institutional integrity in crisis

8/2/2019 INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY IN CRISIS

1/29

KEAN UNIVERSITY:

INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY IN CRISIS

Submitted by Kean University faculty, professional staff,students, and alumni to the Middle States Commission on Higher

Education.

February 16, 2012

The Commissions Team Visits: Conducting and Hosting anEvaluation urges visiting teams to meet a wide spectrum ofcampus constituencies. We invite the members of the team tomeet with us during their visit to the Kean campus. We may be

contacted at:

Middle States Working GroupPO Box 9550Elizabeth, NJ 07202-9550EMAIL: [email protected]


2/29

2

STANDARD 4

The governing body is ultimately accountable for theacademic quality, fiscal and academic integrity, academicplanning, assets, and financial health of the institution.

- Characteristics of Excellence, p. 13.

The individual Boards of Trustees, through theadministrators they hired, now had direct authority over allmatters concerning the supervision and operation of theinstitutions, including fiscal affairs, institutionalplanning, construction and procurement contracts, employment,bonding and borrowing, compensation of staff, tuition andfees, controversies and disputes, and programs and degreeofferings.

- Vulnerable to Abuse: The Importance of Restoring

Accountability, Transparency and Oversight to

Public Higher Education Governance, p. 12; cf. p.3).
http://www.state.nj.us/sci/pdf/HigherEdFinalReport.pdf


3/29

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Preamble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42. Allegations of Academic Fraud . . . . . . . . . 5

3. Impaired Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

4. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)Investigation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

5. Assessment Threat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

6. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

7. Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

9. Exhibits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25?

Last year we submitted a third-party report to the

Commission. That report is available at:

http://concernedkeanfaculty.blogspot.com/2011/07/kean-university-institution-in-crisis_9772.html

3
http://concernedkeanfaculty.blogspot.com/2011/07/kean-university-institution-in-crisis_9772.htmlhttp://concernedkeanfaculty.blogspot.com/2011/07/kean-university-institution-in-crisis_9772.htmlhttp://concernedkeanfaculty.blogspot.com/2011/07/kean-university-institution-in-crisis_9772.htmlhttp://concernedkeanfaculty.blogspot.com/2011/07/kean-university-institution-in-crisis_9772.html


4/29

In the sequel call that report Kean Crisis I, followed by thepage number.

4


5/29

1. PREAMBLE

To say that Kean University is an institution in crisisis truer today than it was a year ago. Kean Crisis Iexplains

the condition of the university then; the following fivefactors have worsened the situation since:

The Commissions warning that Kean is not compliant withStandards 7 and 14

The Presidents threatening remarks when he firstdiscussed assessment publicly

The exclusion of the University Senate from theuniversitys assessment effort

The discovery that the President falsified hispresentation of his professional credentials

A National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA)investigation which alleges, among other things, thatadministrators changed grades to allow athletesparticipation in athletic competitions

Since last June, due to the attention the Commissionswarning and the NCAA investigation have generated, mediareports about Kean have been overwhelmingly negative. Thisreports bibliography lists some of this coverage. Also, forthe first time, the media has begun to report about politicalinterference in university affairs: [(Hehl 2011a); (Hehl2011b); (Hehl 2012b); (Hehl & Bober 2012); (Editorial, Farahisyndrome 2012); (Pizzuro 2012); (Wilson, 2010)]. Last year wereported this interference to the Commission.1

Last Aprils visiting team confirmed the universitysnoncompliance with Standards 7 and 14. The visiting team alsodiagnosed correctly the need to establish, promote, foster,sustain and demonstrate a culture of evidence and assessment(visiting teams report, p. 5); but not identifying Keansnoncompliance with Standard 6 (Integrity) was the visitingteams failure2.

We devote this report to explaining the universityspersistent noncompliance with Standard 6.

