When I was an undergrad, Harvard told its students that it's a good idea to get the files that your university keeps about you and see what's there. While universities discourage it, and sometimes even threaten people who ask for their files (which happened to me at Princeton), I was persistent.
After a bit of a battle, in November of 1987 I was allowed to see some of my Ohio State files. One file contained the letter that my department Chair had sent to the Acting Dean in June of 1985 in support of my formal request to spend the academic year 1986-87 elsewhere. They never let me photocopy that letter, but I still have the slip of paper on which I copied it by hand.
The letter began, "As you know, K was awarded a Sloan Fellowship this year. He is requesting approval of the following plans for using it." This was followed by three paragraphs explaining in detail K's plans, why one part "would be excellent for his research" and why another location he planned to visit "is also an excellent choice of sites for furthering his research and scholarship," giving names of mathematicians he would have contact with at those locations.
Almost as an afterthought, this was followed by: "Of course his wife, Alice Silverberg, is requesting to accompany him." I still feel an awful sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach when I think about that sentence.
The letter goes on to say that I would fund my visit on my fellowship, and "The department has no objection to the arrangements in the areas of teaching and service. They are both excellent teachers who have given more service than required so far." No specific details were given as to why my plans would be excellent for my research or scholarship. The letter ends by recommending "approval of these requests" and that the year "be counted for service credit [i.e., towards tenure and sabbaticals] in both cases."
I wondered whether the Chair's letter contributed to the Acting Dean treating me like a baby-making machine rather than as a mathematician (when he recommended that I not get service credit).
In response, I sent the following to my new department Chair, with a request that it be sent up the hierarchy of administrators:
November 12, 1987
To be attached to all copies of the letter of June 26, 1985 from X (Chairman, Department of Mathematics) to Y (Acting Dean, College of Mathematical and Physical Sciences), and the letter of August 15, 1985 from Y to Z (Associate Provost)
I have just seen the above-mentioned letter from X to Y for the first time. The letter begins with a discussion of how K, an assistant professor in the mathematics department, plans to use his Sloan Fellowship from Spring 1986 through Spring 1987, and continues with the sentence "Of course, his wife, Alice Silverberg, is requesting to accompany him." I would like my comments to go on the record.
(1) First, some historical inaccuracies need to be corrected, and the chronology set right. My plans to use my NSF Postdoctoral Fellowship at research institutes from Spring 1986 through Spring 1987 were discussed with and approved by X in winter and spring of 1984 before I (or K) were hired, and long before K was even nominated for a Sloan Fellowship. Therefore it is not only false that I was following K around, it is chronologically impossible.
(2) The letter connects two separate, independent requests, implying (erroneously and irrelevantly) that one is dependent on the other.
(3) The letter makes irrelevant, inappropriate, and unwarranted assumptions about personal lives and relationships.
To elaborate:
In my letters to and discussions with X concerning my plans, I have never made reference to any other person's plans. I have never informed him or the mathematics department of my marital status, and it is not relevant to my work as a member of the mathematics faculty. I might or might not be married to K; I might or might not want to follow K around. Such assumptions about my personal life, correct or otherwise, do not have their source with me.
Three additional comments:
a) Y's letter to Z on the same subject says "since they are husband and wife they are planning together". It seems appropriate here to draw attention to the fact that I objected (in a letter to Y) to the inclusion of this phrase in a draft of the letter in August, 1985.
b) The inclusion in my files of a letter (which has no reference to me) from K to X is inappropriate.
c) Considering the correct chronology, and X's differing views from mine on my comments (2) and (3) above, one is led to ponder the question: Why did he not begin his letter by discussing my plans, and continue with "Of course, her husband, K, is requesting to accompany her."?
Alice Silverberg
Assistant Professor of Mathematics