Spring Break
Presidential search process fires up faculty members
By: Rick Rojas
Issue date: 11/27/07 Section: News
Faculty members of Texas A&M expressed anger in the exclusion of the faculty's recommendations from the presidential search at a Faculty Senate meeting. Many demonstrated growing dissatisfaction with faculty leadership who, they believe, haven't represented them well enough.
The special meeting was scheduled Monday afternoon with a standing-room-only crowd who gathered to discuss the ongoing search for the next president of A&M. It was one of the most attended meetings of the Senate, said Speaker Angie Hill Price.
After the departure of President Robert M. Gates in December 2006, Chancellor Mike McKinney established a search committee tasked with finding finalists to submit for the Board of Regents' consideration. In October, however, the board was disbanded and the regents began searching.
That action has many faculty members upset, because the system of shared governance created as a part of Gates' efforts to make A&M a top-tier university were discarded, said R. Douglas Slack, the chairman of the search committee and former speaker of the Faculty Senate.
"We must ensure that the Gates revolution continues," Slack said. "That revolution included shared governance."
The regents contend, Slack said, that shared governance was achieved by hearing the results of the search committee. The audience responded with laughter.
One faculty member said the actions of the regents' hurts the reputation of the University, which had been improving under Gates. "We're in the ditch," he said. "Delays have hurt the reputation of the University."
Paul McDermott, a member of the search committee, said the contention between the faculty and regents is a part of a long-standing and systematic disconnect between the two.
"Until shared governance is exercised at every level of the University, we are doomed to be second hand," McDermott said. "The letter from [Board of Regents Chairman Bill] Jones was extremely disrespectful. I was treated like crap."
Jones wrote in a letter to Speaker Price that the decision to select the next president of A&M was the regents', not one for the faculty to make. To which McDermott responded, "The fact that you have a statutory right does not mean you should exercise it.
"The question is, are you willing to get some advice? You need it," he said, to audience applause.
The conflicts within the faculty are not just with what they consider to be their exclusion from the process, but with leaders - such as Slack - who have, in their view, failed to represent them.
"We need to start realizing this is a game and [the regents] have all the aces," a faculty member said. "How do we get the best hand for the University and the best for us?
"The situation couldn't be worse than it is," he added. "I'm asking you [Slack] as a friend to step back."
"Please don't," several audience members chimed in.
"You have your fan club," he responded dramatically, "but are they going to be your pall bearers?"
Slack said he is having troubles on both ends, as he is serving as the intermediary between the faculty and regents. "I'm the middle guy getting shot in the front and the back," he said.
One frustrated audience member asked if there was a reason why the search committee wasn't reinstated.
"I asked that question. The next logical question is, what is the answer," Slack said, insinuating regents failed to provide an adequate response. He added that he is not a tenured professor - if he continued to push, he could have been fired.
"That might not be a bad idea," one woman retorted.
Slack mentioned that, out of the three finalists from the committee's submission, the regents thought one was much more qualified than the other two. They dismissed the findings because the regents thought they didn't have three individuals of equal merit.
To that, one audience member said he found the reaction of the regents to be a valid one. In the future, he said, the regents and the chancellor should clarify the process.
In the current selection, though, many members of the faculty expressed the belief that regents have been openly hostile, citing Jones' letter as an example. Because of that, Slack said, that hostility could reciprocate, injuring morale - and ultimately, the leadership ability of the regents.
"They cannot govern without the consent of the governed," he said.
- David Morris contributed reporting
The special meeting was scheduled Monday afternoon with a standing-room-only crowd who gathered to discuss the ongoing search for the next president of A&M. It was one of the most attended meetings of the Senate, said Speaker Angie Hill Price.
After the departure of President Robert M. Gates in December 2006, Chancellor Mike McKinney established a search committee tasked with finding finalists to submit for the Board of Regents' consideration. In October, however, the board was disbanded and the regents began searching.
That action has many faculty members upset, because the system of shared governance created as a part of Gates' efforts to make A&M a top-tier university were discarded, said R. Douglas Slack, the chairman of the search committee and former speaker of the Faculty Senate.
"We must ensure that the Gates revolution continues," Slack said. "That revolution included shared governance."
The regents contend, Slack said, that shared governance was achieved by hearing the results of the search committee. The audience responded with laughter.
One faculty member said the actions of the regents' hurts the reputation of the University, which had been improving under Gates. "We're in the ditch," he said. "Delays have hurt the reputation of the University."
Paul McDermott, a member of the search committee, said the contention between the faculty and regents is a part of a long-standing and systematic disconnect between the two.
"Until shared governance is exercised at every level of the University, we are doomed to be second hand," McDermott said. "The letter from [Board of Regents Chairman Bill] Jones was extremely disrespectful. I was treated like crap."
Jones wrote in a letter to Speaker Price that the decision to select the next president of A&M was the regents', not one for the faculty to make. To which McDermott responded, "The fact that you have a statutory right does not mean you should exercise it.
"The question is, are you willing to get some advice? You need it," he said, to audience applause.
The conflicts within the faculty are not just with what they consider to be their exclusion from the process, but with leaders - such as Slack - who have, in their view, failed to represent them.
"We need to start realizing this is a game and [the regents] have all the aces," a faculty member said. "How do we get the best hand for the University and the best for us?
"The situation couldn't be worse than it is," he added. "I'm asking you [Slack] as a friend to step back."
"Please don't," several audience members chimed in.
"You have your fan club," he responded dramatically, "but are they going to be your pall bearers?"
Slack said he is having troubles on both ends, as he is serving as the intermediary between the faculty and regents. "I'm the middle guy getting shot in the front and the back," he said.
One frustrated audience member asked if there was a reason why the search committee wasn't reinstated.
"I asked that question. The next logical question is, what is the answer," Slack said, insinuating regents failed to provide an adequate response. He added that he is not a tenured professor - if he continued to push, he could have been fired.
"That might not be a bad idea," one woman retorted.
Slack mentioned that, out of the three finalists from the committee's submission, the regents thought one was much more qualified than the other two. They dismissed the findings because the regents thought they didn't have three individuals of equal merit.
To that, one audience member said he found the reaction of the regents to be a valid one. In the future, he said, the regents and the chancellor should clarify the process.
In the current selection, though, many members of the faculty expressed the belief that regents have been openly hostile, citing Jones' letter as an example. Because of that, Slack said, that hostility could reciprocate, injuring morale - and ultimately, the leadership ability of the regents.
"They cannot govern without the consent of the governed," he said.
- David Morris contributed reporting
Be sure to include your name, major, and class year. Submissions without this information are subject to deletion.
By submitting a comment, you agree to thebatt.com's Terms of Use.
You may also send a Mail Call to The Battalion at mailcall@thebatt.com