We report these events to the Commission not to urge itto resolve them; we know that is not the Commissionsfunction. Instead, we report them for the Commission toassess if Kean University complies with accreditation

1Kean Crisis I, pp. 45-51; cf. pp. 12-17.2Kean Crisis Idealt with Standard 6. See pp. 29-39 & 45-55.

5


6/29

standards, especially Standard 6. Restoring the universitysintegrity and reputation is our motivation.

6


7/29

2.ALLEGATIONS OF ACADEMIC FRAUD3

On November 29, 2011, Associate Professor JamesCastiglione wrote to Ada Morell, Chair of Kean's Board ofTrustees. In the letter, Castiglione informed Morell that"the available evidence indicates academic fraud has occurredin multiple presentations by President Dawood Farahi of his

own academic credentials" (Exhibit A, p. 1). On December 13,2011, Castiglione wrote to Morell again (Exhibit B). Morellreplied three days later (Exhibit C).

Castiglione wrote to Governor Christie on January 19,2012 (Exhibit D, p. 1). Following President Farahi's advicein 2009 and 2011, the Board hired McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney,and Carpenter, a law firm, to assist the universityadministration in labor management issues (Exhibit E).Sometime between the dates on Exhibits A, B, C, and D, theBoard hired McElroy et al. to investigate the allegationsagainst Farahi. Doubts about McElroy et al.'s independence to

conduct this investigation motivated Castiglione's letter to

3 Most documents this section cites are available atwww.kft2187.org/farahi. If documents surface after we mailthis report to the Commission they will be added to this we bsite. All exhibits follow the bibliography at the end of thisreport.

7

STANDARD 6

INTEGRITY

In all its activities, whether internal or external,an institution should keep its promises, honor itscontracts and commitments, and represent itself truthfully.

Educational institutions should exemplify within theirown working environment those qualities that they endeavorto impart to their students.

-
http://www.kft2187.org/farahihttp://www.kft2187.org/farahi


8/29

the governor. The potential for retaliation against whistleblowers motivated Weingartens letter (Exhibit D, p. 2).

As of the date of this report, McElroy et al. isinvestigating. The media has published several articles,

which the bibliography in this document lists.

8


9/29

Farahi has claimed that the charges of academic fraudagainst him are false; "hate, prejudice and greed" fuelsthem, he added (Haddon 2012). About two weeks later, headmitted that his resumes contain errors but he was not

responsible for them; Kean's clerical staff was (Corbett2012).Our conclusions and the supporting evidence follow.

Titles of alleged papers in quotation marks follow thelettersA, B, and C. Below each paper's title we list initalics the journals where Farahi claims acceptance orpublication. Later, in D, we refer to what appears to be analleged book.

A. "Patterns of Administrative Efficiency"

Administrative Science Quarterly(Exhibit F)

Administration and Society(Exhibit G)

Management Science (Exhibit H)

B. "Determining Your MIS Needs"Public Administration Review(Exhibit I)

C. "Fiscal Control and Budget Policy"

Administrative Science Quarterly(Exhibit F)

Exhibits F, G, H, and I contain our inquiries to thosejournals and their editors' replies.

In the CV accompanying his February 2, 1982, letter ofapplication to Kean, Farahi claimed that Administration andSocietyaccepted "Patterns of Administrative Efficiency"(Exhibit J, p. 4). When he completed the Kean's Applicationand Qualifications Form, dated March 15, 1983, he claimedthat Administrative Science Quarterlyaccepted the same paper(Exhibit J, p. 6). In other words, in his application for

employment at Kean, Farahi claimed that two journals hadaccepted "Patterns of Administrative Efficiency." This isimplausible. Academic journals rarely, if ever, consider forpublication or publish articles other journals are evaluatingor have published. Exhibits F and G show neither journalaccepted this paper.

Notice Exhibit F's language:

9


10/29

ASQ has never published an article by Dawood Farahi,nor have we ever accepted an article by Dawood Farahithat has not been published (Exhibit F, p. 1).

