Adjunct hustles students for $60k

[Katrina Gulliver]

She made all 600 students in her class pay $100 to use her website.
https://www.mlive.com/news/2023/05/an-msu-professor-made-students-pay-99-each-to-sign-up-for-her-activist-website-now-theyre-suing.html

[marshwiggle]

She made all 600 students in her class pay $100 to use her website.
https://www.mlive.com/news/2023/05/an-msu-professor-made-students-pay-99-each-to-sign-up-for-her-activist-website-now-theyre-suing.html

I can't imagine that doesn' t directly violate some University policy (or several). Her sense of entitlement is rich.

[lightning]

I've never taught a class with this many students, but I do have colleagues on campus who have as many as 400+ students in one section of an undergraduate required general education course.

I always ruminated on the idea that those professors could require use of their own self-published textbooks at $100 each. (And they are allowed to do that.) Nice perks, if you can get away with it.

[marshwiggle]

I've never taught a class with this many students, but I do have colleagues on campus who have as many as 400+ students in one section of an undergraduate required general education course.

I always ruminated on the idea that those professors could require use of their own self-published textbooks at $100 each. (And they are allowed to do that.) Nice perks, if you can get away with it.

There was a discussion about this, either on the old fora, or on the RMP fora when they existed. Anyone remember that?

[research_prof]

So the fact that students paid to buy the professor's own material is ok, but the fact that the money will support the professor's "liberal activism" is not ok?

[Katrina Gulliver]

I always ruminated on the idea that those professors could require use of their own self-published textbooks at $100 each. (And they are allowed to do that.) Nice perks, if you can get away with it.

I actually had a prof made us buy his book. From him, he had a box in his office. But it was more like $15.

[Katrina Gulliver]

[accidental post]

[Caracal]

She made all 600 students in her class pay $100 to use her website.
https://www.mlive.com/news/2023/05/an-msu-professor-made-students-pay-99-each-to-sign-up-for-her-activist-website-now-theyre-suing.html

I could be wrong, but the legal basis of the lawsuit seems a bit sketchy. These students got their money back, so that's not what the basis of the suit is. They are trying to sue on the grounds that they have been forced to support speech they don't agree with. The problem is that the proceeds from any required text or product could go to causes students don't agree with.

I imagine what's going to happen is that a court is going to rule that the students don't have any standing to sue since they got their money back from the school. The school could certainly bring a lawsuit trying to recoup the money they paid back to the students. They could even try to get a DA to bring criminal fraud charges against this person. I just don't see how the students can really claim any injury here. The argument about policies not being strong enough also seems odd. I'm at a state university and we have to sign a conflict of interest disclosure form every semester, I imagine MSU has something similar. Besides, if you want students to buy something there's a process for that. You can't just tell students they have to go to some site and pay them 100 dollars. What about people who get financial aid for course materials?

[Caracal]

I've never taught a class with this many students, but I do have colleagues on campus who have as many as 400+ students in one section of an undergraduate required general education course.

I always ruminated on the idea that those professors could require use of their own self-published textbooks at $100 each. (And they are allowed to do that.) Nice perks, if you can get away with it.

Can you get the bookstore to stock your self published book? I imagine that might raise some eyebrows. If the book was actually published by someone that would be easy enough, but you also would exactly be getting a financial windfall with the royalties.

[marshwiggle]

I've never taught a class with this many students, but I do have colleagues on campus who have as many as 400+ students in one section of an undergraduate required general education course.

I always ruminated on the idea that those professors could require use of their own self-published textbooks at $100 each. (And they are allowed to do that.) Nice perks, if you can get away with it.

Can you get the bookstore to stock your self published book? I imagine that might raise some eyebrows. If the book was actually published by someone that would be easy enough, but you also would exactly be getting a financial windfall with the royalties.

In the earlier discussion, (wherever it was), a professor forbade the bookstore buying used copies and reselling them so students always HAD to buy new. 

[Katrina Gulliver]

She made all 600 students in her class pay $100 to use her website.
https://www.mlive.com/news/2023/05/an-msu-professor-made-students-pay-99-each-to-sign-up-for-her-activist-website-now-theyre-suing.html

I could be wrong, but the legal basis of the lawsuit seems a bit sketchy. These students got their money back, so that's not what the basis of the suit is. They are trying to sue on the grounds that they have been forced to support speech they don't agree with. The problem is that the proceeds from any required text or product could go to causes students don't agree with.

I imagine what's going to happen is that a court is going to rule that the students don't have any standing to sue since they got their money back from the school. The school could certainly bring a lawsuit trying to recoup the money they paid back to the students. They could even try to get a DA to bring criminal fraud charges against this person. I just don't see how the students can really claim any injury here. The argument about policies not being strong enough also seems odd. I'm at a state university and we have to sign a conflict of interest disclosure form every semester, I imagine MSU has something similar. Besides, if you want students to buy something there's a process for that. You can't just tell students they have to go to some site and pay them 100 dollars. What about people who get financial aid for course materials?

You're probably right, in terms of tort law and the students' purported loss.

But it's amazing that MSU allowed this audacious grift in the first place.

