Lovell releases new statement re: McAdams

[keefe]

mentoring her would've been a much more appropriate thing to do than publicly shaming her on a blog.

I agree. But does McAdams have the right to publish his thoughts on a private internet journal? 

[Badgerhater]

Glow,

Don't get me wrong: I believe McAdams exercised profoundly poor judgment in writing what he did. I think we both agree on that.
And I also believe we agree that the TA was wrong in how she addressed the student in her class. Furthermore, there is little doubt Marquette has the right to discipline McAdams per the employment agreement.

The real question is should Marquette discipline McAdams for what he did and in the manner in which they disciplined him?


When I was a squadron commander at Al Asad an NCO behaved incorrectly over the phone with an Air Force Colonel who was a non-flyer comms officer who had something to do with the IT backbone in Iraq. The Colonel had called directly into my squadron and was giving orders to this enlisted man over whom he had no operational or tactical control. The NCO, after repeatedly asking the Colonel to go through proper channels, finally swore at the Colonel.

I happened to be out flying when this took place but it was clearly something that needed to be addressed, even though we were fighting a war, because the Colonel was raising hell about it. When I got the Colonel on the line, at the time I was a Lt Col, he was demanding to know how I was going to discipline the NCO.

I told him directly that was my business and that I would indeed handle it correctly. But I told the Col that the only thing I wanted to talk to him about was why he felt he could violate chain of command and reach into my squadron and start giving orders which he had no authority to do. I told him the real issue here was not about the behavior of the NCO but of the Colonel.

He hung up on me and I immediately called the Wing Commander (a Brig Gen) and briefed him about the matter. The Col indeed got a hold of the Wing King who later told me that he put the Col in his place. 


If the NCO is the TA and exercised poor judgment then the squadron commander (her academic advisor) has the responsibility for exercising disciplinary action against her.

If McAdams is the Colonel he had no business getting mixed up in the squadron's chain of command. The Colonel should have never been on the phone with my NCO in the same way McAdams should not have been involved with the classroom matter in question.

The Wing Commander had every right to bring the Colonel up on charges. The Colonel violated the UCMJ in a couple ways. Instead, the Brig Gen took the Col aside and told him to stay out of his Wing's business. I am certain that if that Col so much as farted in any of the hangars there would have been repercussions.

It grieves me that my alma mater, an institution my wife and I have held dear, is once more thrust into the national spotlight.

I don't think we disagree that McAdams was wrong. I think the real loser in all of this is Marquette. McAdams will fade away soon enough - he has got to be in his 70s. But the whole nation will have this incident in the back of its collective mind. That is the real issue here.

Correct.   But you left out the part where the NCO's first sergeant (or whatever you blue people call them) conducts some remedial training.

[Coleman]

I agree. But does McAdams have the right to publish his thoughts on a private internet journal?

If you spend 30 seconds looking at his blog, you can very clearly see McAdams' audience is not just himself. It is his own soapbox for which he attempts to play Socratic gadfly to Marquette. It is not a private journal by any stretch of the imagination.

[wadesworld]

mentoring her was the responsibility of the professors in her department.

So then maybe McAdams should aim his rants towards the professors in her department?

[GGGG]

mentoring her was the responsibility of the professors in her department.

Oh OK.  I agree with this.  But this is where McAdams was reckless.  Instead of respecting that, and going through his process, he went straight to his blog to call her out.

According to the Marquette's letter...

"You posted this story on the Internet (1) without speaking with Ms. Abbate or getting her permission to use her name; (2) without contacting the Chair of Ms. Abbate's Department (who had met twice with the undergraduate student) to get her perspective or express your concerns; (3) without contacting anyone in the College of Arts & Sciences to get their perspective or express your concerns; (4) without contacting anyone in the Office of the Provost to raise concerns that you believed had been ignored at the Department or College level; (5) without describing what had happened in the very next class following the one you wrote about--when Ms. Abbate discussed and addressed the student's objection (without identifying him); and (6) without even reporting fully or accurately what the student had disclosed to (and concealed from) others in the University about these events."

[keefe]

Correct.   But you left out the part where the NCO's first sergeant (or whatever you blue people call them) conducts some remedial training.

Oh, trust me. The Shirt and the Squadron Command Chief were out on the ramp waiting for me when I taxied in. And from the looks on their faces I knew they weren't there to ask me about my thoughts on Paris Hilton's latest antics.

The USAF comes out of the old Army Horse Cavalry - the original units traded in their horses for canvas covered bi-planes. Our heraldry, customs, and traditions go back to the Civil War cavalry. We refer to our First Sergeant as the First Shirt or, more commonly, The Shirt.

And in this matter, while I recommended the course of action, the actual remedial training was executed by The Shirt under the Chief's discerning eye. And let me report that the NCO in question was the most squared away mother effer in the Air Force for his remaining time in the unit.

I leave some of the military minutiae details out when relating there I was tales to long haired, flag burning, dope smoking, cheese burger eating civilian types like Glow, Chico, and 4ever!

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I agree. But does McAdams have the right to publish his thoughts on a private internet journal?

