18. In the emails between Jay White and Gill Atnip I received from my open records request I find out other factors about their handling of the situation. Jay White indicates to Gil Atnip that he (Jay) was not the person the grievance was supposed to go to, despite Jay White telling me I had to bring it to Jay White (proof in emails below). So, Jay White tells me one thing about who I should file with, then later tries to shirk responsibility by indicating I was wrong to bring the signed grievance to Jay White, when it was Jay White himself who told me to bring the signed grievance to Jay White (sorry, had to avoid pronouns to avoid confusion). Jay also lied (or misremembered?) about all sorts of things, such as: when I filed the grievance, when I filed vs. when we had our meeting, when we had our meeting vs. when he made his decisions, why I brought him a signed copy, that I withdrew from the program and that I agreed to that resolution, etc. Jay also gave a straw man version of what my complaint was about, and got the order of events wrong concerning when I started to complain about Linda's treatment. Jay says my rights were not violated because I was allowed to express my views, totally missing the point that I got an 0 in class participation because of expressing them. This is like a cop saying that someone's right to free speech was not violated because they got to say something, then the cop hits the speaker over the head with a billy club because they did not like what was said. I got to see Jay's "investigation" notes, which read more like justifications to make the decisions that were easiest on him, faculty, and the administration. Jay White calls someone "combative and obstructive" for trying to help me figure out my due process rights, and seems to have an instructor is always right attitude. Even though I state multiple times before his investigation that Linda gave no clear instruction that the subject of unethical laws were not to be discussed, and I did not take much time, Jay took Linda's word as gospel giving me no benefit of the doubt. While Jay White gives lip service to student rights, all it takes is for the professor to say you were being disruptive, with no other evidence, to throw out any of your rights as outlined in the student code of conduct. Gil Atnip even said in one email that I might be trying to "put one over" on them when I Googled for policy that made his job harder (see emails below, apparently it was old policy left on the site and the administration has been working for some time to reduce the student grievance policy down to just a flowcart). It was far from a fair and impartial mediation. Apparently the IU lawyer that dealt with my case/request for records felt that Jay White's incomplete initial response from before I brought over the signed copy of the grievance form was enough. The IU lawyer ignored the fact that even Jay indicated in an email to me after the signed filing that the grievance process was still ongoing and some decisions (like being able to take the class elsewhere) would have to wait until after the process had finished. He never let the process finish, Jay just led me to believe it was still ongoing and then dropped it without telling me so I never even knew to appeal until it was too late to matter. Even though Jay White never got back to me after the official filing and meeting, and their previous emails only partially addressed my concerns, the IU lawyer had nerve to refer to all this as "due process" and say "It is my understanding that you did not then appeal the grievance further" when they never let me know the grievance was in a stopped state so I would know I had to appeal. Supposedly my grievance against Linda Christiansen is on file now, but somehow I doubt it is anywhere where it would help other students by establishing a pattern to her behavior. I've tried to contact people at IUS to fix these problems, but it seems no one is interested unless it directly affects them. Now the people at IUS either won't respond to my emails, or respond with a copy and paste message that tells me to contact IU counsel, but my contacts at IU counsel won't respond to my emails either.

        I'd like to chalk it up to one bad professor (Linda), but Bingham's lack of regard for policy and White's one-sidedness to the grievance makes me look on the academic honor of the whole IUS MBA program unfavorably. Hopefully if they ever read this they will take it constructively as it was intended, and as a form of guidance to point out the gaps between their current behaviors and the expectations of a student.

        More information is in the docs below, which are far more damning in my opinion than what I said above. I have left in my typos, along with those of the faculty/admins involved so as to not be accused of changing things.

Things to learn for others filing academic grievances: Proofread your documents, or better yet have someone else do it. It's easy to read in your head what you thought you wrote, but not what you really put down. It becomes much easier for people to dismiss your points when you have grammar/spelling errors, even if your points are logically valid. I also find that It becomes harder to proofread accurately when you are irritated.

        The only editing I have done to the documents below is to remove some white space and mail client add-ons for formatting, obscured email addresses so people do not get spammed, fixed character encoding issues and removed the names of some of the people I emailed who would not want to be involved. I kept the file names in the titles as that is how I submitted them.

Grievances against Linda Christiansen.docx
This file contains the main body of the grievance.

My Response.docx
Same as above, but with my responses. I decide to just post the combined file.
 

Gmail - Ethics Question.pdf
The ethics questions/ideas I submitted for comment, but not a formal submission for the final question. It is incredibly petty and hypocritical of her to complain about my typos in something that was not even a final submission when she had typos in her response to this very same email.

Gmail - meeting tomorrow m2.pdf
The set up for the meeting, where I was not given a chance to prepare (please read about policy violations in the main grievance document, and White's excuses in his messages to me).
 

Polanski.docx
The post in question.

Gmail - Test day.pdf
Gmail - alternative testing.pdf
Gmail - Test Date.pdf
These three emails show that originally I was supposed to take the test with the other section of the class so I could attend an ISSA event. I even confirmed this after the meeting with Linda and Bingham. Then, suddenly, it seemed I could not take the test with the other class because "The other class has different conditions so that is not possible." What different conditions? This, and the fact that I took the test first but did not get a grade back until after others did makes these events/choices look very suspicious.

dr whites response 1.pdf
Sorry for the typos in this and the next file, I was pretty irritated by this point and not proof reading as well as I should. The dean excuses Linda Christiansen and Jon Bingham of not following policy because their actions were not an "official grievance" against me, but when I looked at the policy last, the only time the word grievance appears is in reference to a student filing a grievance against someone at the university, not a faculty member filing against a student. It is very clear from the policy that those rules are to be followed for any "disciplinary" action of this sort against a student, but it seems like Jay White feels he can rewrite them when the policy is inconvenient for him. Then again, Dr. White also had some typos and some make it look like he was copying and pasting from some other text ("the you" parts). By the way, I need to point out that Jay White's reference to the "September 20 letter" is a typo, it was September 30th (lest someone think that I got a warning before the 30th).
 

dr whites response 2.pdf
Notice the last section,  which is vaguely threatening that I won't be able to continue in the program if I file the grievance. He seems to care a lot about their expectations of me, but not about my expectations of them (fair treatment, communication of the issues as they come up and not saving them for a spiteful letter mere hours before the final live class, honoring a student's rights as outlined in IU policy, etc.). Which requirements was I supposedly not fulfilling? I was participating in the class in good faith, and was doing as I was supposed to according to the syllabus and according to policy. I guess it is also a requirement never to question the instructor? Then there is the section about finding a major that is "a better match for your disposition", so much for the diversity White claimed to support in the earlier email. White was not interested in resolving a conflict between a professor and a student, but in getting the student to shut up and go away.
 

