Dissensions

Rating:
Summary: Unquestionably the definitive social novel about academe
Review: Book was recommended by my dad, a professor at a major university, when I asked if I should go into academic work.

"Dissensions" shows how to develop a career in academe, what happens when things go wrong and how it can get resolved (the hero), or how things can go easier when the faculty is recruited from a common pool (hero's wife).

The hero observes and survives all sorts of back-biting intrigue, misunderstandings, jealousies, vicious behavior, a threat on his life from a colleague, entry of his office at night by the department head to rifle his files, attempts to divert his control of his research funds, amongst other juicy things. Meanwhile, his career continues to go well as he is accorded all sorts of honors, awards, and above all, more than sufficient external research funding.

The administration passively observes the problems and does little, hoping the problems would go away or resolve themselves. Finally,when an adversarial colleague of the hero comes to the notice of the Board of Trustees, hearing are held and the hero testifies. As consequence both his adversaries are dismissed and the problems disappear.

I recommend this book to all college faculty and grad students, campus administators, state boards of higher education, campus boards of trustees, regents or oversears, and even legislators serving on higher education funding committees to ponder how to make things better in a system that is almost teetering along.

Rating:
Summary: Unquestionably the definitive social novel about academe
Review: George Klein's book, Dissensions, details infighting in research-based technical institutions and personal wars between world-class scientists. Unfortunately, these rifts result in tainted reputations for the players and the institutions they represent. The book is based on actual dissensions the author experienced in his years as professor of Geology, with names of institutions and combatants changed to protect their privacy.

I found the book insightful. It portrays a broken academic system and brilliant men lacking communication skills. The book weaves a prideful march of folly in which the players nearly sink the mother ship in order to save their own skiff. The darker side is in all of us, even our beloved educators.

I would recommend this read for all those presently in academia and those considering an academic career.

Rating:
Summary: How to Destroy an Academic Department
Review: The author has encountered academic dissension all over academia. His universities include the
University of Pittsburgh, University of Pennsylvania, University of Illinois, and a New Jersey
college. He also interviewed at the City University of New York for a position which he declined.
I was involved with recommendations for each one of these positions which gives me a bit of
background in evaluation. I have myself been in academia for a total of 3 positions over a 44-year
span, plus 12 years in industry.

If you stay long enough, wherever you go, you will find dissension of various levels of intensity. My
field is geology. This subject has changed drastically over the last15 years. I have written several
textbooks on how to teach this field, yet my input is now outdated. The field is becoming more
interdisciplinary.

This book's author says "I'm a veteran of departmental dissension". "The administration probably
does not give a hoot about what we think of each other. They expect us to work together as civilized
colleagues whether we like each other or not." In my own college, the consensus of one department
was to deny someone tenure. The faculty members objected and went to the university president
who overruled the faculty members and deans and the individual did receive tenure. Whereupon
another untenured professor received tenure to offset the other. This odd faculty member would grab
a colleague's file, tear up his notes, and toss the torn papers into the air and across the table. He is
a real trouble maker. Since the issue reflects on personality, his behavior is excused and allowed to
be of no one's concern. In situations like this, where a non-deserving chair, does not really and
cannot maintain collegiality, the department is a lost cause and cannot survive. Department
colleagues have to be civilized and interface well with each other.

In one of the chapters in this book, the behavior of a professor is described as, "the department has
two vicious faculty members. There is no way to contain them, "although I checked them out during
their review, they instigated trouble again" and we "are troubled by their vicious public utterances,"
or "the dean will not tolerate any more dissension". "The administration is still concerned with
dissension and better collegial atmosphere". A graduate student complained to the administration
"you supervised me poorly, you kept placing the burden on me to think through the problem with
virtually no help. I got a raw deal."

