Don Wagner and Derek Reeve: scary especially to students

     For Halloween, The Liberal OC Blog has posted about OC’s Scariest Politicians.
     You will be utterly unsurprised to learn that former SOCCCD trustee Don Wagner and current Saddleback College Poli Sci instructor Derek Reeve made their top ten:

10. Don Wagner — Mr. Wagner, the state assemblyman from AD-70 often goes to a number of functions at Irvine schools which we find hysterical because he does so little to help OC schools in his district get enough money just to make state average. Despite a career in education. Mr. Wagner has fallen into his party’s platform of never ever raising taxes and gripes about teacher’s unions. We didn’t think it was possible for anyone to top Chuck DeVore in a lack of action to help schools, but Wagner has. Just ask IUSD to call on Wagner for help and listen to the screams.

5. Derek Reeve — This conservative council member is all about guns and offending Muslims. But for students at Concordia University, the plagiarism scandal over writing Reeve submitted to Patch.com that was lifted from other authors without attribution means you won’t have to worry about getting a bad grade in poli-sci if you are a moderate or a — gasp — liberal. In fact, if you are one of those and got a bad grade in a Reeve taught class, you have grounds to appeal.

Money talks; big money talks bigger

     Nothing new here. Still: fellow instructors, you might want to read Big Money Talks (pdf), a 2010 report of the California Fair Political Practices Commission, which lists fifteen entities that, all together in a ten year period (starting January 1, 2000), spent $1 billion “on candidates, ballot measures and lobbying to influence the outcome of governmental decisions in California” (p. 4).
     On top of the list, as expected, is the California Teachers Association (CTA), of which our own SOCCCD Faculty Association is a chapter. (“Of the 15 identified groups, six are corporations, three are Indian tribes, two are labor unions and four are business associations.” P. 4)
     CTA spent nearly twice the amount of the second biggest spender on the list, the California State Council of Service Employees (a close third: the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America).
     As you know, teachers unions are widely viewed as the greatest obstacles to education reform in the nation’s K-12 systems. It seems to me that anger toward such organizations as CTA is growing among the electorate.

California Community College Locals and Contracts -- Shows all CTA (NEA) affiliates, CFT (AFT) affiliates, and affiliates of the CCI (The California Community College Independents) among California community colleges.
California Teachers Association (CTA) an affiliate of the NEA
Community College Association -- (CCA) The community college division of the CTA (NEA)
California Federation of Teachers (CFT) an affiliate of the AFT
Community College Council -- (CCC) The community college division of the CFT (AFT)
California Community College Independents (CCCI)

27 CCC/CFT/AFT chapters
44 CCA/CTA/NEA chapters
12 CCCI/Independent chapters

(Note: five chapters are for part-timers only)

     My own view (still forming, actually) is that, for both principled and practical reasons, we should separate from the CTA.
     CFT (and AFT) is probably less problematic (than CCA/CTA/NEA).
     But there's a problem: it appears that the (CTA's) CCA and the (CFT's) CCC are merging, something that's been in the works for some time:

Merger talks between CCA and CCC progress (CTA publication)

     What about CCCI? As you can see above, CCCI comprises about a dozen chapters among California community colleges.

Don't ask

San Antonio College Official Asked Student Newspaper to Pay Him for Interview (Chronicle of Higher Education)

     The student-life director at San Antonio College recently declined to be interviewed by student journalists unless they paid him, according to reports by the San Antonio Express-News and the student newspaper, The Ranger. The student paper had exchanged e-mails with the director, Jorge Posadas, but it also wanted a face-to-face interview to discuss the handling of student fees. In an e-mail to The Ranger’s student editor, Mr. Posadas declined to be interviewed but suggested that they could “set up a professional consulting contract” and “negotiate an appropriate fee.” When contacted by the Express-News, he said that his response had been “inappropriate” and that he had misinterpreted a request for budget information as a request for professional consulting.

Socratic Backfire? (Inside Higher Ed)

     …The Socratic style of teaching … is hardly novel. But experts say that while it remains popular in law schools, there are reasons many faculty members have never used it extensively with the current generation of students.
     "When done well, you simply do not impose the teacher's idea, and try to come up with a solution through dialogue," said Michael Apple, a professor of curriculum and instruction at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. "In general, it is a guided dialogue."
     Supporters of the method see it as "a process by which you try to make the best logical argument and you focus on process as much as content,” Apple said. But he added that not that many faculty members use it these days. "The reason for its unpopularity sometimes is because we are in a test-based education system. Students can be increasingly impatient where the answer is not clear and when the professor is not giving it to them immediately."
     A lot also depends, Apple said, on who the students are. "It is controversial to some people, for example, students who are deeply concerned that they have to learn a certain amount of content and then take a test at the end," he said. Students may also think that they are being treated as if they were not very smart.
     Walter Parker, a professor of education at the University of Washington, said he teaches using the “Socratic seminar” method. He cautioned against stereotypes of the Socratic method, namely the depiction in the 1973 movie “The Paper Chase," which shows a professor giving harsh evaluations to a student, leaving the students embarrassed.
     "That is not the Socratic method," he said.
     "It is an interpretive discussion of a piece of text during which the professor says very little,” Parker said. “The professor chooses a rich piece of text and plans an interpretive question as he opens the discussion."
     This kind of teaching is more common in the humanities and social sciences, he said.
     The advantage of this kind of teaching is that students learn how to think on their feet, said Patricia King, a professor of education at the University of Michigan.
     “But it requires hard intellectual work,” she said….

Pet Lovers, Pathologized (Kelly Oliver, New York Times)

     …In the United States, we often see our political leaders hunting, particularly bird-hunting, which seems to demonstrate their manly fortitude and bloodlust — qualities intended to persuade us that they can keep us safe. Hunting has become a tool of sorts within the realm of political image making. With few exceptions, President Obama among them, most presidents and presidential hopefuls have been seen hunting. Meat eating, too, is an act used to portray strength. Obama is known to enjoy his burgers, a fact that has helped counter his image as a green-tea drinking elitist. Even Sarah Palin’s so-called new brand of feminism revolves around the image of a tough “mama grizzly,” as she calls herself, shooting and gutting moose to feed and protect her family. As she says in her memoir, “I always remind people from outside our state that there’s plenty of room for all Alaska’s animals — right next to the mashed potatoes.” But while politicians continue to channel “Joe-Six-Pack” by hunting and killing animals to prove that they are tough providers, animal lovers are often infantilized, pathologized and derided. It is true that White House pets have often become celebrities, but they are usually there for the children, part of the pretty picture of the all-American family….

Ahearn watch

• For what it’s worth, I found a semi-interesting article about the Amy Ahearn situation on a Florida-based online publication called TheSOP. Check it out. Or not. (The article doesn't really tell us anything new, I'm afraid.)

