DtB's Year in Review, Part 3: Process Schmocess—and "Mighty Oaks from little flacks grow"

IVC Prez Glenn Roquemore pretty much does as he pleases, process be damned. A case in point: 

¡I am the process!

     MAY 5: DtB readers know that Irvine Valley College has a very mixed record with regard to its invited commencement speakers. Some have been good. Some have been embarrassing in one way or another. (Plagiarism anyone?)

     The chief difficulty here is familiar: the piss-poor leadership of IVC Prez-for-life Glenn Roquemore, that remarkably non- (or anti-) academic fellow (he hangs out a lot at the Chamber of Commerce and gives speeches over at the knuckle-dragging Pacifica Institute), who generally finds ways to get who he wants at commencement, despite student or faculty preferences—and the demands of process!—to the contrary.

     This year is no exception. The college has a process according to which a committee, with wide representation, arrives at a list of carefully winnowed committee-approved candidates. The committee’s suggestions are sent up to the Prez, who makes the final selection. 

     For years, the Reb, among others, has suggested inviting the inimitable Gustavo Arellano (aka "The Mexican" of "Ask a Mexican!"), editor of the OC Weekly, to speechify. No matter the strength or weakness of the alternatives, Roquemore has always nixed the Mexican. Upon repeated Roquemorian rejections at IVC, Gustavo has given commencement addresses at UCLA, among other fine institutions of higher learning.

     This year, Gustavo made it to the IVC committee’s winnowed list of faves. 

     But no. At a recent meeting, the President’s rep on the committee—chair Diane Oaks—essentially declared that the committee may not suggest Mr. Arellano. And so his name was taken off the list. The list was forwarded, sans Mexican.

     So tell me. What’s the point of having a process in which a committee, with wide representation, chooses the candidates and the Prez makes the final selection, if the Prez also determines who can be on the committee’s list?

     This issue will be mentioned (it is too late to agendize it) at this week’s meeting of the IVC Academic Senate.

     Stay tuned.

TWO DAY LATER:

Erwin Chemerinsky

    MAY 7:  “What’s the point of having a process at all?”
     “Why doesn’t he just tell the committee who they can’t recommend before the process starts?”
     “The idea that this action by the committee chair followed the process is dubious at best.”
     Such were the comments* made at today’s meeting of the IVC Academic Senate when folks were informed of Diane Oaks’ curious pronouncement last week that the “commencement speaker” committee, which she (as Prez Roquemore’s rep) chairs, may not include writer and columnist Gustavo Arellano among its recommendations for the 2016 IVC commencement speaker.
     According to the process, the college President is entitled to choose among the recommendations forwarded by the committee, which has campus-wide representation. Nothing in the official language describing the process refers to the chair's authority to censor (or edit) the committee's list on the President's behalf.
     Meanwhile, a half hour into today’s senate meeting, President Glenn Roquemore sent the campus community the following email:

     It is my honor to announce the 2016 Irvine Valley College Commencement Speaker, Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of the School of Law, University of California, Irvine. 

     Nice diversion, Glenn.
     “Process” sure don’t count for much here at IVC, what with President-for-life Glenn Roquemore running things his way. But at least we’ve lined up an interesting choice for commencement speaker (for 2016—next year).
     Chemerinsky was atop the list of recommendations forwarded by the committee—the list that did not include Arellano, despite committee members' desire to put him there.
     You'll recall that, when Chemerinsky's hire as Dean of UCI's new law school was announced in 2007, local right-wing pols complained bitterly to UCI's then-Chancellor Michael Drake about the left-leaning legal scholar. That led to an embarrassing flip-flop, followed, ultimately, by yet another flip-flop. (In the end, Chemerinsky was again hired.) It was a low point in Drake's tenure.
     At the time, rumors (at least rumors I heard) had it that then-SOCCCD trustee and Neanderthal Tom Fuentes, for many years the chair of the local GOP, was among the noisy complainers about the selection of the decidedly non-knuckle-dragging Chemerinsky.
     Maybe we can get the C-man to talk about that for commencement?!

