Purdue University · Electrical and Computer Engineering
匿名 · 审核后公开
2.0分均分 · 1 条公开评价
公开评价概览
评价数
1
均分
2.0 分
点赞/踩
0 / 0
匿名表态 · 每个导师仅一次
学生评价
2.0分
(The following review is reposted with the permission of its original author, Dr. Jui-Wei Tsai)
I finally decided to stand out and document the bullying incident I underwent during my graduate study at Purdue University Elmore Family School of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) Dept. and my concern on the former Purdue ECE graduate school coordinator, Dr. Michael A. Capano. The form of bullying includes **false accusation**, **threatening** and **ridiculing** that can be considered discrimination against international students, as can be found in the letter "Concerns on the Former Purdue ECE Graduate Coordinator" (https://lnkd.in/gMG58zD8).
This letter was sent to Purdue Hotline, Office of Institutional Equity (OIE), and the First Lady Dr. Kei Hui, and the following replying was received from Dr. Hui: “Purdue strives to be a strong institution and foundation for higher education. I am disappointed to hear about the incident during your time here as a grad student.” A brief version of the bullying incident has also been published on the newsletter website of Academic Parity Movement (https://lnkd.in/gD3DAVW9) which starts with “I am an Asian student who joined a US American PhD program in Electrical and Computer Engineering in 2013”.
It's all about the wellness of all graduate students at Purdue University, especially international students. A start-up company like Artilux Inc. already knows to value its employees and helps them achieve each project goal via reasonable timeline, sufficient supports, and objective performance evaluation. It’s disappointing that some faculties of Purdue University are still driving students with fear and disparagement to meet their personal benefits.
【Concerns on the Former Purdue ECE Graduate Coordinator】
To whom this letter reaches:
I’m writing this mail to arouse your concern on the behaviors of the former Purdue Electrical & Computer Engineering (ECE) Dept. graduate coordinator. My name is Jui-Wei (Johnson) Tsai, a former Purdue ECE Ph.D. student who graduated in Fall 2020. This report is based on my experiences from 2017 to 2020, when I sought mediations from the former graduate coordinator, Dr. Michael Capano, amid conflicts with my major advisor, Dr. Pedro Irazoqui.
I did hesitate to write this letter for several reasons: Dr. Capano is a tenured full professor, while I was an international student with few U.S. connections; reporting someone who once held authority over me, and may still influence my career in industry or academia, puts my future careers at risk; and I must acknowledge Dr. Capano’s claim that I used foul language in my mails to him, a reaction to stress and despair from his behavior.
Nevertheless, since leaving Purdue in 2020, I’ve heard similar stories from other international students facing mistreatment without proper reporting channels or protections. As more international students (especially Asians) are coming to Purdue’s graduate programs, it would be unethical to stay silent and let others endure similar bullying. Having email records to substantiate my experiences, I’ve resolved to speak up and document what happened.
--
I began my graduate studies in Purdue ECE Dept. and joined Dr. Irazoqui’s lab in August 2013. Before accepting his research assistantship, he assured me there would be ample time to explore new areas in my PhD work and no need to worry about future funding.
In February 2015, I was asked to switch topics to align with the lab’s funding. By August 2017, having co-authored prestigious papers like IEEE ISSCC, JSSC, and TBioCAS, I was notified my funding would end due to lab funding changes and claimed irrelevance of my research topic to lab’s future direction (**with a demand to find TA myself**). I was also removed from the lab’s surgical protocol for animal experiments, despite still being required to validate my research on animals (**with a demand to find animal resources elsewhere as well**).
A former ECE graduate student informed me the department could help resolve advisor conflicts, so I sought assistance and began meeting with then-graduate coordinator Dr. Capano. However, the final two years of my program became nearly a torment, leaving me with lasting mental distress. Below are questionable behaviors by Dr. Capano in his role as ECE graduate coordinator:
**1. Unfairness**
In early meetings with Dr. Michael Capano, I repeatedly shared my struggles in Dr. Pedro Irazoqui’s lab, including funding and animal resource cuts as noted earlier. Here’re two additional cases:
(1) In January 2018, I sent Dr. Irazoqui a manuscript (later published in IEEE TBioCAS: https://doi.org/10.1109/TBCAS.2020.3043266) in the hope to regain his trust, but it went unaddressed for 2.5 years until my August 2020 defense.
(2) After my January 2018 preliminary exam, Dr. Irazoqui required IC tape-out of my VLSI architecture (i.e., having it manufactured by semiconductor foundries) for graduation but never specified a date. I paid my own tuition for Spring and Fall 2018 to await it, which finally happened in late October 2018.
Unfortunately, Dr. Capano dismissed the abovementioned issues, citing excuses like “*Dr. Irazoqui is busy with other students*” or “*He has his own plan*”, and even referenced his MIT PhD advisor experiences to justify my situation (**details omitted for Dr. Capano’s privacy; feel free to email me for more**). His response to my struggle was always, “*This is the grinding you need to learn to withstand in your PhD*.”
**2. Disregarding Student’s Efforts and False Accusation**
Dr. Capano had no respect for student’s efforts; he accused students of not working hard when students ask for time and help to complete their research work.
