Analysis: Wise's email reach far and wide

Analysis: Wise's email reach far and wide

Submit your Letter to the Editor here

At 9:28 the morning of April 12, 2014, a Saturday, Ilesanmi Adesida was forwarded a small batch of emails from his boss.

“Here you go,” Phyllis Wise wrote on her iPhone.

The topic of this string concerned Wise’s pet project — an ambitious, first-of-its-kind engineering-based medical college that, back then, was only in the early discussion stages.

Like a lot of email exchanges on this subject between Wise, the University of Illinois chancellor, and Adesida, the provost, it originated from Wise’s personal account, not her address.

Seven hours later, at 5:45 p.m, Adesida responded, thanking Wise and stressing how important it was for the idea to get the blessing of then-UI President Robert Easter (“Bob”), their corporate partner in the venture and two more trustees.

“I just hope that Bob can become an advocate and don’t stay so neutral,” Adesida wrote. “He can advocate and still make the case for UIC Med School to remain strong.”   

“Carle’s commitment is very important in this enterprise. I just wish that they could come out at some point very soon and talk about $100M initial commitment where some of the fund is actual cash which can be used for start-up for clinical folks and an initial operating fund.

“... We need Pam Strobel and Pat Fitzgerald in our corner given that Ed McMillan and Tim Koritz get it already,” he finished.

Wise responded enthusiastically at 9:13 p.m.: “Ade, I agree on all points! ... I will talk with (Carle CEO) Jim (Leonard) about coming out strongly with a commitment so that we can go to other donors. I will work on Bob and on Pam and Pat.”


Wise: ‘Best interests of the university’

That exchange was one of at least 188 between Wise and her No. 2 in an 1,100-page bundle of emails released Aug. 7 as part of an ethics probe into administrators’ use of non-UI accounts to conduct university business.  

Adesida was on the receiving end of more emails from Wise’s personal account far more than anyone else, with the topics ranging from the College of Medicine to James Kilgore and Steven Salaita, a News-Gazette analysis found. 

In her only public comment on the matter since stepping down 10 days ago — four sentences in a four-paragraph statement emailed Thursday night to The News-Gazette, from her UI account — Wise vowed she didn’t do it for reasons that have been suggested.

“In the past week, the news media has reported that I and other campus personnel used personal email accounts to communicate about University business; some reports suggested I did so with illegal intentions or personal motivations,” she wrote. “This is simply false. I acted at all times in what I believed to be the best interests of the University. In fact, many of these same communications included campus counsel, Board members, and other campus leaders.”

It remains unclear whether the email scandal led directly to her ouster as chancellor — she says she tendered her resignation at the request of President Tim Killeen and trustees; Killeen says he didn’t ask her directly to step down — but it at least changed the way some view her four years as campus chief.

In the days following the UI’s document dump, former Board Chair Chris Kennedy said the emails revealed behavior that should be investigated further.

Asked about how her absence would affect plans for the Carle Illinois College of Medicine, Leonard told WDWS: “This was never about any one individual.”

Said Taylor Sanders, a 19-year-old UI student from Libertyville: “I always thought she was a nice lady who stood behind the students. But now that these emails came out, I don’t know what to think about her.”


Rosenstock: ‘Public does not know who was involved’

On Thursday — officially the first day of the post-Wise era — Killeen introduced Acting Chancellor Barb Wilson and spoke of the need for the campus “to learn from the lessons of our past” in a mass email to faculty, staff and students.

The university has said it will not release who was involved in the ethics investigation because it involves personnel issues, but some faculty members are using Killeen’s words as a call for transparency into the probe. 

“We cannot ‘learn from the lessons of our past’ until we know what was done in the past,” Campus Faculty Association President Bruce Rosenstock said in a statement released to The News-Gazette. “The administration has refused to release any names or details of the unethical (and possibly illegal) actions by administrators, faculty or staff. The public does not know who was involved, or what exactly are the ‘allegations and incidents’ to which Killeen refers.”

