Dear RU Faculty,
Get over yourselves and stop your whining. We’re standing behind the administration.
Love,
The Board of Visitors
No, that’s not the real letter just issued by the RU Board of Visitors (BOV) but that’s pretty much the summary.
On the eve of a possible vote of no confidence for Radford University Provost Wil Stanton, the RU Board of Visitors, which has been consistently quiet regarding the turmoil now synonymous with the administration of President Penelope Kyle, released an open letter to the RU community today.
“We realize that many issues, including the most difficult and contentious, must ultimately be resolved by the administration,” the letter said. “President Kyle and Provost Stanton have worked diligently over the past six months to improve communications and collaboration between the administration and the faculty. . . . We have confidence that the President and the Provost will continue to focus on dialogue and collaboration amidst an environment of trust and respect as they lead our university in the years ahead.”
The letter goes on to cite the challenges of the budget crisis and offers a list of recent accomplishments at RU, apparently crediting the current administration for those successes, but one could just as easily say that those accomplishments were in spite of, not due to, the administration.
It’s all a matter of spin, and the RU administration, now joined by the BOV, is in full spin mode.
Take a simple thing such as this headline from University Relations last week: RU Earns High Marks on 2010 “Green Report Card.”
Sounds great, doesn’t it? But when you look at the story you see that while RU did receive a few high marks in various categories, the overall grade from the Sustainable Endowments Institute was a “C” and in a couple categories RU received an “F.”
This morning, Kyle signed the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment at 9 a.m. in an event at the Bonnie Hurlburt Student Center food court. Kyle proudly mentioned the recent high marks that RU received on the Green Report Card but never mentioned all those mediocre or bad scores. She indicated that RU was on the cutting edge with its green programs when actually most every college has similar programs, and some are much better.
That spin might be a small and unrelated matter to the more serious issues at RU, but when you see that the BOV has written, “President Kyle and Provost Stanton have worked diligently over the past six months to improve communications and collaboration between the administration and the faculty,” you have to wonder which narrative the BOV is hearing.
One wonders if the BOV read the recently released faculty satisfaction survey that in response to the statement “I am happy with the leadership of the university,” saw 60 percent of the faculty respond “very untrue” and another 17 percent respond “untrue.”
Did the BOV read Communication Professor Gwen Brown’s motion for a vote of no confidence in the academic leadership of Stanton? Brown’s motion, in part, said, “The sense of discontent, at the very least, and anger and fear, at the very worst, is palpable on campus and is a constant topic of discussion and focus of faculty attention.”
Did the BOV read the report from the ad hoc committee formed by the Faculty Senate to investigate various allegations toward the administration? That report read, in part, “The Committee witnessed the sincere reactions of experienced faculty to their perceptions that policies have been violated and that academic programs have been adversely affected. The sense of disappointment, anger, and betrayal that comes across in these submissions is tangible and alarming.”
And did the BOV read the section of the Committee report that read, “Failure to recognize the gravity and pervasiveness of the problems that these submissions represent invites the further deterioration of a sense of community at Radford University and will undermine the University’s ability to effectively pursue its mission.”
For the BOV to attribute faculty unrest to “enormous change and financial challenges” once again shows how out of touch this board is with the true climate at RU—and now the BOV has clearly chosen a side.
“We have confidence that the President and the Provost will continue to focus on dialogue and collaboration amidst an environment of trust and respect as they lead our university in the years ahead,” the BOV letter said. Despite the fact that dialogue, collaboration, trust, and respect have all been numerously cited by faculty as lacking in the administration, the BOV has chosen not to hear such complaints and has instead drawn a line in the sand.
It’s unfortunate that the situation at RU has come to a point where the Faculty Senate on Thursday will debate and possibly vote on the merits of a vote of no confidence toward the university’s provost. But the BOV and administration continue to throw gas on the fire.
The BOV letter and its timing comes across as a direct statement to faculty—some might call it a threat—to not go through with the vote of no confidence.