• On the Amy Ahearn Missing Facebook page, the administrator (no doubt Amy’s sister) asks the following:

I have a favor to ask everyone who has been looking, praying, and hoping to find Amy. Will you take a moment to send an email to Kathie Allen our Private Investigator to thank her? She has been doing TONS of work for us for FREE and we are ESPECIALLY GRATEFUL to her and would like her to know how much we love and appreciate her. You can email her at allenmorrispi@yahoo.com.

Sat morning, 1:00 a.m., baby now you do

I like. I like very much. —LYRICS

Common courtesy

Letter to the Editor: A Vote for Courtesy (The Capistrano Dispatch)

     I echo Councilman Larry Kramer’s call for “the highest standard of morality” and “common courtesy” by city council members in his response to Councilman Derek Reeve’s unnecessary and tasteless comments regarding the naming of his dog Muhammad.
     Mr. Reeve’s remarks seemed designed to be insulting to Muslims, regardless of his right to speak them freely. I am not Muslim, but his words, and his behavior since he uttered them, offend me as Christian and a citizen of San Juan Capistrano. I expect my City Council members to respect the interests of all the residents of San Juan Capistrano, regardless of race, religion or creed. Mr. Reeves, however, used his right to free speech, and his position on the council dais, to demonstrate contempt for the interests of a particular religious group. Although Mr. Reeve claims that he respects “the many honorable members of that faith” and denies that he intended insult, he refused to apologize for his comments, which makes me worry that this councilman lacks honesty, good manners, and/or good sense.
     I applaud Councilman Kramer and Mayor Allevato for calling Mr. Reeves to task over this incident, which embarrasses the council and shames the city.

—Susan Eberhardt, San Juan Capistrano

Wall Street Journal

Well, that explains a lot

From today's Chronicle of Higher Education:
Intellectual Curiosity Predicts Academic Success, Study Finds
     Intellectual curiosity is a strong predictor of future academic performance, says an article in the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science. That conclusion was based on a meta-analysis of 200 previous studies of students who rated their own intellectual curiosity, among other factors. Intellectual curiosity has as large an effect on academic performance as conscientiousness, though not as much as intelligence, the article says. That finding lends credence to the idea that “a ‘hungry mind’ is a core determinant of individual differences in academic achievement,” write Sophie von Stumm of the University of Edinburgh and two co-authors. Universities should encourage more curiosity among their students and pay greater attention to the trait when making admissions decisions, the authors suggest.

The VC with the extra 'e', back in OC

     I just came upon an Oct. 7 Coast Community College District press release entitled “Coast District Trustees Select [Andreea] Serban to head Educational Services and Technology divisions for Multi‐College District.”
     You’ll recall that, a few years ago, Serban served as Vice Chancellor of Technology and Learning Services at our own district (2006-2008).
     After that, Serban put in a tumultuous stint as President of Santa Barbara City College. (She made some decisions that pissed off the oldsters of her community.)
     According to the press release, “Dr. Andreea Serban [was] appointed Interim Vice Chancellor of Educational Services and Technology.”
     Though she hails from Transylvania, there is no evidence that she is a zombie or a vampire, though, vampire-wise, it has been said that "she certainly does have the voice."

Serban Appointed to Interim Position for Coast Community College District in Orange County, Noozhawk (Santa Barbara) Oct. 21

More clarity on Reeve and Concordia

     This morning, I came across an article in the Concordia University (of Irvine) school newspaper, the Courier, regarding controversial San Juan Capistrano City Councilman and Saddleback College Political Science instructor Derek Reeve's departure from CU. (See Adjunct prof. no longer employed at Concordia; Concordia Courier, Oct. 11; by Stephen Puls, editor-in-chief.)
     As you know, Reeve has been accused of serial plagiarism but has denied the charge, despite overwhelming evidence that he did in fact present work that was written by others as if it were his own.
     Though it is nearly two weeks old, the article provides clarifying details concerning Reeve’s departure from Concordia that have not been reported in the (non-Concordia) press.
     (Note: the subsequent edition [Oct. 25] of the Courier makes no mention of the Reeve affair.)
     The article explains that “Reeve was serving as the instructor for both American Government and Comparative Political Systems [at Concordia] this fall. Doctors Adam Francisco and Daniel van Voorhis, Professors of History, will assume leadership of these classes for the remainder of the semester.”
     It reports (or opines) that “Concordia holds strong to its policy of academic honesty as a means to push students towards independent thinking and resourcefulness. It specifically states that students, as well as faculty, are expected to maintain the highest standards of academic integrity, holding true to commands regarding honesty in Scripture.”
     Further, it quotes a statement released by Dr. Mary Scott, Provost: “The university expects all members of the campus community to follow accepted, legal policies in matters of academic honesty.” The Courier implies that Scott's statement was released re Reeve's departure in particular.
     Assuming the Concordia Courier is reporting accurately, it seems clear that Mr. Reeve’s adventures in plagiarism (or perhaps his refusal to acknowledge that his posting of others' writings as his own [on Patch] constituted plagiarism) are indeed the cause of his departure from Concordia.
     Reporter Stephen Puls also reports that “University policy regarding academic integrity is placed at the beginning of the syllabus for every course.”
     MEANWHILE, the evidence suggests that Saddleback College has taken no action with regard to Reeve's plagiarism, despite Reeve's apparent failure to understand the concept of plagiarism combined with his obligation, as an instructor at Saddleback, to uphold the college's prohibition against student plagiarism in his classes.
     His name continues to appear on the Schedule of Classes for the Spring semester. As far as I know, he continues to teach at Saddleback this (fall) semester.
     As far as I know, there is no truth whatsoever to the rumor that Saddleback College has issued a press release regarding the Reeve affair, declaring that “Saddleback College doesn’t really care if all members of the campus community follow accepted, legal policies in matters of academic honesty.”

The Justice file

     For what it's worth, 96% (i.e. 29 out of 30) of those who participated in our "confidence/no confidence" poll re IVC VPI Craig Justice voted "no confidence."
     It is, I think, remarkable that only one person was willing to vote "confidence" in the fellow. One wonders how an actual vote among IVC faculty would go. Not so well, I suspect. Not for Justice.

