Quote:John Ebersole
8/24/2012 @ 1:38PM

The Myths of Online Learning

More than one-third – six million – of all students in higher education took at least one online course in the fall of 2011. Yet despite its growing popularity, online learning continues to be seen in a negative light by politicians, regulators, and some members of the academic community, especially faculty.

There are six commonly heard myths that are often used to denigrate this form of instruction.

•Myth #1: Online learning will reduce the need for faculty. Nothing could be further from the truth. From surveys and interviews, we have come to know that the number one reason for student success, in a classroom or online, is a caring instructor. Also, online institutions are much more strict about limiting class size than traditional schools, usually setting a maximum of 20 to 25 per section. Thus, there is the need for more, not fewer, qualified instructors. Faculty are also in demand to build new courses, revise old ones, and create the learning assessments for which there is growing need. Not surprisingly, a recent Inside HigherEd/Babson survey reveals that faculty at institutions with more extensive online offerings are more positive about online learning than those who have little or no such involvement.

• Myth # 2: All online courses are the same. Again, not true. Those institutions with restricted budgets may use formats that are little more than text-heavy electronic correspondence courses. However, on the other end of the spectrum are courses that rival a Hollywood production in their use of color, graphics, animation and simulations. Capstone assessments can test a student’s ability to apply concepts and make decisions based on their learning. These are not cheap, but they are engaging, effective, and growing in use.

•Myth # 3: The quality of outcomes is less for an online student than for one who has received the same instruction in a classroom. Research over many decades has shown that the outcomes for those studying at a distance do not differ from those in a classroom. As much as our egos might wish otherwise, students don’t have to sit at our feet to learn. In fact, there has been such consistency of finding in this regard that the phrase “no significant difference” has become the expected hypothesis in making comparisons.

•Myth # 4: “Online” instruction is synonymous with “for profit” institutions. While it is true that many proprietary colleges and universities use online methods to deliver instruction, not all do. It is equally the case that a majority of nonprofit academic institutions are also delivering instruction online, including entire degrees. This myth has been perpetuated, undoubtedly, by the much greater publicity and advertising conducted by for-profit institutions.

•Myth #5: Credentials earned online are not accepted by employers. Over the past several years, Excelsior College and the Zogby organization have conducted nationwide surveys of employers and hiring officials to determine their perceptions of online certificates and degrees. The results of the survey in 2011 revealed that nearly two-thirds of those familiar with online education believe that a degree earned online is a credible as one earned through a traditional campus-based program. Respondents stated the most important factors in determining the credibility of an online degree were the accreditation of the institution awarding the degree and the quality of its graduates.

•Myth #6: You don’t know if the person doing the work is the person receiving the credit. As pointed out by WCET, a partner to the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, student authentication is a complex and frequently misrepresented issue and one that is not unique to online education providers.

An entire industry has now emerged to deal with this concern. At some institutions, face-to-face or “secure” testing is required for online students. Others use 360° cameras mounted at the student’s exam site and employ third party monitors who observe the entire exam process. Most popular is the use of challenge questions to validate the exam taker’s identity. Drawing from public records (i.e., tax, motor vehicle and property), questions that have answers unique to the registered student can be randomly asked during an examination. The answers are such that they are likely only known to the enrolled student. New forms of student verification are being developed and include such things as retinal scanning, electronic fingerprinting, and key stroke analysis. Suspiciously improved writing is a very common “red flag” and submissions can be automatically checked for plagiarism through one of several detection software products.

In this era of post-traditional higher education faculty, libraries and students can be virtually anywhere in the world. Will there ever be a time when the physical college campus becomes obsolete? I doubt it and certainly hope not. What online learning does is bring knowledge to the student. How we harness the power of online learning to advance our society is where we need to focus our efforts and not on the perpetuation of myths that will hold us back.

Thats right! The bastion of honest and unbiased opinion (he he) put out its last issue!

So check it out, The Cheyenne Herald started in 2002 and quit in 2012. Ten years! So much for "Cheyenne's Hometown Paper."

I would add that the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, David Featherly's nemisis continues going on strong.

All this time we thought the slimy bastard was dead. Turns out he was just doing a Huck Finn so he could relocate to Gujarat and open a clothing store dedicated to his hero, the late 88 himself.

