February 12, 2008

Embattled President of William and Mary Resigns

Gene R. Nichol, president of the College of William and Mary, announced today his resignation, effective immediately. He was told last weekend that his contract, which expires on June 30, would not be renewed.

In a remarkably blunt letter to the campus, the controversial president said he had been forced out because of stands he took to defend diversity and academic freedom. He also said the college’s Board of Visitors offered him and his wife money to go quietly. The board rebutted some of his assertions in a written statement, which said the contract decision “was not in any way based on ideology or any single public controversy.”

For more on this story, see an article in tomorrow’s Chronicle. —Paul Fain

Comments

1. Real goof ball. Didn’t know where and what he was hired to do. Wish him the best in a teaching position

   — doug fredrick    Feb 12, 03:25 PM    #

2. Never met the fellow, but from his letter Mr. Nichol sounds rather self-important and clearly not comprehending why he was so unpopular. Maybe he belongs in the faculty lounge at the law school after all, where he cannot do much damage.

   — Bob Sarbane    Feb 12, 03:27 PM    #

3. President Nichol took strong ethical stands throughout his tenure as president. As an alum, I’m disappointed in W&M’s frightened response to the issues that Nichol brought to light. It seems that they (and those who have commented here) are more interested in a college president as politico than as a defender of the liberal arts and sciences tradition. William and Mary risks losing some of its ethical credentials with this move.

   — SK    Feb 12, 03:33 PM    #

4. Looks like a classic case of an individual who was insensitive to the culture of the institution he was putatively leading.

   — Observer    Feb 12, 03:35 PM    #

5. It is a shame that BOV will not let the university run the university. A classic case of religious nuts interferring with public institution.

   — John Scott    Feb 12, 03:41 PM    #

6. As a loyal alumna of the College of William & Mary, I am deeply saddened at this great loss. President Nichol is a great leader who strives to increase access to education, promote diversity, and encourages free speech. It’s a terrible shame the W&M Board of Visitors does not value these pillars of higher education.

   — Kathleen    Feb 12, 03:41 PM    #

7. As an alum of WM, I am very disappointed by this. As far as I could tell, President Nichol tried to make some changes for the better, to make the university a more diverse and welcoming place for all. He has provided students a wonderful educational opportunity to learn about other cultures, opinions, and religions. It’s too bad that the intolerant (yet vocal) few have had their way. This really is a loss for WM.

   — S    Feb 12, 03:48 PM    #

8. For William and Mary, President Nichol’s resignation is like a death; whether it’s for a noble, ignoble, or senseless reason, inevitable or undeserved, it is nevertheless a tragedy—one which will send even more waves through the WM family & present a worse blow to recover from than any of the controversies that preceded it.

   — John    Feb 12, 03:55 PM    #

9. Gene Nichol has a passion for education and its worth to society rarely seen. His leadership will be appreciated more and more in its absence.

   — Peter    Feb 12, 03:59 PM    #

10. As a parent of one alumnus and one current student, I am very disappointed. I believe that President Nichols was moving the college in a very positive direction. It seems the Board of Visitors was unwilling to stand behind what seemed to be principled decisions.

    — Paul    Feb 12, 04:00 PM    #

11. Wow… President Nichol’s statement is forceful and rousing. This man is a true leader, and I’d be surprised if he doesn’t receive feelers from other campuses for the President’s role. Chapeau!

    — Eric Kristensen    Feb 12, 04:01 PM    #

12. Sounds like he had a 50/50 record on decision making. In a position where it’s easy to offend the few or many, that’s really not bad. A little more moderation on his part probably would have helped.

    I still wonder how this “art show” plays into the it all. Isn’t the whole process creating a hostile environment rather than promoting freedom of speech? It seems to me sexual harassment would be the inevitable bi-product of students debating, advertising, and/or promoting a show like this. It would be different if they were having the show off-campus and paying an admissions fee instead of student fees, but that has not been the case. Sounds highly problematic legally, not just “morally.” Maybe the BOV saw this coming?

    — kgotthardt    Feb 12, 04:08 PM    #

13. Michael K. Powell encouraged conservative ideology to reign and bad process to pervade when he chaired the Federal Communications Commission; now he has done the same at our alma mater. He and some of his compatriots on the Board of Visitors should resign, not Nichol.

