The median Harvard jmc will publish ZERO papers in their lifetime. And those proportions get worse the lower rank you go. So JMCs you may never publish, so at least deadwoods hav met that hurdle and usually pick up the admin work
People that stoped producing papers after tenure
-
The median Harvard jmc will publish ZERO papers in their lifetime. And those proportions get worse the lower rank you go. So JMCs you may never publish, so at least deadwoods hav met that hurdle and usually pick up the admin work
yet those are the more successful ones in life. hilarious how this profession has psyoped everyone into believing publications is the life goal
-
No. If everyone did this academia would cease to exist. You are free riding on people who remain productive after tenure. Same thing with service.
Isn't the optimal strategy is to get one A pub while in phd and publish another A using JMP and some A/A-/B+ before tenure and then do whatever you want?
Free riding is often optimal.
-
The median Harvard jmc will publish ZERO papers in their lifetime. And those proportions get worse the lower rank you go. So JMCs you may never publish, so at least deadwoods hav met that hurdle and usually pick up the admin work
yet those are the more successful ones in life. hilarious how this profession has psyoped everyone into believing publications is the life goal
What is the point of a phd? To get a job a masters can do?
-
If you are a junior, why do you have a problem with deadwood? As long as they are nice and do not create trouble, it is totally fine. Less competition for the publication game. The worse type is the ones who appear to be not deadwood, but keep free-riding junior faculty's papers using their power.
---Not a deadwood.
-
If you are a junior, why do you have a problem with deadwood? As long as they are nice and do not create trouble, it is totally fine. Less competition for the publication game. The worse type is the ones who appear to be not deadwood, but keep free-riding junior faculty's papers using their power.
---Not a deadwood.Because their sheer presence creates both inequities and inefficiencies. For example, my LRM department is chronically and severely short staffed for instructors, which is why deadwoods and juniors up for tenure generically have the same teaching load (the statutory maximum). There are several deadwoods who have not published a single line of research in the past decade, so they essentially do half the job of a teaching-track faculty for twice the salary. That's an inefficiency factor of 4.
They are tenured so the department cannot get rid of them. But if it could, it would be able to hire additional teaching-track faculty covering four times as many courses for the same amount of money. That would translate to lighter teaching loads for everyone, hard-pressed juniors in particular.
-
If you are a junior, why do you have a problem with deadwood? As long as they are nice and do not create trouble, it is totally fine. Less competition for the publication game. The worse type is the ones who appear to be not deadwood, but keep free-riding junior faculty's papers using their power.
---Not a deadwood.Because their sheer presence creates both inequities and inefficiencies. For example, my LRM department is chronically and severely short staffed for instructors, which is why deadwoods and juniors up for tenure generically have the same teaching load (the statutory maximum). There are several deadwoods who have not published a single line of research in the past decade, so they essentially do half the job of a teaching-track faculty for twice the salary. That's an inefficiency factor of 4.
They are tenured so the department cannot get rid of them. But if it could, it would be able to hire additional teaching-track faculty covering four times as many courses for the same amount of money. That would translate to lighter teaching loads for everyone, hard-pressed juniors in particular.More likely they use money to hire 3rd assdean of dei.
-
I only have a problem with deadwoods who impose crazy tenure standars that they never achieved.
If you are a junior, why do you have a problem with deadwood? As long as they are nice and do not create trouble, it is totally fine. Less competition for the publication game. The worse type is the ones who appear to be not deadwood, but keep free-riding junior faculty's papers using their power.
---Not a deadwood. -
You guys tear apart juniors every day, chew them, and spit them out. Best is if they are just before tenure and you can really cause damage. But when we talk about deadwoods suddenly we have to feel sorry for their "fate" and be "sensitive" to their feelings? Come ‘on.
Why list them? What are you trying to accomplish?
He thinks he will look better by making other people look bad. A typical lo ser
-
If you are a junior, why do you have a problem with deadwood? As long as they are nice and do not create trouble, it is totally fine. Less competition for the publication game. The worse type is the ones who appear to be not deadwood, but keep free-riding junior faculty's papers using their power.
---Not a deadwood.You've clearly learned to stroke them the way they like...
-
If you are a junior, why do you have a problem with deadwood? As long as they are nice and do not create trouble, it is totally fine. Less competition for the publication game. The worse type is the ones who appear to be not deadwood, but keep free-riding junior faculty's papers using their power.
---Not a deadwood.How sad must your life be to do such scumbag activity for such low stakes. This thread should instead be about these special edition clowns