s**********i
发帖数: 468 | 1 I am wondering about lawsuit for those kind of issue.
why not go through a law suit if all your "hardware" are better than
previous tenured people in you department? I heard many did it this way. |
h********0
发帖数: 12056 | 2 this is not mathematics, nothing is rigid. "hardware"
may become software under certain conditions.
【在 s**********i 的大作中提到】
: I am wondering about lawsuit for those kind of issue.
: why not go through a law suit if all your "hardware" are better than
: previous tenured people in you department? I heard many did it this way.
|
O*********r
发帖数: 1835 | 3 美国的天牛制度就是有意写的很 vague，很多地方无法量化，就是为了方便 get ride
of 想赶走但在文章和funding上又不好赶的人。
我看过我们的 tenure and promotion 手册，就几行，要你demonstrate scholarly
excellence 和 teaching contribution。所谓的“硬件”是基于前些年天牛的人的统
计，但在 bylaw 上来讲，不是”硬件“到位的都有天牛，因为条规就是有意的vague，
你找不到”硬件“。
Bottom line: while you strive to beef up your funding and teaching, also try
to become an amiable member of the group. |
h*****w
发帖数: 8561 | 4 那些TOP的学校赶人的最大理由就是你这些年也开不了一个新方向新领域.
怎么定义"新方向新领域"?
所以没有完全100%的T的CASE,真想赶人,总有理由的. |
s**********i
发帖数: 468 | 5 我是听到好几个例子，都是打赢了留下来了。不过都是百名左右的学校。其中之一还在
我们系工作。我们这儿有个老家伙很坏，沾不到别人便宜就阴人。拉帮结伙的欺负AP。 |
