Interview with J. Michael Straczynski

J. Michael Straczynski is a man of many firsts. Back when the Internet was unknown to everyone except a tiny number of techies, geeks, wealthy dilettantes and nerds, he was the first showrunner (Hollywood-speak for a television show’s executive producer who handles day-to-day operations) to go online and interact with fans.

He was the first – and will likely ever be the only — scriptwriter to write 92 out of 110 episodes of a show, his brilliant creation “Babylon 5.” B5 was the first television show meant to run a certain number of seasons, five, with a definite beginning, middle, and end, and included dynamic storylines the characters and multiple, overlapping story arcs. Long form television writing is now common thanks to Straczynski.  He did it first.

He is probably the first journalist to cross over into a successful television career, likely the first journalist and television writer to cross over into mainstream comic book writing, and absolutely the first television and comic-writing journalist ever to become a major Hollywood screenwriter.

Other “firsts” include developing his own comic book line (Joe’s Comics), his own multimedia studio (Studio JMS), directing his first movie and creating an original series for Netflix.

The word “first” applies to Straczynski in many ways, including as a fiery, intelligent defender of the First Amendment.

From 2009 to 2010, students, faculty members, Sun journalists, and concerned citizens fought with a corrupt Southwestern College administration and governing board to keep the First Amendment Freedoms of Speech, Assembly, and the Press alive on the campus. In 2010, when the administration attempted to strangle the newspaper by tying its purse strings around its throat, Straczynski responded by undermining the administration the best way possible – financially.

It was definitely the first time that had happened.

And now, for the first time, an unbridled, warp speed first person Q&A interview with the 2013 Southwestern College Honorary Degree recipient:



First Amendment Warrior

In September 2010 Straczynski personally funded an issue of The Sun after former superintendent Raj Chopra and his vice presidents attempted to block publication. The issue broke the story of construction contract corruption involving college board members and administrators.

Sun: In the fall of 2010, the Chopra administration dug up a never-used print bidding policy to force the Southwestern College Sun to prevent printing a controversial issue. You stepped in and paid for the entire issue. Why did you feel this was necessary?

It's Time for a Meet and Greet! (Board Candidates, and a Possible New Direction for Southwestern College)

For those of you just tuning in, many members of the community (yours truly included) are gathering signatures for petitions to recall SWC Governing Board members Yolanda Salcido, Terri Valladolid, and Jean Roesch. We believe that their blanket support of SWC's President Raj Chopra and his blatant anti-student, anti-faculty, anti-learning policies are destructive not only to the school, but to the entirety of the South Bay region.

In the past year or so, several respected members of the community have considered running for one of the Governing Board seats which are up for election in November of this year. And now with the recall petitions out, a few more have expressed interest in running against them for any recall election.

To shine a brighter light on these issues and to introduce some of the candidates, the Southwestern College Association PAC is holding a Meet-and-Greet on Thursday, February 11, at the Romesca Baja Med Bistro in Bonita. The Meet-and-Greet starts at 4:30 p.m., with candidate presentations following at 5:30.

Suggested minimum donations (since we are fundraising for the elections, don't forget) are $25 advance, and $30 at the door.

I strongly suggest that anyone with an interest in the future of Southwestern College, Chula Vista, or the South Bay region come out and meet some of these candidates. Southwestern College is one of the biggest employers in the region. With its accreditation now in jeopardy and its continued unstable administration, it has the potential to harm both Chula Vista and the South Bay.

Come out and meet the candidates. Chances are that by fall, three of them will be on the school's Governing Board. Meet 'em early, and avoid the rush.

Please visit our good friends at the Save Our SWC blog for more information about the Meet-and-Greet, and for a PDF copy of the event flier.

Cowardice Defined - Southwestern College Governing Board and Raj Chopra's Evaluation

On Thursday evening, January 28, the more and more ill-named Governing Board reached quite possibly its newest low. It held an emergency meeting to let the public know that they were about to begin evaluating Dr. Raj Chopra's job as Chancellor-President of Southwestern College.

The evaluations, of course, would be done behind closed doors - as is right. What's wrong is how the board is doing it. They are shoving through this evaluation to get it done as quickly as possible; it is being treated as an emergency - hence the reason for this sudden meeting.

You see, the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC), are expected to release their accreditation report on SWC tomorrow - Monday, February 1. It is believed by all that the school will be blasted for several failures (most of them rooted in the administration and its inability to work with any non-administration types, i.e. faculty, contract staff, students...)

Go here for more on WASC and the reasons accreditation may be at risk. (From the November 14 Washroom post.)

By ramming Chopra's evaluation through before the accreditation report comes out, the members of the Governing Board who continue to prop him up - Pres. Yolanda Salcido, Vice-Pres Terri Valladolid, and recent President Jean Roesch - are attempting to clear him from having to shoulder any responsibility for WASC's findings. With the evaluation done and complete, they don't have to address any failings that WASC shines a spotlight on, and they, in their warped minds, are in the clear.

As far as I'm concerned these actions have redefined cowardice at the upper echelons of higher education. I'm calling that the Example of Cowardice Number One.

Example of Cowardice Number Two: Raj Chopra's evaluation was actually due in October 09. But whenever board member Nick Aguilar tried to get his evaluation put on the monthly board meetings, it never made it.

Who is the gatekeeper for the agenda? Who decides what goes on it? Raj Chopra does.

Yes, you're reading this right. Raj Chopra was able to prevent the board from evaluating him, simply by not putting Nick Aguilar's request to do so on the agenda. And of course Trustees Salcido, Valladolid, and Roesch stood behind that every time, because he's their boy, yo.

With his evaluation clearly not important enough to have been done for months (I've been told that Trustee Aguilar attempted to put it on the agenda for seven months, but I don't know that for certain), it is an act of gross cowardice to try to sneak one through the goal moments before a report appears that must affect that evaluation.

What was unimportant enough to be blown off for months suddenly becomes an emergency only if Raj Chopra might look bad. That's your Governing Board at work, folks.

Cowardice Example Three: Had the members of the Board who decided to host this charade chosen to, they could have given written notice to the members of the staff, faculty, students, and the public; and given plenty of time for people to respond.

You may now laugh.

Of course they don't want the public, the faculty, and the students to respond. They know how disgusted the lot is with them, and with Dr. Chopra. So instead of doing anything close to "the right thing," they announced the meeting at around 4 p.m. on Wednesday, only about 25 hours before the actual "emergency" meeting was held.

You saw the photo at the top. People simply couldn't come. It was a near-empty room. Many people didn't know, and many others simply couldn't make arrangements. One instructor who did come brought his children. Besides Phil Lopez, the Union President, and Valerie Goodwin-Colbert, the Academic Senate President, there was a mere handful of instructors, two children, and yours truly.

