Published On: Sat, Jul 16th, 2016

Former FAU Professor Sues University for Discrimination

Dr. Chunxue Victor Wang, a Florida Atlantic University professor of Educational Leadership and Research Methodology was fired from the university after being suspected of sending accusatory emails to faculty members.  Now, he is suing the university under the claim that his dismissal from his position was an act of discrimination. He accused the Board of Trustees of disregarding the Florida Civil Rights Act and claimed one count of deprivation for due process as evidenced by the Broward Palm Beach New Times. Although the lawsuit was filed on Friday, June 3, 2016, the first emails date back to 2014.

The emails signed by a “Mr. Joe” were traced back to Indonesia and blamed faculty of plotting amongst each other to maintain employee wages low and boost unqualified workers to higher positions. Thus, FAU faculty deduced that “Wang and Joe having both come from Asian descent, (Wang from China and Mr. Joe from Indonesia.) Wang or someone connected to him must have been the person behind the account.” The email account is under the name changshakid@gmail.com referring to a Chinese city rather than a location in Indonesia according to the Broward Palm Beach New Times.   It’s also curious that the username mentions a “kid” which may give a signal as to the age of the culprit. But FAU officials seem to be convinced Wang is to blame.

The faculty also took into consideration the professor’s salary complaints around the same time the email campaign was underway.   The lawsuit stated that Wang had come upon the realization he was receiving “19,000 dollars less in comparison to his tenured colleagues that were not of Asian descent.”  Additionally, Wang acknowledged that he had never been to Indonesia as stated in the Palm Beach Post. Despite this, the professor was fired on May 24, 2016 after failing to comply with the universities orders to offer “an official apology” to the professors mentioned in the emails.

Wang decided to seek legal help after he obtained a “C” on his teacher evaluation. In fact, he was also deferred for five days from campus as well as invited to attend a training workshop for anti discrimination, ironically enough.

“It’s not right of a prominent Florida university to try and get rid of a good professor while paying him less,” said an FAU student who wished to remain anonymous.

It seems Dr. Wang has left behind quite a legacy at the university as he has appeared on CCTV America for a segment on vocational education and written over 200 books and journal articles. Some of them even employed as textbooks for courses specializing in Strategic Leadership and Management. Prior to his dismissal, the professor had also been working on editing the International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology alongside Columbia professor Dr. Lyle Yorks and adult educational theorist, Dr. Patricia Cranton according to his college of education profile on the university’s website.

Displaying 15 Comments
Have Your Say
  1. Jeff says:

    Guy sounds like a piece of work. Speaking of which, the amount of publications alone in that amount of time is a huge red flag and I would have them peer reviewed a second time. Since tfa didn’t mention that he was tenured himself, he would make a good bit less than a Prof with tenure duh. Thanks also for the worthless anonymous quote in tfa. Top notch journalism there.
    From a tech standpoint, fau dropped the ball. Probably has a VPN setup stateside for his relatives overseas to access the internet outside of the great firewall of China. Indonesia is lax with hosting (why all the illegal movie sites host there and Estonia lol) so that gels but really should have checked his laptop for the VPN connection saved. Not like he setup a new one each time from scratch…if he did… Good luck to all involved.

    • Mohamad says:

      Jeff, you really sounded like Dr. Ira Bogotch who has been so jealous of Dr. Wang’s publications. You’d be surprised if you search for his books on Amazon.
      Chair Shockley is a known Wily Fox who ordered FAU technicians to have searched Dr. Wang’s on campus computer “numerous” times and found nothing to corroborate his fabricated discriminatory opinions against Dr. Wang. Jury will laugh at his idiocy for sure and Kelly may eventually fire him because over the years, Shockley has fired way too many stellar faculty and students. He should have learned a lesson after he fired Micheal Galbraith. He is SO Guilty and should go to Hell because Micheal was a STAR here and was recently killed at a very young age. If Shockley did not remove him, Micheal would be living like you and Bogotch.

      Jeff, you can never out start the wiley fox, Shockley. He is a criminal and deserves jail time, many women full time and adjunct faculty (removed by him) say so.

    • S. Rios says:

      Agreed. Shockley is such a guilty scoundrel that he should be taken to court. He simply ganged up on Dr. Wang, an exceptional professor and scholar. It is ironical FAU did his 360 chair evaluation within 1.5 years. To cover his own ASS, Shockley perhaps wanted to scapegoat a minority faculty. However, this time, he picked a wrong one. FAU will lose, big time. Shockley engaged in “systematic and intentional” discrimination and retaliation. Please note in 2011, Shockley introduced Dr. Wang as a nationally and internationally recognized scholar.
      This time, no one will be able to protect Shockley. His long time buddies, Bristor and Hawkins will face trial…

      This department needs a chair who must be a leading scholar and ethical person, not a champion of discrimination and retaliation! How pathetic Shockley’s CV has nothing…

    • M. Mountfo says:

      Obviously according to these details, President Kelly’s going to do more damage than good in his tenure here if we gain the heretical reputation as the one university in the nation that fires tenured professors. He should have stopped Shockley’s cohort (seeming racists) from taking abusing their “power”!

