WE WON!! THE UNIVERSITY HAS FINALLY AGREED TO FULL TRANSPARENCY REGARDING OUR DATA AND WE HAVE SECURED THE ACCESS WE DEMANDED!! THIS VICTORY BELONGS TO ALL 176 OF US WHO REFUSED TO BACK DOWN UNTIL THE TRUTH CAME OUT AND WE ARE GOING TO REMAIN VIGILANT MOVING FORWARD!!
November 3, 2016
Final supporters
The undersigned are faculty members employed by Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey;
In 2013, Rutgers signed a four-year contract for approximately one-half million dollars with Academic Analytics Inc. to develop a numerical Faculty Scholarly Productivity Index (FSPI) for tenure-track faculty on the New Brunswick campus;
To develop a FSPI for each tenure-track faculty member, Academic Analytics uses various metrics, including: (1) books; (2) journal articles; (3) conference proceedings; (4) citations to journal articles; (5) citations to conference proceedings; (6) federal research grants; and (7) professional honors and awards.
Academic Analytics does not include in its FSPI calculations critical information about the scholarly accomplishments of faculty members, including, but not limited to, grant funding from states or the private sector, book chapters, private sector collaborations, art curatorships, ethnographic films, patents, and community engaged scholarship.
Academic Analytics uses the FSPI for each individual faculty member to calculate an overall productivity index for every Ph.D. program on the New Brunswick campus;
Academic Analytics maintains a database of information that it uses to calculate the FSPI for each tenure-track faculty member;
As an undersigned member of the faculty, I am concerned that the data Academic Analytics is using to calculate my FSPI may not be accurate or complete;
I am also concerned that data from Academic Analytics may be used by the University to make decisions about reappointment, tenure, promotion, merit raises and out-of-cycle salary awards;
I am further concerned that Rutgers is utilizing FSPI ratings and other data from Academic Analytics in allocating resources to departments, programs, units and schools;
In fact, Chancellor Richard Edwards recently acknowledged that in making resource allocation decisions among various units, Deans use data from Academic Analytics;
On March 25, 2016, the New Brunswick Faculty Council issued a Report and Resolution on the Use of Academic Analytics;
The Faculty Council’s Report and Resolution expressed many of the concerns set forth in this petition and called on the University to “disclose as openly and transparently as possible complete information about Academic Analytics and its metrics to the RU-NB faculty” and to “enable individual faculty members to easily access their own AA data;”
I am aware that in response to requests submitted by individual faculty members under the Open Public Records Act for data used to calculate their FSPI, the University denied such requests, claiming that the University does not “maintain data records from Academic Analytics, Inc., on any individual professors;”
Currently, the University President, the Chancellor of Rutgers University – New Brunswick, department chairs, deans, associate deans and program directors have access to the Academic Analytics database and have accessed that database;
Further, the University has a proprietary interest in the database maintained by Academic Analytics on members of its faculty;
My FSPI and the scores that Academic Analytics used to calculate my index is a record to which I have a right of access under the common law and OPRA;
I am therefore exercising my right under the common law and OPRA to request that the University provide me with access to records containing my FSPI and the data, ratings, or scores in the Academic Analytics data base to which the University has access and which were used to calculate my index;
If for any reason, in order for me to exercise my right to information under OPRA, the University requires me to provide additional information or to complete the University’s OPRA form, please contact me using my University email address;
Further, should the University deny this request by me, I authorize the AAUP-AFT law firm of Weissman & Mintz LLC to initiate an action in the Superior Court, Law Division on my behalf to obtain records that reflect my FSPI and the data relied on by Academic Analytics in calculating my FSPI.
Updates
Reached 100 supporters
October 17, 2016
26 Comments
I think this entire process of bean counting is ridiculous. It fosters use of least publishable units and discourages risk-taking in development of new ideas.
I have looked into this -- with actual examples from my own department -- and every single one I looked into was drastically under counted. Plus, AA does not count books over 5 years old, which, in a Humanities field, means that many of our most influential scholars' most important scholarship is not being registered at all.
It is unsettling to see that Rutgers spent so much money on a tool of such dubious quality and which, even if it were accurate, represents a doubling-down on exclusionary and antiquated modes of assessment. And the inexplicable lack of transparency as regards its use is frankly alarming.
It is, to me, simply wrong to spend funds provided by students and raised by faculty to pay companies whose output is made available neither to students nor to faculty. This secretiveness by those who do not do research and do not teach is contrary to everything that universities stand for and has no place at Rutgers.
At age 74, I am already close to retiring, so I am no longer involved in many career-building activities, although we just got a major research paper published. But, I still want to support our younger colleagues. Bill Ward
This has been used internationally and has not accurately evaluated productivity
I believe that I need this information in order to initiate my own promotion process. Many of my activities appear not to be quantifiable by the methods used here (curating).