10


11/29

Professor Wamsley, Administration and Societys editor,was also clear:

We cannot find a manuscript by Dr. Farahi in any of ourback issues, nor do we still have any copies ofmanuscripts that might have been held in our filesawaiting revision by the authors earlier than 2008.Therefore we conclude that no such manuscript waspublished (Exhibit G, p.1).

"Patterns of Administrative Efficiency" appears inFarahi's CVs throughout his employment at Kean. A 1985 CVlists Management Science as the publisher (Exhibit K, p. 3).When Kean's Master in Public Administration Program appliedfor accreditation in 1987, Management Science again appearsas publisher (Exhibit L, p. 5). Exhibit H shows ManagementScience has neither accepted nor published this paper. As itseditor replied:

Management Science publishes everything we accept.There is a delay from the accept decision to thearticle appearing in print because of the typesettingand production process. I have been told that we haveno papers in that stage which were accepted more than 1year ago. We never accept a paper that we know appearsin another journal (Exhibit H, p. 2).4

Exhibit K, p. 3 and Exhibit L, p. 5, give 1981 as theyear when Management Science published Patterns ofAdministrative Efficiency. Farahi applied for employment atKean in 1982 and 1983 (Exhibit J, pp. 1 & 6-7, respectively);but Exhibit J, a 1982 and 1983 document, lists Administrationand Societyand Administrative Science Quarterly, notManagement Science, as the journals that published Patternsof Administrative Efficiency.

"Determining Your MIS Needs" and "Fiscal Control andBudget Policy" appear in a 1990 CV (Exhibit M, p. 2).

Exhibits F and I show that the journals mentioned in that CVhave not published these papers.

In the CV Farahi used in 2002 to apply to Keanspresidency, Farahi claimed to have "[a]ssisted Dr. Eleanor

4Management Sciences editor confirmed to (Kiley 2012) hisreply to us.

11


12/29

Laudicina with the first self-study of the MPA program"(Exhibit O, p. 4). That self-study lists "Patterns ofAdministrative Efficiency" as a publication (Exhibit L, p.5); hence, because assisting Dr. Laudicina presupposes

personal involvement, Exhibit O belies Farahis claim thatclerical staff is responsible for the errors in his CVs(Corbett 2012).

Notice that Exhibit O, the most public of Farahi's CVs,lists no publications.

D. "Strategic Management: A Decision-Making Approach"

Franklin Watts

Farahi claimed this questionable publication when heapplied for employment at Kean (Exhibit J, p. 6) and in his1985 and 1990 CVs (Exhibit K, p. 2 & Exhibit M, p.2,respectively). We found neither the book nor the data aboutit in the databases where they ought to be if published.

The Library of Congress does the initial cataloging ofbooks published in the United States and abroad; the OnlineComputer Library Center (OCLS) is the database containingthis information, which librarians worldwide use to catalogbooks before adding them to their collections. Cataloguedbooks appear in http://www.worldcat.org. Exhibit Q containsworldcat.org's and BookFinder.com's output.

In a 2008 CV to the National Association of Schools of

Public Affairs and Administration (NASPAA), the agency thataccredits Kean's Public Administration Program, Farahiclaimed "[o]ver 50 technical articles in major publications"(Exhibit P, p. 2). The evidence shows this claim is false.

As the exhibits show, Farahi did not use properbibliographic format (APA, CMS, MLA, etc.)5; instead, he gaveeach paper's title followed only by a journal's name; for thealleged book, he gave title and publisher only. Findingsources is easy when authors format bibliographicalreferences correctly; proper formatting differentiates booksfrom journals. As we noted earlier, the claimed publisher,

not the bibliographic format, led us to assume that Farahiintended to present Strategic Management as a book. This lackof bibliographic specificity made our investigation difficultand time consuming.

