It was a prebuttal.
Radford University’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors and another group of 65 faculty members wrote to the university’s Board of Visitors, complaining about department mergers approved at the board’s last meeting and the recent program review. They wanted the decision rolled back so the faculty could have more input.
Wayne Saubert, the faculty’s representative on the board, was set to bring up the faculty letter first thing at the Academic Affairs Committee meeting Thursday morning. But the committee voted to rearrange the agenda so Provost Wil Stanton, with the aid of Vice Provost Debra Templeton and Graduate School Dean Dennis Grady, took a little more than an hour to address the letters’ concerns before the letters were mentioned.
Stanton argued that everything done to restructure schools as well as the compressed review process was in keeping with Radford’s long term plan, its rules of governance, and established practice. The review was done much faster than is typical, Stanton said, but, “I don’t believe anybody right now believes we’re in typical economic times. … We didn’t have time to do the typical thing.”
Program reviews generally take at least six months. Some of the programs in the expedited review that began in February had just finished their last reviews in December. In place of an intensive review, program directors were asked to, in no more than five pages, describe: how their programs contribute the university’s mission and strategic plan; what adverse impact the program’s elimination would; the program’s contribution to the new core curriculum, interdisciplinary teaching, service, and research efforts; how the program benefits the local community, region, Commonwealth, and larger society.
In those five pages, they were also asked to describe their plans “for increasing program viability” and to provide any additional information that might support their recommendation.
Some programs chose to close down rather than go through the formal process and 28 concentrations within majors were cut before the process began. Of the 24 programs considered by the Academic Program Review Committee, only one—the graduate certificate in Appalachian studies—was recommended to be discontinued.
Board members discounted students’ objections, saying they were being given misinformation by faculty. Board member R.J. Kirk dismissed what he called a “smear campaign.”
Stanton downplayed the level of faculty displeasure, saying, “We have a couple of vocal faculty, a few vocal faculty.”
When Stanton said that contrary to popular belief, his intention had never been to put programs on the chopping block, Kirk stopped him. Calling it popular belief would imply that a majority believes that, Kirk said. “We have no evidence of that.”
Other committee members were quick to come to Stanton’s defense.
“I don’t see it being expedited rush to judgment,” Rector Thomas Fraim said. “I think that this has been a great process.”
Board member Mary Ann Hovis said, “When I was at Radford years ago, being given two weeks to answer five questions would not have been considered expedited. I just don’t get it.”
Faculty Senate President Stephen Owen laid out the faculty’s concerns and said that the plan to form an investigating committee came not from animosity, but from a desire to clarify rumors, “to restore confidence and trust and communication and so forth.”
Fraim said he was glad to hear that, and that he couldn’t agree more with the need to do that.
Kirk, who came to the committee meeting in camouflage, fresh from hunting turkey on his Pulaski County property, said, “I was very concerned coming here that we were slighting students somehow, some way.” But Stanton’s report convinced him that wasn’t so. Kirk called for, and the board approved, a resolution supporting the process.
Nearly lost in all the discussion was a report in the board’s information packet that said Stanton had decided not to follow the Academic Program Review Committee’s recommendation on the Appalachian Studies certificate program.
It will be continued, with a charge to restructure, to become more interdisciplinary. Some programs charged with restructuring will undergo review again in 2011. The Appalachian Studies certificate program, the only graduate level Appalachian Studies program in Virginia, will not. But Stanton wants a more informal report in two years.
“I hope it works well,” Stanton said. “Based on all the cards and letters I received, there must be 10,000 people who want to support it.”
Tim Thornton is a freelance writer who resides in Eastern Montgomery County and is a former reporter for The Roanoke Times where he covered Radford University and Radford City.
11 responses so far ↓
1 RUInsane? // Apr 23, 2009 at 5:29 pm
I don’t have any idea who he is, but this Kirk guy sounds like he might be a lawyer. I quote the above article:
“When Stanton said that contrary to popular belief, his intention had never been to put programs on the chopping block, Kirk stopped him. Calling it popular belief would imply that a majority believes that, Kirk said. “We have no evidence of that.””
Sounds awfully defensive to me.
2 A conserned student // Apr 23, 2009 at 6:30 pm
I think that the BOV are acting like ostriches and have their heads in the ground.
