This story comes from Andrew Gelman's blog. (https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/02/06/its-bezzle-time-the-dean-of-engineering-at-the-university-of-nevada-gets-paid-372127-a-year-and-wrote-a-paper-thats-so-bad-you-cant-believe-it-i-mean-really-you-have-to-take-a-look-at-t/) I think you'll find it worth your time to read it and the comments (which feature some responses from the dean in question):
Just a taste:
QuoteAccording to wikipedia, UNR is the state's flagship public university.
I was curious to see what else Jones had published so I searched him on Google scholar and took a look at his three most-cited publications. The second of these appeared to be a textbook, and the third was basically 8 straight pages of empty jargon—ironic that a journal called Total Quality Management would publish something that has no positive qualities! The most-cited paper on the list was pretty bad too, an empty bit of make-work, the scientific equivalent of the reports that white-collar workers need to fill out and give to their bosses who can then pass these along to their bosses to demonstrate how productive they are. In short, this guy seems to be a well-connected time server in the Ed Wegman mode, minus the plagiarism.
He was a Program Director at the National Science Foundation! Your tax dollars at work.
Can you imagine what it would feel like to be a student in the engineering school at the flagship university of the state of Nevada, and it turns out the school is being run by the author of this:
QuoteOur recent study has the premise that both humans and flies sleep during the night and are awake during the day, and both species require a significant amount of sleep each day when their neural systems are developing in specific activities. This trait is shared by both species. An investigation was segmented into three subfields, which were titled "Life span," "Time-to-death," and "Chronological age." In D. melanogaster, there was a positive correlation between life span, the intensity of young male medflies, and the persistence of movement. Time-to-death analysis revealed that the male flies passed away two weeks after exhibiting the supine behavior. Chronological age, activity in D. melanogaster was adversely correlated with age; however, there was no correlation between chronological age and time-to-death. It is probable that the incorporation the findings of age-related health factors and increased sleep may lead toless train accidents. of these age factors when considering these options supply chain procedure for maintaining will be beneficial.
[...]
I'll leave the last word to another UNR employee, from the above-linked press release:
Quote"What is exciting about having Jones as our new dean for the College of Engineering is how he clearly understands the current landscape for what it means to be a Carnegie R1 'Very High Research' institution," Provost Jeff Thompson said. "He very clearly understands how we can amplify every aspect of our College of Engineering, so that we can continue to build transcendent programs for engineering education and research."
Ohand. He used a textspinner to convert 'painkillers' into 'torment executioners'. That alone makes it worth reading.
Appalling.
Really doesn't say very good things about the selection process at UNR. Also really doesn't look good for academia as a whole given the high profile positions at NSF and in the National Academies.
I think we should all be concerned about that but also that whether or not diversity entered into the hiring process that aspect of this case makes this a gift for the anti-DEI crowd.
Maybe Dean Eric Jones has gambling debts?
Quote from: larix on February 11, 2024, 02:11:51 PMAppalling.
Really doesn't say very good things about the selection process at UNR. Also really doesn't look good for academia as a whole given the high profile positions at NSF and in the National Academies.
I think we should all be concerned about that but also that whether or not diversity entered into the hiring process that aspect of this case makes this a gift for the anti-DEI crowd.
The fact that it is
reasonable to consider whether DEI was involved indicates how little oversight there is on DEI in general;
that's the biggest gift for the "anti-DEI crowd".
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 12, 2024, 04:53:54 AMQuote from: larix on February 11, 2024, 02:11:51 PMAppalling.
Really doesn't say very good things about the selection process at UNR. Also really doesn't look good for academia as a whole given the high profile positions at NSF and in the National Academies.
I think we should all be concerned about that but also that whether or not diversity entered into the hiring process that aspect of this case makes this a gift for the anti-DEI crowd.
The fact that it is reasonable to consider whether DEI was involved indicates how little oversight there is on DEI in general; that's the biggest gift for the "anti-DEI crowd".
Having read more of the comments, some from UNR faculty, it would appear that this is more a case of a wholesale failure in leadership. I'm sure an investigation is going on right now but from some of the comments it sounds like there was a proper search, with a diverse set of candidates, but for some reason a decision was made to fail that search and appoint this person.
