Professor Rodrigo Lopes de Barros, a Black, Brazilian assistant professor of Romance Studies and current interim director of the Cinema and Media Studies Department at Boston University, is suing BU for discrimination after Provost Jean Morrison and President Robert Brown rejected his application for tenure without providing an explanation.
James Iffland, a professor of Spanish and Latin American Studies and graduate studies director of the Pardee School of Global Studies, wrote in an email to the Daily Free Press that Lopes de Barros seemingly received positive votes from all the committees that evaluated his tenure dossier up to the highest level until Provost Morrison rejected the tenure in April of 2022. Lopes de Barros appealed to President Brown, in accordance with the University’s internal bylaws about tenure, but was still rejected in June of 2022.
BU has until the last day of Professor Lopes de Barros’s employment, June 30, to overturn their decision.
Iffland said he was surprised that President Brown did not reverse Provost Morrison’s decision about Lopes de Barros’s tenure, as Brown did so in a similar case for a professor from the Department of Religion.
“The worrisome aspect of this, among others, is the fact that Professor de Barros is Black and he’s from Brazil,” Iffland said. “Quite frankly, I think the BU lawyers who are involved in this case are going to have a hard time explaining exactly why this has happened.”
James Weliky, attorney for Lopes de Barros, said that Lopes de Barros’s discrimination claim was filed at the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, an independent state agency that enforces anti-discrimination laws. The claim was filed at the beginning of February 2023.
“[Lopes de Barros] strongly urges the University to reconsider his decision and grant him the tenure that was recommended at every level of the institution,” Weliky said.
BU spokesperson Colin Riley declined to comment about Lopes de Barros’s case, writing in an email that the University does not comment on personnel matters.
Braden Clinger, a fifth year doctoral degree student studying Hispanic language and literatures, wrote in an email that Lopes de Barros encouraged thoughtful debate and engaged learning in his classroom.
“His research is rigorous and cutting edge, and he is a gifted communicator,” Clinger wrote. “Additionally, he has enriched the campus community by organizing events and bringing leading academics and artists to our campus.”
Fernanda Alves dos Santos, a first year doctoral degree student studying Hispanic language and literatures, wrote in an email that Lopes de Barros is known for his “kind, helpful and understanding approach” to teaching.
“He is one of the few Romance Studies Department professors of color, and not only has he had a substantial impact on previous and current graduate student projects [and] courses and has added academic value, but he brings a unique approach,” Alves dos Santos wrote. “Losing him would be counterproductive to the University’s stated goals.”
Iffland said Lopes de Barros’s denial of tenure is a setback for undergraduate students as well because the Department of Romance Studies has been working to promote the teaching of Portuguese at BU and to offer courses featuring Brazilian subjects. Iffland said losing Lopes de Barros puts the department back at “square one.”
“Part of the vexing nature of this decision is that BU is very much invested in issues of diversity, equity and inclusion,” Iffland said. “In this case, we’re looking at a very talented person of color who has come up for tenure who seems to have checked off all the boxes that are necessary to be promoted, and this is what the result has been.”
Alves dos Santos highlighted how Professor Lopes de Barros is a part of the underrepresented Hispanic/Latinx and African American or Black faculty at BU. According to BU Analytics, just over 6% of faculty are Hispanic/Latinx and around 7% of faculty are African American or Black.
Alves dos Santos also wrote that with Lopes de Barros’s departure, the Romance Studies Department will lose “one of only two professors who can offer advice on Latin American topics, including the underrepresented areas of the Caribbean and Brazil.”
“As a person who is preparing to face a highly competitive academic job market, I question whether I will have to go through this situation in the future: where my professional and academic life is disqualified by a specific person without plausible justification,” Alves dos Santos wrote.
Students of Romance Studies, including Clinger and Alves dos Santos, wrote a letter to President Brown last week contesting Lopes de Barros’s rejection of tenure.
Alves dos Santos wrote that the students have not yet received a response about their letter and are now working on a public petition.
Christopher Maurer, a professor of Spanish and former chair of the Department of Romance Studies, wrote in an email that about half of the students who applied to the Romance Studies graduate program last year expressed interest in studying with Lopes de Barros specifically.
“The decision [to deny Lopes de Barros tenure] is a mistake, and the lack of explanation, galling,” Maurer wrote. “This judgment is refuted by enthusiastic reviews at every level — by outside evaluators, the Department, College, CAS Dean, University and by our own experience in the Spanish section of Romance Studies.”
Maurer wrote that parts of BU’s tenure process “demand reform,” writing no one should ever be refused tenure without clear reason.
“Provost and President owe it to tenure candidates and departments to give them specific reasons for denial of tenure, without those reasons being pried from them by lawyers,” he wrote. “This is a matter of simple workplace fairness and respect: one doesn’t dismiss any employee without offering an explanation.”
Iffland said that after hearing of Lopes de Barros’s case, many faculty are skeptical of BU’s efforts to increase diversity, equity and inclusion.
“We, as faculty, get training on this issue,” Iffland said. “To have brought up the case of a faculty member of color, who was more than qualified, and have [his tenure] get turned down inspires a certain amount of skepticism about the true commitment of BU to remedying the situation that we all know about, which is a lack of faculty of color at Boston University.”
