|
Two Valley College teachers received reprimands and one grade was withdrawn, according to a summary report of a Los Angeles Community College District investigation of charges by a former student that he received undeserved grades in seven classes.
The report did not name the classes or the instructors. It said that during the investigation last fall, one instructor, was given a “notice of unsatisfactory service.” Later, another received a “notice of reprimand.”
Richard Cowsill, one-time student body president at the Van Nuys college, charged last September that in 1979 and 1980, he was given fraudulent grades and course credits for seven classes he rarely or never attended, or for which he did no assignments. Eight instructors were named.
Cowsill said that, in part, he was given special treatment because he obtained student body funds for two college departments.
Five Classes Allowed
The investigation, based largely on interviews with college staff and students and an examination of records, concluded that grades and credits for five classes should be allowed to stand.
Further investigation of the validity of grades in two classes was recommended and, ultimately, one grade was withdrawn.
A study of student body financial affairs found that budgets and expenditures were handled through normal procedures and a system of checks and balances “worked as well as it usually does in a student managed activity.”
However, a certain academic practices at Valley, uncovered as a result of the Cowsill affair, drew criticism, according to both the summary report and the original confidential investigation report obtained by the news media.
Daily Attendance Reporting
The practices include:
- Lack of required daily student att3endance reporting by instructors, which was not provided for under the then-existing agreement between the district and its faculty bargaining unit, the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) College Guild.
- Lack of documentation concerning the conduct of independent study courses.
- A physical education department practice of enrolling students in one type of class and then using it as a vehicle for a different activity.
- Late enrollment of students by instructors bypassing the entire admission process. (Cowsill enrolled in some of the classes in question after the deadline had passed and in one summer course was admitted during the fourth week of a six-week class.)
District officials said these problems have been eliminated as the result of recommendations contained in the investigation, which was done by retired district administrator Ray Johnson at the direction of the Board of Trustees.
Attendance accounting and grading procedures for all college in the district are contained in a manual which the district said was issued before the Cowsill complaint as the result of an earlier Valley College scandal involving improper grades given to athletes.
The summary Johnson report is a digest of last fall’s investigation without the names of classes, instructors, persons interviewed, or information deemed confidential by the district under state and federal laws.
Trustees ordered the summary prepared in the face of repeated demands by Cowsill that the report be made public.
Speaking Limit Challenged
In a related development, the constitutionality of a trustees rule under which the speaking and attendance rights of citizens at meetings may be withdrawn is being challenged as the result of a six-month speaking ban imposed on Cowsill.
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) attorney Rees Lloyd said the rule, under which the board may ban people from attending or speaking at its meetings for up to six months for violation of board rules, is unconstitutional because it abridges the right of free speech.
Lloyd said the ACLU will file suit against the district and seek a court order permitting Cowsill to speak at the next board meeting June 17.
The board two weeks ago imposed a six-month ban on Cowsill after he again publically named the eight Valley College instructors in an open board session. He has named them in the past.
Lloyd said he questions whether the naming of district empl9oyees by a citizen violates the law under which employees are entitled to a closed hearing on charges against them.
|
