The Faculty Letter to NCA

02/24/05

Karen L. Solinski
Assistant Director for Legal & Government Affairs
30 North La Salle, Suite 2400
Chicago, Il 60602

Dear Ms Solinski:

We, the undersigned faculty, are writing this letter because we are gravely concerned with recent trends regarding governance policy at New Mexico Highlands University. A strong university requires a strong faculty. This requirement is the basis for the concept of the shared governance of universities. Under the current administration at Highlands, the ability of the faculty to participate as a strong, effective and collaborative voice in university governance is being systematically eroded. The current atmosphere on campus for the faculty is one of fear, hostility, and intimidation. We submit this letter reluctantly, but feel that the only way our concerns will be addressed, without retaliation, is through intervention on the part of our educational accrediting agencies, professional associations, and the weight of public opinion and concern. The conditions at NMHU are a threat to the academic integrity of our institution and to the students and the local and state community we serve. The following list addresses some recent events and some of our major concerns.

• Manny Aragon, the University’s president, has continually demonstrated his lack of respect for the faculty as professionals. He regularly engages in unwarranted attacks on the faculty in public meetings based on preconceptions and misunderstandings. He makes no attempt to ascertain what the issues are or what the faculty indeed thinks beforehand. For example, in a sub-committee meeting of the Board of Regents, when asked what was being done to encourage faculty members to apply for research grants, Mr. Aragon stated, “You have to be careful about that. Teaching is hard work and these people will do anything to get out of the classroom”. In a Management Team meeting, during a discussion concerning a draft procedure developed by the Faculty Senate for selecting members of the Dean Search Committees, he referred to the Faculty Senate as “17th century white property owners controlling the vote.” He has repeatedly told faculty members, including brand new faculty members at their introductory luncheon at the beginning of the Fall semester, that he would support any faculty member who wanted to leave Highlands. This pattern of encouraging faculty members to leave Highlands was repeated at the December Board meeting when he told Jean Hill, the Chair of the Faculty Senate, to “Fish or cut bait.” In a recent front page interview in our local paper, Mr. Aragon stated “I don’t think we have a professor at this university that has received a research grant based on their talents and accomplishments in the recent past.”
• Mr. Aragon does not seem to have any understanding of the meaning or importance of shared governance in a university. Mr. Aragon has repeatedly stated that the University is not a democracy, and that his decisions do not have to include or reflect faculty input. While the faculty recognizes administrative and presidential prerogatives, Mr. Aragon does not acknowledge that there are limitations to this approach, and that it is not in the best interest of the University to repeatedly overrule the Faculty. For example, Mr. Aragon has stated to the Board of Regents that the Faculty only play an advisory role in the matter of academic policy, and that the Board and Administration can set academic policy without the input or approval of the Faculty. This is in clear violation of the Faculty Handbook. In addition, when the Senate made recommendations regarding the make-up of the Search Committees for Dean positions, the President made arbitrary changes to the Faculty appointments, with no rationale given for these changes. In a clear disregard for shared governance procedures, a decision was made by the administration last fall to discontinue our Physics major. When the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences was asked by members of the Academic Affairs Committee why the issue was not brought to that committee before a decision was made, as required by procedure, the Dean replied that the decision had already been made by the administration and input from the Faculty Academic Affairs Committee was considered moot. Finally, in response to goals set in the Strategic Plan coupled with recent NCA concerns regarding shared governance, a shared governance committee was formed in December 2003. The committee met regularly throughout 2004. Mr. Aragon, after arriving at NMHU in July 2004, began attending the meetings. To comply with NCA’s mandate to formulate some clear-shared governance guidelines, it was suggested that we look at models used by other universities. We decided to visit Eastern New Mexico University and discuss with their representatives the strengths and weaknesses of their shared governance model. Upon hearing of our decision to visit ENMU, Mr. Aragon appeared displeased and wanted to know why we were wasting our time fraternizing with the enemy (paraphrased). We did, however, visit ENMU and reported our findings at the next meeting. The shared governance committee has since been replaced by a more general committee, which was formed by the provost to address itself exclusively to the Strategic Plan.
• Out of seven faculty members applying for tenure this year, four were denied. All four had the support of their colleagues, but two were denied by their Deans and all four were denied by the Provost. When the faculty members took the issue to the Faculty Affairs Committee, as specified in the Faculty Handbook, the Provost walked out of one hearing before it began and attended only a portion of another hearing. At one of the hearings, the Provost actually indicated that she would reverse her decision. However, she later stated in writing that she “could not” change her decision. Ultimately, the Regents denied all four faculty members tenure. Our concern is that there is no clear indication that tenure was awarded or denied based upon the merit of the faculty member, and that procedures were seriously violated.
• One of the faculty members who was denied tenure, despite excellent ratings, is a member of the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate. Another member of the Executive Committee who holds a joint appointment in both Physics and Education (he has a doctorate in nuclear physics) has been told by the administration that he will be reassigned to only Education. This decision was made unilaterally by the administration, is contrary to the decision made by past administrations, and is being appealed by the faculty member. Meanwhile, he was removed from all of his Physics classes at the beginning of this semester and replaced by a per course instructor with a masters degree in drafting. A third member of the Executive Committee was told on the first day of the spring semester that he was being assigned to teach a class on Wednesday afternoons. This will mean that he can no longer attend Faculty Senate meetings or Executive Committee meetings. These meetings have been held on Wednesday afternoons for years, and this year’s schedule of meetings has been public since last August. The Chair of the Faculty Senate has been placed on administrative leave, pending the investigation of allegations that are almost ten years old and have already been thoroughly investigated by various entities, including a previous administration, and completely resolved over six years ago. Finally, the President of the Faculty Association (our collective bargaining unit) has been repeatedly told by Mr. Aragon that he cannot be President of the Association since he is Chair of the Department of Behavioral Sciences and thus a member of the administration. Taken together, these incidents show a clear pattern of harassment of faculty members in leadership positions.
• At the end of the fall semester Mr. Aragon was prepared to send out faculty contracts that included significant changes from all previous contracts. The President made these changes unilaterally, with no consultation with the Faculty. When the Provost communicated the concerns of the Faculty Senate regarding those changes to the President, his response was that the contracts would be sent out as prepared. One of the changes stated that faculty members could be re-assigned to any Highlands campus, with or without notice. This could conceivably result in faculty members being reassigned to a campus five hours from their homes. It was only through the actions of the union, and the threat of a prohibited practice violation being filed with the State Labor Board, that the contracts were prevented from going out.
• Mr. Aragon has made a series of administrative appointments that reflect his personal and professional relationships more than the demonstrated needs of Highlands University. None of these appointments involved input from the faculty most closely impacted, even though established procedures specifically call for faculty input in the appointment of Deans. Examples of these appointments include the appointment of Jim Alarid as Interim Dean of the School of Education and Alfredo Garcia as Interim Dean of the School of Social Work. Both of these individuals served on the Presidential Search Committee that recommended the hiring of President Aragon. Other appointments made without faculty input include Rolando Rael, Interim Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, Janice Chavez, Interim Provost, Clarence Sanchez, Vice President of Graduate Studies, Grants and Contracts, and Institutional Research, and various “personal advisors”. In replacing the Director of Grants and Contracts, Mr. Aragon removed a person who had been trained and funded by the federal government specifically to establish an Office of Grants and Contracts. This same individual, who is a tenured faculty member, had research release time that Mr. Aragon refused to let her use.

Clearly, there is a systematic effort to intimidate faculty at NMHU through terminating the contracts of current tenure track faculty members, through denying tenure to faculty who have been recommended for tenure by their peers, and through the intimidation of the faculty leadership. Mr. Aragon has created a hostile working environment, one that is the antithesis to an educational environment that fosters growth, democracy, and learning.

We, the faculty of NMHU, are seeking the endorsement of and commitment to policies and practice that respect the role of the faculty in the shared governance of the University. We ask that the attacks on the faculty end, and a spirit of respectful collaboration begin in which we can all work to strengthen Highlands University and meet its mission. The University needs your immediate help to achieve these goals.

Sincerely,

(Names Withheld)