In a post on 11 June 2024, Hong Kong Cherian George returned to flog a dead horse – Nanyang Technological University not granting him tenure more than 10 years ago. Seriously ? People like Cherian, think the world revolves around them. Singaporeans have more serious issues to consider. Move on man. If you are good enough, you will get opportunities.
NTU explained that more than 1,000 candidates were considered between 2009 and 2013. 55% were granted tenure, and Cherian was one of the 45% that wasn’t.
NTU explained in 2013: “The tenure review process is purely a peer-driven academic exercise comprising internal and external reviewers. The two equally important criteria are distinction in research and scholarship, and high-quality teaching. Service and other contributions to the university, profession, or community are also taken into consideration.”
Cherian accepts that his claims is speculative, or as he puts it, “an educated guess”. And he admits that neither the university nor government impeded his work as an academic and educator. Cherian retained all the academic freedoms he now posited was being eroded.
Look in the mirror, Cherian!
Clearly, Cherian continues to be haunted by his ghosts.
Cherian has a curious record when it comes to debate. He had a debate with Dr Yap Kwong Weng on Facebook in May 2020. Cherian’s lack of honesty, poorly thought through arguments were all laid bare.
In a fit of pique, Cherian sent a complaint to Dr Yap’s employer, “a rambling email (sent 12:16am 22 May 2020) with a 10-page attachment” – the sort that would be sent by a self entitled, self obsessed person. Dr Yap said: “[ Cherian] calls for civil discourse. While trying to get me sacked for expressing my views”…You don’t need to complain to the employer of every person who disagrees with you. Not everyone can and must agree with you. And everyone who disagrees with you is not a government lackey. And try to be more honest.”
This is the free speech Cherian believes in – when he got exposed, he wrote a letter of complaint to the employer. What sane explanation is there for such conduct ?