The latest on Amy Ahearn (10/26)

[UPDATE: Ahearn found!]
O.C. English professor missing for two months (LA Times)

     Orange County sheriff's detectives are asking for the public's help in finding an English professor at Saddleback College who has been missing since August.
     Amy Ahearn, 40, who has a home in Lake Forest, did not show up for classes she was assigned to teach at the college on Aug. 22, when the semester started.
     Ahearn has no family in California, said her sister, Marjorie Ahearn, though she was recently divorced by her husband, a teacher at another community college.
     Her family in Illinois has hired a private detective to help locate her.
     The private investigator reported that Ahearn was last seen Sept. 11 in Norwalk when she reportedly went to an attorney's office looking disheveled and homeless in appearance, seeking an attorney to handle estate issues and a complaint against "OC Police."
     The attorney told Ahearn he could help her, and she left.
     A paralegal in the area told the investigator that he had spoken with Ahearn several times about a case against "OC Police." She told him she was living in her car.
     Ahearn also was reportedly seen renting a sports utility vehicle at John Wayne International Airport, where a clerk said she was a frequent customer and had a debit card. The vehicle was found Sept. 24.
Her family says Ahearn may suffer from Huntington's disease, a degenerative brain condition.
     Folk singer Woody Guthrie is the best-known victim of the disease. Several members of her family suffer from it, her sister said.
     Ahearn, who may be going by her previously married name of Amy Juntilla, is described as white, 5-foot-6 with brown eyes and brown hair, weighing 140 pounds, though she may have lost weight.
     Anyone with information is asked to call Orange County sheriff’s investigators at (714) 647-7055 or (714) 628-7170.

Special Amy Ahearn Facebook page

UPDATE, 10/27:

Today, Amy’s sister Margie writes:

Her [i.e., Amy's] ex-husband has access to their home and to Amy's mail (they still co-own the house though it was supposed to be refinanced and put in Amy's name by October 1, 2011). He has said from the beginning his lawyers have advised him not to get involved in this. Also he says they tell him he can not provide Amy's mail to our family (including bank and credit card statements that will help us track her) without a court order due to privacy issues. I know if he had provided this information to us from the beginning we might not still be searching for her two months later. Our additional PI will be working on this as well.

James Van Praagh is an asshole

There, there. (Deceive, deceive.)

More unsightly Fuentean residue: Carona loses appeal

     As you know, disgraced former OC Sheriff Mike Carona is a close associate of our own Tom Fuentes (SOCCCD trustee, Lake Forest), a circumstance that yielded numerous appearances by Carona at Irvine Valley College, which once named the fellow its “Hometown Hero, “ or some such nonsense.
     Carona is now cooling his heels in federal prison. Predictably, he’s been appealing his conviction. But that hasn’t gone well:

Former sheriff loses appeal (OC Reg)

     A federal appeals court Tuesday reaffirmed its earlier ruling upholding former Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona's conviction of witness tampering and denied his petition for rehearing.
     The three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals also ruled that Carona, who is serving a 5½-year prison term, may not file further petition for rehearing before it.
     The disgraced former sheriff's downward spiral from the peak of power in Orange County law enforcement landed him in a federal prison in Colorado, where he surrendered in January.
     Carona was Orange County's top law enforcement officer for nine years before he was indicted, tried and convicted of trying to persuade a former top aide to lie for him during a spreading federal investigation of corruption in the Sheriff's Department.
     U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Guilford sentenced Carona to federal prison in April 2009, telling the ex-sheriff he had brought shame to Orange County and had victimized the people he was sworn to serve.
     The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in January Guilford did not abuse his discretion when he declined to grant a defense motion to suppress evidence based on what Carona's attorneys said was prosecutorial misconduct.
     The three-judge panel Tuesday affirmed that ruling – amending some of the language in its earlier opinion – and denied a rehearing. There will be no hearing by a larger panel of 9th circuit judges.
     "Since there was no violation of (an ethical rule), we do not need to reach the question of whether the district court abused its discretion by not excluding evidence it had found was obtained in violation of that rule, not giving a jury instruction concerning the conduct, nor imposing other sanctions on the government," the jurists wrote.
     Carona can still appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The October meeting of the SOCCCD BOT—live and direct! (Extraordinary miasmic tedium)

A drool-inducing meeting

     (Tere's Board Meeting Highlights are here.)

Summary:

• The faculty contract passes; Lang votes no • Cosgrove urges more full-time hires • Curious roll-call vote on Fuentes’ no-show payment • Expand permissibility of alcohol? Hits snag • Confusion over IVC classified changes

     Hello again. It's time for the monthly meeting of the SOCCCD Board of Trustees in beauteous Mission Viejo, CA. I just arrived here in the Ronald Reagan meeting room. The audience is small.
     The meeting is supposed to open at 6:00 p.m. It's 6:10, and it does appear that the board will start the meeting within a few minutes. As usual, the ailing Tom Fuentes is absent.
     When board Prez Nancy Padberg opens the meeting, she'll ask Clerk Marcia Milchiker to read out any actions taken in the closed session, between 5:00 and 6:00 p.m. I'll let you know if anything interesting is announced.
     6:12 - it starts. Marcia: (1) 6/0 vote, approved two-day suspension of police officer. (2) 6/0 vote, approved two-day suspension of classified employee.
     Sheesh. What's that about?
     Frank Meldau: invocation: non-religious moment of silence for victims of Turkish earthquake

Public comments:

Bob Cosgrove: new faculty hires are urgently needed. Only about 50% of faculty are full-time at this point, a decline of a high of about two-thirds, many years ago. A great deal must be done by full-timers—on committees, etc. We shouldn't sell our students short. Classified support is also important. Many exceptionally talented faculty are on the market now.

Presentation:

Will Glen

Stephanie Scofield of The Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) presents awards to IVC Police Chief Will Glen. She says Glen, et al., have committed to the "POST" program. Two plaques. Photo op. "Executive level certificate" granted to Glen. Another photo op. Nancy encourages Glenn to speak. He says: been in policing for forty years. He thanks the men and women who work for the department.

Board reports:

Bill Jay: discusses accreditation reports. Wants to compliment everyone involved. Long, hard, lonely work. Outstanding, quality work. I appreciate it, he says.
Frank Meldau: met with Prez Roquemore at IVC. Saw programs, labs, new construction. Spoke with veteran students. Mentions an upcoming Town Hall meeting on student success at Saddleback College.
Marcia Milchiker: echoes what others have said. Congrats to Chief Glen. We really do have fabulous employees, says Marcia. Our police wear guns and talk with students. We want to hire the best and the brightest. We have an opportunity to do that right now. We're the only CC district in OC that's hiring right now. And, yes, trustees need to visit the colleges.
T.J. Prendergast: agrees with what's been said. Attended golf tournament. Walked away with "day at the beach" package, whatever that is. Will attend college-wide forum. Was at OC School Board Association. Says funny things about that. Yuk, yuk.
Nancy Padberg: I won a raffle prize at the golf thing, she says. Went to IVC/Saddleback girls' soccer game. Also football game.
Dave Lang: want to echo trustee Jay's comments about accreditation work. Chief Glen's awards, well deserved. Mentions retirement of Harry Parmer. A tremendous asset for us, deserves recognition.
Student Trustee Jordan Larson: wants to recognize student government per college. Went to some sort of "Birmingham" civil rights event, here in this room.

Chancellor's report:

Gary Poertner: bust of Ronald Reagan now situated just outside the room in its permanent installation. Tonight, we'll be hearing a report about educational quality. Next month: student success. Thanks faculty for all the work they've done on accreditation.