Why, even one member of the Governing Board failed to show up...

Cowardice Example Four: Trustee Terri Valladolid chose not to show up at the public meeting, but according to a witness standing outside the closed-door session, she "slipped in the back door just as it started."

She could do this. She helped set events in motion before the public meeting. When Trustees Aguilar and Jorge Dominguez attempted to slow the process, they were unable to. To do so required a majority of five, and a tie vote of 2-2 does nothing. Valladolid knew this, and she is fully aware of the petition drive to recall her, so she played the coward card.

By not arriving at the public meeting, she has set herself up to deny fast-tracking Raj Chopra's evaluation. She can say, "I didn't vote against Nick and Jorge! I wasn't even there!" Of course she wasn't. She didn't have to be. But she did have to be there to actually discuss the evaluation. So it's no surprise that she had to skulk in the back to take part in this sham she helped create.

Cowardice Example Five: For the first time in known history, the Governing Board has decided to evaluate its Chancellor-President with no input from the faculty. This is quite simply unheard of. Again, this is as egregious as it is because the board members doing this know that the faculty has voted Raj Chopra no-confidence in the past, and because his grasp of leadership continues to slide.

I could go into this much deeper, but someone else has already done so. Please visit our chums at Save Our SWC for much more on this issue - then hurry back!

It also has to be added that the Board has created an evaluation that is impossible to grade. In the words of Trustee Dominguez: "It's all 'I think,' 'I feel,' 'I wish' statements. You should see it."

But we can't. The Board has decided that not only is the evaluation process a closed-door issue, but that the evaluation form is, also.

I asked Trustee Dominguez this: "Is there any way to quantify it?" He answered, "There's no way."

In other words, no matter what they say about Raj Chopra, there is nothing to measure it against; there is no quantifiable data being gathered. It's a series of "I think he's doing okay" statements. This is another egregious decision - and another transparent attempt to prop up his position.

Cowardice Example Six: With the expected sanctions that WASC will likely levy against SWC, it should be expected that the Governing Board and its administration would try to find some way to spin this so it's not entirely negative.

You're going to love this.

After the sham public information meeting, I was told that Our Good Friend Nick Alioto was heard saying - earlier that day - that the members of the faculty wanted those coming sanctions.

Yes. He's claiming that the professors want WASC to levy sanctions against their school and their programs.

I believe this (and I'm on the record before WASC's report is due), that Chopra's administration is going to try to spin his failures, and his administration's failures, as the fault of the faculty. I believe he is so disgustingly desperate to hold onto his job that he would go so far as to do this. He will likely say it was the professors who wanted those sanctions as a way of making him look bad.

He doesn't need the professors to look bad. He's got himself, and Alioto, and his pocket Board members to do that.

Don't be fooled. This will fall on him, but much of the damage will miss him. Board members Salcido, Valladolid, and Roesch will have seen to that. They have twisted and warped the system to shine up a man who will only ever be known for destroying the reputation of a good school. This man, who is so incapable of admitting his errors and faults, that he will attempt to blame his own victimized professors for errors and faults that the accreditation committee will lay at his doorstep.

The public wants Chopra gone. The staff, the faculty, and the students want him gone. Two members of the board want him gone. Only three want him to stay.

This is just another reason why we're going to have to work to force Salcido, Valladolid, and Roesch out of office. This concerned majority can't touch Chopra, but we can touch them.

Recall them. Give them a reason to be cowards. It's no better than they deserve.

On Grants: Why Does Southwestern College's Board and Administration Hate Free Money?

I call this: Even More Entertainment From Your Governing Board Meeting. (I think this deserves its own post.) One of the absolute highlights of the December (show) meeting was when first-year adjunct professor Ramin Moshiri spoke up during “oral communication” to ask the Board and the administration why they didn’t want the school to have any money.

Professor Moshiri then produced a short stack of papers that outlined a list of grants that Southwestern College is available to apply for. Two of those four grants award a total average of $23.5 million to eligible applicants; the other two are still new, but were offering a piece of an $80 million dollar pie for 70 different community colleges.

He then pointed out it didn’t take him long to research these grants; what the hold-up was, was the administration. He told the Board that he had visited office after office, building after building, and no one would take the slightest bit of responsibility for this information. This information, gathered by one of the school’s professors, offered a chance at free money to the school, but no one in power would take it – or even tell him where he should go.

(Where is the school’s grant writer, you ask? Where is that person who should have snatched away that paper and run, cheering, to their office to get that free money?

Why, SWC doesn’t have one. That was apparently one of those positions that Raj Chopra thought was unnecessary. Yes, in the middle of what he claims is the fiscal equivalent of the Apocalypse – and has fooled trustees Salcido, Valladolid, and Roesch into believing – he’s elected to go without a grant writer.)

Professor Moshiri then told them that the administration’s attitude reminded him of the big-spending days of the ‘70s – “when people would just ignore a quarter lying on the ground,” he said. He then dropped his stack of grant research to the carpet and informed them that they were doing the same thing.

Folks need to face the facts: Salcido, Valladolid, Roesch, and Chopra have no interest in saving the college, in seeking out moneys and opportunities, in considering other options. No, what they want are the classes cut. That they’ve got. It’s clear that certain members of the administration want to punish certain members of the faculty, too, and they’re willing to destroy SWC to do it.

They’ve got to go.

Two last completely unimportant points: the first is that, at the end of the Board meeting, when the trustees could request more information or further research, none of those three Board members thought that Professor Moshiri’s work was important enough to request. It took Jorge Dominguez to compliment the professor on his work, and request that someone get started on pursuing these grants.*

The last point is one of those little moments of irony I love so much. New veep Nick Alioto, who apparently has been unable to find a single thin dime to help keep the school from cutting classes, and apparently also thought that a grant writer was unnecessary used to find money for schools for a living at at least two public school districts in Wisconsin. His last gig was so successful that he apparently resigned his admin job, got himself hired back as a “consultant,” and made well over a million dollars “finding” money for the school – and earning himself a fat 25% fee doing so.

According to Professor Moshiri, it’s not that hard to find money available for the school. It’s just that this Board and the current administration can’t do it. Is anyone really going to be surprised if Alioto tries to work himself a cushy little deal sometime down the road, and suddenly is able to find money and grants that he’d never thought of before?

At a fat 25% commission, of course.

------------------------------------------------------------------

*It’s probably because of that radical, free-thinking, rank-breaking, on-the-bench activism that caused Salcido, Valladolid, and Roesch to alienate him and begin to construct their Empire without him.


