News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Aug. 16, 2007
Critics of the decision to suspend the operations of Antioch College unveiled a new tool Wednesday: a Web site of documents, many of them leaked, about Antioch University management.
The Antioch Papers Web site contains documents sent to some alumni who have been critical of the university administration. The documents include materials prepared for the university board, materials prepared by the university chancellor, and reports about governance and the possible future of the college.
Organizers of the site say that the documents counter the university administration’s contention that the college has been in a free-fall for years. In fact, the organizers say, the documents suggest that as recently as seven or eight years ago the college was building momentum, that the central administration is trying to build up the campuses away from Yellow Springs at the expense of the historic residential program that is now being suspended, and that the central administration wants to minimize the faculty role in governance.
As with many leaked documents, there can be a danger in drawing too firm a conclusion from some of the statements. A subsequent document, unleaked, could disavow the views expressed in one that was leaked, or provide more context. But there are certainly statements that the trustees and administration probably would prefer not to have been made public — and that may add to the distrust of many students, alumni and professors for the central administration.
There is the suggestion, for example, that if faculty members are rehired for a revived Antioch College, that would take place without tenure. And there is a section in a governance document that seeks to justify minimizing faculty contact with trustees. (While plenty of faculty members nationally have little contact with trustees, Antioch has long prided itself on participatory governance in which professors play a central role.)
Mary Lou LaPierre, vice chancellor and chief spokeswoman for the university administration, said that she could not comment on the documents because of a lawsuit filed this week by professors seeking to block the university from suspending the college’s operations. The documents could be evidence in the suit, LaPierre said. Asked generally about the views of those who produced the Web site, LaPierre said that those views “have been their contentions for some time,” even without the documents. She said that those views were incorrect, but that she could not go into detail because of the pending suit. (Prior to the suit, the chancellor of the university offered this defense of recent decisions.)
A largely anonymous collective is gathering more documents for the Web site. Tim Noble, a 2002 alumnus, agreed to speak for attribution as he registered the domain name. He said that the documents show different things. Self-studies prepared for accreditors show that the college was turning itself around in the 1990s, and data cite increases in enrollments, retention rates and various measures of student satisfaction.
The board has described Antioch College as being “in gradual decline since the 1970s,” Noble said, justifying its decision to suspend operations. But he said that it is the current priorities of the board that have created the problems. “They made a mess and they are denying responsibility for that mess.”
The details provided about the future of the college also should concern people who care about it, he said. While the college is generally discussed in the documents as one Antioch campus among many, Noble said that in itself was wrong. “The college is the source of what Antioch is,” he said. And the college has stood for “inclusive and representative decision making,” while the current administration thinks otherwise, he said.
A few examples: A timeline prepared for the board about how Antioch College might be revived after it suspends operations calls for the first new faculty members to be hired in 2010. (All faculty will lose their jobs after the coming academic year.) While few details are provided about who would be hired or in what fields or what capacity, one detail is clear: The document specifies that they would not have tenure. That is significant because Antioch College is the only division of Antioch that has tenured faculty members, so its elimination would effectively eliminate tenure for the university system.
Aside from the question of tenure, the documents suggest that the administration is not anxious for professors to play too active a role in governance. In a report prepared last year by Toni Murdock, chancellor of the university, on the governance of Antioch, she wrote that “one might question whether there should be any communication between trustees and disgruntled faculty.” While noting that professors have a legitimate role in questions of curriculum and academic programs and selecting academic officials, Murdock wrote that “potential controversy surfaces” when faculty members attempt “to influence board members through direct contact and participation.”
She went on to cite “generally accepted analysis” that faculties are made up of spectators (60 percent), apathetics (30 percent), activists (10 percent). With this breakdown, she wrote, professors are unlikely to enjoy “participatory democracy” because they will be represented by the 10 percent who are activists. “Does the faculty really want 10 percent of its members to speak for all of them?” she asked. Leaving aside the question of whether those percentages of faculty are generally correct, many at Antioch say that they do not apply to the college, where there is a much stronger tradition of professors taking governance seriously.
Murdock’s recommendation was that professors be encouraged “to focus on trustees as potential resources rather than as adversaries.” Given that professors sued the board this week, it seems likely that they won’t be swayed by the memo.
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
I encourage all who read this to download the documents provided. They prove the the University Leadership and Members of the Board of Trustees have been malfeasant and dishonest from the begining of this decade.
Since the imposition of the new curriculum, giving by the board of trustees has dropped, as their own documents show. The total giving to the college has been only $20 million over then last 7 years, more than half of it from less wealthy Alumni like myself giving small amounts to the Annual fund.
Considering less than $1.9 million on average per year in capital and restricted gifts have been given over the last 7 years by the Trustees during a curriculum change they imposed on the faculty, so can see a pattern of sabotage or gross mismanagement (take your pick).
Also note, their closing the college documents, they intend to reopen Antioch College with a boost of $50 million dollars, half of which has been or will be pre-committed by the board itself. This leads us to understand that they have the money now, do not wish to keep the college open, instead hoping to fund a tenure-free campus with a much higher student to faculty ratio.
They have the money now, but dont want to spend it to finance changes they themselves have mandated.
I encourage readers and journalists to keep asking tough questions, and get to the heart of this corporate raid on one of America’s finest progressive institutions.