    • Retaliation for Protected EEO Activity is Unlawful
      _________________________________________

      Equal employment opportunity (EEO) statutes that prohibit federal agencies, including the Department of Labor, from discriminating against employees on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, and genetic information, as well as wage differences between men and women performing substantially equal work, also prohibit retaliation against individuals who oppose unlawful discrimination or participate in an employment discrimination proceeding. As a result, an agency may not fire, demote, harass or otherwise take adverse action against an employee or applicant for employment for filing a charge of discrimination, participating in a discrimination proceeding, or otherwise opposing discrimination.

      What activity is protected by the prohibition against retaliation?

      An individual engages in protected activity when s/he: (1) opposes a practice s/he considers to be discriminatory; (2) participates in an employment discrimination proceeding; or (3) engages in other protected activity.

      Opposing Discrimination: Opposing a discriminatory practice consists of communicating to the agency a reasonable, good-faith belief that the agency is engaging in prohibited discrimination. Examples of opposition include complaining to anyone about alleged discrimination against oneself or others; threatening to file a complaint alleging discrimination; picketing in opposition to discrimination; or refusing to obey an order reasonably believed to be discriminatory. Examples of employee activities that are not protected as opposition include actions that interfere with job performance so as to render the employee ineffective or unlawful activities such as acts or threats of violence.

      Participating in an employment discrimination proceeding: Participation means taking part in an employment discrimination proceeding. Participation is protected activity even if the proceeding involved claims that ultimately were found to be invalid. Examples of participation include filing a charge of employment discrimination; cooperating with an internal investigation of alleged discriminatory practices; or serving as a witness in an EEO investigation or litigation.

      Other Protected Activity: Additional protected activity includes requests for an accommodation based on disability or religion.

      Which individuals are covered by this protection?

      Covered individuals are persons who have requested accommodations, opposed unlawful practices, or participated in proceedings related to employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity and pregnancy), national origin, age, disability, or genetic information. Protections are also extended to individuals based on sexual orientation and parental status pursuant to Executive Order and Department of Labor policy. Individuals who have a close association with someone who has engaged in such protected activity also are covered individuals. For example, it is illegal to take adverse action against an employee because his spouse participated in employment discrimination proceedings. Individuals who have brought attention to violations of law other than employment discrimination are not covered individuals for purposes of anti-discrimination retaliation laws. Individuals may have recourse under the anti-retaliation provisions of those other laws, but not under the laws enforced through the federal sector EEO process. For example, “whistleblowers” who raise ethical, financial, or other concerns unrelated to employment discrimination are not protected by laws applicable to federal employees and applicants.

      What is an adverse action prohibited by EEO statutes, regulations and/or policies?

      An adverse action is an action taken to penalize someone for or prevent someone from opposing a discriminatory employment practice, participating in an employment discrimination proceeding, or requesting an accommodation based on disability or religion. Such an action could form the basis of a new EEO complaint. Examples of adverse actions include: (1) denial of promotion; (2) non-selection/refusal to hire; (3) denial of job benefits; (4) demotion; (5) suspension; (6) discharge; (7) threats; (8) reprimands; (9) negative evaluations; (10) harassment; or (11) other adverse treatment that is likely to deter reasonable people from pursuing their rights.

    • G. Lotaya says:

