Update on prof McAdams

[Ellenson Guerrero]

Correct me if I'm wrong.  Marquette is not attempting to stop McAdams free speech.  They are merely not willing to employ him anymore because of it.  There is a difference.

Okay, but state schools can't fire people as a result of their speech. McAdams argument will be that he was contractually promised the same protection.

[mu03eng]

It's what being a TA is all about. When you make a mistake, you should be taken aside - in private - and it becomes a teaching moment. Being ridiculed online? Not so much.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but ridiculed is a bit hyperbolic.

[Galway Eagle]

I'm not disagreeing with you, but ridiculed is a bit hyperbolic.

Did he ridicule her? Not really.  But I'd be willing to bet my life he knew exactly the type of response he was going to insight from his readers and by publishing her name he knew exactly the type of letters and such she was going to be receiving.  

Again I disagree with the firing, perhaps revoking tenure so he has to hold himself to a higher standard than he currently does but not firing him. 

[keefe]

Correct me if I'm wrong.  Marquette is not attempting to stop McAdams free speech.  They are merely not willing to employ him anymore because of it.  There is a difference.

Yea, it's called wrongful termination.

[forgetful]

If his argument is going to be free speech, maybe he should hire this guy, 1st amendment rights expert that may also be looking for a job.

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/02/05/former-texas-law-school-dean-arrested-on-prostitution-charges/

[rocky_warrior]

Yea, it's called wrongful termination.

WI is an at will employment state.  The fact that he made a blog post that played a part in a TA (also a student, mind you) feeling threatened enough to leave MU is case enough.  He has no case.  Note, I'm not saying his blog post threatened the TA, but it sure caused a lot of grief for the girl because of his readers response (and following fox news story).

Here's a more accurate account of the details...
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/11/20/marquette-u-grad-student-shes-being-targeted-after-ending-class-discussion-gay

[Ellenson Guerrero]

WI is an at will employment state.  The fact that he made a blog post that played a part in a TA (also a student, mind you) feeling threatened enough to leave MU is case enough.  He has no case.  Note, I'm not saying his blog post threatened the TA, but it sure caused a lot of grief for the girl because of his readers response (and following fox news story).

Here's a more accurate account of the details...
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/11/20/marquette-u-grad-student-shes-being-targeted-after-ending-class-discussion-gay

Not so fast. At will employment is simply a default rule that can be modified by contract. MU can't just fire Wojo and not pay his buyout by claiming at will employment.

[GGGG]

Not so fast. At will employment is simply a default rule that can be modified by contract. MU can't just fire Wojo and not pay his buyout by claiming at will employment.

Unless he was terminated for cause, and in that case they have procedures to follow outlined in their faculty handbook. 

[Ellenson Guerrero]

Unless he was terminated for cause, and in that case they have procedures to follow outlined in their faculty handbook. 

Not saying there isn't a way he can be fired, just that it is more complicated than calling a blog post harassment and showing him the door.

[mu03eng]

WI is an at will employment state.  The fact that he made a blog post that played a part in a TA (also a student, mind you) feeling threatened enough to leave MU is case enough.  He has no case.  Note, I'm not saying his blog post threatened the TA, but it sure caused a lot of grief for the girl because of his readers response (and following fox news story).

Here's a more accurate account of the details...
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/11/20/marquette-u-grad-student-shes-being-targeted-after-ending-class-discussion-gay

Does it logically follow that the blog post would result in the TA being harassed enough to leave school to justify revoking tenure which is apparently a very big deal?

For this to fly with me it would have to be a foregone conclusion that such a blog post would result in the TA being "forced out" and that McAdams had to reasonable know such an event would occur.  The timeline is important here....

If I remember the timeline correctly.....The Fox News story didn't break until AFTER Marquette suspended McAdams and issued a statement about it.  The threats and harassment that the TA cited as reason for leaving the university occurred AFTER the Fox News story.  So if MU doesn't overreact initially the rest of the stuff probably doesn't happen and it's settled internally.

Again McAdams was wrong but I don't think you can reasonably conclude that McAdams could know the outcome could be what it was and the blog post by itself is not nearly enough to fire someone.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I personally hated McAdams when I was in school. Terrible professor. Frequently unprofessional. Trashes Marquette whenever he gets the chance. A long history of questionable conduct. I think Marquette is better off without him.

However, I think Marquette is on very shaky ground by doing this. I think standing up for the grad student is the right thing, but messing with academic freedom and tenure puts the university at significant risk. I'm not sure it was the right move.

If I was in power, I would have kept McAdams, asked for his resignation, and then minimized his role and power at the university as much as possible. Let him teach one obscure course a semester and that's it. Tenure and academic freedom don't give him the right to what kind of role he wants at the university.

[brandx]

I personally hated McAdams when I was in school. Terrible professor. Frequently unprofessional. Trashes Marquette whenever he gets the chance. A long history of questionable conduct. I think Marquette is better off without him.

However, I think Marquette is on very shaky ground by doing this. I think standing up for the grad student is the right thing, but messing with academic freedom and tenure puts the university at significant risk. I'm not sure it was the right move.

If I was in power, I would have kept McAdams, asked for his resignation, and then minimized his role and power at the university as much as possible. Let him teach one obscure course a semester and that's it. Tenure and academic freedom don't give him the right to what kind of role he wants at the university.

Do you think he would not be writing about this in his blog (using the Marquette name) almost every day? He is an agitator. It's what he does and it is written from a specific political viewpoint.

I think he would be an even bigger thorn this way on a much more consistent basis.

[forgetful]

People do realize that a typical settlement for wrongful revocation of tenure is only about 2 years salary.  I think MU would be glad to get rid of him, even for that type of financial risk. 

[Blue Horseshoe]

People do realize that a typical settlement for wrongful revocation of tenure is only about 2 years salary.  I think MU would be glad to get rid of him, even for that type of financial risk. 

Where is that information from?

If a settlement is not reached and litigation plays out, could one of the conditions/outcomes include reinstatement of McAdams tenured position?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Does it logically follow that the blog post would result in the TA being harassed enough to leave school to justify revoking tenure which is apparently a very big deal?

For this to fly with me it would have to be a foregone conclusion that such a blog post would result in the TA being "forced out" and that McAdams had to reasonable know such an event would occur.  The timeline is important here....

If I remember the timeline correctly.....The Fox News story didn't break until AFTER Marquette suspended McAdams and issued a statement about it.  The threats and harassment that the TA cited as reason for leaving the university occurred AFTER the Fox News story.  So if MU doesn't overreact initially the rest of the stuff probably doesn't happen and it's settled internally.

Again McAdams was wrong but I don't think you can reasonably conclude that McAdams could know the outcome could be what it was and the blog post by itself is not nearly enough to fire someone.

Yup...well stated

[ChicosBailBonds]

I personally hated McAdams when I was in school. Terrible professor. Frequently unprofessional. Trashes Marquette whenever he gets the chance. A long history of questionable conduct. I think Marquette is better off without him.

However, I think Marquette is on very shaky ground by doing this. I think standing up for the grad student is the right thing, but messing with academic freedom and tenure puts the university at significant risk. I'm not sure it was the right move.

If I was in power, I would have kept McAdams, asked for his resignation, and then minimized his role and power at the university as much as possible. Let him teach one obscure course a semester and that's it. Tenure and academic freedom don't give him the right to what kind of role he wants at the university.

You are the first person I have ever come across that thought he was a terrible professor.   

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

You are the first person I have ever come across that thought he was a terrible professor.   

You don't know many people who took his classes then. At least in the last 8 years. I was told when I was there that he used to be a lot more quality but he became increasingly bitter and unprofessional over the years.

[forgetful]

Where is that information from?

If a settlement is not reached and litigation plays out, could one of the conditions/outcomes include reinstatement of McAdams tenured position?

There are a few famous cases, including one that led to a University president losing his job. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

You don't know many people who took his classes then. At least in the last 8 years. I was told when I was there that he used to be a lot more quality but he became increasingly bitter and unprofessional over the years.

Absolutely correct, I don't know people that took his classes recently or for that matter, many young MU students. Back in the day, people that took his classes enjoyed them.

But just for giggles, he is still getting a B+ rating from RateMyProfessor and many of those ratings are recent.

http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=273814

[Blue Horseshoe]

There are a few famous cases, including one that led to a University president losing his job. 

Don't be lazy, cite the cases.

[forgetful]

Don't be lazy, cite the cases.

This is the most famous case.

http://www.wdam.com/story/1692435/usm-fires-2-professors-in-massacre

[Blue Horseshoe]

This is the most famous case.

http://www.wdam.com/story/1692435/usm-fires-2-professors-in-massacre

This was definitely an interesting situation. The story (similar to Marquette"s situation) is complex and dragged out for a long period of time.

In regard to McAdams, do you believe this example parallels an abuse of power behind the Marquette curtain?

More on the USM outcome here:
http://historynewsnetwork.org/blog/5852

and here:
http://msbusiness.com/blog/2004/04/26/in-the-middle-of-a-storm-dvorak-credentials-stand-up/

[forgetful]

This was definitely an interesting situation. The story (similar to Marquette"s situation) is complex and dragged out for a long period of time.

In regard to McAdams, do you believe this example parallels an abuse of power behind the Marquette curtain?

More on the USM outcome here:
http://historynewsnetwork.org/blog/5852

and here:
http://msbusiness.com/blog/2004/04/26/in-the-middle-of-a-storm-dvorak-credentials-stand-up/

No, entirely different situations, as evident by the fact that every faculty organization in the country was crying foul in the USM case.  Not only that, but the state supreme court got involved.  That was a clear abuse of power by the president of the university and led to a no confidence vote in the University President. 

Only the religious right is crying foul in the MU case.

Even with a clear abuse of power the two USM faculty only got two years pay and full retirement benefits (even though they needed a couple years more to reach that level).

[Blue Horseshoe]

No, entirely different situations, as evident by the fact that every faculty organization in the country was crying foul in the USM case.  Not only that, but the state supreme court got involved.  That was a clear abuse of power by the president of the university and led to a no confidence vote in the University President.  

Only the religious right is crying foul in the MU case.

Lots of blanket statements there, "every faculty organization in the country" "only the religious right".

Edited: The issue at hand does not have to do with the actual subject matter of discussion (actual lack of discussion) between Cheryl Abbate and the anonymous student, but the actions McAdams displayed on his personal blog and Marquette's reaction.

[forgetful]

Lots of blanket statements there, "every faculty organization in the country" "only the religious right".

I'll give you the that the latter was a blanket statement.  The former is true, every faculty organization was up in arms in the USM case.  It was an egregious act.  Both of the faculty revoked of tenure, in that case, had job offers (promotions) by other Universities before the day was out.