for someone with her background, but apparently the chance to get tenure makes up for it.
I’m wondering – if she’s going for an insanity defense, does it help or hurt the defense that her husband says she’s never been in therapy, taken medications for depression, etc. He describes her as normal, with the usual stresses for someone in her profession.
It’s not relevant. Legal insanity is being unable to comprehend that your actions were legally wrong. That is to say, if you have any understanding that shooting people is illegal, you are not criminally insane. There are variations on this rule, but that’s the gist of it.
By the way, if you are “not guilty by reason of insanity” you don’t walk free. You get involuntarily committed in a psychiatric facility “until they think you’re better” which could be forever.
If this woman’s background (killing her brother, various random assaults) is allowed as evidence at her trial, NO WAY will an Alabama jury swallow an insanity defense, and are likely to have her put down with a needle.
Michael Behe is a tenured biology professor at Lehigh University and is a major proponent of junk-science intelligent design. He’s important to the junk-science cause in large part because he managed to get tenure without anyone realizing he’s an idiot who doesn’t understand the basics of science.
So it’s not a positive example of tenure being necessary, since is work is an embarrassment and actually extremely harmful, but all his colleagues are embarrassed to be associated with him in anyway. I don’t really know the time line of when he got being the non-science, but I can’t imagine he’d have a position at any respected university without tenure.
One of tenure’s great benefits is the “leveling” effect it has on academic administrators. You can speak out against stupid or ineffectual leadership without getting worried about being shitcanned. There was a famous case out of Stanford in the early 1900s where a sociologist (Ed Ross, I think) pointed out that the railroads in California were being built on the backs of exploited Chinese immigrants. Leland Stanford, Jr., of course, was a railroad magnate and Mrs. Stanford took issue with his comments, and asked David Starr Jordan (the president) to fire him.
These kinds of abuse of power led to the establishment of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and tenure. It’s not only freedom to research controversial subjects, but also freedom to speak out against abuses of power in the university.
Many of you might think, “Well, isn’t there free speech on college campuses?” Of course there is, but junior faculty are encouraged to stay away from third rail issues like institutional leadership because you don’t know how your comments might be interpreted by those who will ultimately decide whether you get tenure. Once you have tenure, of course, feel free to blast the administration.
Amy Bishop sounded like someone that didn’t heed advice about letting your research, and nothing else, earn your reputation as a junior scholar.
(I’m actually going to a dinner with the president of the AAUP this week. No doubt this issue will be a topic of discussion!)
From a law enforcement perspective i wonder what the possible ramifications for the police chief (at the time of the shooting of her brother not current) at braintree Mass? So let’s get this straight… Ms Bishop shoots her brother (accidentally?) and she is never charged nor is the case brought to a grand jury?? HUH?? I wonder if the district attorney/states attorney/solicitor ever received the case at all? What sort of investigation was conducted… I’ve also heard that Ms Bishop’s mother got the investigation terminated… WOW… Our CEO of the county i police in couldn’t get an investigation into a possible rape allegation terminated… I think Ms Bishop’s mother and the Former Police Chief of Braintree need to be brought forth to EXPLAIN their actions… Its not out of pocket to assume that six people may not have been shot if the Braintree Chief had done his job… lookin really really sketchy…
The decision not to prosecute rests in the sound discretion of the DA. Of course a CEO can’t use influence get a case terminated. I find it unlikely that “Ms. Bishop got the case terminated.” It’s a decision only the DA can make based on the evidence they have to hand.
Unless the decision was a abuse of discretion based on what was known at that time – such as it being a case of bribery or other corruption – it isn’t reviewable. The police and the DA are allowed to be wrong.
However as the DA is an elected position, the voters may comment on their good judgment at the polls.
Seems like this stuff could be fixed by a rule like 95 percent (or some high number) of the sitting faculty have to vote (anonymously) that this person is batshit crazy, or a worthless teacher, or wouldnt know real science/research if it bit them in the ass.
I would think we could come up with something a little better that is somewhat between "the boss sucks! your fired! " and “kill someone and we will revoke your tenure, maybe”.
Your proposal is very close to the tenure system, however. Tenure can be revoked. At least where I am now, the faculty senate can vote to do so - which tends to be a remarkably simple procedure when done with cause. We had a professor who pleaded guilty to a (non-violent) felony a few years back. Within a week of the plea, his tenure had been removed and he had been fired. It’s not like it’s an insurmountable barrier to be dealing with.
Exactly. And the cases of tenure being revoked tend to be quite stark, as in the instance the President here notes. I recall another university (Pitt, maybe?) that fired a tenured prof after he was implicated in his wife’s murder. It sounds like LEOs in Braintree, where she shot and killed her brother, dropped the ball. The case of her beating a woman in the head at an IHOP in Massachusetts seems like the kind of thing that would have oversight committees in overdrive. But then again, lots of people screw up badly, get the necessary help, and get better.
The AAUP can censure a university if it feels that the administration has abused its power. There were a lot of cases after 9/11 when professors critiqued the government and universities fired them. This is the kind of situation that tenure is designed to eliminate.
Just to be clear, there is such a thing as post-tenure review. I think it’s generally not considered to be that intensive or that big of a deal, though.
