• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Requiring peer-reviewed articles discriminates against indigenous academics: law professor

Metaphor

Banned
Banned
Joined
Mar 31, 2007
Messages
12,378
National Post

By arguing that publishing peer-reviewed research conflicted with her role as an indigenous scholar, a former law professor has won her bid for a human rights tribunal hearing after losing her job at the University of British Columbia.

Lorna June McCue was denied tenure and ultimately dismissed after 11 years at the university in part because of her failure to submit a single piece of peer-reviewed research during that time.

McCue has alleged that peer-reviewed research is contrary to indigenous oral traditions and that UBC’s research standard effectively discriminated against her “race, colour, ancestry, place of origin … and sex.”

The university’s demand for her to publish in academic journals “would require her to be a round peg in a square hole,” she told a preliminary tribunal hearing whose decision was published this month.

Lawyers for UBC, meanwhile, have argued that there is “nothing about indigeneity that prevents an indigenous person from having the capability of meeting the university’s requirements.”

A hereditary chief with the Ned’u’ten people of B.C.’s Lake Babine First Nation, McCue was formerly the director of First Nations Legal Studies at UBC.

The root of the complaint is UBC’s informal requirement for professors to put their name to at least five academic papers before being considered for tenure.

“Although contributions to scholarship necessarily involve a combination of quality and quantity, generally we would expect to see five to six peer-reviewed, significant publications by the time you seek tenure,” read a note to McCue from the dean of the Faculty of Law early in her career.

As UBC lawyers told a tribunal hearing, McCue “had not even commenced to meet” the standard when the university chose not to renew her contract in 2012.

McCue’s position is that she adheres to an indigenous oral tradition that requires “significant compromise” for her to meet UBC’s tenure and promotion standards.

Instead, she said, UBC should change their standards to account for “non-traditional scholarship” such as conference appearances, submissions to UN bodies and chapters in non-peer-reviewed books.

“This is work that does not fit conveniently into an academic time-table, but it is vital,” she wrote in her CV.

For instance, after a warning from administrators that she was not meeting her research quota she testified that she remembered thinking “I was doing teaching with my community – they should value the teaching I am doing with my community.”

Tenured professors at UBC’s school of journalism, she noted, have been promoted purely based on their professional achievements without publishing any peer-reviewed research.

McCue has been clear that there is no problem with systemic prejudice at UBC with regards to women or indigenous people. Rather, she has said the university is forcing Indigenous scholars to compromise their research by forcing it into non-oral forms.

“The essence of her position is that UBC’s stance forces her, as an indigenous scholar, to be someone she is not,” read a tribunal document.

Lawyers for UBC have countered that McCue was “reckless with her career” by repeatedly ignoring warnings to generate peer-reviewed research, a requirement that had been fulfilled by other indigenous scholars at the university.

In 2008, for instance, the university granted McCue eight months of teaching relief to focus solely on research. In that time, her only publication was an eight-page article included as a chapter in a non-peer-reviewed work.

UBC “does not and need not weigh unknown, unreported and unpublished work as heavily as peer-reviewed publication,” read tribunal documents.

McCue notes in her CV that as an academic she has been “successful in collaborating with legal professionals that work with indigenous peoples.” However, she does not appear to have been a particularly popular professor among UBC students.

Her page of anonymous ratings at RateMyProfessors.com notes that McCue is pleasant outside the classroom and well-versed in aboriginal law, but students of a property law course complained that she reads verbatim from the text, repeatedly mixed up statute names and refused to admit mistakes.

“I had McCue for property law. I am pretty sure her failure to secure tenure had nothing to do with discrimination,” wrote a post on a forum for Canadian law students discussing McCue’s human rights complaint.

This month’s decision by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal saw the dismissal of a no-evidence motion by UBC. The matter will now proceed to a full hearing.

She won't succeed, even in Canada, but the important thing to note that an argument so mind-bogglingly ludicrous gets a hearing and wastes a lot of everyone's time and money.
 
National Post

By arguing that publishing peer-reviewed research conflicted with her role as an indigenous scholar, a former law professor has won her bid for a human rights tribunal hearing after losing her job at the University of British Columbia.

Lorna June McCue was denied tenure and ultimately dismissed after 11 years at the university in part because of her failure to submit a single piece of peer-reviewed research during that time.

McCue has alleged that peer-reviewed research is contrary to indigenous oral traditions and that UBC’s research standard effectively discriminated against her “race, colour, ancestry, place of origin … and sex.”

The university’s demand for her to publish in academic journals “would require her to be a round peg in a square hole,” she told a preliminary tribunal hearing whose decision was published this month.

Lawyers for UBC, meanwhile, have argued that there is “nothing about indigeneity that prevents an indigenous person from having the capability of meeting the university’s requirements.”