*Loose paraphrases of actual remarks, imprecisely remembered

SEE ALSO:

• East LA College Chooses their Commencement Speaker: It's Gustavo!
• Roquemore's curious email
• "Too Political"
• News about Gustavo Arellano, who, again, won't be commencement speaker
• Commencement speaker choices: the controversial and the unimaginative

MORE OAKS:

Marketing Director Diane Oaks

The IVC guide to insulting the IVC community 

     JUNE 2: This afternoon, Daniel Gross, the Director of Composition (among other duties) at UCI emailed TAs, lecturers, et al. about an opportunity, a job. “Greetings,” he said. If you “are interested in this job, please get in touch directly with Diane Oaks at Irvine Valley College….”
     Diane Oaks, of course, is the Director of PR and whatnot here at Irvine Valley College.
     What’s the job? Gross explains by providing Diane’s memo to him:

     I am looking to hire a UCI faculty member to edit our IVC style guidelines.
     We have created an IRVINE VALLEY COLLEGE style guide similar to the UCI style guidelines:

• http://communications.uci.edu/campus-resources/styleguide/
• http://communications.uci.edu/campus-resources/graphic-standards/index.php

Daniel Gross

     We are hoping [you] might recommend a UCI faculty member who would help us EDIT or [sic] IVC STYLE GUIDELINES = we are interested in paying your faculty member a stipend for this project.
     Thanks so much! 

     Diane

     Golly.
     Why on earth didn’t she just contact the English Department here at IVC? Perhaps they are not up to the task, in her estimation.
     Good grief. [And what about her own staff?]

DtB’s Year in Review, Part 2: the fall of the house of Beno (obscuring the deeper issue)

     In mid-February, 2015, we issued our brief “SOCCCD dismal truisms” series. (See here and here.) We offered two such truisms:

• SOCCCD dismal truism #1: [SOCCCD has gone] from board micromanagement to board inaction
• SOCCCD dismal truism #2: to the consternation of thinking people everywhere, the district embraces the illiterate and dunderheaded evaluative architectonic of the Accreditors (and, more generally, of the "education"* crowd), thus busying administrators and faculty with endless committee work that produces mostly nonsense that, ahem, "guides" the district and its planners.

     Truism #1 was explained thus:

     Owing to its history of overreach and loutishness..., the board is particularly concerned that it not be accused of “micromanagement.” Unfortunately, the board has settled into a routine of erring in the other extreme—inveterately refusing to investigate or address complaints and objections about officials' conduct and policies.
     This has been particularly disastrous for Irvine Valley College, which has suffered under Glenn Roquemore’s embarrassing, anti-intellectualist, sub-collegiate leadership—poor hires, poor management, general obliviousness, failure to communicate or to sustain community, tolerance of incompetence and worse—for over a dozen years, allowing the institution to sink ever further into mediocrity and its employees ever deeper into resigned acquiescence.

     I illustrated Truism #2 by taking a gander at SOCCCD’s embarrassing “district-wide goals.” Have you read them? Good grief.

* * *

     But why am I referring to the ACCJC as "dunderheads"?
     At the start of the millennium, our accreditor, the ACCJC, adopted the theoretical assumptions of a movement—the measurable “student learning outcomes” (MSLO) movement—despite an absence of empirical support for the efficacy of the movement's approach.
     Think about that. It’s a serious problem. It should be a show-stopper.
     Well, you'll be pleased to learn that, back then, some noticed the problem and attempted to stop the show. That led, in 2002, to the State Academic Senate’s (ASCCC) challenge to the ACCJC’s embrace of MSLOs:

Essentially, the ACCJC adopted MSLOs [measurable student learning outcomes] as the overarching basis for accrediting community colleges based on their faith in the theoretical treatises of a movement.... After repeated requests for research showing that such use of MSLOs is effective, none has been forthcoming from the ACCJC [accreditors]. Prior to large scale imposition of such a requirement at all institutions, research should be provided to establish that continuous monitoring of MSLOs has resulted in measurable improvements in student success at a given institution. No such research is forthcoming because there is none….