    — Rick Reinhard    Feb 12, 04:18 PM    #

14. It looks like yet another university president opted to be a real leader and take risks, rather than keeping his head down and being a cautious, timid manager. It’s a pity, for our institutions need more genuine leaders. They can always hire good linear minds for the manager slots.

    — /case hardened    Feb 12, 04:25 PM    #

15. As an alumnus, an employee, and a graduate student of the College of William and Mary, I am deeply saddened and disillusioned today. As an educator, I feel that the values and ideals sparked by the appreciation and support of diversity have taken a heavy blow. The Board of Visitors has chosen to work in secrecy and has decided to bow to the wishes of the monied few. Ideology has indeed played a role in this tragedy and unfortunately it is a narrow and closed ideology.

    — joshua    Feb 12, 04:40 PM    #

16. As an alum, I too am disappointed in the BOV. This is not the first time I have been disappointed with this group.

    — GL    Feb 12, 04:42 PM    #

17. Hey, no messin’ with the cross. You coulda done anything else, but you messed with the cross. You mess with the cross, you mess with Jesus. You mess with Jesus, you mess with your job. His beach, His wave, dude.

    — marci    Feb 12, 04:51 PM    #

18. Seems like the fist bold statement anyone has made at the place since 1693! I left W&M back in the ’90s when faculty/staff had forced salary decreases mid-year to balance shrinking state allocations; excellence costs and W&M has done well through some hard fiscal times. A place with such a “glorious past,” however, runs the risk of celebrating that heritage so much… that real, current issues and controversies just bowl it over; I get this shrinking feeling I am driving back in time 30 years every time I drive down I-64. Maybe this will push W&M into the 19th… 20th.. maybe even 21st Century. Let’s hope Gene’s departure comes to some good.

    — abc    Feb 12, 04:51 PM    #

19. I am also an alumnus and encourage my fellow alums to sit tight and await our fellow alumnus Robert Gates to serve as our next president once his term is complete as US Secretary of Defense.

    Nichols was a poor fit from the start. I abhor the website that criticized him, but that was not his undoing. The issues were not his ideals and plans – it was their clunky implementation. Much like Summers at Harvard, Nichols appeared to be tone-deaf to the institutional culture in which he needed to manuever. While his ideals are very much the W&M ideals, his manner and administrative style appeared to be graceless and heavyhanded. That’s not going to fly in Williamsburg.

    — Ben    Feb 12, 04:52 PM    #

20. As a long time admirer of W&M I can only wonder how this once proud institution drifted into the state of narrow mindedness that characterizes this sad story. The State of Virginia seems to have turned away from the kinds of principles their progenitor Thomas Jefferson espoused.

    — CW    Feb 12, 04:53 PM    #

21. I, too, am an alum of William and Mary. I am very glad that the BOV — who, by the way, have the legal responsibility to “run the university” — has done this. In my opinion, rather than Dr. Nichol being some kind of courageous leader defending intellectual and academic freedom, he was instead an arrogant person-in-charge who made decisions on his own without input from others (sound perhaps like another president we know?). Universities often lecture other institutions that they must consider “stakeholders” and not only the “stockholders” — well, in this case, alumni, donors, and “the community” (which grants W&M its tax-free status) are stakeholders in the decisions of William and Mary and our views are certainly worthy of consideration. One last comment: I doubt if very many who hare my views are actually “religious nuts.”

    — PA Man    Feb 12, 04:59 PM    #

22. It is indeed lonely at the top. A man of his convictions call him wrong, call him right. You will either love him or hate him, but you have to respect that he is a man of his convictions.

    — DM    Feb 12, 05:16 PM    #

23. I am an alumnus of The College. It is my strong belief that President Nichol’s inclusive values and bold initiatives have lended tremendous credibility to William and Mary’s efforts to promote diversity in many forms on our campus. He has earned substantial respect and support among many students, faculty and alumni despite frequent public criticism – mostly propogated by a vocal minority of conservative and religious zealots who have sought to bring him down since his decision to alter the display of the cross in the Wren chapel.

