To: Faculty Senate
From: Ad Hoc Committee on Credentials and Hiring and Tenure Processes
Date: April 7, 2004
Subject: Preliminary Report
The Ad Hoc Committee’s investigation has three primary areas of concern: 1) the validity of the public statements regarding Vice President Dvorak’s credentials; 2) the process the administration followed when hiring Dr. Dvorak; and 3) the appropriateness of Dr. Dvorak’s role in tenure and promotion decisions at USM.
1) Progress on the Credentials Questions:
We requested from Dr. Dvorak a copy of the vita she submitted when she applied for the position of VP for Research (submitted in writing on 3/29, with a requested response by 4/5). She responded with the letter to Dr. Henry that was shared with you on Monday, proposing terms under which she is willing to provide us with that vita and meet with the committee. Our committee is uncertain about the intent of or need for some of Dr. Dvorak’s stipulations for meeting with us, so a meeting has yet to be scheduled. We have also requested, in accordance with the Mississippi Public Records Act, a copy of Dr. Dvorak’s vita that is on file in the Office of Graduate Studies to document her graduate faculty status; the administration received that request on March 31 and has 14 working days to respond. A copy of our request is attached. The committee prefers to base its investigation on a full curriculum vitae, rather than the several abbreviated vita we currently have access to; however, since neither Dr. Dvorak nor the administration has provided us with a complete vita at this time, we have produced this preliminary report with the information we do have. Related questions remain, as well, about the nature of Dr. Dvorak’s appointment at USM. While it is clear she does not have tenure, it is not clear whether she has a tenure-track academic appointment. The standing Credentials Committee of the Graduate Council has requested confirmation from Dr. Ken Malone, chair of the department in which Dr. Dvorak appears to hold Associate Professor rank, but has not yet received a response from him. Various artifacts, such as web pages and bulletin copy, provide contradictory information on this point, in some instances identifying her as “adjunct.”
Recommendations: Pending
2) Progress on the Hiring Process Questions:
We have requested the following information from the administration:
< a job description for the position of Vice President for Research, as that position was defined prior to its re-definition as Vice President for Research and Economic Development;
< a job description for the current position of VP for Research and Economic Development;
< a copy of the job advertisement for the position as it was advertised in the summer of 2002, when Dr. Dvorak was hired;
< information on where the ad ran and for how long;
< the number of applicants for the job;
< the names of those who served on any committee charged with reviewing those applications and recommending candidates for interviewing and/or hiring;
< the dates any such committee, if it existed, met; and
< the number of candidates interviewed for the job.
Requests for some of this information would normally be submitted to Human Resources; however, given that the Director of Human Resources is Dr. Dvorak’s husband, the committee felt the normal chain-of-command was compromised and submitted the requests directly to President Thames, copied to Lee Gore, University Counsel, and officers of the IHL Board.
Recommendations: Pending
3) Tenure and Promotion Questions:
These are the facts that the committee has been able to determine and on which we base our subsequent conclusions and recommendations.
A. Dr. Dvorak is not tenured at the University of Southern Mississippi.
Evidence: Tenure must be awarded by the College Board and must be recorded in the Board’s minutes. A careful review of all Board minutes from 2002 and 2003 showed no record of her being awarded tenure.
B. Dr. Dvorak has never been tenured at a four-year, doctoral/research extensive university.
Evidence: Her cv, interpreted in the most generous terms, indicates she was tenured in two community college systems: the Kentucky Community and Technical College System (KCTCS), by virtue of her position as President of Ashland Community College; and Enterprise State Junior College, in Alabama, where she was a “tenured instructor” from 1985-90 while completing her graduate work at Florida State.
C. Dr. Dvorak has never had to meet the requirements for tenure at a four-year, research-oriented university.
Evidence: The criteria for achieving tenure in
the KCTCS, according to the KCTCS Administrative Policies and Procedures, are
synonymous with those required for rank appointments, plus time-at-rank. In other words, these policies do not indicate
explicit criteria for tenure, but do outline expectations for promotion or
appointment to rank; tenure is simply granted after meeting the expectations
for assistant or associate professor and serving the specified probationary
period. (See Appendix A for KCTCS criteria for promotion.) There are no
expectations for research, scholarship, or creative activity in the
requirements Dr. Dvorak had to meet to be granted her tenure in the KCTCS.
D. Dr. Dvorak, in her position as Vice President for Research and Economic Development, is involved in tenure and promotion decisions at USM.
