Jan. 18, 2007

Students’ Complaints, Professors’ Rights

A seemingly innocuous policy change at the City University of New York has faculty leaders worried that their institution — which has not been front and center in the battles over David Horowitz’s “Academic Bill of Rights” — may end up giving the conservative activist a victory, at their expense.

Looking for a job?

See all 217 new postings

Browse all job listings:

Faculty: 3,477
Administrative: 1,652
Executive: 163
FEATURED EMPLOYERS

CUNY administrators have proposed that the university’s board adopt new procedures for handling student complaints that are not related to either academic freedom or covered by other university policies. The proposal — expected to come before CUNY’s board for ratification later this month — sets up investigative responsibilities and creates panels to adjudicate those complaints in which a mutual conclusion can’t be reached. CUNY officials portray the policy as a clarification that will help students who don’t know what to do when they feel they have been mistreated in the classroom. Very few cases are likely to be covered by the policy, CUNY officials say, and it has nothing to do with Horowitz’s cause.

In one sense, the proposed CUNY policy differs from Horowitz’s proposals because the latter are described by him as a protection of academic freedom, while CUNY’s policy is meant to apply to incidents that aren’t covered by academic freedom. But the CUNY proposal is very consistent with Horowitz’s claim that there are categories of student complaints (he has tended to talk about inappropriate political posturing in class) for which most colleges don’t have a current policy. Most college and faculty groups have said that Horowitz grossly overstates any problem and that policies exist to cover any inappropriate actions that need review.

That’s what faculty leaders are saying at CUNY, too. But the new policy states that there is no procedure in place for student complaints about faculty conduct in the classroom or academic settings, when those complaints don’t involve academic freedom. The CUNY draft policy doesn’t offer examples of what kind of situations would be covered, but faculty leaders note that there are already policies on sexual harassment, various forms of bias, and academic dishonesty.

“This sets up this gigantic machinery, without ever defining what one might be complaining about,” said Barbara Bowen, president of the Professional Staff Congress, the American Federation of Teachers unit that represents CUNY faculty members. “There’s a mystery at the center of this procedure? Why create this now?”

The CUNY rules state that if a student files a complaint, the department chair (or academic dean, if the chair is the subject of the complaint) would conduct a fact-finding investigation within 30 days, try to work out an agreement with everyone involved, and issue a formal finding and recommendation. If either party appeals, the chief academic officer would then serve as chair of an appeals committee, which would have as additional members the chief student affairs officer, two elected faculty members, and one elected student. In considering appeals, the panel would be charged with “particular focus on whether the conduct in question is protected by academic freedom.”

A critique of the policy prepared by the Faculty Senate noted that despite the statements about academic freedom, faculty members would have their conduct judged by a panel on which faculty members aren’t a majority.

Frederick Schaffer, general counsel for CUNY, said that the new policy will not permit any intrusions on academic freedom. He said that the policy was for cases — and he estimated that there may be one or two a year — in which students feel a faculty member has been “abusive” in class, generally in a dispute over political views. That doesn’t mean professors can’t express political views, he said, just that they can’t go beyond a certain point of professionalism in interacting with students.

“Professors are entitled to have a point of view, to express a point of view, and to teach as they see fit as a teacher,” Schaffer said. “On the other hand, occassionally, professors’ conduct could spill over into something that could be thought of as abusive or discriminatory,” and the policy was designed for such cases. In cases of a problem, he said, it was likely that informal discussions would resolve matters. Anything that would lead to real discipline, he said, would have to end up in the system currently in the faculty’s contract with the university.

Bowen raised a number of concerns about the proposal. She said that absent any sense of a real problem to solve, it’s hard to ignore “the political context” in which it appears. “This would be a win for whatever groups want to politicize the classroom and intimidate and silence faculty,” she said. (Horowitz, via e-mail, said that he has not been in contact with CUNY officials about this policy, although he noted that some CUNY faculty members have expressed support for his ideas.)

A major criticism professors have made of the Academic Bill of Rights is that it would create a mechanism for students to respond to professors’ intellectual arguments by sending them into some sort of judicial system. So a student offended by a professor’s insistence that evolution and creationism are not theories of equal weight files a complaint that the professor denigrated religion. Or a student encouraged by various groups to monitor professors for criticism of the United States or Israel ends up filing reports or complaints, rather than debating ideas in the classroom.

“This is an invitation to politicize the classroom, to ask students to go in and report on their professors,” Bowen said.

