Student Employment Program Handbook For Supervisors And: Fill & Download for Free

That it’s not worth it it. Years of underpaid menial piddling tasks under faked supervision of a “advisor” (who actually provides helpful info—if you are lucky, not in my case). What you “learn” in the required, paid credits will not be used by your employer. The program is a way to funnel tuition dollars to support a select tenured few. I definitely wasted my time, efforts, and money to go for what I thought was a degree worthy of….something. Turns out PhD just stands for B*llshit Piled Higher and Deeper .*This happened at Fordham University (NYC) and Wright State University(OH)1. Proposal PoachingI wrote a proposal for an experiment that I showed my advisor (Kevin Bennett - WSU) who verbally dismissed it as not usable for the intent of my required thesis. He made me write new ones subsequently after. After the initial rejection, I showed up unexpectedly at an local conference. My advisor and a fellow grad student (Jerred Holt) were there. (At one point, Bennett had suggested that I "hook up" with this grad student and suggested "that I share a bed" with this student when i complained about rent costs--really inappropriate and unprofessional, especially given that there was never any interest). They saw me in the audience and were visibly upset. At the time, I didn't know what was going on, so I smiled politely and waited to hear the conference proceedings. My advisor then proceeded to read out my proposal verbatim and claim the work as his own. I was shocked at this slimy douchebag behavior but said nothing. After the event, the advisor acted like nothing happened and encouraged me to write more proposals, which I assume he passed off as his own in other events.(My main issue was that this guy didn't even have a lab but consistently lied to current and incoming grad students. That, and he stole work and funding from his own "students").2. Bait and switch tactics about research opportunities in adivser's lab (there are none).This guy gets compensation and credit for "PI" status but provides no assistance whatsoever. I am not the only grad student who was offered a contract for a specific price and then told that funding didnt go through and "everyone had to make do with less." The reality is that Bennett asked for funding for $x from an agency telling them he would pay his advisees that amt. Then he tells the advisee that he will pay them $y (after they agreed to work for him for $x). The advisor then pockets the remainder and takes a vacation during the time he is paid to help the advisee.3.Slander /spreading gossip about the grad student so they are socially manipulated.Overheard from WSU undergrads (Danyell Lewis & Kevin Schmidt): The grad student had failed all students they were TA'ing for and was doing poorly In school... the advisor (Bennett) & school (WSU) was doing the student a favor by keeping them on. The reality is that the advisor is stealing all the grad student's work & blamed the student for backdoor grade faking (which the grad student was aware of the whole time, btw).4. Cyber-stalking and using hacked social media account information against themThe grad student's Facebook account was hacked several yrs ago unknown to the grad student. Due to the nature of the hack (ex. Where it appeared the grad student publicly supported polygamy groups and various sexual behaviors), ppl think the student is a promiscious pro- polygamist. The whole time the student is sexually harassed and made to feel uncomfortable Faked grading and mistreatment by WSU and cohort ensue as a result of this horrible misunderstanding. During this time, a faculty member (Deborah Steele-Johnson - WSU) even has the nerve to blame the student for "impression management."5. Failing students without reason (MS program) and forcing them to pay per credit to graduate--the money obviously goes back into the dept.Andrew Rasmussen (Fordham) tells the grad student to take a class in another dept (Political Science) as part of the program requirement. The Poli Sci prof (Monika McDermott) doesn't follow her own syllaus and the graded homework is contrary to the materials the prof tells the students to use. The student is asked to write on an inflammatory topic for the final. Unbeknownst to the student, no one else assigned this topic. McDermott fails the student without reason and refuses to reconsider. During the grade appeal, the student meets with the wrong faculty--meaning the ppl outlined in the school's official handbook are not present. Violation #1. During the grade dispute meeting, Rasmussen & Eva Badowska clearly have no clue what is going on but try make up shit in the meeting. Violation #2. The student provides evidence why there should be a grade appeal but Rasmussen & Badowska pretend it is irrelevant. Violation #3. During the dispute, the student reads over Badowska's shoulder & sees that McDermott wrote poor performance evaluations about the student --even making up things about the what the student said and did during the class. Violation #4.6. School email account got hacked and damaging emails sent from student's account.Some examples:WSU: During Psych 105 lab sections, the students ask the graduate student why they received hateful emails from the graduate student's account. Confused, the graduate student asks the undergrads to produce the hateful emails but they cannot be produced. (Obviously because the grad student never sent anything---Prime examples of man-in-the-middle attacks and IP spoofing).Fordham: Graduate student's emailIs