I Have Been Raped (Repeatedly) At Amarillo College!

I have taught at two-year colleges for more than three decades: Black Hawk College (public, Moline, IL, 1965-1967) and Amarillo College (public, Amarillo, TX, since 1972). In my first semester at Black Hawk College (Fall 1965)—sometime around mid-term—I was summoned to a meeting in the office of the Dean of Students. In attendance was the chair of the English Department; I was teaching history in the Department of Social Sciences. The chair of the Department of Social Sciences (for reasons not germane to me) was not present. The Dean of Students (Charles Carlsen, later President of Johnson County Community College in Overland Park, KS) opened the meeting by saying that numerous student complaints about my grading standards (too strict) had reached his office. I was a first-year teacher, fresh out of a master's program in history (Eastern New Mexico University). Ultimately, I was counseled to mend my ways. When the chair of the Department of Social Sciences learned of this meeting, he was incensed. Although I had no direct confirmation, I believe he told the Dean of Students that the matter was handled inappropriately. I heard no more from Dean Carlsen in the remainder of that year or the next. I left Black Hawk College to enter doctoral study at Texas Tech University in Fall 1967.

Flash forward through five (5) years of graduate study: including reading mastery in two (2) non-English languages, passing preliminary and qualifiying examinations in five (5) history fields and one (1) minor field. Upon earning a Ph.D. in history in Summer 1972, I joined the faculty of Amarillo College in Fall 1972. That first year, I was hired on a one-year, temporary appointment to teach in place of a tenured faculty member who had left for graduate study in political science. A fulltime position in history at Amarillo College was vacant (but unfilled at that time) because a longtime history teacher had retired in May 1972. Approximately midway through the Fall term, I was notified that I was being moved from a temporary appointment to a probationary, tenure-track position. I had forced the issue by notifying the chair of the Department of Social Sciences that I would need to travel to professional meetings to pursue employment when the temporary assignment ended. The chair of the Department of Social Sciences guarded the travel funds in the department budget very assiduously; she regularly consumed the entire travel budget to attend the annual meeting of the Organization of American Historians. The chair never taught a course in U. S. history at Amarillo College in her entire tenure at Amarillo College (30+ years). So, I entered the tenure track at Amarillo College due to the mendacity of the chair of the Department of Social Sciences at Amarillo College.

Beginning in 1973, the rapes began. I was summoned to a meeting with the chair of the Department of Social Sciences in Spring 1974. She did not want to discuss travel. Instead, I was told that a student had complained about something or other I had said or done. I asked for the name of the complainant and I was told that the name was irrelevant. The meeting ended with an admonishment that I was not to transgress again.

Let me post the Amarillo College policy on Student Grievances (unchanged since I arrived at Amarillo College in 1972.):

The Amarillo College policy on student grievances [complaints about any aspect of an AC course] states:

GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE (STUDENTS)

Students who have a grievance concerning a course in which they are enrolled should appeal to the instructor of the course. If the students are not satisfied with the decision from the instructor, they may appeal the decision to the department chair and the division chair in that order. If a satisfactory resolution of the problem is still not achieved, the process may be repeated through the vice president/dean of instruction and the president.

Amarillo College Student Rights and Responsibilities, Fall 2001
and the Amarillo College Faculty Handbook

The final sentence should read: If a satisfactory resolution of the problem is still not achieved, the process may be repeated through the vice president/dean of instruction, the president, and the Board of Regents. Of course, it goes without saying that an aggrieved student can bring a lawsuit against Amarillo College if the Board of Regents do not rule in the student's favor. Conceivably, the case could go to the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

I add the following commentary on the College policy:

The greatest Teacher of all said, Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. If Dr. Sapper has a grievance with a student in one of his classes, he WILL NOT take the matter to that student's parents, spouse, employer, probation officer, friends, or other students in that course. In other words, it will be a private matter between Dr. Sapper and the student. Similarly, Dr. Sapper has zero tolerance for student complaints lodged against him in violation of Amarillo College policy. That means any grievance or complaint that has not been filed with Dr. Sapper before the matter is carried elsewhere is in violation of College policy. Violators of Amarillo College policy engage in such behavior at their own risk.

In 32 years at Amarillo College, a student has NEVER been referred back to me—in compliance with Amarillo College policy—after lodging a grievance against me with a succession of chairs,deans, and presidents at Amarillo College. In ALL INSTANCES, the grievance was entertained and I was expected—after the fact—to provide an explanation or a defense.

In the mid-1990s, a student sent me an anonymous e-mail message that was hostile and threatening. On my own, I discovered the identity of the Internet Service Provider (ISP)—but not the account name—of the sender. I notified the ISP administrator and triggered a crisis. It seems the PC from which the hostile e-mail was sent was the personal, desktop machine of the majority owner of the ISP! All hell broke loose. An internal investigation revealed that the hostile e-mail was sent by the wife of a key employee of the ISP-owner! The employee was suspended—pending an investigation—and the wife/e-mail sender filed a grievance against ME for causing her husband's employment problem. The grievance was filed with the vice president/dean of instruction at Amarillo College. The student demanded the print copy of the e-mail message. At that time, my classes used an e-mail service hosted by an educational support service in Alpharetta, GA. I had the sole copy of the e-mail message. I was summoned to a meeting in the office of the vice president/dean of instruction (with the chair of the division in attendance—a witness for the prosecution?) to submit to an administrative directive that I surrender the -mail to the student so that her spouse's employment would be restored (and the College would avoid a lawsuit?). Instead of attending that meeting, I went downtown to the offices of the owner of the ISP (and other telecommunications enterprises in Amarillo). We talked about the matter. I explained what had happened to me. The employer asked to see the message. I gave him the print copy. After reading it, he called the vice president/dean of instruction's on the telephone. Instead of meeting with me, the vice president/dean of instruction was treated to a good 15 or 20-minute lecture on student propriety. The line I will always remember: If I were the dean of that college, that young woman would be expelled! To this day, I have never received any acknowledgment that I was wronged. No apology. Nothing.

