Did the Martin report give any data about the number of fake classes with zero athletes enrolled? If so, anyone have a page number? A Twitterhole is saying Martin claimed lots of fake classes had zero athletes. Please inbox me so I see response

MattNicholson wrote: If UNC hires from within, that is clear indication they have learned NOTHING from the last 3 years. The entire reason they are in this position in the first place is they kept hiring family members who firmly believed that what they were doing was A-OK, because that's all they have ever known.

The inevitable result of so much inbreeding is an academic Peacock family.

No such animal as far as I remember. But there were fake classes with nothing but athletes!
---------------------------------------------
--- AlignedFor9 wrote:

Did the Martin report give any data about the number of fake classes with zero athletes enrolled? If so, anyone have a page number? A Twitterhole is saying Martin claimed lots of fake classes had zero athletes. Please inbox me so I see response

---------------------------------------------

ProfessorWolf wrote:

MattNicholson wrote: If UNC hires from within, that is clear indication they have learned NOTHING from the last 3 years. The entire reason they are in this position in the first place is they kept hiring family members who firmly believed that what they were doing was A-OK, because that's all they have ever known.

Wasn't the previous chancellor, James Moeser, from Nebraska?

According to Wikipedia, it looks like Moeser had no previous ties to UNC.  Says he returned after a year Sabbatical as a Professor Emeritus though.

James Charles Moeser (born April 3, 1939)^[1] was the ninth chancellor of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He is also a trained concert organist. A native of Colorado City, Texas, Moeser earned bachelor and master’s degrees in music from the University of Texas at Austin and a doctorate from the University of Michigan.

Moeser, formerly chancellor of the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, began his work as chancellor at UNC on August 15, 2000. He has since overseen and introduced many historic changes and improvements for the university, including the Carolina Covenant, Carolina First campaign, Carolina Connects initiative, expansions of current genome research at the university, and the passing of a referendum for the nation's largest higher education bond package. Moeser announced on September 26, 2007 that he would relinquish his position as Chancellor on June 30, 2008.[1] Moeser was succeeded by Holden Thorp on June 30, 2008. Following a year-long sabbatical, Moeser returned to UNC as Chancellor Emeritus and professor in the music department.

When is Martin supposed to make all of his data public?

I thought it would be in "about a month" which has come and gone. Some data was released a few weeks ago but certainly not the details/specifics.

Good question.

mcpack1 wrote: When is Martin supposed to make all of his data public?

I thought it would be in "about a month" which has come and gone. Some data was released a few weeks ago but certainly not the details/specifics.

mcpack1 wrote: When is Martin supposed to make all of his data public?

I thought it would be in "about a month" which has come and gone. Some data was released a few weeks ago but certainly not the details/specifics.

yet another example of people tied to this investigation mess not producing what they claimed they'd do.

With SACS coming to town, I wonder...

• what they might say about the exorbitant (at least on paper ) teaching load Dr. J had?
• if they might question why no one considered the practicality of someone being able to realistically teach so many courses?
• if that might trigger a review of all teaching loads across campus?
• if that might lead to professors that have avoided the classroom (to focus on research) being forced back into the classroom as teaching loads are redistributed? 

Professor, is this truly a personal musing (based on what could clearly be fact), or are you hearing whispers from over there?

ProfessorWolf wrote: With SACS coming to town, I wonder...

• what they might say about the exorbitant (at least on paper ) teaching load Dr. J had?
• if they might question why no one considered the practicality of someone being able to realistically teach so many courses?
• if that might trigger a review of all teaching loads across campus?
• if that might lead to professors that have avoided the classroom (to focus on research) being forced back into the classroom as teaching loads are redistributed? 

Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Oh that is just priceless!

When SACS does get to Chapel Hill. I hope the first thing they do is tell the PTB there to stuff a sock in their pie holes. You just know they will tell SACS that they are cleaning up, moving on, that this is confined to African Studies, yadda, yadda.

Let SACS find out whether or not this is athletic and/or academic corruption.

wolfsnacks93 wrote:

Chapelboro.com

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Typical UNC-CH athlete classroom (and it's empty as usual  ):

wolfchicEE wrote:

wolfsnacks93 wrote:

Chapelboro.com

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Typical UNC-CH athlete classroom (and it's empty as usual  ):

Nominated!!! LOLOLOLOL

Oh my.......  http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956


"There may be more than one reason to create a fake class, but at the very top of the list, with a large gap between number one and number two, is the need to keep revenue generating athletes, eligible."

Treyvon wrote:

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Oh that is just priceless!

but, but, but...it's only the AFAM department, right? Why would other departments need this mandate?

Absolutely incredible that the public ivy (sic) has to be told to actually "hold classes".

