University of Manitoba and Gábor Lukács: chronology

Topics: 
Academia, Gábor Lukács, U of M
Rating: 
0

The following is a chronology of the events surrounding the controversial award of a PhD to a University of Manitoba student who had twice failed the required comprehensive examination.

March 2009
  • A.Z. fails for a second time the PhD Candidacy Examination in Analysis
  • According to the U of M regulations, A.Z. is required to withdraw from the PhD Program
June 26, 2009
  • A.Z. appeals his "required to withdraw" status to Dr. John Doering, Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Studies at the U of M
  • A.Z. claims he has a disability
July 16, 2009
  • Dr. Doering grants A.Z.'s appeal despite the fact that he has no jurisdiction
  • Based on the favourable outcome of the appeal, A.Z. is reinstated in the PhD Program
July 21, 2009
  • Dr. Doering requests that the Math Department accommodate A.Z.'s disability by seeking an alternative to the "three- or four-hour sit-down" exam
August 11, 2009
  • A meeting between the Math Graduate Studies Committee (GSC) and Disability Services (DS) takes place, where it is agreed that:
    • A.Z. can take the exam for a third time, he will be given twice the usual time, and his exam will be divided into two parts, taken on two different days.
August 31, 2009
  • In a memorandum sent by Dr. Doering to Dr. Joseph Williams, Acting Head of the Mathematics Department, Dr. Doering rejects the agreement, and directs, without authority, that A.Z. be given an oral exam, that he (Dr. Doering) appoint examiners for the oral exam, and states that, "In the event that failure is reported, alternative testing will likely be explored."
September 29, 2009
  • Meeting between GSC and Dr. Doering, during which the GSC rejects the terms imposed by Dr. Doering, and Dr. Doering announces that he will waive the PhD Candidacy Examination for A.Z.
Early October 2009
  • Dr. Fereidoun Ghahramani, a member of the GSC elected by the Mathematics Department, resigns his seat on the GSC in connection with Dr. Doering's controversial decision
October 29, 2009
  • Dr. Gábor Lukács is elected by the Mathematics Department to the GSC, and briefed by Dr. Yong Zhang, the chair of the committee, regarding the case of A.Z.
October 30, 2009 Email correspondence between Dr. Lukács and Dr. Doering
  • Dr. Lukács challenges the jurisdiction of Dr. Doering to hear academic appeals, as the U of M regulations state that the appropriate body is the Appeal Panel of the Faculty of Graduate Studies
  • Dr. Doering responds stating, "many of the things a dean can do are not written down"
October 30, 2009
  • Dr. Doering issues a formal letter to A.Z. confirming that the PhD Candidacy Examination is waived for him
November 2, 2009
  • University Legal Counsel informs Dr. Lukács that there is nothing wrong with Dr. Doering's decision
November 6, 2009
  • Dr. Lukács views Dr. Doering's letter of October 30, 2009 in Dr. Zhang's office, and learns about the background
November 17, 2009
  • Dr. Lukács asks to meet with Dr. Joan Keselman, VP Academic of U of M, to discuss concerns about the integrity of the Math PhD Program, and the request is denied
November 19, 2009
  • Dr. Lukács appeals to the Senate of the U of M against the decision of Dr. Doering regarding A.Z.
November 27, 2009
  • Six members of the U of M Mathematics Department sign a petition to convene the Department Council to discuss A.Z.'s case
December 10, 2009 Special meeting of the U of M Department Council of Mathematics
  • Dr. Mark Whitmore, Dean of the Faculty of Science of the U of M, issues a gag order to the Council: discussing A.Z.'s case would violate his privacy
  • The Council asks the Senate to rule on Dr. Doering's jurisdiction to waive academic requirements
December 11-21, 2009 Dr. Archie McNicol, Chair of the Senate Committee on Appeals, and Dr. David T. Barnard, President of U of M, preclude the appeal of Dr. Lukács from being considered by the Senate Committee on Appeals
  • Dr. McNicol rules, without authority, that the Senate Committee on Appeals cannot hear appeals against decisions made by Dr. Doering
  • Dr. Barnard rules, without authority, that Dr. Lukács is lacking standing to challenge Dr. Doering's decision
December 15, 2009 Disciplinary meeting between Dr. Mark Whitmore, Dean of the Faculty of Science, and Dr. Lukács, with others present, regarding Dr. Lukács's role in convening the Department Council
  • Dr. Lukács is accused of violating A.Z.'s privacy, and harassing A.Z.
  • Dr. Whitmore demands that Dr. Lukács not pursue the appeal in the case of A.Z.
December 18, 2009
  • Dr. Whitmore issues a letter of reprimand to Dr. Lukács, but Dr. Lukács does not receive it until January 11, 2010
  • Dr. Lukács first learns about his reprimand through his union, the University of Manitoba Faculty Association (UMFA)
January-August 2010
  • Dr. Lukács is away on research/study leave
February 25, 2010
  • UMFA files a grievance on behalf of Dr. Lukács against the reprimand of December 18, 2009
March 5, 2010
  • Eleven members of the Math Department of the U of M sign a petition, addressed to Dr. Whitmore, to protest against the reprimand of Dr. Lukács
July 1, 2010
  • Dr. David Gunderson is appointed Head of the Math Department of the U of M
August 1, 2010
  • Dr. Fereidoun Ghahramani is appointed Associate Head (Graduate Studies) of the Math Department of the U of M
August 19, 2010
  • In an email written by Dr. Ghahramani to Dr. Gunderson, and provided to Dr. Lukács, Dr. Ghahramani states concerning A.Z. that: "In fact this person has not completed some of the requirements for a Ph.D. degree."
