Issue link: http://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/56539
Letters Financial Times is a vital source of information, analysis, education and illumination in these confusing times. Covering far more than just finance, the FT offers your students current insights from business management to international relations. Today the FT is provided to colleges and universities in a total electronic package. Access is provided through the school Intranet. No passwords, no delivery issues, just complete electronic access campus wide. Educating the next generation of business professionals, politicians and academics is a tough challenge. We believe that the FT can make your job easier. For more information or to learn how to customize a program for your school contact Linda Talarico, Director of Education at 212-641-6412 or email linda.talarico@ft.com. Clarification of Data It was with great interest that I read your November issue, particularly the article "Qualified to Teach" by Mark Hanna and Lowell Mooney. It was very interesting to compare schools using data from the Business School Questionnaire. However, I thought one part was unclear. In the table on page 37 that compares how many peer- reviewed articles schools require during a faculty evalu- ation period, do the authors mean one year or five? Is it possible to clarify? Thank you. Geneviève Champoux Research and Planning Officer Faculté des sciences de l'administration Université Laval Québec, Canada Financial Times GlobalAlliance Program Your campus connection to global events Lowell Mooney replies: "With regard to the table on page 37, 'evaluation period' refers to whatever period the insti- tution uses to evaluate academic qualifications. Therefore, it could be one year or five years or any period in between. For 94 percent of respondents, the time period was five years. For the table on page 38, the 'evaluation period' again refers to whatever period the school uses. The table on page 38 reports the total intellectual contributions required, whereas the table on page 37 reports only peer-reviewed journal articles. Because so many respon- dents indicated their evaluation period was five years, we did not think there would be any value in creating separate tables for separate evalua- tion periods." ■ z 8 BizEd MARCH/APRIL 2009 FT.com