3 Tim E // Apr 23, 2009 at 7:01 pm
It appears as if Stanton and some of the board members are deliberately downplaying the level of discontent, or are simply oblivious to it. Either way, this is disturbing. Board member Mary Ann Hovis seems to compare a program review process with a simple check-box questionnaire: “When I was at Radford years ago, being given two weeks to answer five questions would not have been considered expedited. I just don’t get it.” Um, excuse me Ms. Hovis, but perhaps you might want to go back to Board Governance 101 to at least attempt to maintain the broad oversight and perspective expected of board members, rather than make judgments on something I suspect you’ve never been involved with. And Stanton’s assertion that faculty displeasure is “a couple of vocal faculty, a few vocal faculty” is shamefully inaccurate and out-of-touch. Perhaps he failed to grasp in his own undoubtedly liberal education that these “few vocal faculty” represent a deep and wide discontent among faculty, staff, and students. And Rector “I think this has been a great process” Frain, this statement is almost as ridiculous as Kyle’s statement of cutting back on her lifestyle. Just what does he define as “a great process?” Apparently, anything that is top down and placed in the capable hands of a self-proclaimed expert (Stanton) in all disciplines.
Not long ago I thought that the problems here started and ended with Stanton and Kyle. With a board that would not automatically side with these technocrats, there was hope that a voice for maintaining the values of this instution from the top down, to support the countless voices from the grassroots. Yet, perhaps hope can only be found in those “few vocal ” with their many friends and allies that will be here long after this embarassing leadership team has gone onto work and hobbies that align more closely with what they know, or are willing to learn about.
4 Nose // Apr 23, 2009 at 8:18 pm
Don’t forget that there are many untenured faculty members who agree with the letter those sixty-five people signed but who did not sign it. In my department, we did not even ask them to sign; we value them too much.
5 Cynthia // Apr 23, 2009 at 8:22 pm
“When I was at Radford years ago, being given two weeks to answer five questions would not have been considered expedited. I just don’t get it.”
Mary Ann Hovis, is it?
Oh my. Is this one of the capable hands we had hoped to inform and engage?
Where’s my Alfred E Neuman shirt with “What! Me Worry?” I need it.
6 Planet RU-Admin // Apr 23, 2009 at 8:26 pm
A smear campaign? A couple of vocal faculty?
I wonder what planet Stanton and Kirk actually come from.
7 S.A.L.A. President // Apr 23, 2009 at 10:18 pm
The administration’s trivialization of the hard-working students involved in S.A.L.A. is insulting and will not be taken quietly.
8 Physics Student // Apr 24, 2009 at 8:42 am
Two weeks to answer five questions may be plenty of time for some people. If they’re easy questions. Questioning whether or not a program as fundamental as physics, chemistry, or mathematics should be continued or significantly restructured takes a lot more time than an hour meeting in a basement. In the program review meeting for the sciences, one member of the panel even compared math, physics, chemistry, geology, and geography to the Home Economics program that was a part of Radford many years ago. The vast majority, if not all, of the students and faculty do not agree with Kyle and Stanton. Many faculty haven’t spoken out because they are afraid of losing their jobs. So are work-study students. While at a protest a couple weeks back, there were several work-study students who came up and told us that they support us and wanted to march with us but they had to sign a “gag” agreement to not speak out against the administration to keep their jobs!!! What kind of university threatens their students like that?
9 Christi // Apr 24, 2009 at 11:23 am
One battle won, but the war still rages on (well, at least for the *few*, *vocal* ones among us) — a war which clearly Kirk was prepared for by his dress if not his senses (”Kirk, who came to the committee meeting in camouflage, fresh from hunting turkey on his Pulaski County property…..”). (insert eye-roll)
10 Roudy Red // Apr 26, 2009 at 2:40 pm
It is so easy to make fun of his Turkeyness, isn’t it. But, no one should trivialize his influence and look at the harm it has wrought. The man must be shown to be the self-serving egotist he is.
Continue to expose his true character and to prove the actions of him and his lackeys, a.k.a. the RU Administration and the rest of the BOV. Keeping up the pressure will I am convinced cause shallow , conceited, the self-proclaimed elite to turn tail in the face of those holding truth and the high moral ground.
11 Voiceover: RU Firings Invigorate Campus // Sep 15, 2009 at 9:46 am
[…] and staff, and students—and then later in the day, alumni. And while the RU administration can deny that faculty/staff morale is quite possibly at an all-time low, I can attest by the tone of my correspondence yesterday that […]
Leave a Comment