bet365 bonus code louisiana newspaper comprehensively reports from foreign media April 22，Richard Utz, associate dean of the Ivan Allen College of Arts and Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology in the United States, published an article on the official website of Times Higher Education in the United Kingdom，American scholars should treat the tenure bet365 bonus code louisiana process with a more serious and responsible attitude。

In recent years，There are frequent discussions about the tenure system in American academia。Supporters think，Tenure is academic freedom、Important guarantee for knowledge production and dissemination；Opponents think，Tenureship gives academic staff too many privileges，Hindering innovation and progress。Given the importance of tenure to academic staff and their work，Utz thinks，Scholars who undertake bet365 bonus code louisiana tasks must perform their responsibilities seriously。

The U.S. tenure bet365 bonus code louisiana mainly examines the applicant’s performance in three aspects: scientific research、Teaching、School Services。The materials that applicants need to prepare include: resume、Published scientific research results、Teaching and service experience、Awards and funding received、Personal statement (outline your professional resume and highlight key achievements)。The bet365 bonus code louisiana committee will invite 5-10 senior scholars in the applicant’s subject field to evaluate the applicant’s academic contribution and influence，After receiving feedback, submit it together with other materials to the leadership of the applicant’s department and school leadership。

Utz served as department head at three American public universities、Head of the Professional Title bet365 bonus code louisiana Committee，Also served as an external reviewer。According to his observation，In about 1/3 of the time，The tenure bet365 bonus code louisiana process does not strictly comply with relevant regulations。Because we trust the applicant or to save time，Assessors often omit independent assessments，Write evaluation opinions directly based on the applicant’s self-report or information on the Internet，Even inserting large sections of the applicant’s self-assessment without indicating the source。In an extreme case，A reviewer completely copied the publisher’s promotional text for the applicant’s monograph in the recommendation letter。This is likely to be equivalent to quoting the applicant's own words - publishers often let authors draft their own introductions to new books。

And，Many external bet365 bonus code louisiana comments only have “recommendation” without “evaluation”，This will weaken the rigor and value of the bet365 bonus code louisiana results。There are also external reviewers with undisclosed conflicts of interest，His opinions cannot be adopted either。An applicant once published a lengthy article that positively reviewed an external reviewer’s new work，But did not include this bet365 bonus code louisiana in his own work list，The reviewer did not mention this in the bet365 bonus code louisiana comments。It is difficult not to question the relationship between the two and the fairness of the judges' opinions。In addition，Both internal and external reviewers tend to judge the quality of applicants’ research results based on the popularity of academic journals，But it is not uncommon for published studies to be exposed as scandals involving academic misconduct。

Utz said，Problems arising in tenure bet365 bonus code louisiana，Has raised public doubts about the self-governance ability of academia。To ensure that the tenure system plays its due role effectively，Evaluators must strictly control their standards，Every application is reviewed against the highest standards。

　　（bet365 bonus code louisiana/Compiler）