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
WE WON!! THE UNIVERSITY HAS FINALLY AGREED TO FULL TRANSPARENCY REGARDING OUR DATA AND WE HAVE SECURED THE ACCESS WE DEMANDED!! THIS VICTORY BELONGS TO ALL 176 OF US WHO REFUSED TO BACK DOWN UNTIL THE TRUTH CAME OUT AND WE ARE GOING TO REMAIN VIGILANT MOVING FORWARD!!
November 3, 2016
Final supporters
The undersigned are faculty members employed by Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey;
In 2013, Rutgers signed a four-year contract for approximately one-half million dollars with Academic Analytics Inc. to develop a numerical Faculty Scholarly Productivity Index (FSPI) for tenure-track faculty on the New Brunswick campus;
To develop a FSPI for each tenure-track faculty member, Academic Analytics uses various metrics, including: (1) books; (2) journal articles; (3) conference proceedings; (4) citations to journal articles; (5) citations to conference proceedings; (6) federal research grants; and (7) professional honors and awards.
Academic Analytics does not include in its FSPI calculations critical information about the scholarly accomplishments of faculty members, including, but not limited to, grant funding from states or the private sector, book chapters, private sector collaborations, art curatorships, ethnographic films, patents, and community engaged scholarship.
Academic Analytics uses the FSPI for each individual faculty member to calculate an overall productivity index for every Ph.D. program on the New Brunswick campus;
Academic Analytics maintains a database of information that it uses to calculate the FSPI for each tenure-track faculty member;
As an undersigned member of the faculty, I am concerned that the data Academic Analytics is using to calculate my FSPI may not be accurate or complete;
I am also concerned that data from Academic Analytics may be used by the University to make decisions about reappointment, tenure, promotion, merit raises and out-of-cycle salary awards;
I am further concerned that Rutgers is utilizing FSPI ratings and other data from Academic Analytics in allocating resources to departments, programs, units and schools;
In fact, Chancellor Richard Edwards recently acknowledged that in making resource allocation decisions among various units, Deans use data from Academic Analytics;
On March 25, 2016, the New Brunswick Faculty Council issued a Report and Resolution on the Use of Academic Analytics;
The Faculty Council’s Report and Resolution expressed many of the concerns set forth in this petition and called on the University to “disclose as openly and transparently as possible complete information about Academic Analytics and its metrics to the RU-NB faculty” and to “enable individual faculty members to easily access their own AA data;”
I am aware that in response to requests submitted by individual faculty members under the Open Public Records Act for data used to calculate their FSPI, the University denied such requests, claiming that the University does not “maintain data records from Academic Analytics, Inc., on any individual professors;”
Currently, the University President, the Chancellor of Rutgers University – New Brunswick, department chairs, deans, associate deans and program directors have access to the Academic Analytics database and have accessed that database;
Further, the University has a proprietary interest in the database maintained by Academic Analytics on members of its faculty;
My FSPI and the scores that Academic Analytics used to calculate my index is a record to which I have a right of access under the common law and OPRA;
I am therefore exercising my right under the common law and OPRA to request that the University provide me with access to records containing my FSPI and the data, ratings, or scores in the Academic Analytics data base to which the University has access and which were used to calculate my index;
If for any reason, in order for me to exercise my right to information under OPRA, the University requires me to provide additional information or to complete the University’s OPRA form, please contact me using my University email address;
Further, should the University deny this request by me, I authorize the AAUP-AFT law firm of Weissman & Mintz LLC to initiate an action in the Superior Court, Law Division on my behalf to obtain records that reflect my FSPI and the data relied on by Academic Analytics in calculating my FSPI.
Updates
Reached 100 supporters
October 17, 2016
26 Comments
Academics Analytics is excluding many types of scholarly accomplishments such as book chapters, private grant funding, and art curatorships that are critical to the academic community.
I think this entire process of bean counting is ridiculous. It fosters use of least publishable units and discourages risk-taking in development of new ideas.
I have looked into this -- with actual examples from my own department -- and every single one I looked into was drastically under counted. Plus, AA does not count books over 5 years old, which, in a Humanities field, means that many of our most influential scholars' most important scholarship is not being registered at all.
It is unsettling to see that Rutgers spent so much money on a tool of such dubious quality and which, even if it were accurate, represents a doubling-down on exclusionary and antiquated modes of assessment. And the inexplicable lack of transparency as regards its use is frankly alarming.
It is, to me, simply wrong to spend funds provided by students and raised by faculty to pay companies whose output is made available neither to students nor to faculty. This secretiveness by those who do not do research and do not teach is contrary to everything that universities stand for and has no place at Rutgers.
At age 74, I am already close to retiring, so I am no longer involved in many career-building activities, although we just got a major research paper published. But, I still want to support our younger colleagues. Bill Ward
This has been used internationally and has not accurately evaluated productivity
I believe that I need this information in order to initiate my own promotion process. Many of my activities appear not to be quantifiable by the methods used here (curating).
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
Academics Analytics is excluding many types of scholarly accomplishments such as book chapters, private grant funding, and art curatorships that are critical to the academic community.