Change of Heart

I was inspired to create this blog as counter-point to Bradley Bethel's "Coaching the Mind," albeit not to the degree of dedication Bethel has demonstrated. It's mostly been a place where I've been able to put down some thoughts on the issue of UNC's scandal, typically when motivated by something that Bethel has expressed.

I've respected Bradley and even agree with him on some points. And I've sincerely anticipated his film project "Unverified," impressed with his passion and conviction. I've felt that while he's received the brunt of a lot of personal assaults from anti-Carolina fans, he's mostly held himself above the fray; even though many of his fans and disciples have chosen not to do so.

I'm no fan of Mary Willingham. From the very beginning, I felt she was a poor spokesperson for the reforms that were needed at UNC and for college sports in general, as far as re-prioritizing academics for student-athletes.

Dr. Jay Smith seemed to be the more eloquent of the two and the real motivator behind the push for Carolina to atone, but sadly, he has been shown to have some flaws and has undermined his erudition with some regretful expressions of opinion.

I had never felt that way about Bradley Bethel, and even though I consider myself a staunch opponent of his perspective and his defense of Carolina athletics, he's conducted himself with greater aplomb than many senior to him.

That is until now. He has chosen to counter Smith and Willingham, and their book "Cheated" by highlighting their personal indiscretions. (I'm not going to link any of it since I find it reprehensible.) He justifies this tactic as if it is germane, believing it effectively undermines the credibility of their claims in the book and to the press.

It's a classic smear campaign, and one that should be beneath him. However, he's previously shown hints of a tendency to fight fire with fire, and despite previously retracting some snap statements and apologizing, he's going full bore now to make Smith's and Willingham's apparent personal relationship a matter of discussion and attempting to link it to refutation of statements of facts they've presented in the Carolina scandal.

I'm not going to dignify that strategy with rebuttal, so until Bethel decides he's not going to pander to his built-in audience with the very sort of "yellow journalism" he's decried, I'm not going to acknowledge him or engage him anymore. I'm disappointed to find he's little more than "Professor Croissant" pretending to be a champion of truth.

He's also correct in pointing out that my intolerance for such behavior has not translated equally to the anti-Bethel, anti-UNC crowd. So, if I'm shunning Bethel, I'm going to shun his caustic and personal-attacking opponents as well. I have, in fact, scolded them; however I haven't ceased to converse with them.

I will do that now. It's my last thanks to Bradley Bethel for bringing that failure to my attention.

Dean Owen "Vindicated"

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) has announced the last of its personnel actions taken in response to last year's Report of Investigation of Irregular Classes in the Department of African and Afro-American (AFAM) Studies (also known as the Wainstein Report). In this most recent decision, two lower-level at-will employees were let go and three others were exonerated. The sixth, former Dean Bobbi Owen, is the highest ranking UNC official censured to date.

Owen served as Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies and had oversight responsibilities for the former AFAM Department Chair, Julius Nyangoro.

UNC Provost and Vice-Chancellor, James W. Dean, in a notification letter to Owen, delivered the good news first: Owen had NOT "acted improperly or…knew that Deborah Crowder was grading papers." However, the bad news was that she was being permanently restricted from administrative or programmatic leadership positions due to failure in her responsibility to inform either the Dean of the College or Nyangoro's supervisor of "repeated rules violations" for which she apparently DID have knowledge.

This is a confusing message. UNC admonished her for acts of omission; but just what was it she knew and failed to act upon that other faculty leaders didn't?

The answer could be that, unlike other faculty who'd also excused Nyangoro's lecture classes being taught as independent studies under the rubric of professorial "autonomy," Owen had had hints of Crowder's aberrant role in those classes and, contrary to her leadership position in the College, failed in her duty to inspect those hints more closely.

Apparently, it was not a secret among faculty and academic counseling staff that some of Professor Nyangoro's lecture classes were being conducted in an independent studies format. It was also a common understanding among faculty, including Owen, that how courses were taught was the professor's prerogative.

