Jun Yu v. Idaho State University – Fact Sheet

Jun Yu versus Idaho State University (ISU) is an ongoing civil lawsuit in US Federal Court and Idaho State Court. ISU is facing 18 counts involving discrimination, due process violations and contract breaches, and a trial date of November 13, 2018 has been set in US Federal Court a new trial date of February 26, 2019 has been set in US Federal Court. The case has been reported in Inside Higher Ed, the Idaho State Journal (in 2015 and 2016), the Bengal and AsAm News (in 2016, 2017 and 2018).

“At the time of dismissal, Mr. Yu was a student in good standing with a cumulative GPA of 3.69, and he had only one pre-doctoral internship to complete prior to receiving his Doctorate in Clinical Psychology. Prior to the May 3, 2013 dismissal letter from ISU, Mr. Yu had never been on probation and had never been informed that he was in danger of being dismissed from the doctoral program.” – Expert report of Dr. Shannon Chavez-Korell, page 8

When compared to other similarly situated students, Jun was unfavorably treated by Idaho State University in at least six (6) identified areas, proving that ISU unlawfully discriminated against him.

Jun Yu v Idaho State University

FACT: Mr. Yu is supported by leading psychology experts who have concluded ISU violated professional and academic standards; meanwhile ISU has no psychology experts supporting their case. Mr. Yu’s experts include:

FACT: ISU had never warned Mr. Yu he was at risk of dismissal.

Expert testimony regarding ISU’s failure to warn Mr. Yu he was at risk of dismissal:

ISU testimony regarding ISU’s failure to warn Mr. Yu he was at risk of dismissal:

FACT: Mr. Yu’s grades (all As and Bs in required coursework) and supervisory ratings/evaluations are not consistent with ISU’s allegation of “unsatisfactory progress”.

FACT: ISU violated Mr. Yu’s due process rights.

  • “The ISU faculty also appears to have failed to provide due process in the course of dismissing him…” – Expert report of Dr. Gerald Koocher, page 6
  • “ISU faculty failed to provide due process in Mr. Yu’s dismissal from the Clinical Psychology Ph.D. program.” – Expert report of Dr. Shannon Chavez-Korell, page 7
  • “There are many ways in which Dr. Leslie Speer violated the minimal due process that was available to Mr. Yu – ranging from not offering a second assessment until after his dismissal to not working with him to develop a remediation plan in the face of performance concerns to not assembling the group of supervisors in Ohio to discuss his performance before dismissal….” – Expert report of Dr. Leslie Zorwick, page 27

FACT: ISU failed to develop remediation plans, if needed, as per APA ethical and accreditation standards.

FACT: ISU denied Mr. Yu the PhD degree he rightfully earned.

  • “By further failure to offer an alternative Ph.D. degree option, based on the clear doctoral quality of his work, the university attempted to trivialize the previously recognized quality of his scholarly accomplishments.” – Expert report of Dr. Gerald Koocher, page 8
  • “The university has the obligation and responsibility to award Mr. Yu a Ph.D. in general psychology at a minimum. Mr. Yu successfully completed all doctoral level program requirements of the Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology, including successful defense of a doctoral dissertation, with the sole exception of successful completion of internship.” – Expert report of Dr. Shannon Chavez-Korell, page 7

FACT: ISU faculty substantially deviated from accepted academic norms in their treatment towards Mr. Yu, thus violating the law as per the Supreme Court case Regents of University of Michigan v. Ewing (1985).

  • “Taken as a whole, the actions of the faculty at ISU in dismissing Mr. Yu as they did constitute, in my opinion, substantial arbitrary and capricious and departures from accepted academic norms in clinical psychology doctoral programs.” – Expert report of Dr. Gerald Koocher, page 8
  • “In my opinion, the actions of the faculty at ISU in dismissing Mr. Yu as they did, was a substantial departure from accepted academic norms.” – Expert report of Dr. Shannon Chavez-Korell, page 9
  • “On the basis of these facts, it is my opinion that the behavior of the members of the Idaho State University psychology department was arbitrary and capricious and deviated from accepted professional norms in psychology.” – Expert report of Dr. Leslie Zorwick, page 27

FACT: ISU violated a number of APA ethical standards; as APA Ethics are part of the state board rules for licensed psychologists, ISU violated the law:

  • “A number of ethical and accreditation standards have been violated in Mr. Yu’s case. These include ethical violations by faculty members related to following through with program descriptions (Code: 7.02), flaws in assessing and responding to student performance (Code: 7.06), and avoiding harm (Code: 3.04).” – Expert report of Dr. Gerald Koocher, page 6
  • “In Mr. Yu’s case, there are ethical and accreditation standards that have been violated by ISU faculty and clinical supervisors…[these] include boundaries of competence in training international students who speak English as a second language (APA Ethics Code Standard: 2.01), avoiding harm (APA Ethics Code Standard: 3.04), and assessing student and supervisee performance (APA Ethics Code Standard: 7.06).” – Expert report of Dr. Shannon Chavez-Korell, page 6

FACT: Experts have concluded that ISU was culturally incompetent and aversively racist towards Mr. Yu.

Want to explore the case in further detail? You can view all the public documents for Jun Yu versus Idaho State University.