Boston University, MLK alma mater, should reconsider and grant tenure to this obviously talented and beloved Professor. He “checked all the boxes”, what else does the BU President want?
WOW!!
It is very common for universities to deny tenure with no explanation. In fact it is more common than not. Perhaps the author here should review the faculty handbook for BU to see the rules and process. Tenure committee members are typically advised that they cannot discuss reasons.
it is not at all common and every level of the vote is made transparent to the candidate by BU policy for this reason.
I was a doctoral student in French at BU in 2005 and 2006. Without any plausible explanation, they also eliminated me. I was born in the US, I am white, I have an American name- and yet I was bullied, harassed by professors, students and classmates, and finally eliminated after racist comments, since my mother was Brazilian. By the time I found out I could sue this university, firstly by filing a complaint with the Office of Civil Rights, it was way too late. I hope this professor gets the justice he deserves.
Tenure committee members cannot discuss reasons: their proceedings are confidential. The Provost (and President) CAN and SHOULD provide an explanation for denial of tenure, and not merely a formulaic one. When you know you’ll have to explain it, you’ll consider a decision more carefully. The AAUP (American Association of University Professors) mentions other good reasons:
“Some have argued that faculty members should be kept in the dark because if they do not know the reasons for the nonreappointment, they will not have a basis for challenging those reasons in court—and therefore will be less likely to litigate. Even if this were true, reasons should be given as a matter of elementary fairness and professional courtesy.
Faculty members can be honestly unaware of the reasons for a negative decision. If informed of them, they might try to remedy shortcomings as they continue their careers. Moreover, because the individual should have the opportunity to request a review of the adverse decision or to appeal it, ignorance of the reasons for the decision would create serious difficulties in determining whether to initiate such a request and in presenting a case for review.
Finally, faculty members have long accepted the obligation to explain to students why they have received a low grade. It is unacceptable for an administration to decline to explain to faculty members why their careers at the institution have been ended.
Correct quotation from AAUP:
“Some have argued that faculty members should be kept in the dark because if they do not know the reasons for the nonreappointment, they will not have a basis for challenging those reasons in court—and therefore will be less likely to litigate. Even if this were true, reasons should be given as a matter of elementary fairness and professional courtesy. /. Faculty members can be honestly unaware of the reasons for a negative decision. If informed of them, they might try to remedy shortcomings as they continue their careers. Moreover, because the individual should have the opportunity to request a review of the adverse decision or to appeal it, ignorance of the reasons for the decision would create serious difficulties in determining whether to initiate such a request and in presenting a case for review. / Finally, faculty members have long accepted the obligation to explain to students why they have received a low grade. It is unacceptable for an administration to decline to explain to faculty members why their careers at the institution have been ended.”
You would think someone who plans on suing a university for racial discrimination would be able to describe a specific incidence of discrimination perpetrated against him by the univserity or individuals employed by the university or point to an example of racial discrimination against someone else or an example of the university or one of the accused employees discriminating at some point ever…
On the other hand, you wouldn’t expect one of his supporters to outright admit that “BU is very much invested in issues of diversity, equity and inclusion.”
So now I’m super confused…based on this article, the person suing and people supporting him have not even attempted to demonstrate racial discrimination took place at BU, but one of de Barros supporters specifically pointed out that has invested significantly in diversity efforts, which suggests they actual give minorities preferential treatment…Can someone explain what this guy is suing BU for?
this *is* the specific incident to which his lawyers will be pointing. tf?
Research and scholarly publications are key in earning tenure at a major research university. Why didn’t the article discuss the professor’s scholarly output record when covering this story? It is an unfortunate oversight that betrays lack of understanding of the issues at hand.
I agree with Rayni above that the author of the article could have done a bit more research to understand, and to convey an understanding of, the actual process. And it is also the case that tenure denials rarely have an explanation, certainly not in writing. But it it is true that the candidate received positive reviews at all levels, and the Provost and President overturned it, the faculty senate or governing body can and should push for an investigation of some kind. Are they trying to open up a line for a new chair or another department? Is some whack job on the Board of Trustees mad about the candidates political leanings? Are they trying to punish a department that is not living up to their expectations? Did someone on one of the review committees who disagreed with the consensus have the Provost’s ear and make a private appeal to get their way?These are all reasons for Provost/President level tenure denials of positively reviewed cases. And they are a violation of faculty governance.
This candidate may or may not have their tenure decision overturned, and more likely than not this will be settled out of court with a six figure check and an NDA, and hopefully a lasting undercurrent of dissatisfaction with the President and/or Provost.
Jean Morrison is the ultimate woke force at the university. Everything is top down. It’s laughable that she’d be accused of racial bias. Inevitable though that purists and identity obsessed opportunists—who Morrison and others have empowered—will turn against each other.
Difficult situation here – wish more of the facts of the case were available. BU has a significant and important legacy of diversity and inclusion, so the allegations are serious (and obviously hit an emotional chord).
That being said, it’s important to remember the presumption of innocence concept on which our legal system is built. The plaintiff is going to need to prove their case, and speculation including “seemingly received positive votes …” hardly seems to meet any criteria necessary for the successful litigation of their case.
BU has the lowest percentage of Black faculty and students of all greater boston research institutions. It has an abysmal record on DEI
Let us hope that this matter is resolved quickly and that the final decision will be right.