On Thursday the Radford University Faculty Senate took a major step in expressing its dissatisfaction with the current administration. In a 29-16 vote, the Faculty Senate voted in favor of a motion that the Radford University Faculty Senate has no confidence in the academic leadership of Provost Wil Stanton.
Communication Professor Gwen Brown (pictured at left), who made the initial motion two weeks earlier, initiated discussion on the vote of no confidence.
“I would like to remind the Senate of the conclusions delivered by all members of the Ad Hoc Committee (convened to investigate the administration),” Brown read from a prepared statement. “After commenting on the ‘dozens of specific, serious, and thoroughly documented complaints,’ the Committee unanimously warned that ‘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.’”
Brown cited several of the complaints toward the provost that were lodged by the faculty to the ad hoc committee. Among them Brown listed:
• learning over Christmas break that a degree program you offer is being stripped away from your department;
• learning that your department is being merged with another and having that news sprung on you when that decision was announced as a fait accompli in a Senate meeting;
• hearing that a rationale presented to the BOV for a merger of two departments rested on the prospect of a new focus that RU has neither the money to support nor adequate expertise to offer and about which faculty were not consulted;
• learning that a decision has already been taken to move your department to a new College and then eliminating your department’s identity as it is grafted on to a new School;
• being told that you must immediately refashion your major’s concentrations to meet a common core requirement of twice as many hours as SCHEV requires when no other programs on campus are subjected to the same requirements.
Brown’s impassioned speech concluded with her stating about a vote of no confidence, “It is our only mechanism for saying loudly and clearly and without hesitation that we refuse to live in an atmosphere of fear and distrust. A vote of no confidence is our one best hope for returning Radford University to a place that we love and an institution in which we can express deserved pride. I urge you to support your colleagues . . . and vote in support of this motion.”
Shortly after Brown’s plea, Mathematics Professor Sid Smith introduced an amendment to the vote of no confidence motion. That amendment suggested, among other things, that “The President of the Faculty Senate will call a meeting of the General Faculty for the purpose of voting on the ratification of the Vote of No Confidence within seven days.”
After discussion, the Faculty Senate voted soundly against adopting the amendment with the consensus being that the Faculty Senate was in a position of responsibility and was already charged by their constituents to vote one way or the other on the motion.
With the amendment off the table, the conversation returned to the merits of the vote of no confidence. The vast majority of the senators who spoke did so in favor of the motion. Those speaking against it were Maung Htay of the Department of Information Technology and Gary Schirr of the Department of Marketing, in which Stanton holds the position of administrative faculty.
After much discussion, the vote finally came in the form of a secret ballot. With a 29-16 margin, approximately 65 percent of the faculty voted in favor of the motion.
A vote of no confidence, however, has no legal bearings. It is simply, as Brown stated, a “mechanism for communicating to the president our view of her responsibilities for healing the breach that has opened up between the administration and the faculty.”
There has been no comment from Stanton or RU President Penelope Kyle about the vote nor is it known what action, if any, Kyle will take in light of this vote of no confidence in her provost. The day prior to the Faculty Senate meeting the RU Board of Visitors released an open letter that, among other things, stated, “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.”
Tim W. Jackson is Editor of the New River Voice.
28 responses so far ↓
1 Rebekah Lewis // Oct 23, 2009 at 6:37 am
It is sad that this is what our school has come to, but I am glad to see that the Faculty Senate is speaking out against this obnoxious administration. I hope they get the message loud and clear.
2 Correction // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:03 am
Tim, 16/29=55%, not 65%. Perhaps math was not your strong subject in college? Only a majority was needed to pass the motion, but 55% suggest that faculty are almost evenly divided, as I believe someone in a previous post suggested would happen. I wonder why faculty were divided? It was not a good day for RU.
3 Alicia Ring // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:43 am
Thanks for keeping us updated, Tim.
And “Correction,” I would suggest you reevaluate your own math skills. To calculate the percentage, you would not divide 16 by 29. You add the two together to get the whole (45) and then you divide those who voted in favor (29) by that whole.
29/45 = .6444444 which is, in fact, approximately 65%
That’s all
4 PolishingMyVita // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:44 am
As a long-time member of the RU Faculty, who has personally suffered from the acts of Kyle and Stanton, it seems to me that a vote of no confidence against the provost was an empty and meaningless act.
Isn’t it clear that much of these problems came directly from Kirk and the BOV? Stanton is merely doing the bidding of his bosses - as will whoever takes his place. There is plenty of evidence that Stanton has deflected many of the blows and served as a buffer between Kyle and Kirk’s demands and the academic programs at RU. If Stanton goes, we’ll only have to deal with someone who could be worse.
The meaningful and courageous act - if my faculty colleagues could only rise above their anger at the provost and take a reasoned approach - would be a vote of no confidence in Kyle and the Board of Visitors. Now we’re all puffed up and proud of ourselves, when odds are we’ve only played into Kyle’s hands. Now she can get rid of Stanton and bring in someone who will really do her bidding. To use a metaphor from the Bush Administration, getting rid of Attorney General John Ashcroft seemed like a good idea, until Alberto Gonzalez took over.
As Lyndon Johnson said of J. Edgar Hoover, it’s better to have enemies “inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in.” At least Stanton was inside the tent, and pissing in the right direction. I fear that may change for the worse when he’s gone.
5 recorrection // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:44 am
To get the percentage of people who voted in favor, a person would divide the number of ‘yes’ votes by the number of votes cast. In this case, that’s 64.444444444444444444444444 percent.
In political elections, that percentage is generally considered to represent a landslide, not a divided electorate.
6 Paul T. // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:45 am
Actually, out of 45 senators, 29 voted in favor of no confidence. That is, indeed, 64.4 percent. Correction, perhaps math was not your strong suit either.
7 Math Guru // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:46 am
Correction, before sniping unpleasantly, check your own math. The faculty senate had 45 voting senators. So, a vote of 29 vs 16 is indeed just a hair short of 65%.
29/45=.6444
Not at all evenly divided.
8 Correct the correction // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:58 am
Sorry, Correction, but the vote was 29 for, 16 against, with 45 total votes. 29 out of 45 is 64.4%, nearly two to one in favor of the vote of no confidence.
9 Liza Graham // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:58 am
I have begun to feel that Radford University is thoroughly split between those who wish to educate and those who seem to have other agendas. I believe that the degree changes and the changes of departments will continue to negatively affect Radford University, and I know of many students who have been delayed graduation or have transferred to avoid dealing with these changes. In the two and a half years I have been a student here at Radford University, I have watched the distrust of the administration grow in leaps and bounds, which has been nothing but a detriment to the educational environment and the community spirit of the school. I’m eager to hear President Kyle’s response to the faculty vote, I’d love to hear how she is planning on rebuilding a community which is so obviously split due to lack of trust.
10 Correcting the Correction // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:59 am
29 to 16 is the vote. 29 of the 45 Senators voted that they had no confidence in the academic leadership of the Provost. That is nearly 65% or a vote of almost 2 to 1. That is not nearly as divided as the previous comment suggests. Tim’s math skills have been wrongly impugned.
11 Vicky A. // Oct 23, 2009 at 8:38 am
Actually, Correction doesn’t have a math problem; he or she has a reading comprehension problem. Paul T. has a research problem or he would have seen that lack of understanding of the data given, rather than faulty computational skills was the issue.
Wouldn’t the discussion be better served by knocking off the “gottchas” and talking about the subject of the article?
12 Mike // Oct 23, 2009 at 10:51 am
I was told there wouldn’t be any math. Seriously, this is all troubling — the loss of the kinder, gentler, nurturing RU that so many of us knew and loved.
13 Correction // Oct 23, 2009 at 11:35 am
Yes my math was wrong– it happens with sleep deprived induced brain fogs. Thanks for the correction Paul. Still not a good day for RU, regardless of the numbers.
14 RUALUM0103 // Oct 23, 2009 at 2:32 pm
I am so proud to see movement among faculty to take a stance. Yet, how long and how much have we discussed problems that are rooted with Penny Kyle. Those who are in a position to decide the fate of Penny and Will are not reacting to the majority of students, alumni, and faculty who dislike their leadership. So….it looks like we will just continue to inch our way towards 2012. Whoever, corrected the above mathematician (correction). PRICELESS comeback
15 NRJMike // Oct 23, 2009 at 7:42 pm
RUALUM0103, the only ‘majority’ I see here is in the faculty senate. So unless the senate consists of enough faculty so that the 65% who voted no confidence is in fact a majority of all the faculty, this is still just a bunch of whiney people with cushy jobs hoping not to have to move into the present century. Majority of students? That’s an oxymoron to start with. It might be possible that you people can knock off Penny, but only if she gets tired of dealing with you and decides to leave on her own. As long as she has the support of the BOV, you lose. If you were faculty at VT where your research dollars were the metric for the performance of the university, you would have some, in fact a lot, of influence on things. If you are really this upset, then why don’t you vote with your feet? That’s really the only threat you have. But you are just liberal arts faculty who are easily replaced, by and large. This point in time is the best opportunity you have to set up real processes with the admin to face the coming challenges. So far, all you have shown is a propensity to become insulted when your egos are not stroked enough, and then start whining. Why not work to make a positive action to work with the admin. So you think they aren’t listening, big deal. Keep trying. Don’t just whine when you don’t get your way. Be the heroes here. But first you have to swallow your pride a little. If you really care about the school, then you won’t have any trouble parking your egos at the door and doing whatever it takes to work this out. If you can’t do that, then it’s really just all about you, isn’t it?
16 Absurdity of it All // Oct 24, 2009 at 12:48 am
The only ego in this whole mess is PK’s. So NRJMike, are you asserting that a majority support her? You are right though that the only folks that matter in this whole mess is the BOV and we know exactly where they stand.
I love the irony of the VONC in that it was for a guy who was outspoken behind closed doors about PK’s hire, her early tenure, her person, her lack of experience, her ego, and her management style. He ends up completely flipping, assisting in the ouster of Griffith and then sells his soul for the position. Karma is a b*%*h.
17 Roudyred // Oct 24, 2009 at 12:48 am
NRJMIKE–You are an idi… oops sorry. I almosr got personal there. What part of 64.4 % of he Senate have no confidence in Stanton don’t you understand? What part of 77% of the total faculty are disssatified with the administration don’t you understand? If your pal steals your main squeeze, do you want to talk with him or her about it? They don’t trust the provost!!!!! No degree of talking will cure that. Stalin didn’t trust Hitler after a while, we didn’t trust Bush after a while, Caesar didn’t trust Ptolemy after a while. S… happpens very often in human games.
STANTON AND KYLE LOSE!!!
Roudyred.
18 SilentMinority // Oct 24, 2009 at 5:59 am
Come on guys, comparing Stanton to Hitler?!? Are you serious??? Of course you have grievances, that is quite obvious to the public, but the level of immaturity here is astounding and does nothing for your credibility. It is also sad that the article above gives great detail as to the argument for the vote, and only cursory mention of the people that spoke against it. If the opposition doesn’t have merit why are we so quick to discount those people and shut them down? A little bit of integrity and balance would go a long way here. Remember, the public reads this stuff, and it is not making the faculty of RU look very dignified.
19 Spartacus // Oct 24, 2009 at 7:23 am
The folks who matter most in this mess are the students and that is why the faculty voted no confidence. There is no confidence in the academic direction that Radford University is headed, nor in the academic leader who turned us in that direction (regardless of whether he were just following orders or not).
20 tired retired // Oct 27, 2009 at 9:38 pm
So, has there been any response from the Administration on this? If not, then the Faculty Senate should vote PK out as they could not have any confidence in her leadership any longer.
21 Rebekah Lewis // Oct 30, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Thank you to Spartacus for standing up for us students, who so often feel like a small piece of dust in a huge whirlwind in this whole debate. This university should be focused on the students b/c we are here to learn and on the professors b/c they are here to teach us. In the past 2 years that I have attended Radford, I have had amazing professors from whom I have learned many, many important things. Therefore it saddens me greatly to watch as the administration and the BOV show RU’s faculty such little respect with their lack of communication and obvious ego issues. If the university’s adminitstration and BOV aren’t focused on teaching and learning, then what are they focused on? My suspicion is that many are more interested in lining their own pockets . . . which is a very sad state of affairs.
22 Plaid Warrior // Nov 3, 2009 at 9:54 am
NRJMike and Silent Minority, let me explain something very simple to you, how life at RU works under Penny Kyle. I worked there and I was not teaching faculty. I did not have a “cushy” job as you call it. I worked 80 hours a week for my alma mater, earning accolades from my peers and even from PWK herself. I earned merit based raises. But I also got yelled at, chastised and treated like dirt. My morale was low, and because everyone I worked with also had low morale, we made it worse. I left. I didn’t make a lot of money, I worked long hours at the disdain of my family, but I did it because I loved RU. No longer, at least not while she’s there. And I’m not the only one. The number of givers are down. Enrollment is down (following an NCAA Tournament appearance…that’s unheard of) rats are jumping ship left and right. Students are holding on-campus protests. I’m sorry you think this is about some disgruntled faculty who are unhappy with their leader. From where I sit, it’s thousands of unhappy students and employees and alumni. From where I sit, it’s about a cancer who’s “leadership” has sucked all the happiness and pride out of a wonderful place. The faculty are doing what they need to do. The faculty are the stewards of Radford University. They outlast the students, they outlast the administration. They are charged with the academic vitality of RU. But if you don’t believe me or anyone else who has posted here, that’s fine. We’ll just all sit on our hands and let her make “progress.” And when RU’s enrollment dips below 8,000 for the first time in 25 years or when no new professors want to come here because administration-set academic standards are joke, I’ll re-write my definition of “progress”
23 Voice of Reason // Nov 3, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Aptly put Plaid. The ultimate evaluation of leadership lies in trend data. Are you trending towards the positive or towards the negative? We can all agree on the answer to that question, even the PK supporters. The data is deafening. As Plaid notes, donors are speaking through their non-action, prospective students through their non-attendance, current students through their recent letter of concern, employees through the revolving door departures, faculty through their vote of no confidence and concerned citizens through their observations via blogs such as this.