A hereditary chief with the Ned’u’ten people of B.C.’s Lake Babine First Nation, McCue was formerly the director of First Nations Legal Studies at UBC.

The root of the complaint is UBC’s informal requirement for professors to put their name to at least five academic papers before being considered for tenure.

“Although contributions to scholarship necessarily involve a combination of quality and quantity, generally we would expect to see five to six peer-reviewed, significant publications by the time you seek tenure,” read a note to McCue from the dean of the Faculty of Law early in her career.

As UBC lawyers told a tribunal hearing, McCue “had not even commenced to meet” the standard when the university chose not to renew her contract in 2012.

McCue’s position is that she adheres to an indigenous oral tradition that requires “significant compromise” for her to meet UBC’s tenure and promotion standards.

Instead, she said, UBC should change their standards to account for “non-traditional scholarship” such as conference appearances, submissions to UN bodies and chapters in non-peer-reviewed books.

“This is work that does not fit conveniently into an academic time-table, but it is vital,” she wrote in her CV.

For instance, after a warning from administrators that she was not meeting her research quota she testified that she remembered thinking “I was doing teaching with my community – they should value the teaching I am doing with my community.”

Tenured professors at UBC’s school of journalism, she noted, have been promoted purely based on their professional achievements without publishing any peer-reviewed research.

McCue has been clear that there is no problem with systemic prejudice at UBC with regards to women or indigenous people. Rather, she has said the university is forcing Indigenous scholars to compromise their research by forcing it into non-oral forms.

“The essence of her position is that UBC’s stance forces her, as an indigenous scholar, to be someone she is not,” read a tribunal document.

Lawyers for UBC have countered that McCue was “reckless with her career” by repeatedly ignoring warnings to generate peer-reviewed research, a requirement that had been fulfilled by other indigenous scholars at the university.

In 2008, for instance, the university granted McCue eight months of teaching relief to focus solely on research. In that time, her only publication was an eight-page article included as a chapter in a non-peer-reviewed work.

UBC “does not and need not weigh unknown, unreported and unpublished work as heavily as peer-reviewed publication,” read tribunal documents.

McCue notes in her CV that as an academic she has been “successful in collaborating with legal professionals that work with indigenous peoples.” However, she does not appear to have been a particularly popular professor among UBC students.

Her page of anonymous ratings at RateMyProfessors.com notes that McCue is pleasant outside the classroom and well-versed in aboriginal law, but students of a property law course complained that she reads verbatim from the text, repeatedly mixed up statute names and refused to admit mistakes.

“I had McCue for property law. I am pretty sure her failure to secure tenure had nothing to do with discrimination,” wrote a post on a forum for Canadian law students discussing McCue’s human rights complaint.

This month’s decision by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal saw the dismissal of a no-evidence motion by UBC. The matter will now proceed to a full hearing.

She won't succeed, even in Canada, but the important thing to note that an argument so mind-bogglingly ludicrous gets a hearing and wastes a lot of everyone's time and money.

Go on. What else?
 
99% of the stuff that passes through the journals is worthless rubbish. Not necessarily bad research, just worthless research.

The system where everybody has to get published is a joke.
 
99% of the stuff that passes through the journals is worthless rubbish. Not necessarily bad research, just worthless research.

The system where everybody has to get published is a joke.

But it does help display at least a minimal standard of quality in their work. This professor sounds like a joke and deserves the dismissive treatment she's gotten.
 
Assuming that the decision to not renew her contract was based on lack of publication in peer-reviewed publications, it seems a failure of the imagination to not come up with something where both parties could meet halfway. Could she have tried to get published and didn't try or is there an issue unique to her work? And maybe that's the question: have others similarly situated been able to get published without supposedly compromising their work or values or what have you?

If not, then maybe she has a case.
Is so, she doesn't have a case.

I don't know that student disliking her is material to anything. And while I hope some of my professors, particularly law professors, suffer in hell for an appropriate time when they die, it doesn't mean they were poor educators; just complete petty fucking assholes.

The concept of publication as a necessity is pretty damn tired though. "On the Effect of Milton's Epic Poetry as it Relates to the Sonic Learning's of Poodles" just isn't something anyone in the world needs to be subjected to. It's a slight exaggeration, but some of the shit I've heard professors try to come up with is only slightly less silly.
 
She won't succeed, even in Canada, but the important thing to note that an argument so mind-bogglingly ludicrous gets a hearing and wastes a lot of everyone's time and money.

It's reasonable to give her a hearing so there's no question that the decision to terminate her was proper.
 
There's a box that you can't go outside of because everything outside the box is not valid. This was somehow learned from inside the box.
 
That's what happens when you base your hiring on ethnicity rather than merit.
UC Boulder had a problem with that bigoted fraud Ward Churchill too.
 
