Members of the Faculty, Administration and Board of Trustees,
The recent outcome of the tenure process, resulting in the denial of tenure to four WPI professors has prompted an overwhelming outcry by the student body. Concerned students have turned to the Student Government wondering what steps, if any, they could take to have these decisions reconsidered or at least to understand the rationale behind them. As the Student Government, elected to represent the views of the student body, we believe it is necessary to reexamine the tenure process.
The Student Government has concluded that there are serious problems with the tenure process which affect the student body. First, it is our belief that the recent round of tenure decisions have shown that these monumentally important decisions are not always made in the best interest of the WPI student body. Evidence for this conclusion rests in the fact that several of the professors who were denied tenure had an outstanding level of student approval. Scores of students have expressed the opinion that these professors represent the model of teaching excellence. Beyond their work in the classroom, many of these professors also advise student and campus organizations. Therefore, it is understandable that these students were shocked at the recent decisions. At an institution which prides itself on its undergraduate education, it seems inconsistent that such teachers would be denied tenure.
Second, the fact that there exists no formal appeal process poses a serious problem. An appeal process would ensure that these decisions, which affect the careers of individuals and the well-being of the student body, are as fair as possible. The tenure process should consider the best interest of the student body while at the same time build a strong and diversified faculty.
Third, it is disturbing that in a majority of these cases the Provost has made a decision which was contrary to the recommendation made by the faculty committees. Quoting from the Faculty Handbook, the Committee on Tenure and Academic Freedom specifically ensures the WPI community that the Provost and the faculty committees should "rarely disagree". This year the community has come upon such a situation, and it has caused a great deal of concern and frustration within the student body. We recognize that the need for confidentiality in these decisions is paramount, but a mechanism must exist to help the student body understand such decisions when they are made.
Finally, this is not a situation which will remedy itself, nor will it dissipate in time. As an institution with a one-hundred thirty year tradition of excellence in undergraduate education, our procedures and practices should be consistent with our values. The tenure process should not compromise our faculty or our undergraduate student body. The Student Government firmly believes that the needs of students with respect to this issue must be addressed. On behalf of the undergraduate student body, we bring forth these concerns with the sincere belief that they cannot be ignored.
Respectfully yours,
Matthew S. Freimuth, President, Undergraduate Student Government Association