Not Everything Is Negative!

So loyal readers, I have been accused by the Crony State University regime of only communicating negativity about the university through this humble electronic forum. This,  of course isn’t true, but when the truth is unflattering, attack the truth teller.
I do have good news out of the bad news of the passing of Dr. Maya Angelou. The “poet, memoirist, novelist, educator, dramatist, producer, actress, historian, filmmaker, and civil rights activist” made her transition yesterday. Dr. Kelly Ellis, of the CSU English Department, will be appearing on Richard Steele’s Barbershop Show on WBEZ, 91.5 FM, a National Public Radio station on Sunday, June 1st, at 3PM to discuss the life and work of an American literary icon.

And while we're "searching" (or whatever you want to call it) for a provost --H.R. might want to doublecheck those curriculum vitae for False Degrees

Well, you've got to give the state of ILL credit. They do act like they are concerned with integrity in their public institutions. Here they are enacting a law against those who obtain a job by falsifying their credentials. Enforcement of it? Hah! That will be another thing--just call in your political buddies and "integrity" becomes negotiable. If that doesn't work--get Governor Quinn to stifle reform.

Anyway, a young colleague forwarded this and wondered whether it would have any impact on the current leadership at CSU (or the search for such). Since we are very inconsistent with when and what or to whom we compel compliance you can bet it will be applied with full force and vigor to a faculty member found with a false degree that much is certain, but some people are more equal than others on this campus. At any rate, it's on the books--have a glance at it:

ILLINOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY – FULL TEXT OF PUBLIC ACT 093-0239

Public Act 93-0239

HB1448 Enrolled                  LRB093 06893 NHT 07039 b

AN ACT regarding higher education.

Be it enacted by the People of the State of Illinois,

represented in the General Assembly:

Section 5. The Criminal Code of 1961 is amended by adding

Section 17-2.5 as follows:

(720 ILCS 5/17-2.5 new)

Sec. 17-2.5. False academic degrees.

(a) It is unlawful for a person to knowingly manufacture

or produce for profit or for sale a false academic degree,

unless the degree explicitly states "for novelty purposes

only" .

(b) It is unlawful for a person to knowingly use a false

academic degree for the purpose of obtaining employment or

admission to an institution of higher learning or admission

to an advanced degree program at an institution of higher

learning or for the purpose of obtaining a promotion or

higher compensation in employment.

(c) Sentence. A person who violates this Section is

guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

(d) In this Section:

"False academic degree" means a certificate, dlploma,

transcript, or other document purporting to be issued by an

institution of higher learning or purporting to indicate that

a person has completed an organized academic program of study

at an institution of higher learning when the person has not

completed the organized academic program of study indicated

on the certificate, diploma, transcript, or other document.

"Institution of higher learning" means a pUblic or

private college, university, or community college located in

the State of Illinois that is authorized by the Board of

Higher Education or the Illinois Community College Board to

issue post-secondary degrees, or a pUblic or private college,

university, or community college located anywhere in the

United States that is or has been legally constituted to

offer degrees and instruction in its state of origin or

incorporation.

Section 99. Effective date. This Act takes effect upon

becoming law.

Effective Date: 07/22/03

Where is Compliance and Communication on the Provost "search?" And does anyone (including HLC) care?

The HLC monitoring report is due on June 1st. The “university community” (sometimes known as the "CSU family") is supposed to be able to comment on the report to be submitted. I heard we were supposed to have 2 weeks to do that. So where is it? Something is posted on cougar connect (see the link below), but really, is this what the university has to say about communication and compliance? If HLC buys this then there is a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell them. Can someone please enlighten us as to whether this is the report and where do we submit our comments on the document? Of course, since it is so close to the date of submission how will the university truly take the university community's comments into consideration? Will this be another trumped up phony document and at this point will it matter?

https://cougarconnect.csu.edu/render.userLayoutRootNode.uP?uP_root=root

If you can log in to cougar connect the accreditation stuff shows up on that page. The document on communication and compliance is linked as an odp document. If you can't read that try converting it to a powerpoint document. 