(1) When first joining Dr. Irazoqui’s lab, I did express my research focus: VLSI architectures for real-time biomedical signal processing, with emphasis on architecture definition and digital IC design (as the only member working in this area). After my January 2018 preliminary exam, Dr. Irazoqui demanded I prove the value of my work value via animal studies; he wanted a “*nice and fair comparison with software-computing approach on animals*” and refused to discuss further details. It can be inferred that Dr. Irazoqui expected an implantable device integrating my signal-processing IC, the lab’s wireless transceiver, analog front-end circuit, and closed-loop nerve stimulation software. This spans not only my EE skills but data science, fabrication, and anatomy and can be another PhD topic. Having no choice, I sought animal resources, learned surgeries elsewhere, and self-funded via campus roles (including unfunded 2018) to continue my PhD. Despite investing significant time, money, and effort, Dr. Irazoqui questioned me in June 2019 why I didn’t graduate in 6 years and suggested me to **switch lab and start over**. After reporting these unfair situations to Dr. Capano, he questioned me as well, “*Did you work hard throughout these years? Please work harder, like a crazy man, to meet Dr. Irazoqui’s demands*”
(2) Back in Jan. 2020, when I encountered problems in power simulation of my IC, I was also notified that **I received an “U” (unsatisfaction) grade for my PhD research in Fall 2019**. I went through back-and-forth technical discussions on the EDA tool usages with Dr. Mark C. Johnson for weeks in order to find a solution. Meanwhile, Dr. Capano and Dr. Irazoqui ignored my efforts to solve research problems, and pressed me for PhD defense on Spring 2020 via threatening words (See Point 3 for the details). What Dr. Capano and Dr. Irazoqui didn’t know is, when I went through the review process of my IEEE TBioCAS paper after leaving Purdue (with my ECE workstation account already deactivated), I was exactly asked by reviewers with the question on the power analysis of my IC; I wouldn’t be able to get my manuscript accepted smoothly if I hadn’t collected enough simulation data (while withstanding their threatening words) before leaving Purdue.
(3) In January 2020, I sought research in absentia to remotely run simulations and complete remaining paperwork (including my PhD dissertation and paper manuscripts) while maintain my F-1 visa. Sadly, both Dr. Capano and Dr. Irazoqui flatly rejected it - denying even a single semester, despite the 1-year maximum allowed. As seen in Mrs. Van Winkle’s email, Dr. Capano claimed, “*I’ll use as much time as he gave me*” and agreed with Dr. Irazoqui to refused my Spring 2020 registration unless I could defend by March 2020, which requires completing all research work (including solving IC power simulation problem with Dr. Mark Johnson), manuscript reviews and dissertation in 2 months. Dr. Capano’s accusations in that email, however, were unfounded: I finished my dissertation, two paper manuscripts, and proposed my defense by mid-July 2020. Prior to this, I had all manuscripts revised multiple times by Purdue Writing Lab to ensure their completeness (which’s essential since Dr. Irazoqui never reviewed them as noted in Point 1).
Dr. Capano and Dr. Irazoqui made little effort to understand students’ research aims or challenges, nor did they care about their career success (e.g., passing defenses or getting good publications). Their attitudes suggest they simply wanted to kick out students no longer useful to them, regardless of whether they earned their degrees. It’s frustrating that I strived to meet Dr. Irazoqui’s vague and impractical demands, but only to be falsely accused by Dr. Capano of idleness. As Points 3 and 4 will show, I was even pressured by Dr. Capano for PhD defense through threats and taunts.
**3. Threatening**
The experiences to be described in Point 3 and 4 still leave me with distress and fear today, even after I left Purdue on Dec. 2020.
After receiving a "U" (unsatisfactory) grade for my PhD research in Fall 2019 (as noted in Point 2), the ECE graduate office requested me to report to Dr. Capano. I explained my progress, the problems I faced (e.g., IC power simulation mentioned in Point 2), and my solutions, but he threatened that my program could be terminated by ECE Graduate School, rendering years of my efforts wasted:
***“If you get two consecutive U grades, you can be terminated by the Graduate School. You can apply for the third semester, but there’s no guarantee it will be approved”***.
This already followed earlier threats from him, such as "*You don’t have choice; finding another advisor will be difficult for a many-year PhD student like you*", or “*Your abilities will be doubted if you spend years here without earning a PhD*”.
These words from Dr. Capano, I believe, were to pressure me into defending within two months as Dr. Irazoqui demanded. However, neither he nor Dr. Irazoqui suggested me with support channels to meet their timeline (I sought resources like Purdue Writing Lab, campus staffs, and even Taiwanese research institutes, and solved all research and paperwork problems on my own). For instance, when analyzing data and writing my dissertation, I was also struggling with Endnote citation formatting (despite correctly importing sources, errors persisted in the bibliography), I asked Dr. Capano for assistance (like referring me to experienced students) or more time, and he ignored my plea, replying:
***“I don’t know how to do footnotes in Word”.***
Dr. Capano, together with Dr. Irazoqui, simply ignored my pleads for time and helps, intimidated me, and even warned me of the words I’d used due to being fearful and helpless.
I really felt like being raped and coerced not to make any voice during that time.
