Why we should not hire him

Dear J,

M talked to B, but could not change his mind.

Here is my take.

1. He does not have a PHD in MIS, so he is unqualified.

2. The school has been plugging him everywhere for the last two years. He was all over the place teaching Finance, MIS, Accounting. Can you imagine anyone commending such intellect capacity to do a decent job in each area? It is a joke.

3. I also checked with several students from my simulation class. These are serious students in our MBA program. All of them have problems with his teaching. They complain that he does not know Finance, only read PPT, and does not teach much. Some were his TAs. He told them he knows how to play the game. He gives easy midterm to secure good evaluations then makes the final harder to fix the grades.

To be sure, you may also want to check with your students.

4. We start late in March. The pool has only 8 candidates. Even among them, there are at least two better ones. Why do we have to consider an insider who has so many problems? Of course, in our school, merit is not the only thing that matters. The school is notorious for letting politics dominate merit. I still cannot believe that the school could let a faculty who cannot speak to ruin students for years.

If we keep operating this way, the school will rotten to the core. And I will not waste my time on these matters.

If we believe in merit, we should not hire him.

Best,

L.

5558296_656218860_w1280p

Advertisements

\section{Day 265, 6.08W}

RUN: 2.06MILES, 9.5MPH, 13MIN;
SWIM: 0;
LEARN: ALIPRANTIS, 2.8 CAMPACTNESS, 1HR;

LUNCH WITH ME AND BM, AT MISSION INN, 11:30AM-1PM;

PROCTOR TWO EXAMS: 9AM-11AM, 6:30PM-8:30PM;
ANALYTICS HIRING MEETING: 3PM-4:30PM;

Civil Rights Act of 1964
California Proposition 209

2016-06-08 19.04.41

ON HIRING

The army of diversity bureaucrats in US higher education is a strong signal of its decline. I am all for social justice and compassion. But that should be kept within proper limit. When it blows out of proportion, it discourages hardworking, undermines fairness, worse, it erodes the very foundation of American dream—meritocracy.

Here is a recent example that gets my nerve:

—-

ME: If we really value excellence, we would not dilute it. We single it out.

When a candidate cannot stand on merit alone, and has to be justified on the diversity ground, well, that is quite telling of his/her true caliber.

—-

R: “For the stage of her career (early associate) she has a solid record of publication.  Her seminar presentation was very good although I had several questions about the assumptions she made in the model.  Still, the analysis seems to have been done carefully and competently.   Her teaching evaluations are very good and she will contribute to our gender diversity at the school.  She does not quite fit the bill of being an established scholar(although in the ad we say we will consider tenured associate.   Still, I see her contribution to our school as the highest among the 3 candidates and I rank her first.”

2016-05-02 11.29.57

\section{Day 208, 4.12T}

[ROUTINE]
RUN: 2.4MILES, 9.5MPH, 15MIN;
SWIM: 1KM;
LEARN: BORGERS, 2HRS;

MEET TED 10-11AM;
EMAIL FOR THE EC ELECTION;
TQ2: WRITING;

[MEETING WITH TED]
ALTHOUGHT TED WON THE CASE, IT TOOK A HEAVY TOLL ON HIM: HE SPENT TWO YEARS, 80K, TO GET THE OUTCOME. THE BOTTOMLINE IS, THE ADMINISTRATORS ARE ON THE SAME BOAT. UNLESS YOU ARE WILLING TO PAY THE PRICE, IT MAY NOT BE WORTH YOUR TIME.

2016-04-13 07.04.34

WRITING 181: GAMES WE PLAY, 10

THE WORKLOAD GAME:

THE MATERIAL GAIN IS MARGINAL, TWO COURSE LOAD CREDITS. BUT THIS IS NOT ABOUT MATERIAL GAIN. 

IT IS A FIGHT FOR YOUR YOUTH, A FIGHT TO SET UP THE BOUNDARIES, A FIGHT TO TEST YOUR RESOLVE,  A FIGHT TO SHOW YOUR DARING, A FIGHT TO FORGE YOUR CHARACTER.

IT IS A FIGHT THAT DEFINES WHO YOU ARE.

————————–

I emailed him this morning with only one sentence: but it is all that takes to get him nervous:
“Given you insist a different interpretation of my contract, I may have to ask others for resolution.”

—————-

Hi L,

I appreciated your time talking to me over the phone yesterday. While you feel we cannot agree, I hope that you at least see some of my points of views.  I would like to reiterate my willingness to meet with you to further our dialogue and to look for an acceptable solution.

Since you told me that you need to know your teaching load for planning for next year’ teaching schedule, as I told you during our conversation, for now please plan for having a a four course load for next year, while we continue to resolve the disagreement about your contract.

At this point I would like to request for a face-to-face meeting with you, at your earliest convenience.

Thank you for your patience.

Y.

———————————

Dear Y,

The issue is simple: It concerns only one sentence on teaching in my contract. According to the contract, I believe school owes me two courses credits; yet you insist otherwise, refusing to correct the mistake.

For that simple issue, you have had five years to resolve it. We discussed it five years ago, and you refused to honor it. Last month, in good faith, I asked you again, and you delayed for a month. Yesterday, with goodwill, I discussed with you again, for more than an hour. And again, you refused to honor it.

So the issue now is a simple question: will school honor my contract, and correct the mistake of two courses credits?

As you asked yesterday, please take your time, as long as you please. Meanwhile, I will do what I believe.

Take care,

L.

————-

IMG_2825 (2)