And this comes on the heels of a letter dated Oct. 12 in which the RU Council of Deans signed a statement of support for the leadership of RU and specifically for the provost.
The letter from the Council of Deans led to faculty comments such as, “The Deans have refused to stay neutral and have . . . even further polarized what was already a tense climate.” Or as one faculty member said, “When all these administrators march in lockstep in this letter, you know that what is going on is anything but ‘communication’ but rather an enforced conformity.”
RU has definitely become remarkably tumultuous, and recent letters from the BOV and Council of Deans have hurt more than they’ve helped. RU is in desperate need of calm, level-headed leadership. Instead, we see the lines for battle being drawn.
One is tempted to ponder the lyrics of the 1930s Florence Reece anti-union anthem “Which Side Are You On?” In the song, Reece writes boldly and eloquently about the mine owners and their hired deputies on one side, and the independent, working-class Kentucky coal-miners on the other.
Decades later and even at an institution of higher learning, we still see battle lines being drawn in the workplace. Certainly the hope here is for a much better end result born of collaboration, communication, trust, and respect. But in order for that to happen, the BOV and administration need to stop firing warning shots across the faculty’s bow.
Tim W. Jackson is Editor of the New River Voice.
21 responses so far ↓
1 Alicia // Oct 21, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Excellent column, Tim. The response from the BOV was definitely confirmation that, as you said, sides have been chosen
And clearly, the campus community has no say-so in the future of their institution.
2 Absurdity of it All // Oct 21, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Lines have been indeed drawn though I respectfully disagree with Alicia. We do have a say-so, it just won’t result in a decision other than status quo. Our voices need to be heard tomorrow. With a vote of no confidence we will publically state and affirm our disproval of the administration. If we do not move forward, we will be swallowing our principles and fulfilling the wishes of both the BOV and the administration. The refusal of the BOV to acknowledge the depths of the issue leave us no choice.
3 Rebekah Lewis // Oct 21, 2009 at 7:01 pm
I read the letter sent out by the BOV this morning, and I must say it left quite a bitter taste in my mouth. These people are obviously completely out of touch with what is going on at RU or else they are voluntarily choosing to ignore the problems at hand. The entire letter sounded like the BOV was telling the administration “Sorry, kids, you don’t really know what’s going on. Just trust us, and we’ll take care of you.” It was patronizing, obnoxious, rude, and completely uncalled for. I am so sick of the lack of respect that the wonderful professors of RU are receiving from this administration and the BOV. It is nothing but insulting.
4 Why Tim // Oct 21, 2009 at 7:23 pm
Tim,
The BOV letter did not say “down” with the faculty or us vs. them. It thanked both the Faculty and the Administration. The BOV acknowledged both groups and highlighted each ones support and dedication to RU.
It seems that each time someone says something positive it is up to you to point out what is wrong vs. what is going right.
5 PhDiva // Oct 21, 2009 at 7:43 pm
“They say in Harlan County
There are no neutrals there.
You’ll either be a union man
Or a thug for J. H. Blair.”
Guess the BOV has added “thug” to its collective job description. . . (Using the word “deputies” legitimizes their behavior.)
And what is the membership of the Council of Deans? Are all Deans members of the Council?
6 Rowdiered // Oct 21, 2009 at 8:49 pm
Hope all that are able to vote will seriously take care of business tomorrow. The past 5 years have been a complete sham – just when you think you have heard it all…something more bizarre and ridiculous happens. Though the BOV letter was predictable, many thought they were making inroads with the BOV opening their ears to the the “real” state of RU. We know what the retreat was for – posturing and writing a letter to support this regime of out with the old, in with the new as I pay you more (and even if I hired you – you are not safe my pretty). Bitter? In the words of Sarah Palin – “You Bet’cha” It is time for this nonsense to cease. And what happened to the Internal Governance – did it just disappear or perhaps some “chose” not to follow it – and by golly, we have a brand spanking new matrix to follow (if you want to faculty), brought to you this AM by the Provost who says you can suggest changes to it. My, my my, aren’t we just the sharpest knife in the drawer. We need an administration at RU that leads and does not cast out those who truly care abuot the students – I repeat, the students of RU!!! Is anyone truly happy over there??? I didn’t think so.
