July 15, 2006

More Ugly Gender Politics in Academia

From Steve Gilliard, a story about intra-departmental machinations by a senior scholar to derail the hiring of an up-and-comer.

Eleven MIT professors have accused a powerful colleague, a Nobel laureate, of interfering with the university's efforts to hire a rising female star in neuroscience.

The professors, in a letter to MIT's president, Susan Hockfield , accuse professor Susumu Tonegawa of intimidating Alla Karpova , "a brilliant young scientist," saying that he would not mentor, interact, or collaborate with her if she took the job and that members of his research group would not work with her.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology, they wrote in their June 30 letter, "allowed a senior faculty member with great power and financial resources to behave in an uncivil, uncollegial, and possibly unethical manner toward a talented young scientist who deserves to be welcomed at MIT." They also wrote that because of Tonegawa's opposition, several other senior faculty members cautioned Karpova not to come to MIT.

She has since declined the job offer.

Of course she did. Not only because, if true, a senior scholar would have been gunning for her head, but because of the behavior of the rest of the department as well. Academia is bad enough, but departments with that level of interpersonal acrimony are like a flashing red light.

I can remember talking about this phenomenon, although not always in regard to gender, years ago. The "star system," and even regular departments can get hooked on a cult of mediocrity, never wanting to hire a serious challenger to the status and power of the old bulls. Cuthroat and defeating at the same time.

Posted by binky at July 15, 2006 09:47 AM | TrackBack | Posted to The Academy


Comments

Don't believe everything you read. Did it not cross your mind that the objection of this faculty and others is likely do to lower standard that was set here for the hire. This is just another article misrepresented by the author without spending the time to really investigate the facts. In fact the one person who actually may know the story which - appears to be the dean - he disagrees with the content of the article. What do they call this...... hearsay - when a third party (Stanford) makes comments regarding the other two parties and what went on. Sad that the Boston globe would go so low to deliver a blow. Sounds like a
liable suit to me based on a poorly investigated article. If someone conveyed this story to me in a conversation with so little real information, the letter, those who signed it, who they are, their positions, I would be really suspicious of what the real motivation here might be?
Can one no longer voice an objectionable opinion without being lambasted ??? Sad.

Wien

Posted by: Wien at July 17, 2006 09:08 AM | PERMALINK

You might try reading things first, to give yourself a chance to believe something other than what you're projecting. Apparently you did read my comments at all. You know, those last couple of sentences which talked about the motivations of the people doing the departmental infighting?

Posted by: binky at July 17, 2006 09:13 AM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?