Gmail - Chance to look over Test.pdf
This 2nd chance to view the exam was dropped, and they never contacted me after the meeting.
 

Gmail - Checking to make sure grievance was filed.pdf
Here I start asking secretaries if the grievance was on file already (a question no one ever answers). Between this first email, and Atnip's response, it takes more than a month (7/11/2011-8/16/2011) before Atnip responds, for what should have been as simple as a secretary walking over to a filing cabinet or typing into their workstation to figure out if it was on file or not. Also notice, they never really say when it was filed: When I first put it in, or only after almost two years had gone by.
 

Checking to make sure grievance was filed 11 messages Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:40 PM To: tandrews(-at-)ius.edu, psylvest(-at-)ius.edu Hello,     In the fall of 2009 I filed a grievance against Linda Christiansen while I was working on my MBA. I never heard back so I wanted to make sure it was indeed filed by Dr. White. Also, since the document labeled "Paper given at meeting.pdf" was supposedly put in my student file, I wanted to make sure my response was on file as well (My Response.docx). I'm emailing both academic and student affairs as I'm not sure from the flow chart who handles this. If nothing else, I'd like the attached documents added to the related files in case anyone else comes in conflict with Linda Christiansen in the future. Thanks, Adrian Crenshaw   More information in these docs:     GRIEVANCE_FORM_Adrian Crenshaw.pdf The form from this site:http://www.ius.edu/studentaffairs/grievance.cfm Grievances against Linda Christiansen.docx This file contains the main body of the grievance. B516 Fall 2009 Syllabus.doc So the expectations of the course are clear. Paper given at meeting.pdf As the name suggested, the paper given to me at the meeting My Response.docx Same as above, but with my responses. Other emails showing the casual nature of our conversations up until this point: Gmail - Fraudies.pdf Gmail - Tax Write off.pdf Gmail - SOX Presentation.pdf Shouting Gmail - Questions.pdf Gmail - Ethics Question.pdf The ethics questions I submitted for comment, but not a formal submission. Gmail - meeting tomorrow m.pdf The set up for the meeting, where I was not given a chance to prepare (please read about policy violations in main grievance document). Polanski.docx The Post in question. dr whites response 1.pdf dr whites response 2.pdf             14 attachments   B516 Fall 2009 Syllabus.doc 127K   Paper given at meeting.pdf 388K   Gmail - Ethics Question.pdf 74K   Polanski.docx 13K   Gmail - Fraudies.pdf 15K   Gmail - Tax Write off.pdf 20K   Gmail - SOX Presentation.pdf 18K   Shouting Gmail - Questions.pdf 24K   GRIEVANCE_FORM_Adrian Crenshaw.pdf 136K   My Response.docx 18K   Grievances against Linda Christiansen.docx 17K   dr whites response 1.pdf 85K   dr whites response 2.pdf 78K   Gmail - meeting tomorrow m.pdf 112K Sylvester, Paula K <psylvest(-at-)ius.edu> Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:12 AM To: Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Adrian,   I understand that Vice Chancellor Atnip is viewing your email and materials.  Vice Chancellor Garvey-Nix is out of state for several days-the email and information will be in her inbox when she returns.  Thanks.   Paula Sylvester Indiana University Southeast Office of Student Affairs 4201 Grant Line Road New Albany, IN  47150 (812) 941-2420   From: irongeek(-at-)gmail.com [mailto:irongeek(-at-)gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adrian Crenshaw Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 1:41 PM To: Andrews, Teresa A; Sylvester, Paula K Subject: Checking to make sure grievance was filed   Hello,       Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:21 AM To: "Sylvester, Paula K" <psylvest(-at-)ius.edu> Hello Paula,     Thank you very much. Was it not on file then? Thanks, Adrian     Sylvester, Paula K <psylvest(-at-)ius.edu> Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:26 AM To: Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Adrian,   Please consult with Vice Chancellor Atnip's Office.  Student Affairs does not handle complaints regarding faculty but I have forwarded your information to VC Garvey-Nix as an FYI.  Thanks.   Paula   From: irongeek(-at-)gmail.com [mailto:irongeek(-at-)gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adrian Crenshaw Sent: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 8:22 AM To: Sylvester, Paula K Subject: Re: Checking to make sure grievance was filed   Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 8:29 AM To: "Sylvester, Paula K" <psylvest(-at-)ius.edu> Hi Paula,    Ok. Thanks and acknowledged. Adrian   Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 10:07 AM To: tandrews(-at-)ius.edu, psylvest(-at-)ius.edu Hello Ms. Andrews,      Do you have any information on if this grievance was indeed filed? I never heard back, and if Dr. White chose not to file it then I have another grievance  to make. As per: http://www.ius.edu/studentaffairs/article/grievance "Please note that in accordance with federal regulations, IU Southeast is required to share summary information about complaints with its accrediting agency, the Higher Learning Commission, as part of the reaccreditation process. Individual identities of those who have filed a complaint will not be provided."      I'd like to request that they don't redact my name, and I'm fine with them contacting me. If neither of you are the right person to ask to confirm that the grievance was filed, then could you please tell me the correct contact? Thank you, Adrian Crenshaw   Andrews, Teresa A <tandrews(-at-)ius.edu> Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:37 AM To: Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com>, "Sylvester, Paula K" <psylvest(-at-)ius.edu> Vice Chancellor Atnip is out of the office on vacation until Thursday.  I will follow up with him then to check the status of this.   Have a good day! Teresa   From: irongeek(-at-)gmail.com [mailto:irongeek(-at-)gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adrian Crenshaw Sent: Saturday, August 06, 2011 10:08 AM To: Andrews, Teresa A; Sylvester, Paula K         Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 11:12 AM To: "Andrews, Teresa A" <tandrews(-at-)ius.edu> Cc: "Sylvester, Paula K" <psylvest(-at-)ius.edu> Hello Teresa,      Ok, thanks much. Adrian   Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 5:38 AM To: "Andrews, Teresa A" <tandrews(-at-)ius.edu> Hello Teresa,     I got a response back from Vice Chancellor Atnip that the documents are now on file. When he responded he used the name Christenson, could you place make sure it is filed under the correct spelling of Christiansen? Assuming the records are recovered electronically, it would never come up if someone searched for it under the wrong spelling. Also, I'd still like a date for when they were first filed: when I originally filed the grievance back in 2009, or only after I checked up on it in 2011. Sorry to be a stickler, but I feel it is my ethical duty to make sure. Thanks for your time, Adrian   On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 7:37 AM, Andrews, Teresa A <tandrews(-at-)ius.edu> wrote:       Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 6:03 AM To: "Andrews, Teresa A" <tandrews(-at-)ius.edu> Hello Teresa,     Sorry about that, "place" should of been "please". As you can see, I have problems with typos/auto-correct too. :) Thanks, Adrian