Evidence: Both the current Faculty Handbook and the revised version awaiting presidential approval outline the VP’s role in personnel decisions, including those involving tenure and promotion recommendations. See Appendix B for relevant excerpts from both Handbook versions. The VP’s role is presented as equal in weight to the Provost’s in these decisions.
E. Only
tenured faculty are allowed to vote on tenure
applications at USM.
Evidence: This policy is evident in both Handbook versions. In the current Handbook, departmental Tenure Committees are composed of all tenured faculty in the department. Only tenured department chairs submit separate evaluations to the college dean or sit as ex officio members of departmental tenure committees. Only tenured Associate or Full Professors may serve on College Advisory Committees, which make recommendations to the dean on tenure applications from departments. In the revised Handbook, the same policies are articulated; in addition, the following explicit statements are included: “Only those faculty members who have achieved tenure may evaluate a colleague seeking an award of tenure” (p. 59) and “Only tenured faculty members may participate in tenure proceedings” (p. 71).
F. Votes on promotion applications may be made only by faculty holding a rank equal to or higher than the rank being applied for.
Evidence: This policy is clear in both Handbook versions. In the current Handbook, see pp. XI-14 and XI-23, respectively regarding who may sit on Departmental Promotion Committees and the required recusal of Associate Professors on College Advisory Committees in cases related to promotion to Full Professor. See also pp. 59 and 73-74 in the revised draft.
Recommendations:
We believe full-time senior administrators involved in the promotion and tenure process and especially a Vice President for Research (and Economic Development) should be bound by the same expectations as faculty who are involved in evaluating colleagues for promotion and tenure. Thus, a vice president for research should be fully aware of research and scholarly expectations and have successfully proceeded through the tenure process at a research-oriented university. Based on the scholarship that is in evidence from the credentials we have, we are doubtful that Dr. Dvorak would be approved for tenure through the tenure process at a four-year, research-oriented university.
Evidence presented in this report indicates that the administration is undermining its own policies, as outlined in the Faculty Handbook, when it allows Dr. Dvorak to participate in any tenure decisions or in decisions regarding promotion to Professor. The committee is not, at this time, ready to draw conclusions or make recommendations regarding the veracity of her credentials; however, we do find that the misleading entry on the versions of her vita available in university publications and described in the press shows a lack of knowledge about the conventions of the curriculum vitae genre and the culture and values it reflects. This lack of knowledge, or insensitivity, itself is disturbing in one who now is in a position to review and pass judgment on dossiers of all faculty applying for tenure and promotion at USM. Regardless of the qualifications we might find documented in a full, complete curriculum vitae (should we be granted access to one), Dr. Dvorak has never successfully negotiated the tenure and promotion process under the criteria she now applies to other faculty members. The committee concludes that Dr. Dvorak’s academic background does not meet the qualifications necessary to perform her job responsibilities related to evaluating promotion and tenure applications at USM.
These facts have led us to the strong recommendation that Dr. Dvorak cease to participate in final tenure and promotion recommendations to the President.
Appendix A
Excerpt from the KCTCS Policies and Procedures on General Criteria for Ranks at Community Colleges:
2.1.1.2.2 Assistant Professor in the
Community Colleges
Appointment or promotion to the rank of Assistant Professor in the Community Colleges will be made when it has been determined by colleagues, the Division Chairperson, and the President of the Community College that the individual has a current capability for good teaching, good student relations, and community service; and that the individual has demonstrated a genuine concern in fulfilling the purposes of a community college.
The evaluation of the individual's performance should be determined by the use of current objective evaluative instruments.
The promotion to Associate Professor in the Community Colleges will be made only after an indication of continuous improvement and contribution as a faculty member. The individual shall have demonstrated definite leadership in assigned areas of activity and in the overall development of the program of the applicable community college. The individual also shall have earned recognition for educational leadership.
Excerpt from KCTCS Board of Regents
Policies, on Tenure Policy and Procedure in Community Colleges
2.7.1 Tenure Policy and Procedure (Community College Faculty Hired Prior to January 14, 1998)
2.7.1.1 Tenure in the Community Colleges
Tenure for faculty of the Community Colleges when granted by the Board of Regents in accordance with the Kentucky Community and Technical College System Procedures shall be in the Community Colleges and not at the individual educational unit of the Community Colleges.
