The University of Louisville is trying hard to recover from what can arguably be considered its darkest hours. It has, and is still weathering challenges to its accreditation at several levels. It has been turned upside down by a string of scandals that may yet lead to criminal charges. All of this has been well-reported publicly resulting in a community consensus that a lack of transparency and accountability at the highest administrative and governance levels allowed corrupt and abusive practices to fester for years. Where there should have been openness, there was deliberate obfuscation. It is against this background that the UofL’s Board of Trustees seeks to appoint a new President of the University using a process that could not be more opaque. Faculty members, some administrators, and students who have the most skin in the game are openly critical. I am too.
The descriptors ‘open’ or ‘closed’ in reference to such a search are by themselves poorly defined. However, the recruitment process selected by the Trustees would deliver us as Deus ex machina, a new president to solve our problems, but one who would not be named until after they were appointed. Such a process meets my definition of ‘secret.’ More of the same is the last thing we need. The Board is increasingly being criticized for its retreat into opaqueness generally. Its meetings are carefully scripted and I have yet personally to hear a substantive discussion publicly. I must conclude, as I have in the past, that all major discussions or decisions occur behind closed doors. Perversely, even those Trustee representatives of faculty, staff, and students are prohibited from sharing information with their own respective constituencies – or for that matter even sharing their own opinions publically. The assumption of this posture by the Board beggars the concept of shared governance. Continue reading “The Search For A New President of UofL Must Be More Open.”