Gerry Bello Antioch College Class of ‘97
gerry bello, Alumnus at Antioch, at 9:50 am EDT on August 16, 2007
A quick review of the documents provided on the link confirmed what even an accounting student could see from the start: this didn’t happen overnight.
The Antioch scenario strikes me as an example of the perfect storm: failed leadership, questionable governance and governing structure, and inadequate and/or reluctant oversight by the regional accrediting agencies. I can’t help wonder how many more potential Antioch’s are out there.
The word (albeit hyphenated): SARBANES-OXLEY and the reason it will eventually be coming in some form to the non-profit world. The smart institutions are already in or working toward voluntary compliance
fascinated accountant, at 11:00 am EDT on August 16, 2007
Whether faculty and staff have contact with trustees is not the real issue. “How” the trustees and chief executive(s) manage that contact “is” the issue. Those of us who lead small colleges, in towns where everybody knows everybody, live with constituents in constant contact with trustees who are their neighbors, friends, or are acquaintances they simply run across at the supermarket or downtown. It’s just a fact of life. Managing this fact of life—faculty and staff with easy access to trustees—is not rocket science. Many college presidents and trustees do it very successfully every day.
Kevin Drumm, College President, at 1:40 pm EDT on August 16, 2007
Thank you for this report. Interesting but not surprising that the Chancellor wishes to add more distance between the faculty and the Trustees. Could this be a result of the faculty vote of no confidence she got while serving as President of Antioch Seattle?
Callie Cary, Class of ‘84/Second Generation alum at Antioch College 2007, at 3:20 pm EDT on August 16, 2007
For decades the Antioch University Board of Trustees has been dominated by people who oppose the social justice values of Antioch College. The College’s fate was sealed with the gutting of the Antioch College curriculum under the euphemistically named Revival Plan and the ascendency of Toni Murdoch to the Chancellorship.
Murdoch had been President of Antioch University Seattle, which operates with no tenure, few full-time faculty, and large numbers of adjuncts. It was the values of Antioch University that she brought with her and promptly implemented them by closing down Antioch College.
The documents make clear that the plan is to either eliminate Antioch College or else turn it into another university branch campus.
Richard, at 7:10 pm EDT on August 16, 2007
The announced discussion was cancelled: Never in my 40 years of doing educational public relations have I ever witnessed anything so stupid as tonight’s ducking operation. It may be that the legal issues mean current financial issues cannot be discussed, but there could have been an asking for suggestions from the audience about the issues on their minds.
As well as the past financial statements. The problem really is the setting up of street colleges in the 60’s — which morphed into the “community graduate schools now on the books” — and how much was spent and whether that really has been repaid.
People, good Antioch people were signed onto listen, and the weasels wouldn’t even offer us a forum and to hear to what is on our minds. Unbelievable. F- for the university, which never should have been.
Jo Procter, assoc. dir. of public affairs at Williams College, at 9:25 pm EDT on August 16, 2007
Scott Jaschiks article titled “Leaks from Antioch” combined information From two, in his terms, “leaked documents” without, in my opinion, placing into context the second one, a nine page background piece, from which were extracted a few quotes.
That document — an informational whitepaper — was written by Toni Murdock, Antioch University Chancellor, in October, 2006 for the Board of Trustees as a basis for a discussion on governance at the November 2006Board meeting.
Murdock drew from many, many sources in preparing this piece: she described several Board governance systems used by other institutions; outlined the current Antioch Board governance system and posed many questions for the Board’s discussion in determining whether to changethe current place Antioch system for one that might suit the institution better. In this whitepaper, she made no recommendations —-posing only questions she hoped would prime a full discussion of this issue.
In the Inside Higher Ed article, one of the topics around which Murdock posed questions is presented as the administration’s position on the role of faculty in the governance of the institution. This is simply not true. When the Murdock paper is read in total, one realizes the discussion is not about the role of the faculty in governance but about what the Board’s “role” is or should be in the daily management of higher educationinstitutions. Murdock was summarizing a 1997 Higher Education report written by Barbara Taylor entitled, “Working Effectively with Trustees.”
Mary Lou LaPierreUniversity Vice Chancellor for University Advancement
Mary Lou LaPierre, Antioch University, at 3:15 pm EDT on August 17, 2007
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
The University of Kentucky is one great place to work. UK’s agenda—simple—to accelerate the movement toward academic ... see job
Dean of Academic Affairs opportunity at Institute for American Universities in Aix-en-Provence, France. IAU is one of the ... see job
Director and Professor Center for the Humanities University of California, San Diego see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Hillsborough Community College is a public, comprehensive multi-campus, state-supported community college located in the ... see job
New York University’s College of Arts & Science is seeking a Assistant Director, Admissions Operation to manage the ... see job
Located just north of Houston, Texas, our five campuses serve 1,400 square miles. Our student enrollment is nearly 50,000 in ... see job
Mission accomplished
The NCA Self-study was especially revealing — one of the goals was increased institutional visibility!
The Self-study was revealing in another way — regarding NCA’s 5 minimum standards that are stated so vaguely — it is impossible to determine whether or not they are met! This Self-study is a joke.
observer, at 9:50 am EDT on August 16, 2007