The HLC communication and compliance report hits very closely to the charade played out on campus this week and next. Does anyone really believe that Angela Henderson will not be granted the provost's position? She is Wayne Watson’s anointed successor for CSU president after all. She needs this provost gig to get to the big office. And of course, the Board of Trustees is in Watson's pocket, there is no independent oversight of the university ---something the HLC claims to be concerned about but in reality ignores. How can AH not get the job when WW already paved over the plagiarism issue in the minds of the Board of Trustees at their “emergency” meeting in February? They told him to fire her, he dissuaded them and then persuaded them to wait until UIC ruled lest Mr. H. (atty. for both AH and WW) sue them. How can AH not get the job when WW was on her dissertation committee? when she has been his loyal soldier for all that time at City Colleges and here? He is the giant on whose shoulders she stands—read the diss for this specific reference. How can AH not get the job when the job ad was tailor-made for her and is quite extraordinarily so unlike any other provost job ad you would find at any other institution calling itself a university? Finally, how can AH not get the job when the Hollins Group, the search firm that helped Leon Finney and Emil Jones ensure Wayne Watson's ascension to the CSU presidency, is involved in yet another one of these bogus searches?

And herein lies the question of compliance. In concocting the provost search the way H.R. Director Renee Mitchell and the administration did, is CSU in compliance with state law and the CSU Act itself?  The CSU Act, the law that established CSU as a legitimate body, says that the university may not pay a search firm for anything but a presidential search (see110 ILCS 660 Section 5-175). For any others--provost, vice president searches-- there must be board of trustees' approval.

http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs5.asp?ActID=1128&ChapterID=18

(110 ILCS 660/5-175) 

    Sec. 5-175. Search firm prohibition. Charges for the services of an external hiring search firm may not be paid from any source of funds, except (i) in the hiring of the President of the University or (ii) in the case of when the President of the University and the Board demonstrate a justifiable need for guidance from an individual or firm with specific expertise in the field of the hiring. The University shall implement a policy under this Section, including qualifying criteria, within 6 months after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 97th General Assembly. (Source: P.A. 97-814, eff. 1-1-13.)




Past provost searches on campus have not used search firms. When Beverly Anderson was hired as provost under Elnora Daniel a colleague on that search committee told me, "we did everything ourselves, we did not have a search firm."

Three FOIA (freedom of information act) requests I made this spring for information about the Board's charge to establish the committee or their reasons for authorizing the use of a search firm for a university provost search has netted nothing. The university lawyers who handle the FOIA requests cannot provide documents because there are no documents. "The university does not have records responsive to your request." Where is the university's compliance with the Illinois statute?

We know that Dr Watson, the Human Resources Department, and the legal department unilaterally and without consultation of faculty changed the long-standing university hiring policies that had faculty and deans at the center of the job searches and decisions. Under their revised hiring policies the president is placed at the center of all hiring on campus. This remains unchanged even after HLC's pointed statements about faculty dissatisfaction over this change.

As to the composition of the current provost search committee compare the role H.R. took on for itself in being the sole arbiter as to participants with the "charge" and directions the Board of Trustees gave in 2008 when constituting the committee for the presidential search. Betsy Hill, chair of the Board, set the tone for a legitimate search. That the search was co-opted and maneuvered by board member Leon Finney and ended with the resignation of all but one member of the Search Advisory Committee is another story--see blog posts from 2009 to refresh your memory on that. 

For the record, when the presidential search was conducted, several months in spring, summer, and early fall 2008 were spent taking bids for the search firm contract and interviewing search firms. The Hollins Group appeared late in the process and was pushed through by Leon Finney. At least the process of taking bids was done. Not so in the current provost search. FOIA requests asking for "the names and bids of competitors (including the Hollins Group) received for the CSU Provost Search 2013-2014" were met with the answer: "Please be advised that the University does not have records response to item #2 (contract bids) of your request" (FOIA Response, Feb. 18, 2014). Another FOIA request (May 4, 2014) for "Documents relative to the Board of Trustees' compliance with 110 ILCS 660 Sect.5-175 of Chicago State Law in hiring the Hollins Group to be the search firm for this position" was answered with a list of approved vendors that can be used by the University of Illinois System (FOIA Response May 12, 2014).