The whole thing is a train wreck that probably could have been prevented if the provost and president had only gotten more sleep.
In case fora members didn't get to the P.S section of the Gelman link Para provided look at the link below, from an article by the Dean's co-author and new editor of the "journal". The "figures" made me do a spit-take.
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/02/12/torment-executioners-in-reno-nevada/
Quote from: larix on February 12, 2024, 01:35:52 PMQuote from: marshwiggle on February 12, 2024, 04:53:54 AMQuote from: larix on February 11, 2024, 02:11:51 PMAppalling.
Really doesn't say very good things about the selection process at UNR. Also really doesn't look good for academia as a whole given the high profile positions at NSF and in the National Academies.
I think we should all be concerned about that but also that whether or not diversity entered into the hiring process that aspect of this case makes this a gift for the anti-DEI crowd.
The fact that it is reasonable to consider whether DEI was involved indicates how little oversight there is on DEI in general; that's the biggest gift for the "anti-DEI crowd".
Having read more of the comments, some from UNR faculty, it would appear that this is more a case of a wholesale failure in leadership. I'm sure an investigation is going on right now but from some of the comments it sounds like there was a proper search, with a diverse set of candidates, but for some reason a decision was made to fail that search and appoint this person.
The whole thing is a train wreck that probably could have been prevented if the provost and president had only gotten more sleep.
So what's the
non-DEI explanation for why this happened? Bribery? Nepotism? Politics?
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 13, 2024, 08:07:09 AMQuote from: larix on February 12, 2024, 01:35:52 PMQuote from: marshwiggle on February 12, 2024, 04:53:54 AMQuote from: larix on February 11, 2024, 02:11:51 PMAppalling.
Really doesn't say very good things about the selection process at UNR. Also really doesn't look good for academia as a whole given the high profile positions at NSF and in the National Academies.
I think we should all be concerned about that but also that whether or not diversity entered into the hiring process that aspect of this case makes this a gift for the anti-DEI crowd.
The fact that it is reasonable to consider whether DEI was involved indicates how little oversight there is on DEI in general; that's the biggest gift for the "anti-DEI crowd".
Having read more of the comments, some from UNR faculty, it would appear that this is more a case of a wholesale failure in leadership. I'm sure an investigation is going on right now but from some of the comments it sounds like there was a proper search, with a diverse set of candidates, but for some reason a decision was made to fail that search and appoint this person.
The whole thing is a train wreck that probably could have been prevented if the provost and president had only gotten more sleep.
So what's the non-DEI explanation for why this happened? Bribery? Nepotism? Politics?
A commitment to diversity wouldn't normally require you to
fail a search--especially if the search turned up a diverse set of candidates in the first place.
Blaming this on "dei" because the guy is black is nasty and unfair.
Are you not aware of the cronyism, patronage, and all-about-the-money approach to leadership positions in schools of engineering all around the US?
When you add in the non-elite, striving status of UNR, this kind of thing isn't surprising. The specific nonsense academic practices of this case are super funny though and definitely pretty unique.
It's important not to lose sight of the forest for focusing on a tree or two.
Hiring incompetent Deans or Presidents is a general phenomenon, not one specific to any field. There is a slew of examples in the Dire Financial Straits thread, almost always of Presidents who put off structural change or closing down too long.
The reason is incentives, or better, lack thereof. A non-profit invites poor governance. The job aside, no one has skin in the game. Failure of a President does not result in any loss to the board, or to the people who appoint the board.
The appointees are often people who talk a good game but don't care about a financial hit. And why should they?
Quote from: dismalist on February 17, 2024, 11:36:47 AMIt's important not to lose sight of the forest for focusing on a tree or two.
Hiring incompetent Deans or Presidents is a general phenomenon, not one specific to any field. There is a slew of examples in the Dire Financial Straits thread, almost always of Presidents who put off structural change or closing down too long.
The reason is incentives, or better, lack thereof. A non-profit invites poor governance. The job aside, no one has skin in the game. Failure of a President does not result in any loss to the board, or to the people who appoint the board.
The appointees are often people who talk a good game but don't care about a financial hit. And why should they?