Bowen stressed that she was not suggesting that faculty members have the right to say or do anything in class. But she said that review procedures, existing complaint procedures, and various CUNY offices gave any aggrieved student a range of options to seek help with any real problem. “As a union, we feel 100 percent that we stand for treating students with fairness and respect. The classroom should be a place for lively discussion and challenging one’s views and expanding one’s thoughts and that can be done — and is best done — when students are treated completely respectfully,” she said.

Schaffer said that he realized that the Horowitz debates nationally have faculty members concerned. But he said repeatedly that he did not want CUNY’s actions to be seen as in any way backing the Academic Bill of Rights. “"This is not an attempt to ensure that faculty be absolutely neutral,” he said. “This is not an attempt to enforce any kind of orthodoxy.”

He predicted that some complaints that would be made under the policy would be valid and others wouldn’t. Why put forward the policy now? There are no complaints right now, he said, and CUNY didn’t want the issue viewed through a specific case. “We were careful to bring this forward because there isn’t a hot controversy.”

— Scott Jaschik

Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Comments

professor’s rights

Odd this story was published this week in my favorite news source for education. This week, probably the nicest guy I have ever known, had two complaints from two students and has been investigated by administrators who have told to “play it safe” regarding controversy. He is an adjunct speech prof at several colleges in the DFW area, teaches 9 and 10 classes each semester, and drives 100+ miles daily to do his work on top of volunteering at animal shelters and AIDS/HIV clinics. The complaints: 1)one male high schooler in college took offense at his statement that if we ban Harry Potter books we should also ban the bible; 2) another, a female, student was offended by a dozen comments he made the first night of lecture (i.e., he is a vegetarian—I am not joking— i sone of them). He has never spanked or yelled at the kid he raised and does not even eat meat, but he will risk his career to threaten an offended student? It is getting ridiculous in education. Myself, I am giving up my teaching job in May. These powerful, too-easily offended right-wing conservative students and their ability to threaten colleges with lawsuits and to scare administration into doing what they demand has worn me down. I have been discpilined twice, once for mentioning three times in a semester that I am Jewish, to which a Christian student even said, in class, “perhaps those who turn their backs on Christ did not deserve not to come to America in 1945 or even step into the new millenia in Europe.” Did she mean the holocaust? I told her to leave my class and not come back, yet I was punished with a “semester of careful review” from my department, while she got moved into another prof’s class because she claimed to be joking. Another prof I met last year showed a newspaper article with a photo of Mohammed and a Muslim student was offended, and he got disciplined (then resigned in December). I have met other profs in Houston and am shocked at the complaints students have made, the decisions administrators have wrongly decided, and the lack of any punishment for students even who inarguably lie or wear sensitive sleeves. This has to stop. Administrators are making it impossible to teach and conservative students (mostly) are getting away with twisting their arms. Administrators are abusing profs and letting students abuse them too. It is a slipppery slope. Admin, ultimately, will realize the pain of what they have done in the name of fairness. Bob Palmer, Houston, is not afraid to write his name or provide his e-mail bapalmer1970@yahoo.com

Bob Palmer, at 8:50 pm EST on January 19, 2008

No machinery for student complaints!?!?

Huh? Since when? It’s called a Dean.

Students complain to the admin. all the time, about all and any manner of things—most usually issues of grades, workload, etc. The idea that there is “no machinery” fot student complaintsis nutty.

In terms of what happens to the complaints, it matters not at all what kind of official machinery you have set up, it is a decision that the admin. makes. They can just as easily decide not to actively pursue many complaints witha machinery as without. Or vice versa.

Brian Moore, at 8:56 am EST on January 18, 2007

If approved, this measure would signal a significant loss of status for faculty. By empowering students in this way, the traditional asymmeties that serve to maintain homeostasis in the classroom would vanish.

GSM, at 9:45 am EST on January 18, 2007

The Politeness Police

The worst part of CUNY’s proposed policy (http://soc.qc.cuny.edu/ufs/2policiesdraft.htm, scroll down) is the total absence of standards or explanations for what “faculty conduct” would violate it. CUNY general counsel Frederick Schaffer declared that particularly in political issues, “professors’ conduct could spill over into something that could be thought of as abusive.” What exactly is abusive and who will define it? If a professor tells a student that it’s idiotic to think that the 9/11 attacks were a secret plot by the Bush Administration, is that abusive? Or is it just the truth? Will Holocaust Deniers be able to file complaints against history professors who denounce their views? Will white supremacists put professors through punishments for denouncing racism? What about famous characters like the law professor in the Paper Chase? Would he be abusive? This seems to be another step in the infantilization of college students, promoting the idea that students are babies who must be coddled by administrators and protected from professors who “could be thought of as abusive.”