Last fall, a student dropped one of my history courses. At no time did I have a conversation with this student. The student wrote a letter to the dean of students alleging that my course was without any redeeming value. The dean sent a copy of this trash to two Business Office employees and authorized full refund of the student's tuition for the history course. Again, I was informed of all of this business after the fact.

Finally (and I have glossed over case after case after case) we arrive at the cause célèbre of Fall 2003. At mid-October, I had a case of suspected cheating between two students sharing a pencil (explicitly forbidden in my classroom policies) during a pop quiz. I was so angered by this Grade 13 behavior that I was struggling for self-control. Ultimately, I dismissed class (with the two cheaters included). I had no contact with anyone about this incident. I did not report it. The following class meeting, that class had the second major test of the term. My major tests consist of two (2) parts: Part I (60% of the test grade) is a number of objective questions that are scored on a test scanning device; Part II (40% of the test grade) requires the students to write essays in response to any two of the 4 or 5 essay questions posited. The afternoon of that test, I received a call from one of my best friends at Amarillo College—a counselor in the Advising & Counseling Center—reporting that an irate student had come into the Center ranting and raving about my history class. My friend reported that the student was referred—by another counselor—to the chair of the division.

I did not read the essays on the set of tests for the class in question until Sunday afternoon. When I arrived at the essay written by a male, older-than-average student. It was a hateful, threatening, invective-filled diatribe against my teaching, my methods, and the like.

I assumed the student had dropped the course. However, when I returned to the classroom after a trip to my campus mailbox, the aggrieved student was seated in his usual seat: closer to me than any other student. I expressed suprise at seeing him and further I expressed my regret that he had wasted 40% of the test grade. I received a snarl to the effect that it was his problem. Throughout the class meeting (75 minutes), this student muttered under his breath (inaudibly) after every statement I made to the class. I decided then and there that I was at risk. The daily news over the past several years has been rife with campus/classroom violence.

As I left campus (shaken), I encountered both counselors (the referring person and my friend who called me with a head's up). I told both that I wanted this student OUT of my class. I even offered to refund—at my expense—the tuition for the history class to that student. I urged both to contact the chair of the division and resolve this matter.

The next class meeting rolled around and when I returned to the classroom, the aggrieved student was still sitting in close proximity to my area. I turned on my heel and went back to the Advising & Counseling Center. The referring counselor disclaimed any responsibility in the matter. Her snide, parting words? I'm sorry. I snarled over my shoulder, Yes, indeed, you are sorry! I encountered my counselor-friend and told him that I was not returning to the classroom as long as the student representing a threat was present. My friend went to the classroom and asked the student out into the hall. My friend is partially sightless and physically handicapped (resulting from a stroke more than a year ago) and took it upon himself to represent Amarillo College while those with an administrative stake chose to avoid the issue.

That afternoon, I encountered the chair of the division in a campus parking lot. I asked if he understood the situation in my class. He responded that he did. I asked, then, why the student had returned to my class. After a lot of hemming and hawing, he acknowledged that a settlement was proving difficult. The student was demanding that he remain in the class due to financial aid requirements. I responded Even if the student does not attend class and takes my final exam, I am not grading it. The chair asked what I would do and I replied that I would give the student an A in the course on the condition that he never utter my name again. If I heard anything connecting me with that student, I would go and effect a grade-change to an F. We parted company on that note. Over this past weekend, I came to the conclusion that IF I gave this aggrieved student an A, I must give an unearned A to EVERY student in that class. Further, I wanted to hear nothing about the adademic intergrity of Amarillo College. There is none.

Unknown to me, the vice president/dean of instruction, dean of students (where did HE come from), and chair of the division met with my partially-sighted, physically-impaired counselor-friend about ME. Was I invited to this meeting? If I was, the invitation was lost in the mail.

This morning, I received an e-mail message from the chair of the division inviting me to schedule a meeting within 24 hours to discuss: the student in this class AND matters best discussed devoid of administration AND that it would be in my best interest to attend such a meeting. There has been an exchange of e-mail messages with my final reply (to date) summarizing my position:

I still request a full disclosure of "matters best discussed devoid of administration" and what makes our discussion "in my best interest"? Again, I am dissatisfied with the responses I have received to date. What "matters" and why is my "best interest" at stake? I cannot make myself any clearer on this matter. I am not interested in walking into some Star Chamber proceeding.

And so, the rape of Neil Sapper by Amarillo College continues. If this be (fair & balanced) outrage, so be it!