Other problems with Farahis presentation of his

5 (Kiley 2012) made the same observation.12


13/29

credentials are:

In his 1990 CV he claimed that in 1985 he had been a memberof Public Administration Reviews editorial board (Exhibit

M, p. 2); Farahis name is not included in the list ofeditors for all issues of the journal published in1985(Exhibit R; cf. Exhibit I).

His dissertation appears with two titles:

- Coordination and Control: A Cybernatic Approach toStudy [sic] of Organizational Effectiveness (ExhibitK, p. 3; Exhibit M, p. 2)

13


14/29

- Administrative Efficiency and Information Systems(Exhibit N, p. 1). In 1987, Keans PublicAdministration Department submitted a proposal tothe Department of Personnel of the State of New

Jersey. In that proposal, Farahi also used thisfalse title (Exhibit T, p. 3)

The dissertations correct title is Economic Growth &System Stability: An Empirical Investigation of the

Effects of Rapid Economic Growth on Political Stability

(Exhibit S).6

In 1994, 1997, and in 2008, Farahi claimed to have beenActing Academic Dean at Avila College (Exhibit N, p. 1,Exhibit T, p. 3 & Exhibit P, p. 1). In Corbett (2012), Farahisays that the Avila deanship is one of the inaccuraciesKeans clerical staff put in his CVs. Exhibits N and P, wherehe claimed to have been a dean, were submitted for NASPAAaccreditation; hence, Farahi has misrepresented hisprofessional background in accreditation documents. He alsomisrepresented his background when Keans PublicAdministration Department submitted its proposal to receivepublic funds (Exhibit T, p. 3).This pattern of misrepresentation is important. Last year weinformed the Commission that Keans Self-Study did notmention the facultys vote of no confidence in President

6 The dissertation has suspect features. In its title page,three illegible signatures lack their corresponding namestyped below each. The absence of typed names makes itdifficult, perhaps impossible, to know who the committeesmembers were. Likewise, below the three signatures, a datedoes not follow Dissertation Defended. The ampersand in thetitle is not proper usage for a formal document (Exhibit S).Double-spaced text ends on page 76; from then on, theremainder of the dissertation, including the bibliography, issingle-spaced. Several entries in the bibliography are notformatted properly. The bibliography's format changesstarting on page 143; from that page on, unlike its previouspages, the dates of publication appear next to the authors'names. The sloppy drawing on page 76 is not appropriate in afinished manuscript. The dissertation is available in theProQuest database.

14


15/29

Farahi. Also, it did not mention students opposition to thenew class schedule7: Omitting relevant information or beingselective about evidence that is provided raises questionsabout the institutions compliance with Standard 6

(Integrity).Follow-up Reports and Visits

, p. 4.

The presentation of his undergraduate degree is

inconsistent. In his application for employment at Kean, heearned his baccalaureate in 1970 at Kabul University (inaffiliation with BourdeauxU) (Exhibit J, pp. 2 & 6); butin his application to the Kean presidency he earned thesame degree in 1972 at BordeauxUniversity (inaffiliation) (Exhibit O, p.2).In his 1985, 1994, and 2008 CVs, he received his B.A. fromBurdeauxUniversity in 1972 (Exhibit K, p. 1; Exhibit N,p. 1; & Exhibit Q, p. 1). Of these three, only the 2008 CVadds (in affiliation). Exhibit N has BoreauxUniversity,France (cf. Exhibit J, p. 6). In his dissertations titlepage he received his baccalaureate from Kabul University(Exhibit S). We typed the name of the French institutionwith the two different spellings it appears in theexhibits.

As other universities, Keans catalogs list its facultyand the institutions where they earned their degrees. Formany years (Exhibit U), Farahis entry in that list was:

Dawood Farahi (9-83)Professor, Public AdministrationBA Kabul University (Bordeaux)MA, Ph.D. U. of Kansas

But Kabul University (Bordeaux) disappeared from thelatest edition of Keans undergraduate catalog (Exhibit U, p.5). The catalog is available at

http://www.kean.edu/KU/Undergraduate-Catalog.