—The Accountability Game…., Leon F. Marzillier (Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, October, 2002)

     Actually, the State Senate issued a series of related ACCJC-challenging resolutions, including this one:

• Whereas, The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) adopted new Standards for accreditation over the objections of the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges as well as those of the American Association of University Professors [AAUP] and the Community College Council of the California Federation of Teachers among others;
• Whereas, The ACCJC has not responded to repeated requests to provide the Academic Senate the background materials and research upon which it based its decision to restructure the Standards around the continuous monitoring of student learning outcomes; and
• Whereas, The ACCJC has not responded to repeated requests to provide the Academic Senate with evidence or research to support the contention that such an approach in fact leads to improvements in the quality of undergraduate education or enhances student achievement;
• Resolved, That the Academic Senate continue to request the background evidence and supporting research that would justify recent radical restructuring of the Accrediting Standards by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC); and
• Resolved, That the Academic Senate publicize in relevant educational and public venues its concerns regarding the secrecy and lack of substantive evidence provided by ACCJC to support these costly new accreditation requirements.

     Impressive!
     Ever high-handed, the ACCJC simply ignored the ASCCC’s resolutions, and that was that. (See Systematic rational failures and SLOs, part II: the ACCJC gets dogmatic & dictatorial all over Cal community colleges.)
     I did some research, and, as far as I could tell, in the years since the 2002 challenge, evidence for the efficacy of the MSLO approach has not materialized.
     And so the problem remains. And that's absurd.
     Last Spring, I decided to raise the issue anew. I wrote about the problem here on DtB and that led to a sympathetic discussion of the matter on the floor of the IVC Academic Senate. Our senate then approved a resolution that amounted to a new but essentially similar "evidential" challenge to the ACCJC. It was brought to the ASCCC's April Plenary for general adoption:

• Whereas, In the last 15 years, new attempts to track the success of school systems around the world (e.g., Program International Student Assessment) have achieved impressive bodies of data useful in measuring the effectiveness of education approaches;
• Whereas, These data indicate that the more successful countries do not embrace the notion of “measurable student learning outcomes” that are central to the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges’ (ACCJC) existing standards for evaluating and reviewing institutions and the philosophy that emphasizes that tool; and
• Whereas, It continues to be the case that research fails clearly to establish that continuous monitoring of course-level student learning outcomes (SLOs) results in measurable improvements in student success at a given institution but does engender frustration that continues to characterize community colleges’ attempts to implement the SLO approach;
• Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges request no later than July 1, 2015 that ACCJC justify its continued implementation of SLOs and explain why it does not opt for approaches more consistent with the approaches of successful countries in educating their students.

     Well, as you know, the State Senate is largely a vast cluster of gasbags, and so the resolution failed to gain sufficient support. IVC Senate Prez Schmeidler reported that it went down owing, evidently, to minor issues, such as the desirability of explicitly identifying the empirical evidence, such as existing meta-analyses.
     I wrote about all this here:

Systematic rational failures and SLOs, part III: why don’t we do something? See also DISSENT! Contra anti-intellectualism

     In the Fall, our senate made yet another effort to sponsor a new and improved resolution, and, again, the effort failed. (This time, our Senate Prez seemed even more disgusted by the apparent reasons for the resolution’s failure.)
     Gasbags.

* * *

     IN THE MEANTIME, as you know, for years, there's been much Sturm und Drang about the ACCJC's action of pulling City College of San Francisco's ticket and, more generally, about its notoriously high-handed ways: alleged bias, failures to heed process, alleged unprofessionalism, etc. The State Chancellor’s Office eventually created a task force to examine these complaints. That task force ultimately (June) issued harsh recommendations, including abandoning the ACCJC as the state CC’s accrediting body.
     Then, in mid-November (2015), the system's Board of Governors voted to dump the ACCJC (See).
     Wow. According to the San Francisco Chronicle,

...the Board of Governors voted 14-0 to direct state Chancellor Brice Harris to create a plan to replace the commission and come up with a timeline by its March meeting. State officials say any new accreditor would be phased in, a process that could take years because each of the state’s 113 colleges is reviewed for accreditation every six years. A shift to a new accreditor will also require a lengthy approval process by the U.S. Department of Education….