6:36 p.m. — Discussion item:
Educational Quality, Academic Programs, Program Review, SLO’s:

Don Busche: draws attention to a Saddleback College publication, shows all of the degrees offered. Over 300 certificates, degrees, and awards. The board has ultimate responsibility for this. Shows Title 5 and Cal. Ed Code -- responsibilities of board, chancellor, senates, presidents, etc. Board Policies.

Lisa Davis Allen: explains delegation of authority to Academic Senate. Goes through 11 areas. Emphasizes role in accreditation reports.

Kris Leppien-Christensen: faculty co-chair, Saddleback. Discusses accreditation "standards" (categories).
Explains 1-year curriculum cycle. Yadda yadda.

Dan Walsh: explains professional development. We do these things because it's part of being a college professor....

This is all very snoozular.

Provides examples of activities during Flex week. Lisa DA comes up to mention other professional development activities. "New tools, new technologies...." Explains "Distinguished Academic Lecture Series."

Claire C-S: Assessment of Programs and Learning. We've been doing this for a long time....

I feel that my life is ticking away.

Kathy Werle of IVC: organizational relationships and partnerships.

Thank you. Questions? Prendergast and Milchiker ask questions. Milchiker declares that the presentation was "very interesting."

Everyone does a good job, but still, it seems that time has stopped here in the Ronny Reagan Room. It's the quality of the air in the room: still, empty, meaningless. A kind of odd miasma. Lang asks about grants. Busche yammers about grant money. Werle jumps up to discuss grant money. Werle says something funny, strangely punctuating the miasmic moment. Meldau says sweet and appreciative things about all of this developmental work. The guy seems genuinely impressed. Padberg says the presentation is now over and it was excellent.

Consent calendar (stuff that will be passed in one fell swoop). Lang pulls three items from the impending swoopulosity. Padberg pulls a couple more. Also 5.11 and 5.12 pulled because they contain resolutions. They approve the rest, unanimously. Trustees seem amazed at the number of things pulled.

5.2: a grant for IVC. Marcia thinks its just swell is all. She just wanted to say that, I guess.
5.3: Kaplan International Programs lease of buildings at IVC. Lang: why does this come to us after the effective date of the start of the agreement? Evidently, the question is answered satisfactorily.
5.6 Saddleback Child Development Training agreement. A question, answered. Approved.
5.9 Lang asks a question concerning Basic Aid expenditure. Tabled.
5.10 approved
5.11 authorizing payment to Trustee Fuentes (Sept. meeting), who was absent. Roll call. (In fact, he's been absent since March or April.) Unanimous.
Lang notes that we've approved this item in the past without a roll call vote. Why a roll call this time? Gosh, this is unusual, says Marcia. I didn't understand the explanation. (I think it's CYA, cuz this looks, or might look, hinky.)
5.12 approved. Roll call vote. Unanimous.

ACTION ITEMS:

6.1 Faculty hiring. Poertner: lots of recent faculty retirements. This list (of new hires) comprises mostly replacement faculty.
Lang asks: it seems that no one has signed off on this.
Not sure how this issue is resolved. The item is approved unanimously.
6.2 Utt Library construction. Approved.
6.3 ATEP. Change would decrease costs, demolition, etc. Approved.
6.4 Board Policy Revision. Approved unanimously.
6.5 — board policy re alcoholic beverages for review and study. Slight changes in the policy, which does and has allowed the serving of alcohol on defined occasions. Poertner: minor revision. Eliminating ATEP from the policy.
T.J. Prendergast: we may have violated board policy at a certain event recently. But shouldn't presence of alcohol be allowed on such occasions? Marcia: agrees with TJ. Let's make the policy a little more broad. And why take ATEP out? Poertner: yes, TJ wants to broaden the policy. Do the rest of the board agree? Lang says he recalls that adoption of this policy was controversial. He asks: have there been any problems with it? Poertner: I have not heard of any problems associated with this policy. Both colleges have had fundraisers involving alcohol. Nobody died. So maybe we should expand the list of occasions where alcohol is permitted.
It appears that some trustees wanted to push for "expansion" of alcohol use, but Padberg seemed to resist that. Marcia explains that, after AB 1725, there was some effort to align community colleges with other colleges/universities. The chief advantage: Can raise more money with booze. Lubricated people have an easier time opening their wallets.
Lang: do we have adequate insurance coverage? Are there special considerations at ATEP?
Meldau: we seem to be going against the stream. Lately, alcohol availability at sporting events has been shrinking. So this thing goes forward for review and study. Lord knows what will come back. Poertner seemed unclear, judging by the expression on his face.
6.6 Academic personel actions. Approved.
6.7 Classified personal actions. They pull one item from 6.7. CSEA policy 6-10 is somehow involved. They approve the rest. Lang asks Bugay to have someone speak to reorganization of IVC positions in B and C (whatever that is). Bugay identifies Craig Justice and Gwen Plano as those who could answer questions.
Craig: reorganizations in Admissions and Records triggered by a retirement and some other changes. Gwen: Pam K retired a month ago. An opportunity arose to reorganize slightly. The position as it stood is eliminated. A part-timer is becoming full-time. So a retirement permitted these changes, with no cost.
Bugay: because there's no over-all net change in personel, no need for "going out" with search, etc. There was some apprehension about this. Lang: was this change recommended by some agency? Or was it an internal decision? Gwen: it was internal. No external involvement. Marcia: could you make sure about the legality of this, not advertising the position? Bugay: this is a well-known exception. Jay: confused about what is eliminated, what is added. B & C. B1. Position eliminated. B2, B3 eliminated. Brought back 2. Adding C1, C2. Reworded job description.
Padberg corrects TJ on some detail. Milchiker: many positions are being changed here. 4 pages of explanation. "Enormous" changes. Bugay to Lang: would it help to pull these elements and come back with organizational chart? Gwen: no hardship. Can do, but some staff will be disappointed, but they'll understand. Gwen: it does seem confusing, the way it's written here. "I even know what happened, and I'm confused," she says.
--Maybe we should pull the whole item. B 1,2,3, C 1,2 --just pull these. Lang: C 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 16. And corresponding B. B 1,2,3,.5,6,7,8,10,11. Jay alters his motion according to Dave's changes.
One no vote from Prendergast. Otherwise passes.
Now voting on the rest: Unanimous.

6.8 CONTRACT MASTER AGREEMENT (Faculty union and district.) Bugay: we've discussed this. Let's vote. Padberg asks for faculty vote results. They vote: unanimous, except for one no vote: Lang.

7.1---7.3 bang, bang, bang
7:55 p.m.
7.4: Lang: we a had tough third quarter. What are the implications of this (re our obligation to this trust fund)? Poertner: the audit coming soon will have comments about this. The fiscal lady (forgot her name--Fitzsimmons?) explains things. She's always pretty clear. We're in it for the long haul. Lang: yep, understand that.
7.5 Retiree trust fund. No questions.