Quote:'Hitler' clothing store stirs anger in India
By Penny MacRae | AFP – 11 hrs ago


A security guard looks on from the roof of the 'Hitler' clothing store in Ahmedabad on August 28. Members of the Jewish community in the western Indian state have urged the shop owners to change the name of the store, which was opened on August 19


One of the two Indian owners of the 'Hitler' clothing store -- Rajesh Shah -- poses with a visiting card at his shop in Ahmedabad on August 28. Shah insisted that until the store opened he did not know who Adolf Hitler was and that Hitler was a nickname given to the grandfather of his store partner because "he was very strict".

The owner of an Indian clothing store said Wednesday that he would only change its name from "Hitler" if he was compensated for re-branding costs, amid a growing row over the new shop.

The outlet, which sells Western men's wear, opened 10 days ago in Ahmedabad city in the western state of Gujarat with "Hitler" written in big letters over the front and with a Nazi swastika as the dot on the "i".

"I will change it (the name) if people want to compensate me for the money we have spent -- the logo, the hoarding, the business cards, the brand," Rajesh Shah told AFP.

He put the total costs at about 150,000 rupees ($2,700).

Shah insisted that until the store opened he did not know who Adolf Hitler was and that Hitler was a nickname given to the grandfather of his store partner because "he was very strict".

"I didn't know how much the name would disturb people," he told AFP by telephone from Ahmedabad. "It was only when the store opened I learnt Hitler had killed six million people."

Members of the tiny Jewish community in Ahmedabad condemned the store's name, while a senior Israeli diplomat said the embassy would raise the matter "in the strongest possible way."

"People use such names mostly out of ignorance," Israel's Mumbai Consul General Orna Sagiv told AFP.

Esther David, a prominent Indian writer in Ahmedabad who is Jewish, said she was "disturbed and distressed" by the shop, but added that some Indians used the word "Hitler" casually to describe autocratic people.

David said Jewish residents had sought to change Shah's mind about the store's name and told him about the Holocaust.

The row evoked memories of a controversy six years ago when a Mumbai restaurant owner called his cafe "Hitler's Cross" and put a swastika on the hoarding, claiming Hitler was a "catchy" name.

The restaurant owner eventually agreed to change the name after protests by the Israeli embassy, Germany and the US Anti-Defamation League.

Hitler attracts an unusual degree of respect in some parts of India, with his book "Mein Kampf" a popular title in bookshops and on street stalls.

Gujarat schoolbooks issued by the Hindu nationalist state government were criticised a few years ago for praising Hitler as someone who gave "dignity and prestige" to the German government.

Adjudicated anti-Christian bigot and civil rights violator Alan Contreras would like us to believe he is just a harmless "gay birder."? Now the Empire State Building killer has shown the world just what sort of depraved acts "gay birders" are capable of committing.? The ODA made the smart move putting Gay Al out to pasture before he could add a deadly massacre to his lengthy list of anti-social behavior.

Quote:NY Gunman Quiet Loner, Victim Outgoing Family Man

...Johnson also was part of a community of bird watchers and photographers who document hawks and other wildlife living in Central Park, a few blocks from his home.

In one email to another bird watcher who works at The Associated Press, Johnson wrote tenderly about spending a winter night watching ducks in the park.

"Near midnight by the Harlem Meer I watched a little `flotilla' of Mallards swimming and softly honking ... fifteen degree temp and they were carrying on unfazed. Just remarkable," he wrote.

His photographs of Central Park's hawk population appeared regularly on blogs tracking the birds.

A neighbor who often saw Johnson, 58, said he was always alone.

"I always felt bad," said Gisela Casella, who lived a few floors above Johnson in a modest apartment building on the Upper East Side. "I said, `Doesn't he have a girlfriend?' I never saw him with anybody."

Quote:Empire State Building Attack Is Second Attempted Massacre By Gay Man In Just Weeks

... [W]hen we heard that the man who walked up and killed his ex-boss in cold blood this morning worked in fashion--and the papers didn't mention a wife--our mind went to a whole different place: What if the gunman was gay?

There hasn't been any concrete evidence Jeffrey Johnson, 58, was a homosexual--no lover, friends or bartender have stepped forward. But when you grew up, like we did, seeing gay people reduced to short-hand stereotypes--fiftysomething, unmarried, designed women's accessories--your thoughts just drift in a certain direction.

And, well, he owned a cat. (We told you this wasn't going to be politically correct.)

Chatting with our best girlfriend, who lives a stone's throw from the ESB on 30th and Park, we found he had the same thought: "People will think it's the start of a gay shooting-spree epidemic!"

Another criminal mastermind foiled when somebody (in another state) did their job and tried to verify the degree. The crook knew there was no chance anybody in Obamaland would bother. She probably figured that if nobody had noticed after 15 years she was home free.