**4. Ridiculing Student’s Religion, Visa Loss and Family**
(1) During my conversation with Dr. Capano on "U" grade of my Fall 2019 PhD research, weeks of stress, fear, and sleeplessness led me to email him begging for more time. Overwhelmed with helplessness, I included a Bible verse (Proverbs 14:31) at the end of an email, to which Dr. Capano replied:
***“Proverb is the book of wisdom. Good luck in your pursuit of it.”***
Once again, Dr. Capano rejected my plea for time and help with this mocking response. He continued to align with Dr. Irazoqui, threatening another "U" grade and program termination if I failed to meet Dr. Irazoqui’s demands and schedule my PhD defense promptly.
(2) After my Spring 2020 registration was denied (per Point 2), Purdue’s International Students & Scholars (ISS) advised I sign a withdrawal form and leave the U.S. immediately to avoid F-1 visa violations and potential illegal status. This terrified me, for I couldn’t return to campus for my defense without a valid F-1 even after completing my dissertation. Surprisingly, instead of advising potential ways to take defense without F-1, Dr. Capano, as graduate coordinator, sent this sarcastic email:
***“You are on track to graduate from Professor Irazoqui's group in the next several months. As Graduate Coordinator, there is no longer any reason for me to be involved in your case. Good luck finishing your work, writing a dissertation, and defending your thesis.”***
(3) On July 2019, my F-1 visa expired, requiring me to return to Taiwan to renew it. My wife and I also planned to visit my terminally ill father-in-law (who died in March 2020 from encephalitis), and I’d already paid nearly 5,000 USDs for flight tickets. Shockingly, Dr. Capano demanded I “absorb the cost, stay at Purdue to finish my dissertation, and take my defense in two weeks”. I was devastated upon receiving his demand, but he touched my shoulder and asked sarcastically, “ARE YOU GOING TO DO ANYTHING TO HURT YOUR WIFE OR YOUR NEWBORN DAUGHTER?” After replying “no” in disgust, I endured his sneer: “GOOD. STAY STRONG. DON’T KILL YOURSELF EITHER” (I have no email records for these words, but it’s not surprising given how these words align with Dr. Capano’s ridiculing response).
I don’t know if Dr. Capano is a Christian, nor how much wisdom he’s gained from Proverbs. I’d like to ask Dr. Capano a very simple question, “HOW WOULD YOU FEEL IF SOMEONE IN AUTHORITY THREATENS OR MAKES FUN OF YOU DURING YOUR DESPERATE TIME!?”
**5. The Response from the ECE Graduate Program Director** In August 2020, Purdue ECE Graduate Program Director Mr. Matthew Golden emailed to inform me that Dr. Capano had stepped down as ECE graduate coordinator in July 2020 and that I should stop contacting him about my program. In these exchanges, I solemnly outlined Dr. Capano’s potential misconduct (false accusations, threats, etc.) and my intent to report him to higher campus authorities. Then Mr. Golden replied:
***“You are free to report your case and him to somewhere else. However, my advice would be to do as well as you can on your defense and finish the process to earn your degree.”***
I’m convinced that Dr. Capano’s conducts - especially those in Points 3 and 4 - fit the definition of academic bullying, as outlined in Nature’s “How to blow the whistle on an academic bully” (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01252-z ). Sadly, instead of addressing this, Mr. Golden discouraged me from reporting by urging me to finish my defense and leave Purdue. This is Purdue ECE Graduate School’s disappointing response to students reporting potential faculty bullying.
**A Summary from Point 1 to Point 5** I didn’t turn to criticize Dr. Capano right after our meeting started in Fall, 2017. Early on I stayed cautious by constantly asking Dr. Capano if I needed to improve my manner, and expressed my gratitude in each meeting, regardless of his responses noted in Point 1. Unfortunately, starting from Jan. 2020, the final moment of my PhD program, Dr. Capano’s behaviors became cruel and scornful. Whatever Dr. Capano’s original purpose was, his threatening and ridiculing behaviors only bring students with terror and despair, and I didn’t see how those behaviors would aid students if Dr. Capano really wished students to earn their PhD degree. As an international student who had invested a huge amount of time and money in the PhD program, I lived in the fear of PhD termination when I struggled to solve research problems and complete my thesis. This, of course, took a toll on my physical and mental wellnesses, but Dr. Capano (and Dr. Irazoqui) never seemed to care about it.
**We came to Purdue as a member of Boilermaker community to pursue knowledges and do researches contributive to the mankind, not to receive oppressions or even bullying like this.**
--
I’d like to introduce Artilux Inc. (www.artiluxtech.com), a startup company I’m currently serving in, and my direct manager, Dr. Stanley Yeh, the vice president of Artilux who holds a Stanford EE PhD degree and has over 20 years of experience at top semiconductor companies including TSMC, MediaTek, and Apple. For the survival of Artilux, Dr. Yeh closely oversees team progress: we hold 2 to 3 weekly group meetings for slide-based progress reports and in-depth technical discussions, where Dr. Yeh stays engaged and offers expert feedback across all areas (IC design, software, optics, etc.). Each team member also has a personal meeting with Dr. Yeh’s per month, where he asks our thoughts and supports that he may provide. For example, my team kicked off a biomedical sensing project on 2022; we started from scratch via paper studies and customized experiments. My major goal in this project is the VLSI architecture for on-chip signal processing (with a 6-month IC tape-out deadline), and I once struggled to validate its functionality. Thankfully, in one personal meeting with Dr. Yeh, he encouraged me offered me helpful advices, which enabled me to complete my work on time and earn recognition from him in 2022 performance evaluation. Besides, workload and timeline assigned to each employee by Dr. Yeh are also fair and reasonable, according to their primary skills (e.g., I’m a chip architect focusing on the VLSI architecture design for Artilux IC products).