A faculty member is socially dysfunctional; another will be fired from the university for dropping
a student; there are questions "about his mental stability, his psychological state of mind...or his
moral character"; "I won't tolerate any faculty member circulating petitions about their colleagues."
Compare that with a statement circulated in my own university "the faculty members are aging, ill
equipped, and lack luster." What will the students say if they read this note? Think of the following
statements: "tolerate any of the faculty gaining up on other faculty, and that the faculty had to
respect the rights and prerogatives of others"; "I do not plan to speak with Rob (a faculty member)
or work with him"; "he will destroy the department if you are not careful"; "I am concerned about
continued dissension in the department"; "he is becoming dysfunctional because now he is so
isolated from the rest of the department"; "the department will be further torn apart"; "you instigated
more departmental dissension"; "he is a trouble maker"; "his personality did not fit the department's
style of operation"; "that man was administratively dysfunctional in his relations with his
colleagues"; "want to get into litigation over this?"; "perhaps in universities they are supposed to
work together no matter what"; "they are going to squeeze" him "until he resigns." "He keeps doing
things that are self destructive. They won't let him take the department with him." "You do not
know what integrity is. I'm really sorry. Things have degenerated to this level."

Dear Dr. Llewellyn:

"Please be advised that this office represents Dr. Rob Veenstra" (a fictitious name) "regarding widely
known harassment and threats you directed against him."

We have a colleague who sows dissension and tries to undermine our mission. He is disruptive and
belittles our efforts. He was asked to leave, but refuses". "What he cannot gain through collegiate
goodwill, he will try to gain by the use of the courts. "Please...find another department to destroy
to pieces". "I will write Sunquist (a fictitious name) another letter regarding consequences if he takes
retaliatory action against you." He is mentally deranged. He is unfit to serve on the faculty of this

great university."

There are several conflicting problems between the faculty members, including the chairman who
is fired. I have myself seen almost all of it in my many years in academia, but I like it how some
of the problems were resolved.

From text, p. 352.
Rob got home a little late and Sujin met him at the door with a big hug and kiss. She had her regular
coat on but once Rob entered the house, she threw it off and stood there with her happy coat open.
"I want to make love now with the man who's going to get this department head fired. I don't need
your voice today!" She said with a very big smile, and threw her arms around him.
They headed for the bedroom and passionately made love. They heard the phone ringing but didn't
answer.
When they eventually got out of bed, the phone range again. It was Bill Siebold.
"Where've you been? I've been trying to reach you for two hours." Bill said.
"Bill, do I have client-attorney confidentiality?"

"Of course, Rob."
"When I came home, Sujin and I decided to go to bed."
"For two hours?" Bill asked.
"Yes. Can't you tell I"m out of breath?"

Rating:
Summary: Strange goings on in Academia-land
Review: The Univeristy of Illouria hired Rob Venestra for his geological expertise to develop a new program. Several professors then try to oust his department head. Rob and others support the head with whom Rob has developed great rapport. Then the head professor turns on Rob and asks him to leave. Rob refuses.
This is an interesting viewpoint about the politics and diversity of university life, probably indicative of colleges and universities across the land.
George Klein is a geological consultant who lives in Houston. George's first novel is based on a ringside seat at many intra-departmental fights among university professors scrambling to keep their research and teaching programs going with limited resources.

Rating:
Summary: Been there -- done that.
Review: WOW! That was quite a story! The author calls this book a docunovel and it has the ring of truth. Faculty members of any university/college department will not be surprised. Non-participants, from students to their parents and alumni, have little idea of what goes on behind the public façade of collegiality in a university academic department. In DISSENSIONS, author George Klein exposes the conflicts and tensions in the geology department at the thinly-disguised Illouria University in the Midwest. The intra-departmental strife and petty jealousies between individuals soon escalate into warring factions that form a deeply divided department. In the finale, these and other factors result in the downfall of the department head. The story is told largely through believable dialogue between participants.
From my experiences at another geology department, the plot, characters, and events depicted are entirely possible and believable. However, I hope few academic departments are quite this dysfunctional.
I wholeheartedly recommend this book as a "good read."