hijacked and damaging emails sent from their account.7. Falsifying reasons to remove RA-TA ship from the graduate studentWSU: Graduate student is thrown on probation and threatened dismissal from the program for poor performance for TA duties, when in reality, the grad student did everything they were told to do in addition to passing all students in their class--including students who weren't event enrolled in the school. Completely made up grading force the student on probation. One professor (Valerie Shalin - WSU) even claims the student has a learning disability because they listed a product of 2 positive integers as a negative value. Her evaluations are all fake.Fordham: The graduate student is accused of not completing (Donna Heald) supervisor's orders, when there is evidence that the supervisor was communicating with and emailing the wrong student the entire time. During that time, the student repeatedly asks the supervisor in person if anything else needs to be done and is assured otherwise. However, after the grad student is removed from the post for supposedly poor performance, there is online evidence that the supervisor was making up stuff about the student & publicly complaining to others about this supposed lack of response (through the supervisor's sent emails).8. No lab hours/advising (as there is no real lab)WSU: No lab, no structure, no advising, no nothing. When inquiring about subject material, the grad student is referred back and forth--"Go ask your advisor" & "Go ask your teacher", but since there is no real chances they ever physically meet, very little in-person communication happens. When they do meet, the grad student is lied to about direction (ex. "take this class"--which delays your graduation date by over a year). How convenient that the only remaining jobs available for students who are misadvised and fall behind like his are menial jobs below the minimum wage. Both programs are filled with students who should have graduated years ago.9. Sexual harassment / toxic work environmentWSU:James Christensen -Wright Patterson Air Force Base -commenting to a male colleague that he should get a blowjob for the trouble of obtaining fMRI equipment that the graduate student had written a proposal for. This cross-eyed creeper was stupid enough to believe Facebook rumors. Married, with kids, too--disgusting.Gary Burns - WSU: Random fake grading in order to build out his bs research on priming & motivation.10. Extreme workload (compared to rest of cohort)Wsu: Having close to 120 undergrads but still being paid the same as those with 30 undergrads to manage. (Wait, make that "paid less" since I was paid less than other TAs to begin with).11. Faculty not following own grading rubric / grade appeal process not followed as outlined in official graduate school handbookSee Fordham & WSU grading comments12. Stealing student work and passing it off as you own, then acting like you are doing the student a favor by "keeping them as 'advisees' in the non-existent lab"See WSU13. Back door grade faking: Final grades being changed after the graduate student submits them to the school so I t looks the the graduate student TA failed students (incl. a pregnant woman) and had to be "fired" due to incompetence when that actually was never the case & the TA never failed anyone.See WSU comment.14. Lying to the graduate student about the appropriate classes to take in order graduate on time so the student is left back and no funding opportunities are available.See Bennett - WSU comment.15. Coercion & Being part of experiments (as academia careers are based) where specific levels of the IV are manipulated so publishable research can be obtained:Some topics include: Factors Influencing Burnout, Effect of lack of social support on Depression, Ambiguity in teaching styles, Factors that Influence Motivation, etc.WSU: How convenient that these are published after the student decides to leave. I mean, all research is faked, but the extent to which all this shit was done just to justify and generate funding is just too f*cking ridiculous. The results were not worth the relationship lost.16. Graduate work assignment grades being completely faked and arbitrary so the student is forced onto probation due to low gpa.See Fordham & WSU comments17. Kevin Eschleman (WSU/SJSU) arranging to have the student's car towed the night they decide to leave after being fed up with such bullshit-- an obnoxious & immature $500 con-artist prank. Why this guy is so obsessed, I have no clue--what a creeper.18. Gene Alarcon (WSU/WP-AFRL) leaving harassing phone calls on graduate student's voicemail pretending to be a member of a federal bank in order to learn of the recipient's address. This is illegal and constitutes stalking and harassment. This guy should be arrested.19. Scott Deming (WP-AFRL/CU) stalking the graduate student even after they leave WSU and threatening the student with violence. This malingering liar needs to get his bullshit stories straight.Begin forwarded message:Subject: Hey KeevoYour vet integrator friend is not being compliant and reports back fake information. His observations aren't true. He's not responsive in answering my questions --better to ask who clearly had vested research interests in this whole debacle.The next time you have someone sign up to "babysit" a "research subject", make sure they don't have a criminal background. It makes the PIs look bad.This enlisted has failed. I'm sure there's enough funding in your research grants to send better "babysitters" my way. Have them be more entertaining & less cheap.

