Professor John Biggs' chapter demonstrates clearly how the history of cover-up and collusion at the University of Newcastle has become its established way of operating. Here is a sample of relevant quotes (emphasis added).
“The University of Newcastle faced many difficulties, and
instead of admitting there were problems and endeavouring to correct them, generated
poor public relations by appearing to refuse to admit that any problems
existed, or that if they did, it was because of recalcitrant and difficult
individuals outside — never inside — the Administration.”
“Two notorious
cases, the Spautz Case and the Bayley-Jones Case, wasted millions of dollars in
legal fees and settlements, both in and out of court, not to mention the
incredible waste of man hours, stress and pain, for over a decade.”
“The damage caused by the University’s handling of just the
Spautz and Bayley-Jones cases was colossal: to the people concerned, to the University’s
own national and international reputation, to its finances, to staff morale and
division amongst staff, to time-wasting, to the general functioning of the
University as an educational institution. One could be forgiven for thinking
that the Administration of the University of Newcastle was unable to get
anything right, no matter who was Vice-Chancellor.”
“A culture of lying and cover-up had become endemic, resulting
in 2003 in the University being investigated by the St. James Ethics Committee,
over yet another plagiarism case.”
“The life of the
University went on as usual, with Spautz, Bayley-Jones, the Rose incident
(whereby a newly appointed professor left within weeks claiming he had been misled),
the Academic Plan (which disadvantaged selected departments without prior
consultation), the Rigged Failure Rates (another face-saving case where the
University breached its own examination regulations) and other items on David
Clark’s list to keep us amused.”
“I called an
emergency meeting of Faculty Board. We passed two sets of resolutions for
Senate to endorse: (1) expressing grave concern at the way the matter had been
handled, especially the appalling lack of consultation, (2) requesting the
proposals be withdrawn and alternatives explored.
Senate agreed
with both resolutions by a large margin. The VC’s wrist was slapped for his
nonconsultative modus operandi, and Council was asked to scrap the plan
and go back to the drawing boards.”
“… here we’re looking at a whole string of things, and most
follow the same pattern: a problem, a long period of indecision, then a sudden
decision made by one or a few select senior administrators, with minimal
consultation (least of all with those most affected), and little or no
published rationale or case made. Such a style is the antithesis of everything
a university is supposed to stand for. The essence of academic work is to
arrive at the best approximation to truth or the best decision. So, you base a
case on evidence and sound public argument; you invite criticism, not reject it
as an impertinence.”
“… part of the
tragedy is that universities must take much of the blame for this, in their
refusal to listen to whistleblowers, and so to clean up their act.”
How is it possible that the University continues to act in the same way? - on-going cover-up and collusion rather than dealing with issues constructively.
My personal experience tells me that the University of Newcastle has thrived on punishing the brightest and most decent people by bullying them out.
ReplyDeleteProf. Biggs' revelations are so true about that place.
They will not learn because learning means they would lose their power to bully those better than themselves so as to advance their own careers and agendas.
ReplyDeleteJust look at the history of the institution and it's what's actually happened. Otherwise why are there so many ethical people bullied out of the place and it is still happening there?