The CFA called on Killeen to release complete information about the scandal. “Only then will our campus community be able to move forward,” Rosenstock said.

Also unknown at the moment:

— Who else could be caught up in the fallout of the ethics probe. If any other UI employees lose their jobs over this, it will be a “campus-led” decision, not Killeen’s, he said. 

— How the email scandal could be used against Wise should she file suit over the $400,000 bonus she says she’s due.  

— Whether her actions violated state laws or university policy.


Kaler: ‘I said the same thing I say to everyone’

Many UI administrators were aware that Wise sometimes conducted business via her personal email account since they regularly corresponded with her there.

In addition to Adesida:

— On College of Medicine matters, Wise regularly corresponded with Normand Paquin, the UI’s point person on the project. Those emails were largely business interactions, including drafts of plans for the medical school. 

— In the private sector, Wise corresponded with Leonard most often. Carle, the UI’s main partner on the school, said in a statement: “There are a lot of details to consider during the planning process as the college of medicine moves from an incredible vision to reality. The discussion during the past year, in person and via email has added to the strength of this plan.” 

— Wise often shared meeting recaps with potential donors with Dan Peterson, the vice chancellor for institutional advancement and the administrator she communicated with most often after Adesida and Paquin. Her interactions with Peterson were largely focused on the medical school.

— Wise corresponded regularly with Associate Chancellor for Public Affairs Robin Kaler, more than with anyone else about Kilgore.

In a Sept. 18, 2014 email, Wise wrote to professor Michael LeRoy, “Robin has warned me and others not to use email since we are now in litigation phase. We are doing virtually nothing over our Illinois email addresses. I am even being careful with this email address and deleting after sending.”

Asked to clarify what she told Wise, Kaler said, “I said the same thing I say to everyone: ‘If you don’t want to see it in the paper, don’t put it in an email.’”

— On the medical school, Wise also regularly communicated with Jennifer Woodard, director of strategic engagement in the office of the vice president for research, and Laura Frerichs, director of the UI Research Park.

— On Salaita, she often communicated with professors Nicholas Burbules and Joyce Tolliver. Both are members of the Faculty Senate. 


Tolliver: Some ‘should not have been released’

Tolliver said she found out about the email release when she was contacted by a friend.

“What a sweet love letter you sent your husband,” the friend said.

Tolliver asked what the friend was talking about and was told it was in the emails released by the university. 

“What email?” Tolliver asked. 

She said she didn’t grant permission for the university to release her emails to the public. 

Tolliver said she has asked why they were released, given that they were private emails from a private account not about public business. As of Friday, she hadn’t heard back. 

“Some of the emails are absolutely FOIA-able, and I think it was appropriate for them to be released,” Tolliver said. “Some others should not have been released.”

Not everyone who had an email released violated university policy on Freedom of Information Act requests, UI spokesman Tom Hardy said. And not every email among the 1,100 pages released had been requested.

“Many, even most, were not subject to certain FOIA requests,” Hardy said, adding that Killeen decided, in the interest of full disclosure, that all emails related to Kilgore, Salaita and the College of Medicine — whether they’d been subject to FOIA or not — would be released.

Kaler said it is common for UI officials to use a mixture of work and private email for university business, especially on phones and tablets. Interactions often included a mixture of accounts and private ones, and most officials wouldn’t think twice about receiving an email from one’s personal account.

The problem developed when Wise didn’t turn over all emails, public and private, for FOIA investigations, per university policy.


Of the 1,100 pages of emails released as part of an ethics probe, Phyllis Wise communicated most frequently with these five UI employees from her personal account:

188 emails — Ilesanmi Adesida, provost

153 emails — Normand Paquin, associate director for research, Coordinated Science Laboratory

59 emails — Nicholas Burbules, Education professor and chair of the University Senates Conference

56 emails — Joyce Tolliver, Spanish professor and faculty senator

51 emails — Dan Peterson, vice chancellor for institutional advancement

Note: Some of the names in emails released by the UI were redacted.

