Re: Division between applied & academic (fwd)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Prof. Mike Lieber: "the tribe"
• Previous message: Mark PRENTICE: "REPLY TO PROFESSOR JORGENSEN"

This is a copy of a note from Erickson to me, with my comments
appended. I thought it was worth sharing with the group, and I would
like to hear if people have any ideas about how to push this
process of change forward.

Rick Wilk

On Tue, 2 Nov 1993 ERICKSON@UCONNVM.BITNET wrote:

> Date: Tue, 02 Nov 93 21:46:05 EST
> From: ERICKSON@UCONNVM.BITNET
> To: wilkr <wilkr@indiana.edu>
> Subject: Re: Division between applied & academic
>
> Sorry - message went to you instead of my colleague who forwarded your notes
on
> applied/academic split - which I found interesting - I teach applied anth at
UC
> ONN - where the department was, itself, split in two over that very issue -
> 20 years ago - now rejoined, but Ithe whole thing played itself over again
this
> year. There seems to be no compromise from academe - I've only been here 2
ye
> ars. So, disregard the message for Merril that you got from me. Any more
insi
> ghts into resolving the great divide?

Thanks for the note(s). I think the real battleground has to be the
tenure and promotion process. It is also the process that prevents
real progress in

1. allowing couples to work in the same place. Tenure cannot deal
with two people sharing a single position, for instance.

2. interdisciplinary research & publishing - tenure committees
don't reward articles and papers published "outside."

The question seems to be, how to pressure these kinds of changes.
Ideas?

Rick Wilk

• Next message: Prof. Mike Lieber: "the tribe"
• Previous message: Mark PRENTICE: "REPLY TO PROFESSOR JORGENSEN"