DKW 86 7,424 Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgere...er/15034367.htm Auburn probes grading claimSociology professor accused of fudging grades for student athletes BY CHRISTA TURNER Staff Writer AUBURN, Ala. - Auburn's administration spent a lot of time patting itself on the back after the football team rated tops among public institutions when the NCAA released its academic progress report in March. Now, those lofty numbers are in jeopardy. Professor James Gundlach alleges another sociology professor has been delivering grades to football players for little or no work. Gundlach's accusations first became public Thursday in a New York Times article. Gundlach said professor Thomas Petee, interim chair of the sociology department, gave preferential treatment to Auburn athletes through a directed reading course. Gundlach's now ready for the onslaught from Auburn fans. "I knew hate mail would be coming," Gundlach said. "But I've been through the tough stuff before. I expect they'll make either me the fall guy or Petee the fall guy." Gundlach presented university provost John Heilman and a university investigative committee with information on 18 members of the undefeated 2004 football team, which finished second nationally. Star running back Carnell Williams was one of the 18 who took a combined 97 hours during their career from Petee. Petee carried a workload equal to 3 1/2 professors and taught more than 250 students individually during the 2004-05 academic year. About one quarter were athletes. Petee told the Times, "I basically wore myself out. It was a lot of work." Attempts to reach Petee were not successful. Gundlach said Petee had a difficult time saying no. "In effect, anyone who wanted to do the directed readings, he would do it," Gundlach said. "Word is that if they did anything, they got an 'A' and if they didn't, they got a 'B.' They've been deluging him with requests. He's a criminologist and he started doing it not only for criminology students, but decided since he was the chair, he had the right to offer it under the sociology department." Numbers drop Gundlach said players received 81.1 A's and 16.8 B's. But those numbers dropped to 40.9 A's and 51.7 B's after a confrontation he had with Petee. Gundlach said a grade point average of 3.31 in Pette's classes compared to 2.14 in all of their other classes. On Thursday, Auburn President Ed Richardson released an internal press release to Auburn faculty saying there was an ongoing investigation into "anonymous" allegations of grade-fixing. Richardson, who is in Hawaii, was unavailable for comment. He won't return until Monday. Auburn athletic director Jay Jacobs was unavailable and did not return phone calls. In his release, Richardson said, "Auburn has been, and is, fortunate to have many dedicated instructors, who, like us, will not tolerate academic misconduct. We will deal with this issue as we have dealt with other challenges -- directly and openly." Gundlach said he talked to the Times after becoming frustrated over a lack of concern not only from Auburn administrators, but also from professors in the sociology department. "There were students coming through there really not doing any work," Gundlach said. "It was being an embarrassment. How can you maintain standards when the chair of the department doesn't? I raised it as an issue in the department but they didn't seem to see a problem with it." Gundlach said he took his evidence to Heilman in the spring of 2005, unaware until reading the Times story that Heilman had met with Petee and assumed nothing had happened. Following Heilman's meeting with Petee, the number of directed reading courses offered by Petee dropped dramatically. Heilman said in his statement that he appointed a committee to investigate the claim but it isn't complete. He said a public report would not be issued until it was finished and he would not comment on it until that time. "Academic integrity is at the foundation of every university," Heilman said in the release. "The office of the provost takes any concern related to academic processes at the university seriously." In the Times story, Petee denied favoring athletes, saying only a "handful of them" were in his directed readings. Williams said in the story he took two classes from Petee in the spring of 2005 after he finished his football eligibility. Former defensive end Doug Langenfeld said he picked up a course with Petee about 10 weeks into the 2004 fall semester so he could stay eligible for Auburn's upcoming Sugar Bowl game. This isn't the first time Auburn has been in the spotlight unfavorably. In 2003, Auburn was under probation from the Southern Association of Schools and Colleges, which alleged Auburn's trustees wielded too much power over the athletic department. Auburn football coach Tommy Tuberville, who was not available Thursday, was almost ousted by a clandestine meeting between Auburn officials and Louisville head football coach Bobby Petrino. Williams and Langenfeld said in the article that they received help in setting up classes with Petee from Virgil Starks, Auburn's senior associate athletic director for academic services, and academic counselor Brett Wohlers. The folks pushing this story have been avoiding the 800 pound gorilla: acted to stop this immediately. The press folks are now seeing it. There will bemore about his coming. Folks, this stuff stopped after the spring 2005 semester. It has been stopped over a year now!!! Anyone in America STOOPID enough to believe that Gundlach didnt know it had already been stopped? There are more and more sour grapes around this story everyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tombigbeetiger 223 Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 pretty obvious to me...left-winger trying to further a" cause", and that "cause " is the usual "cause".......THEMSELVES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bottomfeeder 244 Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 pretty obvious to me...left-winger trying to further a" cause", and that "cause " is the usual "cause".......THEMSELVES 248120[/snapback] I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 Can there be a defemation lawsuit down the road? I hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,424 Posted July 15, 2006 Author Share Posted July 15, 2006 Can there be a defemation lawsuit down the road? I hope so. 248124[/snapback] Dont be surprised if this actually happens. The NYT knew all this before they wrote the story. On so many levels there is just nothing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKCAUB 0 Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 Can there be a defemation lawsuit down the road? I hope so. 248124[/snapback] Probably not. Defamation and slander are the hardest to prove for one thing. 248127[/snapback] However...the suit should be filed anyway. It would show a "we're not gonna take it" attitude from the university...and it would cost the Times money to defend it...perhaps making them unwilling to do it again. I'm sick and tired of their crap.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mec814 0 Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 Can there be a defemation lawsuit down the road? I hope so. 248124[/snapback] Probably not. Defamation and slander are the hardest to prove for one thing. 248127[/snapback] However...the suit should be filed anyway. It would show a "we're not gonna take it" attitude from the university...and it would cost the Times money to defend it...perhaps making them unwilling to do it again. I'm sick and tired of their crap.... 248132[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RadioWryn 0 Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 I'm hearing from within the sociology department the main reason this guy's classes were easy was a 30-point scale. Hello! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,876 Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 Can there be a defemation lawsuit down the road? I hope so. 248124[/snapback] What are you claiming was untrue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 327 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 Can there be a defemation lawsuit down the road? I hope so. 248124[/snapback] What are you claiming was untrue? 248238[/snapback] Its pretty obvious AU was attacked in this article. Proper investigations should have been done by the journalist to really figure out what was going on. I can run to the OA news tomorrow and tell them I know exactly who shot Kennedy. They'd be insane if they ran my story as pure fact. No difference in the situation at hand. If the internal investigation comes up empty, then AU definately needs to take action against the NYT, as well as the local media outlets that can't even get the NYT story straight. If some prominent and/or well placed Bama boosters were behind this, I believe the state should prosecute them as well. Its one thing to be rivals on the football field, but AU and uat should be cooperating academically. These idiots trying to give AU a black eye directly hurts the Alabama education system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,876 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 Can there be a defemation lawsuit down the road? I hope so. 248124[/snapback] What are you claiming was untrue? 248238[/snapback] Its pretty obvious AU was attacked in this article. Proper investigations should have been done by the journalist to really figure out what was going on. I can run to the OA news tomorrow and tell them I know exactly who shot Kennedy. They'd be insane if they ran my story as pure fact. No difference in the situation at hand. If the internal investigation comes up empty, then AU definately needs to take action against the NYT, as well as the local media outlets that can't even get the NYT story straight. If some prominent and/or well placed Bama boosters were behind this, I believe the state should prosecute them as well. Its one thing to be rivals on the football field, but AU and uat should be cooperating academically. These idiots trying to give AU a black eye directly hurts the Alabama education system. 248284[/snapback] So what alleged "facts" do you think are suspect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keoson7 28 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 How about the fact that other students were using the class to raise their GPA's, like students at all schools do. No % of the other 75% of students GPA in relation to the grade in this class were given, just the FB players?. Making the facts fit that part of the story leaving out non athletes GPA's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,876 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 How about the fact that other students were using the class to raise their GPA's, like students at all schools do. No % of the other 75% of students GPA in relation to the grade in this class were given, just the FB players?. Making the facts fit that part of the story leaving out non athletes GPA's. 248287[/snapback] Newsflash! Journalist writes story with a slant that fails to show balance and context! Happens everyday. A frivilous lawsuit is hardly the answer. It would be summarily dismissed, but would also open the door for the NYT to subpoena student records they could not otherwise obtain and keep the story going longer. Probably the single