8.0 Reports from constituent groups

Blah, blah, blah....
Lewis Long: we're thrilled that contract negotiations are over. Thanks everyone involved: Bugay, et al. We're pleased.
Craig Justice: sitting in for Glenn Roquemore, Prez of IVC. Nothing to report beyond written report.
Tod Burnett: Saddleback College awarded $1 million grant from Dept. of Labor.... Engineering. Will have press release. Training future engineers. Student Success Task Force will meet in this room.
David Bugay: thanks for ratifying contract agreement. Had professional dialogue during negotiations. Says: "Lewis Long is one of the finest" individuals ever worked with in negotiations. Honorable person to deal with. Praises Saddleback College orchestra performance of Beethoven. Seems to know what he's talking about.
Fitzsimmons: we seem to be doing fine with 50% law, based on preliminary data.
Etc.

Adjourned in memory of Saddleback College student who recently died. (Taylor Samm?)

Scummy Fuentean residue

     You remember fraudster and ex-OC Treasurer Chriss Street. During his Treasurer days, he’d visit SOCCCD BOT meetings often, offering forecasts of tax collections and such.
     No two-minute limit for him, boy. He was OC GOP royalty/organized crime.
     He was one of Tom Fuentes’ pals, like Mike Carona and Phil Greer:

Chriss Street appeals big judgment to Ninth Circuit (OC Reg)

     Former Orange County Treasurer-Tax Collector Chriss Street has appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a bid to stave off a $7 million judgment.
     Street filed the appeal last week after U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Richard Neiter declined to reconsider hisMarch 2010 ruling that Street breached his fiduciary duty. Last May, a federal Judge Dean D. Pregerson affirmed Neiter’s ruling.
     Before becoming county treasurer Street was trustee for the bankrupt Fruehauf truck trailer manufacturing company. He was forced out in mid-2005 by the company’s creditors and subsequently sued by his successor as trustee, Los Angeles money manager Dan Harrow.
     By the time the suit came to trial in early 2010, Street was Orange County’s elected treasurer and was seeking re-election. Neiter’s ruling that Street had breached his fiduciary duty to the trust effectively ended Street’s campaign and his political career.
     In his most recent appeal to Neiter, Street accused Harrow of misconduct as trustee. Harrow denied the allegation. Neiter ruled that Street had had time to raise the allegation during the trial but failed to do so, making the allegation irrelevant.
     In addition, Street argued to Neiter that his attorney at the trial, Phillip Greer, was ineffective. Neiter responded that Street could have fired Greer before the trial if he so wished.
     Now both of those issues will go to the Ninth Circuit.

On The Agenda (Voice of OC)

     The Orange County Board of Supervisors is set to allocate $50,000 to enhance the Orange County Tourism Council's website, with options to renew the one-year contract for two more years.
     The contract raised the eyebrows of OC Weekly's R. Scott Moxley. The tourism council includes politically connected officials from Disneyland, corporate lobbying firms and resort hotels, according to Moxley….

It's like watching Glenn Beck

Accreditation reports are wack

     Here’s how accreditation works. Your college labors to compose a self-study that’s dutifully written according to the Clueless Educationist Style Sheet, which is guaranteed to produce prose that impresses Paranormal Fans and fifth graders but that sends all literate people into paroxysms of laughter or dismay. Then the Accreds show up, go off to dark corners, and talk to everybody, including every crank and jackass within miles; next, after shaking their heads and making glum academic faces, the Accreds go home and get bitch slapped awhile by Babs Beno. That process ultimately yields a report that slams the college for not having enough “student learning outcomes” imbedded in its “mission statement” or in the seats of the new Performing Arts/Soccer Center—or for a failure to pursue digital delivery rubrics and co-curricular, asynaptic assessments. –Something like that.
     Yeah, then the college gnashes its teeth and wails for like six months, spiraling into an institutional depression; next, it labors mightily (and earnestly) to compose a follow-up report, which ‘splains how the college is taking all the accreds’ semi-confused criticisms super-seriously and running “at least” fifteen new committees to ensure that everybody’s on board with the “process,” which yields “do tasks,” which, naturally, are ugly and unrecognizable as anything any sensible person would ever do. College leaders sign it with their own blood and collapse into another corner. More tears. Everybody frets, muttering, “remember Compton.”

     So, anyway, accreditation self-study and follow-up reports often end up being perverse and artificial monstrosities, full of Orwellian creepoid verbulosity plus profound self-deception—and a dollop of flat dishonesty. I mean, if the Accreds show up and say that you’ve got yourself a nasty “plague of despair,” then you don’t do something sensible, like fire the source of said despair—usually a Chancellor or President or Vice President (or Board, but you can’t fire those people). No. Not in Accred World. Instead, you set up a committee to concoct “rules of civility,” such as, “smile and say ‘howdy do’!” or “respect all others and honor their feelings, even if they’re psychotic, and then draw a hand and tape it to your back.” (Patting yourself on the back. Get it?) –Stuff like that.
     Yeah, and when the Accreds tag you for the hideously unhealthy relationship between groups A and B, but then things change and so A and B are now, like, dating or something—and, in the meantime, C grows to fear and loathe B, threatening districtular collapse.... –Well, in that case, you make up some crap about how you’re “taking vigorous steps” to get A and B together. But, natch, you just let the C and B vexation fester beyond all recognition, cuz it's not relevant to the present accredular demands.
     Yeah, that’s the ol’ accreditation do-si-do. It’s very processular. It’s, um, measurable and, uh, based on factoidal and empirical data (probably pulled out of somebody’s a**).
     With that in mind,

If it were MY NEIGHBOR'S COOL BOXSTER, a college’s accreditation report would probably look something like this:

If it were KEN KESEY'S BUS, a college’s accreditation report would probably look something like this:

If it were MY BRO'S ULTRA-UTILITARIAN COROLLA, a college’s accreditation report would probably look something like this:

If it were an old silver DUNE BUGGY, a college’s accreditation report would probably look something like this:

If it were a SEXY RED FERRARI, a college’s accreditation report would probably  look something like this:

If it were a SLEEK AND AGILE TEN-SPEED BIKE, a college’s accreditation report would probably look something like this:

If it were SOME PUNK KID HANGIN' IN THE LIBRARY, a college’s accreditation report would probably look something like this:

If it were A PAIR OF SENNHEISER HD 800 HEADPHONES, a college’s accreditation report would probably look something like this:

ETC.

OK, IT'S TIME FOR SOME TOTALLY COOL BLUES (1964)

Heads up: Monday’s BOT meeting (contract approval, etc.)

     The agenda for the October meeting of the SOCCCD board of trustees is available here. (See bottom right of screen to download the large pdf file.)