Owen had sought to "reign in" Nyangoro's excessive use of independent studies in 2005/2006. But after a July 2006 New York Times article about a professor at the University of Auburn providing an unusually high number of independent studies courses to athletes, the issue of excessive use of independent studies in the AFAM department at UNC became a topic of discussion among staff and faculty. Though not recorded in the minutes, and despite differing recollections, the facts strongly suggest the independent studies matter had been discussed at the Faculty Athletics Committee (FAC) meetings in late 2006 and early 2007. Even the Athletics Department was interested in the issue, as evidenced by emails in the wake of the Times article.

According to former senior associate athletics director John Blanchard, he and former Academic Support Program for Student Athletes (ASPSA) director Robert Mercer joined the discussion at the FAC meetings in late 2006/early 2007, and not only raised the issue of independent studies in general, but also asked about the matter of classes listed as classroom lectures being taught as independent studies in the AFAM department. As had been found previously in the 2012 investigation conducted by former North Carolina Governor James Martin, the Wainstein Report also concluded that Blanchard and Mercer had raised questions with the FAC and had been informed that how an instructor chooses to teach a class is not their concern, so they dropped the matter.

Though FAC members don't recall this in detail, they do agree that would have been the standard response. Owen, however, did recall a specific discussion with Blanchard in which Blanchard had raised the question about the propriety of lecture classes being taught as independent studies. Like faculty on the athletics committee, Owen conceded she would have told Blanchard the same thing the FAC would have.

Though Owen, Blanchard and FAC members differ on what they recall from that period, all seemed to agree that it was, or would have been, conveyed to the athletics department that the issue of lecture classes taught as independent studies was not a concern, given principles of academic freedom that afford teachers autonomy in how they deliver the subject matter to students.What Owen and all other faculty deny, however, is any knowledge of Crowder's abuse of that autonomy granted to faculty.

UNC has now exonerated Owen of having knowledge of the more egregious aspects of Nyangoro's or Crowder's misconduct. Where the water gets murky is who knew about Nyangoro's "rules violations" (the Provost's term) or the extent of Crowder's misconduct?

To illustrate the distinction between knowing and not knowing what Crowder had been up to, just look at one of the earlier disciplinary action by UNC: the termination of Jan Boxill.

As a faculty member who also served as a counselor to athletes, Boxill's failure (according to UNC) was in knowing the extent to which Deb Crowder was conducting the classes without faculty involvement and not taking action. Being senior to the other counselors, and as a member of faculty herself, she should have known Crowder's conduct was improper; or at least that it should have been more closely inspected.

The other low-level employees that UNC fired (Beth Bridger and Jamie Lee last year, and now Brent Blanton) were at-will employees. Specific reasons for their sackings haven't been made public, but it's not unreasonable to presume it was for knowing (and exploiting) Crowder's misconduct.

UNC seems not to have considered or given merit to the likelihood these junior counselors were unaware that these "paper classes" coordinated by Crowder were something that the University might frown upon. After all, the 2006/07 business had impressed upon their bosses how instructors taught their courses was not their concern. They easily could have assumed that Crowder had authorization from Nyangoro or not savvy to the fact that Crowder wasn't faculty. They and students often referred to Crowder as "Professor Debby," confident that she was authorized to perform faculty functions. Perhaps they'd just been following Boxill's lead.

Nevertheless; the University did not give them that benefit of doubt and fired them. UNC cited those firings as being among the 70+ "reforms" enacted in response to the academic scandal.

Unlike those at-will employees and Boxill, the University did not fire Owen, saying she didn't know what Crowder was doing. Instead, UNC removed from her leadership position. Owen expressed that it was her desire anyway to step away from leadership and considered herself vindicated:

That's interesting.

What had the Wainstein Report gotten wrong about Owen?

What "completely unfounded" public accusations had been made about her?