     Then, in December, the DoE spanked the ACCJC:

     The embattled accrediting organization that oversees California’s community colleges should lose some of its existing authority and not be allowed to expand its jurisdiction, the U.S. Department of Education’s accreditation unit has recommended.
     In a report published Wednesday, department staff recommended that the department revoke the accreditor’s existing federal authority to approve some four-year degree programs at California’s community colleges.
     The staff also recommended that the accreditor—the WASC Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, known as the ACCJC—have its request for broader authority to approve bachelor’s degree programs denied.... (Inside Higher Ed, Dec 10)

     This is all very nice. But you should be aware that our colleges’ two presidents—Burnett and Roquemore—have expressed unhappiness with the BoG decision to replace the ACCJC, evidently joining other CEOs in preferring to reform the organization.
     That's some leadership, that SOCCCD leadership.

* * *

     So, is our effort to challenge the ACCJC’s embrace of MSLOs now moot?
     Don’t think so. There’s no guarantee that future accred standards will eschew dubious MSLO assumptions, since the aforementioned "City College"-related controversy made no reference to that can o' worms. This whole noisy chapter about ACCJC bias and impropriety has had nothing to do with the evident fact that there is no empirical support for the presumed efficacy of focusing on SLOs as an approach to bringing about learning.
     Amazing.
     (Denizens of B200: I'm sayin' that we're on this ship, see, and everybody's hopping mad about the shitty navigation and crummy maps; meanwhile, there's this huge hole in the hull, and we're bound to sink. An' nobody's yammerin' about that. Got it?)

DtB's Year in Review, Part 1: the WOMEN'S STUDIES controversy is finally resolved

From the GC handbook

     February of 2015 saw the sudden resolution of the Women’s Studies (WS) controversy here at IVC. (See Resolution of the Women's Studies imbroglio Feb 3.)
     For various reasons, WS has had no real home at this college, in part because the School of Humanities (formerly, the School of Humanities and Languages) wanted to “do” such a program “right,” and none of its faculty was prepared to make that kind of long-term commitment (given their other commitments, etc.). And so WS bounced around a bit but never really rose above half-assery, program-wise. The program—or, better, the bundle of courses—eventually ended up in the School of Guidance of Counseling (GC), where it languished. Indeed, though it had once attained programhood, WS had been allowed to lapse into a non-program on GC’s watch.

     Meanwhile, the School of H hired new instructors, including several faculty with strong backgrounds in Women’s Studies and related fields. In 2013, one of these whippersnappers (very qualified, very gung-ho, very untenured) sought to finally develop a decent, full WS-ish program, and so she made non-threatening overtures to the GC crowd (according to which GC could keep some courses)—who immediately responded with defensiveness, paranoia and worse. In a way, that was odd, since GC had done little with WS, and, as I said, had allowed it to languish. Further, GC was offering courses that, at least on paper, were distinctly outdated. Indeed, the course outlines were an embarrassment. The important point was that WS (and related or associated studies) are precisely the sorts of enterprises that fit in the Humanities, where critical discourse of the WS sort is routine, or perhaps in the social sciences, where of course much the same can be said. For what it's worth, a brief survey of colleges and universities (including community colleges) will reveal that WS and related areas are invariably housed in the Humanities or the Social Sciences and never in something like Guidance and Counseling. (See HERE.)
     And that, of course, is precisely what one would expect.
     Owing to (at least some of) the GC faculty’s curiously unprofessional and hostile conduct, our untenured instructor judged it prudent to hold off on the WS initiative, though, of course, she had received much support from her colleagues in her own school, who had had other curious run-ins with the counselors over the years. (See HERE.)
     Time passed. Eventually, the moment was right to finally pursue the program, starting with a realignment—as per the college’s Program Realignment Policy, which had been created exactly because of the nastiness of past program realignment skirmishes, especially Fine Arts’ notorious grab of Art History about ten years ago.
     So the issue was broached at the Academic Senate.

     Alas, once again, despite our professionalism and carefulness (our maven was advised to sink somewhat into the background), the GC crowd immediately responded with wild hostility and anger. Two full-time GC faculty in particular seemed to make it their business to work the system and push buttons, however preposterous, to preserve GC’s continued “ownership” of WS—including inflaming the passions of the apparently clueless corps of part-timers who have always done the teaching for GC. (“J’accuse!” they said, virtually, at a special discussion session. Somehow, they had been rendered incapable of reason.)
     In truth, all of the arguments were on H’s side, none were on GC's side, and, crucially, the realignment had the support of both the Academic Senate Prez and the college VPI. GC finally backed off, but not before it had pushed faculty* skepticism of GC honesty and competence to new extremes.
     So that was that, I guess.
     A few months later, the two apparent leaders of GC’s dismal realpolitiking popped up in another popular DtB story, a story about faculty salaries over $200k ($201k, $229k).
     Karma, baby.

