November 6, 2008

Dr. Tullisse A. Murdock
Chancellor
Antioch University
150 E. South College Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Mr. Arthur J. Zucker
Chair, Board of Trustees
Antioch University
2012 Prescott Place
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615

Dear Chancellor Murdock and Chair Zucker:

In response to our letter of October 1 concerning our forthcoming governance investigation of Antioch University and the closing of Antioch College, Chancellor Murdock’s October 31 letter states that, owing to pending litigation, the “proposed investigation by AAUP would concern the same issues which are now being adjudicated. For that reason, and upon the advice of our legal counsel, we are not able to participate in any ‘investigation’ by AAUP.

With respect to our decision to authorize an ad hoc committee’s investigation of the college’s closing and related matters, we think it important that you understand our basic aims. The Association has, since its founding in 1915, sought to secure an understanding of sound academic standards in accredited American institutions ofhigher learning. It has issued statements of policy embodying these standards, frequently in cooperation with other leading organizations in the academic community. The 1966 Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities forms the basis of our interest in the issues regarding the faculty role in institutional governance posed by the Antioch case.

The AAUP decides whether to proceed with an investigation on a case by case basis; when it is necessary to investigate and report on institutional actions, the AAUP appoints an ad hoc committee that has not prejudged the matter. The committee issues findings on whether the institution’s actions appear to constitute significant departures from the AAUP’s recommended standards. In the Antioch case, we expect that information already available to the committee will be supplemented by the investigating committee’s written and oral communications with numerous individuals in Ohio and elsewhere. To the extent you believe the investigating committee has received an inaccurate representation of the developments at Antioch College or Antioch University, we invite you to supply any additional information.

Our Association has never maintained that the administration of a college or university is under any official obligation to participate in an investigation; indeed, on a number of occasions we have completed an investigation without an administration’s participation. It has been our experience, however, that administrations are in most instances cooperative. In addition, we have investigated many cases that have simultaneously been in litigation, and we have generally been sllccessful in avoiding the detrimental intrusion of one upon the other. We do not bclieve we would be meeting our responsibility to defend academic principles and procedures if we were to delay our investigation until litigation has concluded. Thus we believe that we are acting soundly in pursuing our own interest in the issues relating to academic principles and procedures instead of waiting until other approaches have run their course.

We have recently worked out dates for the committee’s visit to the Yellow Springs area: Monday, December 15 and Tuesday, December 16. We have in mind additional Antioch visits elsewhere. We hope that you will reconsider your administration’s decision all cooperating and will provide the investigating committee with your perspective on the issues of concern to us. Whether or not you meet with the committee, a report of the investigation and an invitation to respond will be sent to you and other concerned parties upon approval by the Association’s standing Committee on College and University Governance. Your corrections and comments will be taken into account in our preparation ofthe final text for publication.

In the days and weeks ahead, we shall, of course, be sensitive to any new developments that could affect how we proceed.

Anita Levy. Ph.D.
Associate Secretary

cc: Dr. David Caruso, President, Antioch University New England
Dr. Neal King, President, Antioch University Los Angeles
Dr. Cassandra Manuelito-Kerkvliet, President, Antioch University Seattle
Dr. Michael Mulnix, President, Antioch University Santa Barbara
Dr. Zaki J. Sharif, Interim President, Antioch University McGregor
Dr. Laurien Alexandre, Director, PhD in Leadership & Change Program Antioch University
Antioch AAUP Membership
Adhoc Committee

October 1, 2008

Dr. Tullisse A. Murdock
Chancellor
Antioch University
150 E. South College Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Mr. Arthur J. Zucker
Chair, Board of Trustees
Antioch University
2012 Prescott Pl
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615

Dear Chancellor Murdock and Chair Zucker:

Thank you for your letter of last March 21 responding to ours of March 14 (copies enclosed for your convenience). We were tempted to respond at the time, but thought it best to await further developments in the negotiations which were then moving rapidly. Now, with issues remaining unresolved but with a less turbulent situation in the new academic year underway, members of our staff, with the general secretary participating, have once again turned our attention to Antioch. We have come to the view that the closing of Antioch College, whether it proves to be temporary or permanent, is an event the AAUP needs to address. We have agreed that our focus should be upon the governance issues raised by the university’s closing of a core component of the institution and, indeed, its founding college. Among additional issues to be considered are the governance implications for the continuing institution, namely, whether, without the college, Antioch University will operate in accordance with basic principles of academic governance as enunciated in the enclosed Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities. As to Antioch College itself, we shall likely want to address the prospects of whether and in what form Antioch College will resume, and indeed, whether there was a realistic alternative to closing it when that was done.