As the exhibits show, and (Kiley 2012) noted, Farahi mixeshis alleged publications with what seems to be the writtenproducts of his consulting work. Exhibit K separatesConsultation Activities from Research and Publications; but

7Kean Crisis I, pp. 1-2 & 21-25, respectively.15
http://www.kean.edu/KU/Undergraduate-Cataloghttp://www.kean.edu/KU/Undergraduate-Catalog


16/29

the latter section lists documents we have not found inpeer-reviewed sources. Exhibit Ms Research andPublications does not repeat Exhibit Ks separation.Exhibit O has a section titled Research and Professional

Activities (selected). Using New Jerseys Open PublicRecords Act law, we obtained a copy of the document the topentry on Exhibit Os sixth page mentions. That copy is thisreports Exhibit Y. We are qualified to judge neither thequality of the work leading to Exhibit Y nor itsrecommendations; we do assert, however, that Exhibit Y doesnot satisfy the requirements of scholarly works, publishedor unpublished. Notice that Dawood Farahis name does notappear as Exhibit Ys author.

In several places, Farahi claimed to have received theMorris Abrams Award (Exhibit J, p. 7; Exhibit M, p. 6;Exhibit P, p. 2); the dates mentioned are 1975, 1977, and1979. Though he earned his doctorate in 1980, Exhibits Oand P assert that the Morris Abrams Award was for the bestdissertation research. Staff (2012) shows Farahi did notreceive this award. Replying to a Star-Ledgerinquiry, TobyBresky, an administrator with the award, denies that Farahiwas a recipient (Staff 2012).

Exhibit Z, the last in this document, summarizes thenarrative in this section.

As its peers, Kean University has an academic integritypolicy, available at

httt://www.kean.edu/~vpsa/handbook/10_policies_1_academicintegrity.html

The administration dismissed a faculty member last semester,claiming he or she had falsified entries in a reappointmentfolder. This former faculty would not allow us to use therelevant documents as exhibits, so we cannot document thisclaim. In 2007, another faculty member resigned when acolleague discovered she had plagiarized her dissertation(Anderson 2007).

As we mail this report to the Commission, the Board ofTrustees has not decided Farahis future, so no one knows ifit will apply the academic integrity policy to the president.The board held one public meeting on February 9, 2012 (seeyoutube.com in bibliography); it will hold a second meetingWednesday February 15, 2012.

16


17/29

3. IMPAIRED GOVERNANCE

Variations exist, but university governance is usually athree-legged stool: The administration, the senate, and the

student government. The faculty and professional staffslabor union, if it exists, deals with terms and conditions ofemployment only. Investigations of academic fraud belong inthe senate, but Keans Senate has not uttered a word aboutthe allegations of fraud against the university president.

Why is Keans Senate not investigating theseallegations? Kean University Senate is not a faculty senate;it includes untenured faculty, administrators, andprofessional staff who lack tenure. These groups jobinsecurity allowed Farahi to gain control of the senate earlyin his presidency; he maintains that control today.8 In 2008

he also gained control of Student Organization, Keansstudent government (Student Org, colloquially).9Farahi tried twice to turn the Kean Federation of

Teachers (KFT) into a company union; both attempts failed10.Today the KFT is the only independent entity on campus. Inthis environ, it has fallen on the KFT to do what the senateought to do.

The campus community has not seen last Aprils MiddleStates Visiting Team written report, because theadministration has not released it. To get it, the KFT had tofile Exhibit V, a request using the Open Public Records Actlaw.

8Kean Crisis I, p. 26, 54. Page 54 narrates two episodeswhere the Senate and Student Org also failed theirconstituencies.9Ibid., p. 25-26.10Ibid., 55.

17


18/29

4.NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION (NCAA)INVESTIGATION

Kean University must answer to the NCAAs Committee onInfractions regarding five violations of NCAAs rules.Alleged violations 1, 2, and 3, which we emphasize in our

description below, involve not only NCAAs rules; they alsoraise serious questions regarding the Commissions Standard 6

(Integrity).