What’s also worth sharing is the core values of Artilux – appreciation, consistency, and curiosity. The managers of Artilux, including Dr. Stanley Yeh, expect us to persistently work the best to achieve project goals and bring innovations by valiantly facing the unknown, yet they appreciate the talents and contributions of employees. As the pioneer in cutting-edge Ge-Si photo-transducers and their applications, we frequently encounter challenges which take us months or even years to figure out solutions. Nevertheless, the effort and wellness of employees are always valued by Artilux; we’re granted with reasonable time and sufficient supports to bring out reliable technologies and products, and all Artilux employees, including me, have never heard from our managers any threatening word (e.g., “*You can be fired if you fail to work out the product in the next two months*”, or “*You may consider finding another company to join*”) when endeavoring to make progresses in our projects. Moreover, the opinions of Artilux employees have never been overlooked, as long as they’re contributive to team members, projects, and the entire company; we also have never been rejected or ridiculed whenever we propose to the managers our thoughts or needs.
**If a start-up company like Artilux knows to appreciate and value its employees, why can’t Purdue University do it?**
We all know power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The faculty members of Purdue University enjoy full freedom in managing labs and classes, but some of them, lacking knowledge of students’ specialties, arbitrarily assign tasks and timelines and dismiss student’s requests for more time as incompetence or excuses. Unfortunately, Dr. Capano, as a supposedly unbiased graduate coordinator, merely demanded students to accept their advisors’ policies - reasonable or not - at all costs, and even imposed more pressures on them through threatening and mocking. It’s disheartening that a professor of Purdue University like Dr. Capano acts as a bully who enslaves their subordinates rather than enlightens them with professional suggestions, and that Purdue University, as an U.S. public university with more than 150-year history, fails to match a startup company in valuing and nurturing its employees.
--
Here’re my requests, regarding Dr. Capano’s behaviors:
**I. Investigate thoroughly and impartially** Please interview students who have been supervised or advised by Dr. Capano - whether in his courses, lab, or via mediations during his term as ECE graduate coordinator. Ask if they faced unreasonable demands, or were ever threatened or ridiculed by him. Though no longer the graduate coordinator, Dr. Capano remains an active ECE faculty member teaching and supervising graduate research. Please also survey ECE graduate students on their experiences consulting Mr. Matt Golden: whether they received dismissive responses from him when reporting advisor conflicts or bullying.
Many students choose Purdue University for its engineering reputation; they may take Dr. Capano’s courses, work under his supervision, or consult Mr. Golden on their graduate programs. Please help foster a sound environment where prospective students can study and work without feeling terrorized or abased.
**II. Establish resources and protocols to review the conducts and demands of faculty members** From my experience at Purdue University, there is no mechanism to protect graduate students from unjust policies that risk their careers. In most cases, mediators suggest or even force students to submit to advisors during conflicts. For example, when I planned to sign the withdrawal form as Purdue ISS advised, the former ombudsman Dr. Thomas Atkinson asked why I couldn’t accept Dr. Irazoqui’s demand to defend by March 2020, and whether I’d risk him barring my later registration.
*Illinois Computer Science Values & Code of Conduct* (https://cs.illinois.edu/about/values) outlines proper faculty conducts, especially for research supervisors. Please establish resources and protocols to review faculty behaviors using this as a reference. This also includes mechanisms to assess supervisor’s demands in order that students face ambitious yet achievable goals within timelines. As my current supervisor Dr. Yeh notes, his duty as a manager, is to set high and attainable goals for his subordinates and urge them to do better (This, of course, includes understanding their work contents to plan systematically and assign tasks reasonably). I believe Purdue University can and ought to do it as well to fulfill its mission of empowering students and fostering innovations.
**III. Strengthen Student’s Awareness of Academic Bullies** Please consider holding a semesterly seminar to strengthen student’s awareness of academic bullies. It should cover: (1) definitions and examples of bullying; (2) on-campus support for those affected; (3) what to expect after reporting bullying. It’s recommended to encourage anonymous sharing of student’s experiences and use them as case studies of academic bullies in the seminar. Please also keep graduate students informed throughout their studies of Purdue’s grievance policies and bullying complaint channels.
--
My former supervisors at National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan - Dr. Song-Nien Tang and Dr. Yu-Chuan Su, and my current supervisor, Dr. Stanley Yeh, share a key trait: they care about their subordinates’ wellness and success. Under their guidance, I’ve thrived in my careers:
• With Dr. Tang’s patient, professional mentorship, I earned my master degree by taping out an IC in advanced CMOS and co-authoring an IEEE TCAS-II paper. • As a research assistant in Dr. Su’s lab for 2 years and 9 months, I published in conferences and journals including IEEE SENSORS, IEEE MEMS, and Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, thanks to his willingness to give students opportunities. • Now, I’m proud to work with Dr. Yeh, turning our pioneering ideas into patents and products.
