Iowa State's Spokesman Tells Another Whopper about University's Tenure Standards - Evolution News & Views

Evolution News and Views (ENV) provides original reporting and analysis about the debate over intelligent design and evolution, including breaking news about scientific research.

Evolution News and Views
News NEWS
 

Iowa State's Spokesman Tells Another Whopper about University's Tenure Standards


Action Item: Help Guillermo Gonzalez in his fight for academic freedom. Contact ISU President Gregory L. Geoffroy at (515) 294-2042 or email him at president@iastate.edu and let him know that you support academic freedom for Dr. Gonzalez to follow the evidence wherever it leads.
Pity John McCarroll, the poor PR person for Iowa State University: He has so little to work with in the Guillermo Gonzalez case, he apparently has to invent his facts in order to defend his university. Last week, for example, McCarroll put out a document claiming that tenure standards at ISU were "so high, that many good researchers have failed to satisfy the demands of earning tenure." Then it turned out that ISU approved 91% of those who applied for tenure this year. Oops. McCaroll also insinuated that research grants are a major factor in tenure decisions at ISU. Then it came out that grants aren't even listed as a criterion in the tenure standards for ISU's Department of Physics and Astronomy.

This week McCarroll is being quoted in the Chronicle of Higher Education asserting that "Tenure review only deals with his [Gonzalez's] work since he came to Iowa State."

Wrong again. There is nothing in ISU's applicable tenure standards that says that articles published prior to coming to ISU somehow don't count. (By the way, even if McCaroll's claim happened to be true, it shouldn't matter, because Gonzalez has produced 21 peer-reviewed journal articles since coming to ISU, which is still significantly more than the 15 peer-reviewed articles that are supposed to demonstrate research excellence in his department). ISU is obviously getting desperate in its effort to discredit Gonzalez. If I were in their shoes, I guess I would be too. How do you defend the denial of tenure to someone who has produced 68 peer-reviewed journal articles, exceeding by 350% his own department's standard for excellence in research needed for tenure?

Yesterday we sent an e-mail to Mr. McCarroll asking him to justify his latest bogus claim by citing for us the applicable language in the Faculty Handbook or departmental tenure standards. He has not responded.