Further, I do not believe that any of these credit hour monitoring proposals would have seen the light of day had there not been exasperation about the disconnect between big time college sports and the mission of universities. There may be more than one reason to create a fake class, but at the very top of the list, with a large gap between number one and number two, is the need to keep revenue generating athletes, eligible.

I don’t think that we fake classes in musicology or modern European history or molecular chemistry, because faculty across the galaxy of universities hold one another accountable. The education of our students has built in accountability.

The “education” of keeping athletes eligible does not have such accountability, so we devise questionable strategies such as photographing classrooms, a reaction to the degradation of high standards that the athletic scandal has so sadly visited on our fine university.

http://chapelboro.com/Counting...1214?pid=297956

Hey, NCAA, Chapelboro.com gets it. Everyone else gets it.

This AFAM scandal IS an athletic scandal.

This whole sham was a way to keep athletes eligible. Everyone in the world knows it.

FretlessPackJam wrote:

Treyvon wrote:

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Oh that is just priceless!

but, but, but...it's only the AFAM department, right? Why would other departments need this mandate?

Absolutely incredible that the public ivy (sic) has to be told to actually "hold classes".

Well, there goes their great experiment of telepathic learning.

PICTURE OF KINDERGARDEN NO SHOW CLASSES....CREDIT AT UNC NO LONGER ALLOWED....

Treyvon wrote:

wolfchicEE wrote:

wolfsnacks93 wrote:

Chapelboro.com

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

 ):

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Rule-abiding academics are gonna be so offended by this requirement. It's the exact sort of thing that can generate some serious push back from the faculty.

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Wat a tic.. Wasn't UNC told not to write anything down? Thus the paperless athletics office during the NCAA investigation? Things they are a changin'!

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

cue that photo of the unc football players with their heads down on their desks, asleep.

and look closely for signs that the teacher was photo-shopped in.

or that it's actually a photo of a class at Princeton they lifted from the internet.

LOL.

AlignedFor9 wrote: Did the Martin report give any data about the number of fake classes with zero athletes enrolled? If so, anyone have a page number? A Twitterhole is saying Martin claimed lots of fake classes had zero athletes. Please inbox me so I see response

I've asked the same question before.

You have to think IF unc* could document fake courses that contained no athletes, they would have by now. No question about it. The fact that they are hiding behind broad numbers and generalizations, tells you the details are damning.

We DO know that there were fake classes that contained ONLY athletes.

ProfessorWolf wrote: With SACS coming to town, I wonder...

• what they might say about the exorbitant (at least on paper ) teaching load Dr. J had?
• if they might question why no one considered the practicality of someone being able to realistically teach so many courses?
• if that might trigger a review of all teaching loads across campus?
• if that might lead to professors that have avoided the classroom (to focus on research) being forced back into the classroom as teaching loads are redistributed? 

LOL, Prof I know you would know about this better than most here but from what I know about them, that would not make them too happy!

Abecedarian wrote:

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Rule-abiding academics are gonna be so offended by this requirement. It's the exact sort of thing that can generate some serious push back from the faculty.

Guilty until proven innocent. When it starts affected "innocent" students them same way, there will be push back from them as well.

BlackRazor wrote:

ProfessorWolf wrote: With SACS coming to town, I wonder...

• what they might say about the exorbitant (at least on paper ) teaching load Dr. J had?
• if they might question why no one considered the practicality of someone being able to realistically teach so many courses?
• if that might trigger a review of all teaching loads across campus?
• if that might lead to professors that have avoided the classroom (to focus on research) being forced back into the classroom as teaching loads are redistributed? 

LOL, Prof I know you would know about this better than most here but from what I know about them, that would not make them too happy!

Some of us love the classroom... others hate it. 

Sounds like there will now be pictures... no more sending in your graduate students to teach your class.

cmast wrote:

AlignedFor9 wrote: Did the Martin report give any data about the number of fake classes with zero athletes enrolled? If so, anyone have a page number? A Twitterhole is saying Martin claimed lots of fake classes had zero athletes. Please inbox me so I see response

I've asked the same question before.

You have to think IF unc* could document fake courses that contained no athletes, they would have by now. No question about it. The fact that they are hiding behind broad numbers and generalizations, tells you the details are damning.

We DO know that there were fake classes that contained ONLY athletes.

I've asked several times if UNC could document any private fake classes for non-athletes like those for the two basketball players in the period 2007-2009. Those "classes" had no meetings, prof, assignments. Only a grade submitted with a forged signature. The school simply handed the athletes free credit hours and a (good?) grade for free. I would love to know the circumstances under which they have done this for a non-athlete. If they haven't, then we have a "special benefit for athletes". Hello NCAA?