      Federal Laws Prohibiting Job Discrimination Questions And Answers
      Federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws
      I. What Are the Federal Laws Prohibiting Job Discrimination?
      • Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;
      • the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), which protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination;
      The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces all of these laws. EEOC also provides oversight and coordination of all federal equal employment opportunity regulations, practices, and policies.
      II. What Discriminatory Practices Are Prohibited by These Laws? Under Title VII, the ADA, GINA, and the ADEA, it is illegal to discriminate in any aspect of employment, including:
      • hiring and firing;
      • compensation, assignment, or classification of employees;
      • transfer, promotion, layoff, or recall;
      • job advertisements;
      • recruitment;
      • testing;
      • use of company facilities;
      • training and apprenticeship programs;
      • fringe benefits;
      • pay, retirement plans, and disability leave; or
      • other terms and conditions of employment.
      Discriminatory practices under these laws also include:
      • harassment on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability, genetic information, or age;
      • retaliation against an individual for filing a charge of discrimination, participating in an investigation, or opposing discriminatory practices;
      • employment decisions based on stereotypes or assumptions about the abilities, traits, or performance of individuals of a certain sex, race, age, religion, or ethnic group, or individuals with disabilities, or based on myths or assumptions about an individual’s genetic information; and
      • denying employment opportunities to a person because of marriage to, or association with, an individual of a particular race, religion, national origin, or an individual with a disability. Title VII also prohibits discrimination because of participation in schools or places of worship associated with a particular racial, ethnic, or religious group.
      Employers are required to post notices to all employees advising them of their rights under the laws EEOC enforces and their right to be free from retaliation. Such notices must be accessible, as needed, to persons with visual or other disabilities that affect reading.
      III. What Other Practices Are Discriminatory Under These Laws?
      Title VII
      Title VII prohibits not only intentional discrimination, but also practices that have the effect of discriminating against individuals because of their race, color, national origin, religion, or sex.
      National Origin Discrimination
      • It is illegal to discriminate against an individual because of birthplace, ancestry, culture, or linguistic characteristics common to a specific ethnic group.
      • A rule requiring that employees speak only English on the job may violate Title VII unless an employer shows that the requirement is necessary for conducting business. If the employer believes such a rule is necessary, employees must be informed when English is required and the consequences for violating the rule.
      Equal Pay Act
      The EPA prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in the payment of wages or benefits, where men and women perform work of similar skill, effort, and responsibility for the same employer under similar working conditions.
      Note that:
      • Employers may not reduce wages of either sex to equalize pay between men and women.
      • A violation of the EPA may occur where a different wage was/is paid to a person who worked in the same job before or after an employee of the opposite sex.
      • A violation may also occur where a labor union causes the employer to violate the law.
      The Civil Rights Act of 1991
      The Civil Rights Act of 1991 made major changes in the federal laws against employment discrimination enforced by EEOC. Enacted in part to reverse several Supreme Court decisions that limited the rights of persons protected by these laws, the Act also provides additional protections. The Act authorizes compensatory and punitive damages in cases of intentional discrimination, and provides for obtaining attorneys’ fees and the possibility of jury trials. It also directs the EEOC to expand its technical assistance and outreach activities.
      Employers And Other Entities Covered By EEO Laws
      IV. Which Employers and Other Entities Are Covered by These Laws?
      Title VII, the ADA, and GINA cover all private employers, state and local governments, and education institutions that employ 15 or more individuals. These laws also cover private and public employment agencies, labor organizations, and joint labor management committees controlling apprenticeship and training.
      The ADEA covers all private employers with 20 or more employees, state and local governments (including school districts), employment agencies and labor organizations.
      The EPA covers all employers who are covered by the Federal Wage and Hour Law (the Fair Labor Standards Act). Virtually all employers are subject to the provisions of this Act.
      Title VII, the ADEA, GINA, and the EPA also cover the federal government. In addition, the federal government is covered by Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, which incorporate the requirements of the ADA. However, different procedures are used for processing complaints of federal discrimination. For more information on how to file a complaint of federal discrimination, contact the EEO office of the federal agency where the alleged discrimination occurred.
      The CSRA (not enforced by EEOC) covers most federal agency employees except employees of a government corporation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and as determined by the President, any executive agency or unit thereof, the principal function of which is the conduct of
      XIII. What Remedies Are Available When Discrimination Is Found?
      The “relief” or remedies available for employment discrimination, whether caused by intentional acts or by practices that have a discriminatory effect, may include:
      • back pay,
      • hiring,
      • promotion,
      • reinstatement,
      • front pay,
      • reasonable accommodation, or
      • other actions that will make an individual “whole” (in the condition s/he would have been but for the discrimination).
      Remedies also may include payment of:
      • attorneys’ fees,
      • expert witness fees, and
      • court costs.
      Under most EEOC-enforced laws, compensatory and punitive damages also may be available where intentional discrimination is found. Damages may be available to compensate for actual monetary losses, for future monetary losses, and for mental anguish and inconvenience. Punitive damages also may be available if an employer acted with malice or reckless indifference. Punitive damages are not available against the federal, state or local governments.
      In cases concerning reasonable accommodation under the ADA, compensatory or punitive damages may not be awarded to the charging party if an employer can demonstrate that “good faith” efforts were made to provide reasonable accommodation.
      An employer may be required to post notices to all employees addressing the violations of a specific charge and advising them of their rights under the laws EEOC enforces and their right to be free from retaliation. Such notices must be accessible, as needed, to persons with visual or other disabilities that affect reading.
      The employer also may be required to take corrective or preventive actions to cure the source of the identified discrimination and minimize the chance of its recurrence, as well as discontinue the specific discriminatory practices involved in the case.
      The Commission
      XIV. What Is EEOC and How Does It Operate?
      EEOC is an independent federal agency originally created by Congress in 1964 to enforce Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Commission is composed of five Commissioners and a General Counsel appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Commissioners are appointed for five-year staggered terms; the General Counsel’s term is four years. The President designates a Chair and a Vice-Chair. The Chair is the chief executive officer of the Commission. The Commission has authority to establish equal employment policy and to approve litigation. The General Counsel is responsible for conducting litigation.
      EEOC carries out its enforcement, education and technical assistance activities through 53 field offices serving every part of the nation.

    • I. Bogosch says:

      Wrongful dismissal, also called wrongful termination or wrongful discharge, is a legal phrase, describing a situation in which an employee’s contract of employment has been terminated by the employer if the termination breaches one or more terms of the contract of employment, or a statute provision in employment law. It follows that the scope for wrongful dismissal varies according to the terms of the employment contract, and varies by jurisdiction. The absence of a formal contract of employment does not preclude wrongful dismissal in jurisdictions in which a de facto contract is taken to exist by virtue of the employment relationship. Terms of such a contract may include obligations and rights outlined in an employee handbook. Being terminated for any of the items listed below may constitute wrongful termination:
      • Discrimination: The employer cannot terminate employment because the employee is a certain race, nationality, religion, sex, age, or (in some jurisdictions) sexual orientation.
      • Retaliation: An employer cannot fire an employee because the employee filed a claim of discrimination or is participating in an investigation for discrimination. In the US, this “retaliation” is forbidden under civil rights law.
      • Employee’s refusal to commit an illegal act: An employer is not permitted to fire an employee because the employee refuses to commit an act that is illegal.
      • Employer is not following own termination procedures: Often, the employee handbook or company policy outlines a procedure that must be followed before an employee is terminated. If the employer fires an employee without following this procedure, the employee may have a claim for wrongful termination.
      Wrongful dismissal will tend to arise first as a claim by the employee so dismissed. Many jurisdictions provide tribunals or courts which will hear actions for wrongful dismissal. A proven wrongful dismissal will tend to lead to two main remedies: reinstatement of the dismissed employee and/or monetary compensation for the wrongfully dismissed.