I’m convinced true empowerment for innovation comes from valuing employees and prioritizing their well-being and success.
Please value each Purdue employee, and take actions.
I finally decided to stand out and document the bullying incident I underwent during my graduate study at Purdue University Elmore Family School of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) Dept. and my concern on the former Purdue ECE graduate school coordinator, Dr. Michael A. Capano. The form of bullying includes **false accusation**, **threatening** and **ridiculing** that can be considered discrimination against international students, as can be found in the letter "Concerns on the Former Purdue ECE Graduate Coordinator" (https://lnkd.in/gMG58zD8).
This letter was sent to Purdue Hotline, Office of Institutional Equity (OIE), and the First Lady Dr. Kei Hui, and the following replying was received from Dr. Hui: “Purdue strives to be a strong institution and foundation for higher education. I am disappointed to hear about the incident during your time here as a grad student.” A brief version of the bullying incident has also been published on the newsletter website of Academic Parity Movement (https://lnkd.in/gD3DAVW9) which starts with “I am an Asian student who joined a US American PhD program in Electrical and Computer Engineering in 2013”.
It's all about the wellness of all graduate students at Purdue University, especially international students. A start-up company like Artilux Inc. already knows to value its employees and helps them achieve each project goal via reasonable timeline, sufficient supports, and objective performance evaluation. It’s disappointing that some faculties of Purdue University are still driving students with fear and disparagement to meet their personal benefits.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
【Concerns on the Former Purdue ECE Graduate Coordinator】
To whom this letter reaches:
I’m writing this mail to arouse your concern on the behaviors of the former Purdue Electrical & Computer Engineering (ECE) Dept. graduate coordinator. My name is Jui-Wei (Johnson) Tsai, a former Purdue ECE Ph.D. student who graduated in Fall 2020. This report is based on my experiences from 2017 to 2020, when I sought mediations from the former graduate coordinator, Dr. Michael Capano, amid conflicts with my major advisor, Dr. Pedro Irazoqui.
I did hesitate to write this letter for several reasons: Dr. Capano is a tenured full professor, while I was an international student with few U.S. connections; reporting someone who once held authority over me, and may still influence my career in industry or academia, puts my future careers at risk; and I must acknowledge Dr. Capano’s claim that I used foul language in my mails to him, a reaction to stress and despair from his behavior.
Nevertheless, since leaving Purdue in 2020, I’ve heard similar stories from other international students facing mistreatment without proper reporting channels or protections. As more international students (especially Asians) are coming to Purdue’s graduate programs, it would be unethical to stay silent and let others endure similar bullying. Having email records to substantiate my experiences, I’ve resolved to speak up and document what happened.
--
I began my graduate studies in Purdue ECE Dept. and joined Dr. Irazoqui’s lab in August 2013. Before accepting his research assistantship, he assured me there would be ample time to explore new areas in my PhD work and no need to worry about future funding.
In February 2015, I was asked to switch topics to align with the lab’s funding. By August 2017, having co-authored prestigious papers like IEEE ISSCC, JSSC, and TBioCAS, I was notified my funding would end due to lab funding changes and claimed irrelevance of my research topic to lab’s future direction (**with a demand to find TA myself**). I was also removed from the lab’s surgical protocol for animal experiments, despite still being required to validate my research on animals (**with a demand to find animal resources elsewhere as well**).
A former ECE graduate student informed me the department could help resolve advisor conflicts, so I sought assistance and began meeting with then-graduate coordinator Dr. Capano. However, the final two years of my program became nearly a torment, leaving me with lasting mental distress. Below are questionable behaviors by Dr. Capano in his role as ECE graduate coordinator:
**1. Unfairness**
In early meetings with Dr. Michael Capano, I repeatedly shared my struggles in Dr. Pedro Irazoqui’s lab, including funding and animal resource cuts as noted earlier. Here’re two additional cases:
(1) In January 2018, I sent Dr. Irazoqui a manuscript (later published in IEEE TBioCAS: https://doi.org/10.1109/TBCAS.2020.3043266) in the hope to regain his trust, but it went unaddressed for 2.5 years until my August 2020 defense.
(2) After my January 2018 preliminary exam, Dr. Irazoqui required IC tape-out of my VLSI architecture (i.e., having it manufactured by semiconductor foundries) for graduation but never specified a date. I paid my own tuition for Spring and Fall 2018 to await it, which finally happened in late October 2018.
Unfortunately, Dr. Capano dismissed the abovementioned issues, citing excuses like “*Dr. Irazoqui is busy with other students*” or “*He has his own plan*”, and even referenced his MIT PhD advisor experiences to justify my situation (**details omitted for Dr. Capano’s privacy; feel free to email me for more**). His response to my struggle was always, “*This is the grinding you need to learn to withstand in your PhD*.”
**2. Disregarding Student’s Efforts and False Accusation**
Dr. Capano had no respect for student’s efforts; he accused students of not working hard when students ask for time and help to complete their research work.
(1) When first joining Dr. Irazoqui’s lab, I did express my research focus: VLSI architectures for real-time biomedical signal processing, with emphasis on architecture definition and digital IC design (as the only member working in this area). After my January 2018 preliminary exam, Dr. Irazoqui demanded I prove the value of my work value via animal studies; he wanted a “*nice and fair comparison with software-computing approach on animals*” and refused to discuss further details. It can be inferred that Dr. Irazoqui expected an implantable device integrating my signal-processing IC, the lab’s wireless transceiver, analog front-end circuit, and closed-loop nerve stimulation software. This spans not only my EE skills but data science, fabrication, and anatomy and can be another PhD topic.