Sections (2):News, Local

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
andrewscheinman wrote on August 16, 2015 at 8:08 am

Once again I have to credit the News-Gazette for reading my website and my comments and lifting what I said without crediting me.  Next they'll "discover" that Scott Rice, university counsel, knew Wise was using personal emails as of LAST AUGUST, while UIUC only claims to have learned as of April of this year.

Then the Gazette will suddenly "discover" that these are "supplemental" emails, meaning they are "responsive" to the FOIAs filed in 2014 on Salaita, Kilgore and the COM (many if not most of them my filings).  And they'll realize that "supplemental" means that there are MORE of these personal emails out there, more of them on other university business, more than likely more than a few of them as much as if not more egregious than what we've already seen.

Again, these are "responsive to FOIAs on the COM, Kilgore and Salaita."  We have NO idea how UIUC picked these -- they don't really have a good track record on their selection process, do they.

We have NO idea what else is out there.  We don't even know who they went to for these emails, how far their diligence went in finding out who else was doing this.

Let's find out.  Let's sit on UIUC to give full disclosure.  Let's pressure the Gazette to act like an actual newspaper.

And btw, actual newspapers give credit for ideas that they didn't come up with.

Andrew Scheinman

Phil S wrote on August 16, 2015 at 8:08 am

This is a nice introduction to the emails, but I hope that this is just the first in a long series that analyzes the CONTENT of the emails.  You have a great opportunity to do some groundbreaking investigative journalism--please don't drop the ball.

justthefacts wrote on August 16, 2015 at 10:08 am

To date all that these emails have revealed are the rather mundane details of the bureaucratic process (sausage making, as some refer to it). No bribes, no payoffs, no conspiracies to conduct illegal activities. Of course these emails should have been released in response to various FOIA requests, but they are certainly no cause for the current level of hyperbolic rhetoric approaching hysteria currently being employed by some. What has been exposed is a serious error in judgement by an honorable individual who will suffer the consequences for that error.

David Green wrote on August 16, 2015 at 10:08 am

I'm used to being disgusted on Sunday morning by reading the newspaper, but reading the Salaita file goes above and beyond. These privileged people just can't bring themselves to be a tad concerned about Israel killing 2,000 people. Just blame the messenger; no, fire him. Burbules is particularly disgusting; I recommend Corey Robin's blog and his entries at Crooked Timber.

tominmadison wrote on August 16, 2015 at 10:08 am

Let us see them all; what is the harm?


If it is just mundane, ok, it's mundane. But if there is something of significance there, I'm willing to suffer through the mundane...small price.


What I see so far is evidence of a coordinated effort by campus elites to game the system, suppress speech, and protect turf.

There is no heroism here, far from it. It is high time for a little sunlight.

The NG has a real opportunity here.


go for it




andrewscheinman wrote on August 16, 2015 at 10:08 am

You know, David, at this point there's a real question of how much Salaita accomplished with his tweets and how much more he COULD HAVE accomplished by showing a tiny bit more thought in what he tweeted and, by speaking a bit more softly, obtained his UIUC position to use as a much larger platform.

I'm not saying what happened in Gaza was good (not even remotely), or that Salaita didn't have every right to say whatever he wanted.  But I am saying that there are two possible strategies for how you speak out: softly and cautiously; or, screaming as loudly as you can.  Martin Luther King fell into the first camp on black rights; the Black Panthers the second camp.  Which of the two was more effective in changing minds?

And this ties in with your claim that management at UIUC doesn't care about Palestinians.  You don't know that.  What you (and us) do know is that they didn't care about *Salaita* -- for a bunch of wrong reasons, mostly having to do with the COM, some to do with Kennedy (more to be told there).  Had Salaita given them less ammunition to damn him, he might now be using UIUC as his platform to speak the truths he wishes to tell.

Again, Salaita had every right to do what he did, and some people are born to be firebrands, not statesman -- or they're driven to excess by excessive events.  I'm not condemning Salaita, or judging him.

But it's worth making a bit more than knee-jerk statements about Salaita.  Those statements don't help the discussion.

