April 28, 2008
To Provost Haggett:
The Arts and Sciences Executive Committee regrets you have not yet agreed to meet with us to discuss the Council vote of no confidence in the Dean. You asked for reasons to remove Dean Lee.
1. The Dean lacks credibility. He frequently makes contradictory statements and changes words he has said. He often dissembles. For example the chair of Women=s Studies sent him an e-mail saying her department did not want to merge with Law and Social Thought, MLS etc., and within minutes, the Dean sent out an e-mail to all College faculty saying the merger would go forward effective July 1. When I telephoned him to question this, he replied that it was all right because the proposal was in writing. This excuse was not logical. He acted as if he had never heard from the Women=s Studies chair. He is commonly described as lacking principles. Dr. Lee often tries to use secrecy to enhance his authority. For example at a monthly meeting with the Council Executive Committee he asked us to keep secret his proposed reorganization of his office staff even though he had written about it in one of his Monthly Reports e-mailed to all faculty a week or two before. Dr. Lee claims he will be transparent like water, but actually is secretive, opaque and duplicitous.
2. The Dean has poor management skills. He makes arbitrary decisions, hasty edicts and last minute changes. An example is his hiring freeze last February that sabotaged the position in Theatre. Another example was to call in the chairs of English and Foreign Languages to tell them that their departments would be merged, apparently so he could make an announcement at the Council meeting that afternoon. The previous day he had done the same to the chairs of History and Philosophy. A third example is his proposal to merge Communication with Theatre and Film, which took the faculty by surprise when they received a eight page single spaced proposal one morning, and then were asked to keep it secret. He demanded the merged departments-schools be in place on July 1 with the cavalier statement that “we can work out the details.” Since last October professors have been telling me he is “clueless” and “over his head.” He seems unable to understand the big picture. He displays a sharp temper and shouts at his subordinates. He only accepts yes for an answer. If he doesn=t hear yes, he proceeds as if he did. He discourages advice. Frequently in meetings he is agitated and rushes in and out of the room.
3. The Dean has bad relations with departmental chairs, his associate deans and the A&S Council. He fails to take advice from his chairs and associate deans. As Council chair I was routinely invited to attend monthly meetings of the departmental chairs. On February 22 they were very upset with a proposal by the Dean to sacrifice their faculty lines. After an hour of discussion and objections, the Dean left and proceeded as if the meeting had not taken place. Dr. Lee no longer invites me to attend the meetings.
4. The Dean is not good at representing the College in the community and with other colleges. He is a poor speaker, even after multiple rehearsals. Many faculty feel embarrassed for the College. In nearly all his speeches, all he says is SHARE. In addressing the Council, Dr. Lee mumbles at great length about obvious points, yet fails to address the topic. He dissembles before the Council, for example saying the hiring freeze was not a hiring freeze, but an offer freeze.
5. The Dean infringes on faculty shared governance. He has directed me to remove certain items from the A&S Council agenda. He has asked to approve the minutes before they are distributed. He told me he wanted to approve memos I sent to the faculty.
6. The Dean does not advocate for the College. Examples are the 10 percent budget reallocation, the unwanted mergers of departments, the lack of positions, etc. The minutes of our meetings on April 1 and 15 give many details.
We have given Dean plenty of time. As noted, professors have been telling me since October that the Executive Committee should meet with you to complain. We have been quite patient. Dr. Lee has had ample opportunity to hear our complaints. He attends nearly all Council meetings, and the Executive Committee meets with him monthly. Our minutes are sent to him along with all faculty biweekly. He meets with the departmental chairs as a group twice a month, and regularly meets with them individually. Moreover this is not an issue of poor communication. He can understand “yes, Dean,” but not “no, Dean.”
Please recall that with over three hundred faculty, we are the largest college. We teach virtually every student at UT, and the Student Senate passed a resolution on April 15 supporting our vote of no confidence. The Directions strategic plan says the University will be a model of shared governance.
The Council debated the no confidence resolution for 40 minutes on April 1 and one hour on April 15. The vote was 42‑7. The dean should resign. Now that we have explained the problem in writing as you requested, we look forward to meeting with you directly.
David H. Davis, Chair
Arts and Sciences Council
No comments:
Post a Comment