Wednesday, September 14, 2005
!! September 12, 2005 link to the
Taos Discussion [36]
and strategy
for mathematics education renewal !!
Send comments to
psp**@ontologystream.com (remove the “*” to get a valid email address)
educational renewal
communication to the NMHU Board à
I spoke with Dean Mendez on the phone this morning.
His position is that if I am going to have a public discussion about the situation with Dr Turner, and others in regards to the failures in mathematics and computer science education; then he will not talk to me at all.
This is a standard policy that he has established, he said to me this morning on the phone.
Why is such a policy "standard"?
The Dean's office will not engage in any discussion which is also transparent to the press.
With standard policies like this one, there is no light that can be shed on the misdeeds of members of the faculty or administration.
According to the Dean's policy, it is a private matter to be handed by making large financial compensations to those who file law suits (such as the law suit that appears to be involved with Dr Turner's response to his being fired in May 2005.)
Dr Turner has no ability to move his agenda of actually reforming the mathematics program, and agenda for which he was fired. I have no ability to move a similar agenda forward. The only thing that Dr Turner can do is receive just compensation for being improperly fired.
This is not my notion of what a university is for. It is not just nor honorable.
I am not interested in private discussions that seem to be hiding the responsibility that the university has.
http://www.bcngroup.org/beadgames/renewal/10.htm
The link above is a statement of analysis. It is a scholarly presentation that should have a public forum.
The President and the Board avoids responsibility by allowing the Dean to exercise a "policy" which hids reality from the public.
The next step is to go to Board members.
Dr Paul S Prueitt