Having no choice, I sought animal resources, learned surgeries elsewhere, and self-funded via campus roles (including unfunded 2018) to continue my PhD. Despite investing significant time, money, and effort, Dr. Irazoqui questioned me in June 2019 why I didn’t graduate in 6 years and suggested me to **switch lab and start over**. After reporting these unfair situations to Dr. Capano, he questioned me as well, “*Did you work hard throughout these years? Please work harder, like a crazy man, to meet Dr. Irazoqui’s demands*”
(2) Back in Jan. 2020, when I encountered problems in power simulation of my IC, I was also notified that **I received an “U” (unsatisfaction) grade for my PhD research in Fall 2019**. I went through back-and-forth technical discussions on the EDA tool usages with Dr. Mark C. Johnson for weeks in order to find a solution. Meanwhile, Dr. Capano and Dr. Irazoqui ignored my efforts to solve research problems, and pressed me for PhD defense on Spring 2020 via threatening words (See Point 3 for the details).
What Dr. Capano and Dr. Irazoqui didn’t know is, when I went through the review process of my IEEE TBioCAS paper after leaving Purdue (with my ECE workstation account already deactivated), I was exactly asked by reviewers with the question on the power analysis of my IC; I wouldn’t be able to get my manuscript accepted smoothly if I hadn’t collected enough simulation data (while withstanding their threatening words) before leaving Purdue.
(3) In January 2020, I sought research in absentia to remotely run simulations and complete remaining paperwork (including my PhD dissertation and paper manuscripts) while maintain my F-1 visa. Sadly, both Dr. Capano and Dr. Irazoqui flatly rejected it - denying even a single semester, despite the 1-year maximum allowed. As seen in Mrs. Van Winkle’s email, Dr. Capano claimed, “*I’ll use as much time as he gave me*” and agreed with Dr. Irazoqui to refused my Spring 2020 registration unless I could defend by March 2020, which requires completing all research work (including solving IC power simulation problem with Dr. Mark Johnson), manuscript reviews and dissertation in 2 months.
Dr. Capano’s accusations in that email, however, were unfounded: I finished my dissertation, two paper manuscripts, and proposed my defense by mid-July 2020. Prior to this, I had all manuscripts revised multiple times by Purdue Writing Lab to ensure their completeness (which’s essential since Dr. Irazoqui never reviewed them as noted in Point 1).
Dr. Capano and Dr. Irazoqui made little effort to understand students’ research aims or challenges, nor did they care about their career success (e.g., passing defenses or getting good publications). Their attitudes suggest they simply wanted to kick out students no longer useful to them, regardless of whether they earned their degrees. It’s frustrating that I strived to meet Dr. Irazoqui’s vague and impractical demands, but only to be falsely accused by Dr. Capano of idleness. As Points 3 and 4 will show, I was even pressured by Dr. Capano for PhD defense through threats and taunts.
**3. Threatening**
The experiences to be described in Point 3 and 4 still leave me with distress and fear today, even after I left Purdue on Dec. 2020.
After receiving a "U" (unsatisfactory) grade for my PhD research in Fall 2019 (as noted in Point 2), the ECE graduate office requested me to report to Dr. Capano. I explained my progress, the problems I faced (e.g., IC power simulation mentioned in Point 2), and my solutions, but he threatened that my program could be terminated by ECE Graduate School, rendering years of my efforts wasted:
***“If you get two consecutive U grades, you can be terminated by the Graduate School. You can apply for the third semester, but there’s no guarantee it will be approved”***.
This already followed earlier threats from him, such as "*You don’t have choice; finding another advisor will be difficult for a many-year PhD student like you*", or “*Your abilities will be doubted if you spend years here without earning a PhD*”.
These words from Dr. Capano, I believe, were to pressure me into defending within two months as Dr. Irazoqui demanded. However, neither he nor Dr. Irazoqui suggested me with support channels to meet their timeline (I sought resources like Purdue Writing Lab, campus staffs, and even Taiwanese research institutes, and solved all research and paperwork problems on my own). For instance, when analyzing data and writing my dissertation, I was also struggling with Endnote citation formatting (despite correctly importing sources, errors persisted in the bibliography), I asked Dr. Capano for assistance (like referring me to experienced students) or more time, and he ignored my plea, replying:
***“I don’t know how to do footnotes in Word”.***
Dr. Capano, together with Dr. Irazoqui, simply ignored my pleads for time and helps, intimidated me, and even warned me of the words I’d used due to being fearful and helpless.
I really felt like being raped and coerced not to make any voice during that time.
**4. Ridiculing Student’s Religion, Visa Loss and Family**
(1) During my conversation with Dr. Capano on "U" grade of my Fall 2019 PhD research, weeks of stress, fear, and sleeplessness led me to email him begging for more time. Overwhelmed with helplessness, I included a Bible verse (Proverbs 14:31) at the end of an email, to which Dr. Capano replied:
***“Proverb is the book of wisdom. Good luck in your pursuit of it.”***
Once again, Dr. Capano rejected my plea for time and help with this mocking response. He continued to align with Dr. Irazoqui, threatening another "U" grade and program termination if I failed to meet Dr. Irazoqui’s demands and schedule my PhD defense promptly.