This article about leadership hiring at UNR seems to back up all of your points:
https://thisisreno.com/2024/02/unr-faculty-students-call-for-engineering-deans-resignation/
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 13, 2024, 08:07:09 AMQuote from: larix on February 12, 2024, 01:35:52 PMQuote from: marshwiggle on February 12, 2024, 04:53:54 AMQuote from: larix on February 11, 2024, 02:11:51 PMAppalling.
Really doesn't say very good things about the selection process at UNR. Also really doesn't look good for academia as a whole given the high profile positions at NSF and in the National Academies.
I think we should all be concerned about that but also that whether or not diversity entered into the hiring process that aspect of this case makes this a gift for the anti-DEI crowd.
The fact that it is reasonable to consider whether DEI was involved indicates how little oversight there is on DEI in general; that's the biggest gift for the "anti-DEI crowd".
Having read more of the comments, some from UNR faculty, it would appear that this is more a case of a wholesale failure in leadership. I'm sure an investigation is going on right now but from some of the comments it sounds like there was a proper search, with a diverse set of candidates, but for some reason a decision was made to fail that search and appoint this person.
The whole thing is a train wreck that probably could have been prevented if the provost and president had only gotten more sleep.
So what's the non-DEI explanation for why this happened? Bribery? Nepotism? Politics?
Now come on, Marshman. That is a YUGE Trumpy leap there.
I am no fan of diversity hires for the sake of diversity hires or for DEI in its present bureaucratic state----I've said so many times. But you cannot convict without evidence either. There are all sorts of reasons incompetent people are hired. You should meet the current dean at my old place: white as whipped cream and with just as much character. Much hated, this person. But not as much as the provost, also the color of whitewash.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 18, 2024, 08:12:37 AMQuote from: marshwiggle on February 13, 2024, 08:07:09 AMSo what's the non-DEI explanation for why this happened? Bribery? Nepotism? Politics?
Now come on, Marshman. That is a YUGE Trumpy leap there.
I am no fan of diversity hires for the sake of diversity hires or for DEI in its present bureaucratic state----I've said so many times. But you cannot convict without evidence either. There are all sorts of reasons incompetent people are hired. You should meet the current dean at my old place: white as whipped cream and with just as much character. Much hated, this person. But not as much as the provost, also the color of whitewash.
Just a reminder that it was Larix who raised the possibility.
Quote from: larix on February 11, 2024, 02:11:51 PMI think we should all be concerned about that but also that whether or not diversity entered into the hiring process that aspect of this case makes this a gift for the anti-DEI crowd.
The point isn't that somehow DEI
must be the cause of this; rather that without a pretty solid case for some other reason for the hire, it's going to be hard to dispell the public perception that DEI is (or at least might be) responsible. (For instance, if it's some sort of cronyism, e.g. he was a golf buddy of the chair of the hiring committee, then establishing that would go a long way to suggest it wasn't DEI.)
We cannot discount DEI, but you yourself just gave a number of reasons that could explain why this slubbo got hired----so it is not axiomatically DEI in this case.
We both are dubious of DEI initiatives.
Just remember this if you are ever on a jury.
Quote from: Wahoo Redux on February 18, 2024, 11:21:38 AMWe cannot discount DEI, but you yourself just gave a number of reasons that could explain why this slubbo got hired----so it is not axiomatically DEI in this case.
We both are dubious of DEI initiatives.
Just remember this if you are ever on a jury.
The thing is, DEI is the only one people will actually
pride themselves on using; "commitment to DEI in hiring" blah blah blah. No-one is going to
admit to hiring based on cronyism, or getting someone with the right political affiliations, etc.
So if they've made any effort to sell their decisions
based on DEI*, it's going to look especially bad for DEI if it turns out badly.
(*I haven't heard whether that was supposedly part of this decision or not. But usually the people making these decisions will try to
claim as many virtuous reasons as possible in order to pat themselves on the back.)
The point of my original observation was that even if there are perfectly good other reasons for the hire (nepotism, politics, someones golf buddy, etc) and even if hiring bad deans is not an issue unique to UNR. The fact that folks in certain circles will immediately leap to the conclusion that it was DEI initiatives that led to this hire ergo all DEI initiatives must be bad should be cause for concern.
