tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post6348809715029411447..comments2024-02-24T05:19:10.949-05:00Comments on Durham-in-Wonderland: Dowd Settlementkcjohnson9http://www.blogger.com/profile/09625813296986996867noreply@blogger.comBlogger56125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-89606698570745347092007-05-13T10:54:00.000-04:002007-05-13T10:54:00.000-04:00This is one good time to knowthat I'd fail at som...This is one good time to know<BR/>that I'd fail at something!<BR/><BR/>As far as your anger goes at<BR/>Kim Curtis' continued employment,<BR/>all I can do is to quote Blade,<BR/>in Trinity, who said:<BR/><BR/>"Use it! USE IT!"<BR/><BR/>(Well, isn't it fair to compare<BR/>a comic-book character to the<BR/>comic-book antics of a <BR/>College Instructor?)machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14248016116043347912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-82234910188670433812007-05-13T10:48:00.000-04:002007-05-13T10:48:00.000-04:00macyou would flunk for sure! The good news is that...mac<BR/><BR/>you would flunk for sure! The good news is that I think the 0/10 listed after each course means no one signed up, and the upper classmen have already registered for Fall. Based on the "course" descriptions, no freshmen would be eligible, so hopefully this means she won't be teaching. The fact they renewed her contract remains a point of anger for me...Dukex4https://www.blogger.com/profile/00465640862549819265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-2120653920513373182007-05-13T10:34:00.000-04:002007-05-13T10:34:00.000-04:00DukeX4I think I'll enroll inPOLSCI 189 - INTERNSHI...DukeX4<BR/><BR/>I think I'll enroll in<BR/>POLSCI 189 - INTERNSHIP<BR/><BR/>I plan to study the inept,<BR/>corrupt, incoherent attempts<BR/>at local government leadership<BR/>during the past 12 months +<BR/><BR/>How could Curtis possibly<BR/>teach this class? What if a <BR/>student were to actually do<BR/>their research on this topic?machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14248016116043347912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-2951743252286147782007-05-13T10:28:00.000-04:002007-05-13T10:28:00.000-04:00DukeX4,My comments thus far are arough draft for t...DukeX4,<BR/><BR/>My comments thus far are a<BR/>rough draft for the research<BR/>I'll be required to perform<BR/>for Ms. Curtis' class.<BR/><BR/>Think I'll pass?machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14248016116043347912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-8381502998395537382007-05-13T10:25:00.000-04:002007-05-13T10:25:00.000-04:00Their disorders.Their disorders.machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14248016116043347912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-53521479599812928492007-05-13T10:24:00.000-04:002007-05-13T10:24:00.000-04:00Observer 8:52You are right that slander and the ot...Observer 8:52<BR/><BR/>You are right that slander <BR/>and the other things are worse<BR/>than grade retaliation, especially<BR/>in the "real world."<BR/>However, slander is not something<BR/>that's normally part of the <BR/>teaching profession. That is,<BR/>with the exception of the 88s et <BR/>al, who might think slander is a <BR/>mighty-fine tool for a "Collich <BR/>Perfesser" to have!<BR/><BR/>Grading is an integral part of<BR/>teaching, and using grades to<BR/>settle scores is - IMO - a worse<BR/>condemnation of a TEACHER, <BR/>because it is a misuse of <BR/>teacher's essential/neccessary<BR/>effort - (although outcome-based<BR/>education types believe<BR/>that grades don't represent actual <BR/>achievement!)<BR/><BR/>For human beings in general?<BR/>I agree with you, wholeheartedly.<BR/><BR/><BR/>The slander and other things<BR/>you adroitly addressed are <BR/>probably evidence of personality <BR/>disorders and/or illnesses of the <BR/>brain on display.machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14248016116043347912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-37289071668843875842007-05-13T09:57:00.000-04:002007-05-13T09:57:00.000-04:00Remember that Duke just recently changed its gradi...Remember that Duke just recently changed its grading policy to allow for a professor's grade to be overruled. Evidently, prior to this very recent change, there was no recourse if the professor refused to make a change. When that new policy was announced, I felt it had to be related to this case, and as a mother of a current Duke student, I am relieved that in the case of a "rogue" instructor, there is an avenue of appeal.