The headline about West Virginia University should have read, “The university announces the largest pay raise for faculty and staff in recent memory,” but alas, that was not to be. Instead, it is the resignation of the school’s president, Mike Garrison, that commands top billing. It is a sad and difficult situation all the way around. There are no winners.
I never met the embattled Mike Garrison. I’ve never visited West Virginia University. All my information comes from the media; and I’ve read more than one story of recent events (see The Chronicle). Most accounts share the following: The Pittsburgh Post reported last December that a woman named Heather Bresch, the daughter of the Governor of West Virginia, Joe Manchin III, received an M.B.A. from WVU even though she did not complete all the necessary coursework. After this news became public, an independent panel was formed to look into the situation. In April, a report was issued and the university’s provost and the dean of the business school resigned from their administrative, but not from their tenured, faculty positions. Over the past months, several alumni and faculty groups called for the president to resign. To the best of my knowledge, no evidence has appeared in the press linking the university’s president to the awarding of the degree to Ms. Bresch.
There are facts and there is perception and both can help or hinder the public’s understand of a situation. And then, of course, there is the world of politics. To some, the words “politics and education” need the same firewall of separation as do “church and state.” But there are few people involved in the leadership of state colleges or universities who think that politics and education do not overlap. After all, the budget for the state institutions must be passed by the state legislature. And, even in the academy, money talks.
Learning where the power resides, who is friend and who is foe, is one of prime responsibilities of the school’s president. If you tell me that the president of the state’s university and the state’s governor are not “friends,” then I’ll tell you that the university’s president probably isn’t doing her or his job. Likewise — the president should also know the chairman of the state’s education committee, the commissioner of education, and the director of public works, along with dozens of other line and staff personnel in key positions to assist the university.
So given that President Garrison and Governor Manchin have known each other for years (no one denies this); and given that that Bresch and Garrison also know each other for years (no one denies this), we heard from many on and off campus that Garrison must have known about Bresch’s non-earned degree. Maybe he did; maybe he didn’t. No evidence has been made public to tell us either way. When a question has been asked, no reply is also a reply. One can only believe if Garrison’s critics had anything on him they would not keep it to themselves. In any case, please don’t misunderstand. I am not condoning the awarding of an unearned degree; I would never do so. I am only talking about due process. I am asking of what the president was proved guilty.
The calls for Garrison’s resignation came from several sources, most often from the faculty. They weren’t happy when Garrison was first appointed in April 2006, believing, among other things, that his academic credentials weren’t sufficient for the position and that his political background detracted from the school’s reputation. Relations between the school’s administration and faculty have thus been chilly for the past year.
Presumption of innocence is essential to American jurisprudence and this is even truer on campuses, if we are to believe the AAUP, which holds us to a higher standard. Almost all universities have codes that are followed whenever an allegation of wrongdoing is made. Students are covered under one set of guidelines; faculty by another. Both groups have long established procedures designed to stop a rush of judgment. Memories of Senator Joseph McCarthy die hard.
As I said at the outset, I am not lobbying for Mike Garrison. I am deeply concerned, however, that he was not permitted the same presumption of innocence that would have been assumed had he been the chairman of an academic department rather than the school’s president. Where is the justice in that, in reality and perception?
Where does Garrison now go in order to restore his good name?
Meanwhile, the faculty and staff just received the highest pay raise in recent memory. Who knows, perhaps the president’s political connections had something to do with that. And that was his first year. Was the best yet to come? We will never know.