      Retaliation for Protected EEO Activity is Unlawful
      _________________________________________

      Equal employment opportunity (EEO) statutes that prohibit federal agencies, including the Department of Labor, from discriminating against employees on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, and genetic information, as well as wage differences between men and women performing substantially equal work, also prohibit retaliation against individuals who oppose unlawful discrimination or participate in an employment discrimination proceeding. As a result, an agency may not fire, demote, harass or otherwise take adverse action against an employee or applicant for employment for filing a charge of discrimination, participating in a discrimination proceeding, or otherwise opposing discrimination.

      What activity is protected by the prohibition against retaliation?

      An individual engages in protected activity when s/he: (1) opposes a practice s/he considers to be discriminatory; (2) participates in an employment discrimination proceeding; or (3) engages in other protected activity.

      Opposing Discrimination: Opposing a discriminatory practice consists of communicating to the agency a reasonable, good-faith belief that the agency is engaging in prohibited discrimination. Examples of opposition include complaining to anyone about alleged discrimination against oneself or others; threatening to file a complaint alleging discrimination; picketing in opposition to discrimination; or refusing to obey an order reasonably believed to be discriminatory. Examples of employee activities that are not protected as opposition include actions that interfere with job performance so as to render the employee ineffective or unlawful activities such as acts or threats of violence.

      Participating in an employment discrimination proceeding: Participation means taking part in an employment discrimination proceeding. Participation is protected activity even if the proceeding involved claims that ultimately were found to be invalid. Examples of participation include filing a charge of employment discrimination; cooperating with an internal investigation of alleged discriminatory practices; or serving as a witness in an EEO investigation or litigation.

      Other Protected Activity: Additional protected activity includes requests for an accommodation based on disability or religion.

      Which individuals are covered by this protection?

      Covered individuals are persons who have requested accommodations, opposed unlawful practices, or participated in proceedings related to employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity and pregnancy), national origin, age, disability, or genetic information. Protections are also extended to individuals based on sexual orientation and parental status pursuant to Executive Order and Department of Labor policy. Individuals who have a close association with someone who has engaged in such protected activity also are covered individuals. For example, it is illegal to take adverse action against an employee because his spouse participated in employment discrimination proceedings. Individuals who have brought attention to violations of law other than employment discrimination are not covered individuals for purposes of anti-discrimination retaliation laws. Individuals may have recourse under the anti-retaliation provisions of those other laws, but not under the laws enforced through the federal sector EEO process. For example, “whistleblowers” who raise ethical, financial, or other concerns unrelated to employment discrimination are not protected by laws applicable to federal employees and applicants.

      What is an adverse action prohibited by EEO statutes, regulations and/or policies?

      An adverse action is an action taken to penalize someone for or prevent someone from opposing a discriminatory employment practice, participating in an employment discrimination proceeding, or requesting an accommodation based on disability or religion. Such an action could form the basis of a new EEO complaint. Examples of adverse actions include: (1) denial of promotion; (2) non-selection/refusal to hire; (3) denial of job benefits; (4) demotion; (5) suspension; (6) discharge; (7) threats; (8) reprimands; (9) negative evaluations; (10) harassment; or (11) other adverse treatment that is likely to deter reasonable people from pursuing their rights.

    • M. Haught says:

      Remedies For Employment Discrimination–Title VII, Federal Law:

      Whenever discrimination is found, the goal of the law is to put the victim of discrimination in the same position (or nearly the same) that he or she would have been if the discrimination had never occurred.

      The types of relief will depend upon the discriminatory action and the effect it had on the victim. For example, if someone is not selected for a job or a promotion because of discrimination, the remedy may include placement in the job and/or back pay and benefits the person would have received.

      The employer also will be required to stop any discriminatory practices and take steps to prevent discrimination in the future.

      A victim of discrimination also may be able to recover attorney’s fees, expert witness fees, and court costs.
      Remedies May Include Compensatory & Punitive Damages

      Compensatory and punitive damages may be awarded in cases involving intentional discrimination based on a person’s race, color, national origin, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation), religion, disability, or genetic information.

      Compensatory damages pay victims for out-of-pocket expenses caused by the discrimination (such as costs associated with a job search or medical expenses) and compensate them for any emotional harm suffered (such as mental anguish, inconvenience, or loss of enjoyment of life).

      Punitive damages may be awarded to punish an employer who has committed an especially malicious or reckless act of discrimination.

  2. Dennis Keefe says:

    Dear President Kelly, Provost Perry, Dr. Shockley, Professors, Selected Graduate Students,

    (Attachments: Dr. Henschke’s letter; and, this letter in pdf-format).

