Memo: Bruce Speck tells MSSU Faculty Senate to stop being so mean

An epidemic of use of the word collegiality appears to be sweeping the Missouri Southern State University campus if you believe the indignant memo University President Bruce Speck fired off to the Faculty Senate Thursday.

In the memo, Speck whines about the "lack of collegiality" in the Senate and says he won't have anything to do with the Senate until its members learn how to play nice.

Of course, Speck's emphasis at a time when it is growing more and more obvious that he intends on eliminating the jobs of some of those whose collegiality he is questioning is almost as ridiculous as someone writing and singing a song called "The Pink Slip Blues" during a similar time.

Speck's memo is printed below:

Comments to Faculty Senate Executive Committee regarding Collegiality Issues

I made a decision after the October 2011 Faculty Senate meeting not to allow my direct reports to appear before the Faculty Senate. I think there has been some confusion about why I made that decision and what has transpired since I made that decision, so here are the facts about the issue as I know them:

•    The Faculty Senate Executive Committee in its joint meeting with the President's Council prior to the October 2011 Faculty Senate meeting requested that Jared make a presentation about athletics. The purpose of the presentation, as was stated during that meeting, was to provide general information about athletics. Jared agreed to make such a presentation.

•    After making comments at the October 2011 meeting, I left and did not hear Jared's presentation, but immediately after his presentation, he came to my office and was agitated about what had happened. He told me that just prior to his presentation, Cliff told him privately that the Senate would want to hear ajustification for athletics. After his presentation, a faculty member approached Jared and asked about the cases of beer the athletic department provided students on the bus after an away-game. Jared thought the faculty member was kidding, but soon realized that she wasn't.  In short, Jared felt set-up, and came to me to express his agitation at the situation.

•    AJ told me about the treatment Kelly Larson and Shanna Slavings received at the Faculty Senate when they reported on the course redesign in communications. His report served to increase my concern about problems with collegiality in the Senate.

•    At the November meeting between the Faculty Senate Executive Committee and the President's Council, I expressed my concern regarding what appeared to me violations of collegiality in the Faculty Senate. AJ also expressed his concerns. I noted that I would need evidence that the leadership ofthe Senate was willing to address the issue so that should future incidents of failed collegiality begin in the Senate the leadership would address those incidents immediately. I recommended a statement from the Executive Committee that would provide me with evidence so that I would be comfortable allowing my direct reports to return to the Senate.

•    At the November Senate meeting, AJ read a statement regarding his disappointment at failed collegiality and, prior to the November Senate meeting, Richard Miller sent an

I                                                                                                                                               email to Cliff expressing his concerns about failed collegiality at the October meeting.

I

I                  Richard was present during the October meeting. According to the Faculty Senate

minutes for November, the following was attributed to Cliff, "Toliver welcomed Senators

I                                                                                                                                   and briefly reflected on the October 3, 2011 meeting. He noted that good work was accomplished. He encouraged all members to consider ideas, programs, and proposals and subject them to rigorous debate while treating all individuals humanely." That statement fell far short of what I anticipated regarding the conversation with the Faculty Senate Executive Committee before the November Senate meeting.

•             I scheduled an appointment with Cliffto  inform him that I was not willing to have my direct reports come to Senate without assurances that future incidents of failed collegiality would be address immediately. Cliff told me that he thought the October meeting could not have been handled any better, that AJ and Richard's views would not be endorsed by the Senate, and that what transpired was "academics engaged in proper

academic discourse regarding academic issues."  Cliff suggested that I listen to the audio tape of the October meeting and make a judgment of what happened based on that tape. He assured me that I would find his viewpoint correct.  I said that I would listen to the tape.

•    I listened to the entire audio tape of the October Senate meeting in preparation for the January joint meeting between the Faculty Senate Executive Committee and the President's Council.  I was unable to attend that meeting because I was called to Jefferson City to testify before a House committee.  Ultimately, Cliff cancelled the meeting.

•    I attended the January Faculty Senate meeting, and no one asked me any questions about the situation regarding my direct reports coming to the Senate.  However, a Senator, who was present at that meeting, chose instead to write a letter to the school newspaper addressing the issue, without either asking any questions at the Senate meeting or contacting me personally to ascertain the status of my concern.

•              In listening to the audio tape of the October Senate meeting, I could not always hear what was being said.  In fact, several Senators requested that a fellow Senator "speak up."  An audio tape captures only so much of what is being transacted, but I did note the following comments:  "I feel like we're attacking our colleagues"; Thank you for fielding our "aggressive questions"; "Sorry I said 'jerk'  to you."

•    I asked Kelley Larson to provide me with his perceptions of what transpired at the October Senate meeting, particularly in light of the 'jerk" comment, and he told me two people in the Senate called him a jerk.  When I asked him about how he was treated, he said that there was a lack of collegiality.

Given these facts, I believe the Senate needs to address a serious lapse in collegiality that occurred in the October meeting.  I really have little indication that either the Executive Committee or the Senators believes what transpired at the October meeting was a significant demonstration of violated collegiality.  A clear statement by the Senate Executive Committee at the next Senate meeting will provide me with sufficient evidence to resume the participation of my direct reports in Senate meetings.  Such a statement must include the following elements:

•              Clear acknowledgement that during the October Senate meeting the Senate failed to practice appropriate collegiality.

•    A statement of apology for such a lapse in collegiality.

•    A commitment by the leadership of the Senate to immediately address any further lapse in collegiality during a Senate meeting.

If you want to provide me with a draft of such a statement before the next Senate meeting in time to discuss whether the draft is addressing the elements I have outlined, I am willing to review such a draft.