(2) After my Spring 2020 registration was denied (per Point 2), Purdue’s International Students & Scholars (ISS) advised I sign a withdrawal form and leave the U.S. immediately to avoid F-1 visa violations and potential illegal status. This terrified me, for I couldn’t return to campus for my defense without a valid F-1 even after completing my dissertation. Surprisingly, instead of advising potential ways to take defense without F-1, Dr. Capano, as graduate coordinator, sent this sarcastic email:
***“You are on track to graduate from Professor Irazoqui's group in the next several months. As Graduate Coordinator, there is no longer any reason for me to be involved in your case. Good luck finishing your work, writing a dissertation, and defending your thesis.”***
(3) On July 2019, my F-1 visa expired, requiring me to return to Taiwan to renew it. My wife and I also planned to visit my terminally ill father-in-law (who died in March 2020 from encephalitis), and I’d already paid nearly 5,000 USDs for flight tickets.
Shockingly, Dr. Capano demanded I “absorb the cost, stay at Purdue to finish my dissertation, and take my defense in two weeks”. I was devastated upon receiving his demand, but he touched my shoulder and asked sarcastically, “ARE YOU GOING TO DO ANYTHING TO HURT YOUR WIFE OR YOUR NEWBORN DAUGHTER?” After replying “no” in disgust, I endured his sneer: “GOOD. STAY STRONG. DON’T KILL YOURSELF EITHER” (I have no email records for these words, but it’s not surprising given how these words align with Dr. Capano’s ridiculing response).
I don’t know if Dr. Capano is a Christian, nor how much wisdom he’s gained from Proverbs. I’d like to ask Dr. Capano a very simple question, “HOW WOULD YOU FEEL IF SOMEONE IN AUTHORITY THREATENS OR MAKES FUN OF YOU DURING YOUR DESPERATE TIME!?”
**5. The Response from the ECE Graduate Program Director**
In August 2020, Purdue ECE Graduate Program Director Mr. Matthew Golden emailed to inform me that Dr. Capano had stepped down as ECE graduate coordinator in July 2020 and that I should stop contacting him about my program. In these exchanges, I solemnly outlined Dr. Capano’s potential misconduct (false accusations, threats, etc.) and my intent to report him to higher campus authorities. Then Mr. Golden replied:
***“You are free to report your case and him to somewhere else. However, my advice would be to do as well as you can on your defense and finish the process to earn your degree.”***
I’m convinced that Dr. Capano’s conducts - especially those in Points 3 and 4 - fit the definition of academic bullying, as outlined in Nature’s “How to blow the whistle on an academic bully” (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01252-z ). Sadly, instead of addressing this, Mr. Golden discouraged me from reporting by urging me to finish my defense and leave Purdue. This is Purdue ECE Graduate School’s disappointing response to students reporting potential faculty bullying.
**A Summary from Point 1 to Point 5**
I didn’t turn to criticize Dr. Capano right after our meeting started in Fall, 2017. Early on I stayed cautious by constantly asking Dr. Capano if I needed to improve my manner, and expressed my gratitude in each meeting, regardless of his responses noted in Point 1. Unfortunately, starting from Jan. 2020, the final moment of my PhD program, Dr. Capano’s behaviors became cruel and scornful. Whatever Dr. Capano’s original purpose was, his threatening and ridiculing behaviors only bring students with terror and despair, and I didn’t see how those behaviors would aid students if Dr. Capano really wished students to earn their PhD degree. As an international student who had invested a huge amount of time and money in the PhD program, I lived in the fear of PhD termination when I struggled to solve research problems and complete my thesis. This, of course, took a toll on my physical and mental wellnesses, but Dr. Capano (and Dr. Irazoqui) never seemed to care about it.
**We came to Purdue as a member of Boilermaker community to pursue knowledges and do researches contributive to the mankind, not to receive oppressions or even bullying like this.**
--
I’d like to introduce Artilux Inc. (www.artiluxtech.com), a startup company I’m currently serving in, and my direct manager, Dr. Stanley Yeh, the vice president of Artilux who holds a Stanford EE PhD degree and has over 20 years of experience at top semiconductor companies including TSMC, MediaTek, and Apple. For the survival of Artilux, Dr. Yeh closely oversees team progress: we hold 2 to 3 weekly group meetings for slide-based progress reports and in-depth technical discussions, where Dr. Yeh stays engaged and offers expert feedback across all areas (IC design, software, optics, etc.). Each team member also has a personal meeting with Dr. Yeh’s per month, where he asks our thoughts and supports that he may provide. For example, my team kicked off a biomedical sensing project on 2022; we started from scratch via paper studies and customized experiments. My major goal in this project is the VLSI architecture for on-chip signal processing (with a 6-month IC tape-out deadline), and I once struggled to validate its functionality. Thankfully, in one personal meeting with Dr. Yeh, he encouraged me offered me helpful advices, which enabled me to complete my work on time and earn recognition from him in 2022 performance evaluation. Besides, workload and timeline assigned to each employee by Dr. Yeh are also fair and reasonable, according to their primary skills (e.g., I’m a chip architect focusing on the VLSI architecture design for Artilux IC products).
