Update on prof McAdams

[Ellenson Guerrero]

I don't know if MU will win or lose. I can't pretend that I do.

BUT, MU is likely taking carefully calculated steps. If they didn't feel they had a REALLY good chance of winning, I don't think they would have dismissed him.

OF COURSE he's going to sue. He has nothing to lose.

MU has a lot to lose, so I'm guessing they've done their homework.

Doing your homework is not enough.  Unexpected things come up all the time in litigation: a witness stumbles and says something stupid, a bad document is uncovered during discovery, a jury goes off the reservation, etc.  

Marquette could have avoided all of this risk at little to no cost to its core principles.  My guess is that the administration is just pissed off at McAdams and ignored the advice of its counsel to try and show the world that we aren't the gay-bashing institution that we came across as during the Dean fiasco a couple years ago.  

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Doing your homework is not enough.  Unexpected things come up all the time in litigation: a witness stumbles and says something stupid, a bad document is uncovered during discovery, a jury goes off the reservation, etc.  

Marquette could have avoided all of this risk at little to no cost to its core principles.  My guess is that the administration is just pissed off at McAdams and ignored the advice of its counsel to try and show the world that we aren't the gay-bashing institution that we came across as during the Dean fiasco a couple years ago.  

Could be, but hopefully not.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Doing your homework is not enough.  Unexpected things come up all the time in litigation: a witness stumbles and says something stupid, a bad document is uncovered during discovery, a jury goes off the reservation, etc.  

Marquette could have avoided all of this risk at little to no cost to its core principles.  My guess is that the administration is just pissed off at McAdams and ignored the advice of its counsel to try and show the world that we aren't the gay-bashing institution that we came across as during the Dean fiasco a couple years ago.  

Doubtful and here's why. There has been so much turnover since then. New president, a lot of new administration members. Lovell isn't Pilarz (thank God) and he's not Wild. Let him handle his university his way. I personally think it's a welcome change for MU.

[rocket surgeon]

Let's just say mu has 60-65% support.  That might be high and giving them the benefit of the doubt, but, I'm sure all of you can do the math-is that really winning?  They are alienating upwards of 30% or very possibly more of not just their alumni, followers, etc., but of all of those who are paying attention from God knows how far out.  This is a really tough spot for dr. Lovell to come in to.  I guess, things can only get better?  Hmmmm

[🏀]

I guess, things can only get better?  Hmmmm

With McAdams done, it is all immediately better.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

With McAdams done, it is all immediately better.

Zing.

[Lennys Tap]

Yes and no.

As far as gut reaction and "outrage" (shakes fist), you're probably right.

But, as far as MU's actions, and his ultimate dismissal, I think it's really a case of a really unprofessional move by McAdams.

He took things he heard second hand, and critiqued a TA. He didn't talk to her first. He didn't take it to the department head. He didn't critique another professor's published work. He received a student account of a classroom situation, and he ran to his keyboard.

This isn't a case of academic freedom.

He heard about something he didn't like and used it for blog fodder. Again, is this really how we want professors acting?

Your emphasis is that this is something he only heard about second hand from a student. Wasn't there a tape of the student and T.A.'s conversation? Maybe I'm not remembering things correctly.

[Pakuni]

This isn't an academic freedom issue.
There's nothing "academic" about publicly haranguing a grad student because you disagree with how she handled a class matter.
McAdams wasn't presenting a scholarly position, offering an educational theory, engaging in research or teaching, or even offering intellectual debate or discourse. Had he been doing any of those things, you might have a case for academic freedom.
But that's not what happened here. He simply used the platform of his blog to levy a fairly personal attack against a student, as well as to re-hash longstanding grudges with university administrators.
Nothing remotely academic occurred here.

[keefe]

Your emphasis is that this is something he only heard about second hand from a student. Wasn't there a tape of the student and T.A.'s conversation? Maybe I'm not remembering things correctly.

That's correct, Lenny. The student voice recorded his conversation with the instructor. There is no argument about what she said.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

Your emphasis is that this is something he only heard about second hand from a student. Wasn't there a tape of the student and T.A.'s conversation? Maybe I'm not remembering things correctly.

Yes, and I'm not trying to be obstinate, but the tape could have been anybody. McAdams didn't know if it was accurate. What if it wasn't? Then what? He would have critiqued a TA for nothing.

So, we have a senior level professor publicly critiquing a TA based upon one student account and an unverified recording. In retrospect, we know the recording is legit, but still, you get where I'm going.

Instead of giving the TA in question a reasonable time to respond, or even just walking to her office/class and talking to her, McAdams went ahead and published his very public blog.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

That's correct, Lenny. The student voice recorded his conversation with the instructor. There is no argument about what she said.

Yes, but think about it, at the time, McAdams didn't know that.

He was all-too-willing to jump up on the soapbox without actually talking to the TA to confirm the facts.

It's not a good precedent to set for other staff members.

[keefe]

Yes, and I'm not trying to be obstinate, but the tape could have been anybody. McAdams didn't know if it was accurate. What if it wasn't? Then what? He would have critiqued a TA for nothing.