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

The class photos will be a good complement to their "sign-out" sheet to keep track of football players whereabouts.

packphinsfan wrote: Professor, is this truly a personal musing (based on what could clearly be fact), or are you hearing whispers from over there?

ProfessorWolf wrote: With SACS coming to town, I wonder...

• what they might say about the exorbitant (at least on paper ) teaching load Dr. J had?
• if they might question why no one considered the practicality of someone being able to realistically teach so many courses?
• if that might trigger a review of all teaching loads across campus?
• if that might lead to professors that have avoided the classroom (to focus on research) being forced back into the classroom as teaching loads are redistributed? 

Some personal insight on the types of questions SACS have asked of others in the past. ChapelBoro article kinda' confirms, they want to know who is in the classroom (and not just the students).

clearly controls were lacking to catch this fraud, but no way is this a lack of institutional control when the institution was in complete control of setting it up.  Maybe that's the NCAA's view

wolfchicEE wrote:

Further, I do not believe that any of these credit hour monitoring proposals would have seen the light of day had there not been exasperation about the disconnect between big time college sports and the mission of universities. There may be more than one reason to create a fake class, but at the very top of the list, with a large gap between number one and number two, is the need to keep revenue generating athletes, eligible.

I don’t think that we fake classes in musicology or modern European history or molecular chemistry, because faculty across the galaxy of universities hold one another accountable. The education of our students has built in accountability.

The “education” of keeping athletes eligible does not have such accountability, so we devise questionable strategies such as photographing classrooms, a reaction to the degradation of high standards that the athletic scandal has so sadly visited on our fine university.

http://chapelboro.com/Counting...1214?pid=297956

Hey, NCAA, Chapelboro.com gets it. Everyone else gets it.

This AFAM scandal IS an athletic scandal.

This whole sham was a way to keep athletes eligible. Everyone in the world knows it.

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Ok...so, pick and random day, round up all the athletes get them in a classroom and take a picture. Better yet, have them bring a change of clothes reset the date/time on the camera and take another pic while you are at it.

The only thing I think of when I hear of stupid things like this is how much easier these "checks" making their institutional cheating. But we have PHOTOS of the class meeting! See, we picked two random dates and here is the proof! Of course, I'm pretty sure I'm paranoid.

Treyvon wrote:

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Oh that is just priceless!

Why don't they just use a sign-in sheet? 

ProfessorWolf wrote:

packphinsfan wrote: Professor, is this truly a personal musing (based on what could clearly be fact), or are you hearing whispers from over there?

ProfessorWolf wrote: With SACS coming to town, I wonder...

• what they might say about the exorbitant (at least on paper ) teaching load Dr. J had?
• if they might question why no one considered the practicality of someone being able to realistically teach so many courses?
• if that might trigger a review of all teaching loads across campus?
• if that might lead to professors that have avoided the classroom (to focus on research) being forced back into the classroom as teaching loads are redistributed? 

Some personal insight on the types of questions SACS have asked of others in the past. ChapelBoro article kinda' confirms, they want to know who is in the classroom (and not just the students).

You've noted this before, but I think SACS might be most befuddled by the lack of department head review/the lack of accountability and communication in the administrative chain. If UNC can't produce the annual reviews of all department heads, they're screwed. If they can produce annual reviews for some but not all department heads, they're screwed. If they are able to produce them for all department heads, they have been blatantly lying to the public. The annual review + Dr. N's teaching load are potentially toxic.

PackMan97 wrote:

wolfsnacks93 wrote: Chapelboro.com
Lew Margolis
Counting Credits
February 21, 2013

http://chapelboro.com/Counting-Credits/10391214?pi d=297956

"Just this week many academic departments at UNC received notice that they must provide “physical evidence” that courses are meeting, so some units are considering the use of a photographer to visit random classes to record that a teacher and students are present."

Ok...so, pick and random day, round up all the athletes get them in a classroom and take a picture. Better yet, have them bring a change of clothes reset the date/time on the camera and take another pic while you are at it.

The only thing I think of when I hear of stupid things like this is how much easier these "checks" making their institutional cheating. But we have PHOTOS of the class meeting! See, we picked two random dates and here is the proof! Of course, I'm pretty sure I'm paranoid.

Not sure about the paranoia, but with UNC the possibility certainly exists. If their intention is to cheat around any given set of rules and requirements, you can be pretty well assured they will come up with a way to do it. After all, they have more experience in it than anyone else I can imagine. What they do will be based on what they intend to do, not what some new set of rules requires them to do. Until someone within their domain of authority says "game over" they will continue with the games.

Abecedarian wrote:

ProfessorWolf wrote:

packphinsfan wrote: Professor, is this truly a personal musing (based on what could clearly be fact), or are you hearing whispers from over there?