most stupid thing Auburn could do. The report from the investigation should be the next story and that allows Auburn to frame the context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,424 Posted July 16, 2006 Author Share Posted July 16, 2006 Tex, for someone that spends so much time thinking about politics, You amaze me at how litle you understand how the world actually works. IE, Bama sues the NCAA and Fulmer and find some damaging stuff out. The Lawsuit was pure BS ferom day one. It was clearly non-actionable at any level. The NCAA is excused, etc. The Lawsuit shut people up while the discovery phase went on. It revealed a lot of damaging stuff on who was involved. It went literally nowhere but it had an effect that was beneficial for oneside. Maybe we get a lawsuit going, not saying it goes anywhere, but in the process we shut down the NYT smear machine. Therby accoplishing exactly what we need to have happen anyway. Discovery is a bitch...So are paybacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,876 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 Tex, for someone that spends so much time thinking about politics, You amaze me at how litle you understand how the world actually works.IE, Bama sues the NCAA and Fulmer and find some damaging stuff out. The Lawsuit was pure BS ferom day one. It was clearly non-actionable at any level. The NCAA is excused, etc. The Lawsuit shut people up while the discovery phase went on. It revealed a lot of damaging stuff on who was involved. It went literally nowhere but it had an effect that was beneficial for oneside. Maybe we get a lawsuit going, not saying it goes anywhere, but in the process we shut down the NYT smear machine. Therby accoplishing exactly what we need to have happen anyway. Discovery is a bitch...So are paybacks. 248327[/snapback] I, on the other hand, am not amazed at how little you understand how the world works. The NCAA took action against Alabama which Bama could then contest and seek to discover the basis for the action. The NYT printed a story. I haven't heard anyone here point out how that story is untrue. We just don't like the spin of it. We want more context. More balance. More perspective. I feel that way everytime I pick up a newspaper or watch the news on TV. Discover what? Who is their primary source? Gundlach. He had the access and he admits it. Who are their secondary sources? Former Auburn players they interviewed. What deep dark secret do you think Auburn will reveal that so embarasses the Times? What they don't have are actual academic records of the student-athletes. Those are protected by privacy laws which FOI requests can't reach. Subpoenas can, though. If there is a law suit, the Times has an avenue to "discover" plenty. And print tons more stories, just as slanted as they want. And there is not a damn thing we could do about it. The NYT is not the NCAA. The Times would love for us to sue them. They hope we're that stupid. I would be shocked if the actual powers that be at Auburn are that stupid. Auburn is doing an investigation. Auburn will make a report. Auburn will have a press conference and make a strong stand (I hope) for academic integrity. The practice in question will operate with greater parameters and consistency. This will be shown (I think) to be the result of an overly accomodating professor who provided many students, mostly non-athletes, with an opportunity for easy grades. Auburn is already in a position to shape the next story. Damage control is our next step. Your recommendations would escalate the damage and fail to advance a single Auburn objective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKCAUB 0 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 Can there be a defemation lawsuit down the road? I hope so. 248124[/snapback] What are you claiming was untrue? 248238[/snapback] Its pretty obvious AU was attacked in this article. Proper investigations should have been done by the journalist to really figure out what was going on. I can run to the OA news tomorrow and tell them I know exactly who shot Kennedy. They'd be insane if they ran my story as pure fact. No difference in the situation at hand. If the internal investigation comes up empty, then AU definately needs to take action against the NYT, as well as the local media outlets that can't even get the NYT story straight. If some prominent and/or well placed Bama boosters were behind this, I believe the state should prosecute them as well. Its one thing to be rivals on the football field, but AU and uat should be cooperating academically. These idiots trying to give AU a black eye directly hurts the Alabama education system. 248284[/snapback] So what alleged "facts" do you think are suspect? 248285[/snapback] Half truths (he didn't give the positive points made by Caddy, et al) are lies...and the guy misrepresented himself to get on campus access to people...for starters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLink02 8 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 In terms of AU wanting to sue the NYT for a defamation suit, I think the odds of that being successful are slim to none. Though I understand wanting to sue, I just think the evidence is not even close to being there to sue for defamation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKCAUB 0 Posted July 16, 2006 Share Posted July 16, 2006 In terms of AU wanting to sue the NYT for a defamation suit, I think the odds of that being successful are slim to none.Though I understand wanting to sue, I just think the evidence is not even close to being there to sue for defamation 248380[/snapback] I agree...but I'd do it none the less.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.