As an aside, good point on the lack of any impact of making the NCAA tourney. That coupled with a down economy, when all other schools are up & Radford the best “value”, should have resulted in a significant increase. It didn’t.
From an on-line study “Pope combined data from the Peterson’s college guide, which records information about the incoming freshman classes of 330 NCAA Division I colleges and universities, with information on how well these schools did in football and basketball each year from 1983 to 2002. According to the study, the 64 schools that make it into the NCAA basketball championship tournament have a 1 percent increase in student applications the next year, schools in the Sweet 16 have a 3 percent increase, the Final Four have a 4 percent to 5 percent increase, and the championship winner has a 7 percent to 8 percent increase.” taken from http://www.scientificblogging.com/news_releases/ncaa_basketball_march_madness_success_leads_to_admissions_boost
24 Another Former RU Employee // Nov 3, 2009 at 7:06 pm
There have been moments over the past several years when President Kyle and Provost Stanton could have turned the corner and initiated a new era of dialogue in the RU campus community. A kind gesture, a warm statement, or a sincere effort to engage students, staff, and faculty - the simple act of listening - all of these actions could have fostered greater communication among all Highlanders and some sense of trust in the administration. Together, with a shared sense of purpose, the administration could have led a community-wide effort to confront today’s economic challenges and keep the university’s flag flying proudly. Sadly, in what has become a consistent routine, the Kyle administration has fumbled away each and every opportunity it has been granted to right the course of the Radford ship.
President Kyle and Provost Stanton are not stupid people, and they have the ability to size up a difficult situation and do the right thing. They have achieved much in their respective careers, and they are well compensated to develop necessary policies to address acute needs on campus. Each time they have faced such situations, however, they have failed to rise to the occasion and guide the campus community to safety. Nobody expects them to make everyone happy, but people do expect them to consult campus constituencies, engage outside experts where appropriate, and communicate decisions in a professional manner.
President Kyle and Provost Stanton simply have not been able to provide effective leadership for the Radford University campus over the last few years. The economic crisis has only provided more opportunities than before to identify their innate weaknesses as administrators. In an era when advances in communication - Twitter, blogs, webcams, and Blackberries - connect the White House with the engaged constituent and the major retailer with its consumer, it is hardly outrageous to expect President Kyle and Provost Stanton to reach out sincerely to the Highlander community. Instead, they choose to close themselves off from their colleagues down the hall and in the next building on campus. President Kyle hides behind the doors of her card-keyed suite of offices, hiring yet another chief communications officer to spin the latest yarn to try to appease the subjects. There is a sense that the right script is all it will take to change things.
Well, it hasn’t worked for several years, and it’s not working now. It’s time for President Kyle and Provost Stanton to do the right thing and use their golden parachutes, for the sake of the RU community and the institution they both profess to serve.
25 SilentMinority // Nov 3, 2009 at 9:00 pm
Plaid,
Your post has nothing to do with mine, not sure why you named me in it. I’m not a PK fan at all, and yes, I work at RU. Yet shockingly to you I still think it is ludicrous and immature to compare the administration to Hitler. Is that what we’ve come to? Let’s stop with the overblown rhetoric, we get enough of it with national politics, we don’t need it on our campus. Next thing we know there will be ‘tea parties’ on campus, wouldn’t that be fun.
I wonder if any of you might take some of the responsbility for low enrollment by the ridiculous posts on some of these blogs. Parents don’t want to send their children to environments with this much conflict, and the protests and posturing do not help. Step back and take a deep breath and do something constructive.
26 Voiceover: No Comment After RU Provost Vote? // Nov 3, 2009 at 11:37 pm
[…] SilentMinority on RU Faculty Senate Votes No Confidence in ProvostAnother Former RU Employee on RU Faculty Senate Votes No Confidence in ProvostVoice of Reason on RU […]
27 Plaid Warrior // Nov 5, 2009 at 8:55 am
SilentMinority…I named you because you said the faculty’s actions are not making them look very dignified and my argument was that they had a responsibility to do what they have done in terms of the VONC. I wholeheartedly agree with you on the Hitler reference. Running a university into the ground is not even akin to genocide and we should avoid those references . Most of my previous post was directed at NRJMike, who time after time on these boards claims that all the RU problems really revolve around disgruntled faculty and employees who don’t like change. Most of RU’s long time employees have lived just fine with change. From Dedmon to the interim Charles Owen to Covington, it was a very different atmosphere under each president. But even under the power grab that occurred after Dedmon resigned, morale was never as low as it is today.
28 RU Faculty React to Provost Resignation // Dec 8, 2009 at 9:47 am
[…] a 29-16 vote of no confidence in the academic leadership of Radford University Provost Wil Stanton by the Faculty Senate on Oct. […]
Leave a Comment