7 NRJMike // Oct 21, 2009 at 11:11 pm
Perhaps the people out of touch the most are the minority of whiners who can’t take change, and whose egos are so large they feel they must be a part of every decision. The BOV correctly pointed out the roles: faculty have input, administration makes decisions. That’s the way it works. If you guys are so unhappy, why don’t you quit. Let’s see if the administration can find some people out there who are interested in working in an academic environment in times like these.
8 Absurdity of it All // Oct 21, 2009 at 11:49 pm
You’re right NRJMike. We are a bunch of idiots, the entire minority. It is only a few people. The majority think PK is great. What are we thinking that the university community should be treated with respect and dignity by its “leadership”. We are simply workers, morons that are lucky to have a job. RU has never been a better place to work (over 80% of the employees are unhappy) or to attend school (nice decline in enrollment when EVERY other institution is up). Going forward I will thank the Lord every night for the wonderful PK. Thanks for setting us all straight there NRJMike.
9 The Man Who Snarls // Oct 22, 2009 at 6:05 am
I suspect that NRJMike would be happier as SSRIMike.
10 outraged // Oct 22, 2009 at 8:16 am
I am particularly concerned about the behind the scenes activities at RU whereby the Provost, or his toadies have asked AP faculty and staff, people without the protection of the tenure system, to sign letters of support for the Provost. As one staff member said before signing “he signs my checks, of course I’m signing”. This is ugly and dishonorable. It puts unprotected employees in a impossible situation. A vote of no confidence is not based on legal evidence. It simply says that we, the Radford Community, are not confident that this Provost has the wisdom, vision, management or fiduciary skills or the moral compass to lead us.
11 Paul T. // Oct 22, 2009 at 8:44 am
Once again, NRJMike shows his ignorance of how universities work. A university is not a coorporation wherein a board of administrators hand down decisions to “employees.” The fact that we have historically avoided this, and continue to resist this coorporate model, is essential to academic freedom. NRJMike, if you spent a little time studying history, you would learn that academic freedom is one of the cornerstones of a free society like ours–as demonstrated by the fact that when societies have lost their freedoms in the past, among the first harbingers of such events has been the removal of academic freedoms and the muzzling of public intellectuals. We must protect the system wherein faculty, not the administration, control curriculum.
12 Alicia // Oct 22, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Absurdity- I should have phrased that to say “to date, the administration has created an atmosphere in which the campus community has been denied all agency” I definitely support the continued involvement of students, faculty, staff, and alum of RU. Sorry for the miscommunication– bad phrasing on my part.
In the words of Alice Paul, “When you put your hand to the plow, you can’t put it down until you get to the end of the row. “
13 Absurdity of it All // Oct 22, 2009 at 12:42 pm
No worries Alicia. We are on the same team as are the majority of folks at RU. It is really sad that it has come to this. I pray every night for RU and some type of intervention. The faculty and staff deserve better. The fact that non-faculty colleagues of mine are being asked to “sign up” in support is pervasive. Today’s vote will be telling, we either lay down or we keep working to “get to the end of that row.”
14 JustAnotherPeon // Oct 22, 2009 at 1:14 pm
At some level, the outcome of today’s vote really doesn’t matter. The faculty have lost whatever confidence they may have had in Wil Stanton, PK, and the rest of the administration they’ve created. There’s nothing that is going to put that genie back in the bottle, letters from the BOV, Deans, etc., notwithstanding.
There are times when you’ve got to stand up for what is right. This is one of those times.
15 tired retired // Oct 22, 2009 at 3:03 pm
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/06/books/review/Faust-t.html
This post contains a lucid statement regarding the University’s Crisis of Purpose. It is not specifically addressed to the situation at RU, however Dr. Faust points out the concerns of scholars regarding the move towards career training vs. intellectual inquiry. I believe that this summarizes the current concerns of faculty at RU, and it should be required reading for members of the BOV.