*Yes, yes, I know. "In our system," counselors are regarded as faculty.

CONTEMPORANEOUS DtB POSTS:

• Our concern about freedom is manifest - Feb 5 – A stupid talent show issue erupts. You know what they say about academic politics....
• The "talent show" imbroglio, Part II - Feb 6 – More eruption
• Making things easier for students: is that always the right thing to do? - Feb 6 – Endless student do-overs. Yeah, that’s the ticket!

Bustamante Pleads Guilty to Sex Crimes
(Voice of OC)

     Carlos Bustamante, a former Orange County executive and one-time rising star in the local GOP, pled guilty late Friday morning to multiple sex crimes and theft of public funds, according to a press release from the Orange County District Attorney's Office....

‘The Big Short,’ Housing Bubbles and Retold Lies
(NYT)
Paul Krugman DEC. 18, 2015

     …Sure enough, “The Big Short” has already been the subject of vitriolic attacks in Murdoch-controlled newspapers; if the movie is a commercial success and/or wins awards, expect to see much more.
     The thing to remember, when you see such attacks, is why they’re taking place. The truth is that the people who made “The Big Short” should consider the attacks a kind of compliment: The attackers obviously worry that the film is entertaining enough that it will expose a large audience to the truth. Let’s hope that their fears are justified.

Board Meeting Highlights: Jemal is Prez

     Please see Tere’s Board Meeting Highlights
     Here are two interesting factoids therein:

     The board of trustees conducted their annual organizational meeting and facilities corporation meeting. The new board leadership positions are Tim Jemal, President; Jim Wright, Vice President; and Dave Lang, Clerk.
. . .
     Employment contract for Gary L. Poertner as Chancellor, SOCCCD, effective July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2019.

     Jemal as President: that's likely a good thing.

It can be fixed, some say
(the "CEO perspective")

     The extension of Poertner's contract, insiders tell me, does not reflect a desire to extend Poertner's service into the future. Rather, the new contract is, I'm told, an inducement for him to retire asap.
     I'm also told that, when Gary P steps down, which will be soon, "big changes" will occur throughout the district, leadershipwise.
     Let's hope the BOT gets an outsider for Chance (and for other roles). We need to get away from this sorry crowd.
     Am I right?
     Re upcoming trustee races: near as I can figure, these four seats are up (for 2016): Jemal, Wright, Lang, Jay. As I recall, Jay promised not to run for office next time around. Yeah.
     Prendergast, Whitt, and Milchiker are up in 2018, I believe. Did Whitt make a promise similar to Jay's?
     Promises, promises.

P.S.: [12/23] A wanted to watch the streaming video of Burnett/Roquemore's report on the accreditor's (ACCJC) recent troubles, but I couldn't get the streaming video page (at the district website) to open (it's mostly blank). So I emailed Tere, who said she was off to a vacation or something, and she dropped the matter in someone else's lap. But I still can't get the "streaming video" page to open.
     What's up with that?

Fall of the house of Beno

California Accreditor Under Fire (Inside Higher Ed)
Education Department staff recommends sanctions for the accreditor of the state’s two-year colleges. - December 10, 2015

By Michael Stratford

Beno

     The embattled accrediting organization that oversees California’s community colleges should lose some of its existing authority and not be allowed to expand its jurisdiction, the U.S. Department of Education’s accreditation unit has recommended.
     In a report published Wednesday, department staff recommended that the department revoke the accreditor’s existing federal authority to approve some four-year degree programs at California’s community colleges.
     The staff also recommended that the accreditor -- the WASC Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, known as the ACCJC -- have its request for broader authority to approve bachelor’s degree programs denied....

Lost Someone

Interesting districtular factoids: murder, NPR, propositions

Did you know that, thirty years ago, a Saddleback College administrator murdered someone in the nursing department?

