Update on prof McAdams

[brandx]

O' Brien was hardly scalding.  Didn't effect the university much, if at all.  (Notwithstanding a NYT article from FIVE years ago.)  I am certainly not saying they handled it well, but you don't understand how little this stuff ultimately matters in the long run.

Did it have substantial impacts on donations and/or enrollment?  Will it in the future?  If the answer is "no," then ultimately the storm was brief and passed quickly.

I agree, Sultan. We see it as something national because of our association with MU.

But, really, can someone here name the other universities over the last two years that have been sued for free speech issues (I'm not saying THIS is a free speech issue - though some see it that way) and had to pay without googling it? If it isn't about someone close, the news just usually sails over our heads.

[GGGG]

I agree, Sultan. We see it as something national because of our association with MU.

But, really, can someone here name the other universities over the last two years that have been sued for free speech issues (I'm not saying THIS is a free speech issue - though some see it that way) and had to pay without googling it? If it isn't about someone close, the news just usually sails over our heads.

Every university of significance has bad news of some sort.  Every place has to stamp out fires from time to time.  Scoopers think that Marquette is alone in this regard, and is handling everything wrong, but it's just because we are paying particular attention.

[keefe]

Every university of significance has bad news of some sort.  Every place has to stamp out fires from time to time.  Scoopers think that Marquette is alone in this regard, and is handling everything wrong, but it's just because we are paying particular attention.

Here's the bottom line: Marquette has made profoundly bad personnel decisions. As a member of the Marquette community I cringe as I read about these and I am genuinely embarrassed to be associated with Marquette. I believe these actions run counter to its core values as a Jesuit university. I will not contribute financially to Marquette.     

And for the record: I am far more concerned that Marquette live up to its stated core values as a Jesuit university than I ever will be about the success of its athletic program(s). The basketball team could win multiple national championships which has nothing to do with its raison d'etre but will fail in its mission if it rescinds legitimate employment offers to senior administrators because of their lifestyle beliefs.

Anyone who minimizes these matters as trivial when using the gauge of national spotlight misses the issue entirely.   

[GGGG]

Here's the bottom line: Marquette has made profoundly bad personnel decisions. As a member of the Marquette community I cringe as I read about these and I am genuinely embarrassed to be associated with Marquette. I believe these actions run counter to its core values as a Jesuit university. I will not contribute financially to Marquette.     

And for the record: I am far more concerned that Marquette live up to its stated core values as a Jesuit university than I ever will be about the success of its athletic program(s). The basketball team could win multiple national championships which has nothing to do with its raison d'etre but will fail in its mission if it rescinds legitimate employment offers to senior administrators because of their lifestyle beliefs.

Anyone who minimizes these matters as trivial when using the gauge of national spotlight misses the issue entirely.   

I don't use the national spotlight as a gauge, but merely a sign that what is a small problem will not get blown up into a big one.  I use substantial impact on donation and admissions...you know...revenue.  And simply put, your position does not seem to be consistent with many.

[keefe]

I don't use the national spotlight as a gauge, but merely a sign that what is a small problem will not get blown up into a big one.  I use substantial impact on donation and admissions...you know...revenue.  And simply put, your position does not seem to be consistent with many.

Well, you did use national conversation as a measure. And you have no idea of knowing how my position sits with the overall pool other than the unreliable sample of Scoopers. But I know for a fact that the 'many' has not given Marquette anything close to the financial contributions from my wife and I, especially when you include the matching donations of our employers.

And, simply put, your index fails to address the real issue which is how are these decisions consistent with Marquette's core values and mission as a Jesuit University?

To use donations and admissions as a measure of the Jodi O'Brien decision, for instance, is grotesquely naive if not fatuous.

[GGGG]

Well, you did use national conversation as a measure. And you have no idea of knowing how my position sits with the overall pool other than the unreliable sample of Scoopers. But I know for a fact that the 'many' has not given Marquette anything close to the financial contributions from my wife and I, especially when you include the matching donations of our employers.

And, simply put, your index fails to address the real issue which is how are these decisions consistent with Marquette's core values and mission as a Jesuit University?

To use donations and admissions as a measure of the Jodi O'Brien decision, for instance, is grotesquely naive if not fatuous.

