|
May 6,1996
To the Faculty and the Students in the Off-Campus Programs:
By now, you have probably received the mailing from President Greene, which included a one-page explanation of the current budget process and selected articles about the rather thorny internal organizational problems we have been dealing with this past semester. As the Interim Academic Dean for the Off-Campus Programs, I wanted to write a note which might contextualize what must have been a rather bewildering assortment of information. Many of you are on email (I continue to be amazed at the possibilities, both negative and positive, for the transfer of information inherent in this new technology) and have likely been privy to an array of opinion, fact, and perspective on the current situation here at Goddard. Rumors fly fast, of course, in the thick of controversy, and I hope to add a reasoned perspective to the information flow. The struggle is real, as many of you know. In part, it results from a structural contradiction between a corporate, vertical model of organization and the collaborative, horizontal model articulated by our governance document, which lays out the parameters for decision-making in this community. All universities struggle with these tensions - at Goddard, it is exacerbated by our historic commitment to progressive ideals and our size. To reconcile this contradiction, and move forward to increasingly participative forms of governance, the College will require the goodwill and cooperation of the people who hold corporate power, especially the President. The morale here among faculty, staff, and residential students is admittedly low. Peter Burns, the Director of Admissions, resigned about three weeks ago. Just as with the resignation of Steve Schapiro, the former Academic Dean, reasons given involved irreconcilable differences with the President over policy and management style. In Peter's case, Admissions consultants were unexpectedly brought in, and recommendations from the Admissions Director and Staff concerning the implementation of the outside consultants' recommendations were not taken into consideration. Rather than general opposition to any specific new policies instituted, there were serious differences over the process. The situation in Admissions, compounded by the institutional strain of a long and arduous budget process and genuine differences over governance issues, precipitated a crisis which included student protests; a hunger strike which included Manuel O'Neill, the Director of Financial Aid, faculty member Alicia Weiss, and at least 15 campus students; and separate votes of No Confidence in the President by the resident student body and the Core and Associate faculties. Other valued employees have resigned, including Sherri Molleur in the Business Office, Kelly Madden in Development, and Jamie Kline in Admissions. The whole affair has been played out in the local media, and the editorial that you were sent by the President's office was both preceded and followed by more even-handed reporting, some of which began to unpack the complexity of the issues. I have heard from a number of you who have genuine concerns about the stability of the College. I want to reassure you that neither the internal struggles over governance nor a conservative budget will negatively impact your educational program at Goddard. The Faculty remain, as always, deeply committed to student learning, the values of progressivism, and the development of a collaborative, participatory organization. The Off-Campus Programs have grown and flourished in the past few years. We are proud of our growth and of student accomplishments. Budget constraints should not interfere at all with the routine operation of these programs. Neither should the controversy interfere with your work or the work of your teachers. Goddard stands poised to take the next steps as an experimental college. We have historically focused our experiments on exploring new horizons and dimensions of learning, on alternative forms of pedagogy, authentic assessment, and negotiated learning. We hope to continue the Goddard experiment in democracy as well. The challenge for leadership of the College in times of turmoil is to help the organization adapt to rapidly changing circumstances, to facilitate the development of collective problem-solving capacities, and to risk thinking in new ways about order and change, autonomy and control, structure and flexibility, planning, risk, and innovation. With the hard work and cooperation of the Board of Trustees, Senior Management, Faculty, Staff and Students of Goddard, we can take these next exhilarating steps into the future.
Sincerely,
with:
 |