2.7.1.1.1 Types of Appointment–Community Colleges
Full-time appointments shall be of three kinds: (1) non-tenured appointments, (2) tenured appointments, and (3) post-retirement appointments.
2.7.1.1.2 Appointment Records–Community Colleges
The precise terms and conditions covering each appointment shall be stated in writing on an official appointment record. Notice of reappointment shall be in the possession of the appropriate administrative officials and the appointee at least three (3) months before the renewed appointment begins when possible, or at the earliest date feasible in view of budget considerations.
2.7.1.1.3 Review Periods–Community Colleges
Full-time non-tenured appointments may be for one (1) year or for other stated periods, subject to renewal, but the total non-tenured or probationary period shall not exceed seven (7) years, including previous full-time service with the rank of instructor or higher in other institutions of higher learning. A faculty member with more than three (3) years in the academic profession, who is called from another institution and appointed at the rank of Associate Professor or below, may be required to serve in a probationary status for a period not to exceed four (4) years, even though the individual's total probationary period in the academic profession is extended beyond seven (7) years. However, in any case where a period of prior service of a faculty member involves significantly different institutional objectives or significantly different professional activity, all or part of the period of prior service may be eliminated from consideration in determining the non-tenured period at the Kentucky Community and Technical College System. Except as provided in paragraph four below, time spent on leave of absence shall count as probationary period service unless the Community Colleges in granting the leave and the individual in accepting it agree to the contrary. Individuals initially appointed at the rank of full Professor may be given non-tenured status for a period not to exceed one (1) year.
Appendix B: Faculty Handbook
excerpts related to Vice President for Research and Economic Development’s role
in personnel decisions at USM
Current Handbook:
p. IV-4: The Vice President for Research promotes and monitors scholarship among the University community, serves as signatory for all externally funded projects administered by USM, assists the members of the instructional staff in their scholarly endeavors, presides over all administrative proceedings relating to research, creative activities, and scholarship; coordinates institutional planning; and collaborates with the Provost in advising the University President on personnel actions involving members of the academic staff. Advised by the University Research Council (see below), the Vice President has direct supervisory responsibility for the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs. The Vice President serves as a liaison between the University and research institutes, foundations, government agencies, and industry, ensuring compliance with government regulations.
p. XI-4: The Provost and the
Vice President for Research review personnel evaluations and
recommendations,
initiating at their discretion all personnel actions pertaining to nonrenewal,
dismissal and termination, and, advised by University-wide bodies, recommending to the President approval or disapproval of personnel recommendations submitted by academic departments and colleges.
p. XI-24: Like that of college deans, the purview of the Provost over personnel actions is divisible, consisting of original and de novo jurisdiction. It is original in the sense that the Provost may initiate personnel actions. Normally, however, the Provost reviews on the record the written recommendations of departmental personnel bodies and college deans before transmitting final institutional advice to the University President. In this endeavor, the Provost is assisted by the Vice President for Research, who may submit independent recommendations to the University President; the Provost may also be assisted by the University Advisory Committee.
p. XI-26: The Provost and the Vice President for Research review all evaluative materials and testimony obtained from other institutional administrative officers, faculty members, or any other party or parties, afterward advising the University President.
College deans, departmental chairs, and affected members of the academic staff must be promptly notified in writing of Provost/Vice Presidential personnel recommendations to the University President.
In Provost/Vice Presidential recommendations concerning promotion in rank and the bestowal of
tenure, written notification to candidates must include the vote count of the University Advisory
Committee and the rationale for its recommendation. If the recommendation of the Provost and or Vice President for Research is contrary to the recommendation of any committee or individual responsible charged with developing such recommendations, that committee or individual must be informed in writing of the recommendation and the rationale thereof. In the event of negative recommendations regarding promotion in rank and the bestowal of academic tenure, unsuccessful candidates must be notified via certified or registered mail.
Revised Handbook:
p. 7: The Vice President for Research and Economic Development also collaborates with the Provost in advising the University President on personnel actions involving members of the academic staff....
p. 74: The Provost may initiate any personnel action except the termination of the employment of a faculty member. Normally, however, the Provost exercises de novo jurisdiction over faculty personnel recommendations, reviewing written recommendations and the supporting materials submitted by departmental personnel committees, department chairs, college advisory committees, and deans. In either case, the Provost submits the dossiers of faculty members being considered for promotion in rank and the award of tenure tot he University Advisory Committee. The Vice President for Research and Economic Development assists the Provost in these matters and may submit independent recommendations to the University President.