Recent Developments and Upcoming Posts
First, according to the Iowa Courts website, on November 10 the University of Dubuque filed an answer to Jeffries' petition. We hope to have this document posted by the end of the week on our document site.
Second, we have received a number of requests to post a synopsis of (or response to) President Bullock's November 16 meeting with the faculty and staff. Unfortunately, as of yet we have not received enough information to make a confident and informed response to the president's statement. One thing that we have heard consistently from many sources is that Dr. Bullock is of the opinion that we are attempting to either personally attack him or create strife among the faculty by posting salary information. Whether this is Bullock's true opinion or not, it is a valid concern. In light of this, by the end of the week we hope to post a concise, yet thorough explanation of our interest in administration and faculty salaries on our methodology site.
Finally, we wanted to note that we will not be responding to any one particular point raised by Drs. Ebertz and Crandall in the comments section, though we appreciate the fact that they (and Dr. Lisk, et al) shared their thoughts with us. We agree that we should all take seriously what we write on this site; as a result, we want to urge those who will be posting comments to be thoughtful and considerate when choosing their words. As a matter of policy, we will not delete any existing comments, since they are not, strictly speaking, off-topic.
Second, we have received a number of requests to post a synopsis of (or response to) President Bullock's November 16 meeting with the faculty and staff. Unfortunately, as of yet we have not received enough information to make a confident and informed response to the president's statement. One thing that we have heard consistently from many sources is that Dr. Bullock is of the opinion that we are attempting to either personally attack him or create strife among the faculty by posting salary information. Whether this is Bullock's true opinion or not, it is a valid concern. In light of this, by the end of the week we hope to post a concise, yet thorough explanation of our interest in administration and faculty salaries on our methodology site.
Finally, we wanted to note that we will not be responding to any one particular point raised by Drs. Ebertz and Crandall in the comments section, though we appreciate the fact that they (and Dr. Lisk, et al) shared their thoughts with us. We agree that we should all take seriously what we write on this site; as a result, we want to urge those who will be posting comments to be thoughtful and considerate when choosing their words. As a matter of policy, we will not delete any existing comments, since they are not, strictly speaking, off-topic.
posted by WhatWendtWrong at 9:22 AM
1 Comments:
It is amazing! Having read the TH's summary of UD's responce to the Jeffries suit, it is amazing. The university states that Jeffries was not given tenure. It might be the case that Jeffies had not signed a tenure contract but John Stewart publically stated that Jeffies had been given tenure. President Bullock acknowledged Jeffies tenure to various people on campus including the faculty. Now they state Jeffries did not have tenure. The are denying what they stated in front of people. Amazing!
Post a Comment
<< Home