I actually suspect this is the main reason why no other news outlets beyond local news in Reno are covering this case.
It also wasn't just UNR that hired this guy. He has prominent positions at NSF and had a Fellowship with the National Academies. Again could be perfectly good reasons for those selections too, up to an including that maybe he just had really good letters and no one looked too closely at the CV.
This guy is a genius. No more problems with Reviewer #2.
Quote from: secundem_artem on February 21, 2024, 10:25:46 AMThis guy is a genius. No more problems with Reviewer #2.
This comment made me laugh a lot harder than it should have.
Quote from: jimbogumbo on February 12, 2024, 03:15:34 PMIn case fora members didn't get to the P.S section of the Gelman link Para provided look at the link below, from an article by the Dean's co-author and new editor of the "journal". The "figures" made me do a spit-take.
https://statmodeling.stat.columbia.edu/2024/02/12/torment-executioners-in-reno-nevada/
The figures look like they were drawn in crayon by an 8-year-old. How is this guy employed anywhere, much less as a dean? How does he have the gall to list these pubs, has he no shame?! Shocking...
Interestingly,
Quote... that folks in certain circles will immediately leap to the conclusion that it was DEI initiatives that led to this hire ...
This could be perfectly rational, depending upon the numbers. The probability that a non-minority is a DEI hire is zero, so the probability that a DEI hire is a Black person is very high, close to one. Multiply this by the ratio of the share of DEI hires in all hires to the share of Blacks in the population. [Bayes' Theorem]
Thus, even a small share of DEI hires out of total hires, because the share of Blacks in the population is only about 0.15, can easily have the ratio of the shares approach a high probability.
The lesson is not that people are are prejudiced. Rather, it is that DEI tars individuals who are not DEI hires.
Now, to figure out if DEI hires screw up with high probability, we should apply Bayes' Theorem again. :-)
Quote from: dismalist on February 21, 2024, 01:55:09 PMThe probability that a non-minority is a DEI hire is zero, so the probability that a DEI hire is a Black person is very high, close to one.
I'm kind of dense, so please explain to me how this *doesn't* mean "nearly all non-white hires are DEI hires."
Are you using "DEI hire" to just mean "non-white hire?"
Quote from: billtsherman on February 21, 2024, 05:14:14 PMQuote from: dismalist on February 21, 2024, 01:55:09 PMThe probability that a non-minority is a DEI hire is zero, so the probability that a DEI hire is a Black person is very high, close to one.
I'm kind of dense, so please explain to me how this *doesn't* mean "nearly all non-white hires are DEI hires."
Are you using "DEI hire" to just mean "non-white hire?"
No, and no.
It depends on how large DEI hires are as a share of all hires. If that is large, the probability of the Black person being a DEI hire can get weirdly large, because Blacks are such a large part of the relevant DEI population and are such a small part of the general population.
To build intuition, try an extreme case. Suppose only Blacks qualify as DEI hires. Now assume DEI hires are an 0.15 share of all hires, while Blacks are 0.15 of the general population. Then all DEI hires would be Black, for there is nowhere to hire them from except from the general population.
I was thinking that most non-whites are Black for present purposes. But if the relevant share of the population considered for DEI placement is much higher than the Black share, being Black of course conveys less information, so my assumed numbers would overstate the probability of a Black being a DEI hire.
Anyway, the inference that a particular person is a DEI hire need not at all be attributable to prejudice. DEI paints non DEI hires.
Quote from: dismalist on February 21, 2024, 06:10:10 PMQuote from: billtsherman on February 21, 2024, 05:14:14 PMQuote from: dismalist on February 21, 2024, 01:55:09 PMThe probability that a non-minority is a DEI hire is zero, so the probability that a DEI hire is a Black person is very high, close to one.
I'm kind of dense, so please explain to me how this *doesn't* mean "nearly all non-white hires are DEI hires."
Are you using "DEI hire" to just mean "non-white hire?"
No, and no.
It depends on how large DEI hires are as a share of all hires. If that is large, the probability of the Black person being a DEI hire can get weirdly large, because Blacks are such a large part of the relevant DEI population and are such a small part of the general population.
