Also in this week's C&EN, this letter to the editor:
One topic never mentioned in the article on Kristie Koski was how many graduate students have successfully completed their PhD with Koski, either at Brown University or at the University of California, Davis (C&EN, Oct. 30, 2023, page 17). Her website doesn’t mention the names of current or former graduate students or postdoctoral scholars. Her mentoring skills should be a major factor in considering tenure.
I am baffled by her own description of herself on her website, which reads in part, “Professor Koski is an adrenaline junky known for epic adventures: climbing big walls, surfing 30 foot waves, destroying expensive kayaks, and driving her over-powered muscle car way too fast.” No mention of her love of teaching and mentoring new scientists.
An interview with current graduate students might help give a better perspective on professor Koski and whether she is ready for tenure.
Many scientists who get awards and grants do not make good professors.
Roseann Csencsits
Pleasanton, California
I stipulate Dr. Csencsits' point about the disconnect between well-regarded academic researchers and their teaching prowess, but I don't think that "mentoring skills" have ever been a major factor in the granting of tenure, especially at large research universities like UC-Davis. Productivity, productivity, productivity seem to be the top three factors, with collegiality within professors as a trailing consideration.
Bad mentoring per se would not disqualify one from tenure, but an inability to get students "through the system" and graduated out into the real world would seem to me to be a major impediment, no?
ReplyDeleteI am honestly not sure, the letter is written is such a neutral language. I can see perspective that Dr. Koski is a great mentor or Dr. Koski is a great scientist but not a great mentor. which one is it?
ReplyDeleteDoes student success matter to grants in the US? I know my PI talked about the NSERC categories being (I forget the names) but the grant proposal itself, their past research, and former student success (and that could include a range of things as long as you could see their training being useful. Becoming a prof? Great. Going off to become a lawyer or going into management or politics? Also great. Burning out and working at a chapters or the liquor store (as I know people who did those)? Not great.
ReplyDeleteI think the category for this is something like 'Training high quality personal"?
Hmmm...sounds like she has a wasteful, high carbon-footprint lifestyle. Shouldn't that alone be disqualifying in today's woke universities---especially in California?
ReplyDeleteSimilar comments to this are not welcome here. There are many other places on the internet to discuss the political leanings of the university.
DeleteFormer UC Davis grad student here. Commenting anonymously because I, like everyone else who know's what's going on there, don't want to get dragged into this publicly. But consider that the article, follow-up, and online discourse has entirely relied on information gathered from one side of this thing.
ReplyDeleteEmails to chemjobber@gmail.com are welcome and are kept strictly confidential.
DeleteEven anonymously and from a single person's perspective, I would love to hear a different side of the story from a UC Davis student.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure there are other sides to this, because there always are, but I have to completely discount this letter after: "No mention of her love of teaching and mentoring new scientists." Reading someone's bio and getting upset for something they *didn't* include is the ultimate "so you hate waffles?" behavior. It's hard to read the rest without wondering how many of the other complaints are overblown.
ReplyDelete