Quote:City Colleges professor accused of faking degree to earn more pay
Falsified doctorate earned nursing teacher more than $300,000 in undue wages, authorities say
By Jennifer Delgado, Chicago Tribune reporter
August 23, 2012

A former [regionally accredited] City Colleges of Chicago professor falsified a doctoral degree to pocket hundreds of thousands of dollars in fraudulent pay, Cook County prosecutors said Wednesday.

Carol Howley, a nursing professor at Richard J. Daley College, was indicted on charges of theft of government property for allegedly pretending to be enrolled in doctoral classes at [regionally accredited] Rush University when she was hired in 1995. Two years later, she falsely claimed to have earned the doctorate and provided a forged transcript detailing the courses she claimed to have taken, prosecutors said Wednesday.

With pay based in part on educational experience, Howley was overpaid by $307,000, according to the charges.

The theft came to light when a Colorado employer considering whether to hire Howley tried to verify her doctoral degree, according to John A. Gasiorowski, the inspector general for City Colleges.

Rush told Daley College it didn't have any records of Howley ever attending the school, prompting the inspector general's office to investigate. The probe uncovered that Howley lied about graduating with the doctorate in January 1997 and had never enrolled in the school's doctoral program.

"Rush told us, 'We don't even have graduation in January,'" Gasiorowski said.

Gasiorowski said Howley attempted to resign in December 2010, but that the City Colleges' board of trustees fired her in February 2011 based on his office's findings.

Howley, 64, who now lives in Fort Collins, Colo., couldn't be reached for comment. A spokeswoman for State's Attorney Anita Alvarez said the department is working with authorities in Colorado to bring the former professor to Cook County.

At a news conference, Alvarez also announced indictments against two former Chicago Public Schools employees and a former City Colleges official.

Sonia Lopez, 49, who worked as a teaching assistant and treasurer at Marshall Middle School, was charged with theft after she allegedly wrote 14 unauthorized checks to herself for more than $21,000 and took an additional $3,000 from student fees and payments, Alvarez said.

Louis James, 58, a former manager of sports administration for CPS, was accused of stealing $9,000 and using the money to buy sparkling wine, flowers, chocolates, condoms and a king-size mattress at Costco. He was indicted on charges of theft and official misconduct.

Natatia Trotter-Gordon, 43, a former director of business and industry at Kennedy-King College who coordinated a conversational Spanish program for employees at Northwestern Memorial Hospital, was charged with forgery for allegedly stealing more than $51,000. The scheme was uncovered after the hospital notified the school that Trotter-Gordon requested that she personally pick up the payments instead of mailing them to the school, authorities said.

Quote:Niall Ferguson: Obama’s Gotta Go
Aug 19, 2012 1:00 AM EDT

Why does Paul Ryan scare the president so much? Because Obama has broken his promises, and it’s clear that the GOP ticket’s path to prosperity is our only hope.

I was a good loser four years ago. “In the grand scheme of history,” I wrote the day after Barack Obama’s election as president, “four decades is not an especially long time. Yet in that brief period America has gone from the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. to the apotheosis of Barack Obama. You would not be human if you failed to acknowledge this as a cause for great rejoicing.”

Despite having been—full disclosure—an adviser to John McCain, I acknowledged his opponent’s remarkable qualities: his soaring oratory, his cool, hard-to-ruffle temperament, and his near faultless campaign organization.

Yet the question confronting the country nearly four years later is not who was the better candidate four years ago. It is whether the winner has delivered on his promises. And the sad truth is that he has not.

In his inaugural address, Obama promised “not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth.” He promised to “build the roads and bridges, the electric grids, and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together.” He promised to “restore science to its rightful place and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost.” And he promised to “transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age.” Unfortunately the president’s scorecard on every single one of those bold pledges is pitiful.

In an unguarded moment earlier this year, the president commented that the private sector of the economy was “doing fine.” Certainly, the stock market is well up (by 74 percent) relative to the close on Inauguration Day 2009. But the total number of private-sector jobs is still 4.3 million below the January 2008 peak. Meanwhile, since 2008, a staggering 3.6 million Americans have been added to Social Security’s disability insurance program. This is one of many ways unemployment is being concealed.

In his fiscal year 2010 budget—the first he presented—the president envisaged growth of 3.2 percent in 2010, 4.0 percent in 2011, 4.6 percent in 2012. The actual numbers were 2.4 percent in 2010 and 1.8 percent in 2011; few forecasters now expect it to be much above 2.3 percent this year.