[apl68]

She made all 600 students in her class pay $100 to use her website.
https://www.mlive.com/news/2023/05/an-msu-professor-made-students-pay-99-each-to-sign-up-for-her-activist-website-now-theyre-suing.html

I could be wrong, but the legal basis of the lawsuit seems a bit sketchy. These students got their money back, so that's not what the basis of the suit is. They are trying to sue on the grounds that they have been forced to support speech they don't agree with. The problem is that the proceeds from any required text or product could go to causes students don't agree with.

I imagine what's going to happen is that a court is going to rule that the students don't have any standing to sue since they got their money back from the school. The school could certainly bring a lawsuit trying to recoup the money they paid back to the students. They could even try to get a DA to bring criminal fraud charges against this person. I just don't see how the students can really claim any injury here. The argument about policies not being strong enough also seems odd. I'm at a state university and we have to sign a conflict of interest disclosure form every semester, I imagine MSU has something similar. Besides, if you want students to buy something there's a process for that. You can't just tell students they have to go to some site and pay them 100 dollars. What about people who get financial aid for course materials?

Sounds reasonable enough.  The university has learned an expensive enough lesson as it is, and I suspect other schools will be reluctant to hire this loose cannon in the future.

I do understand the students' wish to force the instructor to refund them.  I'd be hugely annoyed at the thought of my fees extracted from me under false pretenses going to support causes like this too.  But I'd rather let it go and make sure it didn't happen again than sue somebody over it.

[Caracal]

She made all 600 students in her class pay $100 to use her website.
https://www.mlive.com/news/2023/05/an-msu-professor-made-students-pay-99-each-to-sign-up-for-her-activist-website-now-theyre-suing.html

I could be wrong, but the legal basis of the lawsuit seems a bit sketchy. These students got their money back, so that's not what the basis of the suit is. They are trying to sue on the grounds that they have been forced to support speech they don't agree with. The problem is that the proceeds from any required text or product could go to causes students don't agree with.

I imagine what's going to happen is that a court is going to rule that the students don't have any standing to sue since they got their money back from the school. The school could certainly bring a lawsuit trying to recoup the money they paid back to the students. They could even try to get a DA to bring criminal fraud charges against this person. I just don't see how the students can really claim any injury here. The argument about policies not being strong enough also seems odd. I'm at a state university and we have to sign a conflict of interest disclosure form every semester, I imagine MSU has something similar. Besides, if you want students to buy something there's a process for that. You can't just tell students they have to go to some site and pay them 100 dollars. What about people who get financial aid for course materials?

You're probably right, in terms of tort law and the students' purported loss.

But it's amazing that MSU allowed this audacious grift in the first place.

I don't think anyone knew she was doing this until students complained. Presumably, she just told the students in class that they were required to buy a subscription to the website in order to complete the work. If it was in the syllabus, I bet she left off the part about the cost. The article doesn't give any details about the timeline, but if she announced that you had to get a subscription to this site to complete an assignment, I imagine most of the students went and did it, a couple people complained and by the time anyone had a chance to look into it, most of the students had already paid.

It's odd to me that the school didn't go to the police. This is basically just an illegal kickback scheme. I suppose they might have wanted to avoid publicity. 

[Wahoo Redux]

She made all 600 students in her class pay $100 to use her website.
https://www.mlive.com/news/2023/05/an-msu-professor-made-students-pay-99-each-to-sign-up-for-her-activist-website-now-theyre-suing.html

I could be wrong, but the legal basis of the lawsuit seems a bit sketchy. These students got their money back, so that's not what the basis of the suit is. They are trying to sue on the grounds that they have been forced to support speech they don't agree with. The problem is that the proceeds from any required text or product could go to causes students don't agree with.

I imagine what's going to happen is that a court is going to rule that the students don't have any standing to sue since they got their money back from the school. The school could certainly bring a lawsuit trying to recoup the money they paid back to the students. They could even try to get a DA to bring criminal fraud charges against this person. I just don't see how the students can really claim any injury here. The argument about policies not being strong enough also seems odd. I'm at a state university and we have to sign a conflict of interest disclosure form every semester, I imagine MSU has something similar. Besides, if you want students to buy something there's a process for that. You can't just tell students they have to go to some site and pay them 100 dollars. What about people who get financial aid for course materials?

You're probably right, in terms of tort law and the students' purported loss.

But it's amazing that MSU allowed this audacious grift in the first place.

The tether is loose around academics, particularly so for adjuncts.

[Hibush]

Just checked out Prof. Wisner's websites, and found that she was following her own advice. She is on a mission to "cancel the patriachy", with the patriachy including a lot of the structures and paradigms that commenters here are referencing in declaring the hustle inappropriate.
She also advocates rejecting the rules. Of course, one needs to finesse one's actions in that regard if the people and structures in power don't reject those rules.

If one is "audacious and unapologetic in one's quest to smash oppressive systems," runins like this are inevitable.

Working for social change is valuable, and it is essential to have business students think about the social change that their work supports, whether it aligns with their values, (what their values are rooted in), and whether there are missed opportunities to drive positive social change. From a pedagogical perspective, what approach is likely to be effective at a big school like Michigan State? Six hundred students is a lot of influence!