In situations such as Antioch’s that present developments of basic concern to the academic community, our experience has indicated that it is desirable, in fairness to the institutional administration, to the affected faculty members, and to the institution as a whole, to establish an ad hoc committee composed of persons who have had no previous involvement with the particular matter, to conduct its own full inquiry and prepare a report. The general secretary has accordingly authorized the appointment of such a committee, charging it with reporting to the Association’s standing Committee on College and University Governance.

The following persons have accordingly been appointed to serve as the ad hoc committee charged with investigating the case of Antioch University and the closing of Antioch College:

Professor Diane C. Zannoni, chair
Department of Economics
Trinity College, Connecticut

Professor Ronald G. Ehrenberg
Department of Industrial and Labor Relations and Economics
Cornell University

Professor Rudy Fichtenbaum
Department of Economics
Wright State University

Professor Duane Storti
Department of Mechanical Engineering
University of Washington – Seattle

We shall welcome your cooperation and shall be back in touch with you when we have dates to propose for a committee visit.

Sincerely,

Anita Levy, Ph.D.
Associate Secretary

Enclosures
cc: Dr. David Caruso, President, Antioch University New England
Dr. Barbara Gellman-Danley, President, Antioch University McGregor
Dr. Neal King, President, Antioch University Los Angeles
Dr. Cassandra Manuelito-Kerkvliet, President, Antioch University Seattle
Dr. Michael Mulnix, President, Antioch University Santa Barbara
Dr. Laurien Alexandre, Director, PhD in Leadership & Change Program Antioch University
Antioch AAUP Membership
Ad hoc Committee

March 21, 2008

Anita Levy, Ph.D.
Associate Secretary
American Association of University Professors
1012 Fourteenth Street, N.W. – Suite 500
Washington, DC 20005-3465

Dear Dr. Levy:

This letter is in response to your March 14,2008, letter to Antioch University. While I appreciate the AAUP’s concern, it’s obvious from the letter that your organization is operating on inaccurate second-hand information without bothering to seek sources that might be better informed, beginning with my office. The sources on which you and your president are relying for information, whom or whatever they may be, are giving you either inaccurate or misleading information, and revealing a very limited knowledge of the University’s financial situation as well as a legal and administrative naivete.

The “Open Letter about Antioch’s Future” that your president posted on the Inside Higher Education web-site on March 18 was similarly lacking in fact and serves only to spread misinformation in an environment already fraught with misleading accounts. It is noteworthy that AAUP, under the direction of an alumnus of Antioch College, has, in its communications, expressed concern for protecting the interests of faculty at only one of Antioch University’s campuses, namely Antioch College. This would suggest that AAUP and Cary Nelson especially would condone putting at risk the well-being and future of the other 200 members of the Antioch University full-time faculty and the University’s more than 4,000 students – all for the sake of the 40 faculty members of the College.

If that is the case, it certainly raises the question of the nature of AAUP’s criteria for identifying the faculty it will recognize and “protect” and those it will not. Such selectivity hardly resonates well when compared to your mission statement. The statement on the AAUP web-site, under the section “Protecting Your Rights,” reads: The AAUP works to protect all members of the profession: full- and part-time teachers; tenured and contingent faculty; graduate students, librarians, and academic professionals; union members and non-union-members .”

The University is in the middle of a complex negotiation that has the potential to be successful for all involved. Both the University Board of Trustees and the Antioch College Continuation Corporation are working to the point of exhaustion to reach an agreement that does not place in harm’s way either the College or the University. The transaction is complex and painstaking, yet the worthwhile goal of both parties is to ensure the future success of the College and the other campuses of the University, their faculty and students. You can be assured that no one is taking this matter lightly-and likewise that, as we continue our efforts to move forward, admonitions from AAUP and uninformed, naive open letters from its president are in no way helpful to the process. On the basis of AAUP’s official statement about protecting “all members of the profession,” I believe that AAUP and Cary Nelson owe an apology to the Antioch University faculty at the five non-residential campuses. As the situation currently stands, AAUP members at those campuses have genuine cause to question the ethics of your organization and the purpose of their membership fees.