Grant Options Presented by Professor Ramin Moshiri

Health Information Technology Extension Program (cycle 2) - $1-$30 Million ($8.5 Million average)

Objective: this program provides grants for the establishment of Health Information Technology Regional Extension Centers that will offer technical assistance, guidance, and information on best practices to support and accelerate health care providers’ efforts to become meaningful users of Electronic Health Records (EHRs).

Application Deadline: Cycle 2: Preliminary Applications – Dec. 22, 2009; Full Applications – Jan. 29, 2010

Beacon Community Cooperative Agreement Program - $10-$20 Million ($15 Million average)

Objective: this program will provide funding to communities to build and strengthen their health information technology (health IT) infrastructure and exchange capabilities to demonstrate the vision of meaningful health IT.

Application Deadline: Feb. 1, 2010 (Letter of Intent due Jan. 8, 2010)

Community College Consortia to Educate Health IT Professionals - $70 Million (for 70 Community Colleges)

Objective: this program seeks to rapidly create health IT education and training programs at Community Colleges, or expand existing programs. Community colleges funded under this initiative will establish intensive, non-degree training programs that can be completed in six months or less.

Application Deadline: Jan. 22, 2010

Curriculum Development Centers - $10 Million (for 70 Community Colleges)

Objective: this funding opportunity, one component of the workforce program, will provide $10 million in grants to institutions of higher education (or consortia thereof) to support health IT curriculum development.

Application Deadline: Jan. 14, 2010 (Letter of Intent due Jan. 4, 2010)

A New Blog to Visit: Southwestern College Board Must Go - The Recall Petition Blog

There’s a new blog up that should be of interest to folks in the Southwestern College district: http://swcboardmustgo.blogspot.com/. This is the Recall blog, the online headquarters for the recall petition drive. Please stop by and bookmark this site. It has just very recently gone up, and has only one post so far, a short explanation about why the recall of board members Yolanda Salcido, Terry Valladolid, and Jean Roesch is necessary to the continued future of Southwestern College.

I have been assured that more will be up very soon, and they are planning on using the blog as a way of keeping the public involved in the petition drive.

They’re still getting everything together, adding all the bells-and-whistles, so I suggest if you have a question, leave it as a comment on the first post. I will be shamelessly flogging that site for the duration of the signature-gathering period, so get used to seeing the links. The Recall is necessary!

Edit: Do you want to sign a petition, and haven't had the chance to voice your displeasure at Salcido, Valladolid, and/or Roesch? I'll be at the Trader Joe's in Eastlake tomorrow from 11 a.m. until sometime in the afternoon. Come by, say "hi!," sign a petition or three. You have to live in the district to do so - and I'm told that is basically the entire South Bay region plus Coronado. I'll have the exact borders in mind before tomorrow.

(And, yes, if you're thinking I'll be taking notes about this - and about the people that show up - for an upcoming blog post, you'd be right.)

Drama, Comedy, Tragedy! A Night at Southwestern College's Board Meeting: Now That's Entertainment!

Since I’ve started attending the Southwestern College Governing Board meetings, I’ve discovered that these things are the best entertainment value to be had in the South Bay. Besides watching the campus police watching for a riot to break out, you can listen as members of the faculty, student body, and the public line up to fire broadside after broadside at the mostly-clueless Board. Or sometimes, like Wednesday’s mellow meeting, you can sit and listen as the Board runs itself into the ground.

Any psychology or sociology professor worth his or her salt would have a heyday using the Board meeting as a paragon of group dynamics gone horribly awry.

The December meeting was Election Night! for the Board, when the five trustees elect – among themselves – their Board President and Vice-President. They also appoint the current school superintendent, Raj K. Chopra, as the standing secretary. Since Southwestern College’s inception, there has been a customary ‘chain of succession,’ which would have elevated trustee Jorge Dominguez to the position of Board President.

That didn’t happen.

In a 3-2 push, Yolanda Salcido was elected president over Trustee Dominguez, and Terri Valladolid was elected vice-president – also over Dominguez (who was nominated both times by Nick Aguilar). Exiting president, Jean Roesch, supported both Salcido and Valladolid.

Why is this such a big deal? Since SWC’s beginning, this custom has been followed, up until this year. Salcido, in defending her right to be Board President, remarked that they needed strong leadership in times of such a fiscal crisis.*

The Governing Board has ascended all manners of buffoons and scoundrels to the board presidency, but when given a chance to elect one who is both qualified and a long-time educator, they chose not to – and instead went with someone without any sort of education background.

It’s an insult, and Dominguez admitted as much. He also let it be known that he would not run for a Board position, which leaves one seat open. It bears repeating – loudly – that these three members of the Board – Salcido, Valladolid, and Roesch – have succeeded in alienating a member of the board who usually votes with them, and that includes on issues regarding Raj Chopra and the school’s budget. Are they so short-sighted that they no longer think they need as much support as they can get?

Or is it something worse? Personally, I ascribe it to empire-building. I believe that these three board members are trying to carve themselves a little fiefdom at the top of Southwestern College. With three votes in lockstep, there is no way for any other member of the Board to challenge them.**

These three support Raj Chopra at every opportunity; support the class cuts, laid-off professors, and tossed-aside students; and, up until Valladolid’s ill-considered “open forums,” have basically ignored every criticism leveled at them. Valladolid also is the one who, during the October GB meeting, dismissed the layoffs of the adjunct faculty as not really layoffs – a fact that has personally offended many folks who heard it (and heard about it).

At this last meeting, she angrily made a comment about certain members of the Board being “unfairly targeted” by certain members of the community (the Recall Petition) – “the women.” The mind reels at her inability to see that the Recall Petition has everything to do with breaking up this up-and-coming empire and nothing to do with their gender.

Furthermore, Raj Chopra revealed himself to be an obstructionist non-pareil this month. When challenged by Trustee Aguilar on why Chopra hadn’t added one of Aguilar’s requested items to the agenda, Chopra dismissed him by saying he was the only one interested in it, and he didn’t find it necessary. Consider the fact that the items Nick Aguilar is trying to get on the agenda include putting GB meetings on streaming video; trying to make sure contractors, consultants, and the like aren’t given nepotistic positions at the college; and asking that the Board finally begin the process of evaluating Raj Chopra. The gatekeeper for actually getting something on the agenda is Chopra himself, who has simply decided not to add any of these to the agenda – in effect, he controls what is discussed, and if he doesn’t want it there, tough.***

In addition to all the above comedy, tragedy raised its ugly head as well. Union leader Phil Lopez had to steal away a few minutes again during the open “oral communication” part to give his report, and it should have been shocking.

Not to anyone who pays attention to all this, but to the Board, it should have been.

Using figures provided by the administration itself and a smattering of math that most of us learned in fifth grade, he was able to demonstrate that, not only was the school not in the worst financial position it had ever been in, but it had made a profit last year (when it was projected to lose millions of dollars), and was on track to make a profit this year, too.

