I don't. I am giving you an examply of why first authorship is very important, while co-authorship is not rated as highly. If you want an example of the quality of his work while at ISU, how about this from the Chronicle of Higher Education:
Under normal circumstances, Mr. Gonzalez’s publication record would be stellar and would warrant his earning tenure at most universities, according to Mr. Hirsch [a scholar who analyzed the publication record]. But Mr. Gonzalez completed the best scholarship, as judged by his peers, while doing postdoctoral work at the University of Texas at Austin and at the University of Washington, where he received his Ph.D. His record has trailed off since then.Note the last statement, that tenure review "only deals with his work since he came to Iowa State." The Discovery Institute knows this yet continues to dishonestly spew the 350% number.“It looks like it slowed down considerably,” said Mr. Hirsch…. “It’s not clear that he started new things, or anything on his own, in the period he was an assistant professor at Iowa State.”
That pattern may have hurt his case. “Tenure review only deals with his work since he came to Iowa State,” said John McCarroll, a spokesman for the university.
The fact that Gonzalez—an Assistant Professor—is ranked higher than any other member of his department, including full professors like Willson, is incredible.
Yes, it is incredible. And now that you've tried to contract the criteria down to only publication rate to eliminate proven unfavorable performance, you try to expand it again in a favorable direction.
Hey, at least you didn't quote the DI's "91%" dishonesty again.
RE: And now that you’ve tried to contract the criteria down to only publication rate to eliminate proven unfavorable performance, you try to expand it again in a favorable direction.
That is EXACTLY MY POINT — It was NOT unfavorable performance.
Assuming that it was 66% in his department, the question is why did he belong to the 34% ? Did he deserve it ? NO.
You keep on harping about his work BEFORE he was at ISU, but that is EXACTLY MY POINT. The tenure criteria states :” publication of approximately fifteen papers of good quality in refereed journals”. It did NOT say while at ISU.
The so called spokesman for the University will of course make the statement he makes, otherwise, why be a spokesman? HE WAS HIRED TO SAY THESE.
So, nope, I am unconvinced that it was unrelated to his personal beliefs.
A Nature article who mentioned him describes Dr Gonzalez as ‘a deeply religious evangelical Christian’, and it says ‘his faith has shaped his views on science.
He considers himself a “sceptic” of Darwin, and says that his Christianity helps him to understand Earth’s position in the Universe. “Our location in the Galaxy, which is optimized for habitability, is also the best place for doing cosmology and stellar astrophysics in the Galaxy,” he says. In other words: “The Universe is designed for scientific discovery.”’
Dr Gonzalez has refrained from mentioning his religious beliefs in his teaching and peer-reviewed works, but his 2004 book The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery, co-authored with Jay Richards of the Discovery Institute, includes many of his pro-design arguments.
AND *THAT* is the main reason ( which was stated before and then minimized later ) that he was denied tenure.