Looking beyond self-interest

A good friend of mine always tells me that when a system doesn't work it is not inherently because it can't function but that the interest of those at stake may be contrary to the set goals.

When reading an opinion article it is usually clear what side of an argument the writer is on. Accordingly I'll come straightforward: I support homosexual marriage and I am inherently skeptical of power. I just wanted to get those out of the way before we get into these issues. Interestingly enough when I approached the subject of Ken Roth and the administrations decision not to renew his contract I was sure I would have to focus on one of those two topics, however, I don't believe I will.

This week the initial recommendations of the Prioritization Steering Committee regarding the prioritization process were released. What has struck me the most about this process is that people are all concerned for themselves. I have heard students dismiss the process with little concern because their major is secure. I have heard other students bemoan their undoubtedly legitimate grievances that their major will end after they leave.

Nevertheless, the report casts larger structural changes as a result of past decisions and ones yet to come. What I mean is the one million dollars for unfunded depreciation (fixing leaky roofs) and cutting benefits to all future part-time employees are rational decisions from a business standpoint, but they obscure the larger effects prioritization will have on the university.

I spoke to Ken Roth this week about how he saw the process of his contract negotiations. I was struck by how much he believed the reason he was fired was for articles written in the Weather Vane supporting homosexuality and asking tough questions. This is in sharp contrast to the administration's position of "concerns about teaching effectiveness and scholarship."

I tried to get the widest possible perspective on this topic as I struggled to form an opinion on the matter. It is clear there are a multitude of perspectives to this very complex situation. I was in contact with the administration who are "not at liberty to discuss personnel matters" with the Weather Vane. While this seems rational not to discuss personnel matter with students, it leaves me with an incomplete picture of the events leading up to Ken Roth's current situation.

But this does not deter Ken's commitment to two things: to struggling students who he believes need to grasp the fundamentals of science, and to social justice. Ken described to me how he has received numerous letters from former students who are nurses or in the field of science, who regard him as instrumental in assisting them to where they are now. He also described how he strongly advocated for Sue Blouch (a former EMU employee). Ken explained how he now feels he can relate to how she did not have her contract renewed for questions regarding a stance on homosexuality. What was clear in my discussion with him was Ken's commitment to people and their education that is rooted in social justice and helping those who need it most.

While not necessarily in contrast to a social justice lens, some hold a different approach to teaching at EMU. Some faculty and members of the administration are pushing for a rigorous academic approach to education that is measurable and prestigious. Speaking with other members of the faculty it was clear that they saw EMU as an institution on the forefront of education. They see the prioritization process as one to strengthen the academic and financial aspects of the institution. It is perceived that Ken may not have prepared students to meet the standards set for higher level classes and scholarship; thus, he was let go.

The underlying questions that all of these perspectives bring together is how do we see EMU? What type of institution is it? Is EMU an institution that is a business? Is it a university that is based on building capacity to secure a larger student base to support itself? Or, should it have a sound pluralistic approach where lessons are taught in an attempt to make sure all succeed? Or, is it a rigorous academic institution of higher education in which we push for academic excellence? Perhaps we want EMU to embody all of these qualities.

These are not questions for me to answer alone but instead complex existing interests for us as a community to realize and to communicate about. If we do not appreciate this we may believe that our way is right and EMU does not function correctly. Rather, as my friend says, it may be that it is just our interests that are not being met.

Contact Jon at jon.helfers@emu.edu