John K. iWilson, at 10:15 am EST on January 18, 2007

There is a structure in place for student (and faculty) complaints at every CUNY college that has an Ombudsperson. This includes Baruch, Hunter, CCNY and the CUNY Grad center. The Ombudsperson is a designated neutral, providing confidentiality to all persons seeking his or her services.

Myron Schwartzman, Professor; Interim Ombudsperson at Baruch College, at 11:10 am EST on January 18, 2007

Losing Their Pulpit

Sounds to me like the professors are just mad that they are losing the soap box they tend to stand on when spouting their Leftist views. My guess is that if one spoke in private to most (secretly) conservative instructors, they would not take issue with this new proposal.Political discourse in the classroom should be limited to that which pertains to the subject being taught. It’s OK in History and Political Science. Maybe in Economics. But not in many others I can think of.

Craig C, political pundit at http://blogresponder.blogspot.com, at 12:06 pm EST on January 18, 2007

What about students who are abusive towards their professors?

In Texas, we have had several problems recently with students who are abusive towards their professors. Quite often, administrators at the school in question have failed to take any action against the student. They seem more inclined to mollycoddle disruptive students than they are to protect the rights of professors. In my view, every institution of higher education should have a clear cut procedure in place by which a student may file a complaint against a professor and another procedure by which a professor may file a complaint against a student. In both situations, it’s imperative that the procedure be followed. In Texas, when a student lodges a complaint against a professor, there’s very often a rush to judgment: the administration finds the professor “guilty” without having first conducted an even handed investigation.

Charles Zucker, Executive Director at Texas Faculty Association, at 1:00 pm EST on January 18, 2007

Faculty don’t care about a ‘pulpit.’ This issue isn’t ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative.’ It’s merely about defining the structure of a rule, i.e. what is misconduct within the system they want to implement. As a law, anything that is not descriptive enough should never pass muster because its uses can then be applied to a variety of situations it was never meant to be applied to. Just redefine the rules, if they can, and maybe it would be a whole lot more clear,

br, at 1:00 pm EST on January 18, 2007

Any new processes for investigation of complaints about faculty behavior that is unspecified will generate more complaints. Complaints about grades can easily be shifted to complaints about teaching style etc. Untenured faculty especially adjunct faculty will think twice about introducing any controversial subject, answering controversial questions, and giving students low grades. Does this improve education?

Dan Georgianna, Professor of Economics at University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, at 1:00 pm EST on January 18, 2007

The right wing is look for a way to muzzle opposing views. In general, America has had a strong tradition of academic freedom, with the notable exception of McCarthyism. No dictatorship, either fascist or socialist allows academic freedom. Is that what the right wingers really want?

Jerry, at 1:05 pm EST on January 18, 2007

br

“As a law...”

This isn’t a law, so it won’t need Supreme Court scrutiny.

Craig C, political pundit at http://blogresponder.blogspot.com, at 1:11 pm EST on January 18, 2007

no pulpit

I’m with br. I don’t know anyone who uses their classroom as a pulpit, bully or otherwise. I’m pretty clear about my politics with students, but I’m fairly even-handed in the examples I use when we talk about things political. I also make it clear they better not try kissing up to me by trying to write to my, or anyone else’s really, political perspective. And while it may not be a positive law of the sort John Locke would refer to, it might be a law found in a state of (human) nature (kinda like the laws of gravity that the SC will never visit) that would make it clear that overly broad rules and regulations do lend themselves to abuse at worst and misinterpretation at best.

bradley bleck, instructor at Spokane Falls CC, at 1:56 pm EST on January 18, 2007

There is definitely a difference between exposing students to different ideas, which is one thing college should be about, and forcing ideas on them. Trying to force ideas on people always backfires. It always costs the teacher their credibility. That always happens in extreme cases, such as teachers using students as captive audiences, or forcing students to espouse on view rather than another on a graded assignment. But teachers have to go through years of teaching evaluations before becoming tenured. If they’re not tenured and they do something unethical they can be let go without an involved procedure.

Jerry, at 2:55 pm EST on January 18, 2007

Craig C:

“Sounds to me like the professors are just mad that they are losing the soap box they tend to stand on when spouting their Leftist views.”