The Hollins Group was paid $75,000 in 2008-2009 to bring us a new president who turned out to be someone who was already chosen by Leon Finney and Emil Jones probably before Elnora's last boxes were packed up from the presidential mansion.

The Hollins Group is being paid between $ 70,000-100,000 to run a provost search this year which will most likely end up with the hiring of insider and presidential protege Angela Henderson. How much are we spending to bring other candidates to campus on top of this and on top of the hours Renee Mitchell's search committee put into this? No paperwork on the Board authorizing the use of the search firm, no contract bids from other firms for taking the search on.

Where is the compliance? Where is the independent oversight HLC and the State of ILL claim they demand of their institutions?

Lastly, where is the outrage?

1) Here's How the Administration Structured the Scam; 2) A Qualified Candidate Who Didn't Make the Cut so Our Chief Plagiarizing Officer Could be Among the Finalists

As an informational follow-up to Corday's post, the search for a permanent Provost at Chicago State began around the first of the year. On January 22, 2014, Renee Mitchell, CSU Director of Human Resources and member of the Provost Search Committee sent an e-mail to a faculty member which included the names of the ten members of the committee: 4 administrators: the Dean of the Library, Director of Human Resources, one Department Chair, an Associate Provost, 1 Civil Service Representative, and 5 faculty members, one each from the Colleges of Arts and Sciences, Pharmacy, Health Sciences, Business and Education. According to Mitchell’s e-mail, the committee received “their charge,” and discussed the job description. The committee also “decided . . . to allow the Hollins Group to review all applicants first in order to eliminate those who do not meet the qualifications.”

A glance at the composition of the committee reveals that in a university at which the various colleges have vastly different faculty contingents, the equal representation results in the following ratios: the business member represents 15 faculty, the Health Sciences member represents 16 faculty, the pharmacy member represents 25 faculty, the education member represents 40 faculty, the arts and sciences member represents 127 faculty. Thus the “equal” representation on the committee is far from equitable.

None of this is presented to disparage the work of the committee members. However, the composition of the search committee, the secrecy with which this search has been conducted, and the ultimate products of the search appearing on campus after faculty have departed is reflective of the way we do business here at Chicago State. It is all a scam. We appear to have put together a “representative” body to consider the candidates (which, in actuality is done by the Hollins Group) and then we make sure that the most potentially troublesome university constituency is likely to be unable to attend whatever sham vetting process occurs.

This morning, a faculty colleague forwarded the C.V. of one of the applicants, a person who is not among the finalists. Because this person currently holds a university job, I will not provide any identifying information. However, I can say that the C.V. describes someone qualified for the position, a person with administrative and managerial experience at the university level, someone who received the Ph.D. in the 1980s, attained the rank of full professor and has published extensively. In short, someone who fits the profile of the “ideal candidate” as delineated in the job announcement. Of course, this person had to give way so that Angela Henderson could be included among the final four candidates.

Another observation: Renee Mitchell served on the search committee that brought Angela Henderson to Chicago State in 2011. Renee Mitchell also worked at CNA Insurance at the same time Cheri Sidney reportedly worked for that company. Cheri Sidney also served on the search committee that resulted in Henderson’s hiring. Am I the only one who finds it troublesome that Mitchell served on this committee? That she will again be able to work to reward Henderson with a position for which she is wholly unqualified?