Gmail - Atnip's response.pdf
He misspelled the teacher's name, hope it's filed correctly and can be found when someone looks for it. I make it known many times that I want to know when Jay White filed it with him, but never got a direct answer. When I pointed out policy that indicated a time table for them to respond to my grievance with an outcome, and that White never did, Atnip points out that the policy I found is old and points me to a new policy that is just a flow chart with little detail. He also says they are working on taking down the policy that had details. I'm not exactly sure how he can say "It's my understanding that Dean White did not ignore your grievance, but that he investigated and resolved it, albeit not in the way you had hoped." when White never got back to me on taking the class elsewhere and other matters such as seeing my test again.
 

grievance 5 messages Atnip, Gilbert W. <gatnip(-at-)ius.edu> Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 3:08 PM To: "irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com" <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Mr. Crenshaw,   This is to verify that the materials you submitted in regard to your grievance against Professor Christenson are on file in my office, along with your email stating that you waive your right to have your grievance kept anonymous during any future accreditation reviews.   Gilbert W. Atnip Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs Indiana University Southeast New Albany, IN 47150 812-941-2208   Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 3:42 PM To: "Atnip, Gilbert W." <gatnip(-at-)ius.edu> Hello Dr. Atnip,     Thanks for the response and the confirmation. As I did not hear back from Dr. White I began to think that the grievance was never filed against Professor Christiansen when I put in the forms.There was the question of taking the course elsewhere, which was never resolved. Also, I had emailed the dean about having a longer chance to view the test, which he said he would set up, but they dropped contact on that and I never heard back(see attachment). Those items led me to suspect that they may have just dropped the matter without following policy. As an employee of the university also, I want to keep things separate from my role as a student. That said there's certain freedoms in my role as a student in discussing the matter I fear may be treaded on. Thanks for your time and for checking into it,   Adrian Crenshaw   -- "The ability to quote is a serviceable substitute for wit." ~ W. Somerset Maugham       Gmail - Chance to look over Test.pdf 25K Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 12:20 PM To: "Atnip, Gilbert W." <gatnip(-at-)ius.edu> Hello Dr. Atnip,     Sorry to bother you again, but there are still a few outstanding issues I would like to resolve. 1. No offence intended in this, but you seem to have a typo in the faculty member name from your last response. It should be Christiansen. I assume records are computerized, and want to make sure names are correct so they can be found in searches. 2. I'm still curious to know if Dr. White followed policy and forwarded the materials on to you, or if you only received them when I brought it up again this summer. I never heard back from him after I made the formal complaint and brought the signed copy to the MBA office. Based on my understanding of: http://www2.ius.edu/studentaffairs/studentcode_part1.cfm it should have been brought to you after 21 days. If it was not, then I have another grievance to file concerning Dr. White. As far as I can tell, I submitted it to him and it fell into a hole and was forgotten. 3. Did the "Campus Grievance Commission" ever see it? My understanding is there are students on this commission as well, and I would certainly like them to review it. 4. I realize I should have followed up in a quicker time frame, but I had other pressing matters with my new master program and various conferences. Granted, many of the "desired outcomes" I asked for no longer apply as I've had to move to a new program. Still, I'd like the Campus Grievance Commission to have a look at it, including all materials I submitted, and Dr. White's response (which was quite dismissive, one sided, and in part vaguely intimidating as to filing the grievance vs. being able to stay in the program). Thanks, Adrian Crenshaw   Atnip, Gilbert W. <gatnip(-at-)ius.edu> Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 10:41 AM To: Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Mr. Crenshaw,   Sorry about the spelling error.  I can assure you it won't affect the accessibility of your complaint in my files.   The link you provided below does not direct you to the correct grievance procedures.   After consulting with Vice Chancellor Garvey-Nix, we have asked Media Services to investigate this link and to locate and deactivate any access to the old procedures.  The current procedures for this campus can be found at: http://www.ius.edu/studentaffairs/article/codeprocedures   As you will see, the IU Southeast procedure assigns responsibility for resolving academic issues to the dean of the relevant school.  Any complaint about a dean would come to the vice chancellor for academic affairs, as would any appeal of a dean's decision.  Please also note that in the case of a grade appeal, the dean's decision is considered final and thus is not subject to appeal.  See:   http://www.ius.edu/registrar/register-for-classes/grades/grade-policies-procedures.html#grade-changes         It's my understanding that Dean White did not ignore your grievance, but that he investigated and resolved it, albeit not in the way you had hoped.   G. Atnip Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs From: irongeek(-at-)gmail.com [mailto:irongeek(-at-)gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adrian Crenshaw Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2011 12:21 PM To: Atnip, Gilbert W. Subject: Re: grievance   Adrian Crenshaw <irongeek(-at-)irongeek.com> Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 11:54 AM To: "Atnip, Gilbert W." <gatnip(-at-)ius.edu> Hello Dr. Atnip,      Thanks for the updated link. I think it's unfortunate that the current procedures are less detailed (just a flow chart), and do not involve members from the student body like the older ones I found (which seem to be based on ones I have found in Bloomington as well).      Under just the flow chart I would still not categorize Dr. White's response as "Prompt Thorough Clear" as I never heard back after the meeting we had as part of what I would guess to be the "Advising Session" (though this meeting did take place after I brought over the formal signed grievance, which might make it part of step 2). No final word was given on if it would be possible to take the class for credit elsewhere for example. I also question whether students not being able to have a copy of their test is "standard procedure" as Dr. White states.      I feel that the "Student's Right" as outlined in the other documents have no teeth as they can be wiggled out of pretty easily if faculty decide to. When I point out in an email issues concerning student academic freedom, White says they care about such issues but then launches into an attack on me indicating that others have a right to criticize my views and the teacher did not have to give me unlimited class time. These are both straw man attacks to get away from the issue of the teacher failing a student because of values and viewpoints expressed that made her uncomfortable. Criticism did not happen in class beyond referring to the the case example as extreme (and criticism would have made for a more interesting class discussion, so I welcome it). I never asked for unlimited class time and very little was taken, especially as compared to other topics that were less related to the course material (see "My Response.docx").      White also indicated policy did not need to be followed when setting up the meeting because it was not an "official hearing". So, you can call anything "informal" or unofficial and you do not have to follow written polices? How could it ever be informal/unofficial if the next step as said in the paper handed to me at the meeting was "Referral to and discipline by Vice Chancellor Ruth Garvey-Nix" and that it was going into my student file? That is in no way informal or unofficial. (see "Grievances against Linda Christiansen.docx"),      Dr. White maintains that the meeting was held to inform me of my gaps and that I'm not taking it as constructive criticism like I should. I certainty felt attacked in the room, but I was not allowed a witness in the meeting (going against university policy). The paper from the meeting is not phrased as constructive criticism but as an attack, with many allegations that are not clarified (my supposedly anti-law and anti-ethics statements and positions for example). Many of the teacher's claims are indeed nitpicky and petty. Also, what good is it to store up all of these complaints, tell me I'm getting a 0 in class participation because of it, and only bring them to my attention hours before the last live class of the semester I could do anything about it? Disregarding the test, I had been effectively failed at that point with no warning since participation is 30 percent of the grade, and the alleged (and not clarified) "At least one violation of the "Online Etiquette" penalty on the syllabus" would have lowed it at least one letter grade (this would take it below the minimum grade requirements for the masters program, unless I aced everything else).      They have a very myopic view of ethics in the MBA program it seems. In one of Dr. White's responses he states:     "In addition you state "[subject] is fairly common thing to bring up in a philosophy class" to defend your in-class comments related to Nazi Germany. But you have to realize this is not a philosophy class, it is a business law and ethics class and we want our students to see the topics from that point of view." Ethics is a branch of philosophy, the text book even goes so far as to mention famous philosophers in the field of ethics and common schools of thought. If it's in the text book, how can it be out of scope? Saying you can't bring philosophy into a law and ethics class is like saying you can't bring math into an accounting course.      I seem to have gotten into a bit of a he said she said, and since Linda is tenured faculty I lose. This is another reason I wanted a witness at the meeting. I'm not sure White went into reading the documentation I sent with an open mind (something he accused me of), but I guess there is not a lot I can do about that. I'm still not confident policy was followed, but what policy I can find is either: 1. said to be outdated, 2. ill-defined, 3. IU general.      If there is a way for a commission with students on it to see the grievance I'd like it forwarded on to them. At this point the only thing I can really get out of the grievance it is to bring attention to the issues. Maybe what I have submitted for the record will help some other student by establishing a pattern of behavior, but my guess is it won't matter. Sometimes you just have do something because it's the right thing to do.      Thank for taking the time to respond, and in a far less insulting manner than Dr. White. Thanks, Adrian Crenshaw