But bear in mind that the Chair or Academic Dean who are undoubtedly totally leftist liberals are conducting the initial investigation :)

Rob Rittenhouse, CS Faculty at McMurry University, at 2:56 pm EST on January 18, 2007

Jerry,bradley, Rob

Jerry your first post sounds a bit paranoid, and your second seems to indicate you don’t interact very much with college students. Bradley, good for you. Too bad more profs don’t have you ethical base.Rob, sad but true.

Craig C, political pundit at http://blogresponder.blogspot.com, at 4:01 pm EST on January 18, 2007

Jerry’s point

Jerry, Good point. When I am trying to convince people that my ideas (or rather ideas that support my clients’ position) I don’t let them know that I am forcing them down the throats of my clients. I calmly explain that my clients’ interests fit neatly within my audiences’ paradigm. Very few people pick up on the fact that I am extremely biased in favor of my clients’ interests, and most think that I am objectively stating things.

People with similar jobs that fail at it, try to shove their ideas down other peoples’ throats, and nobody likes that.

Larry, at 4:10 pm EST on January 18, 2007

Complaint procedures

The comments seem to echo my experiences. Maybe a procedure in place could help the faculty deal with the students complaints to the department head/administration on a more equitable basis. My suspicion is that most problems originate with student disrespect and misbehavior. The administration deals on a one-sided basis especially with adjunct faculty who are generally regarded as disposable, due to the surplus of candidates.

Nancy Gierach, at 6:05 pm EST on January 18, 2007

“Why create this now?”

After investigations on the odds of successfully completing a full discipline of a tenured public faculty being equal to winning $50,000 lottery prize — that kind of question has to be asked?

Silly, ridiculous, and delusional. Madam, you work for the taxpayers. They reserve management rights, which are so minimal, in the private sector they would be laughable and lead to bankruptcy.

You don’t like them — leave. Get out. Go. Take off. Most of these problems are in low-level, “required” courses. Eliminate those problems, and you’d eliminate 99.9% of these matters.

B.D., at 6:05 pm EST on January 18, 2007

Craig, I am always interested in hearing opposing points of view. It is interesting that you characterize me as paranoid rather than stating why you disagree with my first post. It is also interesting that you state, incorrectly as it happens, that I do not interact much with college students, instead of stating why you disagree with my second post. While the term “liberal leftist” might make sense to a Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coutler fan, it doesn’t make sense to anyone who has actually studied political theory. As for deans and chairs being leftists, some of them might well be. It is a separate question than the questions of what their job should be, and whether individuals in these jobs are doing them correctly.

Jerry, at 6:25 pm EST on January 18, 2007

BD, I agree that CUNY faculty works for the taxpayers. I respect that you are a taxpayer, and you feel very seriously about this point. I am also a taxpayer, and I think we need to hire and retain the best and most knowledgeable teachers, irrespective of their political beliefs. If my kid’s teacher says, “I like George Bush” it isn’t the end of the world. He’s entitled to like whoever he wants. And if he is a good teacher I want him to continue teaching.

Jeryy, at 7:20 pm EST on January 18, 2007

As it is usual now, there was a mistake made but unnoticed. Then, the problem appears, but instead of finding the old mistake, everyone is trying to solve the problem which simply can not be solved due to the initial mistake.

I am saying this: The recent events and debates can not be a subject of teaching at universities. They are too recent to represent any science. There simply is no science in them, nothing proved and nothing established as true. Radicals (on all sides) are eager to incude them and through universities change the society right now. But, this is not science, be it biology or a social science.

Michael Pyshnov, at 8:31 pm EST on January 18, 2007

Red & blue agree

” .. I am also a taxpayer, and I think we need to hire and retain the best ..”

There is agreement on this: college costs have gone up faster than inflation and results are very mixed.

One political party dominates soft-side academia. They can try to blame their problems on others, but they are trapped by empirical data.

After all the blather and yada-yada, it is about results. And they are unsatisfactory. Get used to it.

B.D., at 10:00 pm EST on January 18, 2007

Jerry Pt 2

You said “It is also interesting that you state, incorrectly as it happens, that I do not interact much with college students...”

Sorry, but on my computer, I state that it seems that you don’t interact with college students. Was the word seems redacted somehow?

Craig C, political pundit at http://blogresponder.blogspot.com, at 10:01 pm EST on January 18, 2007

Michael, even math and sciences, it is only at the lower levels that everything is known. I think colleges have to go beyond the trivial. By exposing students to different theories regarding the same subject or situation, students learn to handle situations that do not have a cut-and-dried solution.

