<p>I'm sure most of you have heard about James Sherley, the BE professor who was denied tenure at MIT and is mounting a hunger strike to protest what he fees is racism. If not, here's a link.</p>
<p>I have no opinion on the reasons Sherley was or was not granted tenure, but I found another document that sheds some light on the issue. To those in academe, it's an absolutely fascinating document and, to those who are not, it may give you some insights into the truly nasty politics that often infect university departments. It also sheds some light on how petty these things can become.</p>
<p>One of the things that caught my eye is that Sherley was hired into a position specifically reserved for URMs, but without its own laboratory space. Basically, that's setting whomever is hired up for failure. Any conflict with those allocating space would, essentially, make tenure almost impossible.</p>
<p>I've never heard of hiring a regular faculty member of a lab science field without providing lab space, but then again I have never heard of a job candidate for such a position accepting a job offer without an extremely clear idea of what lab space will be allotted. That includes building location, location within the building, size of space, arrangements for use of common equipment, etc. It is hard to believe Sherley had a serious research program in mind at the time he was hired if he didn't have answers to these questions before he accepted the job.</p>
<p>I agree with you. The whole thing seems strange, but it would be beyond comprehension to think that the man DIDN'T intend to do research in biological engineering while at MIT. That's what people in his field do, especially at a place like MIT. In fact, I can't imagine they would hire him without a firm understanding of what research he intended to pursue.</p>
<p>All true, Tarhunt. But it is also beyond my comprehension that he expected to be granted tenure under those conditions--or that MIT thought they would be expected to. I can't speak to the Sherley case, but it is my understanding that few of those hired as assistant profs at a place like MIT expect to be awarded tenure at the end of five or six years. It is not at all unusual for those refused tenure at the loftiest institutions to land firmly on their feet at quite reputable research universities--usually with tenure going in, perhaps even a full professorship. I'm guessing--only a guess--that Sherley has not amassed enough of a record to convert his MIT experience into a good position, so he has chosen to go down in flames. </p>
<p>My cynical self--which I usually try harder to suppress--suggests that this URM-specific position was created as a way to get MIT some short-term diversity mileage. It was supposed to be a trade-off: Sherley helps MIT, MIT gives Sherley a spring-board for a good position elsewhere. I think the deal went awry. All speculation on my part.</p>
<p>The dispute apparently involves stem cell research.
Sherley works with adult stem cells and opposes research using human embryonic stem cells because he believes it amounts to taking human life.</p>
<p>There are a lot of midwestern universities that would love to hire someone doing reputable research with adult stem cells. I'm pretty sure the NIH grant is transferable to another institution. I doubt the hunger strike scene will help Sherley land one of those positions, though.</p>
<p>I've seen a lot of strange scenarios in the university world, but this one takes the cake.</p>
<p>So this is essentially an ethical/religious dispute, perhaps with some cultural overtones, which is being addressed publicly as a dispute about race? Ugh! What a terrible idea! This seems like the academic equivalent of self-immolation: Sherley would have been funded and well employed forever, if not at MIT, but he is turning himself into a crazy.</p>
<p>He came to speak to one of my humanities classes once -- the class was on biomedical ethics, so clearly his research topics were relevant to the class discussion. </p>
<p>I was extremely unimpressed by him, and it doesn't surprise me that he was denied tenure. You know how professors tend to answer questions about their research very easily, probably because they've done it so many times that they could answer any question in their sleep? He couldn't do that, even with a group of sophomore and junior undergrads.</p>
<p>I think racism exists, both in academia in general and probably at MIT. I see this as a case of departmental politics and a poor publication record, but racism? I don't see it.</p>
<p>Interesting molliebat. Thanks. I agree with you, midmo, that this is simply bizarre. It sounds like you work in higher ed, and as you know and have implied, this sort of behavior is practically guaranteed to harm, if not outright sink, his career. </p>
<p>Now, according to the letters he has sent to faculty, he really seems to think that people have made racist comments and denied him things because of his race. For instance, he accuses the former provost (I believe) of being quoted as saying that he would not get lab space because he's black. That's a pretty strong statement.</p>
<p>I have to guess that he really believes this. I have no opinion on the veracity of the accusations, but I think he thinks they're real.</p>
<p>Regardless, if he meant to give MIT a black eye, I think he might be succeeding.</p>
<p>It's an interesting case, isn't it? He seems to have been hired on account of his race--a position he gladly accepted. Now, he's not getting tenure, and he's crying racism. Anybody detects inconsistency here?</p>
<p>Not exactly an inconsistency. I'm not sure he was hired "because of his race." He filled a position reserved for someone of his race. To say he was hired only because of his race would be making the assumption that he was not qualified and/or that there were no qualified applicants of his race.</p>
<p>I can't make that assumption.</p>
<p>Being hired into a position reserved for his race would not, in any way, exclude decision about his tenure being made for racist reasons.</p>
<p>So, no, I don't see an inconsistency. I just see weirdness.</p>
<p>Actually, I was wondering whether the position itself was legally acceptable. It did not bother him. His race was not a tip, it was not a hook; it was an enormous advantage over others who were not URMs.