Finally, at least one other administrator on the search committee seems an interesting choice. The Associate Provost for Curriculum and Assessment is included among the committee members. Given the wholesome administrative atmosphere here at Chicago State, it seems extremely likely that person will simply follow the direction of his masters. After all, he’s just deciding whether or not to vote for his current boss. This entire process is a disgrace and Henderson’s inclusion among the finalists is an insult. For insight into how a proper search can be conducted, check the University of Illinois' Board web site for the April 18, 2014 special meeting. You'll find the board's "charge" to the search committee for a presidential search as well as a list (and brief description of their university experience) of the members of the search committee, all in a public forum. Not quite the way we do things here. The Illinois material is available on this site: http://www.bot.uillinois.edu/agendas-and-material

A Few Questions for the Provost Candidates

A faculty colleague asked me to post this tonight: 

In light of the announcement to the University community of the four candidates for Provost on a Friday afternoon after commencement on the last day of the academic year when most faculty will have departed campus, I invite my faculty colleagues to consider asking EACH of the candidates any one of the following questions (in no particular order):

•  what is the role of the Chair of an academic department at a University?
• what is the role of faculty (or a faculty member) at CSU?
• how would you handle an instance of significant plagiarism by a graduate student?
• do you think professional advisors improve academic advising?
• And what departments (if any) should always have faculty academic advisors?
• who is (should be?) responsible for academic advising at CSU?
• And why is it housed currently in a non-academic unit under a non-academically trained Dean? 
• what are the consequences of this decision (if any) for the perception this arrangement seems to indicate in terms of academic integrity?
• how would you respond to a conflict of interest accusation?
• how would you encourage faculty (in all their capacities) to create a positive “academic culture” at CSU in light of the events of the last five years?
• how would you respond to the perception (if not the belief of some) that “some faculty are more equal than others” on our campus?
• what would you do if a faculty recommendation for a faculty hire in an individual discipline differed from the Chair or Dean’s recommendation?
• what is your vision of shared governance?
• what has been the role of the faculty Senate historically at American universities?
• when will a Union Contract for faculty be negotiated and voted on only by faculty?
• And would you support faculty voting on their own contract exclusively?
• in light of recent events in the  economics program, what is your vision of academic  program review at CSU?
• how does one “empower” faculty and the academic enterprise at CSU?
• are you familiar with or have you heard of the “faculty blog?

Additional concerns (time permitting):

•  what academic discipline is the “department” of doctoral  studies teaching?
• why are there so many programs in the College of Education and why do they keep changing their names and degree requirements so frequently? Is this common at other institutions you have been at or worked in?
• what is the different between the fine arts? liberal arts? liberal arts education? and/or a a liberal education?
• what should “equal opportunity at CSU mean?”
• how will you respond to faculty who say they have not participated in (nor were they even notified of) any searches or campus visits for several academic Dean positions advertised this term?

 These are only a few questions posed by one faculty member who thought the faculty should really ask (or better, explain) each of these questions to the prospective candidates for Provost. In asking a few questions (usually permitted at an academic enterprise) the hope is these questions might inspire some conversation among faculty too. Please know that there are many other questions that could be offered as this list is not exhaustive. Perhaps our faculty colleagues will be able to come despite the late notice on each of the four days that the four candidates are present to hear their responses. The question now is will the current administration actually listen to (or value at all) the faculty’s impression of the candidates’ responses on these important concerns since there is an absence of a mechanism for faculty input into this important academic search?

So I guess we’ll see…. unless the “fix is in” and this is indeed a colossal waste of time for all concerned rather than an opportunity for campus dialogue and improvement. The timing and manner of the announcement suggest strongly the former. 

Prepare for the Latest Chicago State Dog and Pony Show. Watch Wayne Watson Rig Another Administrative Hiring.

Comedy acts often feature a “straight man” feeding lines to the comedian who then gets the laughs. Historically, some of the most famous “straight men” include: Desi Arnaz of I Love Lucy fame, Bud Abbott of Abbott and Costello, Dean Martin who paired with Jerry Lewis, Bing Crosby for Bob Hope, George Burns with Gracie Allen and Dan Rowan of Rowan and Martin. Although I realize the comparison is not precise, in the farcical 2009 hiring of Wayne Watson, those notable writers, the Hollins Group and Leon Finney, expanded the idea of the comedic “straight man” to include a comedic “straight woman”, Carol Adams, of the duo of Adams and Watson.