     The discussion item for Monday’s meeting (4.1) is curiously broad and inclusive, like a bucket of everything:

     Looks like possible educational programs for ATEP will be presented, among other things. That should be scintillating. As you know, development of programs at ATEP has become a bit of a turf war between the colleges. The Hatfields versus the McCoys, but without the banjos. (I heard that one on a TV show, I think.)

     Item 5.3 is extension of Kaplan International Programs’ lease for three years at IVC. KI is a division of Kaplan, Inc., the infamous "for-profit."
     I don’t get it. Aren’t these for-profits the enemy?
     I know. Let's rent space to the Libertarian Party. We'll help 'em get their message out there. We'll smile like idiots.

     Item 5.4 is approval of honoraria (money) for speakers for events or classes.
     Interestingly, one instructor is requesting sixteen $100 honoraria (i.e., $1600) for her “Modern World Culture” course. One guest speaker per week, I guess. Ambitious.
     Among her guest speakers are Richard McCullough—perhaps you remember him—and Virginia Trimble. The latter was my astronomy instructor (at UCI), circa 1974. She's funny and smart. I loved her take on the Bermuda Triangle. It was something like: "when planes crash into the ocean, they sink to the bottom, never to be seen again. D'uh."

     Once again, Trustee Tom Fuentes will be paid (for last board meeting), despite his absence. How many months has it been now? (The last regular meeting Fuentes attended was in March.) He could have resigned but chose not to. He chose instead to accept payment and benefits—for six months thus far.
     As you know, he's a fiscal conservative who's into accountability and such. He's exceedingly staunch. He appreciates "beautiful ladies," evidently.
     I do miss him at meetings, though. He'd occasionally kill somebody with a look or a snarl.

     6.4 is discussion/approval of board policy revisions, including BP-2100, “Delegation of Authority to the Chancellor.” Here’s some language to be added:

     6.5 concerns changes to the district’s booze policy. Expect Nancy Padberg to restart the Prohibition movement.

     6.8 is a big one: "Faculty Association Academic Employee Master Agreement: Approve tentative Agreement between District and the SOCCCDFA for the period July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2014."

ALSO:

Top 1% see income grow 224% (OC Reg)

It's puzzling

     Two weeks after Concordia U ended its employment of long-time Poli Sci instructor—and (surprise!) serial plagiarist—Derek Reeve, the fellow’s name is still listed as the instructor for two courses in Saddleback College’s Spring 2012 Schedule of Classes (See).
     As far as I know, at Saddleback College, Reeve (who is also a noisy San Juan Capistrano City Councilman and demagogue) has suffered no adverse consequences at all for publishing essays, under his own name, and without proper attribution, that were cut and pasted from other publications (see)—and for publicly defending that practice! (As others have asked, how can an instructor enforce the prohibition against plagiarism in the classroom, if he does not recognize his own plagiarism or regard it as inappropriate?)
     Meanwhile, despite the fact that troubled Saddleback College English Comp instructor, Amy Ahearn, is officially missing and did not show up to teach her Fall 2011 Saddleback College courses (see), she, too, is scheduled to teach in the Spring (see), according to the college's schedule of classes.
     Do they expect her to just show up in January, as though everything were hunky-dory?
     I don't get it. Do you get it?
     No doubt, with regard to these situations, some of you are thinking, "they're taking care of it. They're doing what's appropriate."
     Really? If "they" are doing things, why are those things not reported or announced? What's with the secrecy?
     And if they're doing nothing, just why is that? Shouldn't the college deal with these things?
     Either way, it makes little sense to me.
     —No doubt you'll correct me if I'm mistaken. There's always that option, you know.

* * *

     In Frank Mickadeit’s recent column re the Ahearn case, one reader, evidently employed by a local community college, wrote this:

     If the college knew there was something wrong in 2007, why didn't they step in? Why was she still teaching? If I had been a family member, I would have done my best to have her committed for her own safety.
     …With someone like that, you don't just encourage them to get help...you TAKE them to the help. Words will not do her any good, you have to intervene.

     Well, yeah! Did officials at Saddleback College intervene on Ahearn’s behalf? Did they try hard enough to get help for her? Did they contact her family? Were they unaware of the bizarre and worrisome elements in her teaching, going back years? Are they doing anything right now to find her?
     Hello? Anyone out there?
     Yes, civility is good. But how 'bout some old fashioned humanity?

Fuentes: "not a Liberal in sight!"

     Missed this one. From three days ago:

Western CPAC Honors Tom Fuentes' Lifetime of Fighting the Good Fight (John Gizzi, Human Events)

     Like just about everyone else in California Republican politics, the guests at the Western Conservative Political Action Conference here who attended its tribute to Tom Fuentes on Saturday evening know that the former Orange County GOP chairman and longtime conservative stalwart has been battling cancer. But they also know that the feisty Fuentes still gets out to conservative and party functions and says what’s on his mind, in no uncertain terms.
. . .
     Flanked by his family and facing a hushed audience of fellow conservatives at the Hyatt Regency Hotel, Fuentes cited the old adage about feeling as though he'd died and went to heaven. In his words, "Imagine, if you will, a great room full of conservative friends, beautiful ladies, gentle harp music, a flowing bar, the American Flag on display, patriotic Boy Scouts, and, not a Liberal in sight! For me, that is paradise!" And at his tribute, he found his paradise—the flowing bar, surrounded by friends and beautiful women. And there was not one liberal in sight….

     For Fuentes’ speech, go here.

Ill-prepared for college

Billions spent in U.S. on community college students who drop out (LA Times)

California expenditures on such students over five years totaled $480 million, report says. Many students are ill-prepared for college, get too little support and aren't helped by remediation, the study notes.

     California and other states are spending billions of tax dollars on community college students who drop out before completing their studies, according to a report released Thursday.
     The report by the nonprofit American Institutes for Research found that from 2004 to 2009, federal, state and local governments spent nearly $4 billion on full-time community college students who dropped out after their first year.
     In California, expenditures on such students over the five-year period totaled $480 million, far more than any other state.
     The report highlights a nationwide trend of increasing community college enrollment and spending but declining completion rates at the same time that state funding for higher education has dropped.
     "These kinds of numbers say to states like California that our taxpayers are on the hook for substantial amounts of money and they are not getting an adequate amount of return," said Mark Schneider, a vice president at the research center who wrote the report.
. . .
     The report did not study the reasons for the low rate of success but noted that many students are ill-prepared for college, receive too few support services and are not helped by remediation.
. . .
     Steve Boilard, director of higher education at the state Legislative Analyst's Office, noted that even when students drop out, not all money spent on their education is necessarily wasted. But the report raises important questions about lost potential, he said.
     "The hard job is not demonstrating that lots of community college students don't achieve meaningful education goals, or that money is wasted; the hard part is changing those facts," he said.

SEE ALSO

• High cost of first-year community college dropouts (SFChronicle)

“When E.F. Hutton talks, ….”

     Oddly, denizens of Irvine Valley College were sent yet another memo (see below) concerning today’s meeting of the “Working Group on Civility.”
     The memo seems designed to underscore what “drives this project,” namely, the “District-wide Strategic Plan,” goals 1, 1.1, and 1.1.3.
     (I think it was my “threatening” to sit in on this meeting that did it. Golly, I was only kidding!)

Colleagues,

The Working Group on Civility will be meeting today to participate in a District-Wide effort in support of the 2011-2014 District Strategic Plan. Please see the SOCCCD SharePoint Site for details on the development of the Plan. Both colleges are working on developing college civility (Mutual Respect and Collaboration) policies that will ultimately support the development of a Board Policy on Mutual Respect. The District-Wide Strategic Plan goal, objective, and action item that drives this project are shown below:

South Orange County Community College District
Strategic Plan 2011- 2014

District-wide Goal 1. SOCCCD will create a district-wide culture which is characterized by mutual respect and collaboration and which celebrates the uniqueness of each institution.

District-wide Objective 1.1. SOCCCD Chancellor will take the actions necessary to assure that employees district-wide collaborate on the achievement of common educational benchmarks.

Action Item 1.1.3. Draft a Board Policy on mutual respect and forward for BPARC review.

ALLOW ME TO STATE THE OBVIOUS: IVC's plague of despair (etc.) will not be overcome with the passage of a "civility" policy, no matter what it prescribes and proscribes. On the contrary, passage of such a policy amid continued administrative brutishness and cluelessness will only make matters worse. (No, I'm not including Gary Poertner.)

E.F. Hutton commercial

The Kiana file

     Speaking of civility, I've heard for weeks now that Kiana Tabibzadeh (recommended mnemonic: "Ki-a-na-Boomz-de-ay"), IVC President Glenn Roqemore's chemistry instructor wife, is now the chair (co-chair?) of her school, Physical Sciences and Technology.
     Usually, such appointments are noted on the board agenda (doesn't the board have to approve them?). But I don't recall seeing her appointment. I'll take a closer look.

     As I've mentioned previously, Kiana has a reputation for abusing her circumstance—that her husband is the Prez of the college who is liable to be unhappy if Kiana is unhappy. Reliable sources tell us that she has been involved in some difficulties with her deans (over her schedule, cake, etc.), of which there have been several in recent years, some of whom ceased deaning amid a large cloud of Sturm und Drang.
     I've been told that, given this history, and given the obvious potential for conflicts of interest, the wise among us had recommended that Kiana not pursue the chair position.
     Let me know where in past agendas her appointment appeared, if ever.

Amy Ahearn update

     I’m afraid the news isn’t particularly positive concerning missing Saddleback instructor Amy Ahearn.
     For (arguably) the latest developments, check out Frank Mickadeit’s column this evening: Saddleback professor goes missing.
     Mickadeit has more details about Ahearn's possible condition. She has been missing for quite some time now. Her case—and photo—are increasingly in the news, and yet there seem to be no leads about her fate or whereabouts.

Faculty contract ratified (by rank and file)

Just heard from the union boys:

Colleagues,

     At the conclusion of voting this evening, the proposed faculty contract was ratified with 287 (95.7%) yes votes, and 13 no votes, for a total of 300 voters, or 57.2% of all members.
     The contract will be presented to the Board of Trustees for adoption at the Monday, October 24th meeting.
     All nominated representatives were also elected....

A civility policy? Arf!

     Today, I was among the many who received an announcement from the IVC college President. It revealed the (huge!) membership of a new committee: “the IVC Civility Policy Workgroup.”
     A civility policy?
     That doesn’t sound good.

* * *

     I recall a meeting of the IVC Academic Affairs committee some time in the late 90s. At the time, Kate Clark was the chair. The committee was charged with considering pursuit of some sort of “civility” or “ethics” code for faculty. Some in the room were well aware of the many tools—refusal to grant tenure, firing of noisy adjuncts, trumped-up charges of discrimination and violence—that had been employed to make life difficult for critics of the then-current regime (Raghu Mathur and the Board Majority: Steve Frogue, Dot Fortune, John Williams, et al.). Especially with that in mind, but also because of our independent regard of free speech, we agreed to eschew such codes. They could too easily be used as a bludgeon to punish or deter valid criticism, we reasoned.
     Besides, as academics, don’t we seek to champion freedom rather than to limit it? Plus: do we really want to start policing the conduct of our colleagues? That's an ugly business. Is it really necessary?

* * *

     I’ve been away on sabbatical, and so I don’t know the origins of this “civility policy” initiative, though I have some idea what’s going on here. Obviously, when interest in civility policies crops up, it is usually a reaction to alleged “incivility.”
     I.e., somebody's been unpleasant.
     On this blog—and its newsletter predecessor—we criticize and object. We’ve always tried to do that responsibly. I think we’ve succeeded. But I’ve learned that some people just don’t take criticism well. In their minds, any criticism, even implied or gentle or just criticism, is an assault.
     Being a leader or some other public person demands a thick skin. I’ve certainly learned that lesson in the last dozen or so years, pursuing Brown Act lawsuits (two of them), highlighting administrative folly (e.g., banning faculty “war” talk), noting trustee cluelessness and unsavoriness (Fortune’s residence issues, Tom Fuentes’ nixation of the Santander “study abroad” program, etc.), and so on. You get some push-back. You get called things. It can get pretty rough, even dicey.
     These days, top administration at IVC is arrogant and contemptuous of all who seek a place at the decision-making table. The key problem here is the VPI, a fellow with a well-deserved reputation for ruthlessness and vindictiveness. He’s the sort who, in the end, insists on running things. Everyone else needs to get the heck out of the way.
     Faculty's job: to raise no questions, to cause no ripples.
     Naturally, a guy like that will be all over a “civility” or “ethics” policy. I have no doubt that he views the preceding paragraph as an instance of incivility or unethicalness most foul—something that, if possible, should be stamped out, punished.

* * *

     I recall the many lies and machinations that former administrator Raghu P. Mathur would deploy. Starting in 1997, I responded to this by stating the facts and then calling him a “liar” and a “schemer,” etc., in Dissent and The 'Vine. Lots of people seemed to reason that, ipso facto, I was engaged in “name-calling.” I.e., I was being uncivil.
     Well, maybe, I said. But it’s true, isn’t it?—he is a liar and a schemer. Look at the evidence! And if it’s true, given Mathur's power and authority, it’s important to point it out and to understand it, no?