BD, I would be interested in a discussion of results, but we’re getting off the topic of the original article. Unless you believe the new policy described in the article will improve results?

Craig, it seems like a mystery to me. Clearly you didn’t agree with my second post, but you have not said why. By the way, I like your post saying that the policy change is not a law and will not be reviewed by the supreme court. That is true.

Jerry, at 6:26 am EST on January 19, 2007

Jerry/Larry

” .. BD, I would be interested in a discussion of results, but we’re getting off the topic ..”

Overall performance = results.

Lack of performance (e.g., student complaints about faculty’s intellectually-blinding dogma) = lack of results.

Example: Mr. Michael Nifong’s failure to perform = lack of productive results, for anyone. Except bigots, hate-mongers, and race-baiters.

Happy V-Day, everyone in IHE-land!

B.D., at 8:06 am EST on January 19, 2007

I think some of the results that the university wants are for students, on graduation, to be able to get job they want or to attend the graduate schools they want. A sublter goal would be for students to be able to handle difficult situations, where different solutions representing different points of view are offered.

Jerry, at 11:00 am EST on January 19, 2007

answer for BD

BD, In attempting to answer your question, I find that the question is unclear. I have not been following Mr. Nifong’s story too closely, however, at some point, had he stayed on the case, he would have had to present it to a jury. In doing that, he must convince the jury that the testimony that he elicited fits within the jury’s view of the way the world works. If he simply pounded the table and demanded that he be accepted, most jurors would be turned off. Now, if I had been following the story closely, I would probably be able to tell you every single pretrial motion filed by both sides, and the outcome of both. If one of them (that was disputed) was resolved in the government’s favor, at a fairly high level of abstraction, I would attribute it to simply be able to convince whoever determines what the law “is” that his resolution of a dispute issue best fit within that judge’s ideas about law, and justice. Again, simply whining like a spoiled child doesn’t really convince people of anything. Now, of course, this is my theory of advocacy, and if you don’t like it, you can hire another lawyer.

Larry, at 11:25 am EST on January 19, 2007

Wha?

” .. I think some of the results that the university wants are for students, on graduation, to be able to get job they want ..”

Yo — this goes back to undergrad — universities are *bureaucracies.* Their goal is to survive, no matter what the cost to others.

That includes, but not limited to, “marketing” and “retention” efforts to keep the money coming in. It is always about the money, isn’t it?

Everything else is secondary. Including after-graduation outcomes, numbers of years to graduation, six-year graduation rates, and quintennial “investigations” into what taxpayers get for their higher-ed dollars.

Happy V.D.

B.D., at 12:10 pm EST on January 19, 2007

Yes. Its money that makes the world go round. This is on an administrator’s mind more than a teacher’s, but its true nevertheless. But if colleges weren’t doing their job, people would stop going to them. I’m not sure how this ties in with the point of the article. Getting back to the original article, I think CUNY’s officials are bowing to a small but vocal political interest group. In terms of results, I think CUNY does well, but there is always room for improvement, and that is what they should be focusing on.

Jerry, at 1:50 pm EST on January 19, 2007

academic freedom or license to rant?

“A critique of the policy prepared by the Faculty Senate noted that despite the statements about academic freedom, faculty members would have their conduct judged by a panel on which faculty members aren’t a majority.”

Yeah, I bet that scares the crap out of the bullying professors who’ve gotten away with this self-aggrandizing license to do and say whatever the hell they feel like, Academic freedom be damned.

David Carroll, at 2:20 pm EST on January 19, 2007

I’ve certainly had some professors who have been a bit heavy handed. For example, in the days when I was in school, I took a course in Existential Philosophies, and the professor only taught the philosophy of Kierkegaad, and she did so in what I thought was a rather opinionated and heavy handed manner.

I don’t think someone like that would be tenured these days. Certainly she had something to offer, but these days teachers can’t get away with gratuitously rubbing students the wrong way, politically or otherwise.

I guess external parties have always tried to impose their values on the university is nothing new. Of course the most extreme cases are Hitler, Stalin, and Mao Tse Tung.

Jerry, at 3:20 pm EST on January 19, 2007

Academic Freedom (or not)

Academic freedom of course is not a license for faculty to abuse students under any circumstances, but the incidents of alleged abuse by faculty of students (or vice versa) quite often come down to interpretations of the incident. This is just what a typical (well crafted) grievance procedure is for, so I fail to see why any separate policy would be necessary.