Now we have the Hollins Group hard at it again, this time with an assist from Wayne Watson. Rather than the $75,000 Hollins received for the 2009 search, they are getting $100,000 for the 2014 search for Chicago State’s Provost. Somewhat surprisingly, they have generated a pool of four candidates, three of whom actually appear to be well qualified for the position. Of course, we all know that these three persons, Carol A. Blackshire-Belay, Said Sewell and (I believe) James E. Payne are only in the field to provide laugh lines to the anointed candidate, that tower of academic integrity, teaching experience and scholarly accomplishments, Angela Henderson.

First, a comparison between the achievements of the foils and Henderson makes one wonder how in the world any group assessing applicant qualifications for a job like this would construct a group including Henderson. Blackshire-Belay holds a Ph.D. in German Linguistics from Princeton University. She has extensive teaching and administrative experience at universities like Ohio State, Indiana State, Temple, Fayetteville State, Wisconsin-Green Bay and Sonoma State. She has published more than 30 books and articles.

Said Sewell received his Ph.D. in Political Science from Clark Atlanta University. He has nearly a decade of university teaching experience and has served as Dean of Undergraduate Studies and Assistant Provost (current position) at Kent State University. Sewell is the author of several articles and co-authored/edited three books and is currently at work on two more.

James E. Payne (I believe this is the candidate, the university’s announcement included no middle initial) holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Florida State University. He has extensive teaching and administrative experience at Oakland University in Michigan, Eastern Kentucky, Illinois State and the University of New Orleans. Payne has dozens of publications to his credit.

In comparison, here are Angela Henderson’s credentials: Administrative positions at Olive Harvey College and at the Chicago City Colleges District Office under Wayne Watson and Cheryl Hyman. Arguably unsuccessful (based on enrollment statistics) tenure as Vice President of Enrollment Management at Chicago State. She is the recipient of nursing and business degrees from University of Illinois at Chicago. Henderson received her Ph.D. in nursing from UIC on August 11, 2013. Her teaching experience includes a few years at Olive Harvey from 1994 to 1998. As for her scholarly production, that is simply non-existent, although she does have an extensively plagiarized dissertation to her credit.

So, how will Wayne Watson manage to slide her into the provost’s position against formidable opposition? Easy, give extra points for their long-standing personal and professional relationship and then rely on the ridiculous job announcement produced by the university. The job announcement is replete with problematic material. On page 5, under “Knowledge, Skills and Abilities,” one passage reads: “The Provost must have the confidence and competence to speak on behalf of and represent the President to internal and external constituencies . . .” Really, a university provost is supposed to represent its president’s interests? What about the interests of the faculty? What about the interests of the students? Now listen to this set of requirements for the top academic official at Chicago State: “To be successful, the Provost should hold an earned terminal degree and have a level of administrative experience that will add value to CSU’s continuous efforts to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the institution’s human, fiscal and technological resources, required by its academic and co-curricular programs.” Who wrote that bullshit?

As I noted in a previous post on this topic, the requirements are ludicrous, designed to fit the particular experience of Angela Henderson while they provide cover for that other towering academic in the Cook building to reward his long-time crony for her loyal service. As this stupid tableau plays out against the backdrop of an empty campus, it seems inevitable that Wayne Watson will deliver another “screw you” to the students, staff, faculty, administrators and alumni of Chicago State. Is an insatiable desire to practice vindictiveness the only reason he stays on here?

Academic Fraud Angela Henderson One of the Finalists Selected by the Hollins Group.

It's now official. Our plagiarizer-in-chief is magically one of the top four candidates for the position of provost. Her "meet and greet" is scheduled for Tuesday, May 20, 2014. Is there any affront to academic integrity that the Chicago State faculty will not tolerate? I guess we will find out.

Is the Plagiarizing Crony a Finalist for the Provost's Position?: Will Chicago State Finally Reach its Academic Nadir?