"Treating me exactly the same as everybody else is discrimination, because I am so special that even the word 'discrimination' reverses its meaning when used about me."
 
That's what happens when you base your hiring on ethnicity rather than merit.
UC Boulder had a problem with that bigoted fraud Ward Churchill too.
Was she hired for ethnicity? And the article says the publishing is among the several reasons she was let go.
 
Last edited:
That's what happens when you base your hiring on ethnicity rather than merit.
UC Boulder had a problem with that bigoted fraud Ward Churchill too.
Was she hired for ethnicity? And the article says the publishing is among the several reasons she was let go.
Very probably given that both US and Canadian universities are guilty of the practice and I have seen nothing that would indicate she is qualified. On the contrary, she has indicated an unwillingness to do things that are part or normal academic practice. So how was she hired in the first place? Was she less hostile to academic publishing while a grad student? Or was her orally pontificating in front of a teepee accepted in lieu of a dissertation?

junemccue-01.jpg

An average first year graduate GTA who wasn't hired based on ethnicity is probably more qualified than her if this review is even half accurate. And it's far from being the only one like that.
Her RateMyProfessors page
 
Very probably given that both US and Canadian universities are guilty of the practice and I have seen nothing that would indicate she is qualified.
In other words, your conclusion has no basis in the actual facts.
On the contrary, she has indicated an unwillingness to do things that are part or normal academic practice. So how was she hired in the first place? Was she less hostile to academic publishing while a grad student? Or was her orally pontificating in front of a teepee accepted in lieu of a dissertation?
In my experience at universities, it is not uncommon for journalism professors to lack a doctorate, which would mean she would not necessarily be required to have a Ph.D. and a dissertation.
junemccue-01.jpg

An average first year graduate GTA who wasn't hired based on ethnicity is probably more qualified than her if this review is even half accurate. And it's far from being the only one like that.
Her RateMyProfessors page
Being a poor teacher does not necessarily represent a bar to hiring (especially in one's first position). Moreover, evaluations on rate my professor suffer from a selection bias - students have to feel strongly enough to post there.


I am not defending Professor McCue. IMO, there is an inordinate laserlike focus on only peer-reviewed publications as the indicator for academic quality in most disciplines but this standard should not have been a surprise to her. And if she felt so strongly, she might have been able to persuade her peers of alternative measures of academic quality. We don't know how successful she was (or if she even bothered). All in all, I think she has a real uphill battle on her hands.
 
Was she hired for ethnicity? And the article says the publishing is among the several reasons she was let go.
Very probably given that both US and Canadian universities are guilty of the practice and I have seen nothing that would indicate she is qualified. On the contrary, she has indicated an unwillingness to do things that are part or normal academic practice. So how was she hired in the first place? Was she less hostile to academic publishing while a grad student? Or was her orally pontificating in front of a teepee accepted in lieu of a dissertation?

Teepee? Why a teepee? I saw no reference to her ethnicity. (And these things are important here.) And it is a good question to why she was hired, but it could have been for reasons beyond race.

An average first year graduate GTA who wasn't hired based on ethnicity is probably more qualified than her if this review is even half accurate. And it's far from being the only one like that.

Well, first off, you don't know how person will perform until she is in the job. Secondly, most faculty administrators are loathe to use RateMyProfessor as it presents a somewhat skewed portrait as compared to the more controlled course evaluations students fill out at the completion of the course. That being said, RateMy Professor is usually taken into account after considering the formal evaluations to see if the complaints form a pattern. We have fired faculty based upon this method. What happened was the professor cane from another university highly recommended by students in evaluations. The publishing history was strong. Highly regarded, we looked forward to having him on staff. First two semesters everything went well, then suddenly a fall off of the cliff. His evaluations all said the same things, came to class unprepared, didn't seem to know the subject matter, did not return assignments, wouldn't return emails. He stated that nothing changed in his person life and that he was doing the best he could, so we were forced to let him go.

Of course we also hired a highly competent professor who is awaiting trial for first degree murder after shooting her boyfriend and cutting him up into chunks.

Ahhh Life at a major research institution.
 
junemccue-01.jpg

An average first year graduate GTA who wasn't hired based on ethnicity is probably more qualified than her if this review is even half accurate. And it's far from being the only one like that.
Her RateMyProfessors page

And most of that 2.2 rating seems to come from her classes on first peoples. Most of her other scores are 1s.
 
99% of the stuff that passes through the journals is worthless rubbish. Not necessarily bad research, just worthless research.

The system where everybody has to get published is a joke.

But it does help display at least a minimal standard of quality in their work. This professor sounds like a joke and deserves the dismissive treatment she's gotten.

It aqlso illustrates the feeling of entitlement by her origin to be ftreated solely on her own terms. A feeling all too frequent among people of her origin. However bad the treatment of her ancestors may have been her origin does not justify or entitle her to a cushy job, more cushy than similar jobs of her associates in academia.
 