    The festering scandal involving the sudden removal of Dr. Victor C.X. Wang, in the fourth week of his summer courses some 30 days ago, has now reached the attention of a key national leader in the field of Adult Education. This ominous development portends what may be a descent down the dark side of both academic and public opinion for our school and our students. Of note, the letter from Dr. John Henschke (attached below), former president of the AAACE, American Association for Adult and Continuing Education, and past chair and current member of the board of the International Adult Educators Hall of Fame, is particularly damning of the machinations and seeming corruption within the Department of Educational Leadership of FAU. Machiavellian moves mediated by just one, two or three “scholar” administrators, yet countenanced by too many others at low, middle and upper levels of our university management system.

    This purulent-yellow scandal is now deepening as it seeps from inside the walls of FAU into the domain of academia nationwide. Serious scholars in Florida and elsewhere will be asking questions: Why would an educational leadership department fire a tenured professor? Why would it fire this professor in middle of a course, weeks after the semester started? Why would the head of any reputable department remove its, by far, most-published professor? Why would any school ever try to get rid of the editor of an academic journal – few in the FAU Department of Education published more than one peer-reviewed article last year, let alone edit an educational journal! And why would FAU NOT be completely satisfied with a teacher who consistently gets above, and sometimes well-above average ratings from students? The man can publish; the man can teach and inspire. What more does any university big or small want from its loyal faculty? Please know that the very last student survey of Dr. Wang’s semester course, just a few weeks ago, placed him at the top of the entire department – a perfect rating! And finally, while most good universities are trying to hire qualified international professors, why would FAU give the pink slip to their eminent Chinese professor of education? Nothing that has happened to this professor, who is the only breadwinner in a family of four, makes moral or logical sense. These academic contradictions are so egregious that they almost demand a J’accuse from a Zola or a Voltaire.

    Something very unusual is surreptitiously taking place in one dark and dirty corner of FAU, and it is very ugly. I do not know exactly what the cause is, but it needs to be investigated and soon. When adjuncts without publishing records are favored over well-versed scholars, something is awry. Some of us are beginning to suspect nepotism, favoritism and even hemophiliac hiring – well, whatever – the disease is deeply embedded under the veneer of respectable scholarship, concealed in someone’s cap and gown, a wolf in a sheepskin, perhaps. In addition, Adult and Community Education as well as other branches of Educational Leadership were already severely hampered because of its hiring of its own graduates, one after the other, to teach our graduate courses! We are starting to get a reputation of “a charter school,” “a correspondence course center,” “a phantom curriculum.” We are risking investigations by outside accrediting agencies. In the institution itself, we are not only ignoring the traditions of graduate education, we are violating the newly minted key strategic initiatives of Dr. Kelly and his team.

    The damning letter of Dr. Henschke needs to be taken very seriously. To some of us in the field, he is the Jimmy Carter of Adult Education: a good man, an honest man, a very experienced man who has held major leadership positions his entire life, including those of church minister, national president of AAACE (mentioned above), professor and scholar. His CV is some 72 pages long, chock full of peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations domestic and international, and academic experience in South America, Europe, Africa, Asia and, of course, in the United States at the University of Missouri, at Boston University, at Northern Baptist Theological Seminary: Masters in Divinity; Masters in Theology; Doctorate in Education; Studies in vocal music, instrumental music, counseling – a modern Renaissance man and a Humanist. He was a doctoral student of Malcolm Knowles, considered by some to be the leader in adult education. In the field of andragogy (Adult Education), to mention that you studied with Malcolm Knowles is like a linguist saying that he or she studied under Noam Chomsky, or a physicist with Richard Feynman, or an economist with Robert Reich. When Dr. Henschke speaks, the men and women in our field take heed. Dr. Henschke, eminently qualified, is trying to speak reason and humanity to our school FAU, now.

    More and more of us master and doctoral students are realizing that an organization that suddenly fires one of its top scholars, respected and appreciated by so many, is not an institution that is following its own precepts. In fact, it is an institution not worth the tuition and fees, nor the respect of honest men and women students and teachers. And in terms of our respect for scholarship and academic publishing, we are not far from the fallen, and the falling, “virtual universities”. In order that the programs here do not become more tainted than they already are, the reestablishment of honesty, academic excellence and service need to be reinstated, and the first ineluctable step for a rekindling of the academic life of the Department of Education is the rescinding of the cowardly order by Dr. Shockley to fire Dr. Wang. There is no better friend of academia and of FAU than Dr. Victor C.X. Wang (whose CV, by the way, encompasses over 50 pages). This Dr. Henschke knows; and with fear I say, this everyone in the field of Education and Adult Education will begin to hear about in coming months. We do not want the value of our PhD’s nor the reputation of FAU to suffer through the revelation of this scandal. The cure needs to be administered, and the obituary must not, at all costs, be published. For the love of humanity and spirituality, SAVE THIS DEPARTMENT.

    We demand amends, and an apology for the academic assassination of one of FAU’s leading teachers and scholars. We scholars demand an explanation for the indecent firing of a decent man. A South Florida university is not a North Korean institution of higher learning.

