https://thehill.com/homenews/education/5320925-harvard-revokes-professors-tenure/

Quote:

---

Harvard University revoked the tenure of a prominent behavioral scientist and business professor who was accused of manipulating data in her published work.

A spokesperson for the university confirmed on Tuesday that Harvard Business School professor Francesca Gino's tenure has been revoked, marking the end of a chapter in the long-running dispute between Gino and the university, which is ongoing in court.
…
It is exceedingly rare for a professor's tenure to be revoked. According to the school newspaper, The Harvard Crimson, no professor is known to have their tenure revoked since at least the 1940s, when the rules were formalized.

---

Of course with all the disputes they've gotten into with President Trump lately, it leads the casual observer to wonder if they're trying to clamp down on things because of the public spotlight on them at the moment. No more slaps on the wrist, for now anyway.

I assume that this is pretty rampant at almost every institution. A&M too.

No need to be concerned about right, wrong, honest, dishonest, etc. when you pretty much can't get fired from your job no matter what. Plus when grant money is on the line, I am of the opinion that administration doesn't care about much outside of getting that grant money anyway.

schmellba99 said:

---

I assume that this is pretty rampant at almost every institution. A&M too.

No need to be concerned about right, wrong, honest, dishonest, etc. when you pretty much can't get fired from your job no matter what. Plus when grant money is on the line, I am of the opinion that administration doesn't care about much outside of getting that grant money anyway.

---

Tend to agree.

When someone's entire livelihood is dependent on publishing research through grants, human nature will go to extraordinary lengths to ensure survival.

I mean, really, how do you think we end up with all these stupid social and psychological studies that are nothing but hot garbage and cannot even be close to replicated?

CDUB98 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I assume that this is pretty rampant at almost every institution. A&M too.

No need to be concerned about right, wrong, honest, dishonest, etc. when you pretty much can't get fired from your job no matter what. Plus when grant money is on the line, I am of the opinion that administration doesn't care about much outside of getting that grant money anyway.

---

Tend to agree.

When someone's entire livelihood is dependent on publishing research through grants, human nature will go to extraordinary lengths to ensure survival.

I mean, really, how do you think we end up with all these stupid social and psychological studies that are nothing but hot garbage and cannot even be close to replicated?

---

I'm willing to bet there's a high degree of data manipulation and academic dishonesty in climate research more than anything.

techno-ag said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I assume that this is pretty rampant at almost every institution. A&M too.

No need to be concerned about right, wrong, honest, dishonest, etc. when you pretty much can't get fired from your job no matter what. Plus when grant money is on the line, I am of the opinion that administration doesn't care about much outside of getting that grant money anyway.

---

Tend to agree.

When someone's entire livelihood is dependent on publishing research through grants, human nature will go to extraordinary lengths to ensure survival.

I mean, really, how do you think we end up with all these stupid social and psychological studies that are nothing but hot garbage and cannot even be close to replicated?

---

I'm willing to bet there's a high degree of data manipulation and academic dishonesty in climate research more than anything.

---

100% agree

Breaking News: "Tenure-losing professor Francesca Gino rumored to have had a Trump sign in her yard back in 2016."

/probably

When does she announce her run for a senate seat?

No, this has been in the works for several years. But, it is likely getting press now due to the current climate around Harvard and its tift with the federal government.

techno-ag said:

---

Of course with all the disputes they've gotten into with President Trump lately, it leads the casual observer to wonder if they're trying to clamp down on things because of the public spotlight on them at the moment. No more slaps on the wrist, for now anyway.

---

No, this has been brewing for years. Data Colada first brought it up in 2021. Harvard started an investigation into it and then started reviewing all of her work. They placed her on unpaid leave during the investigation, and she sued saying it violated her tenure agreement. Some of that litigation is still working its way through the courts, but this has been coming since long before Trump. Everyone familiar with it knew it was just a matter of time before they worked through all of the policies and procedures and canned her.

This is a pretty good rundown of some of what happened and how Harvard approached it. Definitely worth a watch.

techno-ag said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

I assume that this is pretty rampant at almost every institution. A&M too.

No need to be concerned about right, wrong, honest, dishonest, etc. when you pretty much can't get fired from your job no matter what. Plus when grant money is on the line, I am of the opinion that administration doesn't care about much outside of getting that grant money anyway.

---

Tend to agree.

When someone's entire livelihood is dependent on publishing research through grants, human nature will go to extraordinary lengths to ensure survival.

I mean, really, how do you think we end up with all these stupid social and psychological studies that are nothing but hot garbage and cannot even be close to replicated?

---

I'm willing to bet there's a high degree of data manipulation and academic dishonesty in climate research more than anything.

---

Only around 99% of it is manipulated, what's the big deal? Climate change anything is the massive golden goose and any supporting information (true or not, not) keeps the taxpayers' vault doors wide open.

No doubt it's been in the works a long time. But timing is everything. Just like Biden's cancer was revealed at an opportune moment, I would not be surprised if the trigger was pulled on the recent tenure yank in part because of political pressure.

We will probably hire her as our next AD

Academia and science within it are being absolutely flooded with ideologically biased or self serving low quality of junk science papers and now increasingly AI generated junk science or even outright fake papers, theses, and publications that are utterly overwhelming peer review or corrupting the process. People get paid to publish, and get credentialed to publish, so there is a huge incentive to generate junk, and push it out

It is substantially degrading the critical knowledge base upon which future research is based.

techno-ag said:

---

No doubt it's been in the works a long time. But timing is everything. Just like Biden's cancer was revealed at an opportune moment, I would not be surprised if the trigger was pulled on the recent tenure yank in part because of political pressure.

---

Guarantee you they have nothing to do with each other. They've been in the process of firing her since 2023, and they've spent a lot of time, money, and effort to get to this point. The delay is more likely around contract disputes and ongoing litigation between her and Harvard over her being out on unpaid leave.

After 8 years of Leftist just running wild with propaganda and lying about absolutely everything……I can only imagine the acceptance of untruths runs deep in academia.

There is one big difference between this professor and another Harvard professor who was guilty of plagiarism, Claudine Gay, who is still employed by Harvard. Selective enforcement.