You can do whatever you want. No one will put him in jail.

What would happen to you at Microsoft if you did the same thing.

[keefe]

You can do whatever you want. No one will put him in jail.

What would happen to you at Microsoft if you did the same thing.

Microsoft is an absolutely terrible example because it is like the Wild West. Different business units are in direct competition with each other because that is the Darwinian Model Bill Gates wants.

But this is an excellent example, too, because Softies can and do blog on everything and can even be rewarded for blogging to the world that the emperor has no clothes.

Different cultures have unique norms. Seattle tech is largely defined by openness, self-examination, and public shaming. Behavior such as that exhibited by McAdams is not just expected but encouraged.

Hell, Microsoft has Gold Star Awards (no kidding) and McAdams likely would have collected more than few for his outspokenness.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Microsoft is an absolutely terrible example because it is like the Wild West. Different business units are in direct competition with each other because that is the Darwinian Model Bill Gates wants.

But this is an excellent example, too, because Softies can and do blog on everything and can even be rewarded for blogging to the world that the emperor has no clothes.

Different cultures have unique norms. Seattle tech is largely defined by openness, self-examination, and public shaming. Behavior such as that exhibited by McAdams is not just expected but encouraged.

Hell, Microsoft has Gold Star Awards (no kidding) and McAdams likely would have collected more than few for his outspokenness.

Ha I should have said GE. I didn't think about the open cultures of tech.  I would personally have been fired in The organizations I have worked for. 

This is my last point.  The guy effectively went after an intern publicly. Organizationally that is a problem. Can you imagine a senior leader doing that in a company?

[Badgerhater]

And in this matter, while I recommended the course of action, the actual remedial training was executed by The Shirt under the Chief's discerning eye. And let me report that the NCO in question was the most squared away mother effer in the Air Force for his remaining time in the unit.

I was a first sergeant before my officer lobotomy so I find this to be excellent news.

[keefe]

I was a first sergeant before my officer lobotomy so I find this to be excellent news.

A good shirt is worth his weight in good single malt. If a squadron is running smoothly I guarantee The Shirt is 4.0

[mu03eng]

All three (undergrad, TA, and McAdams) acted outside of their respective dictated behaviors as such each should be "punished" per the violations of their expected behaviors and the punishments should be whatever is codified in Marquette's policies and procedures.

Where Marquette(to be fair it happens to a lot of organizations) gets into trouble is they back emotion into their decision and that tends to influence decisions to be indefensible from a policy and procedure standpoint.

Bottom line, if a public policy is written into the rules and regulations, then expect that of McAdams and if he doesn't do it follow through with whatever the policy is after that. If a public apology is not codified then DON'T ASK FOR IT.

Man, adults can act like babies sometimes

[keefe]

All three (undergrad, TA, and McAdams) acted outside of their respective dictated behaviors as such each should be "punished" per the violations of their expected behaviors and the punishments should be whatever is codified in Marquette's policies and procedures.

Where Marquette(to be fair it happens to a lot of organizations) gets into trouble is they back emotion into their decision and that tends to influence decisions to be indefensible from a policy and procedure standpoint.

Bottom line, if a public policy is written into the rules and regulations, then expect that of McAdams and if he doesn't do it follow through with whatever the policy is after that. If a public apology is not codified then DON'T ASK FOR IT.

Man, adults can act like babies sometimes

We need to be honest - Fellow academics have had a hard-on for McAdams. I recall reading how the Department then the College handled this and it was not entirely objective. Professionals stick to the merits of the matter and not the feelings they have for the individual. Clearly, there was a lack of propriety throughout the Marquette faculty in this.

Marquette needs to understand that alumni and the general public are watching. I have three alma maters and my wife has a fourth. I have given to all but Marquette in recent years. 

edit: My concern is that Marquette has been a vortex of upheaval, uncertainty, and controversy in recent years. And frankly, I am still on the fence about Lovell. Poor hires, bad decisions, and general bone-headedness gives me significant pause.

Marquette is a great institution and it has been a bedrock component of our lives for decades. But it really needs to get its head out of its a$$. The overall strategic management of the university as an enterprise has been substandard for many years.

[Coleman]

We need to be honest - Fellow academics have had a hard-on for McAdams. I recall reading how the Department then the College handled this and it was not entirely objective. Professionals stick to the merits of the matter and not the feelings they have for the individual. Clearly, there was a lack of propriety throughout the Marquette faculty in this.

Marquette needs to understand that alumni and the general public are watching. I have three alma maters and my wife has a fourth. I have given to all but Marquette in recent years. 

edit: My concern is that Marquette has been a vortex of upheaval, uncertainty, and controversy in recent years. And frankly, I am still on the fence about Lovell. Poor hires, bad decisions, and general bone-headedness gives me significant pause.

Marquette is a great institution and it has been a bedrock component of our lives for decades. But it really needs to get its head out of its a$$. The overall strategic management of the university as an enterprise has been substandard for many years.