     Yep. On Sept 16, 1984, the Times reported that a "Saddleback College Dean [has been] Held in [the] Shooting Death of His Wife [Dona Dawson of the nursing department at Saddleback College]."
     Then, on the 19th, the Times reported that "Saddleback Community College Assistant Dean Donald E. Dawson told his ex-wife's boyfriend that he 'killed Dona' minutes after he allegedly used two handguns to shoot her six times, Chief Deputy Dist. Atty. James Enright said Tuesday."
     On November 22, 1986, the Times reported that "A former assistant dean at Saddleback College, Donald E. Dawson, convicted of first-degree murder in the 1984 shooting of his ex-wife, told a Superior Court judge on Friday that he wanted to proceed with the sanity phase of his trial. Dawson had pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity but a jury returned a guilty verdict Wednesday. Dawson was arrested immediately after shooting Dona Mae Dawson, 46, five times on the sidewalk near her El Toro home on Sept. 15, 1984." (See additional articles below.)

Did you know that Saddleback College’s radio station was once an NPR affiliate?

     According to the Times' "Saddleback trustees vote to drop NPR affiliation" (May 31, 1984), "Orange County lost its only National Public Radio station Tuesday when the Saddleback Community College District's Board of Trustees voted to change Saddleback College-based KSBR (88.5 FM) into…."

--Into what? Well, into a student-run station, I guess. I didn't pay for the whole article.

Did you know that the construction of IVC was delayed because of Prop 13?

     Well, according to the Times' "Saddleback's 2nd Campus Faces the Ax" (Jun 17, 1978), "The Saddleback Community College District, nearing the halfway point in building its planned second campus in Irvine, may not be able to complete it because of Proposition 13."
     Groundbreaking had occurred in November of 1977. At the time (Nov 12, 1977), the Times reported that the campus was "due to open next fall," i.e., the fall of 1978. In fact, however, the campus, then called "Saddleback College North Campus," did not open until January (spring) of 1979 (see Times, Jan 15, 1979). 

More about Donald Dawson:

Ex-Dean Found Guilty of 1st-Degree Murder in Shooting of Former Wife, LA Times, November 20, 1986

     Former Saddleback College Assistant Dean Donald E. Dawson was convicted Wednesday of first-degree murder in the fatal shooting of his ex-wife, but jurors rejected a prosecution claim that he was "lying in wait," which could have meant a sentence of life without parole.
     Despite the partial victory, Dawson was bitter about the jury's verdict, said his attorney, Ronald G. Brower.
     "He believes the jurors should have recognized the shooting occurred when he was in something like a psychotic state, a rage, and that legally it was a heat-of-passion shooting," Brower said.
     Killings that occur in the heat of passion are considered voluntary manslaughter in California, which was the verdict Brower sought from jurors. Dawson had pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity.…
     Dawson killed his former wife, Dona Mae Dawson, as she ran away from him down the sidewalk in front of her El Toro home at 9:30 a.m. on Sept. 15, 1984. 

Resigned After Arrest
     According to evidence presented by both sides, Dawson had been trying to persuade his ex-wife to take him back and was upset to learn that she was seriously dating someone else.
     Dona Dawson, 46, at the time was director of the nursing department at Saddleback College. Dawson was assistant dean for Saddleback's division of technology and applied science. He resigned soon after his arrest the day of the shooting.
     About 2:30 that morning, while his ex-wife was spending the night with a boyfriend, Dawson had entered her house with a key she kept hidden. Evidence showed that he had waited part of that time in an upstairs bedroom with two guns, several boxes of ammunition, several pieces of rope and a pair of handcuffs.
     Dawson fired six shots at her with a .38-caliber handgun when she came through the door. All of them missed. But he felled her with a single shot fired as she ran down the sidewalk outside the house. Then, according to witnesses, he stood above her and fired four more shots into her. He stayed at the scene until police arrived and told them what had happened.
     At his trial, Dawson chose not to testify.
     Prosecutors filed the "special circumstances" allegation that he was lying in wait for her, claiming that he shot her after springing from a hidden position. Brower devoted many of his trial arguments to efforts to disprove that claim.
     Jurors on Wednesday rejected the special circumstances allegation.
     Normally, had the jury found that the special circumstances did apply, the trial would have gone into a separate penalty phase for jurors to choose between death or life without parole. But in Dawson's case, prosecutors did not seek the death penalty because of his lack of a criminal background. A sentence of life without parole can only be reduced by the governor.
     The first-degree murder verdict carries a sentence of 27 years to life, including two years for use of a firearm. Dawson would be eligible for parole in 13 1/2 years.
     But if Dawson were found insane, he would automatically be sent to a state hospital.
     Brower said after court Wednesday that before he decides whether to proceed with a sanity phase, he will have to do research to determine how long Dawson would probably have to remain committed to a hospital.
     "I think state mental hospitals are probably just as bad as prison," Brower said. "If a hospital commitment would be longer (than 13 1/2 years) it might not be worth going ahead." 