A political disagreement, or any civilly conducted academic disagreement, is indeed protected by academic freedom and to a certain extent free speech. That a CUNY official would even suggest a political disagreement might fall under a loosely defined new policy is indeed cause for great concern. CUNY, of all higher education bastions, ought to be leading the way in creating an environment safe for just such academic dialogue rather than inducing a chill in the climate.

KED, College President, at 5:05 pm EST on January 19, 2007

2nd time

” .. these days teachers can’t get away with gratuitously rubbing students the wrong way ..”

Again: “After investigations on the odds of successfully completing a full discipline of a tenured public faculty being equal to winning $50,000 lottery prize ..”

Tenure sets the bar of teaching performance so low, it is proof-positive that students teach themselves, not faculty. Nowhere in the U.S. can end-users be so abused without redress.

Consider the impeachment case of Mr. Clinton vs. the discipline case of Mr. W.L. Churchill. That the Clinton case could be processed more quickly than Ward-o’s is so absurd, it is beyond rationality. (Then, it could be noted as an example of things in academia being so small and useless.)

L.H.H., at 6:25 pm EST on January 19, 2007

Which Complaints?

I guess I must read this article again. I’m still not clear what kind of student complaints CUNY has in mind. Only that they are supposedly complaints not having to do with academic freedom and not covered by other policies and rules.

Even if I take those qualifications at face value, I’m still unclear what kinds of complaints warrant the new university policies, and (assuming we can get a clear picture of those complaints), how one will distinguish legitimate complaints from bogus or questionable ones.

If, for example, one has in minds complaints regarding sexual harrassment, I should imagine that a this late date CUNY, like most other schools, already has rules and judicial procedures for such abuses.

There’s a certain vagueness about the kinds of student complaints the university has in mind, a vagueness which makes me a bit uneasy.

Rob, Dr., at 9:30 pm EST on January 19, 2007

Hi LHH,

As I said, ” .. these days teachers can’t get away with gratuitously rubbing students the wrong way ..”

And you mention the case of Ward Churchill. Are any of the people complaining about Ward Churchill his students?

Please correct me if I am wrong. My understanding is that Churchill’s objectionable utterances were made outside the college, and that courts have already ruled that a college cannot punish teachers for objectionable speech outside the college.

Jerry, at 8:45 am EST on January 20, 2007

Rubbing wrongly

http://www.pirateballerina.com/

Off only by about, say, 179 degrees. Nice try — keep up the good effort — have a nice day.

L.H.H., at 1:01 pm EST on January 20, 2007

Accountability

Whatever happened to “accountability” for your actions. Faculty always seem to look the other way with “one of their own".

PS, at 11:05 am EST on January 21, 2007

Jobs Related to Students' Complaints, Professors' Rights

or search for jobs directly.

Artist/Teacher of Voice/Bass-Baritone or Tenor
Oklahoma State University

Department of Music, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma RESPONSIBILITIES: Teach applied voice, and (consistent ... see job

Assistant/Associate Professor — Beef Cow/Calf Mgmt
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Associate Professor or Professor of German
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities

The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job

Service Desk Analyst (112202)
Northeastern University

Northeastern University, founded in 1898 and located in Boston, is a private research university that is a leader in ... see job

Assistant/Associate Professor, EarlyChildhood/Elementary Education
James Madison University

Join one of the finest regional universities in the nation. James Madison University, home to 18,000 + students, welcomes you ... see job

Business & Information Systems Instructor: Part-Time Temporary Pool (Accounting & Statistics)
College of Marin

COLLEGE OF MARIN JOB OPPORTUNITY BUSINESS & INFORMATION SYSTEMS INSTRUCTOR Accounting, General Business, Business Law & ... see job

Assistant Professor in Systematic Theology
College of Notre Dame of Maryland

College of Notre Dame of Maryland is experiencing a time of growth and renewal and is seeking new faculty and departmental ... see job

Systems Analyst II
Lone Star College System

Located just north of Houston, Texas, our five campuses serve 1,400 square miles. Our student enrollment is nearly 50,000 in ... see job

Associate Vice President for Development
University of Texas, Brownsville

Position Number: FY 09-65 Reports to: Vice President for Institutional Advancement Scope: The Associate Vice President for ... see job

Assistant Adjunct Professor, Pediatrics
University of California, Irvine

School of Medicine Department of Pediatrics Child Development Center Division Position: Assistant Adjunct Professor This ... see job