In other words, your conclusion has no basis in the actual facts.
Do I have a statement by those who hired her? No. But we do know that sort of thing is going on in academia and we have evidence of this woman's lackluster knowledge of her subject matter.

In my experience at universities, it is not uncommon for journalism professors to lack a doctorate, which would mean she would not necessarily be required to have a Ph.D. and a dissertation.
But she wasn't a journalism professor. Besides, my understanding is that normally non-PhDs are given the title "lecturer" rather than "professor".

Being a poor teacher does not necessarily represent a bar to hiring (especially in one's first position).
Her problem is not only being a poor teacher (which could be compensated for with research which is is however, unwilling to do) but poor understanding of subject matter. That is something that should have been picked up on during the hiring process if the process wasn't so tarnished by affirmative action nonsense.
Moreover, evaluations on rate my professor suffer from a selection bias - students have to feel strongly enough to post there.
That is definitely true and hence my use of "if". However, so many of these evaluations point out the same thing over and over again. That in itself is indicative of a problem.
All in all, I think she has a real uphill battle on her hands.
Hopefully, but then again it is Canada, so anything could happen.
 
Teepee? Why a teepee?
It's a common Amerindian structure in those parts. My thinking is that if she so loathes academic practice and loves traditional, oral, Indian dissemination of knowledge she should engage in that, rather than trying to force the university to treat her differently just because of her ethnicity.
I saw no reference to her ethnicity. (And these things are important here.)
Apparently she is of Ned’u’ten ancestry, according to this.

And it is a good question to why she was hired, but it could have been for reasons beyond race.
Maybe she sucked the hiring committee members' dicks and licked their pussies for all we know. But smart money is on racial affirmative action.

Well, first off, you don't know how person will perform until she is in the job.
Well there are ways to estimate it, which is why employers solicit resumes and conduct interviews. Otherwise, they might as well hire random people off the street.

Secondly, most faculty administrators are loathe to use RateMyProfessor as it presents a somewhat skewed portrait as compared to the more controlled course evaluations students fill out at the completion of the course.
I can see why, but we are not faculty administrators here and RateMyProfessors has the advantage that it is public. And certainly when most evaluations complain about her lack of command of the subject matter and hostility to answering questions it is very likely she doesn't know what she is doing. And now she is trying to play the ethnicity card to get a tenured position for which she is evidently unqualified.

That being said, RateMy Professor is usually taken into account after considering the formal evaluations to see if the complaints form a pattern.
And complaints about her certainly do form a clear pattern.

Of course we also hired a highly competent professor who is awaiting trial for first degree murder after shooting her boyfriend and cutting him up into chunks.
Jesus Christ. :eek: Maybe I am better off single. :eek: At least you haven't hired her after her murder, like Columbia with Kathy Boudin.

Ahhh Life at a major research institution.
By the way, is this her?
Charges: Prescott woman shot boyfriend, placed him in box, drove body out of state
 
It's a common Amerindian structure in those parts. My thinking is that if she so loathes academic practice and loves traditional, oral, Indian dissemination of knowledge she should engage in that, rather than trying to force the university to treat her differently just because of her ethnicity.
I saw no reference to her ethnicity. (And these things are important here.)
Apparently she is of Ned’u’ten ancestry, according to this.

And it is a good question to why she was hired, but it could have been for reasons beyond race.
Maybe she sucked the hiring committee members' dicks and licked their pussies for all we know. But smart money is on racial affirmative action.

Well, first off, you don't know how person will perform until she is in the job.
Well there are ways to estimate it, which is why employers solicit resumes and conduct interviews. Otherwise, they might as well hire random people off the street.

Secondly, most faculty administrators are loathe to use RateMyProfessor as it presents a somewhat skewed portrait as compared to the more controlled course evaluations students fill out at the completion of the course.
I can see why, but we are not faculty administrators here and RateMyProfessors has the advantage that it is public. And certainly when most evaluations complain about her lack of command of the subject matter and hostility to answering questions it is very likely she doesn't know what she is doing. And now she is trying to play the ethnicity card to get a tenured position for which she is evidently unqualified.

That being said, RateMy Professor is usually taken into account after considering the formal evaluations to see if the complaints form a pattern.
And complaints about her certainly do form a clear pattern.

Of course we also hired a highly competent professor who is awaiting trial for first degree murder after shooting her boyfriend and cutting him up into chunks.
Jesus Christ. :eek: Maybe I am better off single. :eek: At least you haven't hired her after her murder, like Columbia with Kathy Boudin.

Ahhh Life at a major research institution.
By the way, is this her?
Charges: Prescott woman shot boyfriend, placed him in box, drove body out of state

Why are you like this?
 
Back
Top Bottom