Scoop: Feedback Flows In Support Of Paul Buchanan

Monday, 6 August 2007, 6:06 pm
Article: Scoop News

Outrage has been the response following a Scoop article reporting that the University of Auckland has dismissed a most popular and respected lecturer.

Feedback vouching for the good character and professionalism of dismissed senior lecturer Paul Buchanan (formerly of the University of Auckland)has flowed in to Scoop since this news agency broke news of Paul Buchanan's dismissal.

Scoop sought and received a response from the University of Auckland. It reads: "Dr Paul Buchanan is no longer employed at The University of Auckland. This is an employment matter and we have no further comment."

Here is a list of messages sent into Scoop since publishing the article:

Scoop News: Paul Buchanan To Challenge Auckland Uni Dismissal - Selwyn Manning, Scoop co-editor reports that security and intelligence pracademic Paul Buchanan has been dismissed from his senior lecturer role in the political studies department of Auckland University. More >>

FORMER STUDENTS RESPOND:

Sarah, a former student writes: "Paul Buchanan is one of the best lecturers that I had at the University of Auckland. He brings a real enthusiasm to his teaching and while he does demand high standards, students are thoroughly prepared to meet the challenge. Given that the student failed all her other papers, it looks like the University of Auckland is bending over backwards to preserve an income stream, ahead of academic rigour and integrity."

Scott Mansell, MA (Hons) Political Studies, University of Auckland.

I first met Dr Paul Buchanan as an undergraduate student in 2002. Since that time I have had the privilege of being supervised by him at graduate level. Paul uniquely combines an academic background with real world experience, giving him an integrity in the classroom that is seldom seen. Paul has a distinctive ability to present material in a challenging but entertaining manner, and his highly sort after as a lecturer and supervisor. In all my dealings with Paul, he has consistently maintained the highest personal and academic standards and expected the same of his students. Such a stance has stood me in good stead as I entered a managerial career. I remain indebted to Paul for the education and guidance he provided me, and now feel proud to call him a friend.

Yasmine Ryan – Journalist

Having studied with Dr. Paul Buchanan at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels, I am extremely surprised and disappointed to hear that he has been summarily dismissed.

He has always been welcoming to students, ready to answer questions in his own time and even to lend books from his personal collection. Beyond regular teaching duties, Dr. Buchanan ran the Working Group on Alternative Security Perspectives, which was a unique opportunity for postgraduate students.

Given the investment he makes in his students, Dr. Buchanan also expects a lot in return – rightly. Academic standards determine a department's standings on an international level. While I'm not familiar in any detail with the grounds for his dismal, I am not surprised to hear he was disappointed in a student for not taking their studies as seriously as he does.

This is hardly a reason for such a dedicated and respected member of the department to lose his job.

Because of bad staffing decisions, the department has already lost some of its most popular and challenging papers in recent years, notably including a study abroad programme at the Russian Diplomatic Academy in Moscow that had been running for several years. I feel sorry for current and future students of the Political Studies Department. A few notable exceptions excluded, students are increasingly limited to the fields of politics and the media, and public policy. In firing Dr. Buchanan, they've made another big mistake.

Aaron Bhatnagar, MA (Hons), University of Auckland, 2000

I thought Paul was a great lecturer, and while he was often quirky and cheeky, I never thought he was cruel or unkind to anyone. He worked his students hard with exacting standards, and I found him someone illuminating and interesting. Along with Dr Rouben Azizian, he was one of my favourite lecturers during my years at Political Studies 1996-1999. Occasionally I even argued with him because our political ideologies were not close - but he was always professional. Without a doubt, Paul has a style that does not compare easily to many other lecturers. This is because he is challenging and provocative, but most importantly, because he often made us smile in classes with anecdotes and examples of how challenge and provocation were important to thinking. I'd be delighted to go on the record supporting Paul as a great teacher, and a challenger of his students.

Tom Chodor, BA Political Studies and European Studies (University of Auckland), BA (Hons) International Relations (ANU), Completing PhD, International Relations (ANU)

I have known Paul Buchanan since I took his Regimes and Transitions course at the University of Auckland in 2005. Paul was an outstanding lecturer from day one with a clear passion for the subject he taught and a determination to pass his knowledge on to his students. Not only did I obtain an education from him that was unparalleled at the University of Auckland, I also gained an intellectual colleague with whom I often discussed our studies. Paul was also instrumental in encouraging and supporting my enrolment at the Australian National University and eventually undertaking a doctorate in the very topic in which he first sparked my interest in his classes. I have found Paul to be not only a very intelligent and articulate mind but also a very engaging and open person whom I am proud to count as both a colleague and a friend. I consider the charges made against him by the University as both absurd and unfounded.

Jonathan Gardiner, BA (Hons) Political Studies (University of Auckland)

Paul Buchanan is a popular and engaging lecturer who demands high standards of his students. I always found him very approachable, and willing to direct you, if he felt you were putting the effort in. His 'on the job' experiences differentiated him from most lecturers I have encountered. There has always been little doubt in my mind that there would be a lower take up of post graduate study, in the increasingly crucial areas of international relations and security, if a different lecturer was directing proceedings.

