April 4, 2008

Cedarville U. Board Says Officials Followed Procedure in Professor's Dismissal

The Board of Trustees at Cedarville University has sided with the administration in its dismissal of a tenured Bible professor. In a statement issued this afternoon following a board meeting, the trustees said that the Baptist university in Ohio had observed its own guidelines when it fired David Hoffeditz for conduct toward students and colleagues that violated the terms of his contract. The statement did not specify the nature of that conduct.

The decision contradicted an earlier verdict of a faculty panel. In February the panel said the Bible department had been “unable to resolve its longstanding interpersonal and philosophical differences.” Mr. Hoffeditz is one of two Bible professors who were fired; the other professor, David Mappes, filed a grievance but then chose to suspend it.

There have been rumors that the firings were prompted by differences over doctrine — namely, over whether Christians can be certain of Biblical truth. The board’s statement said that such issues did not play a role in Mr. Hoffeditz’s dismissal.

Compounding the controversy, a secretly recorded conversation between a student and a senior administrator suggested that the university’s termination of the two tenured professors had been timed to avoid marring the institution’s accreditation process last year. The statement did not address that matter.

A spokesman for the university did not immediately return a call for comment. —Thomas Bartlett

Comments

1. I am still in shock that any school with such a slanted curriculum could even gain accreditation in the first place. How can that kind of religious intolerance realistically prepare students to function in the world in science?

   — Rusty    Apr 5, 09:45 AM    #

2. It is unfortunate that a university would fire a professor because of demonstrating critical reflection and challenge to a doctrine position. It’s it the purpose of education and teaching to challenge and discuss a position? I feel sorry for those remaining at Cedarville.

   — Michael    Apr 5, 09:54 AM    #

3. The truth will come out soon. Justice will be served. Dr. Brown and Dr. Milliman are corrupt individuals that have lied about everything. They said they didn’t threaten to sue…is that why a 2 page letter was sent threatening a lawsuit. The reason for the firing??? There is none. This is a greedy administration…check the IRS forms they have to file for the University…that will tell the story along with their attempt to squelch the Bible Department for some time now. Finally, justice will be served. I along with thousands of others will be supporting the cause of bringing down these 2 corrupt individuals and the Board of Trustees will finally see the error of their ways.

   — Gary Brenneman    Apr 5, 10:56 PM    #

4. Ummm, Gary, you forgot to laugh maniacally at the end of your post. May I also suggest twirling your waxed mustache?

   — Cedarvillain    Apr 7, 09:23 AM    #

5. I am inclined to be uncritical of religious institutions but the curriculum and impositions on faculty and students to indoctrinate with Biblical infallibility is almost as frightening as what I know of Whabbist schools where Islamic fundamentalism is imposed. In other words, the outwardly benign and kind face of the Cedarville faculty and students I know covers an anti-intellectual view that I deplore, especially in an institution of “higher” learning.

   — Paul R. Cooper    Apr 7, 10:48 AM    #

6. Please do not believe everything you read. The other side of the story is presented here: http://cedarvilleliver.blogspot.com

   — Bannerman    Apr 7, 01:40 PM    #

7. Render unto the trustees what is the trustees’; render unto God what is God’s.

   — J.H. Christ    Apr 7, 01:44 PM    #

8. I went to that website and was seriously disturbed by the lack of intelligent content. The discussion of the “Tenure Issue” was especially circular.

   Look, if Cedarville does not want to give tenure, then they just shouldn’t. Since (according to your argument) the administration does not have to honor their end of the tenure responsibility, why bother to grant it? Just give promotion and be done with it.

   As for other things you seem to be confused about, such as – if tenure is “lifelong employment”, why sign yearly contracts? My answer is because my pay changes each year due to something called a “raise”. Therefore the terms of my employment change each year. I am not on a term contract for a fix pay (5 or 10 year as you suggest). My pay changes year by year and therefore so does my contract.

   Also, the misconception that you seem to have about tenure as “lifelong employment” is a misnomer. Tenure simply means that I have some protection against being released because of the whims of administration (as we see in this case). It means that I can express my opinions of the administration (good and bad) and take a large part in a little thing called “shared governance” without fear of reprisal.

   It does not mean that I cannot be released, but the process takes more than a pissed off administrator to do it. The de-tenuring process is difficult and requires ample evidence and overwhelming proof of gross misconduct or incompetence or failure to do my job that is agreed to by a broad representation of the University (Faculty, Staff and Administration).

   In this case, none of these criteria seem to be evident. I logged on to this site to find “The other side of the story” to learn about the gross misconduct that these professors engaged in. I found none. Instead I found rambling, circular, defensive diatribes that blame everyone who is attacking Cedarville of being “illogical”. It reminds me of a scene from Monty Python’s Holy Grail (“Therefore if she weighs the same as a duck, then she is made of wood. . . and therefore . . A WITCH!)

   So again Cedarville I ask – Why bother to give tenure in the first place?

   — blogreader    Apr 7, 06:46 PM    #

9. What are the chances that the accreditation body will return now and give a thorough re-evaluation?

   — Rusty    Apr 8, 06:48 AM    #

10. Blogreader: The way you describe tenure makes such employment the equivalent of what is already established under labor law – basic rights. Where is the difference? Labor law is also not well understood. Because some employees are “at will” does not mean that they can be fired for no reason in any way possible. Attorneys often say this to discourage people from suing but it is not true. What is true, though, is that often it takes a competent attorney to enforce the rights and a jury to convict – which is not difficult if one can get that far. Power is on the side of the employer simply because of this – if they can abuse their rights and delay the justice system – they can destroy their victims long before their victims’ voices are heard. Hiring a bible professor and then removing him/her for doing that in a manner someone does not like should not be acceptable in our free society – however offensive the teaching may seem (barring anything violent or x-rated, of course). Why is this point lost on leaders within our higher education administrations? Isn’t understanding of this a prerequisite?

    — Confidential    Apr 8, 12:26 PM    #

11. I found some interesting information at http://www.cedarvilleheart.blogspot.com

    — CM    Apr 11, 10:00 AM    #

Previous: Charles Miller: Maybe College Doesn't Pay Off, After All
Next: Nebraska Governor's Office Penalizes Student Newspaper for Article It Didn't Like