Most of the Documents above I received again when I did an Indiana Open Records/FOIA Request. I did however receive a few interesting new items.

I had asked a professor that has a JD if a student's exam was really property of the university. Looks like she was told not to answer, and Atnip did not want to ask IU counsel.

I'd like to know what posts he thought were disturbing. What I posted was no more disturbing than what was in the book. See my response above. At least I know he sent some stuff to Atnip, not that Atnip seemed to care.

Guess he did know. Funny that Jay White says my grade is because of my performance, but is afraid to even let a 3rd party see the test with me (is that why he dropped the ball and never let it happen?).

Not sure how Atnip is "not quite sure why he decided to send all this stuff now", I state the reason in my email, and I would not want to reenter a program that cares so little for students. You can see even Jay says he does not recall the outcome. In my opinion the reason for that is that after our meeting he let it drop because he did not think it worthy of his attention. It seems the idea of a legitimate student grievance is foreign to these two. Also, I never technically left the MBA program.

Some how Jay convinces himself I dropped out of the program. I never official did that, only the class. I never "agreed to that resolution". What Jay calls excuses I call reasons, and the only evidence that clear instruction was given he seems to have is that the instructor said so (Unless he is not referring to the classroom but instead referring to the attack memo from Sept. 30th, in which case it came too late to do any good, was vague & petty, and what "directions" did I supposedly not follow from it? Maybe an implied direction was not to file a grievance because of Linda Christiansen's bad behavior?). From Jay's choice of language, you can see he does not like it when a student defends himself. He states "After a lengthy meeting with Mr. Crenshaw, he indicated to me a desire for a course substitution which I did not grant." and "In any event, since I did not feel that his rights were violated I did not grant a waiver for this course or permission to take it elsewhere." These statements by Jay are falsehoods, he never gave final word, just said the class substitution decision would have to wait until after the grievance process was over (which he never let happen by just dropping the matter), only saying he did not think my situation would apply (see the quote from him above on the matter). Also, I requested the course substitution before the meeting, not after. Glad I had a witness at the meeting who can corroborate these things. His version of the events in the email below are incredibly one sided (in the instructor's favor of course) and lack important details, but that is to be expected considering how he handled his "investigation". He does not seem capable of understanding that the rights I had filed the grievance about do not so much involve being allowed to say something as the fact I was given a 0 in class participation without warning because of expressing my view points. Being "allowed" to say something and being penalized because of it are two separate issues, so yes, student rights as outlined above were violated. Jay saying "Once the instructor communicated to Mr. Crenshaw that he needed to stay on topic and bring in relevant business examples Mr. Crenshaw replied by saying his student rights were violated." is an over simplification to the point of being an outright lie. I did not start complaining about my rights being violated until I got the attack/complaint memo, which was not phrased as constructive communication and effectively told me I had failed the class without warning. Even then, I did not file the grievance until I got back an F on the exam, which they seem afraid to even let me have a copy of. This quote is another example of Jay using a straw man argument (he does a lot of that). Also, the instructor did not communicate to me that I needed to "stay on topic and bring in relevant business examples", she passive aggressively held on to it until the meeting to tell me, and my examples were on topic and at least as business related as other items in the book and that were mentioned in class. If she had problems with my examples/class participation she should have told me in or after class, not passive aggressively save things up and fail me, that is not communication. Also, saying I was infringing on other's rights to continue with the subject at hand is a low form of rhetoric. As I stated elsewhere I took very little time, they were not tangents and they were not from "other disciplines" (I assume he is referring to philosophy, which was in the book and ethics is a branch of philosophy). Were MY rights to "continue with the subject at hand" infringed upon by other students talking about wedding dresses/boyfriends bringing flowers (and the bad things they must be compensating for)/the tv show Snapped/etc? Apparently all of my communications with Jay were as pointless as speaking to a brick wall, he seems to only care about the instructor's side of the story and treats it as gospel without considering my side at all.