So, we have a senior level professor publicly critiquing a TA based upon one student account and an unverified recording. In retrospect, we know the recording is legit, but still, you get where I'm going.

Instead of giving the TA in question a reasonable time to respond, or even just walking to her office/class and talking to her, McAdams went ahead and published his very public blog.

The real issue is how our alma mater chose to handle this whole situation. Frankly, it is wanting. Sadly, once again.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

The real issue is how our alma mater chose to handle this whole situation. Frankly, it is wanting. Sadly, once again.

What do you propose? (Im asking honesty, not sarcastically)

[mu-rara]

As I read this thread, I pick up personal dislike of Dr. McAdams.  Perhaps this has nothing to do with right or wrong.

Maybe it has to do with getting rid of someone many of you disagree with.

[rocket surgeon]

With McAdams done, it is all immediately better.

From the outside, looking in-you seem to be good, but I wouldn't be doing the happy dance just yet.  There's a lot of heavy lifting to do here

[Coleman]

The real issue is how our alma mater chose to handle this whole situation. Frankly, it is wanting. Sadly, once again.

I respect you Keefe, but I disagree. This was handled as well as it could have been. It has angered some folks, but that rests squarely on McAdams for trying to turn people against his employer for the last 20 years.

[rocket surgeon]

As I read this thread, I pick up personal dislike of Dr. McAdams.  Perhaps this has nothing to do with right or wrong.

Maybe it has to do with getting rid of someone many of you disagree with.

Yessss-thank you for that observation as I believe I also noted earlier

[Ellenson Guerrero]

I respect you Keefe, but I disagree. This was handled as well as it could have been. It has angered some folks, but that rests squarely on McAdams for trying to turn people against his employer for the last 20 years.

Please explain what purpose firing McAdams, as opposed to simply issuing a public reprimand, serves.

[🏀]

As I read this thread, I pick up personal dislike of Dr. McAdams.  Perhaps this has nothing to do with right or wrong.

Maybe it has to do with getting rid of someone many of you disagree with.

I do disagree with McAdams, but it's solely with his anti-Marquette stuff.

[Lennys Tap]

As I read this thread, I pick up personal dislike of Dr. McAdams.  Perhaps this has nothing to do with right or wrong.

Maybe it has to do with getting rid of someone many of you disagree with.

It's personal and political. Not that Dr. McAdams didn't provide the firing squad with ammunition, but many on that squad had volunteered for duty long ago in hopes of getting a chance to "serve".

[Pakuni]

As I read this thread, I pick up personal dislike of Dr. McAdams.  Perhaps this has nothing to do with right or wrong.

Maybe it has to do with getting rid of someone many of you disagree with.

Never met the guy, had him for a class, knew his politics or even read his blog until all this blew up a couple of months back. Seems like a bit of a blowhard, but don't we all on the Internet? Also seems like a bully.
No idea whether I'd like him or not in real life.

[WarriorInNYC]

As I read this thread, I pick up personal dislike of Dr. McAdams.  Perhaps this has nothing to do with right or wrong.

Maybe it has to do with getting rid of someone many of you disagree with.

I never had McAdams and had actually never heard of him until this incident.  I was completely on his side of the boat about allowing the conversation to happen and was on his side of things until I read that he publicly blasted the TA on his blog.  Then my take on this changed dramatically.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Never met the guy, had him for a class, knew his politics or even read his blog until all this blew up a couple of months back. Seems like a bit of a blowhard, but don't we all on the Internet? Also seems like a bully.
No idea whether I'd like him or not in real life.

Thanks Pakuni.  Never heard of him at all until brought up on Scoop a few month sago.  I just keep thinking the same exact thing.

The only opinion I keep coming to after 8 pages of thread and counting is that he sounds like a real Douchey Doucherson and simply acted like one, just one too many times and MU Administration whether right or wrong reached a breaking point and the decision had nothing to do with politics at all (and as usual everyone wants to inject in).

If he is a prestigious professor in academia then there should be many institutions waiting to scoop him up.  (Pun there!)  

Maybe he go to Liberty University with Dawson?

[jsglow]

As I read this thread, I pick up personal dislike of Dr. McAdams.  Perhaps this has nothing to do with right or wrong.

Maybe it has to do with getting rid of someone many of you disagree with.

I find his transformation somewhat odd.  Admittedly, I studied under him 35 years ago and times change.  His lectures were fascinating, he aired all sides in a discussion, and at the time I actually believed him to be an old school (Kennedy/Truman) democrat.

I don't know if I've told this story here before but I had a final with McAdams the morning after John Lennon was shot.  He decided it was worthy of extended discussion so we did that as a class for about 20 minutes and he told us to write 4 out of 5 essays (our choice) given the time constraints.

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

I'll say one more thing. To see people on Facebook saying the same things about the TA that McAdams did is truly upsetting. I have never been more upset aND disgusted at the Marquette community for attacking this TA and making this a political issue which is not. It seriously makes me want to pack my bags and leave MU. Absolutely disgusting haven't hated the Marquette community this much since I almost transferred back in my freshman year. Signing off.