Kris Munday, Master Graduate (University of Auckland)

Having tutored one of his papers, I know that Paul Buchanan is extremely popular with students. He is strict and sets high standards but is also a tremendously entertaining lecturer. Students showed genuine engagement with the course material and his classes were always well attended. As a supervisor he was also very strict and encouraged hard work. This might make him sound unfriendly, but he was also one of the most approachable lecturers I have known. He would be a great asset to any academic department and deserves to be treated as such.

Bella Waugh, BA (Hons), Political Studies and Latin American Studies, University of Auckland

Paul is a very inspiring teacher. He has a wealth of knowledge on a variety of subjects, and is most entertaining and inspiring in the delivery of that information to his students. I know that he attracted many students to his classes for his distinctive style. During my time as his student, I found him to be an excellent class teacher and dissertation supervisor, who was often prepared to go that little bit further for me as a student. Paul was always direct - he didn't sugar-coat things. Although this was at times difficult for me as his student, I always took his criticism in a constructive manner, and I truly believe that my learning processes, knowledge and skills were the better for it. I found Paul to be a joy to learn from, and someone who inspired me a lot. Paul has an great sense of humour and a knack for lecturing (and story-telling!) which helped to make his manner of teaching very attractive. I always found him to be very generous: with his time, dedication, opinion and even things like resources - books, essays and the like. In my opinion, the dismissal of Paul constitutes a significant loss for the University of Auckland, and particularly for the students which form the core of that institution.

Ryan Lang, Graduate Student, University of Auckland

During four years at the University of Auckland, I took several of Dr. Paul Buchanan's courses and worked closely with him on my Honours dissertation. His input into my learning has been invaluable. He pursues excellence in his students, seeking to make the standard of their research, writing and work ethic internationally competitive. He is a man of integrity, an exceptional and dedicated teacher and researcher, and has been my academic mentor and advocate. The faculty has lost one of its greatest assets in Paul and will not easily be able to replace him.

Gerald Piddock - Journalist

Hi, I too am a former student of Paul's. I was at university when Paul came to the politics department in 1998 I think, and I was in his inaugural class. He's a great lecturer and teacher and he quickly became popular with students because of his life experiences and his passion for teaching. It just rubs off on his students and I have fond memories of his classes.

He is also someone that was not afraid to question authority and take on the establishment. For example, I think I recall him supporting a group of University employees - cleaners I think, when they went on strike for better working conditions which did not exactly please the University. So he certainly doesn't fit the stereotype of the cardigan -wearing, pipe-smoking, stuffy university academic, but so what?

I think the university has done students a huge dis-service by dismissing him and it smells of putting profit ahead of academic excellence.

M.B

What an incredible shame that a dissident voice like Buchanan has been dismissed. Although I have never taken his class, as a tutor for the past 3 years in another Arts department, I have heard many a student sing his praises, although of course, some did not always agree with his arguments, he was respected.

This action taken by the University sets an unfortunate and dangerous precedent. Those of us in varying levels of University study and/or teaching positions recognise this as just another battle lost in the war against the "Cash for Degrees" phenomenon that seems to have overtaken University practice. The University has shown that they value rich students coming to the University and paying full International fees over respected and venerated lecturers. What will happen next? Will any student frustrated with a mark on a test be able to contest it and get the lecturer dismissed? Are lecturers now unable to tell a student when their work is sub par and does not meet necessary standards? As a tutor who has no problem with failing incoherent essays from International students struggling with English (despite all of the offers of help BEFORE the essays are due, not to mention the Student Learning Centre), I now fear for my job if I continue to mark as I see fit.

This threat by the girls family is educational terrorism at its worst. There are many tools available to students in difficult life situations to avoid their grades suffering. Differing forms of compassionate consideration, aegrotat and free counseling services for students all are availble for students in dire straights, and now, it looks as if this one student (who failed ALL her papers last semester) has found a new form of "compassionate consideration" — that is— simply complain to the powers that be (rich relatives, and the University and its capital vs education practices) and have the offending voice removed.

Lest us not forget that this was a GRADUATE student. Graduate studies require a great deal of dedication obviously of which the student did not possess. Good for Paul Buchanan for having the gall to not allow the students behaviour to go undiscussed and unmentioned. And Shame on the University for failing to stand behind one of its most popular lecturers and show us once again, that the University is no longer a place of dissenting voices, of questioning, of critique, of learning, but now a place where money rules all and a students threats can remove all loyalties to those that deserve it, the lecturers.

Rona Grovenor

As a former student of Paul's, and someone who has now had experience on both sides of the fence (studying and lecturing) there are a few things in this article I would like to comment on. Firstly, despite doing only one paper with Paul (I was in the final year of my degree, he in his first year of teaching at Auckland) I found him to be a breath of fresh air into a seemingly lifeless Political Science department, not only in terms of his teaching style but also the intellectual demands he placed on students.

The mere fact that Aaron Bhatnagar has posted in his support. despite coming from a completely different side of the political spectrum, should testify to the respect Paul commanded both inside and outside the classroom.

Paul was both welcoming of students (inviting us into his home at the end of semester for celebration) and considerate of viewpoints different to his own, contributing to free and frank discussions between himself and his students.

Regarding the specifics of the alleged email and the aftermath, one can only speculate at this stage and I can only say this from my own experience with the University: this is precisely what happens when the field of education is delivered into the hands of managers and money men, something that has been happening at an alarming pace in recent years, and has had the result of turning previously mild-mannered academics into competitive learning 'facilitators' focused only on 'outputs' and 'efts'.

