Does anyone have any idea...

[tarheeltiger 0]

Anyone?

Anyone?

Bueller?

[cleburnecountytigerfan 0]

I am not sure why the NYT did the story about Chette Williams. I think Grundluch sought out the NYT to do the story on academic fraud. I think Grundluch compiled a bunch of information he thought proved Auburn was committing academic fraud and sent this information to the NYT. Once they received this information, they ran with it. Any newspaper in the country would have probably done the same thing if Grundluch had sent this information to their newspaper.

[TexasTiger 12,876]

I am not sure why the NYT did the story about Chette Williams. I think Grundluch sought out the NYT  to do the story on academic fraud. I think Grundluch compiled a bunch of information he thought proved Auburn was committing academic fraud and sent this information to the NYT. Once they received this information, they ran with it. Any newspaper in the country would have probably done the same thing if Grundluch had sent this information to their newspaper.

248367[/snapback]

No! No! It's an evil plot! The NYT hates America, Apple Pie and Auburn University, not necesssarily in that order. They would never have run the same story on Alabama because they are in the Turd's back pocket! Gundlach is a pawn! A patsy! Like Oswald! Bama's in the grassy knoll taking aim again!

[SouthLink02 8]

I dont think the NYT has anything against AU

They would have done the same story had they had the info on UF, UT, or UGA

[stoic-one 1,544]

If it sells papers, anyone would have published it...

Not saying it is right or wrong, just the way it is.

[aumoore 0]

For what its worth I took the NYT off my AvantGo account. This had nothing to do with Auburn.

[Grider 1]

I think it is not a thing against Auburn, I think it is a thing about wanting to find fault in anything good to come out of any place south and west of the Hudson River.

"I see success not from here, therefor I must find fault in it to make myself feel better."

[DKW 86 7,424]

Anyone on this thread want to show us non-believers another story hacking apart another school as unfairly as this?

It is frustrating to have people you know and respect look at the sun setting in the west and tell everyone it is the sun rising in the east...

I have had several very telling conversations with folks at Auburn. If you cant see the lynch mob in this story.....well, words just fail me. It is like watching someone pound your head in and then apologizing to them because they broke a sweat kicking your

Especially with the stuff I posted in the Barn, some of you folks dont have anywhere to hide. You are uninformed and refuse anything that makes you have to get up off your and do anything.

[tombigbeetiger 223]

its a hatchet job....the traitor,selena roberts, and the bammerfart warren st. john are the reason that this story traveled....the DRAKE GROUP is the reason that it got started

[Ranger12 46]

Ok, I'll bait.

The NYT is full of writers that are of a "superior intelligence" then the rest of us. They are made up of graduates from UAT, Notre Dame, USC, etc. The can't stand to see the attention that a "cow college" is getting and there is no way we are graduating as many student athletes that we claim. That would actually mean that they were not superior to us, thus their respective schools were not superior to that cow college.

That may sound silly and I admit that I got a little silly with that on purpose, but the bottom line is that they have connections to UAT, like St. John, so instead of exposing the better know colleged like ND, UAT, USC, etc, they choose to pick on little ole' Auburn. Are swimming and diving programs shows how diverse and succesful our athletic department is. They can't let Auburn start being recognized at the same level as Stanford, USC, UCLA, Notre Dame, UAT, etc. Since the paper has strong ties to the UAT journalism department, why not go after UAT's in state rival?

Like David said, if you can't see UAT's hand in all of this then you are being naive. Why else would the NYT go after us when they could go after schools that are alot more well known on a national scale. There is nothing wrong or uncommon with the IS program they wrote about. It is a flat out smear campaign to benefit their UAT connections.

[TexasTiger 12,876]

There is nothing wrong or uncommon with the IS program they wrote about. It is a flat out smear campaign to benefit their UAT connections.

248469[/snapback]

You apparently haven't read the article. It is very uncommon the way it was done. It would be perceived as a problem anywhere, but the Times wouldn't likely pay much attention if it were Troy State.

The constant whining on this board has really gone to a new and annoying level.

[GalensGhost 0]

There is nothing wrong or uncommon with the IS program they wrote about. It is a flat out smear campaign to benefit their UAT connections.

248469[/snapback]

You apparently haven't read the article. It is very uncommon the way it was done. It would be perceived as a problem anywhere, but the Times wouldn't likely pay much attention if it were Troy State.

The constant whining on this board has really gone to a new and annoying level.

248476[/snapback]

TT, I respectfully disagree. I spent the last few days talking to people I know in higher education at all levels. It's one of the few things on which I can speak with relative authority.

I can tell you unequivocally that despite the spin put on this situation by the New York Times, this "situation" is no different at Auburn than it is at any school in the country. There are professors who overextend themselves in an attempt to help STUDENTS, not athletes. There are classes that require little work. There are classes that require no attendance. There are classes that can be completed in three or four weeks with even a halfway effort.

If you can't see the malice in the NYT article, if you can't see the orchestration, if you really take the position that Auburn should bow its head in shame and "do something" then I just don't know what to say.