I have not recently commented on whether or not the O'Brien and McAdams decisions were correct and if they are, or are not, consistent with the core values of the University.

The entire context of this discussion are not whether those decisions were "right" or "wrong," just if Marquette has been harmed PR-wise. 

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Well, you did use national conversation as a measure. And you have no idea of knowing how my position sits with the overall pool other than the unreliable sample of Scoopers. But I know for a fact that the 'many' has not given Marquette anything close to the financial contributions from my wife and I, especially when you include the matching donations of our employers.

And, simply put, your index fails to address the real issue which is how are these decisions consistent with Marquette's core values and mission as a Jesuit University?

To use donations and admissions as a measure of the Jodi O'Brien decision, for instance, is grotesquely naive if not fatuous.

I brought up the national conversation because earlier in this thread it seemed like several people were very nervous about the negative PR MU was going to receive.

I hadn't seen any negative PR, so I was asking if others had seen some, and if this was even a big story (as some people feared).

As far as your opinion on MU's core values, in this instance, I disagree with your position... but I fully support you taking your dollars and donations elsewhere. If you don't like the direction MU is heading on key issues, then the best way to show them is to take away your money.

The blessing and the curse of a private institution is that MU is beholden to what the donors want. If enough people are like Keefe, then MU will have to listen.

If only a few people feel like Keefe, then for better or worse, this simply won't be a big deal to MU. It's all about the money, ya'll.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I brought up the national conversation because earlier in this thread it seemed like several people were very nervous about the negative PR MU was going to receive.

I hadn't seen any negative PR, so I was asking if others had seen some, and if this was even a big story (as some people feared).

As far as your opinion on MU's core values, in this instance, I disagree with your position... but I fully support you taking your dollars and donations elsewhere. If you don't like the direction MU is heading on key issues, then the best way to show them is to take away your money.

The blessing and the curse of a private institution is that MU is beholden to what the donors want. If enough people are like Keefe, then MU will have to listen.

If only a few people feel like Keefe, then for better or worse, this simply won't be a big deal to MU. It's all about the money, ya'll.

The story was forwarded to me probably 10 times from folks out here on the west coast.  People's attention spans don't stay on target for very long, but the story at least made it out this way. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

http://www.amazon.com/Exiled-Conservative-Professors-Ostracized-Marginalized/dp/0986018325

[GGGG]

http://www.amazon.com/Exiled-Conservative-Professors-Ostracized-Marginalized/dp/0986018325

I don't understand why you have to turn everything into this sort of issue.  You have no idea if this is the case or not with him.  He treated a student like a turd after being told not to do so previously.  Has Marquette allowed a "liberal" professor to do the same thing?

[Coleman]

As expected, this issue was a minor flash in the pan. No one cares anymore. The media circus rages on. McAdams had his 5 seconds of fame. Bye bye.

[keefe]

The story was forwarded to me probably 10 times from folks out here on the west coast.  People's attention spans don't stay on target for very long, but the story at least made it out this way. 

Obviously, the O'Brien story was big news in Seattle. It is still foremost in people's minds here if one mentions Marquette - which I do on occasion.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Obviously, the O'Brien story was big news in Seattle. It is still foremost in people's minds here if one mentions Marquette - which I do on occasion.

Honestly, you and Chico's must just run in a different crowd than I do.

If MU ever comes up, it's usually basketball, then maybe something about being Jesuit, then the nickname, then maybe something about McGuire.

I've never had anybody either MU affiliated or non-MU affiliated bring up something about O'Brien or McAdams.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

The story was forwarded to me probably 10 times from folks out here on the west coast.  People's attention spans don't stay on target for very long, but the story at least made it out this way. 

Totally fair. From my own anecdotal experience, nobody gives a rip about McAdams either way. I didn't hear anything from anybody about it being a good or bad move.

Did you ever get to ask Lovell about it?

[keefe]

Honestly, you and Chico's must just run in a different crowd than I do.

If MU ever comes up, it's usually basketball, then maybe something about being Jesuit, then the nickname, then maybe something about McGuire.

I've never had anybody either MU affiliated or non-MU affiliated bring up something about O'Brien or McAdams.