That was before the class cuts and laid-off professors. He provided them with visual aids, and used very small words so the Board could understand, and when his time was up, he took his seat. At the very end of the meeting, after most of the drama had come and gone, and the Board had an opportunity to “request further information,” they failed to do so. Apparently the fact that the school isn’t in as bad a fiscal state as they were afraid isn’t good news to some of them.

To Salcido, Valladolid, and Roesch, it’s very bad news. Salcido claimed her Right of Presidency based on the financial crisis. Their entire empire is built on the idea that the school needs them – and only them – to guide it through these tough times. If the times aren’t so tough, then these three are attempting to build their castle on a foundation of shifty sand.

----------------------------------------------------

*Yeah, we’ll get to that line of horse poo soon.

**Unless, of course, somehow some folks manage to vote them out of office. That would be the Recall Petition people. We’ll get to that in a coming post.

***Yes, you read it right. If he doesn’t want it discussed, he just leaves it off the agenda. By my count, he admitted to doing that exactly as many times as Nick Aguilar asked why his requested items weren’t on the agenda.

Student Leader Films Part of Southwestern College Governing Board Meeting - World Does Not End

Southwestern College student Veronica Golenia - one of those who have taken an active role in standing up to the administration and its constant appalling decisions - took a big step forward this week, doing something that the Governing Board has been too terrified to do: she filmed their meeting.

Please, please, please visit the Save Our SWC blog to watch quite a bit of the "oral communication" portion - that bit where the public speaks out. This one is much more mellow than last month's, but those that did speak really shined.

For those who haven't yet gone to the other blog, let me add that trustee Nick Aguilar has asked repeatedly - and been ignored, bulldozed, and buffaloed - to simply discuss putting the GB meetings on streaming video. They ignore the suggestion with a vehemence normally given towards discussions about the Apocalypse, the Mayan Calendar, and Armageddon itself. Clearly the Board doesn't want its work out there.

I suspect that the Board is used to operating in its quiet, obfuscatory manner, and knows that if the public can easily see how they spin and ignore the truth, and justify the administration's incompetence, then people might just think that someone else could do their jobs better than they can.

Let's hear it for this student leader, taking the first step toward proving them right.

Southwestern College Administration Now Attacks Freedom of the Press

Apparently unsatisfied with their attacks on America’s Freedoms of Speech and Assembly, the Southwestern College administration has taken aim at undermining the Freedom of the Press.

Just before last night’s Governing Board meeting, several different people informed me that less than half an hour earlier, the college administration had decided to handicap one of its prestige programs by refusing to fund the requested printing budget for its nationally-recognized newspaper, the Southwestern College Sun.

In some cases this could be an understandable decision, particularly in times of financial distress. That simply isn’t the case here.

For nine consecutive years, the Sun has been awarded the Pacesetter and General Excellence awards, the top awards given by the Journalism Association of Community Colleges (JACC) – the top community college journalism organization in the country. In addition, this year all five of the top college and university media organizations – which also include the Associated College Press, Columbia Scholastic Press, American Scholastic Press Association, and the National Newspaper Association – awarded the Sun their highest awards. Also this year, individual journalists won awards on a national level from the Society of Professional Journalists, and on a local level from the San Diego SPJ, San Diego Press Club, and the San Diego County Fair Media Competition.

This is about an average year for the Sun. This is no scrubby little rag we’re talking about.

Starting publication in 1963 – at the dawn of SWC itself – the Sun is truly one of the best-respected and recognized college newspapers in the country, and is one of the school’s flagship programs; one of those programs that drives students to the school.*

Why would the administration want to attack and cripple such a prestigious program, you ask? Because the Sun has come down, again and again, in opposition to President Raj K. Chopra. This fall, they covered the student rally that Chopra has attempted to spin as a “riot” and refused to fall into the administration’s line. They refused to turn over photos of the event when the campus police came out and demanded they do so. They have done proper journalistic due diligence and have watchdogged this shameful administration.

So, though I’m not terribly surprised that the administration has decided to attack the Sun, I am surprised that they have done so in such an obvious, buffoonish fashion. The fact that clearly none of them realized that they have hit a unique trifecta – stomping on the freedoms of Speech, Assembly, and now the Press – only further proves how absolutely out of touch with reality this administration is.

Check out the Southwestern College Sun online edition here.

*And in mentioning the Sun, I’m not attempting to detract from its talented musical performers and teams, or its debate team, which is another one of SWC’s proud flagship programs.

Note to the Parents of Southwestern College Students (Something to Think About Over the Thanksgiving Weekend)

This is addressed solely to those people who have children attending Southwestern College. I know some of you read this regularly. I also know some of your kids will make you read it (at least this one post).

...Sorry about that.

In the past few weeks, I've had a couple of conversations with parents who have children going to school there. In each case, the parents say they know their students have told them about the troubles at the school. But they've also heard - usually by reading the San Diego Union-Tribune, it must be noted - that President Raj K. Chopra denies these charges levied against him by the students and faculty members.

Just this week, I spoke with a man who is a respected member of the community. He told me that his child had told him about President Chopra's continued attempts to quell free speech, and about the student protest that Chopra dishonestly referred to as a "riot" that was inspired by several members of the teaching staff.

This man (who is, yes, remaining nameless) reported that it is hard to justify what his child told him with what Dr. Chopra continues to say, again and again and again.

He didn't say why, but I suppose I can understand. It is in a child's nature to lie to his or her parents. "No, I didn't break the window. No, I didn't take the car out. Yes, I did my homework."

As such, it's in a parent's nature to take what a child tells them with a grain of salt.

On the other hand, one expects people in authority to be honest. We expect that the president of the college the child attends to be honest. We need him to be honest.

Your son or daughter has likely told you that the students held a rally to protest budget cuts, and then decided to march on the president's office to be heard. They will tell you they (the students) met the police, spoke with them, and after half an hour or so, went their own way. No one was arrested, no one was harmed, and no one assaulted anyone in uniform.

Raj Chopra has said that members of the teaching staff incited a riot, by going on the microphone and urging the students to march. He has said that his students followed the professors, attacked the police, and threatened the safety of all and sundry on the campus. In fact, here he states (and I quote): "Then there was a faculty member who went on the microphone and said they should march with the students and incited them."

Parents, understand, that is not true.

Again, as I have said here and here, and in other places, I was present at the students' protest, and at the administration building when the police stopped the march. At no point did the professors incite the students to do anything, and at no point was there a riot.

I am no young student. I am a middle-aged man likely older than many of you parents reading this. I know some of you have wondered if what your children have told you is true, and I know that many of you assume that if the college president says it, it must be true.

