It is VIU It is Virginia International University. Click VIU faculty and staff directory to see Rich's name. Ike Okonkwo. Ph.D.
Gee, thanks for all the attention. I may or may not have made comments about finding a job. But I have one (I'm a senior trainer at AT&T). But with my recent graduation, I've begun considering a change. However, I'm limited right now to staying in the Washington, DC area. I'm certainly not having problems with my degree, per se, just with the tougher job market and with making a transition to a different career (maybe). At no time has anyone indicated any problem with my degrees, including my UIU Ph.D. In fact, I've turned down one position (as a dean, no less), am about to turn down another, and had to give up on a third because of geography. All three schools were just fine with my Ph.D., as are the schools with whom I teach, and the other four I've not yet agreed to serve with as an adjunct. As Tom is quoted as saying, it would be a severe pay cut to become an assistant professor somewhere, even if they would have me. Yes, I've taught courses for VIU. (I've said so, and I assume I appear on their website.) But I do not represent them. I'm also slated to teach courses (and do faculty development) for an RA school in this area, but I don't speak for them, either. Bottom line: I'm going through the typical B.S. when considering a career change. But that's hardly the situation some people would like to ascribe to me. But when has that ever changed? (Sorry about the interruption. I'll go away now.)
I'm not sure why you'd bother. You and every rational human being already know the answer to that question. Rich has definitely not given a detailed description of applying for jobs and not getting them, particularly not getting them because of the origin of his doctorate. Will the truth make a difference to those with far too much time on their hands? Hardly. Tom Nixon
question about Rich Douglas Tom Nixon wrote about Rich Douglas's not having secured a lecturing position: James (kf5k) wrote on the same subject: Who's right?
Rich Douglas is right--his right to privacy, that is. Now, if somebody has a dubious track record, then public exposure is a public service. Douglas does not. Leave the man alone.
He does (or did). If Rich wants to break his silence to reveal which one, fine, but I'm not going to say w/o his approval.
I admire Rich, and I have no wish or intention to invade his privacy. James's claim is that Rich has made public statements about having sent out résumés and failing to secure a position. If there are no such statements to be found, then James's claim is false, and I don't need to invade anyone's privacy to show that it's false. If I'm seeking to expose anyone, it's James, not Rich.