<BR/><BR/>That said, it is outrageous that Kim Curtis is still employed at Duke. She is listed in the Fall 2007 Course Schedule as teaching the following:<BR/><BR/>POLSCI 189 - INTERNSHIP<BR/>Open to students engaging in practical or governmental work experience during the summer or a regular semester. A faculty member in the department will supervise a program of study related to the work experience, including a substantive paper on a politics-related topic, containing significant analysis and interpretation. Consent of director of undergraduate studies required. Instructor: Staff<BR/>15<BR/>IND<BR/>0/10<BR/>TBA<BR/>Curtis,Kim F<BR/>POLSCI 191 - SOPH/JUNIOR INDEPENDENT STUDY<BR/>Individual non-research directed study in a field of special interest, under the supervision of a faculty member, on a topic previously approved by the supervising faculty member and the Director of Undergraduate Studies, resulting in an academic product. Instructor: Staff<BR/>15<BR/>IND<BR/>0/10<BR/>TBA<BR/>Curtis,Kim F<BR/>POLSCI 192 - SOPH/JUNIOR RESEARCH IND STUDY<BR/>Individual research under the supervision of a faculty member, the central goal of which is a substantive research paper or report containing significant analysis and interpretation of a previously approved topic. Consent of director of undergraduate studies and supervising instructor required. Instructor: Staff<BR/>15<BR/>IND<BR/>0/10<BR/>TBA<BR/>Curtis,Kim F<BR/>POLSCI 193 - SENIOR INDEPENDENT STUDY<BR/>Individual non-research directed study in a field of special interest, under the supervision of a faculty member, on a topic previously approved by the supervising faculty member and the Director of Undergraduate Studies, resulting in an academic product. Instructor: Staff<BR/>15<BR/>IND<BR/>0/10<BR/>TBA<BR/>Curtis,Kim F<BR/>POLSCI 194 - SENIOR RESEARCH IND STUDY<BR/>Individual research under the supervision of a faculty member, the central goal of which is a substantive research paper or report containing significant analysis and interpretation of a previously approved topic. Consent of director of undergraduate studies and supervising instructor required. Instructor: Staff<BR/>15<BR/>IND<BR/>0/10<BR/>TBA<BR/>Curtis,Kim F<BR/>POLSCI 308 - INDIVIDUAL RESEARCH<BR/>Students will conduct research designed to evaluate hypotheses of their choice. Reports on the research must be presented in appropriate professional style. Instructor: Staff<BR/>15<BR/>IND<BR/>0/10<BR/>TBA<BR/>Curtis,Kim F<BR/>POLSCI 399 - SPECIAL READINGS<BR/>Instructor: Staff<BR/>15<BR/><BR/>While these all appear to be a one-on -one situation, (meaning at least she is not let loose on unsuspecting students in a general class), I am angry she is still employed. BTW -- you can search any professor, course, major, etc at the following:<BR/>http://www.siss.duke.edu/schedule/search?strm=1220Dukex4https://www.blogger.com/profile/00465640862549819265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-11259190706501931542007-05-13T01:09:00.000-04:002007-05-13T01:09:00.000-04:00Kim Curtis is a flat out friggin embarrassment. I...Kim Curtis is a flat out friggin embarrassment. If she finds a job as a teacher anywhere, her employer should be ashamed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-84028875615557396812007-05-12T20:52:00.000-04:002007-05-12T20:52:00.000-04:00"It implies that the teacherwould misuse his/her p..."It implies that the teacher<BR/>would misuse his/her profession<BR/>for personal spite. That's<BR/>low." <BR/><BR/>I know you are referring to grade retaliation here, but I think this applies almost as well to the Gang of 88 ad and the other numerous opportunities taken by the faculty to insult, demean, and slander the LAX defendants by Houston Baker, Wahneema Lubiano, Kim Curtis, etc. I know the sense here on-line is that grade retaliation is the worst academic sin...but I am not really sure why it is worse than Houston Baker's letter, for example, or some of the classroom comments. Arguably, I suppose, the grades are less a matter of opinion, but in the whole scheme of things, the damage caused by the slanderous comments, published to the world, probably cause even deeper, more lasting damage.<BR/><BR/>ObserverAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-50744885664176353552007-05-12T17:47:00.000-04:002007-05-12T17:47:00.000-04:00One of the worst things ateacher or professor coul...One of the worst things a<BR/>teacher or professor could<BR/>be accused of is grade retaliation: <BR/>it's worse than<BR/>sexual harrassment, making<BR/>your students read Margaret <BR/>Atwood (that's a joke, folks)<BR/>or just being a bad teacher.<BR/><BR/>It implies that the teacher<BR/>would misuse his/her profession<BR/>for personal spite. That's<BR/>low. <BR/><BR/>IMO, an acknowledgement that<BR/>both Duke and Dowd are satisfied<BR/>with the settlement - (minus<BR/>the implied "satisfaction" <BR/>of Kim Curtis) - is a damning<BR/>acknowledgement.machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14248016116043347912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-64719638455554403152007-05-12T17:13:00.000-04:002007-05-12T17:13:00.000-04:00Maybe a lawyer can help us again.Obviously, the te...Maybe a lawyer can help us again.<BR/><BR/>Obviously, the terms of any settlement between the Dowds and Curtis personally can be made confidential, but in my experience such settlements always require dismissing the case with prejudice. I presume the dismissal with prejudice is public record so it would be possible for someone to determine whether Curtis was or was not included in the settlement. Is that presumption correct?<BR/><BR/>Second, someone said that Duke would be subject to discovery in any suit against Curtis. I have not been too involved in third-party discovery, but in the few instances when I was, I recollect it was possible to limit it rather stringently. Furthermore, Duke could have limited the Dowd's scope of discovery against Duke in litigation with third parties as part of the settlement agreement with Duke, no?<BR/><BR/>JeffMUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12126104394487680318noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-78032538026431399792007-05-12T16:32:00.000-04:002007-05-12T16:32:00.000-04:00I'm wondering if Dowd insisted that the changed gr...I'm wondering if Dowd insisted that the changed grade be mention in the statement. Since it would appear on his transcript, there would be no way to keep it confidential by either side.<BR/><BR/>I'm also wondering if the settlement included Kim Curtis as well, but that she was kept out of the announcement intentionally. It would make no sense for an image-conscious Duke U to settle and keep this out of court only to have Curtis dragged through the process by the plantiff, thus exposing Duke to the ugliness of discovery they have paid dearly to avoid. Curtis may have gone along with the deal because Duke would likely foot the bill for her. Whether she remains on the Duke faculty is another question. At some point visiting lecturers have to 'unvisit'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-46717496780412898202007-05-12T14:29:00.000-04:002007-05-12T14:29:00.000-04:00Carolyn says:Thank you, Luke, who answered my ques...Carolyn says:<BR/><BR/>Thank you, Luke, who answered my question about whether Dowd's confidentiality agreement would prevent Reade, Dave and Collin from citing Curtis' abuse in their own lawsuits: <BR/><BR/>"Most confidentiality agreements...are inapplicable in the face of judicial process or similar language...Whether a court would hold that the inquiry is relevant is a separate issue." <BR/> <BR/>Well, Luke - that obviously rules out any Durham court - at least one with Judge Hudson perched on the bench.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-55814027654546678282007-05-12T13:36:00.000-04:002007-05-12T13:36:00.000-04:00I am glad Dowd won. Any chance Bob Steele wrote th...I am glad Dowd won. Any chance Bob Steele wrote the check on his account?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-26542059179612059752007-05-12T12:22:00.000-04:002007-05-12T12:22:00.000-04:00Make that "everyone."ObMake that "everyone."<BR/><BR/>ObAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-55346399279125588242007-05-12T12:20:00.000-04:002007-05-12T12:20:00.000-04:00Thank you JLS,I did go back and read the complaint...Thank you JLS,<BR/><BR/>I did go back and read the complaint, and those causes of action form an excellent basis for a lawsuit against Duke on behalf of the defendants in the hoax. Although the details of Finnerty, Seligmann, Evans' complaint will differ from the Dowd's (unless there was grade retaliation of which we were unaware) the causes of action listed in the Dowd complaint (based in contracts, equity, and tort) work just fine for me. I believe we could present a persuasive case that Duke breached its contract with these LAX defendants. <BR/><BR/>What say you Anon who was casting about for a precise cause of action?? Why doesn't this Dowd complaint work as a blueprint for everone else?<BR/><BR/>ObserverAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-42910519311033425992007-05-12T11:57:00.000-04:002007-05-12T11:57:00.000-04:009:50 am,Another question is: whose reputation is m...9:50 am,<BR/><BR/>Another question is: whose <BR/>reputation is more likely to be <BR/>damaged? Duke's, or the boys'?<BR/><BR/>The boys have already had theirs<BR/>torn to shreds (as evidenced by <BR/>the continued notion that they <BR/>did "something.")<BR/><BR/>Duke doesn't want to end up <BR/>with something that could be<BR/>far more costly to the University's<BR/>reputation. You're right: an <BR/>early settlement is in everyone's<BR/>best interests - except perhaps<BR/>in the interests of Justice. <BR/><BR/>Remember: settlement means <BR/>"no disclosure." <BR/><BR/>Let's hope any settlement <BR/>doesn't preclude action against<BR/>individual Instructors and <BR/>Professors.machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14248016116043347912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-3792286067531055952007-05-12T09:50:00.000-04:002007-05-12T09:50:00.000-04:00There have been reports that the Evans, Finnerty a...<I>There have been reports that the Evans, Finnerty and Seligmann families have asked Duke to play their legal fees for this case and that Duke did not reject it out of hand.<BR/><BR/>May 11, 2007 11:39:00 PM</I><BR/><BR/>In KC's D-I-W post on 12/25 last year, there is this curious statement:<BR/><BR/>"In an article last week, Brodhead expressed his belief that it will take two to five years for Duke to recover from this affair."<BR/><BR/>With that assessment of the impact by Brodhead, perhaps he and the BOT believe a settlement would be well worth it if it speeds the recovery process by a couple of years. Duke should be content to settle quickly and let the spotlight that is upon Nifong and the DPD to remain there. Surely the BOT believes Duke's reputation is worth $3 million.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-48824877384780334682007-05-12T09:38:00.000-04:002007-05-12T09:38:00.000-04:00This is how it will happen with all the lawsuits. ...This is how it will happen with all the lawsuits. As a former university administrator, I have first hand witnessed this approach.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-14269057053575252892007-05-12T08:35:00.000-04:002007-05-12T08:35:00.000-04:00This is a settlement?The Dowd's got what they aske...This is a settlement?<BR/>The Dowd's got what they asked for.<BR/>That's a surrender.<BR/>The admin at Duke must have investigated Curtis' actions. I'm sure they'll just cover that up and do nothing.<BR/>Apparently the group of 88 are immune from any disciplinary action.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-71660279395339373222007-05-12T01:37:00.000-04:002007-05-12T01:37:00.000-04:00to Carolyn: A confidentiality agreement between p...to Carolyn: A confidentiality agreement between private parties is not a recognized basis for refusing to answer a question posed at trial -- stated another way, the mere fact you've agreed to keep something confidential amongst yourself does not give you a privilege to refuse to answer a question while on the witness stand. Most confidentiality agreements recognize this, and commonly state they are inapplicable in the face of judicial process or similar language. Even if they don't say this, that still is the case. Whether a court would hold that the inquiry is relevant is a separate issue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-34572134733225419002007-05-12T01:23:00.000-04:002007-05-12T01:23:00.000-04:00Carolyn says:I'm glad Dowd won - but worried about...Carolyn says:<BR/><BR/>I'm glad Dowd won - but worried about the settlement terms being kept confidential. <BR/><BR/>As I understand it, this means Reade, Dave and Collin can't cite Curtis' misconduct in their own lawsuit against the university. Their lawsuit's strength depends on establishing a pattern of abuse by Duke professors - a pattern which Curtis proves. However, if her abuse is sealed in a confidential agreement, does that mean it cannot be cited in a different lawsuit? <BR/><BR/>Please tell me I'm wrong.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-78924642493155287392007-05-12T00:25:00.000-04:002007-05-12T00:25:00.000-04:00The suit now settled exposed Duke in several ways:...The suit now settled exposed Duke in several ways: (a) the testimony given by high officials would have bound Duke in other litigation or been near impossible to overcome; (b), the testimony would have been public; (c), the testimony would have been on the record and sworn now--preventing the nuancing of testimony to be given over time which I bet Duke desparately wants the opportunity to do; (d)it could have resulted in findings that might be collateral estoppel--binding on Duke--in other bigger cases.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-86706373138393836492007-05-12T00:22:00.000-04:002007-05-12T00:22:00.000-04:00Reade and Colin should ask Duke for tuition for wh...Reade and Colin should ask Duke for tuition for where ever they choose to go for the next two years as well as their legal fees. They had athletic scholarships for Duke but likely won't get them where ever they choose to go next (As has been pointed out, Brown is interested in Reade and he can play lacrosse for them; but they don't offer scholarships for lacrosse.) ... and they shouldn't, in any way, be forced to return to Duke. Duke will very likely pay to avoid a lawsuit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-615282788924092652007-05-11T23:56:00.000-04:002007-05-11T23:56:00.000-04:00JLS says...,DBay MD, There have been reports that ...<I>JLS says...,<BR/><BR/>DBay MD, There have been reports that the Evans, Finnerty and Seligmann families have asked Duke to play their legal fees for this case and that Duke did not reject it out of hand. <BR/><BR/>May 11, 2007 11:39:00 PM</I><BR/><BR/>I am hearing similar things. But look for lawsuits against Durham and Lord knows who else.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com