Unemployment was supposed to be 6 percent by now. It has averaged 8.2 percent this year so far. Meanwhile real median annual household income has dropped more than 5 percent since June 2009. Nearly 110 million individuals received a welfare benefit in 2011, mostly Medicaid or food stamps.

Welcome to Obama’s America: nearly half the population is not represented on a taxable return—almost exactly the same proportion that lives in a household where at least one member receives some type of government benefit. We are becoming the 50–50 nation—half of us paying the taxes, the other half receiving the benefits.



And all this despite a far bigger hike in the federal debt than we were promised. According to the 2010 budget, the debt in public hands was supposed to fall in relation to GDP from 67 percent in 2010 to less than 66 percent this year. If only. By the end of this year, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), it will reach 70 percent of GDP. These figures significantly understate the debt problem, however. The ratio that matters is debt to revenue. That number has leapt upward from 165 percent in 2008 to 262 percent this year, according to figures from the International Monetary Fund. Among developed economies, only Ireland and Spain have seen a bigger deterioration.

Not only did the initial fiscal stimulus fade after the sugar rush of 2009, but the president has done absolutely nothing to close the long-term gap between spending and revenue.

His much-vaunted health-care reform will not prevent spending on health programs growing from more than 5 percent of GDP today to almost 10 percent in 2037. Add the projected increase in the costs of Social Security and you are looking at a total bill of 16 percent of GDP 25 years from now. That is only slightly less than the average cost of all federal programs and activities, apart from net interest payments, over the past 40 years. Under this president’s policies, the debt is on course to approach 200 percent of GDP in 2037—a mountain of debt that is bound to reduce growth even further.
. . .

Coming soon to a school near you?

Quote:British schools drop Holocaust from history lessons so as not to offend Muslims
posted at 2:30 pm on August 17, 2012 by Howard Portnoy

A report by Britain’s Department for Education and Skills notes that an increasing number of schools are dropping the teaching of the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim students. The report, titled Teaching Emotive and Controversial History, also observes that many teachers are reluctant to discuss the Crusades because the lessons frequently contradict what is taught in local mosques.

It gets worse. The website Family Security Matters (h/t Weasel Zippers) reports:

Quote:In an effort to counter ‘Islamophobia’ in British schools, teachers now are required to teach ‘key Muslim contributions such as Algebra and the number zero’ in math and science courses, even though the concept of zero originated in India.

The article further notes that 30 non-Muslim children at an elementary school in Scotland were required to visit a mosque in Glasgow, where they were instructed to recite the shahada, the Islam declaration of faith, which states, “There is no god but Allah and Mohammed is his messenger.” In addition, Muslim leaders are demanding that Islamic preachers be sent to every school in Scotland to teach children about Islam, ostensibly in an effort to counter negative attitudes about Muslims.

In London, 85 of 90 schools have implemented “no pork” policies, reflecting a nationwide trend toward banning pork from lunch menus, all once again to avoid offending Muslim students.

The question that naturally arises is whether any of this same type of bend-over-backward pandering would be taking place had the hijackers who commandeered the four jetliners used as missiles on September 11, 2001 been anything other than Muslim. Taking an alternate hypothesis—that the attacks had been carried out by, say, murderous Zionists—would New York City public schools be mandating the teaching of Hebrew in grades 2 through 5?

Oh yeah, that's the physique of an RA physical education teacher.

Involved with pervert groups on campus? Just the sort of guy we want hanging around the school boys' showers. The Gold Standard strikes again!

Quote:Parents of Floyd Corkins II tell FBI that their son has 'strong opinions' about those he believes do not treat homosexuals respectfully
8:40 PM, Aug 16, 2012

HERNDON, Va. (WUSA) -- More details are shedding some light on the accused Family Research Council shooter, Floyd Corkins II. The 28-year-old graduated from [regionally accredited] G[eorge] M[ason] U[niversity] six years ago. He holds a teaching license in physical education. He was involved in gay, lesbian bisexual transgender groups on campus and he volunteers at the DC Center for GLBT.

His Facebook page had no picture. It indicates he has 12 friends and likes men.

According to an FBI affidavit, Corkins' parents informed FBI agents that their son has "strong opinions with respect to those he believes do not treat homosexuals in a fair manner."