[freebody 0]

The constant whining on this board has really gone to a new and annoying level.

248476[/snapback]

Says the guy with a half screen's worth of quotes in his signature........

[Ranger12 46]

Where I come from and how I was raised, it's not called whining when you stand up or defend something you believe in. It's called having some freakin' nutts! If you would rather let a bunch of twits bash you school for something that every dang school in the country does, then that is something you need to live with. However, don't come be coming on this board and call me a whiner for taking a stand!

[AuNuma1 1]

I think Grundluch compiled a bunch of information he thought proved Auburn was committing academic fraud and sent this information to the NYT.

248367[/snapback]

So if this all turns out to be a bunch of hot air can Auburn do anything about this? to the NYT? to this disgruntled prof? can he be fired for this?

[crashman009 4]

Ive been gone for the last 2 weeks so I dont know that much about this. But could this result in bad consequences for Auburn?

[TexasTiger 12,876]

Where I come from and how I was raised, it's not called whining when you stand up or defend something you believe in. It's called having some freakin' nutts! If you would rather let a bunch of twits bash you school for something that every dang school in the country does, then that is something you need to live with. However, don't come be coming on this board and call me a whiner for taking a stand!

248507[/snapback]

What's your stand? Crying, "The Bammers did it!"?

I was raised to recognize when I screwed up and to accept responsibility for it, even if it were a worthless weasel that pointed it out. I guess you were raised to blame someone else.

Every school may have easy courses that many athletes take. This particular practice is not common.

[TexasTiger 12,876]

If you can't see the malice in the NYT article, if you can't see the orchestration, if you really take the position that Auburn should bow its head in shame and "do something" then I just don't know what to say.

248495[/snapback]

I know that you are actually bright enough to know that you just unfairly and inaccurately characterized my position. If you've read all my posts on this issue, you wouldn't reach that conclusion. Auburn should recognize the problem, fix it, and then frame it. Auburn couldn't control how this story got out there, but it can go along way to bringing a more favorable ending to it.

[TexasTiger 12,876]

Ive been gone for the last 2 weeks so I dont know that much about this. But could this result in bad consequences for Auburn?

248519[/snapback]

Based on what we know, I would think it is doubtful there was an NCAA violation. I do think we have the possibility of lingering bad press, especially if we don't get out in front of the story, correct what needs correcting, and placing the story in the proper perspective--- an over-accomodating professor went too far in providing all students who asked, athlete and non-athlete alike, directed reading courses. We should probably find other examples of non-athlete students who may have had circumstances that took them away from campus much of a semester, as did Carnell, who took similar courses.

The challenge for Auburn is to provide context and perspective without seeming to make excuses.

[GalensGhost 0]

If you can't see the malice in the NYT article, if you can't see the orchestration, if you really take the position that Auburn should bow its head in shame and "do something" then I just don't know what to say.

248495[/snapback]

I know that you are actually bright enough to know that you just unfairly and inaccurately characterized my position. If you've read all my posts on this issue, you wouldn't reach that conclusion. Auburn should recognize the problem, fix it, and then frame it. Auburn couldn't control how this story got out there, but it can go along way to bringing a more favorable ending to it.

248524[/snapback]

You assume that there IS a significant problem. Based on what I've learned over the last few days, I'm not inclined to concede that. If this was something that was a practice by only one professor and was only done at Auburn, then I would have a different take. It is, however, a common and accepted practice at the vast majority of schools. Administrators RARELY get involved in the number of courses of this type that a particular instructor offered unless there were complaints by students or a pattern of complaints by division or department administrators. As you can tell, this simply wasn't the case here. ONE person didn't like it. ONE person breached the code of ethics and failed to follow proper procedure. ONE person put their own personal agenda ahead of anyone else's and why? Because that ONE person didn't think it could be done? Because that ONE person was jealous that students took classes other than his? Who knows what the motives of that ONE person are, but it's borderline insanity to think they are as pure and high handed as he now claims.

If the directed reading/individual study type courses themselves, or the load that this one particular professor bore are a problem, then the problems are universal and should be addressed at a higher level than Auburn University. Based on what I now know, this isn't Auburn's problem, it's everybody's -- or it's no one's depending on your viewpoint.

Sorry if I characterized you unfairly, but given the above, if you take out the hype, it's pretty clear this was an organized, orchestrated, intentional attempt to draw negative publicity to Auburn.

[TexasTiger 12,876]

If you can't see the malice in the NYT article, if you can't see the orchestration, if you really take the position that Auburn should bow its head in shame and "do something" then I just don't know what to say.

248495[/snapback]

I know that you are actually bright enough to know that you just unfairly and inaccurately characterized my position. If you've read all my posts on this issue, you wouldn't reach that conclusion. Auburn should recognize the problem, fix it, and then frame it. Auburn couldn't control how this story got out there, but it can go along way to bringing a more favorable ending to it.

248524[/snapback]

You assume that there IS a significant problem. Based on what I've learned over the last few days, I'm not inclined to concede that. If this was something that was a practice by only one professor and was only done at Auburn, then I would have a different take. It is, however, a common and accepted practice at the vast majority of schools. Administrators RARELY get involved in the number of courses of this type that a particular instructor offered unless there were complaints by students or a pattern of complaints by division or department administrators. As you can tell, this simply wasn't the case here. ONE person didn't like it. ONE person breached the code of ethics and failed to follow proper procedure. ONE person put their own personal agenda ahead of anyone else's and why? Because that ONE person didn't think it could be done? Because that ONE person was jealous that students took classes other than his? Who knows what the motives of that ONE person are, but it's borderline insanity to think they are as pure and high handed as he now claims.

If the directed reading/individual study type courses themselves, or the load that this one particular professor bore are a problem, then the problems are universal and should be addressed at a higher level than Auburn University. Based on what I now know, this isn't Auburn's problem, it's everybody's -- or it's no one's depending on your viewpoint.

Sorry if I characterized you unfairly, but given the above, if you take out the hype, it's pretty clear this was an organized, orchestrated, intentional attempt to draw negative publicity to Auburn.

248530[/snapback]

Every article I've read has professors expressing significant surprise with the number of directed readings Petee did. I haven't seen anyone else say they've done the same. Even Petee's mentor, Kowalski, said it was a mistake in judgment because he was too accomodating. I haven't seen anyone say, "yeah, that's common."

Every school has easy courses and maybe even other structured "distance" or "correspondence" courses which may be no less easy than these seem to be. When the light is shined on those, however, schools should look to make sure they are consistent with what the school wants its academic standards to be. I suspect other institutions may be doing that right now.

So what is the proper response to any orchestration of this article in your opinion? About the only thing I've heard is "sue 'em!" I've mostly heard whining, though, and not any meaningful course of action.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

I dont think the NYT has anything against AU

They would have done the same story had they had the info on UF, UT, or UGA

248375[/snapback]

You don't think? Now that i can agree with dawg. You don't have a clue what you are talking about so maybe you should abide by the old saying and just cool it before you expose yourself any further. Besides it's not your fight so just let it be. If we need any dawg hel we will bark.

[bigsixfive 327]

Every article I've read has professors expressing significant surprise with the number of directed readings Petee did.  I haven't seen anyone else say they've done the same.  Even Petee's mentor, Kowalski, said it was a mistake in judgment because he was too accomodating.  I haven't seen anyone say, "yeah, that's common."

248535[/snapback]

Do you trust the reporter to accurately quote others and express their true concern? Its been shown mathematically (DKW) and by personal testimony (Cadillac) that his other "facts" are pretty far off base, and truths and actuality have been misconstrued. Can you really place trust in the reporter to adequately represent others, when his record of doing so isn't good?

The numbers do seem high to me, but I'm not a sociology professor. I'm an engineer, so a big class to me was 50. I'm not really one to say what is too much, only Petee knows his limits. The NYT guy is perhaps even less qualified than myself to make a judgement on this professor. Now had he visited this scenario among other schools (heck, even other departments within AU) and educated himself on the practice, then yes, he could have provided a more justified arguement. Instead, he comes up with a supposed quote from Petee's mentor. I know my mentor would have no comment to a national media outlet if I slipped up on an issue that should be taken care of in house.

[DKW 86 7,424]

The constant whining on this board has really gone to a new and annoying level.

248476[/snapback]

Says the guy with a half screen's worth of quotes in his signature........

248501[/snapback]

Now, THAT was funny!

[TexasTiger 12,876]

Every article I've read has professors expressing significant surprise with the number of directed readings Petee did.  I haven't seen anyone else say they've done the same.  Even Petee's mentor, Kowalski, said it was a mistake in judgment because he was too accomodating.  I haven't seen anyone say, "yeah, that's common."

248535[/snapback]

Do you trust the reporter to accurately quote others and express their true concern? Its been shown mathematically (DKW) and by personal testimony (Cadillac) that his other "facts" are pretty far off base, and truths and actuality have been misconstrued. Can you really place trust in the reporter to adequately represent others, when his record of doing so isn't good?

The numbers do seem high to me, but I'm not a sociology professor. I'm an engineer, so a big class to me was 50. I'm not really one to say what is too much, only Petee knows his limits. The NYT guy is perhaps even less qualified than myself to make a judgement on this professor. Now had he visited this scenario among other schools (heck, even other departments within AU) and educated himself on the practice, then yes, he could have provided a more justified arguement. Instead, he comes up with a supposed quote from Petee's mentor. I know my mentor would have no comment to a national media outlet if I slipped up on an issue that should be taken care of in house.

248570[/snapback]

Apparently, after meeting with the Provost, he cut back significantly so perhaps Petee doesn't know his own limits. David posted about similar situations at other schools, but the numbers of IS per professors still paled in comparison. They thought one guy was exceptionally high with 27 students. Petee had almost 10 times that amount.