Paul was (and is) a breath of fresh air because he continued to promote education over earnings, debate over dollars, and critique over commercial imperatives.

Whether or not people in the university admit it, there is pressure to allocate a certain number of passes and A-grades, to maintain a steady flow of students cash-cows through the corridors of this-or-that department or the University in general. The standard of work being accepted as 'passable' seems to drop each year, and in effect we are heading towards a system where enough money will allow you to purchase a degree by proxy.

Whatever the merits or drawbacks of a user pays education system may be (and I for one have only ever studied at tertiary level under such a system), the fact is too many students interpret it as a system where they call ALL the shots.

From the posting of lecture materials on the internet to the reduction of coursework requirements, students have never had the 'learning' aspect so easy. And from personal experience, the more that is given, the more is expected. So if the University are successful in their action against Paul, we can wave goodbye to one of the few faces in the University who have not succumbed to the bureaucrats and officials that now patrol Symonds Street. Which is, of course, precisely what they want.

J

I am pleased Paul Buchanan is fighting his dismissal from Auckland University. I 'met' him on Breakfast a while back. His views on international affairs were concise, informative and thought provoking. There will no doubt be a place for him as a commentator on tv or radio but teaching OUR youth is far more important. I am concerned that my children will be seeking the very best academic training at Uni but there'll be no one dedicated and principled left to tutor them. Shame on Auckland University. Another country with little to recommend it influences our principles in New Zealand. You have my support, Paul Buchanan, as a mother of New Zealand's future.

Pat Northey – University of Auckland Student

Dear Sir,
As a student at the University, I find it disappointing to see a popular and obviously effective lecturer dismissed on the grounds of economic threats to the University.

The University has a high proportion of international students - is this a precedent for reaction to similar threats to any academic from any overseas student who tries to pass a subject without putting in the work?

Is the University of Auckland so dependent on the student funding from this overseas country that they will compromise the institution while still advertising and proclaiming the high academic standards of which they are so proud. The front of the web site advertises - "The University of Auckland is the leading research university in New Zealand. It is ranked in the world's top 50 universities." This does not appear to be the way a university of standing should behave. If academics do not uphold the standards expected of students then all students suffer as the quality of the degree becomes degraded. Integrity of the institution becomes threatened.

If students cannot handle the courses they have elected and enrolled in, the onus is on them to seek extra tuition and support or drop out. The student learning centre at the university is a magnificent facility and the help they offer is fantastic. ESOL centres are also available for overseas students. If the young woman chose not to take advantage of all the facilities set up to help the student, it is not the fault of her lecturer. This is not a high school it is a tertiary institution where students are supposed to learn to study independently at a tertiary level.

If the young woman chose not to attend lectures, hand in assignments on time, attend tutorials and submit to the discipline of the department, then it was her responsibility and choice. It may be that she was in Auckland for the social life experience and not an education.

The over reaction to this one email appears to be disproportionate to the event. One has to ask what is the real issue at hand? Has the University or Faculty been trying to find a way to shed this university academic because of his high personal profile, and found this event provided a convenient way of doing it?

Fairness and natural justice does not appear to have been applied in this matter. I would respectfully encourage the management to reconsider the action in a speedy manner.

Roy McDowall – BA (Hons)

I, Roy McDowall attended the University of Auckland from 2002-2005. During this time I completed a BA (Hons) in Political Studies. During the course of my studies I had the pleasure of taking a number of courses taught by Dr Paul Buchanan. I found him to be an insightful, entertaining and engaging lecturer. I consider him to be one of the best lecturers I have been taught by in my life. He sets high standards for his students, pushing them to excel. At times this was very demanding, deadlines that were announced months in advance were held to the letter, and some students struggled to comprehend that Paul's yes meant yes, and his no meant no, and a deadline was a deadline. I highly recommend Paul to any faculty considering employing him. Without a doubt he has played a huge role in my undergraduate and post-graduate education.

Stephanie Thompson BA (Hons) Political Studies, University of Auckland

Though I never took any of his classes, Paul Buchanan always struck me as a real asset to Auckland’s political studies department. His fierce intellect got the best out of his students, and even if he ruffled a few feathers along the way, isn’t getting challenged to be the best that you can be part of the university experience?

Alice Hutchins – University of Auckland Student

I have not read the letter so cannot comment directly but I still wish to speak out in support of Paul.

Paul's policy on coursework extentions is a bit different to other lecturers.... he makes it abundantly clear from the outset (both in capitals and italics in his course syllabus handouts and by going on about it in class) that he is against extensions except in the most necessary cases. He also makes it clear that where a genuine reason exists, he will allow an extension but that the student should be aware that he will check into any such request.... including (as an example) ringing doctors to verify extension certificates. Again, I do not know what the exact circumstances are here, but I feel it needs to be read in the light of Paul's somewhat quirky attitude towards granting extensions.

Secondly, Paul is a lecturer like no other, a strong personality who I imagine can appear somewhat brash to the uninitiated. He loves a good debate but this might also be read by some as somewhat confrontational. I don't think anyone can really appreciate this aspect unless you have actually met him or been in his lectures. It is difficult to judge without actually having read the letter, but Paul is Paul and his style of communication can't exactly be compared with any other lecturer.

Finally, Paul made it perfectly clear that his viewpoints on education and Auckland Uni were somewhat at odds with the rest of the Political Studies department. I wonder to what extent this may have factored in the decision?