According to more than one administrator, the finalists for the provost's position are going to be on campus between May 19 and May 27. Although their identities seem to be a closely-guarded secret, it seems likely that one of them will be that notable academic fraud: Angela Henderson. It has come to my attention that Watson's defense of Henderson's cheating on her dissertation now includes the assertion that she "didn't do anything wrong." I think this raises questions that should be asked: 1) why did Watson serve on Henderson's dissertation committee? what could he possibly contribute to a Ph.D. dissertation in nursing? 2) since the UIC Academic Integrity policy clearly defines "intellectual theft" as "us[ing] someone else's words or work product without giving them credit for the work through adequate attribution", and 3) since Henderson did this repeatedly (as well as lifting passages with no attribution)in her dissertation, how did Watson come to the conclusion that "she did nothing wrong"? 4) Since Watson recently pontificated at the board meeting about how he had "raised standards" for tenure, how can he ignore the obvious cheating by the administrator ostensibly responsible for the university's academic viability and integrity? 5) Are there no academic standards for Chicago State administrators? As neither Henderson nor Watson would qualify for tenure at this university, I think we know the answer to that question.

Since I have concerns about the potential for this search to become nothing more than another Watson-inspired crony-riven travesty, this morning I sent the following e-mail to the unit A faculty at Chicago State:

Dear Colleagues:

Apparently, the Hollins Group has come up with four finalists for the job of Chicago State Provost, none of whom is yet known to the campus generally. I am concerned that the administration, specifically Wayne Watson, will attempt to foist Angela Henderson on the university as the permanent provost. In order that you be fully informed of why she is wholly unqualified for this position, I am circulating this e-mail. Here are the reasons she should be rejected as a possible candidate: given her non-existent scholarly production and limited teaching experience, she is not even qualified for tenure at this university. She might be qualified to apply for an Assistant Professor's position, but nothing else comes to mind; most important, she has demonstrated academic dishonesty by committing extensive plagiarism in her doctoral dissertation. I reported this to UIC five months ago. Although they have apparently not yet made a disciplinary determination, the dissertation is obviously plagiarized. In order for you to make an informed decision on this matter, I am attaching several items for your review. Of course, you can choose to look at as few or as many as you wish. Should you choose to examine all these documents, I believe you will come to the same conclusion I did. Here is what I am attaching: 1) a copy of Angela Henderson's dissertation with plagiarized passages, "padded" bibliographical entries and in-text citations that do not appear in her bibliography highlighted in yellow; 2) the academic integrity policy from the UIC College of Nursing and the plagiarism standards from APA style; 3) the report I submitted to UIC in December 2013. Please note in the report the number of instances where Henderson lifts passages from other literature reviews and presents this material as her own review, often without any attribution. Of course, if you have questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

Bob

I have no idea if Angela Henderson will be among the finalists for the position. However, even considering her for this position (or, given her demonstrated academic dishonesty, any university position) is a slap in the face to the entire university community. I cannot imagine a more inappropriate person to serve as the chief academic officer of any institution. Although I doubt it matters to that out-of-control dictator in the Cook building, I hope my fellow faculty members agree that students, staff, alumni and faculty deserve far better than this.

The Cyber-Bullying (and Harrassment) Policy Comes to Chicago State. Of Course, Only for the Subalterns

Guess what that "distinguished" board of trustees did when they had time to conduct business other than choking out students who had the temerity to challenge Wayne Watson on May 9? They waived the third reading and passed that nine-page cyber-bullying policy. If you are interested in the discussion and the amazingly inarticulate (but painfully and amateurishly pedantic as always) remarks of our faux president, go to the board section of the CSU web site and open the meeting recordings. The discussion of the policy and its passage begins around the forty-minute mark of the first recorded segment. I wonder how the administration will use this new weapon in their war against free expression? What do you think?

Graduation Day Thoughts: Congratulations to Jokari Miller For Graduating! Congratulations to Wayne Watson, Angela Henderson and Anthony Young for Demonstrating Their Ability to Trample the Powerless and Their Committment to Authoritarian Governance

Congratulations to Jokari Miller on his Graduation!

