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. ....
2.”I CAN’T DO THAT.” 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 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.
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 [Dan Rivas. —Ed.] 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.
At the meeting, Jacobson asked Jeff to sign the evaluation. Jeff said he wouldn’t be signing anything right away, and asked for a copy of the evaluation to take with him. She wouldn’t give him one. (Later, perhaps having conferred with lawyers, she did grant him a copy.)
3. MATHUR RETALIATES AGAINST A STUDENT. 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