Sincerely,
Toni Murdock, Ph.D.
Chancellor
Cc: Arthur J. Zucker, Antioch University Board Chair
Andrzej J. Bloch – Antioch College Interim President
Professor Tom Ayrsman – Antioch College Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Professor Jill Becker – Anrioch College Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Professor Pat Mische – Antioch College Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Professor Paul Davis, President, Ohio Conference AAUP

A version of this letter is available in PDF format as well

Dr. Tullisse A. Murdock
Chancellor
Antioch University
150 E. South College Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Mr. Arthur J. Zucker
Chair, Board of Trustees
Antioch University
2012 Prescott Pl
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615

Dr. Andrzej Bloch
Chief Operations Officer/Chief Academic Officer
Antioch College
795 Livermore Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Dear Chancellor Murdock, Chair Zucker, and Dr. Bloch:

In our letters to you of August 7 and September 19, we set forth our concerns arising from faculty complaints that the manner in which Antioch University had decided to declare financial exigency and determined to lay-off tenured faculty was inconsistent with widely accepted AAUP standards.  Your decision not to respond substantively to our queries has heightened our concerns.

In our last letter of March 4, we urged the Antioch University trustees “to keep working with the ACCC [Antioch College Continuation Corporation] to reach an agreement that will allow the college to continue its operations uninterrupted.”  We understand that the ACCC has since submitted to the trustees a draft letter of intent for its immediate consideration.  We understand further that the university’s board of trustees is scheduled to meet this coming week to review the proposal and to formulate its response.  We urge the trustees to give the utmost serious attention to the ACCC proposal with a view to reaching a decision that will permit the college to remain in operation beyond June 30.

We will be watching further developments closely, and hope to learn that an agreement has been reached that will ensure the college’s continuing and uninterrupted existence.  Absent such an agreement, we shall determine our further course of action consistent with our established policies.

Sincerely,

Anita Levy, Ph.D.
Associate Secretary

cc:    Professor Tom Arysman, Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Professor Jill Becker, Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Professor Susan Eklund-Leen, Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Professor Pat Mische, Faculty Senate Steering Committee,
Professor Paul Davis, President, Ohio Conference AAUP

PDF of this letter available here

Dr. Tullisse A. Murdock
Chancellor
Antioch University
150 E. South College Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Mr. Arthur J. Zucker
Chair, Board of Trustees
Antioch University
2012 Prescott Pl
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615

Dr. Andrzej Bloch
Chief Operations Officer/Chief Academic Officer
Antioch College
795 Livermore Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Dear Chancellor Murdock, Chair Zucker, and Dr. Bloch:

We continue to watch developments regarding the future of Antioch College with keen interest, and have read the statement recently issued by the Antioch University’s board of trustees reconfirming its June 30, 2007, decision to suspend the college’s operations effective June 30, 2008. The recent decision has apparently sparked renewed efforts by the Antioch College Continuation Corporation (ACCC) to keep the college open with its current faculty carrying-out their teaching responsibilities. This office has not of course been a party to the discussions between the board of trustees and the ACCC, and therefore we are in no position to propose specific recommendations to help resolve the college’s serious financial problems. In view, however, of Antioch College’s historic importance in American higher education, and noting that the AAUP has long called on governing boards to consider all feasible alternatives to terminating faculty appointments when faced with dire financial problems, we urge the trustees to keep working with the ACCC to reach an agreement that will allow the college to continue its operations uninterrupted. We do not doubt that this is a daunting challenge, but one worth making every effort to overcome.

Sincerely,

Anita Levy, Ph.D.
Associate Secretary

cc:    Professor Tom Arysman, Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Professor Jill Becker, Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Professor Susan Eklund-Leen, Faculty Senate Steering Committee
Professor Pat Mische, Faculty Senate Steering Committee,
Professor Paul Davis, President, Ohio Conference AAUP

PDF of this letter available here.