Andrew Scheinman

rsp wrote on August 16, 2015 at 11:08 am

Martin Luther King Jr. did not speak cautionly! He spoke boldly. You have to put it in the context of the times he was living in. As far as Salaita, It seems like people are much more willing to speak out against the atrocities in Israel and Palestine than they were. More people seem to know what's going on there. And it's because of his tweets, and the arguing about them, and the fact-checking, etc.

And I'm curious, have you foia'd Kennedy's emails? I have a feeling they would retract everything to protect his reputation.

andrewscheinman wrote on August 16, 2015 at 11:08 am

I didn't FOIA Kennedy's emails.  I think David Prochaska at the IMC did ... actually that's a good point, was Kennedy using personal emails?  I don't know whether UIUC could get those directly (Kennedy isn't a UIUC employee), but certainly they could pull all emails RECEIVED FROM Kennedy relating to the COM, Kilgore and Salaita.


David Green wrote on August 16, 2015 at 1:08 pm

Andrew, once again thank you for your efforts. Don't you miss hanging around the UCLA quad and sculpture garden? I know I do. In any event, I suppose at some level I wish that Salaita had been less impulsive. His scholarship and thoughtfulness deserve better than that label. On the other hand, the truth about the Palestinians has been a precious commodity on this campus, and the last year has told us a lot about why that has been the case, perhaps more so than if Salaita had just assumed his position. I've worked over the years to try to expose the underlying relationships that have been so repressive, including regarding the Program for Jewish Culture and Society and the Israel Studies Project. You can look up my articles on Mondoweiss and Electronic Intifada. This has involved classic Lobby manipulation and Zionism/racism as business as usual. In any event, this whole affair isn't just about corruption at high levels; it's about a pervasive bigotry within academia, akin to white supremacy, which includes Nelson/Burbules every bit as much as Gottheil etc. I'm sick of the Wise/Adesida's of the world not being called out for their racist mentality--and that includes their assumptions about what "the Jews" believe and support.

Bulldogmojo wrote on August 16, 2015 at 9:08 pm


"You know, David, at this point there's a real question of how much Salaita accomplished with his tweets and how much more he COULD HAVE accomplished by showing a tiny bit more thought in what he tweeted and, by speaking a bit more softly, obtained his UIUC position to use as a much larger platform."


I don't think there is an Emily Post chapter on addressing institutional bombing campaigns, Is there?

Thankfully Salaita's rude tweets revealed back door corruption at Swanlund (Again) before Wise could have had done more damage to our University.

Had he been "civil" (that absurd word) he would not have managed to get Universities all over the world talking about the war crimes Israel is complicit in with their military and their protection of settlers who recently poured gasoline on an infant and set him ablaze along with his family. How do you soft soap that? At least the Nazis gassed people before they burned them, these Zionist creeps just skip the gassing part and go right to the burning. Those settlers (Israel calls arsonists not terrorists btw) brought in for questioning and released.

I'm sorry Steve Salaita offended your sensibilities [and many others] of your standing with those systematic murderers but your social discomfort will just have to go on while free thinkers address the issues of genocide committed with my [our] tax dollars to that theocrat Netanyahu to fund his war machine while the ReMax corporation (Literally) sells stolen Arab lands.

Salaita hasn't told one lie in this process how many has Wise told? How many deceptions? Enough to fill a thumbdrive.

"Israel's apologists have to view criticism of the state as anti-Semitic. The  other option is to acknowledge complicity in terrible injustice."~ (A civil tweet by Steve Salaita)

A guaranteed injustice...

Reykjavik wrote on August 16, 2015 at 11:08 am

The reports and emails consistently indicate that Wise was completely dedicated to and working hard for UIUC, not to mention ethical.

UIUC is fortunate to have had Wise as our leader for four years, which is a fairly normal tour of duty.  Now Killeen gets to guide the selection of his person for his most important campus.  And meanwhile, the campus is overseen by a real pro, Barb Wilson.  