Former Under-Graduate Student University Of Auckland

I am writing to voice my concern and disappointment at the sacking of Paul Buchannan from the University of Auckland.

I am an alumni of the University of Auckland and a former undergraduate student of Paul's. Five years on I feel that his lecturers are among the only ones I had at the University of Auckland, that prepared me for working in the real world.

I speak as a student who had a confrontation with Paul about an extension. In my experience, once Paul knows he is wrong, he will apologise and make amends – I understand he did this on this occasion. He expects students to prove they need extensions – maybe he is too harsh sometimes, but nobody is without fault.

I know the high standards that Paul expects of students, and to be honest, more lecturers should follow his lead. Many students walk over the good nature of lecturers when seeking extensions - this creates an unfair environment for those students who managed their time well and handed their assignments in on time.

Paul takes his students' analytical abilities and theoretical knowledge to new levels. If he sees that a student is giving 100%, he will give 150% back. Despite his hard edges he is a well meaning person at heart. If the University does not reinstate him, the loss to the Political Studies programme and the University will be great.

John Murray

Paul was the most engaging and entertaining of all the lecturers who taught me at Auckland University. His classes were so good that several of my friends, who weren't even in his class, attended his lectures with me just because he was such a fascinating speaker.

Amoungst a faculty full of tenure dulled slugs, Paul stands out as a passionate, dedicated and talented teacher of students. His loss is a tragedy for Politics students at the university.

Given the trivial nature of this incident, which could easily have been dealt with through the usual disciplinary process, one can only guess that this is merely an excuse to dismiss him, and not the real reason.

Auckland's loss will be someone elses gain.

Rebecca McAllum

The loss of Paul Buchanan is a significant loss to the University of Auckland.

Paul Buchanan has been the only lecturer in the department who has really inspired me and stimulated my interest in the subject.

Students have always been fore-warned about his no-excuses policy sounding assignments and essays.

Amanda Lennon – BIC (UNITEC), BA(Hons), MA (Hons) (Auckland), PhD Candidate (ANU)

As a former student, tutor - and now good friend - of Dr Paul Buchanan, I am writing in support of him as a teacher, academic and student facilitator.

I first met Paul in his previous role as the Department of Political Studies’ Undergraduate Advisor when I was exploring the possibility of returning to the University of Auckland in order to finish off my BA - and thanks to his assistance and support I was able to achieve this goal.

I was also fortunate enough to experience Paul as a lecturer during my time as an undergraduate. His was the class that really awoke my passion and interest in security issues, and every week I looked forward to his lectures with their unique mix of information, theory and anecdotes that made each a joy to attend. I also appreciated how he stood out from many other lecturers in making clear his expectations of his students; hard but fair and very approachable, he demanded we each exhibit the self-discipline and respect for others to do such things as arrive at class early, turn off our mobile phones – and, of course, get our essays in on time.

Following the completion of my BA, I was also very fortunate to have Paul agree to supervise my Honours Dissertation, and then in turn my Masters Thesis. Throughout both of these exercises Paul remained actively engaged and totally supportive. Even when my own dedication and self-discipline waned during my Thesis, Paul did not give up on me – and I largely have him to thank for getting it completed. I am now undertaking a PhD at The Australia National University – thanks again in a large part to Paul’s enthusiastic support of my ongoing education.

I have observed over time that Paul and his straight-talking approach tends to elicit extreme reactions in people. But love him or hate him, one cannot deny his gifted ability to teach and inspire others - and I believe it would be a tragedy if this great educator’s career is allowed to be destroyed.

Mohan Nepali, Kathmandu

The news article about the sudden dismissal of Auckland University lecturer Paul Buchanan surprised me as the justification that has come to light does not seem to be adequate.

The underlying facts have not been exposed if any. Yet the information that I have been able to obtain from the Scoop about him makes me feel that he must be an honest academic personality stressing on educational ethics and standards. Indeed, quality education demands not only the dedication and hard work of lecturers but also the responsible work of students.

Such a dismissal of a faculty member shows how educational authority works in different countries. Deficiency of internal communication within an educational institution has been reflected because of this incident.

I depend on the Scoop report to say that Mr. Paul Buchanan, like other human beings, might have some problems. But the main reason of his dismissal seems to be the failure of Saudi student, who failed in the whole course of Auckland University. Total failure in the University course does not reflect the weakness of the lecturer. It is the weakness of the university itself. Will the university authority consider this?

Besides, that the university unjustifiably dismissed him because of an irresponsible student’s complaint is really surprising. Was the lecturer given an opportunity to explain his things? Were there other disputes between the university authority and the lecturer? As he is also an academic expert in security and intelligence matters, was there anything else that led the university to take such a decision? Or what about Buchanan’s ideology and its favorable or unfavorable relationship with the mainstream politics of New Zealand? As ideological intolerance has become a major problem in today’s democracy, this question can also be considered as to Buchanan’s dismissal.

The Auckland University will have to restore Buchanan to his position as the dismissal has not been justified at all.

Tom OBrien - MA

Paul supervised part of my MA a few years ago and has remained an occasional sounding board. He was a tough but fair supervisor, who was engaged in the work I was doing. If this decision is upheld the University will be losing an excellent/lecturer with experience and knowledge of areas not well covered in NZ or Australia. It is disappointing to see students adopting sense of entitlement, simply because they pay fees.