In this one Jay tries to wiggle out of having to be the one to file the grievance by saying the form requires me to submit it straight to academic affairs, not him. That's not what the flow chart seems to show,  nor is it the way other IU documentation seemed to indicate. If I had not filed it correctly, then it is his duty to tell me, not to just let it drop because it is inconvenient. If Jay did not think he was the one that the grievance was to be filed with, then why did he write "At this point, if you wish to continue with an official grievance you will need to provide me with a signed copy of the grievance form (the electronic version did not have a signature) so we can continue the process."? I did not choose "to bring over a signed copy of the grievance on the 6^th anyway so that we would have a signed copy on file", I brought over the signed copy so the grievance process would continue, as Jay White said I would need to do, I never accepted Jay White's informal resolution as he seems to be trying to say.  Jay also has the dates wrong, I brought the signed copy over on the 4th, Jay is the one who said he was holding it until the 6th (and I told him on the 4th to go ahead and file it). I also submitted my signed copy before we ever had a meeting, not afterwards as Jay says (he made all of his decisions before ever talking to me in person). So, because he responded to the first round before I brought over a signed copy, he does not have to respond there after when an official grievance is filed? I think that it is pretty clear that I disagreed with his opinions and intended to appeal it up the chain after the official filing, but I guess he assumed he had the right to ignore it and not send it on to the next level. Face it Jay, after the meeting which took place on 11/11/2009 you just let it drop, and never told me it was in a stopped state so I could appeal.

When I show policy Atnip does not like, he freaks out a bit. Not sure how Googling might be "thought he could put one over on us", the old policy (the one with details) was still out there, and I did not know it was "old policy" at the time. His tone seems adversarial, as oppose to just trying to sort out the facts.

Ok, so there were notes made, and I seem to be right about the copy and paste job.

Now for this one, I'm going to add my comments in red.

When I got my student file from IU Legal, it did not include my response to the memo given to me on at the Sept. 30th meeting (I assume they sent me the complete file). They could not even bother to put my side of things in the record, just the bare meeting memo itself. Bizarrely, one of the things in my student file was a garbled message I tried to post to Oncourse. It was garbled because I copied and pasted from MS Word, and I guess it looked a little like an XSS. No idea why they decided to include that in my student file.

Things to learn for others filing academic grievances: Ask to see your student file, don't just trust that they will add your side because you requested it. The "Amendment of Education Records" section of FERPA may help you with this.

Well, I suppose I've said my peace on the matter. Hope these notes help some other student if they ever have to file a grievance, but if the admins want to ignore your side, they will. Best of luck to all others fighting the good fight.

Continued: Amendment of records, FERPA and getting your side put in the record

    This section will be more advice than anything I imagine. As stated above, there were many questions I had about IUS policy, if it was legit, and if certain statements were true. I addressed these questions to people dealing with IU policy. It took some time to get a response since some people deferred to others, who had to request information from IUS administration. Based on previous experience I imagine a lot of the delay was not the IU people's fault, but waiting on the IUS administration to respond and having to send them reminders. As for getting back a formal answer to a signed grievance, apparently Jay White felt he had the right to ignored the grievance after it was formally filed, and that his first answer was enough. This lead the IU lawyer to think I never appealed. I never knew I had to appeal! Even some of Jay's emails seemed to indicate things would have to wait until after the formal grievance procedures had finished, which he never got back to me on, so I never knew to appeal, and he knew I intended to. Granted, after a few months went by with no answer I should have asked again, but one of the people in the chain was my boss's boss's boss so I had some fears of retaliation and I had just started a new degree program. I also asked that my version of events be put in the records, as well as amendments. By my understanding of FERPA, they have to do this or tell you they are not, but you have to be given a response. I assumed they had, but when I got my student file my amendment/side of the story was not there.

Things to learn for others filing academic grievances:  You have to drag university administration kicking and screaming through the grievance and records amendment process, you can not trust them to do something just because you asked them to and you can not expect them to follow through. It's unfortunate, but if they feel like they can ignore you they will, by dragging their feet and being obstructive in hopes that you will just forget the whole matter. In other words, you have to be a pest to make sure they do what they are suppose to do. I've contacted FPCO (the people in charge of handling FERPA violations) about the matter. Getting the FPCO to listen is another matter however. Apparently the right to even have your side put in the record has exceptions. To quote from their site, first they say "If, as a result of the hearing, the school still decides not to amend the record, the eligible student has the right to insert a statement in the record setting forth his or her views" but later put in exceptions "Thus, while FERPA affords eligible students the right to seek to amend education records which contain inaccurate information, this right cannot be used to challenge a grade or an individual's opinion, or a substantive decision made by a school about a student." Wait, so I can't put my side in if the record I have a problem with involves a grade, opinion, or substantive decision (which could possibly mean anything)? So, when would a student ever be allowed to put their side in? Everything I can think of where a school would want to not change a record falls into those categories, so when does a student ever get a chance to have their side of events put into the record as well?