O'Brien teaches at Seattle U. And given the context of her intersect with Marquette combined with the weltanschauung of most people here the O'Brien case was a significant issue. To this day if you mention Marquette in Seattle the first association is with the O'Brien case - and the reaction is visceral.

This isn't a matter of running in different circles. You are making the mistake of extrapolating from the Scoop sample into the world at large. The vast majority of people do not care about college basketball. Frankly, I would hope that people's immediate reaction to Marquette is not basketball for, if it is, then the University PR folks are indeed failing at a much more fundamental level.

In my world of medical professionals and technologists, when the University of Michigan is mentioned the first association made by my colleagues is that of a world class academic institution. There is never a mention of Michigan's sports enterprise. If the world at large thinks basketball when they hear Marquette then the university has a much deeper problem than mismanaging personnel matters.

[GGGG]

O'Brien teaches at Seattle U. And given the context of her intersect with Marquette combined with the weltanschauung of most people here the O'Brien case was a significant issue. To this day if you mention Marquette in Seattle the first association is with the O'Brien case - and the reaction is visceral.

This isn't a matter of running in different circles. You are making the mistake of extrapolating from the Scoop sample into the world at large. The vast majority of people do not care about college basketball. Frankly, I would hope that people's immediate reaction to Marquette is not basketball for, if it is, then the University PR folks are indeed failing at a much more fundamental level.

In my world of medical professionals and technologists, when the University of Michigan is mentioned the first association made by my colleagues is that of a world class academic institution. There is never a mention of Michigan's sports enterprise. If the world at large thinks basketball when they hear Marquette then the university has a much deeper problem than mismanaging personnel matters.

You are making the exact same mistake you are accusing of Canned.  Extrapolating the "visceral" reaction from the world of "medical professionals and technologists" in the Seattle area as somehow representative of Marquette's target audience is an error.

And I actually agree with you on the O'Brien issue, and said so at the time.  The McAdams issue is the one I am undecided on.  Not because of any political leanings, but because not enough facts have been disclosed to form an opinion.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

O'Brien teaches at Seattle U. And given the context of her intersect with Marquette combined with the weltanschauung of most people here the O'Brien case was a significant issue. To this day if you mention Marquette in Seattle the first association is with the O'Brien case - and the reaction is visceral.

This isn't a matter of running in different circles. You are making the mistake of extrapolating from the Scoop sample into the world at large. The vast majority of people do not care about college basketball. Frankly, I would hope that people's immediate reaction to Marquette is not basketball for, if it is, then the University PR folks are indeed failing at a much more fundamental level.

In my world of medical professionals and technologists, when the University of Michigan is mentioned the first association made by my colleagues is that of a world class academic institution. There is never a mention of Michigan's sports enterprise. If the world at large thinks basketball when they hear Marquette then the university has a much deeper problem than mismanaging personnel matters.

I'm not talking about Scoop at all.

It's neither good nor bad, but in my world, people don't bring up MU's academics or it's mission statement when MU is casually mentioned. I'm not saying it's like this everybody, but just my own personal experience.

I might get "Oh, my cousin went there", or "What's with the nickname?" or "that's a pretty good school".

I do NOT get "Did you hear about how liberal the administration has become?", or "Isn't it great how liberal the administration is?"

I have a friend who went to Georgetown. I'm well aware that Georgetown is an excellent school. But, when I found out he went there, I didn't ask him about the academics. We started talking about hoops and the Big East.

Again, I don't assume it's like this for everybody. I'm merely providing my anecdotal experience. I think you just run in a different circle than I do because the stuff you are talking about literally have NEVER comes up in my day to day conversions. NEVER.

I'm realizing that maybe I'm just a meatball, so whatever, I guess I'll wear the label.

[forgetful]

O'Brien teaches at Seattle U. And given the context of her intersect with Marquette combined with the weltanschauung of most people here the O'Brien case was a significant issue. To this day if you mention Marquette in Seattle the first association is with the O'Brien case - and the reaction is visceral.

This isn't a matter of running in different circles. You are making the mistake of extrapolating from the Scoop sample into the world at large. The vast majority of people do not care about college basketball. Frankly, I would hope that people's immediate reaction to Marquette is not basketball for, if it is, then the University PR folks are indeed failing at a much more fundamental level.

