UPDATE: MIT professor lost 14 lbs in first week of hunger strike

ballz2wallz · 01-13-2007, 03:17 PM

This post is a little more personal, as it has to do with something happening here at work. I was reluctant to post it here, as I wasn't sure how much I should help in 'outing' the story. Of course, I was foolish to think that something sent to so many people would be addressed internally. So I'm going to post it.

I received an email around Christmas from a Associate Professor in my department, James L. Sherley. This email was sent to everyone in the department and all staff at MIT. Attached to the email was a pdf letter explaining his case (which I have attached in this thread), a case of supposed racism keeping him from getting tenure in the department. This apparently has been going on for quite some time now.

Read the letter, it's quite interesting. This is where it gets REALLY interesting:

I am also asking for your help in another way. My two young daughters and wife and my lab are now going through a third bleak holiday season of waiting for MIT upper administration to figure out how to do the right thing. Courageously, they join me in my determination to never leave MIT without a just resolution and correction of what a few racist members of the MIT community have done. If their wrongful deeds are not corrected by February 5, 2007, I will go on hunger strike outside the MIT Provost's office. I hope that you will support me in this effort by joining me in my protest starting on February 5, 2007. Of course, I am not asking you to join me in my hunger strike, just to support me with your presence when you are able.

I will either see the Provost resign and my hard-earned tenure granted at MIT, or I will die defiantly right outside his office.
This is the strength of my conviction that racism in American must end. What better place to kill a small part of it than at a great institution like MIT. It is time for leaders at MIT to stop sitting around in monthly faculty meetings wringing their hands about difficulty retaining minority faculty. Some, like Provost Reif are not fretting at all. Instead, they are trying to wipe the stain of their own racism from their hands before someone who cares sees it.

So this poses an interesting situation; should MIT grant tenure so he doesn't kill himself (is this something he'll really do, or will he sneak off at night and eat something?), which will, of course, eliminate any credibility to the tenure process at MIT and every other school, or should they stand by their decision not to grant him tenure at the risk of being seen as a racist institution? Is this political correctness run amok? Can the race-card even be effective these days?

Granted, I don't know the full situation, nor both sides of the story. I doubt anybody but those involved know exactly what's going on. A source close to me said last night that Dr. Sherley's work, while not necessarily bad, isn't quite up to par either, as his religious beliefs strongly influence his work. Supposedly he's attempting to find a way to use adult stem cells to circumvent the need for fetal stem cells, as he doesn't believe in the use of fetal stem cells. That alone is not sufficient to deny tenure, but I suspect it plays a part.

I also find it hard to believe that the chair of the BE department would be racist, even moreso out themselves as racist at the risk of their own career and credibility. Why would they do such a thing? That seems unreasonable to me.

I believe Dr. Sherley has essentially destroyed all chances of getting tenure at this point, but he seems to have reached desperation. It'll be interesting to see where this leads.

ballz2wallz · 01-13-2007, 03:18 PM

Dr. Sherley has essentially requested that all email contact and discussion be made public, but this is the last email I received, Dec. 22.

Provost Reif:

This afternoon, I received your letter dated December 22, 2006.

Please, recognize that because of the past untrustworthy behavior of MIT's upper administration, for the present, I will not conduct any communications with you or other members of MIT's upper administration that are not as public as possible. In this way, I hope to improve the integrity of any future proceedings. Therefore, I request that any future communications from you or other officers of MIT are sent to me by e-mail and to the cc-list on this e-mail message. I will communicate in this manner until there is a change in the current obtuse posturing adopted by MIT's upper administration regarding the evidence for my complaint.

In your letter, you state that you "...have extended [my]
current appointment to January 31, 2007..." After a resolved
decision not to tenure a member of the MIT faculty, it is customary to provide the faculty member a year or more time to arrange for new positions for themselves and their research staff. Certainly, however MIT's upper administration decides to address my charges, they should responsibly extend fair treatment to the members of my laboratory. Your stated plan to only extend the appointment of my laboratory at MIT for one month is an egregious one; and it deviates dramatically from both accepted practice and from the 6 months or more time that you suggested in the presence of my advocate, Professor Kenneth Manning, and Professor Philip Khoury in your meeting with me on Monday, December 18, 2006.

ballz2wallz · 01-13-2007, 03:20 PM

BE Professor Threatens Hunger Strike to Protest Tenure Denial

An African-American associate professor has threatened to go on hunger strike unless the provost resigns and his tenure is granted, protesting what he claims were racist motives behind the denial of his tenure. The Department of Biological Engineering decided not to advance BE Associate Professor James L. Sherley’s case for tenure on Dec. 13, 2004. Since then, Sherley has asked senior administrators to overturn his department’s decision.