'Background of Depression'
     Dawson has been interviewed by half a dozen psychologists and psychiatrists, all of whom testified at his trial that he killed his ex-wife in a rage and that he was mentally unstable at the time. But they have not touched on the sanity issue yet.
     Brower said it was not out of character for Dawson to be bitter about the jury verdict.
"All the doctors have told us that he has a history of rejecting responsibility," Brower said. "He has a background of severe depression, very exaggerated mood swings."
     Dawson's parents and his brother, Robert, left the courtroom quickly after the verdict was read. An angry Robert Dawson told reporters, "Just leave us alone."
     Chief Deputy Dist. Atty. James G. Enright, who prosecuted the case, said afterward that he could not discuss the verdict in detail because of the possibility of a penalty phase. But he did say he was pleased with the first-degree murder verdict and not too surprised at the jury's rejection of the "lying in wait" claim.
     "That one was a close call; without any witnesses, we knew that one would be tough," Enright said.
     Dona Dawson's two sisters, who attended most of the trial, were not able to get to court Wednesday in time to hear the jury's verdict. But a close friend of the victim, Dorothy Williams, wept and whispered, "Thank you," as jurors left the courtroom. Lee Arth, a former professor at Rio Hondo College who had known both the Dawsons for about 15 years, was in court for the verdict too.
     "It was a fair verdict, considering what Don did," Arth said.

Parole denied for killer of ex-wife, OC Register, Aug 1, 2001

     The confrontation exploded in front of the house, where Dawson pumped five bullets into her back.
     Then the scholar poured himself a glass of wine.
     In rejecting Dawson's first bid for freedom, the parole board agreed with prosecutors that he remains, in essence, a serial philanderer whose lust for control drove him to kill.
     Dawson, who was convicted of first-degree murder, is serving a sentence of 27 years to life at a medium-security prison in San Luis Obispo.
. . .
     Dawson, who has a master's in criminal justice, is a quiet inmate who has caused no problems during his 13 years at the California Men's Colony….
...
     Dona Mae Dawson was 46 and about to become assistant director of the nursing program at Saddleback College when she was murdered.
. . .
     Donald E. Dawson swears he's a new man…
     He swears he's no longer the person who 17 years ago gunned down his former wife in front of her Lake Forest home in a crime that stunned colleagues, friends and family members.
     On Tuesday, a parole board didn't buy his story and told the former college administrator he will have to wait four years to make his case again.
     He will be 67 then.
     The board still thinks he poses a danger to society, '' said Denise Schmidt, spokeswoman for the Board of Prison Terms in Sacramento.
     Dawson became obsessed with his former wife after their divorce in 1982, prosecutors say.
     One night, the former police officer, Navy intelligence investigator and assistant dean at Saddleback College broke into her home and waited.
     Several hours later, Dawson – incensed that Dona Mae Dawson was seeing another man – fired his .45-caliber pistol when she walked in the door, hitting her thigh.
...
     Dixie Bullock, president of the college in Mission Viejo, said Donald Dawson doesn't deserve freedom.
...
     In 1996, a Santa Maria woman married Dawson.
...

     According to [Prosecutor] Middleton, Donald Dawson has kept his reason for being in prison a secret from Marianne's children.

     They think he works for the California Department of Corrections on undercover assignments, ' Middleton said.
     In papers submitted to the parole board, Dawson stated, I did not love my previous wives, but I love my current one.''
     That statement chills Middleton
     It shows his contradictory nature, '' the prosecutor said. To me, it shows that he now has another obsession.''

All Things Must Pass

E.g., this passed.