Please stop. Raj Chopra has been dishonest about this situation from the beginning, and now he has no choice but to continue to do so. He has to continue to call this a riot, and to blame the professors, because if he admits to any of it being a lie, then his entire house of cards tumbles. He has more to lose than anyone - his position, his power, his pension, and his local prestige. Of course he'll do anything to keep that.

As SWC president, he has a voice in the media that no one else has. He is able to simply make a statement and to some members of the press (the Union-Tribune, for instance), it is true. For some readers, because it's in print, it's automatically true.

It's not. Listen to your children. They may likely tell you something different than the newspaper has. Listen. Because they're right.

Coming Soon: Rallies, Protests, and Board Meetings! (Southwestern College)

Consider this space a short "Coming Soon" notice, because that's what it is. I have chosen to wait to do a combined post on last week's faculty free speech rally, this week's students' silent protest, and last night's Governing Board meeting.

I was unable to attend the silent protest, and would like to use a photo or two here. Of course, I'm happy to give all photo credits and a big thank you! for the use. And because I actually participated last night, I was unable to detach myself enough to take any photos then. I'd like to use a few good photos of the Governing Board meeting, too, if anyone has any I could use and/or link to.

Leave a comment, or send me an email - nickolasfurr (at) yahoo (dot) com, if you have photos I might use. It will probably be Friday before this post is removed and replaced by the next one. Thanks, y'all!

EDIT/APOLOGY:

My brain has melted this weekend. I'm fighting a nasty cold, and haven't been able to update. I will as soon as I'm able to. I still would like a good photo or three from the the GB meeting, but I do have a couple of shots from the silent protest.

I haven't forgotten. I just haven't been able to get to it yet. But I will.

Chopra Returns! Just in Time for the New Governing Board Meeting at Southwestern College

Tonight's the night, folks. Starting at 7 p.m. on the campus of Southwestern College in Chula Vista, the public, students, and faculty will get to speak.

President Raj K. Chopra has finally returned from that very long vacation he needed after suspending four professors, and I'm guessing he's feeling rested, tanned, and ready to hear what we have to say.

I suggest we give it to him.

This Governing Board meeting will be held in Cafeteria East. Pressure from the public, the students, the faculty, the press -- pretty much from everywhere -- forced Chopra to move this meeting from its usual location to the cafeteria. This means that no one should be forced to stand outside in the cold again.

If you want to speak, show up before 7:00 and fill out one of the "yellow cards." They're available as you go inside. Fill in your name and city, and you can speak to the Governing Board for up to three minutes. You don't have to speak that long, but that is the most you can speak.

This is your chance to be heard, people! Seize it! If you're an angry or frustrated parent, a student who's being forced out, a member of the public with questions or concerns, or even a business leader who just wants to know what the heck is going on over there (which we're hearing a lot of you do), come out and be heard.

The press will be there. This is likely to be big. You want to be here tonight. I suspect that if someone needs translation into Spanish, that can be found.

It is time to start taking back this school from this current administration. And it's time the Board takes some responsibility for putting this shameful leadership in place.

A Frustrated Southwestern College Student Speaks to the Administration

Last night, I received the following from an SWC student. Frustrated at the current administration, “they” explained that they feel that the students’ voices have been ignored by the administration and the Board through all that has gone on. The student, going by the name of “SOSWC Student Blogger,” has no connection with the Save Our SWC blog, and has asked for a chance to be heard.

I’m all for it. The bottom line is: President Raj K. Chopra has made a very bad choice in his decision to cut classes. Southwestern College will lose many professors, and it will probably lose thousands of students. I’m delighted that so many of these affected students have become involved in the protests and rallies, and I’m happy to provide a bit of online real estate for them to be heard.

I’ve formatted this to fit the blog, but I have changed no content. The letter’s words are the words of the student, not mine.

Letter begins:

“October 22, 2009 will be the day that changed the community of Southwestern College forever. Most students and faculty gathered around this so called “free speech” zone to voice their concerns on recent budget cuts and staff layoffs. As one courageous student stood out and spoke, “let’s take it to where they can hear us,” students and faculty were marching to President Chopra’s office to meet face to face with him, so they thought. Students were confronted by a blockade of SWC police officers, as a crowd of onlookers from the side watched. After the crowd of students dispersed about a half hour after the rally was supposed to be over, the war on education began. This is certainly a “slap in the face” for all who were affected by the administration’s move to suspend the “SWC Three” the day after the rally took place. It personally affected me in more ways than one.

I would like to take a moment and say the following to all the members of the Governing Board, the administration, and especially to President Chopra:

‘Why did you have to make matters worse by threatening the “SWC Three” with criminal charges, when it shouldn’t have been done in the first place? Why did it have to be until three weeks later that we hear that the charges are being dropped, especially in the form of a letter that was sent an hour before the Free Speech Rally? Was this an attempt from you to have us cancel the rally? I say that sending that letter was a cowardly move. We would all like to hear a public apology, especially from you, President Chopra. It was unfair, unjust, and flat out wrong what you did, and you know that. Until then, we the students and faculty of SWC will not give up…until our voices finally reach you and you decide to answer us…’

SWC is the starting point of abolishing unconstitutional free speech areas in community colleges and universities in the state of California and around the nation. This goal cannot be reached alone. Together, students, faculty, and community members can step up and make a difference.

--SOSWC Student Blogger

P.S. To all the students out there supporting this cause: You guys are doing a fantastic job. With brilliant minds and kind hearts, we can fight this war and win it! Keep it up, and if all else fails, ‘try and try again.’”

What is Southwestern College's Reserve Fund? (The Economics of Accreditation, the Surplus, and the Bond Rating)

Like the Nick Alioto piece, this came from some of my comments in the comments section. I think the questions are big enough to warrant consideration. Call it hubris if you will, but I haven't heard anyone else asking them. I'm going to call it "watchdogging."

Accreditation in Jeopardy?

In February, WASC (the Western Association of Schools and Colleges – Accrediting Commission for Schools) will present its findings regarding Southwestern College. This will be one month after the school begins its new Chopra-created shorted schedule.

Among their initial findings were these (and I'm quoting here from SWC's Exit Interview Transcript of October 8, 2009 - written by Dr. Gari Browning/Superintendent of Ohone College, and WASC Team Chair):

"The Team recommends that the college set as a priority fostering an environment of trust and respect for all employees and students." (This was not part of another bullet point; it was one entire point on its own.)

How well can this administration’s agenda of fear reflect on WASC's decision? Chopra or his sidekick, Nick Alioto, has apparently finished their "investigation" and placed official Letters of Reprimand in the files of those professors the administration is trying to railroad! Students are saying they've been told they're not allowed to complain about the administrations' actions. The community is starting to realize how divisive these actions are. WASC quite rightly said that the college should move in the opposite direction - engendering trust among its faculty and students, the very people who are being turned out into the cold.