What’s also worth sharing is the core values of Artilux – appreciation, consistency, and curiosity. The managers of Artilux, including Dr. Stanley Yeh, expect us to persistently work the best to achieve project goals and bring innovations by valiantly facing the unknown, yet they appreciate the talents and contributions of employees. As the pioneer in cutting-edge Ge-Si photo-transducers and their applications, we frequently encounter challenges which take us months or even years to figure out solutions. Nevertheless, the effort and wellness of employees are always valued by Artilux; we’re granted with reasonable time and sufficient supports to bring out reliable technologies and products, and all Artilux employees, including me, have never heard from our managers any threatening word (e.g., “*You can be fired if you fail to work out the product in the next two months*”, or “*You may consider finding another company to join*”) when endeavoring to make progresses in our projects. Moreover, the opinions of Artilux employees have never been overlooked, as long as they’re contributive to team members, projects, and the entire company; we also have never been rejected or ridiculed whenever we propose to the managers our thoughts or needs.
**If a start-up company like Artilux knows to appreciate and value its employees, why can’t Purdue University do it?**
We all know power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The faculty members of Purdue University enjoy full freedom in managing labs and classes, but some of them, lacking knowledge of students’ specialties, arbitrarily assign tasks and timelines and dismiss student’s requests for more time as incompetence or excuses. Unfortunately, Dr. Capano, as a supposedly unbiased graduate coordinator, merely demanded students to accept their advisors’ policies - reasonable or not - at all costs, and even imposed more pressures on them through threatening and mocking. It’s disheartening that a professor of Purdue University like Dr. Capano acts as a bully who enslaves their subordinates rather than enlightens them with professional suggestions, and that Purdue University, as an U.S. public university with more than 150-year history, fails to match a startup company in valuing and nurturing its employees.
--
Here’re my requests, regarding Dr. Capano’s behaviors:
**I. Investigate thoroughly and impartially**
Please interview students who have been supervised or advised by Dr. Capano - whether in his courses, lab, or via mediations during his term as ECE graduate coordinator. Ask if they faced unreasonable demands, or were ever threatened or ridiculed by him. Though no longer the graduate coordinator, Dr. Capano remains an active ECE faculty member teaching and supervising graduate research. Please also survey ECE graduate students on their experiences consulting Mr. Matt Golden: whether they received dismissive responses from him when reporting advisor conflicts or bullying.
Many students choose Purdue University for its engineering reputation; they may take Dr. Capano’s courses, work under his supervision, or consult Mr. Golden on their graduate programs. Please help foster a sound environment where prospective students can study and work without feeling terrorized or abased.
**II. Establish resources and protocols to review the conducts and demands of faculty members**
From my experience at Purdue University, there is no mechanism to protect graduate students from unjust policies that risk their careers. In most cases, mediators suggest or even force students to submit to advisors during conflicts. For example, when I planned to sign the withdrawal form as Purdue ISS advised, the former ombudsman Dr. Thomas Atkinson asked why I couldn’t accept Dr. Irazoqui’s demand to defend by March 2020, and whether I’d risk him barring my later registration.
*Illinois Computer Science Values & Code of Conduct* (https://cs.illinois.edu/about/values) outlines proper faculty conducts, especially for research supervisors. Please establish resources and protocols to review faculty behaviors using this as a reference. This also includes mechanisms to assess supervisor’s demands in order that students face ambitious yet achievable goals within timelines. As my current supervisor Dr. Yeh notes, his duty as a manager, is to set high and attainable goals for his subordinates and urge them to do better (This, of course, includes understanding their work contents to plan systematically and assign tasks reasonably). I believe Purdue University can and ought to do it as well to fulfill its mission of empowering students and fostering innovations.
**III. Strengthen Student’s Awareness of Academic Bullies**
Please consider holding a semesterly seminar to strengthen student’s awareness of academic bullies. It should cover: (1) definitions and examples of bullying; (2) on-campus support for those affected; (3) what to expect after reporting bullying. It’s recommended to encourage anonymous sharing of student’s experiences and use them as case studies of academic bullies in the seminar. Please also keep graduate students informed throughout their studies of Purdue’s grievance policies and bullying complaint channels.
--
My former supervisors at National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan - Dr. Song-Nien Tang and Dr. Yu-Chuan Su, and my current supervisor, Dr. Stanley Yeh, share a key trait: they care about their subordinates’ wellness and success. Under their guidance, I’ve thrived in my careers:
• With Dr. Tang’s patient, professional mentorship, I earned my master degree by taping out an IC in advanced CMOS and co-authoring an IEEE TCAS-II paper.
• As a research assistant in Dr. Su’s lab for 2 years and 9 months, I published in conferences and journals including IEEE SENSORS, IEEE MEMS, and Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, thanks to his willingness to give students opportunities.
• Now, I’m proud to work with Dr. Yeh, turning our pioneering ideas into patents and products.
I’m convinced true empowerment for innovation comes from valuing employees and prioritizing their well-being and success.
Please value each Purdue employee, and take actions.
Sincerely yours,
Jui-Wei (Johnson) Tsai
frozenraytsai@gmail.com
No, I don't recommend this PI.