* * *

     Back in the nineties, our newsletter (Dissent) engaged in criticisms of the powers that be. The push-back was ferocious. I had to go to federal court to defend myself against outrageous (and implausible) trumped-up charges—e.g., that I personally caused the colleges' accreditation woes!
     In the end, Judge Gary Feess stated:

I understand that a lot of people would like to do business behind closed doors, that they would like to make decisions that they don’t have to explain, that they would like to come to conclusions and judgments and issue policy without having anyone present to listen and hear and to understand and therefore to make rational, powerful, criticisms of them. That’s just too bad under our system…And if people are afraid of going to meetings and speaking up because … they’re going to be the subject of criticism in a publication, that’s…just life under the First Amendment…. [My emphasis.]

     Yeah. In our system, people in positions of power can be criticized. Nobody is immune from that.
     Deal with it.

* * *

     At one point—I believe it was in the May of 1998—Mathur was in a bad spot. The faculty had just recorded a stunning vote of “no confidence” in him. Mathur was furious.
     He responded by accusing three faculty leaders, including me, of racism and “mail threats.” He offered no evidence. I recall John Williams shaking his head at me. Dot Fortune too. "You're bad," their bodies sneered.
     There was nothing really that I could do about Mathur’s absurd charges. I had to live with them.
     And I did.

* * *

     Academia—colleges and universities—are associated with free speech. If you can’t speak freely and criticize authority at a college, so the saying goes, then where can you speak freely and criticize authority? Judge Gary Feess made that exact point in court. It was also made by several people back in 2003, when administration at IVC banned faculty comments about the war in the classroom. (Do you suppose Dennis "Moneybags" White and Glenn "Clueless" Roquemore are at long last ashamed? —Of course not.)
     But some people don’t see it that way. Even in academia, there are some with a little bit of the Pious Puritan or Grand Inquisitor in ‘em.
     Remember those speech codes at colleges, back in the 90s? Luckily, academics with a longer view of higher education and free speech pushed back against them, arguing that restrictions on speech are contrary to the very idea of higher education. Thus we have the American Association of University Professors’ famous policy concerning “Freedom of Expression and Campus Speech Codes.” It's marvelous.
     Some excerpts:

     Freedom of thought and expression is essential to any institution of higher learning.
…
     This mission guides learning outside the classroom quite as much as in class, and often inspires vigorous debate on those social, economic, and political issues that arouse the strongest passions. In the process, views will be expressed that may seem to many wrong, distasteful, or offensive. Such is the nature of freedom to sift and winnow ideas.
     On a campus that is free and open, no idea can be banned or forbidden.* No viewpoint or message may be deemed so hateful or disturbing that it may not be expressed.
     …Most campuses have recently sought to become more diverse, and more reflective of the larger community, by attracting students, faculty, and staff from groups that were historically excluded or underrepresented.
…
     Hostility or intolerance to persons who differ from the majority … may undermine the confidence of new members of the community….
     …[S]ome campuses have felt it necessary to forbid the expression of racist, sexist, homophobic, or ethnically demeaning speech, along with conduct or behavior that harasses….
     …But … rules that ban or punish speech based upon its content cannot be justified. An institution of higher learning fails to fulfill its mission if it asserts the power to proscribe ideas…. Indeed, by proscribing any ideas, a university sets an example that profoundly disserves its academic mission.
. . .
     … A speech code unavoidably implies an institutional competence to distinguish permissible expression of hateful thought from what is proscribed as thoughtless hate. [My emphases.]

     As near as I can tell, nobody’s accusing me or anybody else of “hate speech” at IVC. It’s a lesser charge, I suppose: some kind of loutishness, boorishness. —“Incivility.”
     On the other hand, I suspect that that mean spirit that lets people assume that they and the “institution” are competent to distinguish permissible and impermissible speech—well, it's alive and well at IVC.
     Maybe I'm wrong. We'll see. (I'm thinking of monitoring the proceedings of the IVC CPW, doin' a play-by-play.)

* * *

     But what, exactly, are those who shout "incivility" referring to? That’s the funny thing. When you ask that question, often, the “victims” of allegedly obnoxious speech (or their terriers) seem unable to cite anything relevant.
     Back in 1998, incensed by Dissent’s endless criticisms, administration accused me of  “discriminating” (against Indians, I guess—I called Mathur “Mr. Goo”—and against Christians—I said something snarky about the Christian Coalition) and violating the “workplace violence” policy (I told Glenn Roquemore he was “going down” along with Mathur).
     I recall challenging the Chancellor (Fredrick Sampson) over this anti-Christian blarney. I asked: where exactly did I exhibit hostility to Christians? In fact, I hadn’t. Not once. A certain speechifying member of IVC’s faculty evidently “believed” that I was anti-Christian because I had once criticized him (he had led his forensics students in prayer before tournaments). He complained to Mathur. That was it. I kid you not.
     Even now, I am often accused (by commenting DtB readers) of being an anti-religious atheist. When I challenge them to show where I have evinced that perspective, they come up with nothing.
     Poor readers, I guess. They oughta go to college.
     It’s part of the blog (or newsletter) thing. Bloggers are routinely accused of anything anyone ever says in their blogs, including reader comments over which they have no control. 

* * *

     QUESTION: People need to ask themselves why a “civility code” is being pursued right now. What exactly has occasioned this? (The official "story" seems to be that it's demanded by the accreditors.)
     My guess: as usual, people with power do not like to be criticized. They use their power to push-back against the critics, to portray them as hateful or uncouth or even sporting bad hair.
     Again, I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.

* * *

     GOSH, since I’m going to be accused of saying loutish things in loutish ways, I may as well come right out and say them. Clearly. (In my view, of course, these things are not loutish; neither are they delivered loutishly!)
     So:

• Just what are we to make of a faculty member who makes no secret of her administrative ambitions and who then attains the Presidency of the Academic Senate (the obvious faculty “step” toward an administrative career)?
   Might there be some conflicts of interest in this scenario? My answer: in this case, I do think so. (Please note: I am not objecting to administrative ambitions per se.)
• What are we to make of a faculty leadership that must be goaded to take to task the bad initiatives (e.g., the infernal Early College program; the quietly mounted and initially disastrous Crean Lutheran set-up) of top administration? That steadfastly refuses to acknowledge a spirit inimical to "shared governance" in the latter? My answer: get straight, lady, or move aside. 

     There is nothing personal here. On the contrary, I have always liked LDA. We’ve been friends for years. I’ve even given her a pass for being a Texas Republican for chrissake. (I can be absurdly tolerant.)
     But a whatchdog has got to do what a watchdog has got to do.
     Arf. ~

*As I have explained previously, my adventures in "free speech" in the last dozen years have led me to reconsider positions I once took publicly. For instance, I no longer feel that the appropriate response to Mr. Frogue's planned "forum"—one that included participation by Holocaust deniers and members of an anti-semitic organization—was cancelation of the forum. A better response: the setting up of a corrective "forum" plus the deposit of a burning sack of shit on Mr. Frogue's doorstep.**
**Just kidding about the sack of shit. Fudge maybe. And those cool fake flames.