Sherley has announced that his hunger strike will begin on Feb. 5 if MIT fails to take action. Based on an independent review by senior faculty members, MIT has deemed that the denial of tenure was fair, according to a statement from the MIT News Office.

In a December letter sent to MIT faculty members calling for support, Sherley argued that his case for tenure was handled carelessly and that Douglas A. Lauffenburger, director of the Biological Engineering Division, performed a racist act by asking “an African-American head who is not in my field of research” to sign off on his decision “not to advance my tenure case for review by Engineering Council in December 2004.”

According to Provost L. Rafael Reif, after Sherley filed a grievance, a committee of senior faculty members from different MIT departments was appointed to address the issues Sherley had identified. The committee “gathered information from many sources and carefully considered the facts of the case,” Reif said. “This is the same process that has been followed in other tenure cases in which a greivance has been filed,” Reif added. “The committee reported that the tenure process conducted in Professor Sherley’s case was fair.”

In his letter, Sherley argued that there were two acts that should have been sufficient justification to overturn Lauffenburger’s decision to deny him tenure. According to Sherley, he was denied laboratory space during his seven years at MIT because of his race. He also received a call from a member of the MIT Corporation regarding his “confidential outspoken criticism against Provost Robert [A.] Brown,” who was the provost before Reif arrived in 2005, Sherley said. “I now know that for a member of the Corporation to contact an untenured faculty member regarding such important Corporation business is improper,” Sherley wrote.

BE Professor John M. Essigmann PhD ’76 said that he had never heard Sherley complain about lacking adequate lab space.

“Academia is a difficult place. MIT is a difficult place,” said BE Professor C. Forbes Dewey, Jr. He mentioned that the faculty went through great deliberation, understanding that someone’s life would be in their hands, but “[we] felt in every respect the process was appropriate and complete, and the result was appropriate.” According to various BE professors, the review of tenure includes assessment of teaching ability, reputation, external and internal letters, community service, and grants received.

In a December letter sent out to MIT faculty calling for support, Sherley said, “I will either see the Provost resign and my hard-earned tenure granted at MIT, or I will die defiantly right outside his office. This is the strength of my conviction that racism in American [sic] must end. What better place to kill a small part of it than at a great institution like MIT.”

“I am saddened by Professor Sherley’s statement,” Reif said in an e-mail. “Although I respect Professor Sherley’s right to disagree, I hope that he will find other ways to express his views. He is a promising scientist who has a great deal to offer to science and society.”

Sherley considered the denial of tenure mostly a matter of racism, but he mentioned in his letter that hostility toward his research from BE Professor Linda G. Griffith also played a role. Whereas Griffith “and her supporters would tolerate and even celebrate such a challenge from a White faculty member,” conflict ensued because they would never welcome it “from one who is Black,” Sherley wrote in the letter. Griffith declined to comment for The Tech.

Known for his controversial position on stem cells, Sherley works with adult stem cells and opposes research involving human embryonic stem cells, which he believes amounts to killing human life, according to a December article in the Boston Globe.

The hunger strike “will seem rash to those who don’t know me well, but it is not,” Sherley wrote in an e-mail. “I hope that people will realize that my [letter] said ‘Help me end racism at MIT,’ and not ‘Help me get tenure at MIT.’ My motivation for this protest is not the fact that I have been denied an opportunity for tenure. It is because of the reason that I have been denied this opportunity ….What I do now is not a rash reaction to disappointment, it is a well-reasoned self-sacrifice for change.”

ballz2wallz · 01-13-2007, 03:22 PM

I suspect the ball might start rolling soon...

Apparently he went public with this about 2 yrs ago, the Boston Globe printed up a story, but nothing really caught on, according to sources close to me.

kinggovernor · 01-13-2007, 03:26 PM

sounds interesting but I have a hard time believing it is race based, probably more to do with his personal beliefs

ballz2wallz · 01-13-2007, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

sounds interesting but I have a hard time believing it is race based, probably more to do with his personal beliefs

According to his own students, it's racism at its worst. I suspect they also only get his side of the story.

I also disagree that it's race-based, but it would be a shame if anything other than his work was influencing tenure decisions. Personal beliefs should not be a factor. From what I understand however, he's had trouble with his work (ie funding). That would lend credibility to his denial of tenure.

RMNIXON · 01-13-2007, 03:35 PM

Well, I want to see the claims of racism substantiated? I don't see it in these posts. If MIT can make a good case that the work is substandard and perhaps tainted with a religious/political bias then that should be something you can put on the table. I am looking for facts, not crying. That is why I am not a modern liberal. Not that a Black man who has conservative leanings cannot be discriminated against, but I would make a case of politics before race. I know how liberals act and think......