    Have we no decency? Dr. Shockley, You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency, Sir? Family of four, a home to be lost, insurance canceled, a reputation to be blighted, a career and an academic life to be snuffed out – in secrecy. A statue of clay standing on a pedestal of ashes pointing a finger at an honest, hard-working man, beloved by his family, his students, and scholars the world over.

    With deepest respect for this Institution of Higher Learning, on this day July 13, 2016,

    Dennis Keefe
    Presidential Scholar
    Department of Educational Leadership, Adult and Community Education

  3. M Deede says:

    Some 100 current College of Education Faculty members accused Bristor and Shockley (his stooge, Bryan) of disrupting the collegial, close-knit culture of the school and turning it into an environment of fear and intimidation, discrimination and retaliation, where the back-stabbing politics were so thick that few would dare challenge the dean and the incumbent chair, demoted from associate dean’s position in 2003. Those current and former employees had unsuccessfully urged the university via UFF administrator’s survey (more than two years consecutively) not to reappoint Bristor to a second term, claiming that she created a “hostile workplace” in which staff, particularly women and people over 40, were hounded out of jobs and roles amid numerous violations of FAU’s Code of Conduct and HR policies. According to these UFF administrators’ surveys, Bristor refused to redress the bully mentality of chairs towards faculty and students. Some faculty claim that Bristor might be “reimbursed” by Shockley’s grant monies. 2015, July, Provost Perry’s memo was to do the chair’s 360 evaluation immediately, but she hid the memo until the beginning of the 2016 Spring Semester. Out of pressure from this department’s faculty, she reluctantly did it. However, in 2014, when Perry wanted to replace Shockley with another, Bristor protected Shockley, indicating Dr. Russo had left FAU on her own, ignoring the fact that Shockley has had a history of removing stellar faculty including a tenured professor named Michael Galbraith, he fired for sexual harassment (fabricated by Shockley’s cohort). She allowed Shockley to remove most of ACE full time faculty and now he successfully made Bryan the only Queen Bee in the program, teaching all her courses online in her comfortable home located in South Carolina. The rest of the vast majority of courses are assigned to her students, a clear violation of SACS accreditation standards. For more, please contact Bob or Meredith, UFF presidents.

  4. M. M says:

    Facts About Retaliation/Discrimination–A Lesson for University Officials:

    Retaliation is the most frequently alleged basis of discrimination in the federal sector and the most common discrimination finding in federal sector cases.

    An employer may not fire, demote, harass or otherwise “retaliate” against an individual for filing a charge of discrimination, participating in a discrimination proceeding, or otherwise opposing discrimination. The same laws that prohibit discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, and disability, as well as wage differences between men and women performing substantially equal work, also prohibit retaliation against individuals who oppose unlawful discrimination or participate in an employment discrimination proceeding.

    For details, please visit EEOC website

    • Patricia Ows says:

      Florida Civil Rights Act

      760.01 Purposes; construction; title.—
      (1) Sections 760.01-760.11 and 509.092 shall be cited as the “Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992.”
      (2) The general purposes of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 are to secure for all individuals within the state freedom from discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy, national origin, age, handicap, or marital status and thereby to protect their interest in personal dignity, to make available to the state their full productive capacities, to secure the state against domestic strife and unrest, to preserve the public safety, health, and general welfare, and to promote the interests, rights, and privileges of individuals within the state.

      • Burdham says:

        Dear President Kelly and Provost Perry,

        Please allow me to introduce myself. My name is Dr. John A. Henschke, Ed.D. and I currently work at Lindenwood University in St. Charles, MO. I have served as President of the American Association for Adult and Continuing Education [AAACE], the Professional Association in the field of Adult Education. I have also served as Chair of the Commission on International Adult Education [CIAE] of AAACE. Recently, the Self Directed Learning Society directed by a former FAU Professor, Dr. Lucy, awarded me the Malcolm Knowles Award in Florida.

        I am contacting you to urge you to reconsider your decision to terminate the tenure of Dr. Victor C. X. Wang as it may draw negative national and international attention to your institution that is likely to tarnish its reputation due to the fact that the termination appears to be based on discrimination and retaliation.

        I have known and worked with Dr. Wang for the past 15 years in the field of Adult Education and Education Leadership on an international level and have come to know him as an exceptional instructor with an outstanding record who is popular among his graduate students as well as his peers and colleagues. I serve as an associate editor for Dr. Wang and have personally contributed to Dr. Wang’s journal. I have also asked Malcolm Knowles’ close colleague, Dr. Edgar Boone, to endorse his journal, International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology. The scholarship of Dr. Wang adds greatly to the scholarship level and reputation of your institution based on the sheer number of his refereed publications as well as the renown of his journal, which is catalogued by many schools around the world, including Ivy League schools. In fact, I have learned that the FAU library deans look forward to the journal’s publication and his books every spring and hold workshops to study Dr. Wang’s journal articles.

        I have heard from both Dr. Wang’s graduate students as well as his colleagues that they feel that Dr. Wang was framed by his chair and dean based on unfounded and discriminatory opinions, rather than hard facts, related to negative statements about FAU made by a “Mr. Joe” with an e-mail account in Indonesia. Universities should be the institution in society that is the most dedicated to reason and evidence-based decisions, but the decision to terminate Dr. Wang’s tenure does not appear to be supported by either reason or hard evidence. Instead, the decision seems to be based on a personal agenda of only a handful of people with a serious lack of even the most basic knowledge of geography, as they seem to assume that every person of Asian origin knows and communicates with every other person in Asia.