Sam Hoben

"I was taught by Paul Buchanan in my last under-grad semester way back in 1997, and I still remember him as one of the two or three most engaging and challenging lecturers I've had. Looking back, he played a big part in me continuing with my studies. Other people's comments about Paul putting real effort into his students, and expecting hard work in return, certainly ring true.

Sure, he could be blunt at times, but that was exactly what my somewhat wan performance warranted. Although I can't support the tone of Paul's email (as I've heard it reported), lecturers surely need to have leeway to communicate robustly with their students. And from what I've heard, Paul has expressed more than mere contrition - he's been up-front and acknowledged he transgressed.

How rare is that?! I hope Auckland Uni can find a way to reinstate Paul Buchanan; otherwise, it'll have lost a real asset."

Fairlie Jensen

Dr. Paul Buchanan is an excellent teacher. In my time at the University of Auckland Political Studies Department I found he made himself unique among his colleagues by challenging students to question received wisdoms while striving for the highest academic standards. His classes were well known as the most demanding and the standard expected was dramatically higher than in other classes.

However, Dr. Buchanan always made every possible effort to help students succeed and excel, both by his own standards and their own.

The only essential pre-requisites for his classes were commitment, maturity, and the courage to grow intellectually through constructive, if frank, criticism.

I believe the University of Auckland has committed a grave error in depriving itself of one of the few teachers capable of mixing the highest academic standards with real world experience.

This is confirmed to me by the fact that since continuing my studies at graduate level in France and Switzerland with professors from all over the world, Dr Buchanan’s classes were among the few I took at the University of Auckland Political Studies Department that stood up to a truly international standard of excellence.

Although I cannot support the unprofessional nature of his response to the student in question in the matter that led to his dismissal, I cannot understand why the University and the Department should choose to punish themselves and future students on account of such an indiscretion. A professional of Paul Buchanan’s calibre will not need to look far to find future opportunity, the Department and the University on the other hand will be hard-pressed indeed to fill his position with a thinker and educator of equal quality.

Hamish Glenn - MA (Hons)

I was listening to National Radio today. Two things in particular caught my attention: firstly, the junior analyst inside Treasury that was responsible for disclosing how much the Reserve Bank can spend on international currency markets has not been sacked and, secondly, John Key - the man who apparently is going to lead Labour after the 2008 election - is still the leader of National after deliberately misleading the New Zealand public over comments regarding National's Iraq War policy.

I never saw the infamous letter Paul wrote, and nor did I see his apology written the following day (unprompted and long before anyone had complained), but I did see Paul soon after he wrote what he then confessed was an impetuous and regrettable email. He was clearly uncomfortable with what he had said and more than a little apprehensive about what might come of it. That was I believe May. Three months later, Paul has been dealing with this issue and paying for its consequences while a student who was unprepared for New Zealand University standards has gone home to recommence her life.

When I tutored one of Paul's papers last semester I found him to be an affable and professional colleague. I have no doubt he shouldn't have written the letter, but if our friend in Treasury, John Key, and Helen Clark can get away with their actions and words, I fail to see why a lecturer in what is a bastion of free speech must pay the ultimate price for an error of judgement.

David Tong – Former Undergrad Student

I am a former undergraduate student of Paul's. I have taken every undergraduate paper he teaches.

His dismissal was both unjustified and undesirable. I am not writing this simply because I like the man, enjoyed his classes, or have a bizarre hatred towards international students.

His dismissal is unjustified because the email - which, yes, I have read - does not reasonably contain grounds for dismissal and because he apologised for it one day later.

It is entertaining that the apology has not received the same sort of samizdat distribution as Paul's initial email (we also have not seen the student's extension request).

It was unprofessional, yes. The slight on Hoadley was out of line, but the clash between those two is long-standing and far from one-sided. The "western liberal guilt" line was laughable, but not racist. There is no evidence that Paul was biased against her in any way due to her race. Indeed, one entirely sensible interpretation of it is that he perceived, perhaps justifiably, we don't know, her as expecting special treatment based on her culture and nationality, and he wished to reject that. If her excuse was indeed "culturally driven", his response could be comprehensible. We don't know.

Telling her that she was unsuitable for graduate study was insensitive in the extreme, but, given her marks, probably entirely correct. I don't think we can justify her poor marks with reference to her bereavement, given that she was receiving Cs already.

Cs might [get]degrees, but they really shouldn't get honours.

Dismissing Paul is also undesirable. It is foolish because Buchanan added a lot to the politics department. His reputation amongst (most) students was glowing. His presence at the university was often a determining factor in class/major/university decisions, and he has attracted many students to post-graduate study. Paul also researches and writes in a field that is under-represented in the department. His public presence is also high. Even before I studied at Auckland, I knew of Paul through his regular appearances on radio and television interviews. This does a lot to improve the University's reputation. Dismissing him in such circumstances hurts it.

Again, this is not simply a defence of Paul as a lecturer, mentor and friend. I do like and respect him, that is true, but if it was Hoadley who was dismissed in the same circumstances, I'd probably feel the same way.

My impressions of Paul have not been uniformly positive. He is blunt, repetitive, dogmatic, and occasionally rude. That's the man he is, and, given his background, it's not hard to understand.

He has high expectations of students. When students fail to meet these expectations, he tells them so. At times, yeah, he goes overboard. He does, however, encourage students to write work of a much higher quality than is the norm in the Auckland arts faculty.