    I think most members of our community who are familiar with this evolving controversy are not surprised by the alleged hush money offered up by the Board to silence Mr. Nichol and his wife. I find Rector Powell’s assertion that the decision is not tied to ideological differences both questionable and laughable. If this turns out to be true, it must be agreed that you do not offer substantial compensation to one in exchange for silence unless you are truly worried about certain details and facts entering the public dialogue. In the event ideological differences between the Board and the President did not lead to the decision, pressure from the state legislature on individual Board members up for confirmation may very well have.

    While I have not always agreed with the manner in which Mr. Nichol has executed his plans, I agree very much with his vision for William and Mary as a GREAT, diverse, and accessible public university and celebrate his tenure with the majority of my peers. Thank you Gene Nichol for standing up for OUR values, for turning down the Board’s alleged hush money, and for teaching each of us the importance of leading and acting by principle. Although our Board may not show it, the rest of us are forever in your debt.

    — Dan M.    Feb 12, 05:22 PM    #

24. Look, the guy’s letter makes him out to be a saint. Had he pushed the Pell grant and internationalization plans instead of his own agenda at the outset, he could’ve made a fine (& longstanding) president. But he came in and first thing he did was remove a marker of historical and community significance from a 300 year old chapel and then made a big splash in the media about it – tarnishing the school’s great name in the process – all WITHOUT the benefit of consulting the community, alumni, and students FIRST. When those groups were finally consulted and received the say that was due them, they engineered a fine compromise over the “cross” at Wren and that compromise will remain after he leaves. He was passionate and did some great things, but, as many people have alluded, he didn’t pay attention first to the tenor of the institution he was tapped to lead. No one is saying that W&M should stay in the past in terms of diversity and socio-economic equality, but Mr. Nichol did a disservice to the College by acting without consulting those who went before him and those who are there presently. As for the alleged “hush” money – give me a break. He sounds like a petulant child who didn’t get his way and is now acting out… if people have a beef about what was said or talked about – submit a FOIA request. That’s exactly how all of us alumni found out that Nichol’s actions caused a donor to reneg his pledge of $12 million. As a former student-athlete there, I can tell you that we could’ve used that kind of cash in trying to compete with the other huge state schools….

    — VA W&M alum    Feb 12, 05:29 PM    #

25. I visited William and Mary last Friday. I was shocked to read that there are exactly 6 South American international students from 2 countries at the University. This shows that there could be only lip service to the concept of diversity. How sad.

    — Meredith    Feb 12, 05:30 PM    #

26. As faculty I can tell you that Dr. Nichol is a great President. The ultra-conservative BOV and the fundamentalist Christians which dominate this area prevented him from dragging Wm & Mary into this century. It is not the liberal arts bastion of Thomas Jefferson’s renaissance. It is quite sad to see Dr. Nichol’s vision of what Wm. & Mary could have been killed in a sea of local narrow mindedness. Dr. Nichol is a man committed to diversity and academic freedom. I suppose in the present climate here, that does make him a bad fit.

    — SLW    Feb 12, 05:32 PM    #

27. Someone needs to correct VA W&M alum and any future posters before the facts surrounding the ‘history’ of the cross get skewed beyond recognition here as they have been elsewhere – The cross traditionally on display in the Wren chapel is NOT the property of The College and is NOT an historic artifact. It was only placed in the chapel in the 1930s – a good two and one quarter centuries and change after the building was completed. Anglican chapels, if we are to be true to form and history, would NOT have had a cross on display on the altar – and possibly not in any other part of the sanctuary, as well.

    The zealots that have driven this issue have avoided that fact throughout the debate, also ignoring the fact that the Wren chapel is frequently used for required and extracurricular secular events – and is part of a public building at a public university.

    — Dan M.    Feb 12, 06:04 PM    #

28. Many of my classmates and I had been waiting for nearly 40 years for a W&M President like Gene Nichol. Powell et al. are a disgrace.

    — John Hempel '71    Feb 12, 06:32 PM    #

29. Nichol never found his way to the bath room down there on the river. He jumped in and said that what William and Mary has been and is was all wrong. He single handedly tried to remake the university in his image. A fat poorly dress and groomed guy.

    — doug fredrick    Feb 12, 06:36 PM    #

30. ho hum, back to business as usual at the College. Good luck Gene. Many alumni out here were behind you all the way

    — Robert    Feb 12, 08:52 PM    #

31. Religious fundamentalism has trashed so many of our country’s values; but I never imagined it would come to my Alma Mater. Where will it end? A christian state?