Corkins lives with his parents in Herndon. His parents told the FBI that their son left the home at 9 Wednesday morning. He allegedly went to a Chik-fil-A before getting on Metro. One employee at the Reston Chik-fil-A tells 9News she remembers a man ordering 15 sandwiches Wednesday morning. But when she told him it would take 15 minutes, the man said he didn't want to wait that long and left.

The restaurant chain was recently embroiled in controversy involving a senior executive who made comments opposing same-sex marriage.

In a statement about the shooting incident the restaurant chain wrote:
"Chick-fil-A has not been contacted by the authorities in relation to the incident at Family Research Council headquarters yesterday. Because it is a police matter and we do not yet know the facts, we would prefer not to speculate on the issue. Our thoughts are with the security guard who was injured in the incident and his family."

Quote:...Six years ago, Corkins earned an advanced degree from a college not far from that home. "We can confirm that Floyd Corkins graduated from [regionally accredited] George Mason with a master's degree from our college of education and human development," said [regionally accredited] George Mason University spokesman Dan Walsch. ...

Innovation and a call for a competency-based accreditation model? The klones want to crush it like a bug! Notice in the Comments how bow-tied scumbags like Anal Contreras and AACRAO's Barmak Nassirian immediately jump on the "drive-them-out-of-business" bandwagon.

Quote:At New Online University, Advertisers Will Underwrite Free Degrees
August 2, 2012, 7:57 pm
By Angela Chen

An online degree-granting institution called World Education University, set to open this fall, plans to try an advertiser-driven model to support its free content.

“Any Silicon Valley start-up will tell you that if you can drive enough eyeballs to your Web site, you can find ways to leverage that and monetize it,” said Scott Hines, the university’s chief executive. “We’re very transparent to students. They understand that their education is being underwritten generally through advertisers.”

Advertisers will pay for students to answer survey questions related to their products. For example, students may be asked a question like “Are you a runner?” when they log into the learning-management system. If a student checks “yes,” he or she will thereafter see ads for a certain brand of running shoes on the home page.

World Education University will also allow companies to publicly sponsor students, who will then be told about the connection. According to Mr. Hines, that approach is attractive to advertisers because it will help to build brand loyalty early.

A third main source of financial support will derive from a points system. Students will receive points for performing well academically or completing certain courses. They will then be able to redeem the points for prizes and services offered by partner advertisers. Mr. Hines said that other revenue models include fee-based tutoring and charging for premium content.

The university plans to offer 120 to 150 courses in areas such as art history, psychology, and business administration. Although it plans to develop its own content instead of forming partnerships with existing universities, Mr. Hines said that the initial course materials—such as videos and syllabi—are being provided by two colleges with which the university has confidentiality agreements. The colleges want to help his university, Mr. Hines said, but wish to remain anonymous because they are afraid of retribution from accreditation agencies.

Accreditation is a struggle for World Education University, Mr. Hines said, because “the accreditation system right now is not real supportive of innovation.” The university is seeking accreditation from national, regional, and international bodies, including ones recognized by the U.S. Department of Education, he said. The university is also interested in creating a competency-based accreditation model, in which corporate partners accredit the university as properly preparing students for their industry.

How many of these criteria apply to George Gollin?  What is the University of Illinois doing about it?  Are they really committed to a nonviolent environment or just paying it lip service?  In view of the obvious dereliction of duty coming to light in the Batman theater shooting, is ignoring an obvious nut case really the smartest course of action?

Quote:CAMPUS VIOLENCE THREAT ASSESSMENT POLICY

The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign is committed to a nonviolent environment for all employees and students. In service of its commitment to the welfare, health and safety of all those in its campus community, the campus has developed a comprehensive Campus Violence Prevention Plan (CVPP) which can be found on the Division of Public Safety’s Website at www.police.illinois.edu. The CVPP is also linked to the following websites: Office of the Dean of Students (www.odos.illinois.edu), Staff Human Resources (www.shr.illinois.edu), Academic Human Resources(www.ahr.illinois.edu), and the Faculty Staff Assistance Program(www.fsap.illinois.edu). The CVPP is expressly incorporated by reference into this policy.

What To Watch For

The CVPP is founded on principles of early intervention and proactive engagement to prevent violence and provide supportive services. Based on the assessment that certain conduct may be a pre-cursor to violent behavior, the CVPP has identified thresholds of unacceptable conduct and standardized responses to those who cross those thresholds. Thresholds of unacceptable conduct include, but are not limited to, the following:

1.  Acts and threats of violence towards a specific person(s), unspecified person(s), and/or the campus as a whole.

2.  Significant violent ideations or the expression of violent ideas or the intent to harm others.

3.  Suicidal threat, attempt and/or significant suicidal ideation.

4.  Pattern of physical or emotional bullying and/or intimidation.

5.  Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.