The succession is proceeding about as well as could be hoped, with the bonus that UIUC might retain Wise, a renowned scholar, as a professor.

Illinifan2000 wrote on August 16, 2015 at 2:08 pm

Make sure someone asks Mike Thomas point blank if he used his personal email to communicate to Chancellor Wise or anyone regarding the football, women's soccer or women's basketball matters and if he knowingly did so in an effort to prevent full disclosure. 

tominmadison wrote on August 16, 2015 at 2:08 pm

You mean Tim 'trust me, I've got your back' Killeen'?

So, he is a primary partner to a negotiated settlement, then he encounters BOT pushback, and he folds like a cheap lawyer.


So, who exactly was he leading? Would anyone trust him to stand with them, for them.

Is that one of those leading from behind things?

talk is cheap


Not off to the greatest start






Illinifan2000 wrote on August 16, 2015 at 2:08 pm

I guarantee you they settled with Wise late Thursday night within a matter of hours for any one of 100 good reasons. Notice they didn't need any outside independent investigators to wrap this one up.

Illinifan2000 wrote on August 16, 2015 at 2:08 pm

Killeen should have cleaned house long before all this started to boil over. It's never too late. Build your own team. Build your own legacy. You're in the deep waters now. 

sweet caroline wrote on August 16, 2015 at 2:08 pm

So who do we all think will play the main characters in the blockbuster movie?  And what will the title be?  "Scandal in the Heartland" sounds appropriate.  Wise, Killeen, Adesida, Kennedy, Leonard, Kaler, Tolliver, Burbules, Salaita....the list of characters just goes on and on.  I can see Kevin Costner playing Jim Leonard, Richard Gere as Chris Kennedy, and surely there's a role fit for Meryl Streep somewhere in there.

Illinifan2000 wrote on August 16, 2015 at 4:08 pm

Drama ala Champaign, dozens of extras to play all the lawyers. 

Illinifan2000 wrote on August 16, 2015 at 4:08 pm

It's hard to tell who is more loathing toward Phyllis Wise; Chris Kennedy or Bruce Rauner.  

She absolutely forgot who brought her to the dance. 

wayward wrote on August 16, 2015 at 9:08 pm

At first, some of the emails showing Wise drumming up support for COM reminded me a little of Frank Underwood in "House of Cards" finding ways to push things through. But Underwood is a sociopath, and the show probably wouldn't work if he was a nice guy. Wise isn't like that. She's ambitious, but didn't seem ruthless. A character as inconvenient as Salaita in "House of Cards" would end up getting killed, which is a lot more dramatic than what's actually happening here. In fact, there's pretty much no sex or violence in this saga, which makes me doubt that it could be turned into an American TV show.

Rocky7 wrote on August 16, 2015 at 4:08 pm


Who else in the UIUC Administration AND Faculty are using private emails to conduct university business, exchange research ideas, and data for openers?  There could be room for a lot of troubling activity here. The problem could be deeper than just the higher administrtion.  This problem has deeper and wider roots in my view.

Recall "climategate"  where FOI requests were stonewalled, scientific reputations were trashed, and data was "fudged." This could be a widespread problem inother arenas.

One difficulty for researchers is access to campus web-based email while travelling. So, if then they must use private email accounts, be sure to copy that email to the campus account. UIUC should mandate that in its policies.

Phil S wrote on August 16, 2015 at 6:08 pm

"One difficulty for researchers is access to campus web-based email while travelling."

Actually, no, it's not.  The campus email website is, and it can be accessed by anyone with an email account ANYWHERE there is internet service.  There are no excuses.

Rocky7 wrote on August 16, 2015 at 7:08 pm

Perhaps, but try sending email from remote locations in US Territories, lesser developed countries, and even developed countries where services may be substandard.  WiFi is of poor quality in many of these locations, as is phone service.Try sending  email from Venezuela, for instance,  and you'll understand what I mean (Been there, done that).

