falcongrad 
Member since May 2, 2011


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “"COIN" investigation continues

Asher Clark gets booted from USAFA and the AF while claiming he "didn't know he was smoking spice"
BGen Born continues in her position after lying about the academic credentials of the staff claiming she "didn't know" he staff was unqualified.

One is a CADET and the other is a GENERAL OFFICER.....and it's no surprise who get's punished and looses their job......

5 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by falcongrad on 05/23/2012 at 9:18 AM

Re: “Cracks in the code

Zoomie,

Thanks for making my point. Just to help you understand the point:

self-licking ice cream cone
n. a process, department, institution, or other thing that offers few benefits and exists primarily to justify or perpetuate its own existence. Also in the form self-licking lollipop.


Now, it would have been more effective, and relevant had you pointed out where my post was wrong. You didn't......you went straight to the personal attack, without any frame of reference concerning my background. Next thing you know, we'll be measuring our peckers.

The point about the "Outstanding Educator Award" is extremely relevant with respect to academic qualifications. While you may have been the ultimate, prototype instructor (which based on how quickly you lost your temper and patience and launched a personal attack would be hard to believe), let's look at how the winner of the award is determined. Let's pretend I'm the Math Department head, and I've hired several "marginally qualified" instructors (some would say unqualified) who have degrees like MPAs and MBAs. When "called out" on the qualifications of one of those instructors, would the Department head be able to justify the hire by saying "well despite not having a technical masters degree, Maj X is a great instructor as illustrated by their winning the Department's Outstanding Educator Award"? Sounds good right? It may even be proof positive for some of the analytical thinkers over at the "Christian fighter pilot" blog....but if the Math Department head is the guy who decides who gets the award...and then uses the award to justify his hiring of a marginally qualified instructor...do you NOT see a problem there? It's a SUBJECTIVE award....and it should not be used to justify ignoring OBJECTIVE data. I'd be FAR more impressed if you said "every semester I taught, my sections scored higher on standardized or group graded events"...or "my student critiques were consistently the highest". But you used an award with no objective criteria.

54 likes, 6 dislikes
Posted by falcongrad on 04/20/2012 at 4:08 PM

Re: “Cracks in the code

Zoomie,
Your post brings up a very important point. You say you were the #2 guy for the Dean's "Outstanding Educator Award"....could you please explain to us how this award is determined? My impression of the award, after seeing some of the recipients, is that it is the epitome of a "self licking ice cream cone". In my former Dept, it was regularly given to officers who had poor reputations in the classroom, but played the right political games. Is it true that ultimately, the Dean makes the decision on who is given the award, or at least signs off on the recipient?

Now I'm going to try to walk you down the logic road.....

You claim to have been an instructor in the History Department, and admit you did NOT have a Masters Degree in History, or a closely related subject. If you finished second for the Dean's "Outstanding Educator Award", then how is it possible that she didn't know that some of her faculty didn't have a Masters Degree in the subject they teach or something similar? Seems to me she either KNEW she was lying, or she paid no attention to the resumes of those who she handed out awards to...to include the extremely prestigious "Outstanding Educator Award"....

One additional point. When I was an instructor pilot, I usually had that one weak student in each class who complained about the requirement that he be proficient in formation flying even though he was destined to be a "heavy driver". The simple answer to that question is "because we can". There is no shortage of qualified applicants for pilot training. We want the best Air Force, so our STANDARDS are higher than "good enough". "Good enough" should NOT be "good enough" for USAFA. The qualified instructors ARE out there, but until we DEMAND the highest level of professionalism from the leadership, USAFA will remain just "good enough". If you were truly committed to USAFA, the cadets, and the Air Force, then why didn't you get the degree you needed to teach that subject? Is it because the Air Force told you having a marginal education was "good enough"? What ever happened to "Excellence in all we do"? Does that only apply to the cadets, or should we expect it from the faculty?

45 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by falcongrad on 04/20/2012 at 12:56 PM

Re: “Cracks in the code

Blue, thanks for pointing out the obvious. There is a certain lunacy to someone calling someone else out for trying to remain anonymous about an article that mentions US v Wailly. Did they not get the part about the whistleblower being punished?

For reference, I am a whistleblower. I was once on faculty at USAFA, and was extremely successful in that roll, both in student critiques and student performance. I got my MS degree from the same program that is the number one destination for the Department I taught in's sponsored PhD students. Unfortunately, I ran afoul of the "Godfather" and was dismissed wrongfully in a case tainted by religious bias and bigotry. The IG investigated, and found multiple violations of the MWPA....making the actions against me a federal civil rights crime.
You would have expected one party in the case to have been sent packing, and the other to have gotten promoted...and that's EXACTLY what happened....problem is, the person found to have broken the law was recommended for promotion to O6 by BGen Born, and promoted by Lt Gen Gould. I on the other hand, was sent packing.
In my case, I asked Gen Gould for his help...he even sat down and talked with me, and gave me his word that he would get to the bottom and "close the loop" with me after he did. He did not....despite many attempts on my part to just get an answer.
I have no doubt that Gen Gould is an extremely loyal man. The problem is what he's loyal to. Every despot in history had loyal LTs to do their bidding. This is the US Air Force. The loyalty should be to the rule of law and the constitution. It should also be to the truth. I find it ironic that we have a crack investigator on this thread jumping to conclusions.

Mike, I'm not sure if you know Lt Gen Gould. All I ask is if you do, ask him a couple questions. Ask him what he did to or for the victim in the McKenzie whistleblower case. Ask him what he did for McKenzie. Ask him what his advisers told him to do. Gen Gould showed his "loyalty"...to McKenzie...and in the process, his disdain for the rule of law.

FWIW, Ms Zubeck knows the particulars of my case...and knew them when Lt Gen Gould elected to ignore the outcome of the IG investigation and promote Lt Col McKenzie. Ms Zubeck sacrificed a great headline..."Screw Up and Move Up at USAFA". She did it because I asked her to respect my privacy and not "out me". My family has suffered enough for my actions. When I went forth with the truth, and expected USAFA to do the right thing, they were along for the ride, and have sacrificed every day since then...all because we can't expect integrity from our leaders at USAFA.

BTW....I know the IG made the determination that BGen Born was negligent in her statements concerning faculty qualification....ask BGen born what Lt Col McKenzie...her former "Reserve Advisor"...had a degree in and from where (Lt Col McKenzie taught math). Then ask her what his replacement had (Master of Public Administration...and also taught math)...and her replacement (night school MBA mill..and now a math "professor"). If she didn't even know how unqualified her own reserve advisors were, then she has bigger problems than being "negligent".

45 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by falcongrad on 04/15/2012 at 8:05 PM

Re: “Air Force pilot challenges investigation, leading to complaint

“Fighter pilots by nature don’t like to be wrong, and their first response is generally to become defensive and deny an offense was committed”
Jonathan Dowty

0 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by falcongrad on 10/08/2011 at 1:19 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

All content © Copyright 2014, The Colorado Springs Independent   |   Website powered by Foundation