To put his email in context: At the start of every course I have taken with him, he has told us the procedure for requesting an extension. He has said what evidence he requires, when he will grant and extension, and when he will not. I have received extensions from him in the past. It's very simple; you ask before the due date, and if it's medical or bereavement, you provide documentary evidence. This is because essay flu and mysterious sixth grandparents' deaths are not all that uncommon.

Buchanan's approach to deadlines is far better than the blind-dart-player approach taken by many in the faculty. Requiring evidence is better than guessing wildly and hoping.

In summary: Buchanan should have apologised for the email. He did so. Reasonable disciplinary action should have been taken to prevent repetition. Unreasonable action should not have been taken.

Dr Christine Dann

I have over 20 years experience as a student and teacher in five different NZ universities. During that time I have observed some staff being MUCH more rude, unkind (and 'racist') to students (and colleagues) than Dr Buchanan has been - and it has never been a sacking offence. Some of the staff in those universities were/are convicted criminals for much more dangerous and egregious offences e.g. importing child pornography, drink driving - yet they have kept their jobs. In the case of the pornography importer, Dr Michael Carter of Canterbury University's Economics Department, the University's defence for him retaining his position was that he is a good teacher and researcher, i.e. academically competent. (He was also popular with his students.)

Dr Buchanan is also academically competent and popular with his students (or at least with those who are keen to succeed at their studies, which is as it should be). Rudeness to a student is not a criminal offence, and on the scale of giving moral offence I would put it far lower than importing child pornography.

Therefore his dismissal is clearly political and totally unjustified. It is political in two ways. Firstly because NZ universities now structure their courses and research and recruit their students on the basis of money, not academic merit. Taking fees from foreign students who are academically incapable is one example of this; disestablishing courses and centres with real value (such as Islamic Studies at Canterbury University and the Latin American Centre at Auckland) in favour of business training and other intellectually bankrupt activities, which we have seen happen NZ universities in recent years, is the other side of this dumbing-down and selling-out coin.

The second sense in which the dismissal is politically motivated is that Dr Buchanan has been telling truth about what is happening to NZ universities which are chasing dollars not knowledge, and he has also been telling the truth about what is going on in world affairs. This honesty is not acceptable to his superiors in the University hierarchy, within Political Studies and beyond, who prefer to keep propping up rotten systems and apologising for them. (This is not the first time the University of Auckland has behaved badly towards a competent academic who told the truth rather than repeating corporate propaganda, as you may read on Dr Peter Wells' webpage with regard to his submission to the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification.)

Dr Buchanan has apologised to the student for giving offence. The University should have given him a strong warning not to behave like this again, and the matter should have ended there. That it did not shows that something is deeply rotten in the groves of NZ academe.

DF

I support the view that the summary dismissal of Dr. Buchanan is not warranted. One might argue about his intemperate and irreverent behaviour as exhibited in his email. If what is reported here was all the evidence there was, then Auckland University is doing it's own academic and intellectual integrity serious harm. Is Auckland University still a university or just another degree mill? Or is there something else that we don't know about this case?

Dr. Steve Hoadley, mentioned in Craccum, was my lecturer. I enjoyed his lectures.

Babak

Dr. Buchanan let me kindly to audit one of his valuable graduate courses last year.

Like others, I can simply testify of his high competence and professionalism.

One day, in a midst of a having a horrible day (a sequence of bad events, including a physical illness), I wrote an angry rant and intemperate email, and as a recipient, Dr. Buchanan was very understanding, compassionate and forgiving.

We all can have a bad day or simply make a bad mistake - can’t we?

Tony Wilson - BA (Hons) MA (Hons) in Political Studies

I am extremely disappointed to hear of the dismissal of Paul Buchanan from The University of Auckland.

I have known Paul since 1999 when I was an undergraduate in his classes, and have since known him as a graduate student in the Department of Political Studies. Paul is nothing less than a brilliant presenter of his material, at ease in both the lecture theatre and often on radio and television. He is one of those rare lecturers who is able to communicate ideas and a range of technical information to a general audience effortlessly.

Paul tells it how it is - he always has, and he always will. He is also an inspiring, dedicated lecturer who challenges students and gets the best results from them. The fact that so many students - both undergraduate and postgraduate - have already written in is a testament to how well he is regarded by students. Having worked with him as a tutor, I know that he is committed to high academic standards and he is generous with his time with students and colleagues. While he comes across sometimes as strict, he is a caring individual who has often taken time out to help students and colleagues with projects or to provide advice. I consider him a mentor and a good friend.

I ask the University to reinstate a gifted teacher and an acknowledged expert in his field.

NEGATIVE FEEDBACK:

Afifa Chida - 2nd year Bachelor of Graphic Design

Having read the e-mail which this man sent the girl, I am shocked and amazed that so many Kiwi/New Zealanders are citing support for him. This country is known for it's intolerance to racial or prejudicial discrimination, and for that Mr. Buchanan was guilty.

Please do let me know if you would like a copy of the e-mail, I have it sitting in my inbox at this very moment.

The University may look like it is putting profits above this man, but to me it is that they realise that such a person should not and will not teach on their staff.

Although he may be an excellent tutor, he has shown complete and utter disregard to the student involved.