    — David    Feb 12, 09:22 PM    #

32. I don’t know Gene, but it would appear from his statement that he is guilty of acting in the interesets of not only the institution, but of its students, faculty, alumni and doing so in recognition of the noble tradition of the school and its very renowned history.

    I don’t know what behind the scenes political and/or personal agendas were at play here and we may never know.

    As a 30 year veteran of university administration, I have seen presidents come and go and all too sadly, the decisions to crown (and support) one candidate or another are NOT rooted in the professional, philosphical or pragmatic perspective of the individual.

    All too often, the dysfunctional institutional personality prevails and in this instance, the personality factor has FAILED the institution.

    How sad that a leader with this level of integrity, vision and inititiative finds himself at odds with an admnistrative culture more inclined toward mediocrity, hipocrisy and political correctness and not with true enlightenment or forward vision.

    William and Mary is much less for this abyssmal decision.

    I look forward to all the warm and fuzzy fake diversity web designs and doctored photos representing the “diversity”, “access” and “inclusiveness” that is clearly not present on this campus.

    Best of luck to Gene. You deserve better that the shabbiness of this disgraceful display of “shared governance”.

    And as for those detractors who criticize Nichols for his “farewell address”, I would suggest that it is a far bigger person who addresses his enemies and serves them notice than to crawl away under the mantel they nailed to his shoulders.

    Shame on you.

    I know alumni will remember this shameful assault when they receive the next reqeust for money. And rightfully so.

    — g medina-olivetti    Feb 12, 10:01 PM    #

33. I doubt that William & Mary will be able to attract the best and brightest grad students in the future. I wouldn’t send my children. This liberal arts school cannot afford the reputation of being elitist, homogeneous, and repressive. This is truly sad for the students, faculty, and staff.

    — Bruce    Feb 13, 03:26 AM    #

34. 300 years of tradition, uninterrupted by progress

    — lbw    Feb 13, 09:33 AM    #

35. At the 2:00 rally yesterday the students, faculty, and administration stood united behind Nichols. An ROTC student stood up and said, “I will not fight and die for a country who does this to its own people.” The anger and concern here is palpable. I have taught at a number of schools but I have never seen this kind of unanimous support for a president. There is a campus-wide teacher strike today. Nichols was attempting to bring the school into the 20th century, and possibly even the 21st, but the BOV and Powell are attempting to take the school back to the middle ages. Professors (tenured and not) have begun to submit transfer requests and are on the market at Cornell, Yale, Columbia— anywhere but here, in other words, where the BOV and Powell have embraced a brand new Inquisition.

    — der    Feb 13, 10:30 AM    #

36. Everyone involved in this situation just needs to take a breath. I too am an alum as well as a current PhD student. I do not object to Nichol’s views so much as I do to his knee jerk responses to situations. If he had convened a group to discuss the cross issue and then announced the new policy I think there may have been less controversy. This has been my problem with Nichol – for lack of a better word he appeared wishy-washy. Even with the sex show he appeared to take the stand that his hands were tied more than boldly asserting free speech rights. I don’t think this will plunge W&M into the dark ages.

    — Kevin Valliant    Feb 13, 11:42 AM    #

37. This decision was about competence. The Board of Visitors exercised its appropriate oversight, listened to everyone on all sides, and conducted an independent 360 degree review which was not favorable of Nichol’s executive skills.

    Like him or not, Nichol has divided the College community like no other president in modern history. Division never plays well in alumni relations and fundraising.

    I wish him well in teaching and writing, tasks to which he is better suited than being CEO of a modern university. University presidents must reach out to those with whom they disagree. Nichol never showed that ability and it cost him.

    — Alumnus    Feb 13, 12:14 PM    #

38. Pride goeth before a fall. He ignored the fact that the Consitution prohibits the prohibition of religious expression, NOT religious expression itself. Separation of church and state is nowhere in the Constitution itself, but rather in some letters of Thomas Jefferson, who did not—thankfully—single-handedly found the United States. I wish Nichol all the best in his more proper role of faculty member. Leadership is not his forte.