An inquiry from a professor to former Athletic DirectorGlenn Hedden unleashed the series of events leading to theNCAAs involvement. The professor reported to Hedden that shethought a student athlete was taking nine credits rather thanthe twelve minimum the NCAA requires (Exhibit X, p. x).

The issue first became public last July (DAlessandro2011a), after the university fired Athletic Director GlennHedden less than a week after the NCAA visited Kean (Exhibit

X, p.14-15); Hedden had served in that position for twenty-two years (Exhibit X, p. 1); Hedden has sued the university,alleging that by firing him Kean violated the ConscientiousEmployee Protection Act (Exhibit X).

Last September, the NCAA gave Kean ninety days torespond to its Notice of Allegations (Exhibit W). This Marchthe university must appear before the NCAA Committee on

18

STANDARD 6

INTEGRITY

An accredited institution is expected to possess ordemonstrate the following attributes or activities:equitable and appropriately consistent treatment of

constituencies, as evident in such areas as the applicationof academic requirements and policies, student disciplines,student evaluations, grievance procedures.

The following may facilitate the institutions ownanalysis relative to this accreditation standard: reviewand analysis of policies and their consistent applicationregarding the recording of grades on transcripts.


19/29

Infractions. The NCAA considers these infractions to be fivemajor violations.

19


20/29

The five alleged violations are:

1. During the 2010 spring semester, without consulting theAthletics Department, university officials created a

three-credit course exclusively for student athletes inone of Keans teams (Exhibit W, pp. 7 & 14); the courseinvolved a foreign tour. By enrolling in that course,student athletes in that team who could not pay for thetour received an extra benefit from the Financial AidOffice. The benefit was that the university did notcharge the cost of the foreign tour to the studentathletes involved (Exhibit X, pp. 3-4 & 9); NCAA rulesforbid such benefits.

The tour occurred in August 2010, but the courseoffering first appeared in Keans registration systemafter the add/drop period for fall 2010 had ended. Thestudent athletes registered for the course fromSeptember 28, 2010, to October 13, 2010; in other words,they registered after they had gone on the foreign tour.This also violates NCAA rules, because advertising thecourse after its conclusion precluded nonathletestudents from registering in it and going on the tour(Exhibit W, p. 7; Exhibit X, pp. 8-9).

2. A student athletes failure to complete the assignmentsnecessary to remove an incomplete grade led to her GPA

falling below 2.0, making her ineligible forcompetition. The professor teaching the course where thestudent had earned the incomplete declared to universityofficials that F accurately reflected the studentsperformance (Exhibit X, pp. 9-11 & 14).11 Before thestudent exhausted the remedies Keans grade grievancepolicies afford, and without consulting the athleticsdepartment, university officials changed the studentsgrade from F to incomplete (Exhibit W, p. 9; Exhibit X,p. 14). This grade change raised the students GPA above2.0, allowing her to play an important game (Exhibit W,

p. 9; Exhibit X, pp. 9-14). Noticing that the gradechange raised the students GPA from 1.97 to 2.04, theRegistrar emailed a university official: I will notmove forward with the grade change until I hear from

11 On line 5 from the top, Exhibit X, p. 11 misspell thenProvost Lenders last name as Lerner.

20


21/29

you. The university official ordered the grade change(Exhibit X, p. 12). After the student played theimportant game, university officials changed the gradeback to F (Exhibit X, p. 14).

Another case suggests that the violations the NCAA isinvestigating may be a systemic problem. Last year,Professor Bert Wailoo sent the Commission a letter,addressed to Dr. Kilnman, dated march 6, 2011. In hisletter, Wailoo explained that a student of his hadearned a D. Six months later, without followingestablished procedure, Dean Martell filed a DeansWithdrawal Form which expunged from the studentstranscript the grade and the evidence that the studenthad taken the course.

