Inside Iowa State
June 5, 1998
To the Editor:
Some critics of tenure probably call what they support "post- tenure review" (PTR) partly to insinuate the slander that tenured faculty aren't reviewed. (They are reviewed.) Although Inside Iowa State (IIS) had heard this phrase denounced as misleading, it made "Faculty rejects post-tenure review" its 15 May headline. Besides falsely implying that the faculty refuse to be reviewed after tenure, this headline is false because PTR wasn't on the ballot. It had been replaced by a form of peer review designed (inadequately, some thought) to respect tenure. The ensuing article also stinks. It complains about the low voter turn- out, without noting that since PTR wasn't being voted on, its tenure-compromising supporters and tenure-protecting opponents had no special incentive to vote. It rehearses repeatedly the scare tactics which figured in last year's failed attempt to get PTR on the ballot, and explicitly insults the 431 who voted against the peer review, never allowing that there were reasons to vote "No."
Usually IIS has a boost-ISU slant. But this 'news' article misrepresents, criticizes, insults and threatens faculty, gratuitously damaging ISU. IIS witnessed the events, but has reported inaccurately and tendentiously.
-- Bryan Cain
Iowa State homepage
Inside Iowa State, firstname.lastname@example.org, University Relations
Copyright © 1998, Iowa State University, all rights reserved