Bulldogmojo wrote on August 16, 2015 at 9:08 pm


What does wi-fi quality have to do with ease of access to University webmail vs. Gmail or yahoo or one over another? Absurd

Maybe Wise flew to Venezeula to send those emails. There's an angle, right?

and if anyone is using outside email to evade the ethics office then they better get ready to receive the same severe punishment Wise is getting. Full pay, a year off and a guaranteed teaching job at 6 figures with benefits and the ability to sit on corporate boards. UGH


Phil S wrote on August 17, 2015 at 8:08 am

YOU'RE JOKING, RIGHT?!?!???  I was in Venezuela during Chavez's recall referendum, not exactly a peak time of political stability, and didn't have any trouble accessing internet.  Of course, I didn't have a smart phone, so I had to use an internet cafe, but I could read and send emails easily.  BEEN THERE AND DONE THAT.  Plus, the university email system is more secure than gmail or hotmail.  There are NO EXCUSES.  The recently released emails reveal that the reason they used these less secure private email services was to AVOID LEAVING A PUBLIC RECORD.  The university email system can be accessed as easily as hotmail or gmail ANYWHERE in the world where you have internet.  The university email requires no more bandwith than the private systems, and is more secure.  This is a no-brainer, and Phyllis Wise's knowing and repeated violations of public records laws is criminal.  They were the reason for her downfall as Chancellor.

Rocky7 wrote on August 17, 2015 at 3:08 pm

It depends where one is. I was 60 KM west of Maturin, VZ, and there was no Internet at all.  In Maracaibo, VZ, email could only be accessed by, a phone line.

In remote part of the world, there is no Internet.  It's that simple.

Phil S wrote on August 17, 2015 at 6:08 pm

I was in Caracas and Merida.  But the point is, if you don't have access to ANY internet, you won't have access to any email, public or private.  And Phyllis is still without excuse.

Reykjavik wrote on August 16, 2015 at 4:08 pm

I doubt that there is particular loathing with respect to Rauner - he's too busy to pay attention to this hiccup.  I doubt if members of the BOT are particularly loathing toward the former chancellor, who served them so well. Just because there was some public disagreement about the terms of her resignation, does not translate to loathing. 

tominmadison wrote on August 16, 2015 at 6:08 pm

 Good casting:


How about America's Sweetheart, Jennifer Aniston, as Robin K?

Denzel Washington as Ade.


I smell Oscar.












andrewscheinman wrote on August 16, 2015 at 9:08 pm

BTW, did I misread that earlier statement that Wise had gone to personal emails because of Laura Frerichs telling her that someone (me) was FOIAing her communications over the COM?

Isn't that a conversation we should know a LOT more about?  Isn't that the start of this whole thing?

Andrew Scheinman

sweet caroline wrote on August 16, 2015 at 9:08 pm

Yes, Tom!  Excellent choices of actors!  Instead of a blockbuster movie, perhaps a weekly TV series, such as the real "Scandal," since circumstances seem to change and get more interesting each week.  Stay tuned for scenes from next week's episode....