To build intuition, try an extreme case. Suppose only Blacks qualify as DEI hires. Now assume DEI hires are an 0.15 share of all hires, while Blacks are 0.15 of the general population. Then all DEI hires would be Black, for there is nowhere to hire them from except from the general population.
I was thinking that most non-whites are Black for present purposes. But if the relevant share of the population considered for DEI placement is much higher than the Black share, being Black of course conveys less information, so my assumed numbers would overstate the probability of a Black being a DEI hire.
Anyway, the inference that a particular person is a DEI hire need not at all be attributable to prejudice. DEI paints non DEI hires.
Good thing all of us on this board are white people, otherwise you might really have offended someone. Because, G-d forbid, a non-white person being hired on merit alone?
^ You don't understand dismalist's point. A real-world example from thirty years ago; I don't know what the situation is now:
The people leading the FBI regarded the low number of female special agent hires as problematic. So the FBI instituted a second set of criteria for evaluating only female applicants. Screening panels evaluated female applicants according to the old criteria that continued to be used for the entire pool of applicants, but if female applicants weren't hired from the general pool, their applications were then evaluated using the second set of criteria, which were defined differently.
This generated a new problem: at the FBI Academy, no one knew which female applicants had been selected via the old criteria (i.e., top-ranked applicants regardless of sex) or via the new criteria (top-ranked among the smaller set of just female applicants). So people just assumed that all of the female hires had been selected using the second method. Male hires didn't encounter this assumption.
ciao_yall, why would you assume that
Quoteall of us on this board are white people, otherwise you might really have offended someone. Because, G-d forbid, a non-white person being hired on merit alone?
Don't you have colleagues who aren't white? Why would anyone assume that forumites are all white? Here in the city, I recall several non-white colleagues--faculty--as early as twenty years ago.
As for DEI hires, several of them appear to be the result of the institution virtue-signalling. See for instance, the DEI websites for Harvard and Cornell, for instance. Columbia, on the other hand, appears to have given some thought to what DEI includes, and has therefore chosen its diversity officer based on the needs of more than one group.
Quote from: Langue_doc on February 22, 2024, 05:42:12 AMciao_yall, why would you assume that
Quoteall of us on this board are white people, otherwise you might really have offended someone. Because, G-d forbid, a non-white person being hired on merit alone?
Don't you have colleagues who aren't white? Why would anyone assume that forumites are all white? Here in the city, I recall several non-white colleagues--faculty--as early as twenty years ago.
As for DEI hires, several of them appear to be the result of the institution virtue-signalling. See for instance, the DEI websites for Harvard and Cornell, for instance. Columbia, on the other hand, appears to have given some thought to what DEI includes, and has therefore chosen its diversity officer based on the needs of more than one group.
Sorry, forgot the /s.
The sad part of the misplaced emphasis on DEI is that people who were hired because of their qualifications are now lumped with some of the recent hires who got their jobs because they checked certain boxes. Claudine Gay comes to mind.
Quote from: Langue_doc on February 23, 2024, 06:04:46 AMThe sad part of the misplaced emphasis on DEI is that people who were hired because of their qualifications are now lumped with some of the recent hires who got their jobs because they checked certain boxes. Claudine Gay comes to mind.
I agree 100%. Anecdotally (note this was a decade ago), I had a postdoc friend that was hired from the NIH diversity supplement. She was EXTREMELY annoyed that she felt she needed to work incredibly harder than everyone else to prove she deserved to be there and wasn't
just a DEI hire. The PI of the lab confided to me that they would likely never hire a white male postdoc again because the economics didn't pan out... It was the system rewards themselves that drove the issue, and inadvertently perhaps drove further inequity and racial strife.
Quote from: dismalist on February 21, 2024, 06:10:10 PMQuote from: billtsherman on February 21, 2024, 05:14:14 PMQuote from: dismalist on February 21, 2024, 01:55:09 PMThe probability that a non-minority is a DEI hire is zero, so the probability that a DEI hire is a Black person is very high, close to one.
I'm kind of dense, so please explain to me how this *doesn't* mean "nearly all non-white hires are DEI hires."
Are you using "DEI hire" to just mean "non-white hire?"
No, and no.
