[These comments are in regard to "Novartis: Gone But Not Forgotten" - California Monthly 1feb04 | More... ]
The article "Novartis: Gone but not forgotten" (February) raises important questions: What does it mean to be a "public" university? Is there any such thing as "independent" research when the results of that research have significant monetary consequences? How can the public know who is framing the questions researchers are asking? Graduate student David Quist's statement about "fee inquiry" replacing "free inquiry" is worthy of full consideration. — Kathie Zatkin '72 Berkeley
T he vice provost for academic affairs claims that, in Chapela's tenure case, "the system worked." Did it? Despite repeated requests, the Budget Committee has refused to provide information about how often it has gone against the recommendations of the departmental committee, the entire department, the department chair, the dean of the college, dozens of external letters, and its own ad hoc committee–all of which supported Chapela. Nor is there any data on how often a member of the Budget Commit-tee has a personal conflict of interest. Unless these are common practices, Chancellor Berdahl owes the University community a public explanation of why he contradicted the advice of nearly everyone involved in the tenure review process. — Jesse Reynolds, M.S. '00 Berkeley
There are other issues behind the tenure case of Professor Ignacio Chapela that have not yet surfaced in the media. Specifically, in the last five years all professors of color have been denied tenure in the Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management (ESPM), while all white professors have been offered tenure. Four minority professors have either been denied tenure or, because of extremely portentous signs, "chosen" to leave before being denied. Tracy Benning fits the last category. The three other professors—Ye Qi, Mahsoud Ghodhrati, and Ignacio Chapela—were all denied tenure. — Earth Duarte-Trattner Ph.D. candidate, ESPM
As a life member of the Alumni Association, I have often wished the Monthly would take on some of the real stories; and, increasingly, it has. I was very pleased to see your coverage of the tenure case of Ignacio Chapela. I believe it to be a very insidious and dangerous trend for University research to be dominated by the corporate world; certainly there appears to be undue influence in this case. Any light shed on this trend is valuable. — George Gibbs Jr. '68 Redwood Valley
As a non-academic staff member in the College of Natural Resources from 1989 to 1999, I would like to add the following key information. Your story mentions that Chapela was chair of the executive committee of the college's faculty, a prominent and powerful position in the college's decision-making process. It is important to state explicitly that his appointment was unusual since he was only an assistant, untenured professor. Faculty leadership positions are not usually offered to, nor demanded of, junior professors, for a number of obvious reasons. It is also important to state that he was appointed to this position by then-Dean Gordon Rausser, who very much wanted the Novartis deal and knew it had to go through the executive committee.
Connecting the dots: A powerful dean, who has an endowed chair, "asks" a junior faculty member (who can't say no) to head the college's most powerful faculty committee, through which the dean's deal must go. Did the dean assume that this junior professor, new and lacking the protection of tenure, would just go along? Did the dean estimate that this junior professor in particular would support the deal because Chapela had once worked for Novartis? After this junior professor found substantive scientific, procedural, and ethical reasons not to go along with the powerful dean, guess who did not get tenure? — Jessea Greenman Oakland
* Photo of Ignacio Chapela by Inez Chapela
|
To
send us your comments, questions, and suggestions click
here |