Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, December 10, 1993 TAG: 9312100109
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: B1 EDITION: NEW RIVER VALLEY
SOURCE: ALLISON BLAKE STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
In a joint statement, the ad hoc faculty committee that recommended the vote and the board of visitors outlined a variety of changes designed to put the two sides in better contact.
"We acknowledge and are in agreement that each party shares responsibility for the common good of Radford University," the statement read.
Mullis said the accord was reached at an "informal" discussion late Wednesday attended by representatives from Radford's board and faculty.
The meeting was a "great breakthrough" that enhanced communication between the two sides, Mullis said.
"I feel very good about it. I think what was done was what was best for the university," he added.
The faculty will meet Monday to consider the agreement.
In a escalating standoff out of character for the normally placid school, some faculty members finally blew up last week over the handling of a tenure appointment for an administrator.
Although nobody blamed the administrator, Charles Wood Jr., faculty who undergo rigorous scrutiny to attain the university teaching world's plum - tenure - were angry that Wood was awarded tenure without having to go through the same lengthy review.
For its part, the board of visitors wanted to reward the 20-year aide to President Donald Dedmon.
Wood's appointment was made in April, although some faculty members said this week that they knew nothing of it until late summer. At a faculty meeting in September, the motion was made and passed to set up an ad hoc committee to look into the appointment, because Wood's position clearly was not among those administrative jobs eligible for tenure as outlined in the faculty/staff handbook.
The committee began work in October, seeking an explanation from the board, perhaps even an apology, said Sidney Pearson, the political science professor who headed the committee. Efforts to extract an explanation seemed to be ignored, he said earlier this week.
On Dec. 1, a letter to the committee from board Rector Marion Jones arrived in Pearson's mailbox.
Jones' letter told the committee that while the board respects tenure, as the granting authority it was well within its bounds. The letter also said "the interests of the university were ill-served by this inquiry," and "the board feels that it has given full consideration of this issue." Further review would only be "counterproductive and damaging to the collegial relationship between the board and the faculty."
"I was appalled by the response. If we stand by and let it go, a dangerous precedent will be set," English Professor Alex Weiss said Monday at a faculty meeting called to consider the no-confidence vote.
Some faculty said Monday the vote was too extreme. Communication Professor Clay Waite described the two sides as oncoming freight trains, and set about trying to find a compromise. Two or three petitions reportedly began to circulate on behalf of the administration.
By Wednesday, hints of a truce were being given by faculty.
Here's what both sides agreed in Thursday's statement:
"The board understands the sensitivity of the faculty in all decisions involving tenure. The ad hoc committee understands the position of the board of visitors on this particular issue.
"The board will continue to honor the faculty handbook in decisions regarding tenure and promotion, and if exceptions are to be considered, they will seek input from the appropriate academic department."
In addition, the faculty will be invited to regular board meetings and may address those meetings. In return, the faculty will create communication committees, and board members will be invited to attend.
"I think the development of this statement is a wonderful example of a commitment to the common good which continues to be the hallmark of this institution," Jones, the rector, said in a separate statement released Thursday.
It "demonstrates an environment of mutual respect among the faculty, the administration and the Board of Visitors," she said.
"I did not want a no-confidence vote," said Mullis, the faculty president. "I didn't really think it was in the best interests of the university."
Staff writer Rob Freis contributed to this report.
Memo: shorter version ran in the Metro edition.