Dick Andzenge’s monthly column includes this ridiculous statement:

The university’s Faculty Association complained that many student grades, given by classroom faculty, were changed by administrators without using the proper protocol for making such changes, and often without the knowledge of the professors who had assigned those grades. In some cases, the complaint was that some students’ names simply disappeared from class rosters.

While the dispute focused on faculty rights, compliance with due process and academic integrity, the investigation by the U.S. Department of Education focused on the possible violation of federal law.

It’s time to squash the administration’s BS that the US DoE investigation was about potential “violation of federal law.” First, Adam Hammer insisted that there wasn’t an investigation. Is Mr. Hammer willing to admit that he lied then? Second, when asked about the status of the transcript investigation, the administration said it wasn’t an investigation:

FA: I have a clarifying question. I heard you say this is a preliminary investigation at looking so once you do your preliminary then am I hearing you say then you will decide what your next step is going to be in terms of your going after other data collection for the past four years before this?

Admin: Sure so then we have as to what kind of data is relevant and we go there and we can collect the information so that it makes sense for you. The other thing is I won’t call it an investigation I would call analysis. So it’s a data analysis to understand if there is a spike and then understand whether it is due to factors outside our control or if it is factors of the band of discretion becoming wider.

In other words, the investigation that didn’t exist was always about whether federal laws were broken. Except when it was considered data analysis. Except when Devinder Malhotra emphatically insisted that transcript integrity was among SCSU’s highest priorities:

“Integrity of transcripts and the record is very, very important and so is the involvement of the faculty in that process,” Malhotra said. “There’s no question about that in my mind. And it’s our attempt to make sure that going forward we do our due diligence and we make sure that the faculty input is not only taken but recorded.”

Other than those things, Dr. Andzenge’s statement is fairly accurate.

This question has a simple answer:

Have the university’s administration and its academic faculty come to a mutual understanding about what actually happened regarding the grade changes and missing names class lists?

That answer is no. The administration is still spinning constantly that this was just an administrative misunderstanding. The administration insists that it wasn’t transcript corruption. It was just bureaucrats making wrong decisions.

The faculty, starting with Dr. Tamara Leenay and including Dr. Phyllis VanBuren, insist that students who did all their class work, took all their tests and who failed their classes had their participation in those classes deleted from St. Cloud State’s official transcript system. This isn’t about late drops and withdrawals, which is what President Potter and his administration have insisted. It’s about a system where the administration let students who failed their classes off the hook.

It isn’t logical to say that students who simply failed classes should benefit from administrative corruption.

Technorati: , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply