FULL TEXT OF THE ARTICLE AS OF MONDAY, DEC. 5, 2011:<br />
<br />
<p><em>Editor's Note: This is part two of a two-part series exploring why three professors and a graduate student are embroiled in a string of University court cases and the problems they've found with how UM evaluates discrimination, threats to campus safety and allegations of misconduct.</em></p>
<p><strong>As the Kaimin </strong>reported Wednesday, a student complaint against a professor and concerns from that professor and others about the student's behavior have escalated into a complicated flurry of he-said-she-said accusations in a process almost everyone involved agrees is flawed.</p>
<p>After an argument last December between graduate student Wayne Moore and English professor Katie Kane, Moore filed a complaint against Kane for her lack of professionalism. After the same argument, Kane became worried about Moore's behavior and went to her chair for advice. The chair collected statements from other professors who had had similar experiences and filed a form about Moore to the University of Montana's Critical Incident Response Team (CIRT).</p>
<p>The CIRT is a group of administrators and faculty tasked with addressing anyone's concerns about students who may pose a risk to themselves or others. Teresa Branch, vice president for student affairs, and Charles Couture, dean of students, oversee the group, which also includes administrators from Curry Health Center, Residence Life and Public Safety.</p>
<p>Moore said a CIRT form was filed about him as a punishment for complaining about Kane. Couture denies that the CIRT process is a punishment.</p>
<p>The group doesn't kick students out of classes or punish them through the Student Conduct Code, but its job is to "identify, assess, and respond to serious or potentially serious incidents related to student mental health, physical health, or conduct, which, if disregarded, could threaten the health and safety of the student or campus community," according to UM's website.</p>
<p>CIRT forms are two-page questionnaires about a student's behavior and a potential threat to the campus, classroom or themselves. Faculty, staff or students can file CIRT forms, Couture said.</p>
<p>The process is "designed to really reach out to students who are seemingly in some sort of crisis and then to meet with that student and offer supportive services to help that student get through that crisis or particular troubling event," Couture said in an interview. He cited issues ranging from talk of suicide and major campus-wide threats to sudden poor academic performance or decline in personal hygiene as reasons to use the CIRT process.</p>
<p>Brian Krylowicz, director of counseling and psychological services at Curry and a member of the team, reiterated Couture's claims that the CIRT form isn't accusatory, but admitted the team's work is broad.</p>
<p>"We use the term, ‘Don't worry alone,'" Krylowicz said. "It's meant to do a lot of different things and there's flaws with that and there's good with that."</p>
<p>But because the CIRT encompasses crisis response, Moore claims he felt he was being called a threat when his professors used the process.</p>
<p>After the CIRT form was filed, Couture began calling Moore trying to set up a meeting to discuss the professors' concerns, according to the discrimination investigation by UM's equal opportunity officer.</p>
<p>Couture refused to talk about specific details about Moore, but said this is common practice when CIRT forms are filed. He attempts to schedule a meeting to talk to the student about whatever concerns the CIRT includes, and offers the student advice on what services, like counseling, the University can offer.</p>
<p>Moore said he wouldn't meet with Couture because he wanted to know more details about what the CIRT form said about him and wanted to seek advice from others first. Couture declined to give him more details over the phone, and requested again that he meet with him in person, Moore said.</p>
<p>Because Moore didn't meet with Couture, Couture placed a hold on his registration, which prevented him from registering for classes. Couture said this is common practice if a student refuses to meet with him when asked.</p>
<p>When Couture refused to give Moore more details about the CIRT form and placed the hold, Moore wanted to file a complaint against Couture, according to documents related to the case.</p>
<p>The Collective Bargaining Agreement between the University Faculty Association and the Montana University System governs the process of student-faculty complaints. But because administrators aren't part of the union, there's no formal process for student complaints against administrators. Students can get help from the Associated Students of the University of Montana student resolution officer, said David Aronofsky, UM legal council.</p>
<p>To appeal an administrator's decision, students must speak to President Royce Engstrom, who will then decide whether to form a committee or ask an already existing one to decide whether the administrator did something wrong, Aronofsky said.</p>
<p>Moore claims Aronofsky reiterated that he needed to sit down with Couture but didn't tell him to go to Engstrom.</p>
<p>"There is nothing preventing the student resolution officer or the student directly from contacting the president," Aronofsky said.</p>
<p>Moore went to ASUM's student resolution officer in February, whose job is to help students draft and resolve their complaints against faculty members, according to their email exchange.</p>
<p>But Moore said that when he went to ASUM to pursue a complaint against Couture and the complaint against Kane he worked with four SROs over the past year. The position had high turnover because of graduation and stress levels. They declined to help him with his complaint against Couture and later complaints against the professors.</p>
<p>The most recent retired resolution officer and current officer declined to comment for this story.</p>
<p>"As ASUM we advocate for students, so if the student isn't happy with the mediation results, then why?" President Jen Gursky said. "Then as ASUM we have to figure out if it's within the scope of the position to continue with the process or should students proceed by themselves."</p>
<p>Couture wouldn't elaborate on Moore's attempt to complain about him, beside saying, "For what? Only he knows."</p>
<p>Moore's complaint didn't come to fruition and he turned his attention back to his dispute with Kane.</p>
<p>Until the April hearing about Moore's complaint against Kane, he didn't know who had filed the CIRT report about him.</p>
<p>English professors Katie Kane, Heather Bruce and Louise Economides made statements about Moore's behavior that were attached to the report. Throughout the process, Moore has claimed that the three professors used the CIRT process to complain about him, but Kane and Economides contend they only sent those statements at the request of their department chair, not knowing she would attach them to a CIRT, according to their statements to the discrimination committee. In UM's equal opportunity officer's investigation of Moore's claims of discrimination, the chair said Couture encouraged her to use the CIRT process to express concerns about Moore's behavior.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong>In April, a </strong>committee upheld Kane's professionalism, ruling against Moore's claims that she failed to do her job.</p>
<p>Moore wasn't satisfied with the loss.</p>
<p>Now aware of the identities of the three professors who had voiced their concern about his aggressive behavior, Moore launched a discrimination complaint.</p>
<p>In that complaint, which he submitted a month after that April hearing, he wrote that Kane, Economides and Bruce accused him of threatening them and their students because Moore is an older male. In his complaint, Moore largely cited their statements attached to the CIRT, which recalled times they or their students had uncomfortable encounters with Moore.</p>
<p> "All of the accusations against me depend upon a prejudice against me that too easily portrays the non-traditional white male as a threat to women and girls in the academic community," Moore wrote in his complaint.</p>
<p> He wrote those accusations of threatening and angry behavior damaged his reputation.</p>
<p>Moore also wrote that the professors only became motivated to accuse him of his aggressive behavior after he filed his original complaint against Kane in December. This would later become Moore's basis for the retaliation complaints he filed against the three professors and the English department chair. That case is currently ongoing and the proceedings are confidential.</p>
<p>Immediately before the start of this fall semester, three months after Moore filed his discrimination complaint, the investigation into his complaints was released. </p>
<p>Lucy France, UM's equal opportunity officer, concluded the professors never discriminated against Moore.</p>
<p>Although he is considered a part of a class that could be discriminated against by being an older male, in order to prove there was discrimination, France wrote that Moore needed to experience a negative impact. Although Moore said the damage to his reputation qualified as such, France wrote that the concern over his behavior detailed in the CIRT was not an accusation and a student can't be punished for a CIRT report.</p>
<p>"There's no accusation in a CIRT referral," said Dean of Students Charles Couture. "You don't accuse someone you're trying to help; you're just trying to share information."</p>
<p>But, because the CIRT encompasses crisis response, Moore felt the referal implied he was threat. He thinks the threat was unfounded and based only on discrimination.</p>
<p>Although the CIRT process doesn't have a punishment component— its primary goal is to get students to sit down with Couture and get whatever sort of help administrators think the student needs — if a student refuses to meet with Couture, Couture said he can sanction him or her under the Student Conduct Code. Couture decided not to sanction Moore.</p>
<p>In France's investigation, Moore also claimed that he was blindsided at the hearing in April addressing his complaint about Kane because the focus of the hearing shifted to his aggressive behavior detailed in the CIRT rather than his complaint against Kane's alleged unprofessional conduct.</p>
<p>The investigation said that although Moore was treated unfairly it didn't rise to the legal standard of a discriminatory attack. Because Moore had filed a complaint alleging unprofessional conduct by an instructor, France wrote that instructor was in turn allowed to give evidence to attack his credibility, according to the investigation.</p>
<p>"Other students who wage complaints about instructors through the ASUM Student Resolution Process may be subjected to attacks on their own credibility," France wrote in the investigation. "There is no evidence Mr. Moore was treated differently because of the fact that he is an older white male."</p>
<p>Although France found no discrimination, and didn't recommend any action be taken against Moore or the professors, she did advise University officials to look into ways to prevent including "accusations against students about which they have no notice and thus no opportunity to rebut," in hearings.</p>
<p>It wasn't enough for Moore. He appealed France's decision to a committee hearing.</p>
<p> During the appeals process, Moore wrote that the way the professors framed him as aggressive and a threat against female students was dishonest, and that discrediting him did negatively affect him.</p>
<p>He also wrote his reputation was damaged as a result of four student witnesses testifying on behalf of the professors at the hearing for Moore's complaint against Kane.</p>
<p>As Moore worked to gather witnesses in the fall to testify on his behalf during the upcoming discrimination hearing, he said the University Faculty Association, which is responsible for representing faculty members in cases, tried to intimidate him and his potential witnesses.</p>
<p>On Oct. 10, Moore sent out an email to nearly 100 friends and acquaintances — many in the English department — asking for letters he could submit as evidence in his discrimination hearing. In that email, he said the professors accused him of intimidating and silencing female students and threatening students.</p>
<p>Three days later, University Faculty Association President Doug Coffin respdonded to that email to English faculty and students. In an emailed memo, Coffin wrote that Moore's email was full of "false accusations of conspiracy," and "unwarranted personal attacks, misinformation and insults," against the professors.</p>
<p>Coffin wrote the professors had not discriminated against Moore, and asked everyone to ignore Moore's email entirely. He said Moore had a right to send out that email, but Coffin felt like the faculty association had a right to respond and tell the professors' side of the story.</p>
<p> "I don't see that as an attempt to intimidate anyone," Coffin said in an interview with the Kaimin.</p>
<p>Although Lucy France wouldn't comment on Moore's case specifically, she said in an interview that she's never before heard of the faculty association sending a letter to potential witnesses.</p>
<p>"That would cause me concern," she said, although she wasn't familiar with this specific incident.</p>
<p>Moore eventually did find some help from people in the English department, including one person who wrote a confidential letter to the committee supporting his personal character.</p>
<p>But most of his case relied on more than 100 pages of documents he'd gathered or written since his December argument with Kane.</p>
<p>Some of the documents he submitted came from the confidential case alleging Kane was unprofessional and others from the confidential CIRT form filed about him.</p>
<p>Bruce said the professors were disappointed to see confidential documents used from entirely separate processes.</p>
<p>"I think it overtly breached the instruction of confidentiality we received," Bruce said in an interview with the Kaimin.</p>
<p>The lawyer representing the three professors in the discrimination grievance case wrote a letter to the committee shortly before it convened to say, "a number of allegations ... (in Moore's documents) have nothing to do with any alleged discrimination and which are, therefore, outside the jurisdiction of the Discrimination Grievance Committee."</p>
<p>Moore disagreed, arguing the documents provided necessary context since the various complaint cases are so intertwined.</p>
