CAMPUS

Hindered Hiring: Bucknell Puts Fairness Above Quality

“What’s more important than quality? Equality,” at least according to Michael Scott of “The Office.” Apparently, Bucknell also adheres to this philosophy.

For the sake of “fairness” and “equality,” the Bucknell administration recently deprived students of an excellent and experienced professor.

In the Chemistry Department’s search for a new tenure-track biochemistry professor, the administration only consented to interviews with two of the three candidates who had been short-listed by the Department’s search committee. The third candidate was not allowed to interview because he has more experience than the other candidates; the administration felt it was “unfair” to compare him to the two other short-listed applicants.

Ranked second on the Chemistry Department’s short list of candidates, the potential biochemistry professor had five years of full-time teaching experience. Neither of the other two short-listed candidates had any such experience. When reviewing the applicants for the position, the Department search committee easily chose this candidate as one of their two preferred choices. The remaining candidates were less qualified, and the committee had difficulty choosing a third candidate for the original short list from the applicant pool.

If hired, the candidate would have left a position at a largely graduate institution for Bucknell. His interest in the position indicated a strong desire to teach in the less illustrious undergraduate environment. Although the position was advertised as “entry-level,” this particular candidate applied anyway, despite already having a tenure-track position at another university.

Not only that, but the candidate would have brought a $250,000 grant from the National Institutes of Health to continue his research here at Bucknell, largely with undergraduate students.

With such a willing faculty member and large grant, many students could have pursued meaningful research. Yet, the administration chose to dismiss this opportunity for its students and denied the applicant an interview.

Applicants for entry-level faculty positions at Bucknell may not have more than three years of full-time teaching experience. Even though this applicant had more than three years of such experience, he was willing to accept an assistant professorship. As an assistant professor, he could receive two years of credit for his more than five years of full-time teaching experience.

His acceptance of the assistant professorship would have meant that he would receive a marginally higher salary – because of the two years credit – than those with no full-time teaching experience. Bucknell could have hired a more experienced professor for essentially the same salary.

Yet, the administration felt it would be unfair to the other candidates to compare them with this more experienced applicant. After the initial rejection of the candidate, the search committee immediately appealed the administration’s decision. The chair of the committee even requested to speak with President Mitchell if the decision to reject this candidate ultimately lay with him.

Nonetheless, the administration of the College of Arts and Sciences – in consultation with President Mitchell and other senior administrators – again refused the candidate an interview. The search committee was directed to find another interview candidate – one with less experience as a full-time professor.

Consequently, the search committee was forced to choose not one but two candidates from this largely mediocre pool when the administration rejected their second selection for the sake of “equality.”

Chris Zappe, Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, maintains that the University is strictly enforcing its “efforts to promote fairness” in the hiring of new faculty members. This translates into passing over highly-qualified applicants simply because they do not satisfy the arbitrary “less than three years experience” requirement.

More experience is generally regarded as a positive aspect of someone’s résumé. And, as the search committee said in their appeal to the administration, “Teaching experience does not contribute to or correlate with the potential for long term excellence.”

While Bucknell prides itself on providing the “premier undergraduate experience in the nation,” University administrators apparently do not believe this experience is contingent on their hiring the best faculty. Although Zappe emphasized the University’s commitment to providing its students with the best education, these senior administrative officials have decided that fairness to inferior applicants is more important than providing a superior education.

The administration’s rejection of this initial candidate clearly demonstrates the lack of importance it places on Bucknell students’ education. Having professors with such prominent research grants would undoubtedly attract other highly qualified professors and students. Hiring outstanding professors should be one of the University’s primary goals – both for its students and its own reputation.

Even more troubling is the fact that the administration has reacted similarly earlier this year. Evidently, the administration – including President Mitchell and other senior administrative colleagues – has not permitted two other departments to interview certain applicants. Only until all of the less experienced candidates have been interviewed or deemed unacceptable will applicants with more than three years experience be granted interviews.

If Bucknell wants to hire the best faculty to provide the best education, then the University must hire the best applicants, regardless of their experience. Not hiring inexperienced candidates as faculty members only encourages those candidates to get more experience and improve their résumés.

However, the only objective Bucknell promotes is the employment of less experienced faculty in the place of more qualified candidates. The decision to approve or reject candidates should be based on their merits, or lack thereof, rather than on the equality of their résumés. Nothing should be more important than an applicant’s proven ability to do his job well. Candidates with more experience should receive even greater consideration because they have proven themselves as professors.

It is this system of meritocracy that directs societal achievement. Without being rewarded for accomplishments, people would not strive to improve.

Hiring is an inherently biased process. Without it, the best candidates would not be hired or adequately compensated for their efforts. Not hiring lesser qualified candidates encourages them to improve their qualifications and gain more experience. There will always be a disparity between job applicants. Bucknell should accept this fact and do its utmost to ensure that it provides its students with the best.

Thus, Bucknell’s hiring practices contradict everything we hold important as rational human beings. Simply for the sake of “equitable handling,” the University is willing to forsake its academic integrity. Bucknell’s actions effectively glorify mediocrity, condemn excellence, and negate the very principles which drive human industry and ingenuity.

For an institution supposedly dedicated to providing the best education for its students, it is difficult to imagine how we can be deprived of some of the best faculty merely because it is “unfair.”

Sarah Schubert is the former Editor in Chief of The Counterweight, a Collegiate Network member paper of Bucknell University. This article was originally featured in the December 2007 issue of The Counterweight.