Dissent 40
January 4, 2000
“JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS”
by Big Bill [Roy Bauer]
I observed a mature and initially poised businessman enter the laboratory smiling and confident. Within 20 minutes he was reduced to a twitching, stuttering wreck, who was rapidly approaching a point of nervous collapse. He constantly pulled on his earlobe, and twisted his hands. At one point he pushed his fist into his forehead and muttered “Oh God, let’s stop it.” And yet he continued to respond to every word of the experimenter, and obeyed to the end. --Stanley Milgrim, 1963
1. During finals week, everyone
received an electronic “Holiday Greetings” card from El Ced and the board,
which sported a cheesy holiday photograph of the 8 standing together. (The
student trustee, Jennifer Kalena, wasn’t shown.) Apparently written by Cedric,
the card noted, lamely, that “positive things happened this year”—including the
completion of “the new administrative team”—and predicted that “Saddleback and
Irvine Valley Colleges will be reaffirmed as the excellent institutions they
are by the accreditation process.”
I predict a probationary future. We’ll
know who’s right in about two weeks.
I printed out the lovely card and
took it home with me. Somehow, I came across the damn thing on New Year’s Day.
I briefly examined the cheesy
photograph. Some of the images had been transformed by time! (See in this
issue.) What can it mean?
2. Recently, I visited old friends
who told “Raghu P. Mathur” stories from the old days. For instance, there was
the time that Raghu had, through egregious interference, screwed up a faculty
hire, causing then-president Ed Hart to put him on his Permanent (with a
capital “P”) shit list. Raghu, who, from the very beginning, harbored
administrative ambitions, felt that he could not afford to be on the outs with
Hart, and so he sought the assistance of such people as Peter Morrison and
Terry Burgess, who negotiated with Hart on his behalf for a month. Finally,
Hart agreed to take Mathur off his shit list—if, that is, Mathur would
apologize for his conduct. When Mathur was told of this, he said that he
couldn’t do it. He could not apologize.
 |
| Mathur & Lang |
On another occasion, Raghu had,
during a meeting, accused a certain administrator of lying (with regard to
scheduling). Later, the administrator found a memo he had received from Mathur
which proved beyond a doubt that he hadn’t lied. With memo in hand, he
confronted Raghu and asked him to go back to tell everyone that his accusation
was mistaken. Raghu studied the document for a long time. Finally, he said that
he “couldn’t do that.”
Naturally, by now, Raghu--the only
person ever to be formally censured for lying at IVC--has many detractors.
Being a narcissist, he hates criticism, and he punishes critics whenever he
can. That keeps him pretty busy.
Among Mathur’s critics is Jeff K, a
popular and affable Life Sciences instructor. Jeff, along with several of his
colleagues in Life Sciences, helped bring about the new Life Sciences
greenhouse. When it was finished, Jeff and the others erected a sign, naming
the structure after IVC’s first botanist, Terry Burgess, the popular Chabot
College president, whom Mathur detests.
Mathur was outraged. He got Cedric
to order the instructors to remove the sign, for only the board is authorized
to name “buildings.” The instructors complied; but then a certain administrator
noted (within earshot of one or some of the instructors) that no board policy
forbids naming a garden. Thus, the
instructors erected a little sign in the nearby garden; again, it had Terry
Burgess’s name on it. Mathur fumed.
Several instructors were involved in
this “outrage.” Only one instructor, however, lacks tenure: Jeff. Hence,
Mathur, being the loathsome and cowardly sort of person he is, went after Jeff
and only Jeff.
Jeff was called in for a
disciplinary meeting. The administrator who made the suggestion about the
garden attended. She said nothing. A negative letter was placed in Jeff’s file.
If you want to fire an untenured
instructor, it’s best to have a negative teaching evaluation on hand. But Jeff
is a terrific instructor and has always received glowing evaluations. What to
do?
Enter Ruth Jacobson, Jeff’s dean. We
all figured that Mathur would pressure Jacobson to place something negative in
Jeff’s evaluation. That’s just what happened.
Mathur has a long history of
monkeying with faculty evaluations. About two years ago, he inserted negative
remarks in the evaluations of three of his faculty critics, despite contract
language according to which the elements of the evaluation are to be based on
the evaluation process itself.
On another occasion, when he saw the
completed evaluation, which was uniformly favorable, of a faculty critic, he
complained to her dean. The dean told Mathur that he had written his
evaluation, and he wasn’t about to change it or add something to it, and if
Mathur wanted to criticize the instructor, he had better write his own damned
evaluation.
Evidently, few administrators have
such gumption. Ruth Jacobson is a case
in point. During finals week, Jeff was called in by Jacobson to discuss his
evaluation. She showed it to him. Under the heading, “attitude to college,” the
box for “needs improvement” was checked. Further, Jacobson’s written comments,
which were otherwise positive, included this curious paragraph:
Over the past year, Dr. Kaufmann has worked hard and expended a good deal of time and energy in an effort to launch and complete the greenhouse project. I have been informed that the president has given him a letter of reprimand for not complying with Board Policy 1500—Naming of College Facilities. The greenhouse is an excellent complement to the instructional program in Life Sciences and will enhance student learning for years to come.
 |
| Cedric |
3. Of course, the ranks of Mathurian
critics include some non-faculty. Deb Burbridge, a student known for her
intelligence and mild manner, led the peaceful protests at IVC that ultimately
led to the district’s adopting a new “speech and advocacy” policy in the spring
of ‘99. She is also among the petitioners who successfully challenged that
policy in federal court during the subsequent fall.
Deb has often been the target of
Mathurian retaliation and the like. For instance, she was threatened with
serious disciplinary action when, one morning last spring, she wrote political
messages on campus sidewalks with chalk, something she has every right to do.
More recently, she received a letter from Jess Craig, Dean of Guidance,
Counseling, and Students; according to the letter, Craig has been “informed”
that Deb has, on five occasions, violated board policy 5406 as it regards
“banner posting.” In fact, her postings have been entirely legal.
Deb recently applied for “student
volunteer” status for the spring semester, which requires board approval by
December. It now appears that Mathur pulled Deb’s name from the list of student
volunteer applicants that was submitted to the board in December. Hence, she
was not approved and will not be a student volunteer.
Mathur has a history of violating
students’ rights. You’ll recall that, five years ago, Mathur, in an
unsuccessful effort to discredit his imagined nemesis Terry Burgess,
distributed a letter (to trustees, et al.) that included a student’s
transcripts. Mathur’s distribution of a student’s transcripts without her
permission, according to a written opinion by the district’s attorney, Spencer
Covert, violated her rights as set out by the Family Educational Rights and
Privacy Act of 1974 and exposed the district to possible litigation. The
district quickly hushed the matter up; the student—Miss N—was never told that
her rights had been violated.
Raghu sure is a fuck-up. No matter. A year later, he was president of IVC. --BB
No comments:
Post a Comment