<p>One student member of the committee, Asa Hohman, told the Kaimin the dispute about what could be used confused the committee before they could even begin to consider the case itself. He said the confusion was compounded by the fact no one was an expert on discrimination law and there were no established policies to guide them on how to handle related, yet separate, complaints that were being deliberated by different committees at the same time.</p>
<p>"There wasn't a clear-cut definition of what we are supposed to do, so I think we kind of cut that out at this hearing," Hohman said. He also said the committee concluded that since they don't have an attorney on the committee, its "responsibility is to get consensus among faculty, staff (and) students" from a common-sense perspective.</p>
<p>Two members of the committee declined to speak about the case while two others did not return calls or emails from the Kaimin seeking comment. Committee Chair Rosi Keller declined to talk about details of this particular case, but explained the committee's procedures. Faculy, staff and students sit on the commitee.</p>
<div>
</div>
<p><strong>Once the committee </strong>members clarified their goal, they dug into the case, reviewing documents and doing pre-hearing preparations.</p>
<p>"Going into the pre-hearing, I didn't think anything discriminatory had happened," Hohman said. "I thought Wayne was going to be hard pressed to prove discrimination."</p>
<p>But Hohman said the hearing's proceedings changed his mind.</p>
<p>He said he thought "there was a little bit of a good ol‘ boy thing going on" when the three professors "banded together to discredit a student" even though he only complained about one of them and they went years back for evidence of bizarre behavior.</p>
<p>Hohman said it was also interesting to see how Moore acted at the hearing.</p>
<p>"I thought that Wayne Moore was very professional although he seemed timid and really uneasy," Hohman said. "He had been described as this kind of big, intimidating, foreboding fellow which was not at all who showed up to the hearing.</p>
<p>"He sounded sort of how he presented himself, as a guy that's not afraid to throw out his line. He's very opinionated," Hohman said.</p>
<p>By contrast, Hohman said although the three professors were all very professional and well prepared, "they didn't seem concerned at all."</p>
<p>Bruce said something very different, telling the Kaimin she cared very much about resolving the dispute so everyone could return to their academic pursuits. Since Moore had asked they be fired or suspended, it was a serious concern for her.</p>
<p>"When someone's threatening to have your job it's very frightening and actually disproportionate to anything that's gone on (to cause the complaint)," Bruce said.</p>
<p>When asked how she would describe the hearing's atmosphere, she said she didn't know.</p>
<p>"I was in the hall," Bruce said. "He's asking for me to be fired and I'm standing in the hall . . . so there's no way to know what's going on.</p>
<p>"It felt frightening and disempowering," she said. "There's no fairness to it."</p>
<p>Committee Chair Rosi Keller said fairness is exactly why she asked the professors to wait in the hall for part of the proceedings.</p>
<p>Keller said all the professors were in the room when Moore presented his testimony and they interviewed two other witnesses. But when it was the professors' turn to present, she asked two of them to wait outside while the third spoke with the committee.</p>
<p>"I felt it was the most fair and equitable way," Keller said. "Each individual to speak and not, you know, be influenced by the others."</p>
<p>The hearing lasted two to three hours then the committee took a preliminary vote, Hohman said. They reconvened a few days later for final deliberations, which lasted another two hours. He said they reviewed their responsibilities, reached a consensus and discussed what they'd include in their report and recommendations to President Royce Engstrom.</p>
<p>"I feel like it was a very unified and thorough process," he said. "There were definitely concerned voices amongst us that were leery — understandably leery — to charge three professors with discrimination ... It's an intimidating process to throw out the word discrimination."</p>
<p>In the committee's report to the president, it concluded Moore had been discriminated against. Although a CIRT is not technically a complaint against him, they wrote, it led to a hold on his course registration, which is in effect a punishment. The report also said the committee decided that the professors had not filed the CIRT out of concern for Moore's welfare, but rather based on a discriminatory prejudice because "there was no other plausible reason."</p>
<p>Although Moore had asked for the professors to be fired or suspended for their discrimination, the committee recommended that the president "reprimand faculty appropriately." The other recommendations were to expedite the ongoing retaliation complaints, negotiate a joint settlement after all cases are closed, make sure Moore can finish his degree without further difficulties and reevaluate the scope and authority of the CIRT process.</p>