In my world of medical professionals and technologists, when the University of Michigan is mentioned the first association made by my colleagues is that of a world class academic institution. There is never a mention of Michigan's sports enterprise. If the world at large thinks basketball when they hear Marquette then the university has a much deeper problem than mismanaging personnel matters.

Ok, I just did a quick poll of 5 academic researchers at UW (the real one in Washington) that I know.  I asked them about Marquette.  They had favorable opinions about academics there.  I asked if they knew about O'Brien.  Not a one of them had.

I think you are making a bigger deal about this than it really is.

[reinko]

Honestly, you and Chico's must just run in a different crowd than I do.

If MU ever comes up, it's usually basketball, then maybe something about being Jesuit, then the nickname, then maybe something about McGuire.

I've never had anybody either MU affiliated or non-MU affiliated bring up something about O'Brien or McAdams.

Ummm, you forgot "Marquette...yeah, how is going to school in Michigan?"

[keefe]

You are making the exact same mistake you are accusing of Canned.  Extrapolating the "visceral" reaction from the world of "medical professionals and technologists" in the Seattle area as somehow representative of Marquette's target audience is an error.

And I actually agree with you on the O'Brien issue, and said so at the time.  The McAdams issue is the one I am undecided on.  Not because of any political leanings, but because not enough facts have been disclosed to form an opinion.

The visceral reaction is not from my colleagues but from the the general population. Now, I will admit that the vast majority of my interactions is not drinking with commercial fishermen in Ballard but with educated professionals. But that is Marquette's target demographic - and is a mirror of the Marquette alumni: educated, articulate, informed, and discerning.

I am conflicted about the McAdams issue. I think it should have been handled much better by all parties but I believe Marquette must meet a far higher bar than McAdams. At the end of the day people will not remember John McAdams but they will remember Marquette being in the news yet again for something unseemly.

[keefe]

Ok, I just did a quick poll of 5 academic researchers at UW (the real one in Washington) that I know.  I asked them about Marquette.  They had favorable opinions about academics there.  I asked if they knew about O'Brien.  Not a one of them had.

I think you are making a bigger deal about this than it really is.

Well, I did my own completely unscientific poll of four full members of Fred Hutch, three full professors at the U Dub School of Public Health, and two former Microsoft SVPs.

What do you know about Marquette University?

- Good school:    8 of 9
- Jesuit:            5 of 9
- Jodi O'Brien:    2 of 9
- Basketball :     0 of 9


Jodi O'Brien and Marquette

- I know about that: 7 of 9



 

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Well, I did my own completely unscientific poll of four full members of Fred Hutch, three full professors at the U Dub School of Public Health, and two former Microsoft SVPs.

What do you know about Marquette University?

- Good school:    8 of 9
- Jesuit:            5 of 9
- Jodi O'Brien:    2 of 9
- Basketball :     0 of 9


Jodi O'Brien and Marquette

- I know about that: 7 of 9



 

Hmmm... totally crazy. I don't think I know anybody who knows anything about Jodi OBrien. (I had to google it BTW).

Like I said, I guess we're just running in different social and professional circles. That's neither good nor bad. Just different.

[forgetful]

Well, I did my own completely unscientific poll of four full members of Fred Hutch, three full professors at the U Dub School of Public Health, and two former Microsoft SVPs.

What do you know about Marquette University?

- Good school:    8 of 9
- Jesuit:            5 of 9
- Jodi O'Brien:    2 of 9
- Basketball :     0 of 9


Jodi O'Brien and Marquette

- I know about that: 7 of 9
 

My completely unscientific poll was composed of 3 members from pharmacology and 2 from Biology.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't understand why you have to turn everything into this sort of issue.  You have no idea if this is the case or not with him.  He treated a student like a turd after being told not to do so previously.  Has Marquette allowed a "liberal" professor to do the same thing?

In my opinion it has a lot to do with the issue at hand and I'm not alone.  It's an opinion, but I believe he was targeted because of his beliefs. 

[keefe]

My completely unscientific poll was composed of 3 members from pharmacology and 2 from Biology.

Well, see, there you go. That's the difference between theorists and practitioners!