In another curious example of leadership style, it has been almost two full weeks since the RU Faculty Senate voted 29-16 that it had no confidence in Provost Wil Stanton, yet there has been no official comment from Stanton or RU President Penelope Kyle.
No official comment has been released nor has a request for comment been answered by RU’s University Relations. So what is Kyle, the Board of Visitors (BOV), and perhaps Stanton himself thinking? Few, if any, really know that answer.
Perhaps the BOV already gave its answer in an open letter to the RU community prior to the Faculty Senate vote of no confidence in the Provost. The BOV letter read, “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.”
It hasn’t issued any statements since that letter, so we must assume the BOV’s confidence in the RU administration hasn’t wavered.
Members of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee (FSEC) met with Kyle on Oct. 28. According to the minutes of that meeting, Kyle “informed the members that on the advice of the BOV) consultant, Tim Sullivan, she wants to meet with faculty members to hear first-hand the issues that informed the vote of no confidence.”
Kyle’s said she wanted to hear from all sides, which raised concerns from many faculty.
Enough faculty, in fact, contacted Faculty Senate President Steve Owen that he felt compelled to send a letter to his fellow Senators on Oct. 29 stating, “I want to thank those of you who have shared your thoughts with me regarding the proposed meetings (referenced in earlier e-mails) between faculty members and President Kyle, regarding the recent vote of no confidence. The clear and consistent message in those communications was that the Faculty Senate is the voice of the faculty and, as such, neither the Faculty Senate Executive Council nor I should support or arrange meetings in other venues between faculty and administrators, in regard to Faculty Senate business. Therefore, I have communicated with President Kyle that the Faculty Senate Executive Council and I will not facilitate the proposed meetings.”
Which brings us back to the question of why no official response has been given regarding such an important and historic act by the Faculty Senate? As one faculty member said, “These proposed meetings have another function: to buy time. It is already bizarre that Kyle has made no response yet, and it gets weirder by the day.”
The Faculty Senate meets again on Thursday of this week. Perhaps the RU community will finally receive a response from Kyle over the matter of a vote of no confidence in her provost. If so, it will be a response that the RU community needs and deserves as it strives to move forward.
Tim W. Jackson is Editor of the New River Voice.
9 responses so far ↓
1 Voice of Reason // Nov 4, 2009 at 11:26 am
Silence implies consent.
2 Voice of Reality // Nov 5, 2009 at 7:03 am
Silence implies consent? Do you honestly believe that? Oh please. What is the point of making silly statements like that.
3 Voice of Reason // Nov 5, 2009 at 11:53 am
She isn’t protesting that there is an issue. By remaining silent she is agreeing that there is an issue. There is no defense coming out.
4 Kyle, Faculty Senate to Meet Nov. 10 // Nov 5, 2009 at 7:09 pm
[…] Comments Chris Arvidson on Wild & Scenic Designation Hangs In Balance for New RiverRebekah Lewis on Charles Snarls: One Nation Under No One in ParticularWild and Scenic « Thornton’s work on Wild & Scenic Designation Hangs In Balance for New RiverThe Man Who Snarls on Charles Snarls: One Nation Under No One in ParticularVoice of Reason on Voiceover: No Comment After RU Provost Vote? […]
5 Voice of Reality // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:56 am
Of course there’s an issue, that’s been paraded very publicly. She clearly doesn’t know how to handle this, but perhaps she is also not dignifying the protests with a public response? You have wishful thinking to say it means consent.
6 Voice of Reason // Nov 6, 2009 at 12:37 pm
I agree with you Voice. I hadn’t thought that she probably doesn’t know how to handle this. I do believe, however, that the protests have been dignifyed and the official (non-blog) analysis fair. I was admittedly being tongue in cheek with my consent comment. Bottom line is that the issues need to be addressed in an honest and forthright manner. Her handlers (poor souls) should be advising her to state publically contrition. While I can understand the initial reaction of no public comment, it is in the court of public opinion that she is taking such a beating. The strategy should be a combination of private dignifyed meeting to address specifics and public declarations/actions that demonstrate that she is not above accepting responsibility for her poor decisions and communication. Unfortunately for PK she works for a public entitity, as such there is an increased level of transparency that is expected. The US is the land of second chances, but they always begin with a heartfelt mea culpa.
7 Really tired // Nov 7, 2009 at 6:11 pm
How many second chances does she get? enough already.
8 Flyonthewall // Nov 8, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Who is Tim Sullivan and why does Radford’s Board of Trustees need a consultant? More interesting still…who is paying for Mr. Sullivan’s time?
9 Voice of Reality // Nov 8, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Thank you for your thoughtful response. I think we are in agreement on the necessity of a public mea culpa (and not letting Stanton take the fall for her). I also think that even a seasoned academic would be unsure what to do next, and we all know she is a novice!
Leave a Comment