Rankings are determined by numerous factors including: perceived value, quality of education, employment opportunities, tuition, student satisfaction, employee satisfaction, graduation rate, turnover, etc.In my experience as a graduate student, I learned that Fordham was an overpriced private school piece of crap. Like a naive consumer, I bought into the mktg hype.The program content itself was nothing special and frankly can be obtained anywhere and learned for less. I distinctly remember trying to schedule office hours multiple times with one prof who was repeatedly late (Tiffany Yip. While I would be waiting outside her office door, I would hear her mocking me to the rest of her advisees who she was meeting with earlier.One assumes that by going to a supposedly better school, you will have access to better opportunities, but if you’re selected to be that scapegoat like I was, then all you’re going to do is pay a lot for deliberately incompetent faculty and sh*tty attitude. Your tuition just goes to funding fancy dept offices and campus facilities that you’ll rarely get to use.When I attended, I produced work that was individually selected for presentation by other recognized professional organizations—that are more highly ranked than the school/program. yet, despite this, was forced onto academic probation due to faked grading and claims of poor academic performance.See additional details below:1). Failing students without reason (Fordham-MS program) and forcing them to pay per credit to graduate--the money obviously goes back into the Psych dept.Andrew Rasmussen (Fordham) tells me to take a class in another dept (Political Science) as part of the program requirement. The Poli Sci prof (Monika McDermott) doesn't follow her own syllaus and the graded homework is contrary to the materials the prof tells the students to use. For the final, I was requested to write an inflammatory topic for the final--free access gun control and legalizing prostitution--things of that nature. Unbeknownst to me, one else was assigned this topic. After submitting the final, McDermott fails me without reason and refuses to reconsider. During the grade appeal, I continuously met with the wrong faculty--meaning the ppl outlined in the school's official handbook are not present. Violation #1. During the grade dispute meeting, Rasmussen & Eva Badowska clearly have no clue what is going on but try make up shit in the meeting. Violation #2. I provided multiple evidence as to why there should be a grade appeal but Rasmussen & Badowska pretend it is irrelevant. Violation #3. During the dispute, I read over Badowska's shoulder & sees that McDermott wrote poor performance evaluations about me--even making up things about the what I said and did during the class. Absolutely outrageous and disgusting. Badowska & Rasmussen were shocked that I could read that quickly and see all this informaiton. Badowska even covered her screen in an attempt to hide this info and she & Rasmussed acted like nothing had happened. Violation #4.2). Fordham: Graduate student's email is hijacked and damaging emails sent from their account.3). Fordham: I was accused of not completing (Donna Heald) supervisor's orders, when there is evidence that Heald was communicating with and emailing the wrong student the entire time (I saw in her inbox and deleted emails that she kept emailing the incorrectly named student with the wrong email). During the time I worked with her in person, I repeatedly asked Heald if anything else needed to be done and was assured otherwise. However, after my term ended and I was told I would not be considered for any other work-opps at Fordham (and before Heald scuttled off--cockroach-like-to the College of Sweet Briar Rose where she wouldn't be able to defend her actions in person), I found that she had spoken poorly about my perfomance and recommended that I not be considered for term renewal. Despite having ZERO evidence of this.4). Fordham: Faculty not following own grading rubric / grade appeal process not followed as outlined in official graduate school handbook

Mostly personality and behavioral conflicts. Unfortunately, some people are just incompetent lazy a**-holes and shouldn’t be in positions of advising.At Wright State, my main ‘advisor’ (Bennett) happened to be a greasy good ol’ boy. Pulled bait & switch tactics for employment funding on incoming students so they would be strapped for cash coming in and desperate for any handout. He deliberately misadvised on coursework that impacted student progress. He tried to live vicariously through his male students and women who remained in his lab did not do well. Had mud-mongering sparrows (Gene Alarcon-WSU/WPARL) report incorrect info to him and was too biased to see otherwise.At Fordham, the ‘director’ of the program (Rasmussen) had zero experience and thought it was smarter to promote his career by supporting the failing of student so the tuition would be funneled back into the dept.Or more specifically, this:*This happened at Wright State University (Fairborn, OH: PhD in Psychology - Left) & Fordham University (New York, NY: MS in Psychology - Completed)1. Proposal PoachingI wrote a proposal for an experiment that I showed