16 Absurdity of it All // Oct 22, 2009 at 4:51 pm
A moral victory at best, but still a victory. Thank you!
RU faculty senate OKs no confidence motion against provost
The Radford University faculty senate approved this afternoon a motion expressing no confidence in the academic leadership of Provost Wil Stanton.
The vote, cast by secret ballot, was 29-16 in favor.
Communications professor Gwendolyn Brown made the motion during the senate’s last meeing Oct. 8 after a brief discussion of an investigative committee report released Oct. 7. As per faculty senate procedures, the motion was immediately tabled.
To be officially considered, a majority needed to vote to take up the motion at today’s meeting. Without a majority vote, the motion would have remain tabled.
The investigative committee report, generated by a special committee of the senate, was based on months of investigation of alleged policy and rules violations by top university administrators, including President Penelope Kyle and Stanton.
The committee found no wrongdoing but criticized the administration’s top-down approach to decision-making, its lack of transparency and insufficient communication.
On Wednesday, the university’s board of visitors called for unity in a statement released via e-mail to the campus community.
In the open letter, the board acknowledged continued discontent among faculty and addressed the recent termination of administrators Michael Dunn and Marc Jacobsen and their subsequent reinstatement after public protests by faculty, students and alumni. It also emphasized recent overtures, including public apologies, made by Kyle and Stanton to repair relations with the faculty.
Stanton, a longtime Radford professor, became the university’s second provost in 2007. He was promoted after the demotion of the school’s first provost, Ivelaw Griffith, nine months after Kyle hired him.
17 Exhausted // Oct 22, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Now that you have all gotten that off your chest in a public way, what have you accomplished? More bad publicity for RU, which will make us look even more like a joke in this area, and will likely lead to further dropping of enrollment. Will it hurt the administration? Probably not. It will hurt the mission, it will hurt the credibility of our institution, it will hurt the reputation of our programs, and will ultimately hurt our STUDENTS and ALUMNI. Great work guys. But hey, 29 of you are feeling very smug and victorious now, so I guess that is your accomplishment.
18 Rowdiered // Oct 22, 2009 at 9:32 pm
hmmmm… Pretty sure the publicity will not be as bad as where things were heading. Sometimes you have to take some heat in order to work toward really accomplishing the mission. Some tasks, while not popular, are part of righting what is wrong. Developing true teams of people who can strive together to meet the mission is not easy. Sticking with it and seeing this to the end will not be easy either. RU can and will weather this – that light is at the end of the tunnel, dim, far away, but it is there, because of students, faculty, staff and alums who care about RU.
19 The Man Who Snarls // Oct 22, 2009 at 9:48 pm
I can see how some would see this as less than a victory, but the only alternative to going aggro on the administration is standing by idly. Given that so much of the faculty agreed to make this declaration says something; I’m sure that there are those among them who aren’t the protesting type, and I don’t just mean among the paltry 16 who voted “nay.”
20 Smug and Victorious // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:52 am
Exhausted, since the faculty senate is a representative body, and since I know many of the senators cast their votes after consultation with their constituents, you can rest assured that there are far more than 29 faculty members on campus feeling, in your terms “smug and victorious.”
21 Exhausted // Oct 24, 2009 at 5:48 am
How reassuring, so there are lots of people feeling smug and victorious! Wonderful, but that still doesn’t address my point that it is a hollow “victory” and probably will do more harm than good. Seems to me that all of the saber rattling got the administration’s attention, why not graciously hold off on the no con vote? You are not going to get rid of them that way! You have only burned whatever olive branch has been extended. Yes, you can stand on principle and say that you have a right to protest, of course you do. But practically speaking I think you are all making it WORSE rather than better! And by the way, untenured people are just keeping their heads down to stay out of the fire. If the untenured people in your departments enthusiastially support you then I would take that with a grain of salt. Your bias is obvious, your willingness to become punitive is obvious, and your power over them is obvious, so those constituent numbers should be left out of whatever support you are assuming.
Leave a Comment