I have been reading the Wainstein report for shits and giggles this morning and came across this little anecdote. I was so struck by it that I thought I'd share. In 2002, the Head of the Athletic Support Department (Mercer) raised an alarm with the Faculty Athletics Committee (FAC) about athletes clustering in certain majors. The information that he presented to the FAC was incomplete and failed to identify that there were 15 athletes in AFAM enrolled in "paper classes" at the time he raised the alarm. Nothing came out of that meeting, quite possibly because the FAC was not presented with all of the relevant data
Fast forward to 2006, that year Auburn was the focal point of a story by the NY Times for an academic scandal that involved a Sociology Professor assigning hundreds of independent study assignments to athletes. Mercer went to a Senior Assoc AD (Blanchard) to raise another alarm. Blanchard and Dick Baddour decided to take it to the FAC. The three men from the AD (Baddour, Blanchard and Mercer) each alleged that they told the FAC that there was an AFAM Professor that was using lecture classes as independent study classes. All three men alleged that the FAC told them that a Professor should be given latitude regarding how to instruct his students. Mercer was tasked to provide some additional data regarding these AFAM classes. The 8 Profs on the FAC tell a different story. They claim that they were never told that lecture classes were being taught as independent study classes and that if they were, they would have demanded to know more about what was happening. there is a clear disparity in the two stories about what exactly the FAC was apprised of.
Wainstein and his group could not make a clear conclusion regarding which group was telling the truth, but they noted that the preponderance of the evidence supported the FAC's version of events. Wainstein noted that Mercer had long known about the irregularity of the classes (going back to at least 2002 when the issue was first raised) and that the timing of raising the alarm (after the NYT expose) was very suspect. They also noted that Mercer never gave the FAC the additional information they requested. The report noted, "Mercer conceded in our interview that he never acted on that tasking and completely let it drop. That is a telling fact, and it lends support to the suspicion that the Athletics and ASPSA personnel were more interested in creating a record of advising the FAC about these classes than in following up and addressing the issue."
That's remarkable to me. One might conclude from this anecdote that the Athletic Director may (I am not saying he was) have been part of a conspiracy to give the department cover in the event the true extent of the irregularity of the class was discovered. I don't know if anyone else is shocked by that as I am. To me, that's game over for the Heels. Taken in the worst light possible, there is evidence that the AD knew and, quite possibly, deliberately misstated the true nature of what was happening in the AFAM Dept from the members of the Faculty for self-interested reasons. Taken in the best light, it shows a callous disregard for getting at the truth and rather demonstrated a half-hearted attempt to raise the alarm for the sole purpose of giving the department cover.
