ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND TENURE: NEW MEXICO HIGHLANDS UNIVERSITY1

Academe, May/Jun 2006 by Nails, Debra, Baez, Benjamin, Hollinger, David A, Collins, Linda, Et al

III. The Case of Professor Wiedenfeld

Professor David Wiedenfeld received the PhD degree in chemistry from Columbia University in 1993. In fall 1997, after having served two years as a postdoctoral fellow and two years as a senior research fellow at the California Institute of Technology, he was appointed to a position as assistant professor of chemistry at the University of North Texas, where he remained for four years. In August 2001, he moved to New Mexico Highlands, accepting a tenure-track appointment as assistant professor in the Department of Natural Sciences, with a year of credit for prior service granted toward the probationary period. His primary teaching area is organic chemistry. He has developed an active research program while at Highlands, securing outside funding and publishing peer-reviewed papeI-S in internationally respected journals. The chair's evaluation in April 2004 stated. "Dr. Wiedenfeld is making good progress toward tenure." Submitting his application for tenure in early fall 2004, I'rolessor Wiedenfeld concluded the document with the following summary:

I have worked to bring the best educational opportunities to our students through rigorous course offerings and opportunities to conduct organic chemistry research, directed a vigorous research program that has received significant funding and yielded many peer-reviewed publications and also presentations, and given active service to the community, university, and my discipline.

Professor Wiedenleld's tenure dossier passed to his disciplinary peers in chemistry, his colleagues in the natural sciences department, and his department chair. At each stage, both quantitative and qualitative evaluations gave his tenure candidacy strong and unanimous support. When the dossier reached Interim Dean Kael, problems arose that were not disclosed to the candidate. The facnlu handbook stipulates that the dean "transcribe written comments verbatim and collate the peer evaluations within two weeks of receiving the packet." that is, the three previous sets of quantitative and qualitative assessments, and that these are to be "sent to the faculty member." This did not take place.

Dean Rael. in a memorandum to Interim Provost Chavez, dated December 9, 2004, but not shared with Professor Wiedenleld at the time, reported the unanimous support of Professor Wiedenfeld's colleagues for his tenure candidacy and went on to state that Professor Wiedenfeld had satisfied the faculty handbook requirement of an averaged score of at least 4 ("very good") in teaching and at least 3 ("satisfactory") in each of research and service. In fact. Professor Wiedenleld had exceeded the requirement, with scores of 4, 4, and 3, respectively. Moreover, his scores had been 4, 4, and 4 when Dean Rael received them, but the interim dean assigned Professor Wiedenteld a rating of 2.5 for service (2 means "needs improvement"), lowering the average for that criterion to 3. The interim dean did not provide these numbers to Professor Wiedenteld, nor did he provide any qualitative assessment, even though both are required by the faculty handbook. The investigating committee noted the further requirement that any score of 2.5 or below be accompanied by a written justification, which the interim dean failed to provide. Dean Rael concluded his memorandum to Dr. Chavez by stating: "At this time, I reserve the right to abstain from making a recommendation in favor [of] or opposed to Dr. Wiedenfeld's tenure. I feel that I cannot make an administrative decision without allowing a personal bias to enter into that decision. Therefore, I pass on the recommendation of the faculty to [you] and the president."