6.  Assuming a stance of being substantially "in-charge" or attempting to control processes, outcomes, or decisions that are inappropriate given the person’s standing or position.

7.  Pursuing options that do not reasonably exist and continuing to do so after being instructed to cease.

8.  Delusional ideation(s) or behavior.

9.  Excessive, inappropriate and/or illegal alcohol and other drug use.

What To Do

Any individual witnessing conduct that they believe may pose an imminent threat to safety, security or health should call 9-1-1 (9-9-1-1 from a campus phone) immediately. If the conduct does not pose an imminent threat to safety, security or health, individuals should contact the Division of Public Safety (www.police.edu or #217-333-1216), the Dean of Students Office (www.odos.illinois.edu or #217-333-0050), their respective Human Resource Office (www.shr.illinois.edu or #217-333-3101 or www.ahr.illinois.edu or #217-333-6747) and/or the Counseling Center (www.counselingcenter.illinois.edu or #217-333-3704).
. . .

VI.  VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAM FOR FACULTY AND STAFF

A.  Thresholds Applying to Faculty/Staff

1.    Acts and threats of violence towards a specific person(s),
unspecified person(s), and/or the campus as a whole.  For example, a faculty/staff member acts violently or makes a threat towards a specific person(s) or towards the community as a whole. This includes all acts and threats that occur at work and in some instances, acts and threats that occur away from work.

2.  Significant violent ideations or the expression of violent ideas or the intent to harm others.  For example, a faculty/staff member expresses the intent to harm others in the absence of an identified individual(s).

3.  Suicide threat, attempt, and/or significant suicidal ideation. For example, a faculty/staff member expresses intent to end his or her life through threat, attempt and/or ideation.

4.  Pattern of physical or emotional bullying and/or intimidation. For example, a faculty/staff member uses force of a physical or emotional nature, or the threat of force to intimidate or coerce others.

5.  Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.  For example, a faculty/staff member makes unwelcome sexual advances, requests sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature, as defined by the Campus Administrative Manual policy on Sexual Harassment.

6.  Assumes a stance of being substantially "in-charge" or attempting to control processes, outcomes, or decisions that is inappropriate given the person’s standing or position.  For example, an employee wants complete control of his/her work environment. She confronts and criticizes her manager stating if the rest of the work group doesn’t comply with her expectations, she will make it her mission to get her coworkers fired.

7.  Pursuing options that don't reasonably exist and continuing to do so after being instructed to cease.  For example, a faculty member persists in pursuing a tenured track position after being denied such status or a staff member persists in pursuing a reversal of a sanction after exhausting the established appeal process.

8.  Delusional ideation(s) or behavior.  For example, a faculty/staff member appears to be suffering a delusional disorder as defined by the most current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (including subtypes: Grandiose, jealous, persecutory, and somatic).

9.  Excessive, inappropriate and/or illegal alcohol and other drug use.  For example, a faculty/staff member is known to have used alcohol or drugs at work (in the case of alcohol, other than at an approved university function). Additionally, if a faculty/staff member is known to have used alcohol or drugs away from work that resulted in a criminal conviction.

B.  Responses to Faculty/Staff Who Cross One or More Threshold(s)

1.  University Police are contacted as appropriate to address an immediate threat of harm.

2.  Supervisors and Executive Officers consult with Human Resources.

3.  The employee may be placed on administrative leave while the situation is evaluated.

4.  A meeting is convened which may include a supervisor, unit executive officer(s) and personnel representing Human Resources, Legal Counsel, Office of the Dean of Students, Office of the Provost, University Police and the Faculty Staff Assistance Program to assess and address the situation.

5.  Representatives from the Threat Assessment Team for Faculty/Staff/Public who represent Academic and Staff Human Resources will notify the full Threat Assessment Team for Faculty/Staff/Public when a member of the faculty or staff has crossed one or more of the nine thresholds.

6.  Appropriate employment action is taken as necessary.

7.  If needed, the Threat Assessment Team for Faculty/Staff/Public is convened.

8.  If a situation arises to the threshold of being “Activated” (by consensus of the Threat Assessment Team for Faculty/Staff/Public, an individual is deemed to be of concern), a Coordinator is assigned and an action plan is developed.

9.  Any “Activated” Faculty/Staff member may also be monitored by the Special Situations Group (See Attachment A).