Abstract
Since Qizhi Chen made an abundantly clear rejection to sexual advances of her academic supervisor, the Engineering Faculty waged aggressive academic bullying against her. Murray Rudman, Associate Dean in Research of Engineering Faculty Monash University, consciously and purposefully undervalued Chen’s performance in a series of events, by miscalculating 1,2,3,4,5. The extremely hostile working environment successfully invited Chen to speak up.
01. In Academic Promotion Process
Chen commenced her appointment of Monash University on 12 May 2008. By the time of promotion of 6 June 2011, her publications amounted to 22 in this 3-year period. However, Associate Dean Murray Rudman (Rudman) counted 4 years in his report (R116 = CB552) and as a result, Chen’s score was undervalued to an entire scale lower.
Rudman failed to count 3 and 4 correctly.
02. In Application for Best Thesis Award
In his memo, Rudman made a handwritten note about the award application of Chen’s student Ms Shu-ling Liang (the awardee), noting that the student had three papers, and two of which she was the first author (R143 = CB594, p2637). This is despite the fact that the application form of the student listed clearly that she wrote three papers, where she had been the first author on all three (A204= CB350, p1347). The Student missed out.
Rudman failed to count 2 and 3 correctly.
To ensure their complicit Nick Birbilis to get the award, Murray Rudman miscounted small numbers again so as to deprive Chen of the opportunity to obtain the award.
The policy of the Dean’s ECR award nomination is “The award is based in research achievements over the last five years” (A136 = CB592). On 18 March 2012, Rudman incorrectly stated in his email to Simon, which began with “To make sure we are on the same page”, that the award would be “for research in the PRIOR 3 years (i.e. 2009-2011 inclusive) not prior to 2009, and not 2012”(A134= CB386). This incorrect policy was subsequently circulated by Simon to the Material Engineering Department headed by him(CB386, A96 = CB387, A135 = CB388, R107 = CB389).
Rudman failed to count 3 and 5 properly.
The incorrect policy was not circulated in other departments of the Faculty(A97= CB 399), only applied in 2012 and in Chen’s department (A96 = CB387, A135 = CB 388, R107 = CB389).
Chen’s two quality, Monash-never-had-before, publications was directly narrowed outside the 3 years. Hence, this narrowing of the scope of the scheme directly disadvantaged her opportunity to obtain this award.
The award eventually went to Nick Birbilis, as plotted.
04. Monash University’s Bogus Claim
Monash University claim Rudman’s miscalculations were “genuine errors”. Given that Rudman is a professor in Mechanical Engineering having PhD in mathematics, “genuine error” is not an innocent defence, but mere bogus claim.
- Can we trust the bicycles, bridges, air planes, trains, ships, … if the designers, the engineering professors, are unable to count 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 correctly?
- Can we trust the computers, power stations, oil pipes, buildings we reside … if the designers, the engineering professors, are unable to count 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 correctly?
- Ultimately, can we rust the education of Monash University if its professor in engineering, with a PhD in mathematics is unable to count 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 correctly?
Judge Tracey of Australian Federal Court viewed the series of mistakes from Rudman all against one single academic (that’s Qizhi Chen) as “innocent events” and even made a colourful remark “fanciful on testing“.
Do Not Assault The Intelligent of Public!
qizhichen04 