The Wainstein Report didn't offer any finding that Owen knew Crowder was scheduling courses on her own, grading papers on her own, forging grade change forms, tolerating plagiarism, etc. There were hints of some wrongdoing that Owen herself made her wary of Crowder, but Owen has always disclaimed the depth of that knowledge, and the Wainstein Report didn't reach any conclusions to the contrary:

Wainstein Report pg. 21

Wainstein Report, pg. 91

One noted dispute Owen did have with claims Wainstein reported from other staff (including Nyangoro) was about an alleged lunch she had had with Nyangoro over which she discussed "reining in" independent studies:

Wainstein Report, footnote 19 on pg. 21

Her dispute that the particular lunch meeting happened may be because Nyangoro claimed that at that lunch Owen had cautioned him to get Crowder "under control." That would imply that she was at least somewhat aware of Crowder acting outside of her authority and that the independent studies issue was, indeed, about more than just lecture classes being taught as independent studies.

But Owen doesn't deny -- and it's a matter of record -- that she did make an attempt to get Nyangoro to "rein in" the number of Independent Studies courses. And she was pleased by that reduction by late 2006.

The real issue Owen may have with the Wainstein Report is whether or not "reining in" included the activities of Crowder and not just the number of independent studies enrollments in AFAM. The other hint that Owen may have known more than she admits is the Wainstein Report's noting of an instance when Owen may have been alerted to possible malfeasance on the part of Crowder:

Wainstein Report, pg. 69

Unlike the lunch meeting, this anecdote wasn't disputed by Owen. In fact, it is Owen, herself, who provided this account to the Wainstein investigation. Owen provided an explanation that, at least in her mind, had given her reason not to pursue the matter further.

But it's THAT very failure of oversight and lack of diligence in following-up for which UNC held her accountable. How she can feel vindicated is curious.


As for the so-called "terrible public accusations" that she said were unfounded, the Raleigh News & Observer (N&O) has been the primary news outlet covering the UNC scandal and, in assuming a public watchdog stance, would be the most likely source for publishing such "public accusations."

And yet, here is the past year's N&O coverage as it pertains to Bobbi Owen's involvement in the scandal:

October 22, 2014
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article10104428.html

October 24, 2014
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article10107065.html

November 3, 2014
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article10116632.html

November 20, 2014
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/article10138202.html

November 25, 2014
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article10144967.html

June 11, 2015
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article23751628.html

October 22, 2015
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article40937289.html

At worst, Owen is portrayed as enabling the misconduct by failing to follow-up on so-called "red flags" that might have uncovered Crowder's activities and Nyangoro's negligence earlier. And that is precisely what the Wainstein Report conveyed and what UNC has censured Owen for.

I don't know what "error" Owen believes has been corrected by UNC's admonition. The media has neither inflated nor downplayed the Wainstein Report as it pertains to Owen's culpability.



When SACSCOC notified UNC of new concerns after the release of the Wainstein Report, it indicated that at least two individuals who had been party to the 2013 SACSCOC review had information not shared with the special committee at that time. One of those was then-dean Bobbi Owen.

What Owen and other faculty claim they didn't know was that Nyangoro was essentially absent from the teaching most of these "irregular" courses or that his non-faculty staff assistant, Deborah Crowder, was administering the courses in performing functions that were required to be faculty or, if delegated, properly authorized. When they defended Nyangoro's right to teach classes as he saw fit, they claim they didn't know he wasn't actually teaching the courses but had turned over "teaching" duties to his admin assistant. What Crowder had done and what Nyangoro had negligently allowed to happen (Crowder doing the grading of student work, for instance) were what constituted the "irregularities" that crossed the threshold of integrity for both the University and its accrediting body, the Southern Association of Colleges & Schools, Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC).

Did Owen know what Crowder was doing or didn't she? She says she didn't. Neither the Wainstein Report nor the media allege that she did.

Did Owen know of "red-flags" that might have led her to discovering what Crowder was doing? The Wainstein Report found the answer to that to be yes, and that's what the media has reported. And that is what the University censured Owen for.

I don't consider that vindication.