As it seems to fit well in this thread, here is a back and forth I had in a prior thread on Churchill. I'm the one who retired from UIC:
My question is how did a man who has an M.A., but no Ph.D., a) be hired to a professorship at a major public university, and b) rise to be Department Head? I just retired from UIC (U. of IL at Chicago) and I can assure you, we did not interview nor hire in our Department (as with all the Departments throughout the University) anyone who did not have a Ph.D. to a professorship. It is a prerequisite to having a faculty position on campus. There are other rules for lecturers/instructors (only an M.A or M.S. needed), but for tenure track professors, a Ph.D. was a must have.
Reply by someone else:
"One doesn't always need a PhD to be hired or promoted at universities; a "terminal" degree is necessary. This is often a PhD, but can be other degrees."
Reply by me again:
That sure wasn't hiring policy at UIC, and I was intimately involved in the hiring process as I was the Assistant to the Head in our Dept. Whatever you are talking about (a "terminal" degree) doesn't allow for hiring of TT/T faculty at any of the large public universities that I know about, and I interfaced with many other universities when dealing with promotion matters and hiring of faculty. Our policy was and still is that you must be a Ph.D. to be hired in a tenure track/tenured position. Can think of no exceptions on our University campus. (Now back in the olden days that may have been done upon occasion, and a few leftovers from those days probably still teach at professorship level, but you could probably count them on one hand.) Frankly, I think it's an artificial rule. I think there are those out in industry whose vast experience should allow for them to teach at University level, and be given the title of "Adjunct" professor, or some such thing.
As to your comments about the Head not necessarily being the most credentialed or qualified person in the Department, I totally agree with you. Usually it is someone who is somewhat administratively skilled, such as having been a Director of Grad Studies before, or an acting head, or in someway administratively savvy, as it should be. However, think Ward Churchill now, do you think, with his attitude, phony publishing record, anti-authority mentality, and political advocacy, that he was a good Department Head? And once again, I can't imagine giving a Headship to a person without a Ph.D. It just isn't done. Not in normal universities, but then again U. of Colorado is a totally PC university, so anything can probably happen there. Just wouldn't want to send any children to such a university, unless it was for a degree in the hard sciences or medicine, which are less steeped in political activism.
I agree. While the dept Chair doesn't have to be the brightest bulb in bunch, I do expect that person to have a PhD.
I am on the west coast and had been looking at schools/nice towns in the west for possible positions. Boulder was on that list, but no more. I can understand the Ethnic Studies dept being PC, but if the whole university is as PC as you say, it's not the place for me. It's hard enough to live with the normal amount of idiotic leftness that you find on most campuses, I don't need to go someplace where people like Churchill are hired, promoted, and revered.
btw - one of my classmates worked at UIC before starting her doctorate. Small world, eh?
Interesting post, and very well articulated response on your part. Nice to know someone in the education field still has a bit of intelligence, but then again, you said you are retired (sigh).
I doubt that "anything" can happen there.
I'm sure the leftist orientation of the administration and faculty provided protective coloration for Churchill's fraud, but the specific acts involved in his employment, tenure, and headship are almost surely violations of existing University policy, done by specific, identifiable individuals for reasons of their own-likely to facilitate the indoctrination of children into an anti-American, revolutionary cult.
I am much more interested in finding, outing, removing, and punishing Ward Churchill's masters than I am in what happens to old Sitting Bullsh*t himself.
Left in place, he is a poster boy for reform of academia (which is why he will be fired soon).
But if he is fired and those who created him are left in place, there will soon be a more clever and more insidious revolutionary in his place.
Who broke the rules to hire Churchill? Who broke the rules to promote Churchill? Who broke the rules to give Churchill tenure?
Find THEM, fire THEM, prosecute THEM if possible, and we'll be making progress.