my advisor (Kevin Bennett - WSU) who verbally dismissed it as not usable for the intent of my required thesis. He made me write new ones subsequently after. After the initial rejection, I showed up unexpectedly at an local conference. My advisor and a fellow grad student (Jerred Holt) were there. (At one point, Bennett had suggested that I "hook up" with this grad student and suggested "that I share a bed" with this student when i complained about rent costs--really inappropriate and unprofessional, especially given that there was never any interest). They saw me in the audience and were visibly upset. At the time, I didn't know what was going on, so I smiled politely and waited to hear the conference proceedings. My advisor then proceeded to read out my proposal verbatim and claim the work as his own. I was shocked at this slimy douchebag behavior but said nothing. After the event, the advisor acted like nothing happened and encouraged me to write more proposals, which I assume he passed off as his own in other events.(My main issue was that this guy didn't even have a lab but consistently lied to current and incoming grad students. That, and he stole work and funding from his own "students").2. Bait and switch tactics about research opportunities in adivser's lab (there are none).This guy gets compensation and credit for "PI" status but provides no assistance whatsoever. I am not the only grad student who was offered a contract for a specific price and then told that funding didnt go through and "everyone had to make do with less." The reality is that Bennett asked for funding for $x from an agency telling them he would pay his advisees that amt. Then he tells the advisee that he will pay them $y (after they agreed to work for him for $x). The advisor then pockets the remainder and takes a vacation during the time he is paid to help the advisee.3.Slander /spreading gossip about the grad student so they are socially manipulated.Overheard from WSU undergrads (Danyell Lewis & Kevin Schmidt): The grad student had failed all students they were TA'ing for and was doing poorly In school... the advisor (Bennett) & school (WSU) was doing the student a favor by keeping them on. The reality is that the advisor is stealing all the grad student's work & blamed the student for backdoor grade faking (which the grad student was aware of the whole time, btw).4. Cyber-stalking and using hacked social media account information against themThe grad student's Facebook account was hacked several yrs ago unknown to the grad student. Due to the nature of the hack (ex. Where it appeared the grad student publicly supported polygamy groups and various sexual behaviors), ppl think the student is a promiscious pro- polygamist. The whole time the student is sexually harassed and made to feel uncomfortable Faked grading and mistreatment by WSU and cohort ensue as a result of this horrible misunderstanding. During this time, a faculty member (Deborah Steele-Johnson - WSU) even has the nerve to blame the student for "impression management."5. Failing students without reason (MS program) and forcing them to pay per credit to graduate--the money obviously goes back into the dept.Andrew Rasmussen (Fordham) tells the grad student to take a class in another dept (Political Science) as part of the program requirement. The Poli Sci prof (Monika McDermott) doesn't follow her own syllaus and the graded homework is contrary to the materials the prof tells the students to use. The student is asked to write on an inflammatory topic for the final. Unbeknownst to the student, no one else assigned this topic. McDermott fails the student without reason and refuses to reconsider. During the grade appeal, the student meets with the wrong faculty--meaning the ppl outlined in the school's official handbook are not present. Violation #1. During the grade dispute meeting, Rasmussen & Eva Badowska clearly have no clue what is going on but try make up shit in the meeting. Violation #2. The student provides evidence why there should be a grade appeal but Rasmussen & Badowska pretend it is irrelevant. Violation #3. During the dispute, the student reads over Badowska's shoulder & sees that McDermott wrote poor performance evaluations about the student --even making up things about the what the student said and did during the class. Violation #4.6. School email account got hacked and damaging emails sent from student's account.Some examples:WSU: During Psych 105 lab sections, the students ask the graduate student why they received hateful emails from the graduate student's account. Confused, the graduate student asks the undergrads to produce the hateful emails but they cannot be produced. (Obviously because the grad student never sent anything---Prime examples of man-in-the-middle attacks and IP spoofing).Fordham: Graduate student's emailIs hijacked and damaging emails sent from their account.7. Falsifying reasons to remove RA-TA ship from the graduate studentWSU: Graduate student is thrown on probation and threatened dismissal from the program for poor performance for TA duties, when in reality, the grad student did everything they were told to do in addition to passing all students in their