at Northwestern:
More relevant parts of the article
Assuming the accusations are true, Northwestern did the right thing. If a student recieved multiple complaints for similar behavior, no one would bat an eye if a private university banned them from campus.
There is a response those accusations on her website:
Good for Northwestern!
I only wish that Karl Eikenberry was more of the man and not the rabbit!
She “growled” at her colleague? That made me laugh!
Right. In the real world (outside of academia), no one would bat an eye if this type of person were promptly fired.
This lady needs to get a grip. If NU is indeed the military-industrial complex and it bothers her so, she needn’t take a paycheck from them. I hadn’t heard about the Eikenberry matter but it does sound embarrassing. Thank you for sharing this!
Interesting to hear a political science professor tried to curtail the voting rights of a peer because of their race.
@STEM2017
Agreed. I was just reading earlier about reasons managers fire employees; any sane manager would have fired Stevens on the spot.
Why were the other faculty members so against Eikenberry’s “military ties and lack of a Ph.D.”?
The lack of a PhD objection would be no different than say…if the US military or those abroad which are run along similar lines in peacetime or non major emergency situation like WWII accepted someone right off the street to serve as a commissioned officer without having attended an officer candidate training course* of some kind and not having a bachelor’s degree or worse…even a HS diploma/GED by the time they are commissioned.
Or law firms hiring someone as an attorney without having completed law school**.
In most areas of academia, the PhD degree is the MINIMUM credential necessary to be hired onto the tenure-track…especially if one hopes to advance to the level necessary not only to be tenured…but to become the academic head of institutes in which other senior tenured Profs and those below report to him/her. And the military has several generals who have earned a PhD in their own right…Generals .Wesley Clark and David Petreus are two I can think off right off the top of my head.
Edit:
Just read Kark Eikenberry’s academic history. Seems like he earned 2 MA degrees from Harvard(East Asian Studies) and Stanford (political science).
This history may cause many in academia to wonder whether he earned them as “consolation prizes” for being invited to leave his PhD program by advisors, not being able to complete course requirements, pass comps, etc. Especially since most elite/respectable political science departments do not offer a Masters as a standalone degree. Instead…it’s offered only to students who couldn’t/wouldn’t continue on to complete the PhD program they started.
- Even officer candidates entering as doctors, lawyers, nurses, and other professionals usually must go through an officer candidate training course specifically geared towards such professionals before becoming commissioned.
** Non-starter not only because the LL.B/JD is them minimum degree required for attorney level jobs, it would be against the law as the JD is the minimum degree necessary to take the bar exam to be a qualified practicing attorney in this country or many nations abroad.
It’s not uncommon for a U to hire to run a program based on experience in the subject matter, rather than an academic degree. But he will not take the role.
@cobrat -
The position that Eikenberry was appointed to was not a tenure track teaching/research position, but he can discuss his background better than I can:
While earning 2 Masters degrees…especially elite Us may sound impressive to the average person on the street who aren’t familiar with norms within academia, to those familiar with credentialing practices within academia…earning two Masters…especially in a field in which most elite/respectable departments don’t usually have a stand-alone Masters program…the 2 MA degrees would be regarded as a red flag.
That he got at least one of them because he wasn’t able to/willing to complete course requirements, comp exams, etc needed to get to the dissertation stage of a PhD program he likely started and intended to complete.
Keep in mind the difference in completing requirements for a Masters vs a PhD are great. This is underscored by one Prof I had who said “Anyone can complete a Masters degree if they put in the time/effort. Not everyone can complete a PhD even if they did likewise”.
Another thing is getting a fellowship position within a university/college may likely be just as much due to internal politics/likeability…especially if one’s an alum of the institution and/or in a position with a lot of connections as Eikenberry as as a career military officer. One fellow at my undergrad institution and two others I knew of at an Elite U were offered fellowships for similar reasons.
One from each institution didn’t even have Masters degrees and one actually asked me for advice on applying to PhD programs despite the fact I was still in the middle of undergrad at the time. Interestingly enough, the individual concerned was a military officer in a foreign military whose prior education was at his nation’s military academy(Bachelors).
Frankly, it’s just not a “non-norm” in academia. Now let’s get back to Stevens.
One of the reasons why Stevens and similar minded Profs opposed Eikenberry’s appointment is that they viewed it as another case of “corporate/non-academic minded” university admins attempting to erode the authority and traditional prerogative of the more academically oriented faculty senate/groups.
Eikenberry’s lack of a PhD and the fact his 2 MAs were very likely viewed as red flags of failing to complete one he initially attempted being one sticking point I can easily see being a serious issue even among faculty members who aren’t opposed to his appointment for political reasons.
I can easily see why professionals in other fields would object if someone with lesser qualifications was not only appointed to be one of their colleagues, but worse…as a potential superior. Talk about a potential Dilbert principle in action.
For instance, I doubt professional military officers who graduated from military academy/ROTC/OCS would be happy to take orders from someone hired off the street without any prior officer training or worse…someone who flunked out of officer training suddenly appointed to command them.
Especially in a combat-arms unit where the lack of such training could easily get subordinates killed.
Or how about someone who flunked out of law school who is somehow hired to work as an attorney and thus…not only arousing the ire of colleagues who are law school grads…but also risk the property, freedom, and in some cases…the very lives of their clients?
Not speaking to objections to his candidacy based on his connections to the military because that’s a matter of political perspective.
Eikenberry is a retired army general. That is a much more significant achievement than getting a run of the mill Phd in political science. Additionally, about 20 percent of college presidents are non-academics. The whole non-Phd thing was a smoke screen to keep someone elements of the faculty disagreed with out.
Apples and bananas.
For instance, I doubt professional engineers at a hardcore engineering/tech firm would agree that being a retired admiral/general or senior executive at coca cola or another non-tech fortune 500 firm would qualify them to work as a senior executive or worse…CEO of their hardcore engineering/tech firm absent other more RELEVANT qualifications.
And incidentally, the one instance where something like that happened off the top of my head…with Apple’s John Scully turned out to have been a great disaster in retrospect as he was one of the CEOs/senior execs who paved the way for Apple’s near bankruptcy through poor decisions on various fronts…including product quality control due to excessive corner cutting.
Most academics I know would cite this or senior college admins who weren’t academics as one reason why universities/college governance have rushed off in the wrong direction in the last 30 or so years.
@cobrat
That makes sense, thanks for clearing it up!
VERY few general officers get a PhD. It takes them out of the command structure for too long It’s much more common to have 2-3 Master’s degrees as a general. And there are agreements between the gov’t and academia for Master’s slots. That is much more probable than your supposition that he didn’t get thru a PhD (his one year assignment to Stanford rather than a two year make that almost certain).
There are similar agreements for PhD slots. And once one is past the coursework/comp stage of one’s PhD program and proceeds to the dissertation stage, they can complete it while they are continuing their military careers whether it’s a 3 year stint teaching at a military academy or other mid/high level officer assignment.
A few grad classmates at an elite U who are career military officers were beneficiaries and once they complete them…will follow in the footsteps of Generals like Wesley Clark and David Petreus.