3. Kean University violated NCAAs financial aid regulations:A) During the 2007-08 through the 2010-11 academic years,

student athletes received the Dorsey Scholarship at arate higher than students in the nonathletic studentpopulation (Exhibit W, p. 11)

B) During the 2007-08 through the 2010-11 academic years,the percentage of the total dollar value ofinstitutional grants was not sufficiently equivalent tothe percentage of student athletes in the total studentpopulation (Exhibit W, p. 11)

C) Discussions between university officials and athleticsstaff occurred before the university mailed financialaid letters to student athletes (Exhibit W, pp. 12, 14 &15)

4. A coach did not promote an atmosphere of compliance byfailing to consult the athletics department on mattersinvolving violations 1, 2, and 3 (Exhibit W, p. 14).

5. The University did not supervise its athletics department

and failed to exercise institutional control:

The NCAA enforcement staff alleges that thescope and nature of the violations set forthin Allegations Nos. 1, 2, and 3 demonstratethat the institution failed to monitor itsathletics department and exhibited a lack of

21


22/29

institutional control .... The university'sadministration acted in matters related toathletics without consulting the athleticsdepartment, the institutions awarded a greater

percentage of total dollar value scholarshipsaid to student-athletes compared to thegeneral student body; and the institutioninvolved athletics staff in the review ofinstitutional financial assistance for studentathletes (Exhibit W, p. 14).12

Facing the NCAA investigation, Kean self-imposed aban on some of its teams (Corbett 2011; DAlessandro2011c); also, according to (DAlessandro 2011d): Theschool ruled that all 11 Dorsey scholar-athletes campuswide--who met or exceeded the programs criteria (and)did absolutely nothing wrong, according to Morgan--would have to forfeit that $10,200 tuition and feewaiver, or forfeit their athletic eligibility. (ChrisMorgan is the new Athletic Director). At least one ofthe affected students has sued the university, accusingit of announcing its ban too late for students totransfer to other schools (DAlessandro 2011d).

12 In Kean Crisis I, pp. 17-19 & 21-24, we reported majordecisions implemented without consulting the Senate or thestudents.

22


23/29

5.ASSESSMENT THREAT

The Academic Program Review Guidelines (Exhibit AA),approved by the trustees on September 12, 2011, was forwardedby the administration to the Board without the UniversitySenates deliberation and approval.

In response to this circumvention of the Senatesconstitutional authority, granted by the Board of Trustees,the Senate passed by a vote of 16-6-1 a resolution assertingits authority under Article II section 1 of its still extant1997 Constitution.

That Resolution (Exhibit BB) emphasizes that AcademicProgram Review falls under the Senates purview. The

Resolution also makes clear that the most recent AcademicProgram Review was in March 2000 at which time then ProvostAlexander directed the Senate to take up Program Review inanticipation of Middle States accreditation that places agreat deal of emphasis on . . . assessment.

The Board of Trustees may not know that the presentadministration suspended assessment. Historically, AcademicProgram Review has been a rolling five-year process thatfirst assesses departments, programs and learning outcomesand then reviews those assessments to make recommendationsfor the succeeding cycle. As a result of suspending this

process, and because the Commission has found Keannoncompliant with Standards 7 and 14, now we have at Kean arushed panic to assess every department and program in ninemonths.

One week before fall semester 2011, faculty were orderedto revise their course syllabi. In mid semester students hadto take an ACT critical thinking. This cut into class time.

STANDARD 4

LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE

The Commission on Higher Education expects a climate ofshared collegial governance in which all constituencies . . .involved in carrying out the institution's mission and goalsparticipate in the governance function in a manner appropriateto that institution.

- Characteristics of Excellence, page 12.