annabellissimo wrote on August 17, 2015 at 4:08 pm

I think the issues that are being buried under all the analyses of Wise's emails center on the personnel decisions: why was Salaita recommended for the job? why did that recommendation move up the ladder? why was Kilgore ever considered for ANY job at UIUC? How on earth did that job application ever receive one second's worth of consideration? Whether it's Ayers, Kilgore or Salaita, what is the agenda of people making these hiring recommendations and decisions for Illinois? There are great academics, fine scholars, smart, talented people who want jobs in academe – and somebody at the University of Illinois keeps recommending these outliers, felons, terrorists, liars, crooks, promoters and/or practitioners of violence, big-mouth blowhard violent agendists - and they get hired! I wish somebody who knows how to find the information would compare the hiring practices at the University of Michigan, at Stanford, at UCSD, at Harvard, at University of Pennsylvania, Caltech, Wisconsin and so on to see how many faculty with such backgrounds have been hired at those places. Kilgore’s background, even the murderous terrorist criminality aside (!), is stunning when one realizes he stole the identity of a dead child and used that name to obtain his advanced degrees. That ALONE should disqualify him – and he admitted in his resume, per the newspaper accounts, that he used a stolen identity, and that his transcripts would be found under that stolen name! His academic TRANSCRIPTS are under a stolen name! Unbelievable. There are innumerable people who are NOT felons, NOT murderers, NOT identity thieves, NOT fugitives from justice (and not in the “romantic” sense of Dr. Richard Kimball, TV/movie fictional character who, in contrast, was innocent!), not liars, not convicted domestic terrorists, not killers of innocent people, potential job candidates who have NONE of that as part of their background or their character, and yet it is Kilgore who was hired. What is WRONG with the University of Illinois? Once upon a time I was proud of the University of Illinois. No more. Are these people with hiring power confusing real life with fictional/movie stories? Some notion of romance in domestic terrorism? Didn’t Tom Wolfe write about this quite perfectly in Radical Chic and Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers? Is that what the University of Illinois people who are making these hiring recommendations are confused about? None of it makes any sense, unless you really want to undermine and sabotage the University, and from the hatred and anger so often expressed here, that may be at the base of the craziness. It is quite fascinating to me to read in today’s comments that frequent commenter and self-promoter Andrew Scheinman is now wishing Salaita had held back his hate-filled “tweets” until after being officially hired when he could then use “his” University of Illinois position as a platform to advance his views. That is what I have been positing was the whole idea behind his hiring from the get-go, between him and Warrior, an agenda put forth for BDS and whatever else they endorse, from the University of Illinois “platform.” Oh yes, the once imagined-great University of Illinois now an outpost for terrorists, sponsors of terrorists, murderers, sponsors of murder and violence, felons, thieves, liars, cheats, crooks, criminals, opportunistic blowhard bullies. To read the one comment from the University of Illinois employee (was it Wise or another?) email in reference to Chris Kennedy’s emailed expressions of great concern, yet measured analysis, about the significance of and damage from these lunatic (my word, not his, not that I know of anyway) personnel decisions was stunning in its implied dismissal of questions of basic right and wrong! That employee wrote, “Wow. Hope he calms down some.” (or words close to that), effectively dismissing the seriousness and belittling his point of view, patronizingly, arrogantly. There are some serious moral and ethical inadequacies revealed in all of these matters and what happens? People get on here and write about their hatred for all administrators, for the University of Illinois (for which many of them seem to work!), and their strong support for the Kilgore, Salaita, Ayers group over all others. Bizarre. Fantasy-land. Down the rabbit-hole, hi-ho, hi-ho.

Rocky7 wrote on August 17, 2015 at 8:08 pm


What has to be understood is this.  Social and related standards disappeared not just from UIUC but academe in general.  It was triggered by the fact that all the 'crazies' of the 1960's earned their PhD's, got appointed to the facuty, earned tenure, and stacked the critical committees, including curriculum committees.  Then, some of their ilk became administrators like Deans, Provosts, and later, even Chancellors!

Now only the PhD's trained by that ilk get academic jobs - certainly in the humanities and social sciences and schools of education.

This just reflects a deterioration of societal standards and has pervaded the entire American and global university environment.  If you think it is bad here, it's worse in Europe.


Rocky7 wrote on August 17, 2015 at 9:08 pm

Let's add some timelines:

1979- LAS Curriculum Committee began gutting science requirements at UIUC.

1985 - Earliest attempts at establishing behavior-speech codes and accompanyng deterioration of standards.

1994- Deanships nationwide become populated with 1960's activist ilk.

From then, it went downhill.

Rocky7 wrote on August 17, 2015 at 9:08 pm

The article lists the following members of the UIUC administration as actively receiving using private email accounts

Ilesanmi Adesida, provost;

Normand Paquin, associate director for research, Coordinated Science Laboratory;

Dan Peterson, vice chancellor for institutional advancement

Robin Kale, Associate Chancellor for Public Affairs.


How soon will UIUC remove Messrs.  Adesida, Paquin, Peterson and Ms. Kale from their administrative posts?.   Sooner is better than later.