“You see these dictators on their pedestals, surrounded by the bayonets of their soldiers and the truncheons of their police ... yet in their hearts there is unspoken fear. They are afraid of words and thoughts. . .” Winston Churchill, Blood Sweat and Tears.

“We despise and abhor the bully, the brawler, the oppressor, whether in private or public life, but we despise no less the coward and the voluptuary.” Quote attributed to Theodore Roosevelt.

”And when I speak, I don't speak as a Democrat. Or a Republican. Nor an American. I speak as a victim of America's so-called democracy. You and I have never seen democracy - all we've seen is hypocrisy. When we open our eyes today and look around America, we see America not through the eyes of someone who has enjoyed the fruits of Americanism. We see America through the eyes of someone who has been the victim of Americanism. We don't see any American dream. We've experienced only the American nightmare.” Quote attributed to Malxolm X

As Chicago State holds its graduation today, perhaps it is time for sober reflection upon what this university has become. Last Friday, May 9, at the Board of Trustees meeting, this purported school stopped being a public university. As administrators and members of the Chicago State University Board of Trustees looked on and did nothing, Michael Jones of the Chicago State police choked and arrested Jokari Miller, a graduating senior, for wearing a baseball cap to a public open meeting. As Wayne Watson and Anthony Young stood only feet away, the police dragged Miller off to jail. Watson had no response, possibly considering the incident another “job well done” in his never-ending effort to destroy any opposition to his cancerous regime, while Young and the board responded idiotically, by promising to enact a “dress code” for subsequent board meetings.

Today, Watson will preside over another graduation ceremony at Chicago State. Following his Kangaroo Court hearing yesterday, Jokari Miller will not be able to attend the ceremony. There will undoubtedly be flowery and fulsome praise for Watson’s “greatness” and “leadership” from a number of sycophants, with nary a reference to how he and his police treated Miller. Also present at the ceremony will be another key player in the administration’s repression efforts, our faux provost “Doctor” Angela Henderson. Will Anthony Young be there to receive the plaudits of the pro-Watson crowd? I suppose we will just have to wait and see.

One of the board members has publicly drawn a stark distinction between the “rightness” of the Watson administration as opposed to the “wrong” stance of his critics. Taking that Manichean argument into consideration, it seems appropriate to examine the two sides of this coin. In terms of repression and oppression at Chicago State, let us reject the notion that the persons doing the oppressing are actually the victims. Instead of believing the administration’s nonsensical rhetoric on this topic, we can examine the behavior of the persons involved in this latest incident.

The real perpetrators of the “violent, harmful or criminal acts” (dictionary definition of perpetrator) are Wayne Watson and Angela Henderson abetted by the board and its chairman, Anthony Young. Simply read the complaint filed by Willie Preston and Brittany Bailey on Monday, simply consider the brutal response to Miller’s baseball hat on Friday. If you are not completely obtuse, you’ll get a pretty fair idea of how these two “leaders” administer this campus, particularly their efforts to neutralize anyone who disagrees with them. Using the power of the state against both Willie Preston and Jokari Miller, the nightmare twins have continued their destruction of the university as an academic institution. In fact, they have worked assiduously to create a 1984-esque police state here on the south side of Chicago, heedless of the damage they are causing to other human beings.

When you consider the empty seat that should have been occupied today by Jokari Miller, also consider the persons responsible for the travesty. For my inert colleagues, I will not waste any more time exhorting you to action. Perhaps you think you can just “ride this out,” in your office, perhaps you don’t like the persons involved in the opposition to Watson, perhaps you are uncomfortable with the “tone” of our rhetoric, perhaps you simply want to safeguard your own position, perhaps you are unwilling to sacrifice the “social capital” you have accrued, perhaps you simply believe that this kind of corruption will never touch you, perhaps you even support Wayne Watson and his regime. So be it.

In any event, here are the perpetrators to whom you are expected to kow-tow. Shame on them for their gross abuse of the power they are supposed to exercise responsibly. As you walk into the ceremony this morning, keep in mind that under that sparkling edifice runs a foul and polluted stream.