23


24/29

Standard 7 (Institutional Assessment) requires theinstitutional communitys involvement (Characteristics ofExcellence, pp. 25 & 28). Whatever work, if any, Kean hasdone to remedy its noncompliance with Standard 7 has lacked

faculty and professional staff input. It is unclear who isassessing the administration and how it is being assessed.The team that wrote the Self-Study is no more. Professor

Linda Best retired; Associate Vice President of AcademicAffairs Kenneth Sanders is now Dean of Students at Rutgers;LaMont Rouse, Director of Accreditation and Assessment, hasleft Kean; Professor Barbara Lee has been disenfranchised.

The administration excluded this group and the entiresteering committee from writing the institutional response tothe visiting teams written report; unlike the campuscommunity (see last paragraph on page 12 above), Best,Sanders, Rouse, and Lee (but not the full steering committee)read the report but could not keep copies. The administrationdoes not announce major personnel appointments; so, afterLamont Rouses departure, we do not know if those running theAccreditation and Assessment Office have the relevantqualifications.

President Farahis threatening statement during thepublic session of the May 23, 2011 meeting of the Board ofTrustees is more disheartening than any of the above. Asynopsis of the statement follows; you may hear the completestatement at

http://aftnj.org/topics/news/higher-education/farahi/2012/farahi-threatens-to-use-assessment-for-retaliation-against-faculty/

Student outcomes assessment in theassessment of programs is not as simple asit sounds. I want to alert this Board thatif you thought that all of the things thatyou heard in the past were pretty rough, youhave not seen rough yet. Because now you'retalking and asking the individual thatcreate me a matrix and tell me, What does

it mean to have a Master's degree in PublicAdministration? What is it that theexpectations are? And what set of knowledgeand skills and capabilities are associatedwith the award of that degree? Then tell meeach single course that is covered in thatprogram is connected to each one of those

24
http://aftnj.org/topics/news/higher-education/farahi/2012/farahi-threatens-to-use-assessment-for-retaliation-against-facultyhttp://aftnj.org/topics/news/higher-education/farahi/2012/farahi-threatens-to-use-assessment-for-retaliation-against-facultyhttp://aftnj.org/topics/news/higher-education/farahi/2012/farahi-threatens-to-use-assessment-for-retaliation-against-facultyhttp://aftnj.org/topics/news/higher-education/farahi/2012/farahi-threatens-to-use-assessment-for-retaliation-against-faculty


25/29

components of what you said a Master ofPublic Administration or an undergraduateCriminal Justice would do.

. . . .That requires that you understand that thosewho do not follow these rules and those whodo not update their skills and theirsyllabi, and what needs to be done for thestudents, to create a structure that doesthe best for the students, would be takenout of the classroom, they will be put intoa different location, they will be sent forretraining, they will be subject toinsubordination if they fail to do that.

. . . .Those are very difficult choices. They willbe made. And you will see that there willbe a lot more ferocity.

When assessment is credible it may involve retraining,reorganizations, reassignments and other outcomes unfavorableto faculty; we know that. The problem with the presidents

remarks is its tone and the present institutional context. Dueto its history of retribution and its emphasis on constructionand renovation, unfavorable decisions emanating from assessmentoutcomes will be perceived as punitive or unrelated to Keanseducational mission.

As we said in last years third party report, credibleassessment requires mutual respect and collaboration betweenthe administration, the faculty, and the professional staff;because those conditions do not exist at Kean, credibleassessment cannot (Kean Crisis I, pp. 18-19).

6. CONCLUSION

We end where we began, inviting the visiting team to meetwith us. The otherwise valuable work of last Aprils visitingteam would have benefited from meeting Kean Crisis Issignatories.

25


26/29

Our contact information is in the title page.

26


27/29

We, the undersigned, to evidence our agreement,attach our signatures to this third-party report titledKean University: An Institution in Crisis II. Wepresent this third party report with our signatures to

the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. Weunderstand that the Commission will share this third-party report with the Kean University administrationand will ask that administration to respond.

NAME (PRINT) SIGNATURE POSITION(faculty, student,alumni, etc.)

27


28/29


28


29/29


29

institutional integrity in crisis

Documents