I don't have an opinion on Lovell, but I thought Fr. Wild ran this university near-flawlessly during his tenure, when you think about where it was when he came on board.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Ha I should have said GE. I didn't think about the open cultures of tech.  I would personally have been fired in The organizations I have worked for. 

This is my last point.  The guy effectively went after an intern publicly. Organizationally that is a problem. Can you imagine a senior leader doing that in a company?

I thought going after interns is a good thing.....

[Archies Bat]

I think very few people outside the MU community actually know or care about this, despite McAdams' petulant hissy fits on Fox News

Agree.  I am far out of Milwaukee, and the only place this has popped up on my radar is here on Scoop.

That said, reading this thread and the other McAdams thread, I don't understand the logic of folks defending McAdams by pointing at the Grad Student/TA.

As many have pointed out, there is plenty of blame to go around.  The question is on the appropriate punishment.

As for the Grad Student/TA, I believe she has already received her punishment for her share of the blame:

She was publically called out on the blog
She received a ton of unwanted publicity
She ended up deciding to leave MU
It was brought up on cable news
She apparently did have some counseling from her MU supervisors after the incident, because she did re-raise the issue the next time class was held.  Further details of any counseling/punishment cannot be discussed by MU

Is that enough punishment for her?

If so, I believe it is a distraction to defend McAdams by pointing to her.  She received her punishment. Whether she should be punished or not is immaterial to his punishment.  She has already been punished.

If however, you believe her punishment is pertinent to McAdams punishment, then I think the appropriate question is:  Given her punishment, what is appropriate for McAdams?

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Not really, if you know anything about how academia works.

Luckily, I live and work in the real world.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Luckily, I live and work in the real world.

 

[keefe]

I don't have an opinion on Lovell, but I thought Fr. Wild ran this university near-flawlessly during his tenure, when you think about where it was when he came on board.

Fr Wild did a solid job running Marquette but it was hardly flawless. If his only mistake was Jodi O'Brien that would be bad enough. But unfortunately O'Brien wasn't his only lapse. And that one alone made me ashamed of my alma mater.

[jsglow]

I really enjoy chatting with you keefe. I can't easily read all this on my phone but will as time permits.  I'm sure you thoroughly enjoyed that Col getting his butt tanned.

[muwarrior69]

She is a student.  A graduate student who teaches, but a student.  Not only by Marquette's status, but by the status that the academy uses and has used for decades.

This isn't a debatable point.  Graduate students can teach...but they are still students.  Just like undergraduate students can be hired to tutor...but they are still students.

So one student (the teacher who is not a teacher) can deny a student in the same class from speaking freely? I will no longer make donations to MU if this is their policy.

[Coleman]

There are two interactions at the heart of this controversy.

1) the interaction between instructor and an undergraduate. Instructors have the right to control the flow and direction of discussion in their classroom. This has always been true. An undergraduates right to free speech is not absolute in the classroom. You can't start talking about X when X is not on topic. It sounds like Abbate handled this interaction poorly, and it should have been a learning opportunity for her as a graduate student, but let's get real here, no one's constitutional rights were trampled.

2) the second interaction between a tenured faculty member and a graduate student. Although he was commenting on her perormance as an instructor, the relationship and power dynamic here is hardly one of equals. Mcadams was way out of line in subverting the normal protocol and calling out a graduate student on his blog.

[GGGG]

So one student (the teacher who is not a teacher) can deny a student in the same class from speaking freely? I will no longer make donations to MU if this is their policy.

Read the thread.  Good lord.  I never said that.  Not in the least.

I never said she was above reproach.  I have repeatedly said that there were proper avenues for McAdams to take, and he decided not to take them. 

[jsglow]

There are two interactions at the heart of this controversy.

1) the interaction between instructor and an undergraduate. Instructors have the right to control the flow and direction of discussion in their classroom. This has always been true. An undergraduates right to free speech is not absolute in the classroom. You can't start talking about X when X is not on topic. It sounds like Abbate handled this interaction poorly, and it should have been a learning opportunity for her as a graduate student, but let's get real here, no one's constitutional rights were trampled.

2) the second interaction between a tenured faculty member and a graduate student. Although he was commenting on her perormance as an instructor, the relationship and power dynamic here is hardly one of equals. Mcadams was way out of line in subverting the normal protocol and calling out a graduate student on his blog.

That's about how I see it.

Now back to keefe calling me a dope smoking, flag burning civilian!  I never burned a flag.  Not one time.

[ChicosBailBonds]

There are two interactions at the heart of this controversy.

1) the interaction between instructor and an undergraduate. Instructors have the right to control the flow and direction of discussion in their classroom. This has always been true. An undergraduates right to free speech is not absolute in the classroom. You can't start talking about X when X is not on topic. It sounds like Abbate handled this interaction poorly, and it should have been a learning opportunity for her as a graduate student, but let's get real here, no one's constitutional rights were trampled.

2) the second interaction between a tenured faculty member and a graduate student. Although he was commenting on her perormance as an instructor, the relationship and power dynamic here is hardly one of equals. Mcadams was way out of line in subverting the normal protocol and calling out a graduate student on his blog.

He called out a graduate student \ instructor