For those of you that have been following the "selection" of our new Provost closely, it will come as no surprise that former Provost James Wright has been re-appointed for another year as Provost. Despite resigning after faculty members raised objections that the appointment process had been circumvented by the direct selection of Wright by President Freedman, Wright has once again taken the reigns to be Provost for another year. I wrote a column concerning the bypassing of this process a few weeks ago and I want to respond both to those who responded in The Dartmouth against me, and to continue my opposition and the public discourse of what it means when due process is ignored.
News flash: The procedure to appoint a new chief of DDS has just been bypassed by Lyn Hutton, who has personally appointed Tucker Rossiter to fill the position.
The rulebook governing selection committees to replace high ranking Dartmouth officials was last seen being thrown into the heating plant for more fuel.
First, I would like to respond collectively to those who defended the appointment of James Wright as Provost. They based their arguments on how loyal and effective Wright has been during his career. I never said otherwise. My argument was based on the fact that Dartmouth has rules governing the selection of high ranking administrators, and that these rules need to be either followed or permanently changed. The rules that are in place are, I believe, fair. They make sure that faculty, students, trustees, and administrators all have some say in the selection process. I do not believe, and I doubt that any of those who wrote in believe, that the system should be permanently altered to allow for a few administrators, or the college president, to simply appoint a new Provost. If James Wright is the best man for the job, then let him go through the normal selection process, and he will be legitimately appointed Provost. If there is someone better, at least allow them the opportunity to compete for the job. Ultimately, Dartmouth College either benifits or looses from who it selects to fill its positions of power, so let Dartmouth College, not just select powerful individuals, decide who these individuals are going to be.
What troubled me most when I read the responses to my column, was the current Dean of Faculty, Edward Berger's reply. ["Jim Wright Was Loyal and Effective Dean: Student Column Was Mean-Spirited," Oct. 16, The Dartmouth.] He said that my column was full of "character assassinations." He then goes on to call me "mean spirited" and compare my column to something from "the bad old days of the Dartmouth Review." First of all, why are you attacking me for name calling, and then calling me a set of names? Secondly, do you believe that by simply equating my column with the Review, you can discredit me? Is that how we handle dissenting opinions at Dartmouth? Simply associate them with the Review, and then they are no longer legitimate. And finally, if you are going to call me names, at least call me correct ones, like a trouble-making hippie perhaps? (It's a shame that my picture wasn't run with my last column, or he could have gotten in a few cracks about my hair, and at least realized that I'm a good young liberal.)
Dean Berger then goes on to say that my facts, "Might well have come to [me] in a late-night vision from Cloud Cuckoo Land." Strangely enough, my facts came from conversations with faculty members. In fact since writing that article, I have received numerous blitzes from faculty members telling me that I was right on, and congratulating me for speaking the truth. It is difficult for a student to find out what is going on in the world of faculty politics. And I believe that this is intentionally kept from the public, so that the faculty can be intimidated and coerced to support the administration. I believe that the faculty is losing it's independent voice on campus. What are you, Dean of Faculty, doing, to make sure that the faculty can speak their mind freely, without fear of reprise?
Another distressing response came from Karen Blum, Associate Director of Capital Giving. ["Publishing of Klein Column Showed Poor Editorial Judgment," Oct. 20, The Dartmouth.] She lambasted The Dartmouth for even printing my article. I guess that any alumni reading my article, might begin to ask questions as to who was in charge of their large donations? Lord forbid that that ever happen. Or even worse, perhaps a few precious dollars were not raised from people who read my article and were disgusted with what is going on. What ever happened to making Dartmouth the best college that it could be? Do we have to sacrifice public discourse for the almighty dollar?
Finally, I must respond to Professor Rassias ["'We Should Be So Lucky!' to Have Dartmouth Produce People Like Wright, Oct. 20, The Dartmouth], who, in my opinion, had the most well written and eloquent rebuttal -- He says that "We should be so lucky" to have a man like James Wright. If that is the case, then why do we have to shield this man from due procedure? If he is the best man for the job, then let him be Provost. But at least, let us all have an input in this decision. Let us not simply throw out our procedures, which are necessary safeguards against power usurpation, because some people believe James Wright is the best for the job.
In conclusion, no one should be surprised that Wright was reappointed Provost. We all saw it coming. Clearly the administration has no intention of following it's own procedures to safeguard against the abuses of power. It's much more fun to abuse power. I am very disappointed both with President Freedman and the Trustees for not stepping in to do something about this. Also, by naming Wright Provost for just one year, with the public reasoning being that when a new President can be found he can have input into who the new Provost will be, is a serious mistake. It is important to have a diverse administration that can check one another, not simply one full of people found through the good old boy network. Until power is divided, and rules are followed, the faculty and student body will continually get shoved aside. And those who speak out against this will be called names and threatened, as Dean Berger threatened the student body when he said that my last column, "Can do nothing but undermine the integrity of the student's voice in the Dartmouth community." Please Dean Berger, if you are upset at me, talk to me, do not threaten to take it out on the student body. We already have too small of a voice at Dartmouth.