        Should you need to contact me regarding this petition on behalf of Dr. Wang, please do not hesitate to contact me. I am available every day as I am deeply concerned about Dr. Wang’s well-being which is seriously affected by your institution’s decision to terminate his tenure and exceptional contributions.

        Most Sincerely,

        John A. Henschke, Ed. D.

        • Eric Fisher says:

          I had the opportunity of talking with Kelly twice about this dinosaur, Shockley. No one is happy with his TOXIC/Nasty MISCONDUCT against faculty and students. From what Kelly told me, Shockley’s days are numbered. He will retire on his own. We told Dr. Wang to sue his pants off to get justice for the whole academic community. FAU should release this racist and his racist friends in the administration, engaged in a pattern of misconduct and discrimination…

  5. Dennis says:

    Dear University of FAU, EEOC, State Attorney General, and Colleagues,

    I discuss the mistreatment of me as a student by Dr. Shockley of the Department of Educational Leadership. Dr. Shockley dropped me from the doctoral program in January, 2016, after I had started the Spring Semester, totally outside of legitimate channels. Further, he stopped my GA payment, causing great stress on my family. In addition, he took away my Presidential Scholarship in the second or third week of January, 2016. Finally, because of the fact that I live in an Adult Education Doctoral Program Ghost Town, with regrettably not even ONE class to take in my field this semester, I am therefore placed in a position where I need to set the record straight about my work here in Educational Leadership FAU. I came to FAU from China to quietly study for a PhD in adult education, and had absolutely no intent of getting involved in the office politics of this university. However, being the witness and victim of discrimination on the part of Dr. Shockley and his abuse of power toward me as a student, I cannot now remain silent. At a minimum, I must at least show my progress here at FAU.

    Let’s look at my record at FAU, and only at FAU:

    1) Peer-reviewed publications, five already published 2) Additional international publications
    3) Grades, GPA = 4.0 4) GRE scores = 1420 5) Volunteer work at FAU 6) Educational research trips
    7) Speeches and presentations 8) GA responsibilities and 9) Obstacles by Dr. Shockley.
    Number One: Peer-Reviewed Publications, five already published.
    1. Published 2015, February. Book review in Adult Education Quarterly, North America’s
    leading journal in my field, Tier I, Reviewed Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.). (2013). International
    Education and the Next-Generation Workforce: Competition in the Global Economy. Hershey,
    PA: IGI Global. 304 pp. $176.70 (hardcopy). Publication attached below.
    2. Published 2016, January. Book review in a Wiley’s leading journal, New Horizons in Adult
    Education and Human Resource Development; reviewed Wang, Victor C. X., & Bryan, Valerie
    C. (Eds.). (2014). Andragogical and Pedagogical Methods for Curriculum and Program
    Development, Hershey, PA: IGI. Publication attached below.
    3. Published 2015, October. Book review in International Journal of Adult Vocational
    Education and Technology; Book review about Activity Theory, Authentic Learning and
    Emerging Technologies: Towards a Transformative Higher Education Pedagogy. Publication
    attached below.
    4. Published 2015, September. Article in IJAVET about adult learning and social justice:
    Keefe, D. (2015). Andragogy in the Appalachians: Myles Horton, the Highlander Folk School,
    and Education for Social and Economic Justice. Course 1, Current course (IJAVET), 6(3), 16-
    30. Journal article published in IJAVET, article went through blind review process; journal
    indexed in 13 academic data bases including Applied Social Sciences; under review by SSCI
    indexing. IJAVET has published articles by leading scholars including former
    Harvard/Columbia Professor, Stephen Brookfield, Harvard graduates, current FAU Professor
    Ostrowski and her Columbia friend, Ellie Dragon Severson (Department Chair). Publications
    attached below.
    5. Published 2014, May. Refereed chapter on Adult Motivations for Learning and the 19th
    Century Chautauqua Movement (abbreviated title), published in Education and Technology in a
    Changing Society; once again found a chapter by the above mentioned professors and chapters
    by other leading scholars in the same book. Publication attached below.
    Number Three: Grades, GPA = 4.0

    Course 1, Grade A, Wang, Leadership I
    Course 2, Grade A, Liberman, Statistics
    Course 3, Grade A, Vasquez-Colina, Research
    Course 4, Grade A, Wang, Leadership II
    Course 5, Grade A, Morris, Advanced Statistics
    Course 6, Grade A, Wang. Curriculum
    Course 7, Grade A, Maslin-Ostrowski/Wang, Leadership III
    Course 8, Grade A, Wang, Adult and Community Education
    Course 9, Grade A, Bottorff, History and Philosophy of American Education
    Course 10, Grade A, Maslin-Ostrowski, Qualitative Inquiry
    Course 11, Grade A, Maslin-Ostrowski, Directed Independent Study, Nonagenerians
    Course 12, Current course, spring, 2016, (Outside of program because no classes available!)
    Course 13, Current course, spring, 2016, (Outside of program because no classes available!)
    Course 14, Current course, spring, 2016, (Outside of program because no classes available!)