Asking who is on the "Graduate Policies Committee"

        I started asking around about who was on the "Graduate Policies Committee" that was mentioned in the memo from the Sept. 30th meeting so I could email them. Only got one response from a person that did not know. I sent another email and got this back from the same person (truncated to remove names):

Looks like the lawyers told them not to talk to me. So much for openness on campus. I also have another email conversation with Atnip that is telling of their attitudes:

        Then I also had this exchange with Jay. Does he really not understand why what he did was wrong? I'll admit I have a problem with proofreading, reading the words I meant to write instead of the typos I did. Jay seems to have a problem understanding how snide he is, and has an odd idea of professionalism that perhaps comes with tenure and no accountability. After putting up with his behavior, I find myself becoming pretty snide as well.

        Not real useful communication. Shortly after this exchange, Jay posted this to his Twitter feed: "Good advice, don't debate zealots or crazy people. They defy logic and reason. Yes, you know who you are. 1:37 PM - 25 Jul 12". Yes, that is "courteous and professional". Granted, he could be talking about someone else, but Jay does seem like the kind of person that would refer to someone as a zealot and crazy for demanding that a university dean follow through on what they are supposed to do, expects honesty, and asks for a simple list of names of who is on a committee. This comment was before I made my most snarky comments to him on Twitter, but I at least have the courage to add him to the Tweets so he can respond. Does he know what logic and reason are? He does not seem to know the definitions of ethics or sociopath. Anyone like Jay White who uses straw man arguments and excuses like calling something unofficial so as to bypass official policies in place to protect students clearly has little idea as to what logic or reason are. While I admit to being obsessive, I think I understand logic and reason better than he does. Shortly after I posted the Twitter quote, it looks like Jay White deleted it (some people don't stand behind their words). If Alan Jay White understood logic or reason, why would he say something as logically asinine as "My cut and paste response below is all that is left as there has been no new information provided since your original contact". What "new information" besides the name of the committee I'm trying to find the members of would I possibly need to provide for him to be able to give me the list of names? As a side note, IU Counsel did not respond either. One contact I have there was on maternity leave, and the other just did not respond. I contacted a third party at General Counsel and they did not respond either. Their answer to a problem seems to be to ignore in and put the student in the crank file. Seems like it would be easier just to tell me who is on the committee. In the end, I just emailed all of the business faculty:

Of course, me adding peoples names back on the list annoys Jay.

        When in doubt, spread fear of tech savvy people, I guess that's one way to keep folks from wanting to read it. Notice Jay White does not specify what claims he wants me to back up in his email above. I think I have given plenty of evidence and proof that, amongst other things,
1) I was dragged into a meeting without being allowed my own witness,
2) given a 0 in class participation without warning mere hours before the last live class, with a letter that was not written as a form of feedback but as an attack,
3) that Linda Christensen talked to my co-workers about my "behaviors" she found annoying before she ever talked to me about them,
4) that she changed the test date on me for nebulous reasons (and despite taking the test first, I seemed to get my grade back after everyone else I talked to, people who I could have called as witnesses if he asked),
5) that I was not allowed to keep a copy of the exam and they never got back to me on receiving a longer chance to review it. (Jay White even going so far as to say at least three times in emails that I would not be able to have a copy. Why does Jay White care more about not allowing me to have a copy of my own essay answers on the exam and the instructor's "feedback" than he does due process?)

        I gave more evidence for my side of events than Linda Christiansen ever gave for hers. Jay White just chooses to ignore the evidence I gave him, he's used to bullying people that care more about the MBA degree than they do what is right and I think the fact that someone is willing to call him on his unprofessional and discourteous behavior upsets him.

Things to learn for others filing academic grievances:  Be aware, once you involve lawyers, FERPA, and government agencies expect folks to clam up.

        It seems someone has forwarded my site to the campus police. I talked to the campus police chief about it, but his response when I asked is that he knows nothing about it (his username was in the reverse DNS for the site visit, he may not understand how I know he or someone on his workstation visited), he would not be the one to make decisions about me, and he said something to the effect of "I don't need to know anything about you unless you have done something criminal? Have you done something criminal?" when I asked him to check in with others about me. I just wanted to see if someone in the administration had been making threat allegations to try to silence me.

Things to learn for others filing academic grievances:  Be aware that if you cause trouble for some people, they may try to mitigate you as a problem by claiming you are a physical (or maybe security) threat of some sort. Modern universities seem to have a knee jerk reaction these days after a few instances. I need to find a copy of the campus watch list they had out a few years ago that seemed to indicate you might be a threat if you played a lot of video games and did not believe in a higher power. It was so broad a list everybody matched a few points on it.

Talking with the IUS SGA about improving the IU Southeast grievance procedures

        A little while after left the University I started emailing people involved with student policy at IU Southeast to see if I could get some interest in reforming the grievance procedures to be something more substantial than just a flow chart (in other words, more like the grievance policies in Bloomington). It may be too late to help me, but perhaps something good could come out of this whole mess for some other students so they would not have to go through the same things I did. I emailed not only university officials, but also people who I thought were SGA members based on what I could scrape from websites. I also posted to numerous Facebook pages related to IU Southeast. I did not get much response. On the IUS SGA Facebook page I got the reply back from someone using the IU Southeast Student Government Association account that said "It's been years. Get over it", but this comment was deleted from the wall very quickly. Obviously this did not sit well with me considering they are suppose to be looking out for student interests. It seems more than one person has access to the IU Southeast SGA account, so I'm not sure who actually sent that reply (but I have some guesses). Here is the rest of the exchange, which became much more productive as some other SGA member got involved:

http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=457248020993921&id=111837312226571&comment_id=5022466

        Hopefully I will get a chance to speak to them soon so we can make IUS a better place for students (Update: The Spring 2013 semester is now over, and the SGA never contacted me).

Received a message from IU Southeast Chancellor Sandra R. Patterson-Randles

        Finally heard something back from the IU Southeast Chancellor Sandra R. Patterson-Randles. I had emailed her office before, but it took emailing the IU Trustees to get a response from her.

Change Log:

I've made many little changes over time, but I figured I should record some of them here:

 07/10/2012: I added the line:

    "I did not choose "to bring over a signed copy of the grievance on the 6^th anyway so that we would have a signed copy on file", I brought over the signed copy so the grievance process would continue, as you said I would need to do, I never accepted your informal resolution as you seem to be trying to say."

to the article to point out Jay's "misinterpretation" (most polite word I can think of to call it) of events.

