New Nutty Northwestern Criticism of Academia

Yesterday, the Northwestern ran an editorial that is a tongue-in-cheek criticism of a UWMadison business professor who bought DVDs to show in his class.

The jocular nature of the commentary--ha-ha Seinfeld would be better--covers another slam of our profession.

They have no idea about what the prof. teaches, but only see fit to cast aspersions. As you can see from the few comments here is that you get outrage that professors waste "our" money like this.

It is a far cry from equating professors to Jeffrey Dahmer, but it continues their theme of anti-intellectualism.

Edit: Link is now fixed! Thanks to the commenter who noticed!

Rieckman is now pro-UWO?

Although this topic has already gotten plenty of play in the blogosphere (Tony, Babblemur and Miles), I wanted to add my two-cents.

After all, it is striking to see Rieckman endorse a "Jeffrey Dahmer" to be on the city council. (I really do hold a grudge!!) After Rieckman's ready use of the university as a whipping boy in his columns, to see him write that it might not be so bad to have three people associated with UWO on the council is quite a change of heart.

For Stew, Palmeri is a great addition to the council. As someone devoted to open records, the Northwestern will surely benefit if Tony insists on opening up the cozy world of city government. Perhaps he also recognizes that continually attacking a significant percentage of his subscribers is not the best way to build his newspaper.

I, for one, don't really understand the town and gown split here. On the other hand, I don't understand the north/west split either . . .

Paging Dr. Dahmer: Responses to UW job security column

The northwestern published a few letters in response to Rieckman's column while I was out of town, but here is the link.

K.C. Wong weighs in on the misrepresentations in Rieckman's column

K.C. does a good job explaining the legal issues at hand, which Rieckman completely ignored:

Response to “bar” talks

On 8/24/05 Rieckman called for the immediate dismissal of three convicted tenured UW professors. There are two conclusions one can draw from such “bar” – intoxicated and intoxicating - talks:

First, the author knows very little about the facts:
The column is 588 words long. 438 words or 74.5% of the content was devoted to an imaginative case of Professor Jeffrey Dahmer, which was intended to inflame more so than inform.

The three cases under discussion came to 90 words or 15.03% of the column; hardly enough for a comprehensive and informed, much less intelligent and serious discussion of the issues involved, e.g. should tenured professors be fired for all criminal convictions, e.g. civil disobedience? should ex-convicts be hired as professors, i.e. after reform?

Second, the author knows very little about the law:
In one case, Steven Clark was convicted of stalking and serving a Huber sentence. This meant that the court has decided that Clark was of no danger to the community or his victim. More significantly, Clark was given a chance to reform himself and to contribute to the society. Should the university not support our judicial process?

In another case, Lewis Cohen, pleaded no contest to sexual communication with a minor. He was placed on two years of probation. Legally speaking, pleading no contest (nolo con•ten•de•re) is not an admission of guilt, i.e. it does not bar future contestation of the case, as in administrative (tenure) proceedings. Is Cohen not entitled to assert his rights and contest his case in the time and manner he saw fit?

In the last case, Roberto Coronado was convicted on 8/5/05 for sexually assaulting three young girls. The university was instating proceeding to fire him. Should the university not be given sufficient time to process his dismissal, in order to avoid future liability?

But for the serious implications resulting, such “bar” talks deserve no comments!

Kam C. Wong, J.D., Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Criminal Justice
University of Wisconsin (Oshkosh)

Michael Zimmerman's letter to the editor

The Dean of COLS wrote a letter to the editor last night:

To the Editor,


Stew Rieckman embodies and enhances the Northwestern’s frequent lack of respect for and understanding of the University of Wisconsin and its employees in Sunday’s column. In case you missed it, he asked, inflammatorily, what would have happened if serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer had been a faculty member. He answers his rhetorically suspect question by concluding that the University would have done nothing. He concludes his rant by informing readers that if they’re “not outraged,” they’re “probably drawing a paycheck from UW system.”


Rieckman’s upset that tenured faculty members who break the law aren’t summarily fired. He ignores two critical points. First, depending on the circumstances, faculty members can be placed on unpaid leaves while legal battles are fought. Second, rules and regulations have been established on every campus for dealing with issues of this sort. Those rules and regulations have to be congruent with rules established by the UW Board of Regents and by the state legislature. Implementation of those rules has to be scrupulously fair and able to withstand review by the state’s Employment Relations Commission as well as state and federal courts.


Rieckman implies that a better policy would be to fire first and worry about legal details later. He mocks UW System for creating a system that includes “due process.” His system might be more comforting to those looking for instant “justice,” but it’s likely to lead to chaos. And, I might add, the concept of “due process” is embodied in the US Constitution.


Finally, it would be nice if Rieckman got the “facts” embedded in his fictional account correct. He says “Professor” Dahmer collected “three months accrued vacation pay.” Sorry, Mr. Rieckman, but unlike newspaper editors, professors do not earn paid vacations.


I’ll be looking for his apology to the hard-working UW faculty across the state.


Michael Zimmerman
Dean, College of Letters and Science
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh

Stew Rieckman launches personal assault on professoriat

The editor of the Northwestern, Stew Rieckman attacked university professors in his column yesterday. Using a specious analogy of a hypothetical professor (Jeffrey) Dahmer, he accused the university system of protecting criminals under the guise of due process.

He ended the column by claiming that anyone who believed in work-place rights must "drawing a paycheck from UW systemy." It makes you wonder what planet this guy is from.

Here is the link:
I am going to post two responses that have already come to the COLS list last night and this morning.