My guess would be he is playing the race card because it works with these people and he knows the political card (respect for human life) means nothing! So that would be a false argument that makes these people do the wrong thing and back off! Good thing he is not white or this would not work unless he could say I am Gay? As I said the quality or work should be considered. Watch how it wont be!

JaJae · 01-13-2007, 04:02 PM

I don't know enough about the story to make a determination.

But it does sound like he's making a publicity stunt with his "give me tenure or I'll die" mentality. He has a family and children, it would be irresponsible of him to do so. There are more rational ways of getting his point across.

Donkey® · 01-13-2007, 04:29 PM

He loses all credibility with me for this comment:

"My two young daughters and wife and my lab are now going through a third bleak holiday season of waiting for MIT upper administration to figure out how to do the right thing."

RMNIXON · 01-13-2007, 04:43 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

sounds interesting but I have a hard time believing it is race based, probably more to do with his personal beliefs

Yes, but what will work?

I would say he should start talking about 400 years of oppression. And if they dare question his actual performance start on how he was a poor black child and went to a bad school. It does not have to be true. It will work.......

When you work for the mob act tough! If you want to join a gang act tough! When you work for Liberals be a diaper baby!

MKULTRA · 01-15-2007, 11:03 AM

Anytime I see any accusation of racism I immediately ask:

Where is the evidence?

If I see no evidence then I make no decision one way or the other.

What I see much more than racism is generally empty, convenient, accusations of racism and it is the same with sexism, etc. People are walking around on eggshells at work. It has really, the whole PC thing, went way overboard.

I don't know anything about this guy but to support him one way or the other I'd have to see some evidence to back up his claims. Unfortunately, it is so easy to work people up in a fervor little or no evidence that it doesn't really matter to most people.

RMNIXON · 01-15-2007, 06:13 PM

Yes, but that would be being a rational person. If this guy works for people who are not rational and have a PC measure of things then what do you do? If he is under fire because his views on stem cells don't fit he won't get a fair hearing. But play on their racial oversensitivity and they cower like a wet poodle! Jason Blair did it with the New York Times, wrote major fraud, and laughed at the people who hugged him and gave him chance after chance because he was black! Why not? If we are making up for 400 years of oppression it is better than welfare fraud in my book.

Just so long as liberals are on the bad end of the stick!

MKULTRA · 01-17-2007, 01:41 AM

If someone makes a claim of racism with no evidence then I just can't support them or the goals they hope to achieve out of that.

Diamond Cross · 01-17-2007, 04:00 AM

The problem is though that evidence for racism is difficult to come by. You pretty much have to get it on tape.

MKULTRA · 01-17-2007, 05:49 AM

I don't think it's that difficult. Witnesses are evidence. A pattern of racist prejudice against previous or current employers is fairly easy to prove.

Diamond Cross · 01-17-2007, 06:29 AM

But eyewitness testimony is unreliable.

MKULTRA · 01-17-2007, 08:06 AM

That may be so but if you get a handful of people behind you then that is fairly credible. Even a couple of people testifying on your behalf is very useful. It's not difficult to expose a racist workplace. Most accusations of racism I've seen personally involve some remark that was taken the wrong way or some revenge burn, which is why I'm skeptical of people like this throwing the word around and then not backing up their claim with any evidence whatsoever.

ballz2wallz · 01-29-2007, 10:42 AM

It seems he still has plans to go through with his hunger strike, despite his previous emails. Apparently MIT has done nothing about his requests.

Therefore, I continue with the plan for the next phase of my protest.
Unless MIT's upper administration addresses these demands, I will begin a hunger strike at 9 AM on the morning of Monday February 5,
2007 outside of the offices of President Susan Hockfield and Provost Rafael Reif, Room 208 in Building 3 on MIT's campus. I will protest in person every morning in this location for as long my health allows it. Thereafter, I will continue my hunger strike even if I am unable to stand in person at the door of 3-208. I am hopeful that I will not have to stand alone and, when I am no longer able, that some among you will rise to stand in my stead. Racism must end at MIT.

The rest of the letter details what his demands are, why he thinks he deserves tenure, and why all these other guys should resign.

Nuts.

7960 · 01-29-2007, 11:13 AM

If everything in his letter is true (and there's no way to know that because we're only hearing one side) then he's been wronged but is it because of racism or some other reason? He thinks it's racist that he only gets 355 feet of lab space while others more junior to him get more?