If you had lost your father, and were sick, how would you appeal to the University, I wonder. Ask Paul Buchanan what he said to the girl. Ask him whether he showed any concern whatsoever. Ask him whether he stated that even if she had shown an obituary of her late father he would not have believed her.

What kind of a tutor, lecturer, or basic human nature is that?

He may be exceptional in the teaching zone. But when it comes to being a person, when it comes to having any form of human empathy? I beg to differ.

He deserves to be treated the way he has been. In fact he should never be able to teach again.

Charlie Gao - BA(Hons) Political Studies student

As a current BA(Hons) Political Studies student at the University of Auckland, I am dismayed at the lack of balance displayed in this Scoop article and its subsequent comments. It is not in dispute that Paul is an excellent lecturer and was an asset to the university. However, this does not address the main issue at hand: the email that was sent to the student. It does not appear that the students who have written in support of Paul have actually read the email in question. I have. At best, the words that Paul used were grossly rude, disparaging and inappropriate. At worst, one part of the email was racist and culturally insensitive. Although I believe that the punishment does not fit the crime in this instance, I do strongly believe that there is no place for such rude and insensitive discourse in a high level educational institution such as the University of Auckland.

I also reject the baseless accusations being thrown around that links the student with foreign money from the United Arab Emirates. It is disappointing that highly educated political studies graduates would base arguments on unsubstantiated evidence and comment on the content of an email that they have not even read. I am not writing this in order to attack anyone, least of all Paul. But I felt it my duty to present a side of this story that wasn't being told.

Sahar - Current Political Studies (Hons) Student

As a current political studies (hons) student at the University of Auckland, i'm deeply disappointed at how unbalanced the article on Buchanan was. The comments that followed merely reinforced this. The various students who have come to Buchanan's defence clearly have not read the email, and are jumping to silly accusations and assumptions which have no grounding.

I'm very surprised your journalist did not bother to shed some light on the other side of the story. That's what journalism is meant to be about: A balanced account to provide the necessary information for readers/viewers in order for them to make their own judgement.

Buchanan is indeed a good lecturer because he's passionate about what he teaches and is engaging. However, having read the email, I am not surprised that the university has taken it seriously.It was racist, insulting, and unprofessional. The student asked for an extension because the student's father had died, and Buchanan's reaction- considering the circumstances- was completely irrational and insensitive. No professional responds in such a manner.

Ye Miao – BA (Hons)

As a BA(hons) student in the University of Auckland, I am appalled and disappointed at the imbalances within this article, and frankly disgusted with some of the comments posted here. Not only is the article based on no evidentiary claims whatsoever, being obvious that the author has made no attempt to obtain the email in question or to ask the student for her side of the story, but furthermore, many of the comments in defence of Paul Buchanan are defamatory toward the student.

Frankly, for highly educated students, many have not even attempted to make an argument based upon the email, nor does it seem like many even care about its contents. Instead, attacks ranged from claims of ‘educational terrorism’ to grossly unjust characterisations and stereotyping of the student’s character. Simply put, this is unacceptable.

The author of this article needs to obtain the email which Paul Buchanan wrote to the student, in reply to her request for an extension, before making his misrepresented statements masking as investigative journalism. The email, which should be the central issue in the article, is instead bypassed through in one paragraph, stating only that Paul had bluntly told the student of her performance and rejected her request for an extension.

It fails to mention, as Afifa Chida has already pointed out, the actual content of the email, the racial insinuations made by Paul Buchanan within the email and the actual request which the student had submitted. I wonder if, in both the article and many of the comments posted below which moves to dismiss the claims of the student dogmatically and attack her personally, whether they had even bothered to consider the position of this student and her circumstances of having lost her father. Not believing in a request for an extension does not given anyone the right, whatever authority this person may hold, to produce an email of both personal and racial insensitivity. Furthermore, it does not give the author of this article any right to misrepresent the issue at hand (which should be the contents of the email) or to misrepresent the position of the student and make outrageous claims which have no foundation.

I would like to know where Scoop obtained the information that the ‘family’s networks’ had put political pressure on the university for it to act upon the complaint. Not only does this suggest that the only reason that the university chose to act was because of political pressures (in which case all students should fear for the fact that we are essentially without rights), but it is also engaging in defamatory claims against the student and her family, if this is unsubstantiated and unproven. If this is the case, and such sensitive information is either misrepresented or reported merely of hearsay, then it should be reported to the Press Council as neglecting the responsibilities of the journalist and wilfully attacking the people in question. In fact, the article is unbalanced to such an extent, in neglecting the injuries caused to the student, that it shows neither integrity nor ethics in its approach.

The randomly thrown comment at the end of the article to emphasize the negative performance of the student is neither placed in a context of her bereavement, nor does it move toward discrediting the fact that the email was offensive and appalling, especially coming from a person of authority. In this regard, I demand an apology from the author of this article to the student and her family, for the undoubted stresses which this must have caused, and for the utter negligence towards reporting her side of the story.

It is also disappointing that students of the university which have posted comments here have shown utterly no solidarity toward a fellow student, but have instead incriminated and attacked both the student and her family.

Almost all of the present and past students have sidestepped or completely ignored the issue at hand, the content of the email, and instead resort to a positive profiling of Paul Buchanan and a negative profiling of the student. This is utterly shameful for people who obviously have no idea of the situation, no knowledge of the email and furthermore, have not endeavoured to seek the other side of the story. And most of us are Arts Students, taught to base claims not on dogma but on evidence!