Dr. Tullisse A. Murdock
Acting Chancellor
Antioch University
150 E. South College Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Mr. Arthur J. Zucker
Chair, Board of Trustees
Antioch University
2012 Prescott Pl
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615

Dr. Andrzej Bloch
Chief Operations Officer/Chief Academic Officer
Antioch College
795 Livermore Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Dear Chancellor Murdock, Chair Zucker, and Dr. Bloch:

We have yet to receive a response to my letter of August 7, 2007, concerning the June 2007 actions taken by the Antioch University board of trustees to declare Antioch College in a state of financial exigency and to suspend college operations as of July 2008, with the intention of reopening in 2012.  We raised with you in that letter a number of important issues: the apparent absence of meaningful faculty participation in the decisions that resulted in the declaration of financial exigency and the suspension of college operations, the extent of the college’s financial difficulties, and the importance of maintaining an intact tenure system should the college reopen.  Recent information shared with us by members of the faculty, available in news accounts and in newly released documents, has heightened our concerns regarding these matters.

On August 14, twenty Antioch College faculty members filed suit against the board of trustees of Antioch University to prevent the planned closure of the college.

The lawsuit alleges that by suspending college operations for four years, the university bypassed a provision of the college’s Faculty Personnel Policies and Procedures manual giving tenured faculty “the right to be reappointed within a period of three years to any positions eliminated due to a declaration of financial exigency.  By limiting the declaration of financial exigency to Antioch College, Antioch University is in a position to eliminate the only tenured faculty within the Antioch University system.”  The lawsuit also questions the fundamental basis for the board’s declaration that the college is in a financially exigent condition, alleging that “less drastic means existed and exist to address the financial crisis at Antioch College.” It charges the university with breaching college policies with respect to “procedures to be followed in the event of necessary and justifiable budget curtailment,” and further states, “Antioch University’s poor governance of Antioch College also created the supposed financial crisis that purportedly supported the declaration of financial exigency by . . . mandating a ‘Renewal Plan’ that consisted of the elimination of the college’s entire existing curriculum and majors.”  When the curriculum plan “led to a rapid decline in enrollment and revenues,” the suit alleges, the board failed to consult the college faculty “regarding the appropriate means to correct the numerous and significant problems created by Antioch University’s ‘Renewal Plan’.”

University trustees, following a meeting with faculty and alumni on August 25, released an August 27 statement confirming a resolution agreeing “to work with the College Alumni Board to demonstrate, by the October 2007 Board of Trustees meeting, the financial and academic feasibility of the College Alumni Board’s proposal for the continued operation of the College.” In a second August 27 resolution, the trustees also agreed to a faculty and alumni request that they consider the possibility of establishing a separate board of trustees for the college.  Chancellor Murdock, earlier addressing this possibility in a July 30 Inside Higher Ed article (“Who Should Control Antioch?”), stressed that, regardless of the amount of authority delegated to the college board, final decision-making authority would continue to rest with the chancellor and the university’s board, and stated, “We are one corporation and all the assets are owned by one corporation.”

On August 31, Chancellor Murdock asked college president Steven Lawry to step down effective immediately, four months prior to his previously announced December 2007 resignation date.  We understand that the president was placed on administrative leave and barred from campus.  The university also announced the appointments of several new administrators, including a chief operations officer, and the reorganization of the college’s development office.  The latter was preceded, according to faculty accounts, by the changing of office locks and the early dismissal of staff for the day.  Faculty members report they were dismayed with the administration’s failure to consult them prior to acting against President Lawry, and prior to making new senior-level administrative appointments.  They expressed concern that the president was asked to resign because of his public commitment to alumni fundraising efforts to keep the college open.

Within days of the administration’s announcement regarding President Lawry, the faculty voted no confidence in Chancellor Murdock. Their September 4 resolution stated,

In light of the August 31st news that the leadership of Antioch College has been dramatically restructured, including 1) the elimination of the position of College President; 2) the invention of new administrative positions; 3) and the encroachment onto the operations of the Alumni and Development offices, all of which were done without consultation with the College Administrative Council or College faculty, we the faculty of Antioch College, issue a vote of ‘no-confidence’ in Tullisse Murdoch, Chancellor of Antioch University.  The Chancellor’s precipitous actions have damaged the college to such an extent that her continuation works against the survival of the institution.  The vote was unanimous among the twenty-six faculty present.