 07/15/2012: Add this to point 17:

"When I got my file, my version of events was not in it. This is further evidence that they just don't care about  what a student says, only listening to the professors' skewed side. It's also technically a FERPA violation as I outline towards the bottom of this page, but for what I have seen FERPA has no teeth as the FPCO is unresponsive to student complaints and inquiries. Strangely, though my version of events was not in my file, a print out of the garbled Oncourse post I made because of copying and pasting from MS Word was. Why? Did they think it was an XSS attack or something? It just seems so silly."

I also changed the word retribution to retaliation as it better captures what I was trying to say, and fixed some typos.

 07/17/2012:

I expanded the line:

Jay saying "Once the instructor communicated to Mr. Crenshaw that he needed to stay on topic and bring in relevant business examples Mr. Crenshaw replied by saying his student rights were violated." is an over simplification that boarders on being an outright lie.

to:

Jay saying "Once the instructor communicated to Mr. Crenshaw that he needed to stay on topic and bring in relevant business examples Mr. Crenshaw replied by saying his student rights were violated." is an over simplification to the point of being an outright lie. I did not start complaining about my rights being violated until I got the attack/complaint memo, which was not phrased as constructive communication and effectively told me I had failed the class without warning. Even then, I did not file the grievance until I got back an F on the exam, which they seem afraid to even let me have a copy of. This quote is another example of Jay using a straw man argument (he does a lot of that). Also, the instructor did not communicate to me that I needed to "stay on topic and bring in relevant business examples", she passive aggressively held on to it until the meeting to tell me, and my examples were on topic and at least as business related as other items in the book and that were mentioned in class.

I also expanded out a section to read:

(Student Comments: I never said they did not have a right to disagree. Also, what does "outliers or risky subjects" have to do with it, don't they have a right to disagree regardless? And who decides what is an outlier or risky subject?) Furthermore when the instructor has indicated that it's time to move on, a wise person would move on. (Student Comments: What an insulting way to put it, and she never clearly said to move on as I have stated elsewhere such as in my grievance. So much for listening to both sides.)

and added the line:

In addition, your choice of words, "if we chose to pursue it" instead of "they", shows you were already taking sides and not being impartial.

 07/18/2012:

Added this note to a section above which I had written before I got the open records request back:

"[Subnote: I found out later because of the open records request that he did compare mine to another student's himself, but I still question him as being an unbiased judge and would like to know how they chose who to compare mine to. If there was a real qualitative difference, why not let me have a copy of my exam?]"

Just want to be more fair to others than they were to me.

 07/19/2012:

Added Asking who is on the "Graduate Policies Committee" section.

 07/20/2012:

Added a new email to/from Gil to the Asking who is on the "Graduate Policies Committee" section.

 07/23/2012:

Added a bit more to the email conversation with Gil to the Asking who is on the "Graduate Policies Committee" section.

 07/26/2012:

Added some of an email thread with Jay to the Asking who is on the "Graduate Policies Committee" section. I also tacked on a bit at the end about campus police visiting my site.

 07/30/2012:

Added a blurb to the 2nd paragraph of this page pointing out that IUS has dropped to 73rd in the Business Week part-time MBA rankings. That's quite a bit behind University of Louisville at 35.

 08/24/2012:

Added line:

In addition, what good is feedback that comes too late for a student to do anything about it? The "advising meeting" was not useful feedback that a student could act on and essentially told me I had already failed the class, the exam feedback was illegibly (which you did not let me see again to decipher) and I'm not sure what thread replies you are referring to (he may be confusing terms again and referring to email).

 09/05/2012:

Added lines:

Basically they deliberately bypassed the rights I had to a fair hearing as outlined in policy by making it "informal ", yet were still able to penalize me by giving me a 0 in participation. Given this, why would a professor with a grudge ever choose to do things formally? If Jay thinks the complaints against me from the memo were guidance, then why does he call them "charges" in his email to me? (edited some more on 09/09/2012)

and

(Student Comments: I think it is obvious why I wanted an electronic version, so it could easily be duplicated for comment and to show others. It's also interesting that the IU lawyers decided to send me scanned PDFs of printed emails rather than a more search engine/Internet friendly format.)
 

and

(Student Comments: The grievance policy is meant in part to protect student rights, by calling the meeting unofficial you bypass those rights (like me having a witness and being able to prepare a defense) but can still penalize the student. More comments on this subject and how they like to wiggle out of respecting student rights are above.)

09/09/2012:

Added point 18 to the Timeline section.

09/16/2012:

Rewrote/expanded section 18 in the Timeline.

10/11/2012:

Expanded point 3 in the Timeline section to show that Linda Christiansen had the chance to communicate that there was a problem, but chose not to.

10/29/2012:

Added some more exchanges with Jay to the Asking who is on the "Graduate Policies Committee" section.

11/21/2012:

I updated the FERPA section a bit. The major addition was this:

Getting the FPCO to listen is another matter however. Apparently the right to even have your side put in the record has exceptions. To quote from their site, first they say "If, as a result of the hearing, the school still decides not to amend the record, the eligible student has the right to insert a statement in the record setting forth his or her views" but later put in exceptions "Thus, while FERPA affords eligible students the right to seek to amend education records which contain inaccurate information, this right cannot be used to challenge a grade or an individual's opinion, or a substantive decision made by a school about a student." Wait, so I can't put my side in if the record I have a problem with involves a grade, opinion, or substantive decision (which could possibly mean anything)? So, when would a student ever be allowed to put their side in? Everything I can think of where a school would want to not change a record falls into those categories, so when does a student ever get a chance to have their side of events put into the record as well?

12/12/2012:

Edited a sentence to clarify where Jay was not telling the truth (again):

He states "After a lengthy meeting with Mr. Crenshaw, he indicated to me a desire for a course substitution which I did not grant." and "In any event, since I did not feel that his rights were violated I did not grant a waiver for this course or permission to take it elsewhere." These statements by Jay are falsehoods, he never gave final word, just said the class substitution decision would have to wait until after the grievance process was over (which he never let happen by just dropping the matter), only saying he did not think my situation would apply (see the quote from him above on the matter). Also, I requested the course substitution before the meeting, not after. Glad I had a witness at the meeting who can corroborate these things.