<p>The professors were disappointed with the committee's process and conclusion.</p>
<p>"The hearing was, then, professional in its atmosphere and deeply problematic in its procedures," Kane wrote in an email to the Kaimin. "What we're all here for is to help further the educational process itself and these processes are really important as well because they make sure the rights are respected and education can go forward."</p>
<p>At least when the process works.</p>
<p>Kane said in an interview the process is so slow — this discrimination case lasted six months from start to finish — that disputes fester, rather than being solved, and it disrupts people's normally productive lives.</p>
<p>Kane said it might be quicker and more thorough if the committee had more time to go through training and prepare for hearings.</p>
<p>"The processes themselves are done by people who already do a lot of work," she said in a phone interview, suggesting that perhaps UM should "give a course release to some of these people on these committees so they can spend more time doing their job on the committees."</p>
<p>President Engstrom had 10 academic days to reach his decision, which he issued Monday. He concluded it wasn't fair for the committee to conclude it was discrimination just because they could find "no other plausible explanation."</p>
<p>Engstrom wrote he instead believes the professors filed the CIRT "based on the contentious relationship" with Moore. He notes, however, that he has faith in the existing retaliation process, which is separate and already considering those cases.</p>
<p>Engstrom declined to speak with the Kaimin about his decision.</p>
<p>Both Moore and committee member Hohman are demanding an explanation of how Engstrom reached his decision and why he can simply overturn the committee's ruling without consulting them.</p>
<p>"I was livid when I saw it," Hohman said. "That put a huge hole in my confidence in his leadership. What's the point of having that committee if he can completely veto our findings? It makes the checks and balances out of whack."</p>
<p>He wishes Engstrom would have at least consulted the committee. If not, Hohman said Engstom should have sat in on the hearing, so he could better understand why they reached the conclusion they did.</p>
<p>"I don't think you can use his reverse logic," Hohman said. "If it can't be anything else than it is that thing."</p>
<p>But the professors were relieved by Engstrom's decision, even if Moore says he might appeal it to the Board of Regents.</p>
<p>"I was happy to see the president had given a lot of consideration to the issues," Kane said. "It's definitely a difficult thing and definitely not something I'd like to see attached to my name at all. I just hope that everything comes out in the end the way it should come out.</p>
<p>"The end result should allow everybody to go back to doing their job, which is the pursuit of knowledge," she said. "I mean that really sincerely. I would like to go back to my work and I'm sure Mr. Moore wants to go back to his educational career."</p>
<p>Despite the disagreements, Kane said she has hope that she could again work with Moore.</p>
<p>"I've been teaching for a long time now and I've had all kinds of intellectual disagreements and emotional disagreements with students," she said. "Always, always, always I've been able to come to some kind of resolution. As long as there's good faith on both sides, resolution is always possible."</p>
<p>But Bruce isn't sure she and Moore could ever restore a good working relationship.</p>
<p>Because graduate advisers and their students must have a mutually strong trust for each other and their shared research, she doesn't think she and Moore could continue to work together.</p>
<p>"I think that any sense of trust that could have existed with Wayne (Moore) has been eroded completely," Bruce said. "But there are others in the department that feel completely fine working with him and so he's not left out to dry.</p>
<p>"I don't want to blast Wayne (Moore) by any means because he's been doing what he felt was right," she said.</p>
<p>And although she's relieved by Engstrom's conclusion, she's still anxious.</p>
<p>"The fact is it's not resolved yet because there's these confidential hearings still to be concluded and I don't trust anything anymore," Bruce said.</p>
<p>Moore, too, doesn't trust the ongoing reprisal process and he thinks the damage may be irreparable.</p>
<p>"This is the hardest, most completely stressful thing I've encountered. There's no help in it at all," Moore said. "But for me to drop and ignore things and graduate, I would have to put on blinders."</p>
<p>The only consensus Moore and the professors could reach so far is that they're all tired and have little hope that the remaining hearings will be any smoother.</p>
<p><strong>editor@montanakaimin.com</strong></p>
<p> </p>
