There are lots of interesting threads coming from this whole discussion. = In search committees I have served on, no one would dare ask a = candidate about family status and any committee discussion of it is an = absolute non-starter. The problem is that we can't really consider = anything except quantity and quality of publications, amounts of = funding, and maybe quality of teaching. Referees might mention other = things in their letters, but it would be hard to see how personal = parameters (such as the number of children someone has) might be = considered in making decisions about hiring and perhaps even about = granting tenure. Having children (I have 2) has widespread societal = benefits (and costs) but it is only one of a large possible set of = personal options. One might also choose to take time away from academia = to help victims of AIDS in Africa, or care for a relative with cancer, = etc.. How are these activities valued, what effect do these activities = have on academic productivity? How do we account for them in hiring and = tenure decisions? =20 There is room for improvement, remember to a large extent it is us as = scientists who are setting the bar so high. Think about your own vision = of what the best ecologist/scientist is. Does it always have to be = someone who publishes 5-10 papers/year in top journals, has flocks of = postdocs and graduates students, and has megadollars in NSF funding? = That person (especially if they are just starting out) likely spends 16 = hours/day, 7 days a week, in the lab. Maybe the first problem is that = we need to revise our vision of success and bring a different one to the = search committee table. I hope that many of the students and postdocs = now asking for a nicer world will remember their feeling about this when = they themselves are sitting on faculty search and tenure committees. =
=20 Daniel A. Soluk, Assoc. Prof. Dept. of Biology University of South Dakota 414 East Clark St. Vermillion, SD 57069 ph. 605 677-6172 =20 ________________________________ From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news on behalf of = Garcia, Tiffany Sent: Thu 11/2/2006 2:19 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Ecological Equality? I recently started an academic position and have been struggling with these issues for several months. I am currently childless, but my biological clock is ticking. I would love to have children and waiting the 5-6 years it takes to achieve tenure (fingers crossed) will put me at the far end of the reproductively capable bell curve. I keep asking myself 'What happens if my productivity slows down after having a baby?' One option is to ask your department to "slow down your tenure clock", or go up for tenure a year or two later. My question to the list is whether this is discrimination? Is the delay of tenure a professional punishment (lots of good things happen when you get tenure) and should women be punished for having a baby? Or is this a way of compensating for that lag in productivity? I'm interested in hearing if people feel this strategy is a good thing or a bad thing. Tiffany Garcia