    — Cal    Feb 13, 12:22 PM    #

39. as was stated above…I can’t wait to get my next letter from the campus cup-rattlers asking for more money…I have a few 4 letter words to share with them and NOT ONE penny ever again!

    — gm fitz...alum    Feb 13, 02:01 PM    #

40. #17: Once again, another difficult issue summed-up in but few words by the incomparable MARCI!

    marci, marci, marci!

    — Jaye    Feb 13, 02:55 PM    #

41. Just another act of intolerant conservative “christians.” This is how to demonstrate loving your brother and understanding for all people, by making sure to punish them for not agreeing with your entire party line. I am so tired of the conservative morons who just cannot keep their fingers out of every pie. Please go move to the mountains with your brainwashed children, your bibles, and your ignorance.

    — barbara ukrops    Feb 13, 07:42 PM    #

42. If President Nichol was making all the wrong decisions for the College then why is the applicant pool increasing by such large numbers each year. Is it because of the BOV? Does BOV stand for “Bereft Of Vision”? President Nichol had a vision for this fine College. It was a vision not blurred by a cross, or a sex workers show but of a College community that could relate and reach out to each other and its President….and it is the ability to relate to students that distinguishes great Presidents and great Colleges.

    — ANS    Feb 13, 08:19 PM    #

43. President Nichol is an inspirational leader who encouraged students to think boldly and act boldly. He was only following his own advice. My daughter graduated from W&M recently and my son is there now. So I have seen Nichol in action and admire him. He will be missed.

    — Perkins    Feb 14, 07:55 AM    #

44. what a disgrace…the bully pulpit reigns again…truly sad

    W&M will feel this for a long time to come, no matter how many people-pleaser presidents follow Nichols…it all seems so very cheap…

    — grey    Feb 14, 10:53 AM    #

45. Every generation needs a new revolution.
    Thomas Jefferson

    — GGAllen    Feb 14, 02:56 PM    #

46. I have been increasingly concerned about the college’s tilt toward the right on the board of visitors and high level positions. This decision was the last straw. I, too, am planning to withdraw my pledge of money. If enough “small” donors protest this action, maybe the school will stop bowing to pressures from the extreme right and live up to its reputation as a liberal arts university.

    — 70s alum    Feb 14, 04:46 PM    #

47. One criticism of Gene Nichol stated repeatedly is that he did not consult the BOV before making his controversial decisions. Since when does a College/University President need to
    obtain permission to enforce the Statut seperating Church and State (penned by William and Mary’s most distinguished alum). Since when does a College/University President need permission to enforce the first Amendent to the Constitution.

    The BOV and the conservative alum and legislators who, in effect, fired President Nichol lost their last best chance to make William and Mary a first-rate academic institution, able to compete with its peer institutions nation-wide. Instead they have assured that William and Mary will remain a hyper-conservative, antiquated, backwater college living in its glorious past.

    Under the current “leadership” Thomas Jefferson would have been asked to withdraw.

    — MLW    Feb 20, 10:40 AM    #

48. Why is it that in academia, where we make such a show out of valuing the free exchange of ideas, is it so very politically dangerous to speak the truth as we see it (however controversial it may be), or worse favor – let alone act upon – a strongly held opinion? The paradox boggles the mind. Do we really intend to create future generations of cowards?

    — Mike    Feb 20, 02:19 PM    #

49. I suspect the University of Dallas President will soon follow, for similar reasons. Just a guy out of touch with the university he is supposed to lead. In the Dallas case, he is promoting an anti-Catholic and ant-liberal arts direction and essentially doesn’t get it.

    — Pete    Feb 21, 04:35 PM    #

50. Those who would debate constitutional requirements should examine the text of the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom as penned by Thomas Jefferson. It specifically stipulates “That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever . . . “. Since the chapel is used for University events that aren’t religious occurrences, it was clearly required by statute to make the space not a religious place. It’s there in plain text.

    — Tracy    Feb 23, 05:31 AM    #

51. Arrogant university president—one doesn’t see that very often. Difficult to imagine.

    — Algore Majkenmewuzi    Feb 25, 03:53 PM    #

Previous: Job Prospects Look Brighter for 2008 Graduates
Next: Reed College Howls With Landmark Recording by Beat Poet