I do not and cannot dispute the claims that Paul Buchanan is indeed a very good lecturer, as I have heard many positive reviews about him during my time at university. But we cannot confuse this with the actual issue of the contents of an email he sent to the student in his professional capacity.

Partly due to the negligence of the article itself, many of the commentators here have purely assumed the contents of the email to be merely a professional criticism on the student’s academic performance and then proceeded to dismiss it outright. I am especially disheartened by the comments of ‘educational terrorism’ and the portrayal of a vengeful student behind the dismissal of a benevolent lecturer.

There was in fact support for her to lay the complaint against Paul Buchanan, and furthermore, once the complaint had been submitted, it was entirely up to the jurisdiction of the university to decide the consequences and punishments. This is no fault of the student, who merely complained because of an offensive email. Furthermore, having the knowledge of the content of Paul Buchanan’s reply, I certainly would also have supported and encouraged such a complaint at that time. The fact that he is a good lecturer does not override the fact that the email was offensive, and that the complaint was legitimate.

I am thereby appalled by those of you who have simply chosen to malignantly attack and negatively portray the student, in what must be a very difficult time for her. What happened to showing solidarity for your fellow students? It doesn’t matter if they are a national student or an international student, they deserve rights and they deserve to be treated with integrity and dignity.

I am not a supporter of the increasing commercialization of the university, and like many of you, I have been appalled recently at the reduction of all process, staff and students to exchangeable capital (PBRF being a noted example). Yet in this case, I can only assume that you are laying such a charge at the student because she is an international student. This is unacceptable.

Let the issues speak for themselves and not dilute it with prejudice towards students from overseas, many of whom live in extremely difficult situations and attempt to achieve to their highest levels. Instead of purely commenting on the proficiency of Paul Buchanan as a lecturer (which I do not dispute), or attacking the student in question personally, this needs to be an issue seen in the light of the actual email.

I for one, support the student in her lodging of the complaint, and feel for the student as a victim of another in a position of authority. I reserve my judgement on the actual punishment dealt out by the university, which occurred through their judiciary process.

Simply put, she laid a complaint against a lecturer which had sent her both a racially offensive and personally insensitive email in a professional capacity; the email was unprofessional and unacceptable from a lecturer in a position of authority within the university setting. The complaint was thereby legitimate. The punishment was dealt out by the university autonomously in light of the evidence.

The student herself had no control over the judicial process of the university. She does not deserved to be personally attacked and portrayed in this manner, either by the comments posted her, or even worse, by the article and journalist himself.

Sidra Khan

Had it been you who had just lost their father been made to feel you were unworthy, a liar, a disappointment and a failure, would you then be in favour of this man having any affect on your education, on your intellect and on your future? Would you want this man to be around people in the form of a guide? a leader? someone one would generally turn to? And yet again here you are shoving details such as grades to further humiliate the girl. Its a breach of privacy, no student wants there grades available to everyone.

How is it, that having come out of such a prestigious university, many of you having studied politics of all things be so lacking in cultural awareness? How can you be so culturally disrespectful? Had it not been a student from the United Arab Emirates would you have reacted this way? Would you have been so insensitive? What actions would you have taken then? View this from the ethnic lens and acknowledge that Paul Buchanan has acted most unacceptably, and decide whether these are the kind of tutors you want in our country.

Its saddening to see Scoop has not put up equal representation to both sides of the story and taken further stance by differentiating between negative and positive feedback-what is that?

The University of Auckland is a highly recognised institution-does it really seem to you they would fire someone over one email? I wouldn't put it past Paul Buchanan to have acted this way in other occasions.

If you can lose your temper once and send an "angry rant email" then you can do it again. Continue respecting the man for his teaching abilities, just decide whether those abilities are worth it if he is doing more harm to the students then good in the end. No one has that right. Teaching is an authority that must not be abused.

SCOOP EDITOR'S NOTE: Scoop rejects the assertion that it has not provided access to information and the stated positions of both sides of this issue. Scoop sought and published a response from the University of Auckland, and has published all letters and feedback on the Paul Buchanan dismissal, irrespective of the position taken by the writer. The sectioning of respondents demarcating those in support of Paul Buchanan and those who are against his reinstatement is designed to ensure readers can easily compare the arguments presented from both sides of this polarised situation, and is not a comment on the position conveyed by those who are critical of Paul Buchanan's conduct.

Scoop also would welcome a response from the student who was the recipient of the Buchanan email and will welcome her account.

Scoop has not published the email in question due to Scoop requiring the consent of both Paul Buchanan and the student. However, due to the public interest being high in this case, Scoop has published bFM audio where the email was read out by the presenter Kim Choe, (See Scoop's FULL COVERAGE item) and has also published a link to a pdf displaying the Cracum article, within which the email is displayed.

Again, should any Scoop reader wish to provide us with feedback or information on this issue, you can do so by Clicking here

© Scoop Media

Scoop

Scoop Independent News

Scoop is NZ's largest independent news source; respected widely in media, political, business and academic circles for being the place on the internet for publishing "what was really said", and for the quality of its analysis of issues.

Contact Scoop

• Editorial - editor@scoop.co.nz
• Twitter - @ScoopNZ
• Facebook
• YouTube
• Services - services@scoop.co.nz
• Phone - 04 910 1844