Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, December 4, 1993 TAG: 9312040157
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: A-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: ALLISON BLAKE STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
The motion will be offered by an ad hoc committee that has spent 10 weeks investigating the procedures used to grant tenure to an administrator, said Sidney Pearson, chairman of the committee.
"Nobody on this committee wanted it to come to this," said Pearson, a tenured political science professor.
If the vote takes place, "that would be the first time I've ever heard of anything like that," said Karen Petersen, Virginia's secretary of education.
Faculty members are quick to point out that the tenure flap is not aimed at the administrator, Charles Wood Jr., a longtime top aide to President Donald Dedmon.
Controversy over his appointment has brewed all fall, but apparently was pushed to the boiling point this week. In a Dec. 1 letter to Pearson, university Rector Marion Jones defended the board's action, saying it has "the sole authority to approve promotions and grant tenure for faculty and administrators," and that "the interests of the university were ill-served by this inquiry and the resulting publicity."
Faculty members claim that by failing to follow established guidelines for granting tenure, the board weakens the integrity of the teaching profession and of the university. The board maintains Woods' appointment is a one-shot deal, a reward to a valued employee that is allowed under its authority as the university's governing body.
Tenure, which essentially guarantees job security, is granted to qualified academicians who meet a rigorous set of criteria. Typically, a peer review is part of the process.
Historically, tenure was developed to protect teachers who espoused unpopular views in the classroom.
The committee was formed in September by a faculty vote. Since then, it has looked into whether the board circumvented procedures outlined in the university's faculty/staff handbook. According to the handbook, "the granting of tenure for faculty members serving in administrative positions shall be limited to persons serving in the positions of President, Vice President for Academic Affairs, and College Deans."
In a Nov. 5 letter to Jones, Pearson noted "evidently a significant difference between how the faculty views tenure decisions and the position taken by the board."
Jones said Friday that the board's action does not indicate a disrespect for teaching professionals.
"It's really a personnel matter, which we do not see duplicated in the future," she said. "It's a promotion after 20 years of service. It's what you would do with any valued person. It was not considered a faculty issue at all. It was an internal governance matter.
"There are a great many in the faculty who do not feel this is a big, general issue."
Wood could not be reached Friday for comment. Neither could Dedmon, who was out of town. Board member Carson Quarles also declined comment, saying the matter is being handled by Jones and Dedmon.
In the university world, tenure often is a point of contention between administrators and faculty, said Margaret Miller, associate director for academic affairs for the State Council of Higher Education.
"Faculty generally want to have control over tenuring people who are likely to be their lifelong colleagues," she said, "and the administration wants to provide the security of tenure for people who have been of service to the university."
What would happen if the faculty did vote no confidence is unclear. Board members are appointed in staggered terms by the governor.
"It's as much symbolic as anything else," Petersen said, "and is definitely something that has to be handled internally and worked out."
However, the conflict may have grown beyond the faculty. In Friday's issue of The Tartan, the student newspaper, an unsigned editorial questioned Dedmon's 21-year presidency and suggested the time may be ripe for new leadership, citing, at least in part, Wood's tenure.
by CNB