Late August 2010
  • The Faculty of Graduate Studies of the U of M determines that A.Z. is missing coursework required for his PhD degree
August 30, 2010 According to Dr. Stephanie Portet, Acting Associate Head of the Math Department of the U of M, a meeting takes place between Dr. Portet, Dr. Gunderson, and Dr. Doering about A.Z.'s failure to complete required coursework
  • Dr. Doering's initial position is that A.Z. should get a PhD without further work
  • Dr. Doering later proposes that A.Z. "upgrade" in eight days an undergraduate course taken in 2006 to a doctoral-level course
September 1, 2010
  • The GSC refuses to approve Dr. Doering's proposal to "upgrade" A.Z.'s coursework
  • The "upgrade" goes ahead anyway
September 3, 2010
  • Dr. Lukács writes to Dr. McNicol, Chair of the U of M Senate Committee on Appeals, to protest against Dr. McNicol's actions in December 2009
September 17, 2010 U of M Senate Committee on Appeals meets
  • Despite the U of M's policy requiring a notice to parties to an appeal, Dr. Lukács is not given notice of the meeting, and learns about its outcome from a letter signed by Dr. Arlene Young, Vice-Chair of the committee
  • Dr. McNicol admits that he erred in December 2009, and recuses himself from the committee
  • The committee refuses to hear the appeal of Dr. Lukács for lack of jurisdiction--no reasons are provided
September 18, 2010
  • Dr. Lukács protests in writing against the lack of due process before the Senate Committee on Appeals, and asks for a hearing
September 20, 2010
  • Dr. Young advises Dr. Lukács in a letter that the Senate Committee on Appeals's decision is final, and there will be no hearing
September 23, 2010
  • Dr. Lukács makes an application for judicial review to the Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (File No.: CI10-01-68359), seeking:
    • to quash the decision to waive the PhD Candidacy Examination for A.Z.
    • to quash the decision to permit A.Z. to "upgrade" an old undergraduate course to a doctoral-level course in eight days
    • to quash the Senate Committee on Appeals's refusal to hear the appeal
    • an injunction against the University granting A.Z. a PhD until A.Z. fulfills the degree requirements
    • various declarations concerning jurisdiction of the Dean of Graduate Studies and the Senate Committee on Appeals
September 27, 2010
  • Dr. Lukács files an affidavit with exhibits in support of his application
October 6, 2010
  • In a hand-delivered letter written by Dr. Barnard, the President of the U of M, Dr. Lukács is suspended without pay until December 31, 2010 The reasons given by Dr. Barnard were:
    • disclosing A.Z.'s personal and personal health information to the Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba
    • allegedly harassing A.Z. by making an application to the Court
October 8, 2010
  • The Board of Governors of the University approves the suspension without pay of Dr. Lukács
October 8, 2010
  • Concerned students from the class taught by Dr. Lukács start collecting signatures for a petition requesting that Dr. Lukács be immediately reinstated
October 13, 2010
  • Petition containing 81 signatures is delivered to Dr. Whitmore, and to the office of Dr. Barnard
October 14, 2010
  • Dr. George Gratzer, Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada and Distinguished Professor of Mathematics at the U of M, affirms an affidavit in support of the application of Dr. Lukács
October 15, 2010
  • UMFA refers to binding arbitration the grievance against the December 18, 2009 reprimand of Dr. Lukács
October 19, 2010
  • The affidavit of Dr. Gratzer in support of the application of Dr. Lukács is filed in the Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba
October 20, 2010
  • A.Z. receives his PhD
October 25, 2010
  • In a hand-delivered letter written by Dr. Barnard, the President of the U of M, Dr. Lukács is advised that he may expect further disciplinary action for filing the affidavit of Dr. Gratzer
October 26, 2010
  • Dr. Lukács files a motion for an injunction restraining the U of M from taking further disciplinary action against Dr. Lukács and other employees for giving evidence for the judicial review
  • Counsel for A.Z. files a motion for publication ban on the name and identifying features of A.Z.
October 27, 2010
  • UMFA files a grievance on behalf Dr. Lukács against his suspension
October 28, 2010
  • Lukács consents to the motion of A.Z. to protect the identity of A.Z. Madam Justice Keyser pronounces a consent order, replacing the name of the student with the pseudonym "A.Z.," and placing a publication ban on the name and identifying features of A.Z.
  • U of M challenges the "standing" of Dr. Lukács to bring the application for judicial review, and a contested hearing is set for November 30, 2010
November 3, 2010
  • The Senate of U of M refuses to pass a motion to grant sweeping powers to the Dean of Graduate Studies to waive academic requirements
  • The motion, as well as the issue of what constitutes reasonable accommodation of disabilities, was referred back to the Executive Committee of the Senate for reconsideration
November 5, 2010
  • U of M and Dr. Doering flie a motion in the Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba to strike out the application for judicial review of Dr. Lukács on the ground of lack of standing
November 15, 2010
  • The affidavit of Dr. Mark Whitmore is filed in support of the U of M and Dr. Doering

Last Updated: November 17, 2010