Regarding Mollie's comments, he may not have published a lot, but he certainly has been very visible in the field of stem cell research. I am certain that a lot can be done using only adult cells. And I agree that he could take his grant elsewhere and thrive there.
Finally, he appears to have had a lab, whose members are featured on his MIT homepage. So I wonder why he is now claiming he was not given one.
As Tarhunt says, weird.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Actually, I was wondering whether the position itself was legally acceptable. It did not bother him. His race was not a tip, it was not a hook; it was an enormous advantage over others who were not URMs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There's a fair chance that the position was endowed. In that case, it's not a matter of taking a position away from someone. It's a new position.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Finally, he appears to have had a lab, whose members are featured on his MIT homepage. So I wonder why he is now claiming he was not given one.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>He had lab space which was donated to him by others with dedicated lab space. Believe me when I tell ya, it ain't the same thing.</p>
<p>I agree that when he was hired, he was not taking a position away from someone else. But I have to wonder at the legality of having a position specifically earmarked for URMs. And it did not bother Sherley that there was such a position that enabled him to be hired.</p>
<p>As for the lab space, I have no opinion as my knowledge of the case is very limited. I have to assume, though, that he was teaching and doing research at MIT for a while. Did he never complain about lack of lab space, especially considering that his team was sizable? He was not an inexperienced, right out of grad school person. He is an Associate Professor, with major grants to his name. It all seems so weird.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As for the lab space, I have no opinion as my knowledge of the case is very limited. I have to assume, though, that he was teaching and doing research at MIT for a while. Did he never complain about lack of lab space, especially considering that his team was sizable?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>According to him, he complained incessantly.</p>
I think that's another interesting part of the whole thing -- adult stem cells seemed to be very out of vogue a few years ago, but recently (perhaps after the Korean case?) I feel like they have been given more attention and praise. I think Sherley suffered professionally for taking up the adult stem cell cause when it was unpopular, but I don't think he'll be redeemed in the eyes of the scientific community now that adult stem cells are cool.</p>
<p>Part of that is probably due to Sherley's personality -- I've heard through the grapevine that he has been (is?) very unpleasant to researchers who work on embryonic stem cells, and that he's been known to ask them at conferences how many people they've killed recently. (I'll add that I have issues with his research program being based primarily or totally on his ideological beliefs, although I'm having trouble articulating exactly why that bothers me.)</p>
<p>A certain amount of maverick spirit is respected in the scientific community, but there are interesting lines that seem to separate "forceful personalities" from "shunned loudmouths." I think scientists would like to have a community that wasn't affected by petty personal issues, but I don't think we're capable of doing it.</p>
<p>You may be right, but it's not always as easy as one might think. I know some men who simply cannot understand why women who are being subjected to sexual harrassment don't simply pick up and leave their jobs in protest. The answer, of course, is that there are career considerations, benefit considerations, the ability to find a job that pays as well, the issue of finding a new job where one is subject to the same sorts of harrassment as before, etc.</p>
<p>Jobs in higher ed. are limited. Jobs in higher ed. with the prestige of MIT are scarce as hen's teeth.</p>