"The Team further recommends that the college establish and follow a written process for providing faculty, staff, administrators, and students, a substantial voice in decision making processes."

Do I need to mention again the fact that these unilateral budget cuts weren't even allowed to be discussed? The Board rubber-stamped Chopra's budget and refused to even allow Board member Nick Aguilar's motion to simply discuss other options in an emergency meeting. There is no one besides the upper administration that thinks they have a voice in the process. They don't. That has been made clear.

There are other recommendations, but these are two that directly impact how WASC perceives Southwestern College.

It would be ludicrous to think that WASC is unaware of the actions of FIRE and the ACLU, the frequent negative (to the administration) news coverage, and yes, the constant buzz about the blogosphere. Can anyone take seriously the idea that this can't affect SWC's accreditation process?

It can, and it would fall hard at the feet of an administration that has created an atmosphere of fear and disenfranchised the very people that WASC thinks must be included in the decision-making process.

The Bond Rating: Why is This More Important Than Classes?

At the last Board meeting, the vice-president, Yolanda Salcido, said that the college's 11.5 million-dollar 'reserve' needed to be left intact, "to help maintain their bond rating." (And, yeah, that's a quote.)

Leaving aside for a moment the concept that a school's administration and Board should tear apart their own schedule, disenfranchise their faculty, and kick an unknown number of students to the curb, just to make themselves more attractive for possible future investors, there is a question of economic fact.

Standard & Poor's has given Southwestern College a rating of AA- (Double A minus), which is pretty damn good, and keeps them in the top bracket of performance. But, after doing some research, I've found some facts of interest.The amount of money in the bank counts very little toward how a rating agency (like S&P) grades the bonds. You know what's more important? The quality of education, the diversity of adjunct faculty, the diversity of students, and a well-balanced selection of classes all weigh more to the rating agencies.

To recap: to keep from spending less than $2M out of $11.5M in the bank, the Board would rather lower its quality of education (point 1), by cutting hundreds of classes - both electives and core (point 4); in doing so, laying off (or "not bringing back" in SWC parlance) about half its adjunct faculty (point 2), and forcing an undefined number of student - but surely in the few thousands - to give up their education or go somewhere else (point 3).

All to 'keep that money in the bank to look good' - which is not nearly as important to the rating agencies!

To me, this appears to be the short-sighted nature of this administration and its Governing Board - to take the 'easy' way out, and do it on the backs of the students and faculty, all so they can make the school look better to those possible future investors.

You have to ask: why does this matter more than the student's education? Does this focus on the financial risks of the investors (not the school) mean that they have ignored the school's focus: to educate those students of the South Bay area?

I'll be the first to admit that I could have this wrong. If someone out there with a background in Economics could let me know how I got it wrong, please do. I'd be delighted to hear it.

Okay…one last thing I forgot to point out.

According to Moody's (another rating agency), approximately 95% of all the public institutions that they rated received a grade of "A" or better.

(Moody's, Standard & Poor's, Fitch IBCA, and Duff & Phelps' all use equivalent "A" ratings. SWC's "AA-" is equivalent to Moody's "Aa3" - both of which refer to High-Quality, strong Investment Grade bonds.)

This reflects well on the school - pre-budget cuts. By undermining its own values as an educational institution, they'll have done more harm to the credit rating than spending less than $2 million - most of which would have gone back into the economy in and around Chula Vista.

But with about 19 in 20 public institutions being "Investment Grade" bonds or better, Yolanda Salcido's comment takes on a darker hue: is she unaware of how the bond rating is determined, or does she not care - and simply whipped it out as a handy reason hard to challenge on the spot?

So...why? Why was this reason given? Why would they rather keep this money in the bank than spend the profits of a few good years on one year when the school needs it?

The Board's driving goal should be to maintain the highest quality of education. Instead, it looks like their one goal is to protect a fat, fat bank account.

Is Southwestern College's Nick Alioto Racine USD's Nick Alioto?

Nick Alioto is the current Vice-President of Business and Finance at Southwestern College, and the guy calling the shots now that Raj K. Chopra is "on vacation." Just a couple of years ago, a chap named Nick Alioto made a lot of news in Wisconsin for some business dealings with the Racine Unified School District.

Were they the same people? This question came up in the comments on my recent ACLU piece. It interested me, and I did a little digging. I posted my thoughts in comments, but decided they were worth putting here instead. (I've modified my own answer in a few places to better suit the format.)

I don't think that they can be the same person. Wisconsin's Nick Alioto was a financial genius able to save Racine USD somewhere between $15 and $18 million dollars in the first six months that his company - Public Business Consulting Group (PBCG) - went to work. They painstakingly sought out "savings" that no one else had ever considered*, transferred money from one fund to another**, and implemented energy savings programs.***

That Nick Alioto was so successful that his company made an estimated $1.8 million is less than two years - based upon an agreed-upon pay rate of 20% of all found savings****. That Nick Alioto almost forced the Racine USD to pay a multi-million dollar penalty from breaking a contract with PBCG, but still collected a $750,000 settlement when the district insisted on parting ways.

Southwestern College's Nick Alioto clearly isn't that guy. Knowing that this question must come up, our Nick Alioto is the guy who arrived at the last Governing Board meeting unable to narrow down the amount of budget shortfall any more than, "somewhere between 1.3 and 1.7 million dollars." Our Nick Alioto is the guy unable to divine any way of saving the college's big fat bank account, short of putting faculty and students on the street.

Nope. There's no way this is the same guy.

--------------------------------------------

*Stuff that almost every other Wisconsin public school district had been doing for decades.

**A shell game that meant that taxpayers paid more for those savings, and then paid PBCG its percentage for the privilege of getting ripped off.

***Claiming money saved on hypothetical situations.

****Twenty-five percent.

--------------------------------------------

Seriously, you need more proof these can't be the same guy? These these links:

JSOnline (Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel) - "Firm Overbills Racine Schools"

JSOnline - "Director Left Last District in the Hole"

FoxPolitics.Net - "Racine: The Tragedy of Smoke and Mirrors Savings"

Real Debate Wisconsin - "An Interesting Story About PBCG Head Nick Alioto"

JSOnline - "District May Renegotiate With Consulting Firm"

LawyersAndSettlements.com - Settlement Details

ACLU Weighs in Regarding Southwestern College

It's official; this is big. The ACLU has sent a letter to Southwestern College's president, Raj K. Chopra, the members of its governing board, the various vice-presidents, and even to the campus police chief. In that patented American Civil Liberties Union fashion, it fires a broadside at the administration - but in a very polite, very professional manner.

(Please visit the Save Our SWC blog for a summary of the letter, and for a link to the entire thing. I haven't figured out how to link to PDF's yet, so I'm going to let them do it.)