It depends on how large DEI hires are as a share of all hires. If that is large, the probability of the Black person being a DEI hire can get weirdly large, because Blacks are such a large part of the relevant DEI population and are such a small part of the general population.
To build intuition, try an extreme case. Suppose only Blacks qualify as DEI hires. Now assume DEI hires are an 0.15 share of all hires, while Blacks are 0.15 of the general population. Then all DEI hires would be Black, for there is nowhere to hire them from except from the general population.
I was thinking that most non-whites are Black for present purposes. But if the relevant share of the population considered for DEI placement is much higher than the Black share, being Black of course conveys less information, so my assumed numbers would overstate the probability of a Black being a DEI hire.
Anyway, the inference that a particular person is a DEI hire need not at all be attributable to prejudice. DEI paints non DEI hires.
There is so much drivel to pick on here, I dunno where to start.
WTF is a DEI hire anyway?
If it means someone who was hired based on physical/cultural attributes with no merit whatsoever, then I think you are looking at a miniscule fraction of hires. The UNR Dean, for example, had a PhD, prior faculty experience, was an NSF rotator, started companies, etc. Clearly there was some merit, at least on paper, and this is already an extreme case.
If it means someone who is hired that isn't the dominant physical/cultural demographic of the field (women in STEM? Latinos, Filipinos, Thai, African, Indonesian, African American, Indigenous in any field?), then most hires are "DEI hires" and labeling it in that way is odd and really insulting.
Quote from: fizzycist on February 24, 2024, 08:18:03 PMThere is so much drivel to pick on here, I dunno where to start.
WTF is a DEI hire anyway?
This (https://builtin.com/diversity-inclusion/what-does-dei-mean-in-the-workplace) describes it this way:
QuoteDE&I stands for diversity, equity and inclusion. As a discipline, DE&I is any policy or practice designed to make people of various backgrounds feel welcome and ensure they have support to perform to the fullest of their abilities in the workplace. This kind of environment is created by following all three aspects of DE&I.
Diversity is the presence of differences within a given setting. In the workplace, that can mean differences in race, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, age and socioeconomic class. It can also refer to differences in physical ability, veteran status, whether or not you have kids — all of those are components of diversity.
Which sounds very clean, safe, sane, and ethical.
I've posted my own limited anecdata on this policy several times on The Fora which suggests that people are not automatically hired because of physical or cultural attributes alone, but "DEI hires" do not necessarily hire the best person for the job either; rather, DEI proponents set out to hire someone with the necessary qualifications but privilege race or some other demographic over hard, objective criteria.
To suggest this----
Quotebased on physical/cultural attributes with no merit whatsoever
----is a strawman and something no one has argued is happening. Certainly you don't believe people believe this. I suspect you are exhibiting the typical frustration of someone who thinks it is fine to privilege certain physical/cultural attributes over pure merit.
Quote from: fizzycist on February 24, 2024, 08:18:03 PMIf it means someone who is hired that isn't the dominant physical/cultural demographic of the field (women in STEM? Latinos, Filipinos, Thai, African, Indonesian, African American, Indigenous in any field?), then most hires are "DEI hires" and labeling it in that way is odd and really insulting.
Then why is it necessary to have some sort of bureaucracy and process specifically to address that?
Quote from: marshwiggle on February 25, 2024, 05:39:19 AMQuote from: fizzycist on February 24, 2024, 08:18:03 PMIf it means someone who is hired that isn't the dominant physical/cultural demographic of the field (women in STEM? Latinos, Filipinos, Thai, African, Indonesian, African American, Indigenous in any field?), then most hires are "DEI hires" and labeling it in that way is odd and really insulting.
Then why is it necessary to have some sort of bureaucracy and process specifically to address that?
Do you have a bureaucracy and process that forces your dept to hire faculty only from specific races? Because we don't.
There are trainings and seminars and even a deanlet. But there are deanlets of all kinds of things, the worst training is still the 90s-style sexual harassment one, and there are so many more seminars on just normal research.
Look I get that there is some academic groupthink and maybe some of the DEI stuff makes your eyes roll. But if it's getting to the point you are accusing a bad engineering dean of "being a dei hire" cuz their black you've entered the groupthink of the racist crowd.