Monday, August 31, 2009

Faculty senate president: There is a growing dissatisfaction with President Speck

Missouri Southern State University's Faculty Senate voted 23-2 today to form a committee to study a vote of no confidence in President Bruce Speck,

An article on the decision, posted earlier tonight on website of The Chart, Missouri Southern's student newspaper, shows just how much fear Speck has generated around the campus since Faculty Senate President Roger Chelf noted that only tenured faculty members would serve on the ad hoc committee, sparing others from Speck's wrath:

The Faculty Senate sent the following letter to Speck and other top campus officials:

This is to inform you that the Faculty Senate has formed an ad hoc committee for the purpose of determining the proper procedure for taking a vote of no confidence in President Speck by the teaching faculty of MSSU. The committee is also charged with collecting the evidence that demonstrates a vote of no confidence is both necessary and deserved. We expect that this committee will have completed its task by the next Faculty Senate meeting, which is scheduled for October 5, 2009. At that time, we will convey our evidence to you, and if and when a vote is taken, we will inform you of the results.


Anonymous said...

Typical college faculty action: form a committee and study the problem to death. We'll be lucky if we get a vote by next Spring...

Bruce and Dwight are smiling...

Alum said...

Maybe a faculty vote will give the Board the political cover they need to euthanize the Speck presidency before it can cause any more embarassment to my beloved university.

Anonymous said...

As someone who believes that Speck must go in order to save the university from eventual ruin, I am pleased with today's outcome. A 23-2 vote is pretty convincing, especially when many are worried about their jobs and/or promotions. It's going to take a little more time, perhaps another six weeks, but the job will get done. Then, the Board of Governors must do the right thing and restore order to MSSU.

Anonymous said...

I believe the "form a committee" approach was the right one in this case. I am hopeful that the Board will act at long last and remove the gentleman in question before the Faculty has to complete the distasteful task of formally asking them to do so.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 6:12, get a clue. The Committee will have done its work by the next Faculty Senate meeting. Perhaps you believe in making uninformed, emotional decisions; the faculty of universities do not. Lawsuits are another reason to carefully examine the question rather than bend to the capricious whims of a few. Again, get a clue.

MSSU Follower said...

If Roger Chelf and the Faculty Senate need help in collecting the evidence against Speck, here's a Baker's Dozen:

The reassignment of Director of Financial Aid Jim Gilbert, who spoke up against Speck

Drastic cuts to the International Mission budget

Elimination of the men’s soccer program (at the same time Crowder College had just added men’s soccer)

Elimination of the women’s tennis program, which resulted in negligible cost savings

Announced closing of the Child Development Center without consulting Dean Glenn Coltharp, and then later reversing the decision

No faculty raises for two years in a row, except for those promoted

The confusing travel moratorium

Pursuing an indoor practice facility for football at the same time trying to explain that the university is running a million dollar budget deficit

Not hiring Robert Corn as the new athletic director, or at least giving him an interview, and alienating Hall of Famer Rod Smith in the process

Vice President for Academic Affairs John Messick quitting after only 16 months in the position

Pursuing the School of Osteopathic Medicine without first consulting the faculty (What happened to shared governance?)

The messy parting of Vice President for Academic Affairs Jack Oakes after only 18 days in the position

Senior Vice President Terri Agee’s desire to leave her position (and Speck) as soon as possible

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 7:12. Excuse meeee... but the committee will "just report" next October. Then another month to take the vote and we are talking November. The 23-2 vote could have been it.
Uninformed decisions? gather evidence? Anonymous 7:13 just provided a whole bunch of reasons (and they are not all) and it took 7:13 only a "few minutes"!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 8:59, why don't you contact Dr.Chelf and volunteer your services in developing a plan. Wait, never mind. You know nothing, you twit. No one wants this for MSSU. Hopefully it is the least of evils. Regardless it must be done right. Much is at stake. If only you could understand.

Anonymous said...

I'm not sure I understand why a vote of no-confidence needs to have "evidence and proof". A vote of no-confidence is a vote that expresses the lack of confidence the faculty have in their leaders. The proof of the lack of confidence is in the vote itself.

To provide reasons as a way of explaining the vote or putting it into a context seems fine to me (a partial list of grievances is above, but surely it could be quickly expanded and doesn't need a sub-committee to be formed), but to imply that the vote needs to have evidence and proof before it can proceed does not seem right to me.

The fact is that the faculty lacks confidence in its leaders, and that's all a vote of no confidence expresses, whether or not the objects of the lack of confidence are well grounded.

Moreover, I worry that moving this to an "evidence gathering" stage invites "well, we can't prove that, so we can't use it" or "we don't all agree on that reason, so we can't list it" and so on. All of which seem separate from the fact that the faculty lack confidence in its leaders.

Anonymous said...

The vote to form the committee and the margin that was achieved can be viewed as a de facto no confidence vote. But the fact that two senators did not believe that this was the correct intermediate step indicates that there are faculty who still need to be convinced of the need for a formal no confidence vote. Of course this is all moot if the Board of Governors does their job on September 18.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 12:25 is right. The ball is now on the Board of Governors court.

Bruce still doesn't get it and claims the faculty "has not presented him with any issues" according to his latest press release.

Anonymous said...

I wish the Senate many blessings and a firm mandate in the Faculty vote today to send Speck on his way. You certainly deserve better.