class--including students who weren't event enrolled in the school. Completely made up grading force the student on probation. One professor (Valerie Shalin - WSU) even claims the student has a learning disability because they listed a product of 2 positive integers as a negative value. Her evaluations are all fake.Fordham: The graduate student is accused of not completing (Donna Heald) supervisor's orders, when there is evidence that the supervisor was communicating with and emailing the wrong student the entire time. During that time, the student repeatedly asks the supervisor in person if anything else needs to be done and is assured otherwise. However, after the grad student is removed from the post for supposedly poor performance, there is online evidence that the supervisor was making up stuff about the student & publicly complaining to others about this supposed lack of response (through the supervisor's sent emails).8. No lab hours/advising (as there is no real lab)WSU: No lab, no structure, no advising, no nothing. When inquiring about subject material, the grad student is referred back and forth--"Go ask your advisor" & "Go ask your teacher", but since there is no real chances they ever physically meet, very little in-person communication happens. When they do meet, the grad student is lied to about direction (ex. "take this class"--which delays your graduation date by over a year). How convenient that the only remaining jobs available for students who are misadvised and fall behind like his are menial jobs below the minimum wage. Both programs are filled with students who should have graduated years ago.9. Sexual harassment / toxic work environmentWSU:James Christensen -Wright Patterson Air Force Base -commenting to a male colleague that he should get a blowjob for the trouble of obtaining fMRI equipment that the graduate student had written a proposal for. This cross-eyed creeper was stupid enough to believe Facebook rumors. Married, with kids, too--disgusting.Gary Burns - WSU: Random fake grading in order to build out his bs research on priming & motivation.10. Extreme workload (compared to rest of cohort)Wsu: Having close to 120 undergrads but still being paid the same as those with 30 undergrads to manage. (Wait, make that "paid less" since I was paid less than other TAs to begin with).11. Faculty not following own grading rubric / grade appeal process not followed as outlined in official graduate school handbookSee Fordham & WSU grading comments12. Stealing student work and passing it off as you own, then acting like you are doing the student a favor by "keeping them as 'advisees' in the non-existent lab"See WSU13. Back door grade faking: Final grades being changed after the graduate student submits them to the school so I t looks the the graduate student TA failed students (incl. a pregnant woman) and had to be "fired" due to incompetence when that actually was never the case & the TA never failed anyone.See WSU comment.14. Lying to the graduate student about the appropriate classes to take in order graduate on time so the student is left back and no funding opportunities are available.See Bennett - WSU comment.15. Coercion & Being part of experiments (as academia careers are based) where specific levels of the IV are manipulated so publishable research can be obtained:Some topics include: Factors Influencing Burnout, Effect of lack of social support on Depression, Ambiguity in teaching styles, Factors that Influence Motivation, etc.WSU: How convenient that these are published after the student decides to leave. I mean, all research is faked, but the extent to which all this shit was done just to justify and generate funding is just too f*cking ridiculous. The results were not worth the relationship lost.16. Graduate work assignment grades being completely faked and arbitrary so the student is forced onto probation due to low gpa.See Fordham & WSU comments17. Kevin Eschleman (WSU/SJSU) arranging to have the student's car towed the night they decide to leave after being fed up with such bullshit-- an obnoxious & immature $500 con-artist prank. Why this guy is so obsessed, I have no clue--what a creeper.18. Gene Alarcon (WSU/WP-AFRL) leaving harassing phone calls on graduate student's voicemail pretending to be a member of a federal bank in order to learn of the recipient's address. This is illegal and constitutes stalking and harassment. This guy should be arrested.19. Scott Deming (WP-AFRL/CU) stalking the graduate student even after they leave WSU and threatening the student with violence. This malingering liar needs to get his bullshit stories straight.Begin forwarded message:Subject: Hey KeevoYour vet integrator friend is not being compliant and reports back fake information. His observations aren't true. He's not responsive in answering my questions --better to ask who clearly had vested research interests in this whole debacle.The next time you have someone sign up to "babysit" a "research subject", make sure they don't have a criminal background. It makes the PIs look bad.This enlisted has failed. I'm sure there's enough funding in your research grants to send better "babysitters" my way. Have them be more entertaining & less cheap.