    Number Four: GRE Scores: Taken at age 62.

    GRE Qualitative 670
    GRE Quantitative 750
    GRE Total 1420
    GRE Analytical Writing 5.0 (for interpretation: 93rd percentile)

    Number Five: Volunteer work for FAU
    Three full days accompanying visiting Chinese scholarship (only unpaid volunteer), 2014
    Three full days of help from my Chinese wife, also unpaid, 2014
    Preparation of the first Southern USA Language Festival for Dr. Kelly and FAU, 2015-2016
    Judging in the Science poster presentations for FAU, 2015
    Reading for students who cannot see, 2016.
    Number Six: Educational Research Trips, NB: NO funding from department; I paid for everything.
    The Chautauqua Institution, 8 days, August, 2016
    Highlander Folk School, Knoxville, Tennessee, 4 days, December, 2015
    FernUniversitat, Hagan, Germany, 1 day, August, 2016
    Frankfurt School of Sozialforschung, Frankfurt, Germany, 1 day, August, 2016
    Volkshochschule, Freiburg, Germany, 1 day, August, 2016
    Number Seven: Speeches and Presentations
    John Dewey and the Application of Language Learning to Life, Lille, France, August, 2016
    The International Festival of Languages, Duisberg, Germany, August, 2016
    The Chautauqua Heritage Lecture, Chautauqua, New York, August, 2016
    Number Eight: GA Responsibilities, 2014-2016
    The gamut. Mostly researching. Topics touched on in addition to those published so far:
    Transformative Learning, Confucianism and Transformative Learning, History of Chinese
    thought and adult learning, Stakeholders and diffusion of technology in the case of language
    laboratories, Dewey in China, various article reviews, literature reviews, editing of others’
    articles.

    Number Nine: Dr Shockley, unfair discrimination against certain students, start: April, 2015. WHY?

    I will always wonder what Dr. Shockley’s motives were in attempting to, illegally I insist, take
    away my Presidential Scholarship in April, 2016. Why would any department head try to do
    something so unethical? Why did he ask me to tell no one of what happened? (I almost felt I
    was in Godfather IV or something). Why did he delay my summer registration by weeks, and
    my fall registration as well? Why did he insist that a change in one course taken BEFORE the
    course even began (and completely due to HIS mistake) involved a FEE of over $3,000? And
    speaking of $3000, why did I have to talk to 14 people at FAU to get another erroneous charge
    of $3000 off my school bill? Why did he ask ONE YEAR after I was in the program for a
    minor transcript from 46 years ago? Why has he let the department again erroneously charge
    me for my classes? Why did he give me an internal scholarship of about $2,000 in 2014, but
    NONE in 2015 in spite of four new peer-reviewed publications in my field, plus a straight-A
    GPA? Why did he cut me out of the program, suddenly and without any warning or due
    process? Why do I hear so many stories of favoritism in Educational Leadership where a
    student with a GRE of 250 in quantitative gets scholarships and three more classes to teach, and
    one with 750 gets nothing despite acute financial need? I am not even allowed to teach at FAU
    – thanks to our department — and yet I have the most university teaching experience of anyone,
    including most of the professors, here! Why does another student who has had more than 15
    incompletes get a big scholarship, and a student who has NO incompletes gets nothing? Why
    since August 2015 have I been able to take ONLY ONE course directly on the list of classes that
    the Department says I need to take? Why are the middle courses in Adult and Community
    Education a complete ghost town? An academic ghost town. Why the poisonous administrative
    atmosphere? Why? Dear professors, I came from China to STUDY, to study HERE. I was assuming that the department heads of this university were, above all, scholars, and also humanists with a sense of decency and a soul that believes in helping students (whether or not that student’s work redounds to a particular department head’s glory or not). Dear professors, I am not asking you to publicly stick your neck out for me or for my professor because I fear that in this toxic atmosphere of the Educational Leadership program, you will also suffer from repercussions and subtle or not so subtle retributions from Dr. Shockley. At best, you will be made to feel uncomfortable, disloyal to the team. But I do ask you to remember. I ask you to not close your eyes, and to not allow others to aid and abet an injustice. I have seen how this department chair, Dr. Shockley, (“getting by with a little help from his friends,” sayeth the Beatles) flouts past and present pillars of the FAU mission and vision to raise our admission standards, to keep talented faculty, and to offer student support and scholarship funds to exceptional students, even if they are age 64. To make this concrete: this Department is on autopilot with a flight path directly opposite that which Dr. Kelly and FAU is striving for. Something is very wrong here, and I just spoke last week to one blind student who has undergone what I consider horrible, discriminatory treatment by Dr. Shockley. Also recently, one kind colleague who became aware of the “serial” mistreatment that I have been undergoing since April, 2015, sent me the results of the internal 360-degree evaluations for the Education department. Honestly, as a former manager in business and in education myself, reading these extremely negative evaluations, I would say you have some severe leadership problems here in Educational Leadership, right here, and so I would say “follow the money” or trace the networks of nepotism and favoritism. Make this place a REAL department of EDUCATION that at least follows its own written precepts and those of the university.

    Sincerely,
    Dennis Keefe,
    Presidential Scholar,
    Educational Leadership, ACE
    Florida Atlantic University

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these html tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>