CSU Faculty Voice: More on the Criminal Justice Search 2012--now compare the narratives

Monday, January 21, 2013

More on the Criminal Justice Search 2012--now compare the narratives

At the complaint of faculty in the Criminal Justice Department over the hiring of three new members in August the Senate conducted an investigation which condemned Administrators, notably the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences and the Chair of Criminal Justice, for failure to follow established proper academic procedures and especially the failure to involve the Criminal Justice faculty in any meaningful way.

Last week a memo was circulated to faculty which offers the Administration's perspective on the hiring process in Criminal Justice. Dr Renee Mitchell of the Human Resources Department of Chicago State University conducted the investigation and that report as well as the report of the Senate are available at the link below. If I read it correctly H.R. absolves the administration from any wrongdoing paradoxically she recommends that the CSU hiring policy be revised.

See what you think about these competing narratives--the Senate report and the H.R. report. Both are linked below.

I wonder what the Illinois Inspector General's Office would say about the situation presented here?

Criminal Justice Search --Senate Rept vs H.R. Investigation Rept.

1 comment:

R. BennyJan 21, 2013, 11:43:00 AM
The H.R. report has a certain lyrical grace. The artful glides around inconvenient facts and leaps over time and space make the reader quite giddy in places. The reference to Casablanca ”I’m shocked! Shocked! …” from the lips of the Provost, is just the right touch to a piece of seasoned fiction.
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

Thanks to Haki Madhabuti

"1. He/she must be a scholar of national note, with significant peer review publications and books in his or her field. There must be no doubt as to his/her standing in the community of scholars. This would also include a history of the candidate’s participation in the appropriate professional organizations.

2. He/she must have served with distinction as the administrative head of a major unit within an institution of higher learning or at the important position of Provost and/or Dean. Of course, prior service at the presidential level is preferred.

3. He/she must have a documented history of raising significant monies from the private and public sectors. At most major and research one universities it is not unusual to expect the president to come with a plan to raise in excess of half a billion dollars or more in the first few years.

4. The prospective president must have a consensus buy-in from the faculty, students, administration and staff, therefore, arriving with a unity mandate to lead by joining a University community that has bought into his or her vision for the future."

From an open letter to the CSU Community, 2009.