With respect to the matter of tenure, as we wrote in our August 7 letter, “[i]f the college does reopen, we hope and expect that it will do so with a tenure system intact, and with a sense of its continuing obligation to the current college faculty with regard to reinstatement.”  We understand that when the board of trustees met in June, they considered two scenarios for the future of Antioch College. The first scenario detailed the college’s permanent closure, while the second plan, which was ultimately approved by the board, involved the suspension of college operations and its planned reopening in four years. Recently released university documents indicate that the approved plan included a year-by-year countdown to the college’s 2011 reopening.  We were dismayed to learn that during year two of the four-year closure searches are to be conducted for the first eight faculty members to be appointed for the 2010 academic year, and that these appointments will not be eligible for tenure.

These ongoing issues of faculty governance, and what appears to be the planned reopening of the college without a system of tenure, have contributed to the faculty’s deepening skepticism about the university administration’s claim that the college is financially exigent and about the reasons for the decisions to declare exigency and to suspend college operations.  In particular, faculty members have maintained that the board’s failure to consult them adequately when it redesigned the college’s curriculum, and later when enrollments dropped as a result of curricular inadequacies, raises serious questions not only about faculty governance, but more importantly about the sufficiency of the board’s financial planning.  In this regard, we draw your attention, as we had in our August 7 letter, to Regulation 4c of our Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure.  Under this regulation, a “demonstrably bona fide exigency” – an exigency, that is, which permits the “termination of an appointment with continuous tenure, or a probationary or special appointment before the end of a specified term” – is “an imminent financial crisis which threatens the survival of the institution as a whole and that cannot be alleviated by less drastic means” than the termination of tenured appointments.  As noted above, the chancellor has stated that the university is one corporate unit owning all the corporate assets, including presumably those of the college.  It is clear that the financial situation confronting Antioch College over the past several years has been a serious one, but we are not aware that the survival of the university as a whole is threatened or that the university administration has shown that the college’s situation could not be alleviated by means less drastic than suspending operations for a period of four years.    Even if the college does suspend operations because of a bona fide financial exigency, the university is obliged under Association-supported standards to make every effort to place affected faculty members in other suitable positions within the institution.

We would welcome your comments on these several matters.  We also hope that the October meeting of the board of trustees and the college faculty and alumni, where the alumni will present their plan for the continuation of the college, will be conducted in the spirit of cooperation that characterized the August meeting.  We look forward to learning about the meeting and its outcome.

Sincerely,

Anita Levy, Ph.D. Associate Secretary

cc:    Professor Tom Arysman, Faculty Senate Steering Committee Professor Jill Becker, Faculty Senate Steering Committee Professor Susan Eklund-Leen, Faculty Senate Steering Committee Professor Pat Mische, Faculty Senate Steering Committee, Professor Paul Davis, President, Ohio Conference AAUP

THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS
EXPRESSES ADDITIONAL CONCERNS ABOUT ANTIOCH UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP

The American Association of University Professors, the largest and most prominent advocacy organization for higher education faculty in the United States, has issued a second letter to Tullisse A. Murdock, Antioch University Chancellor, and Art Zucker, Chair of the Antioch University Board of Trustees. The September 19 AAUP letter reiterates the Association’s earlier concerns that College governance procedures and College Faculty Personnel Policies were bypassed in the June 2007 announcement of the upcoming suspension of Antioch College operations due to financial exigency. This second letter also calls attention to the AAUP’s heightened concerns about responsible stewardship and the preservation of tenure in the wake of recent administrative upheaval and of newly-released information about the proposed direction of a reconstituted Antioch College.
The AAUP letter provides a brief recap of some significant recent events. Following the June announcement, Antioch College Faculty responded with a lawsuit attempting to halt the suspension of operations at the College; the suit alleges that “less drastic means existed and exist to address the financial crisis,” and that the Board of Trustees had ignored institutional personnel procedures and long-standing traditions of participatory governance. On August 27 a meeting between the University Board and College faculty, alumni, staff, and local supporters yielded a resolution in which the Board agreed to consider Alumni proposals regarding the financial and academic feasibility of keeping the College open. This cooperative effort was jeopardized a week later when the Chancellor unexpectedly eliminated the position of the College President, placing President Steven Lawry on administrative leave four months earlier than his planned departure. On the same day, the fundraising and communications operations of the College Office of Development were shut down, and only restored through intervention by members of the Alumni Board. In the aftermath, the Faculty voted “no confidence” in the leadership of Chancellor Murdock. The AAUP cites these actions by the University leadership as possible evidence of continued violations of College governance procedures and the ongoing lack of “meaningful faculty participation” in important decisions affecting the survival of the College.
New information released by the University about the College’s potential 2012 reopening without a tenured faculty has increased the AAUP’s concern that the proposed suspension of operations involves an attack on the system of tenure. While all parties agree that the financial situation confronting the College over the past several years has been a serious one, the current AAUP letter questions whether the University administration has demonstrated that the criteria for declaring bona fide financial exigency–”an imminent financial crisis which threatens the survival of the institution as a whole and that cannot be alleviated by less drastic means than the termination of tenured appointments”–have indeed been met.
The AAUP notes the lack of response to their earlier letter of concern regarding the June 2007 actions taken by the University Board of Trustees, and continues to invite the University leadership’s comments on the issues they and the College Faculty have brought forward.

