ILNews

Indiana Tech dean's exit shocks backers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

It was the kind of offer that encapsulated Peter Alexander’s philosophy of legal education – he lent Fort Wayne attorney Dennis Geisleman use of his facility to practice opening and closing statements before a focus group in exchange for students being allowed to observe.

As dean of the Indiana Tech Law School, Alexander trumpeted the school’s curriculum with its heavy focus on experiential learning and bringing practitioners and real-world, hands-on training into the classroom. He made connections to Allen County lawyers and judges to have them mentor and advise the new students before the school opened.

Consequently, Alexander’s surprising resignation as dean has many in the Fort Wayne legal community questioning what happened. But attorneys said they will maintain the relationships with the school that were fostered by the former leader.

Dedication_4-15col.jpg Former Dean Peter Alexander (right) smiles as Indiana Tech President Arthur Snyder recognizes him during the law school’s 2013 dedication ceremony.  (IL file photo)

“I’m sad and disappointed by the news, but I intend to continue to support the school, and I am looking forward for the accreditation process to be completed successfully,” Allen Circuit Judge Thomas Felts said.

Indiana Tech made the announcement May 23 that Alexander had stepped down as vice president and dean of the law school May 21. The university did not reveal the reason behind Alexander’s departure, but in a statement Alexander said he has achieved the goals he established for the institution and he has a desire to pursue other employment opportunities.

Although he also resigned his tenured faculty position, Alexander will remain with the school in a consulting role. The school did not detail what his specific duties would be going forward.

Associate Dean for Academic Affairs andré douglas pond cummings has been named interim dean. He sought to reassure the community that the direction of the law school would not be changing.

“While Peter is and was a dynamic and charismatic leader, the vision is completely shared by me and the folks we hired,” cummings said, adding the vision and goals are not different just because Alexander left. “I think we’re totally and completely on track as far as what we set to do in the very beginning.”

Indiana Tech Law School is planning to add two or three new faculty members to its current staff of 11, cummings said. The school is taking applications and has set a goal of having 40 to 50 students in its second class.

andre-douglas-pond-cummings.jpg cummings

A committee of administration officials and law school faculty will be established soon to begin the search for the new dean.

Alexander joined Indiana Tech in January 2012 to help the university start what is now the fifth law school in the state. He was involved in multiple aspects from the design of the new building and development of the curriculum to hiring the faculty and personally recruiting students.

Attorney David Van Gilder, of Van Gilder & Trzynka P.C. in Fort Wayne, credited Alexander with getting the legal community talking about legal education and thinking about what a law school could do to assist the bench and bar.

“I just wish him the best,” Van Gilder said. “We’re going to miss him. He added a dimension to the legal community here that was sorely needed.”

Alexander also gave an opportunity to students who want to be lawyers but felt law school was way out of reach, Van Gilder said. Alexander impressed upon the students they could be successful.

In turn, Van Gilder believes those students will benefit Fort Wayne by practicing locally and bringing the diversity that is currently lacking in the legal community.

Prior to his tenure at Indiana Tech, Alexander was at Southern Illinois University School of Law. He served as dean from 2003 through 2009 and then remained on the faculty until 2012. He often said he was not actually looking to lead another law school but was attracted to Indiana Tech because he could build the school from scratch and put his ideas in practice.

cummings emphasized he understood Alexander’s vision for legal education and helped craft the new curriculum that incorporates collaborative and experiential learning.

“Peter and I were in lockstep all along,” cummings said.

Avery Avery

Before Alexander’s resignation, the law school had started the process of seeking accreditation from the American Bar Association. Obtaining provisional accreditation in the spring of 2015 is vital for the school to continue since their graduates would not be allowed to sit for the Indiana Bar Exam without the institution having ABA approval.

Again, cummings pointed out other faculty members besides Alexander were preparing the school for the accreditation review and they will carry on with their duties.

cummings said he has been captaining the process since it started and is co-chair of the committee that is compiling the self-study report due in August. In addition, Indiana Tech President Arthur Snyder has contacted the ABA and informed it of Alexander’s resignation.

“We think it’s going to be pretty seamless as far as the accreditation application is concerned,” cummings said.

The law school summoned the students back to campus May 23 to tell them about Alexander’s departure. Many in the legal community found out after they returned from the Memorial Day weekend.

Allen Superior Judge David Avery said the news was unexpected and shocked the bench and bar. He could not speculate on what the resignation will mean for the school, but he did not anticipate it would negatively impact the school’s relationship with local attorneys and judges.