Some personal insight on the types of questions SACS have asked of others in the past. ChapelBoro article kinda' confirms, they want to know who is in the classroom (and not just the students).

You've noted this before, but I think SACS might be most befuddled by the lack of department head review/the lack of accountability and communication in the administrative chain. If UNC can't produce the annual reviews of all department heads, they're screwed. If they can produce annual reviews for some but not all department heads, they're screwed. If they are able to produce them for all department heads, they have been blatantly lying to the public. The annual review + Dr. N's teaching load are potentially toxic.

You are correct... how a department head can go 10+ years with no evaluation is unbelievable. Even a once every 5 year review would be expected as they "reappointed" Dr. J as head for another 5 years. And what about Erskine's post-tenure review policy forced down the throat of all faculty at all of the UNC System campuses... does that not apply to AFAM? If the College of Arts & Sciences was not implementing that policy for AFAM, can we assume it wasn't implemented in the other departments in CAS?

ProfessorWolf wrote:

Abecedarian wrote:

ProfessorWolf wrote:

packphinsfan wrote: Professor, is this truly a personal musing (based on what could clearly be fact), or are you hearing whispers from over there?

Some personal insight on the types of questions SACS have asked of others in the past. ChapelBoro article kinda' confirms, they want to know who is in the classroom (and not just the students).

You've noted this before, but I think SACS might be most befuddled by the lack of department head review/the lack of accountability and communication in the administrative chain. If UNC can't produce the annual reviews of all department heads, they're screwed. If they can produce annual reviews for some but not all department heads, they're screwed. If they are able to produce them for all department heads, they have been blatantly lying to the public. The annual review + Dr. N's teaching load are potentially toxic.

You are correct... how a department head can go 10+ years with no evaluation is unbelievable. Even a once every 5 year review would be expected as they "reappointed" Dr. J as head for another 5 years. And what about Erskine's post-tenure review policy forced down the throat of all faculty at all of the UNC System campuses... does that not apply to AFAM? If the College of Arts & Sciences was not implementing that policy for AFAM, can we assume it wasn't implemented in the other departments in CAS?

With the upcoming SACS visit, I predict that Professorwolf's posts on the subject will become very popular the next 90 days or so.

ProfessorWolf wrote:

packphinsfan wrote: Professor, is this truly a personal musing (based on what could clearly be fact), or are you hearing whispers from over there?

ProfessorWolf wrote: With SACS coming to town, I wonder...

• what they might say about the exorbitant (at least on paper ) teaching load Dr. J had?
• if they might question why no one considered the practicality of someone being able to realistically teach so many courses?
• if that might trigger a review of all teaching loads across campus?
• if that might lead to professors that have avoided the classroom (to focus on research) being forced back into the classroom as teaching loads are redistributed? 

Some personal insight on the types of questions SACS have asked of others in the past. ChapelBoro article kinda' confirms, they want to know who is in the classroom (and not just the students).

Isn't it one of their main defenses that knowing who is in a certain section (and pictures would confirm that) violates FERPA? If it is not then we want names as well as the numbers broken down by group of the people who were enrolled in the suspect "classes". We want to see the names of the people in the group they were counted in also.

ProfessorWolf wrote:

Abecedarian wrote:

ProfessorWolf wrote:

packphinsfan wrote: Professor, is this truly a personal musing (based on what could clearly be fact), or are you hearing whispers from over there?

Some personal insight on the types of questions SACS have asked of others in the past. ChapelBoro article kinda' confirms, they want to know who is in the classroom (and not just the students).

You've noted this before, but I think SACS might be most befuddled by the lack of department head review/the lack of accountability and communication in the administrative chain. If UNC can't produce the annual reviews of all department heads, they're screwed. If they can produce annual reviews for some but not all department heads, they're screwed. If they are able to produce them for all department heads, they have been blatantly lying to the public. The annual review + Dr. N's teaching load are potentially toxic.

You are correct... how a department head can go 10+ years with no evaluation is unbelievable. Even a once every 5 year review would be expected as they "reappointed" Dr. J as head for another 5 years. And what about Erskine's post-tenure review policy forced down the throat of all faculty at all of the UNC System campuses... does that not apply to AFAM? If the College of Arts & Sciences was not implementing that policy for AFAM, can we assume it wasn't implemented in the other departments in CAS?

Easy. Thorp didn't think it is his roll to grade teachers. He said it himself. Next question.

Is it just me, or does hoping SACS gets them kinda feel like a legitimate citizen hoping to get Al Capone on tax evasion?

seniorwolf60 wrote:
Well, there goes their great experiment of telepathic learning.

Loller!  Nominated!