Please see the attached document for the full text of the letter.

For further information:
Anne Bohlen, Professor of Communications, Antioch College atbohlen@gmail.com

Susan Eklund-Leen, Associate Professor of Cooperative Education, Antioch College
susaneklund@gmail.com
Anita Levy, Associate Secretary, American Association of University Professors
202-737-5900 or 800-424-2973
alevy@aaup.org

The latest breaking news on the struggle to save Antioch College

The American Association of University Professors, the largest and most prominent advocacy organization for higher education faculty in the United States, acting on behalf of the faculty of Antioch College, has submitted a statement of concern to Tullisse A. Murdock, Acting University Chancellor, Art Zucker, Chair of the Antioch University Board of Trustees, and Antioch College President, Steven Lawry.

The Antioch University Board of Trustees voted in June to suspend operations at the historic liberal arts college in Yellow Springs as of July 1, 2008. The AAUP raises serious questions as to whether long-established and widely-practiced principles of academic government, laid out by the AAUP Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities, were adhered to by the administrators and the Board in the process of deciding to close the college.

The AAUP, “deeply disappointed” at the Board’s lack of consultation about the alleged budget crisis, calls the Board’s plan for suspension “highly unusual.”

Please see the full text of the letter below.

For further information:

Anne Bohlen, Professor of Communications
atbohlen@gmail.com

Susan Eklund-Leen, Associate Professor of Cooperative Education
susaneklund@gmail.com

American Association of University Professors
aaup@aaup.org 202-737-5900

August 7, 2007

Dr. Tullisse A. Murdock
Acting Chancellor
Antioch University
150 E. South College Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Mr. Arthur J. Zucker
Chair, Board of Trustees
Antioch University
2012 Prescott Pl
Raleigh, North Carolina 27615

President Steven Lawry
Office of the President
Antioch College
795 Livermore Street
Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387

Dear Chancellor Murdock, Chair Zucker, and President Lawry:

Members of the faculty at Antioch College have sought the advice and assistance
of the American Association of University Professors regarding the actions taken by the Antioch University Board of Trustees on June 7, 2007, to declare financial exigency, and on June 9 to suspend Antioch College’s operations effective July 1, 2008, with the stated intention of reopening the college in 2012. They have shared with us a considerable amount of information about these recent events, which have also received a good deal of coverage in the media. We understand that all faculty appointments are to terminate by the end of June 2008. We were deeply surprised and disappointed to learn that members of the faculty were not consulted prior to the board’s actions with regard either to the declaration of financial exigency or to the suspension of operations, and that, in fact, they were not informed of these actions until three days later at a campus meeting on June 12. Faculty members allege that the board’s lack of consultation is part of what they perceive as a pattern of disregard for the faculty’s legitimate role in institutional decision making for the past several years.

The Association’s interest in these matters stems from our longstanding concern for sound academic government, the principles of which are set forth in the AAUP’s enclosed Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities, jointly formulated with the American Council on Education and the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. The Statement on Government, which embodies standards widely upheld in American higher education, rests on the premise of an “inescapable interdependence” in the relationship among governing board, administration, and faculty, which calls for “adequate communication among these components, and full opportunity for appropriate joint effort.” With regard to the internal operations of the institution, the Statement on Government further provides that “effective planning demands that the broadest possible exchange of information and opinion should be the rule for communicating among the components of a college,” and that the faculty should be fully informed on all budgetary matters.