The school enlisted lawyers to mentor the students and invited members of the bar to lecture or make presentations to the students. From Avery’s perspective, it made sense for the new law school to cultivate that relationship and gain as much support as it could.

“I think Dean Alexander did a nice job when he was here,” Avery said. “He’s certainly the type of person if I was planning on going through this type of process of opening a law school … he’s the type of individual I would want to lead it.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

  • critical study
    he's deconstructing some kind of privilege no doubt. perhaps it is a protest against Capital-ism? Professors of the world unite!
  • Standard practice
    Is it fair to all Andre's to allow one andre to go uncapitalized? Not to mention all other Cummings, all other Douglas' and all other Pond's. Should we poll all using those names to be certain they agree with a downsizing? Ancestors? Other living relatives? And if the aforementioned adpc decides to go all the way and adopt some new symbol, like maybe a ampersand topped by a number sign, so we all have to invest in new keyboards to so replicate his symbol? Just wondering the protocols here? (Oh, and please call me Loretta)
  • Capitalization
    I understand that Mr. cummings does not capitalize his name, but when his name is the first word in a sentence it is not really up to him. The first word in a sentence should always be capitalized.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT
    Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
    1. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) End of Year Report 2014. (page 13) Under the current system many local registering agencies are challenged just keeping up with registration paperwork. It takes an hour or more to process each registrant, the majority of whom are low risk offenders. As a result law enforcement cannot monitor higher risk offenders more intensively in the community due to the sheer numbers on the registry. Some of the consequences of lengthy and unnecessary registration requirements actually destabilize the life’s of registrants and those -such as families- whose lives are often substantially impacted. Such consequences are thought to raise levels of known risk factors while providing no discernible benefit in terms of community safety. The full report is available online at. http://www.casomb.org/index.cfm?pid=231 National Institute of Justice (NIJ) US Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs United States of America. The overall conclusion is that Megan’s law has had no demonstrated effect on sexual offenses in New Jersey, calling into question the justification for start-up and operational costs. Megan’s Law has had no effect on time to first rearrest for known sex offenders and has not reduced sexual reoffending. Neither has it had an impact on the type of sexual reoffense or first-time sexual offense. The study also found that the law had not reduced the number of victims of sexual offenses. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/app/publications/abstract.aspx? ID=247350 The University of Chicago Press for The Booth School of Business of the University of Chicago and The University of Chicago Law School Article DOI: 10.1086/658483 Conclusion. The data in these three data sets do not strongly support the effectiveness of sex offender registries. The national panel data do not show a significant decrease in the rate of rape or the arrest rate for sexual abuse after implementation of a registry via the Internet. The BJS data that tracked individual sex offenders after their release in 1994 did not show that registration had a significantly negative effect on recidivism. And the D.C. crime data do not show that knowing the location of sex offenders by census block can help protect the locations of sexual abuse. This pattern of noneffectiveness across the data sets does not support the conclusion that sex offender registries are successful in meeting their objectives of increasing public safety and lowering recidivism rates. The full report is available online at. http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658483 These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of conclusions and reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. People, including the media and other organizations should not rely on and reiterate the statements and opinions of the legislators or other people as to the need for these laws because of the high recidivism rates and the high risk offenders pose to the public which simply is not true and is pure hyperbole and fiction. They should rely on facts and data collected and submitted in reports from the leading authorities and credible experts in the fields such as the following. California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 0.8% (page 30) The full report is available online at http://www.cdcr.ca.gov/Adult_Research_Branch/Research_Documents/2014_Outcome_Evaluation_Report_7-6-2015.pdf California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) (page 38) Sex offender recidivism rate for a new sex offense is 1.8% The full report is available online at. http://www.google.com/url?sa= t&source=web&cd=1&ved= 0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.cdcr.ca.gov%2FAdult_ Research_Branch%2FResearch_ documents%2FOutcome_ evaluation_Report_2013.pdf&ei= C9dSVePNF8HfoATX-IBo&usg=AFQjCNE9I6ueHz-o2mZUnuxLPTyiRdjDsQ Bureau of Justice Statistics 5 PERCENT OF SEX OFFENDERS REARRESTED FOR ANOTHER SEX CRIME WITHIN 3 YEARS OF PRISON RELEASE WASHINGTON, D.C. Within 3 years following their 1994 state prison release, 5.3 percent of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime, the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) announced today. The full report is available online at. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rsorp94pr.cfm Document title; A Model of Static and Dynamic Sex Offender Risk Assessment Author: Robert J. McGrath, Michael P. Lasher, Georgia F. Cumming Document No.: 236217 Date Received: October 2011 Award Number: 2008-DD-BX-0013 Findings: Study of 759 adult male offenders under community supervision Re-arrest rate: 4.6% after 3-year follow-up The sexual re-offense rates for the 746 released in 2005 are much lower than what many in the public have been led to expect or believe. These low re-offense rates appear to contradict a conventional wisdom that sex offenders have very high sexual re-offense rates. The full report is available online at. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/236217.pdf Document Title: SEX OFFENDER SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON STATE: RECIDIVISM RATES BY: Washington State Institute For Public Policy. A study of 4,091 sex offenders either released from prison or community supervision form 1994 to 1998 and examined for 5 years Findings: Sex Crime Recidivism Rate: 2.7% Link to Report: http://www.oncefallen.com/files/Washington_SO_Recid_2005.pdf Document Title: Indiana’s Recidivism Rates Decline for Third Consecutive Year BY: Indiana Department of Correction 2009. The recidivism rate for sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05%, one of the lowest in the nation. In a time when sex offenders continue to face additional post-release requirements that often result in their return to prison for violating technical rules such as registration and residency restrictions, the instances of sex offenders returning to prison due to the commitment of a new sex crime is extremely low. Findings: sex offenders returning on a new sex offense was 1.05% Link to Report: http://www.in.gov/idoc/files/RecidivismRelease.pdf Once again, These are not isolated conclusions but are the same outcomes in the majority of reports on this subject from multiple government agencies and throughout the academic community. No one can doubt that child sexual abuse is traumatic and devastating. The question is not whether the state has an interest in preventing such harm, but whether current laws are effective in doing so. Megan’s law is a failure and is destroying families and their children’s lives and is costing tax payers millions upon millions of dollars. The following is just one example of the estimated cost just to implement SORNA which many states refused to do. From Justice Policy Institute. Estimated cost to implement SORNA Here are some of the estimates made in 2009 expressed in 2014 current dollars: California, $66M; Florida, $34M; Illinois, $24M; New York, $35M; Pennsylvania, $22M; Texas, $44M. In 2014 dollars, Virginia’s estimate for implementation was $14M, and the annual operating cost after that would be $10M. For the US, the total is $547M. That’s over half a billion dollars – every year – for something that doesn’t work. http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/08-08_FAC_SORNACosts_JJ.pdf. Attempting to use under-reporting to justify the existence of the registry is another myth, or a lie. This is another form of misinformation perpetrated by those who either have a fiduciary interest in continuing the unconstitutional treatment of a disfavored group or are seeking to justify their need for punishment for people who have already paid for their crime by loss of their freedom through incarceration and are now attempting to reenter society as honest citizens. When this information is placed into the public’s attention by naive media then you have to wonder if the media also falls into one of these two groups that are not truly interested in reporting the truth. Both of these groups of people that have that type of mentality can be classified as vigilantes, bullies, or sociopaths, and are responsible for the destruction of our constitutional values and the erosion of personal freedoms in this country. I think the media or other organizations need to do a in depth investigation into the false assumptions and false data that has been used to further these laws and to research all the collateral damages being caused by these laws and the unconstitutional injustices that are occurring across the country. They should include these injustices in their report so the public can be better informed on what is truly happening in this country on this subject. Thank you for your time.

    2. Freedom as granted in the Constitution cannot be summarily disallowed without Due Process. Unable to to to the gym, church, bowling alley? What is this 1984 level nonsense? Congrats to Brian for having the courage to say that this was enough! and Congrats to the ACLU on the win!

    3. America's hyper-phobia about convicted sex offenders must end! Politicians must stop pandering to knee-jerk public hysteria. And the public needs to learn the facts. Research by the California Sex Offender Management Board as shown a recidivism rate for convicted sex offenders of less than 1%. Less than 1%! Furthermore, research shows that by year 17 after their conviction, a convicted sex offender is no more likely to commit a new sex offense than any other member of the public. Put away your torches and pitchforks. Get the facts. Stop hysteria.

    4. He was convicted 23 years ago. How old was he then? He probably was a juvenile. People do stupid things, especially before their brain is fully developed. Why are we continuing to punish him in 2016? If he hasn't re-offended by now, it's very, very unlikely he ever will. He paid for his mistake sufficiently. Let him live his life in peace.

    5. This year, Notre Dame actually enrolled an equal amount of male and female students.

    ADVERTISEMENT