I'll admit, I'm feeling pretty prescient - a few posts ago, I commented that have FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) take you to task was one short step to having the ACLU get involved. (The actual comment is located here.)

I've decided to test it again. I think that, given the consistent bad press that they're getting from Higher Education's most respected publications - Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Ed; and because of the actions of FIRE and the ACLU; and because the Governing Board is trying to blame these budget cuts entirely on the government of the State of California, I predict that it won't be too much longer before the state's Attorney General's office gets involved.

So again I ask: What is wrong with this Board? Do they enjoy this? Have they completely abrogated their responsibility to keep the school and its students first in their priorities?

To me - and I suspect to many others, it appears that they have. The only communication they've made so far to anyone has been supportive of Raj Chopra's 'non-suspension' suspension of the professors. Will it take the involvement of the Attorney General for the Board to realize what a mistake they've made?

I'm guessing it won't be long until we find out.

Southwestern College Professors & Students March Again

Together with students of all ages, members of the faculty at Southwestern College took their protest to the public on Thursday. Literally walking a thin line (between the street and campus property - where they apparently were told they could not protest) for a few hours under the sun, the professors and their students worked together to call more attention to the budget cuts tearing the school apart.

During the march, some professors left to teach their classes. Other arrived only after their classes were dismissed. Students came and went, some taking extremely active roles.

With passersby honking and cheering their support, one of San Diego's alt-papers, City Beat, made its first appearance, as did Univision.

It goes without saying - but I'm saying it, that this isn't going to just fade away. In a just world, they wouldn't have had to go this far to support the education of the youth of the South Bay area.

It's a good thing that some members of the community actually care.

Let's Talk About This "Riot" at Southwestern College (An Open Letter to the DA's Office)

To Whom it Does Concern:

Two weeks ago, out of a desire to watch a bit of student activism at work, I went to Southwestern College in Chula Vista. Students were rallying to protest budget cuts. I went, took a few photos with my cell phone, and watched as the students decided to march on the president’s office. He wasn’t there; campus police stopped the students from getting near the office. I took a few more pictures. Three professors – at least one of whom wasn’t even present at the rally – spoke to the police, and were informed that no one would be allowed to pass into the administration area until they (campus police) decided.

Frustrated, the students chanted, asking President Chopra to come out. Not realizing that he wasn’t even present, they remained until another the Dean of Student Services, Mia McClellan, came out and told them they couldn’t be there. She opted not to tell them he wasn’t around. Had she done so, she could have short-circuited their anger quite neatly. She didn’t. Instead, she demanded they leave.

The professors had left the ‘conflict area’ before that, and only watched over their students from the back of the crowd. The only people near the police were students – and none of them did anything more than launch entirely-justifiable questions and complaints at Ms. McClellan.

Apparently fed up with those folks exercising their Right to Assemble, Ms. McClellan told them again to leave. She walked off, leaving it in the hands of the campus police. The police very calmly asked the students to leave – and most did. A few students stayed behind, asking “What would happen if…” and “Why can’t I…” questions. After another few minutes, the crowd drifted away, and even the police went their own way.

I was there. I arrived before at least one of the professors, and remained within a few feet of the police at all times. There was no riot; I saw no conflict.

Two days ago, the administration of the college apparently completed their “investigation” and referred their situation to the San Diego County District Attorney’s Office. They have asked the D.A. to file charges on three professors: SCEA President Phillip Lopez, Andrew Rempt, and Dinorah Guadiana-Costa.

The claim is that the professors:

1. Incited the students to move outside the “free speech area” and to violate SWC policies,

2. Ignored the warnings and directives of the campus police, and

3. Had physical confrontation with the police.

These are bogus charges. None of the professors ever had contact with the police. Had they, I doubt the police would have simply waved them away – which they did. When the police told them that they were not allowed into the administration area to do their jobs, the three of them left. There was frustration in their voices, yes, but I’d not even go so far as to call it anger. Hardly the behavior of police-assaulting rioters, is it?

Furthermore, I was also present at the rally. By happenstance, I was standing near the faculty when one of the students ran over and breathlessly informed them that they were going to march. The professors raised eyebrows and wondered aloud about this decision. A minute or two later, when the students began to march, a few of the faculty followed them – and some simply chose to walk on to their next class.

At no point did any member of the faculty incite this lawful action. The students of SWC chose to do so – and, personally, I applaud their decision to do so. But to claim that any member of the faculty beat the drum to start this action is ludicrous, dishonest, and wrong.

Lastly, I must point out that the SWC police peacefully met the students face-to-face. When one young female student held a sign up in front of one of the officers, he pulled it down and quite reasonably explained that she simply could not block his line of sight; it was unsafe for him to not be able to see. When she had follow-up questions, he patiently explained that his safety and the safety of his fellow officers must be paramount.

I agree with that; as, I suspect does most everyone else – including these professors whom the school has asked you to railroad. Don’t let this happen. Don’t give this administration – an administration which appears to be drifting from unremitting incompetence toward earnest corruption – another tool to attack its faculty. They get enough of that on a daily basis from President Raj K. Chopra.

If you need, I have more details, and I’m happy to put this on the record. My email is nickolasfurr (at) yahoo (dot) com. I thank you.

Media Attention Continues to Shine on Southwestern College's Suspended Professors (And FIRE Opens Fire)

I’m back with more press coverage; I’m late, yes, but I’m back. I’m posting these to remind you that people are watching the ridiculous blow-up at Southwestern College. Though President Raj Chopra and his administration would love for this to disappear (a sentiment shared by the San Diego Union-Tribune, which has apparently reverted to its notorious anti-education screeds), it has not.

People are watching, they’re reading, they’re talking about it…and they’re taking action.

Newly Updated! Check below for information on new press and even coverage from the Huffington Post!

The protest march last Thursday attracted about as much attention as I had expected – all of it from television and radio, of course. (Visit here to visit earlier press & media links.)

KPBS – San Diego public radio (audio and print): "Local Professors Protest Budget Cuts to Higher Education."

KUSI – Television: "Students Protest Community College Budget Cuts."

KFMB – Television: "Protestors Rally in Balboa Park Against Cuts in Education."

And there’s more!

Inside Higher Ed weighs in with “When is a Suspension Not a Suspension?”

Student Activism continues to take a very active role:
"Lawful Free Expression" at Southwestern College."
"New Administration Statement on the Southwestern College Suspensions."
"Update: Southwestern College Suspensions."

The Chronicle of Higher Education keeps it on the radar with “Is Your ‘Fiscal Crisis’ Real?” This refers to SWC, but is about the whole of the situation.

