A University of Connecticut professor’s work on a secret public-opinion poll for Gov. M. Jodi Rell last year violated university policy and demonstrated questionable judgment, the university’s Office of Audit, Compliance, and Ethics found on Thursday. Kenneth Dautrich, an associate professor of public policy, used university resources in the form of two paid graduate assistants and the university’s e-mail system for partisan activities, which The Day reported were the deciding factors in the office’s ruling. University officials said they were awaiting results from other investigations before they decide on disciplinary action against Mr. Dautrich. Governor Rell ultimately decided not to seek re-election.
- 1255 Twenty-Third St, N.W.
- Washington, D.C. 20037
- Copyright © 2013 The Chronicle of Higher Education
While I’m not one to encourage professors to help Republicans in any way, I don’t see how being paid by a candidate is ethically any different than being paid by a corporation. I doubt that UCONN has any problem with the latter.
davidrshumway — i doubt it is the being paid that is at issue. The issue is the use of university resources in a political endeavor. I am sure your university, as mine, and virtually all others in the U.S. do not allow use of their resources for personal or political activities/reasons.
Folks: every research university has some kind of consulting policy for faculty members. The USG limits the proportion of time, for example, and the use of university facilities for a campaign (one’s own or another’s). But professors are free to engage in these activities on their own time (we do not give up our citizenship rights when we accept a paycheck from the state). If professor here was working for a candidate on his own time, and hired grad students using non-university funds to help on their own time, it is unlikely that he violated UConn’s policy. The university’s own inquiry will probably reveal something like this. Best, Peter
My comment has nothing to do with the subject of the article. It is about the usage “different than” in the first comment. I am amazed at the way academicians use this usage so inaccurately. Than is used when you compare quantitative data like longer than, smarter than taller than and so on. When you want to compare qualitative data, use “different from.”
crunchycon (in Dallas, I presume?): It all depends on the details. Congratulations to you if you have never used your university email for a personal message…gmanacheril: I think this is a lost battle. And, of course, if you were British, you’d be saying “different to.”
kathden — not in Dallas — midwest. And, yes, I do admit to having received, and occasionally even sent, personal emails on/from my university account. But I don’t use my office computer for personal projects, research or otherwise.
Nor would I ask office staff or teaching/research/other academic assistants to do tasks for personal projects/research not relating to academics.
2. crunchycon: It’s not doing political work and using university resources that should get him in trouble, it’s using university resources for *any* consulting work that is wrong.
Is the question here about a professor AS a professor? I think it might be about a professor as a STATE EMPLOYEE. State employees should not, for a number of reasons, use public resources for political purposes. To allow it is to invite politicians to turn faculty positions into patronage jobs.
I would like to add a word to gmanacheril’s comment at October 8, 2010 at 4:16 pm, regarding the usage “different than”. Besides “different from”, “different to” is also quite correct, although more common in Britain. Fowler explains all.
Regarding the professor’s consulting, at issue would be use of resources paid from student fees (like his salary, the grad student’s, or the equipment and network he was logged on to) for a purpose that does not benefit the students directly. If he was home, using his own computer, off the clock, and paying the grad assistant out of his own pocket or from the consultancy account, no problem. If that were the case, the matter would never have come up. PJTramdack
IF all this individual did was conduct a public opinion poll for a client, and did not publicly advocate election of one candidate over another, in what sense was his activity “political?”
Sounds like an ordinary consulting contract to me, which normally universities encourage, as long as they don’t take time away from the classroom. Tempest in a teapot?