The Association’s concern is based also on Regulation 4c of our enclosed Recommended Institutional Regulations on Academic Freedom and Tenure, which sets forth AAUP’s formulation of criteria and procedural standards in the matter of financial exigency. These standards, which define a demonstrably bona fide financial exigency as “an imminent financial crisis that threatens the survival of the institution as a whole and that cannot be alleviated by less drastic means,” call for meaningful faculty involvement in arriving at a decision that a condition of financial exigency is at hand and that all feasible alternatives to the termination of appointments have been pursued. We have noted the relevant provisions of Antioch College’s Faculty Personnel Policies, Section 59 regarding “necessary and justifiable budget curtailment.”
According to the information available to us, Antioch College faculty have been represented in institutional governance for at least the past eighty years through a variety of mechanisms, including the Administrative Council (ADCIL), which was created by Yellow Springs faculty in 1942. While the composition of ADCIL membership appears to have changed over the years, we understand that faculty had primary responsibility for determining its membership until quite recently. Faculty members contend that in the past few years the increasing number of administrators on ADCIL as a proportion of its total membership led to a marked diminution in faculty authority with respect to various matters of institutional policy, including budgetary review. We understand that faculty and administrators have often been at loggerheads as to which administrators should have voting privileges on the administrative council. Faculty also complain that relations with the administration as well as with the board deteriorated further following the 2003 formation of the board-appointed Sesquicentennial Commission for the Renewal of Antioch College. With its members consisting primarily of trustees, administrators, and alumni, the commission was charged with outlining a “sustainable vision for the renewal” of the college. The commission’s report, Experiential Learning at Antioch College: A Strategy for Renewal, called for a radical transformation of the college curriculum, and included plans to make substantial improvements to the college’s rapidly aging infrastructure, and to engage in a capital campaign. Faculty members allege that the curriculum set forth in the renewal plan was imposed upon them without adequate consultation, and instituted ahead of schedule, two factors which may have weakened its potential impact on enrollment numbers and donor confidence. They maintain that, because they had received assurances from the board that the renewal plan would have its unqualified support for the next five years, they were taken by surprise at the board’s announced suspension of college operations. We understand that questions have been raised regarding the extent of the college’s financial difficulties, the steps announced by the board of trustees to alleviate them, and the extent of enrollment declines. Faculty members have also expressed concerns with respect to the possible elimination of the tenure system in the reopened college, and with regard to the timing of the college’s proposed reopening date, which would place it one year beyond the three years stipulated in the Association’s Recommended Institutional Regulations for offering reinstatement to tenured faculty members whose positions have been eliminated because of financial exigency.

The announced suspension and potential reopening of the college in 2012 are highly unusual in our experience, matched perhaps only by events in Antioch’s own history. If the college does reopen, we hope and expect that it will do so with a tenure system intact, and with a sense of its continuing obligation to the current college faculty with regard to reinstatement. We also expect that the faculty will have a meaningful role in the governance of a reopened college. For the present, we urge the institution to make every effort to assist the faculty so that they can continue their work elsewhere with minimal injury, including placement in other suitable Antioch University positions. Further, if plans go forward for the reopening of the college, it is critical that faculty contribute significantly to the development and implementation of these plans for such matters as the curriculum and the principles and procedures that will govern faculty status.

Meanwhile, however, we understand that many groups, among them faculty, alumni, and former board members, including the last three board chairs, are offering suggestions for enhancing the solvency and governance mechanisms of the college with a view toward keeping Antioch College open. We would be pleased to work with the college’s academic community in reaching this goal. In the meantime, we await further developments with interest.

Sincerely,

Anita Levy, Ph.D.
Associate Secretary

Enclosures

cc: Dr. Andrzej Bloch, Dean

Professor Tom Arysman, Faculty Senate Steering Committee

Professor Professor Jill Becker, Faculty Senate Steering Committee

Professor Susan Eklund-Leen, Faculty Senate Steering Committee

Professor Pat Mische, Faculty Senate Steering Committee,

Professor Paul Davis, President, Ohio Conference AAUP