La Prensa San Diego: the oldest, largest Mexican-American newspaper in San Diego County (and probably the second-most read newspaper of any kind) has been a long-time supporter of both President Chopra and the Board. However, even they question the misguided actions taken by the administration, following the student rally of late October: "Editorial: Southwestern College Community Wants Answers!"

SWC’s own newspaper, the Southwestern College Sun (http://www.southwesterncollegesun.com/), has unsurprisingly taken a pro-student, pro-faculty stance. In a lot of schools, this would mean nothing, but the Sun is actually regarded as one of the leading student newspapers in the country. (And so it should surprise no one that Chopra has attempted to disembowel it at every opportunity.)
“Students, Staff, Faculty Protest a ‘Culture of Fear.’’
“New ASO Looks for Hope During a ‘Brutal’ Year.”
“Unsigned: The Truths and Myths About Raj K. Chopra."

And now there’s this!

Just before I was about to post this, I received word that FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) sent a letter to Raj Chopra today. In essence, the letter rips him a new one. I’d love to quote from it, but you should read it here, in its entirety.

A link to FIRE's initial blog entry (and another link to the letter to Chopra), can be found here: "FIRE Intervenes in Case of Professors Suspended at California's Southwestern College for Assembly Outside the 'Free Speech Patio.'"

NEW!

FIRE's president, Greg Lukianoff, has gone so far as to strike out at President Chopra on one of the biggest, most influential political websites in the country, the Huffington Post. What does he have to say there?

Channel 10 (ABC) covers the situation with: "Criminal Charges Possible for Professors' Role in Protest."

The Southwestern College Sun actually ran a special edition today, with a few new pieces:
"Faculty Union Members Banned"
"Faculty Four are Experienced Professors"
"Strong Voices, Deaf Ears"

Actions like these is usually what helps lead to further national attention. My question to the Board: How much longer are you willing to put up with the SWC’s shredded reputation among higher-education organs, all for the sake of keeping Raj K. Chopra in place? You have made a mistake. You know you’ve made a mistake. Admit the error. Agree to a special meeting ASAP to find different ways to handle this. If not, you’re letting the school – your charge – continue along a route of self-destruction, all piloted by a president who has become higher education’s biggest punchline.

Remember to visit Save Our SWC for the most current information. They’re on Twitter (as @saveourswc), and on Facebook. Follow the badge over there to become a friend.

Next Time: I was there, and what I saw.

EDIT: Added link to FIRE's website.
NEXT EDIT: Added Huffington Post/Channel 10/Sun information, and changed "An action like this..." to "Actions like these..."

Southwestern College's Suspended Professors Receive Media & Press Attention (And It's Positive!)

So…after a few days of keeping this post at the top of the page, I decided to go ahead and update. Nothing had changed yet, and nothing likely will at least until after the rally tomorrow. But the pro-faculty movement is making great strides.

Local press that is notoriously… anti-faculty (and anti-education) has begun to weigh in – and are giving this a fair look. Oddly enough, local television has been a boon to the Southwestern College faculty – the exposure is growing much more through TV than through print.

The really good news comes from online, and from publications that focus on educators, schools and colleges, education, and faculty and students’ rights. This is getting major play on their sites – and these are the publications that Those Who Oversee Education in the country read. The Chronicle of Higher Education, generally regarded as the Wall Street Journal of education has weighed in, as has Inside Higher Ed, a vastly-influential news organ that took immediate interest. I’m not going to name everyone who’s done so, since you’ll find the links below.

Go to them, read them, and comment there - they would like to know what you have to say. Feel free to leave a comment here if you know of anyone I’ve missed – and I’m certain I have. Lastly, If anyone reading this knows any other media organization – whether it be television, print, radio, or online – please contact them and let them know. Let’s keep pushing this out there; the more light shines on this, the less chance that President Raj Chopra and the Board will have to hide.

And, hey! Remember, I'm not an educator or a professor. I'm not a student at Southwestern College. I'm not employed there in any way. So, the place you want to go if you want the most information is here: Save Our SWC. While you're at it, follow that blog on Twitter at @saveourswc.

Chronicle of Higher Education: "Professors Suspended After a Protest Might Also Face Criminal Charges."

Inside Higher Ed: "Can Free Speech Be Furloughed?"

Inside Higher Ed: "More Anger After College Statement on Suspension of 4 Profs."

10News (San Diego ABC) [video]: "College Instructor Placed on Leave: 'This is Union Busting.'"

KPBS (San Diego Public Radio/Televison) [print only]: "Four Southwestern College Professors Suspended."

San Diego Union-Tribune (daily): "4 Faculty at College Suspended After Rally."

Center for Campus Free Speech: "Suspended for Walking Across Campus?"

Confessions of a College Dean (from the blogs at Inside Higher Ed): "Power 101." (A college adminstrator gives his thoughts on the actions of Dr. Raj Chopra.)

Dissent the Blog: "Curious Suspensions." (Contains much on the history of the administration's troubles at Southwestern College.

Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE): "Community College in California Suspends Four Professors Without Explanation Following Peaceful Protest." (Notes that FIRE is beginning an investigation into this.)

Free Exchange on Campus: "Free Speech on the Chopping Block at Southwestern College."

Minding the Campus: "Free Speech Woes." (SWC is included with several schools having this same problem.)

Student Activism: "Four California Professors Suspended After Budget Protest."

Student Activism: "New Details on the Suspension of Four CA Profs for Campus Budget Protest."

The New Faculty Majority also weighed in, posting my original post (same link as in first paragraph) - along with the note that the AAUP (American Association of University Professors) had taken an interest in this case.

Some of these articles and posts - along with mine - have been picked up by many news, education, and business sites: All Business, More About Education, and NewsOnFeeds.com, to name only the first three I found on Google.

Don't forget to visit Save Our SWC for the most current information. They've got a Facebook page as well. They'd love it if you'd connect with them there.

UPDATE (November 3): For updated links to more media coverage, I've added this post.

Multi-School Rally at Balboa Park!

On Thursday afternoon, I’m going to join the faculty of several different colleges at a protest rally at Balboa Park in downtown San Diego. Of course, the goal is protesting ongoing budget cuts to California's educational institutions. If things go as they should, the rally should culminate with a march to the governor’s office. Assuming we can get all these teaching types to go in one direction, it just might work.

This event is sponsored by (and I’m taking this directly from the flyer): American Federation of Teachers, Local 1931, San Diego Education Association, BEAT, City College ASG, Save Our Schools, the San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council, University of California AFT, UPTE, Southwestern College Education Association CCA/CTA/NEA, the Interfaith Committee for Worker Justice, and Palomar Faculty Federation AFT Local 6161.

Students and the public are encouraged and asked to attend. If you want to know more, call 619-640-1155.

Edit - Added the second to last line - about the public and students.