12/18/2012:

I expanded out points 7 and 10 in the timeline a bit. As a side note, inspired by Jay White's silly notion that just because something is time stamped the contents can not be lies (the time when something is written or said does not define the truth of the statements in the words or speech) I looked at the timestamps from his "investigation" notes. This is what I found in the Word document's metadata:

Notes on review of Adrian Crenshaw grievance against Linda Christiansen.docx
Content Created: 11/04/2009 10:03AM
Content last saved: 11/4/2009 3:12PM

So, did he do all his investigation in one day? He also said he did his interviews with my witnesses that same day (November 4th), so considering the amount of time he seems to have spent on researching my side and writing his notes I doubt much real thought was put into it (metadata says 4 revisions). How does he consider this a thorough investigation? He had not even had a meeting with me yet. It seems to me as if the document was something he wrote as a justification just to back Jon Bingham's and Linda Christiansen's side of the story, and that his "investigation" was only going through the motions of a real investigation.

12/26/2012:

Prepping up to talk to the SGA next semester, I added the section "Talking with the IUS SGA about improving the IU Southeast grievance procedures". I also decided to add an ordered list after one of the more recent exchanges with Jay White to point out that evidence for my claims has been provided, but he chooses to ignore it.

02/04/2013:

Added section Received a message from IU Southeast Chancellor Sandra R. Patterson-Randles.

05/04/2013:

Had to update the line above about being a straight A student in Informatics. In my final class I only made a B. Just wanted to have more integrity than Jay White, Jon Bingham, Linda Christiansen, Gil Atnip, and Sandra R. Patterson-Randles. The IUS MBA program still boasted about being the 9th rated part time MBA from the Business Week ratings in 2009, forgetting to mention they had fallen to 74th since then (I have to question the metrics they used in the first place).

09/07/2013:

Someone pointed out a reference to a letter on September 20 that does not exist on this page, that is because of a typo by Jay White, so I added the line "By the way, I need to point out that Jay White's reference to the "September 20 letter" is a typo, it was September 30th (lest someone think that I got a warning before the 30th)."

11/10/2013:

Looks like IUS got back up to 42 on Business Week's part-time MBA rankings some how (they were at 73). Do a search for Business Week's methodologies and you will find some interesting criticisms. Seems a lot of the schools have huge swings from year to year as to where they are on the rankings. The University of Louisville did not get a new ranking this year, I assume they did not submit enough of the student surveys or some other type of paperwork was missing?  UofL's metrics still appear to be higher (and more selective). I had to change the 2nd paragraph to reflect this.

12/02/2013:

Added a few lines of commentary bellow a letter above, and changed some of the wording in the next paragraph for tense. I also posted this about "Linda's" syllabus:

Critically Plagiarizing?: Ideas On Spotting Plagiarism

What can I say, I'm a "Zealot", especially if you define that to mean holding people to certain standards of honesty and integrity in what higher education is becoming, and wanting to keep others from having to go through the same things I did. Some people should be shamed into better behavior, then again, some people have no sense of shame or self reflection.

12/07/2013:

Added the comment:

"Funny that Jay White says my grade is because of my performance, but is afraid to even let a 3rd party see the test with me (is that why he dropped the ball and never let it happen?)."

12/26/2013:

I recently heard that IU Southeast is planning to offer an MIS (Management Information Systems) Masters degree. While I think their Computer Science and Informatics Schools seem good, since the degree would be co-ran by the School of Business I would not recommend it to anyone in the Louisville area under its current leadership. Anyplace where an IU Southeast Business Law & Ethics instructor appears to plagiarize on her own syllabus that warns that students will be instantly failed for plagiarism, and asking simple questions about laws as it relates to technology is considered "excessive us of jargon", is not a good place for IT people (and especially security people concerned with integrity) to be. While the School of Business at IUS has its current leadership, I strongly recommend that you steer clear if you really want to learn. Just figured I'd help others not go through the same things I did there.

01/04/2014:
Added to a section above:

Shortly after I posted the Twitter quote, it looks like Jay White deleted it (some people don't stand behind their words). If Alan Jay White understood logic or reason, why would he say something as logically asinine as "My cut and paste response below is all that is left as there has been no new information provided since your original contact". What "new information" besides the name of the committee I'm trying to find the members of would I possibly need to provide for him to be able to give me the list of names?

01/24/2014:

Added this line to two sections to show Jay White's weird interpretation of policy:
The dean excuses Linda Christiansen and Jon Bingham of not following policy because their actions were not an "official grievance" against me, but when I looked at the policy last, the only time the word grievance appears is in reference to a student filing a grievance against someone at the university, not a faculty member filing against a student. It is very clear from the policy that those rules are to be followed for any "disciplinary" action of this sort against a student, but it seems like Jay White feels he can rewrite them when the policy is inconvenient for him.

03/10/2014:

 Fixed a typo and added the lines:

"(Unless he is not referring to the classroom but instead referring to the attack memo from Sept. 30th, in which case it came too late to do any good, was vague & petty, and what "directions" did I supposedly not follow from it? Maybe an implied direction was not to file a grievance because of Linda Christiansen's bad behavior?)"
and
"Anyone like Jay White who uses straw man arguments and excuses like calling something unofficial so as to bypass official policies in place to protect students clearly has little idea as to what logic or reason are."

Also update Critically Plagiarizing?: Ideas On Spotting Plagiarism article with the response from IU (or lack of a response).

05/22/2014:

Added an addendum about the answers I got from Jennifer Westerhaus Adams to the 4 questions at the beginning of this review.

05/24/2016:

Looks like Jay White has had some legal trouble:
http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/indiana/2016/05/23/ius-business-dean-arrested-drug-charges/84777534/

10/04/2016:

Looks like Alan Jay White is like a dumber, low rent version of Walter White. More drug charges:
http://www.newsandtribune.com/news/ius-business-professor-faces-more-drug-charges/article_689c9d6c-89ac-11e6-8835-270e364dd2d9.html
http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/indiana/2016/10/04/ius-business-dean-arrested-again/91536724/

Printable version of this article