Letter to the Editor-in-Chief
Malon Courts ’92
Chairman – Roanoke College Board of Trustees
December 12, 2024
Dear Mikaela,
I have been closely following your recent series in The Brackety-Ack, which examined the college’s financial circumstances, shared governance, and change in teaching load. I commend you for tackling a highly complex situation. However, I feel compelled to respond to several misunderstandings in your series. Notably, you reference certain faculty assumptions about the board and its understanding of faculty opinions, knowledge, and perspectives. Yet, you did not invite the board chair or any member of the board of trustees to express their views on the decisions made by the board when writing this series. This omission represents a missed opportunity if your objective was to thoroughly examine this complex situation from a neutral perspective.
When I was elected board chair in 2019, I publicly stated that my singular goal was to position the college in a permanent state of stability, success, and celebration. This goal remains unchanged today.
When hiring President Shushok, the board and search committee delivered a mandate: fix the college’s broken business model, innovate to make it relevant to today’s students and those of the future, and act with urgency. This is what it will take to succeed in today’s highly competitive and changing higher education market.
The change in teaching load was necessary and was the only way to begin a serious attempt to close a $6 million budget deficit. No member of the board or administration would have chosen this change unless it was absolutely necessary. The alternative would have been a far worse outcome for all faculty, staff, and students. With perfect clarity, hindsight reveals that the college had been clinging to a teaching model it could not afford for at least a decade. Over this time, budgetary decisions were made to preserve a model preferred by faculty but not economically viable. The consequences of these decisions are apparent across our campus, from deferred maintenance to residence halls needing repair, diminished budgets, reduced staffing, and limited opportunities for professional development. Witnessing the ramifications and execution of this change over the past 17 months clarifies why the former administration was resistant to this shift; in my opinion, they did not want to deal with the political fallout. To be clear, these changes were inevitable, regardless of the administration; the only difference was the rate of implementation. As it has for many other colleges, the rapidly changing and competitive higher education market necessitated financial adjustments. While most other colleges are simply eliminating multiple academic programs, we listened to the faculty when they asked that we try to avoid doing that—but we could not simply do nothing.
The change in teaching load is the right decision and the best outcome for the college’s long term health and viability, aligning with my singular goal as chairman.
There has been significant debate about the increased teaching load and its impact on student outcomes, relationships, mentoring, and time management. There is no debate about the allocation of work: Faculty are being asked to spend more time teaching in the classroom. Faculty may continue to engage in research with students and in scholarship of teaching and learning, though it may be more realistic for faculty wishing to conduct specialized disciplinary research to utilize time during the summer or other times when the college is not in session. The notion that the new teaching model will irreparably harm student outcomes is simply false. Numerous institutions have successfully implemented this model for many years. With support, I believe our faculty members are up to the challenge, as I witnessed their resilience and determination during the shift to online learning during the global pandemic.
Concerns have been raised about faculty retention and the balance between tenure-track faculty, visiting professors, and adjuncts. While it is always difficult to see colleagues leave, this is a common and natural occurrence in any workplace. Data from our Human Resources office show that from 2019-2023, an average of 17 faculty members and 50 staff members departed each year; in 2024, the numbers were 21 and 49, respectively. For those faculty members who left in response to the change in teaching load or other changes, they made the decision that they felt was best for them. Any departure presents an opportunity to bring in new talent to benefit the college, its students, and the community. The 12 new faculty members who have joined our community are shining examples of this, eager to teach, mentor, and build relationships with students.
Some faculty members have made veiled assertions that reducing the number of tenured faculty impacts the college’s teaching quality. I, along with many others, find this claim offensive and baseless. While the achievements necessary for tenure are certainly worthwhile, tenure is not the sole guarantor of teaching quality, and assuming so ignores the fact that talented educators are found throughout the faculty ranks and also among the staff. One of my most memorable experiences as a student at Roanoke College was a class taught by a business practitioner. Today’s higher education environment requires additional flexibility to quickly adjust teaching resources to meet new demands from our students and needs in our community, responding to the dynamics of our marketplace.
Your series also highlighted ongoing debates about shared governance and the belief by some faculty members that a faculty vote was required to change the teaching load. Neither the administration, board, nor many other faculty members believe such a vote was necessary or advisable.
The board of trustees is the fiduciary of the college and controls all budgetary matters. No dollar can be spent without board approval through the annual budgeting process, and
direct board approval is also required for any tenure and promotion requests. While the faculty handbook may have long-standing processes, these do not bind the board of trustees, especially in significant budgetary matters. To exaggerate the point: If faculty or staff voted to reduce their workload to zero, would these changes be binding on the board? The answer is obvious, yet this is the argument some faculty members are making.
Since August, a shared governance task force of faculty, staff, a student, and board members has been working to define a process that allows all constituents appropriate input on matters within their domain while permitting the college to execute new ideas and initiatives efficiently. The co-chairs of this task force report that progress is being made, albeit slower than anticipated, but they are pleased with how the conversations are unfolding.
I have met with, and continue to meet with, dozens of faculty members, many of whom were interviewed for your series. The vast majority of faculty members I speak with understand why the change in teaching load was necessary. While they may not like it, they have decided to go to work and teach to the best of their ability, given the current circumstances. I am deeply appreciative of these faculty members. There is, however, a minority group of faculty who claim that the administration and board have disempowered them, violated the faculty handbook, undervalued their labor, threatened academic freedom, and promoted a lack of transparency. They have not, however, offered any viable solutions to our financial difficulty. Instead, it often feels like each week brings a new complaint, from decisions made by the former administration to issues regarding alumni donations for locker rooms. The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) represents many of these faculty members. I have met with AAUP leadership on multiple occasions to maintain and improve communications, build trust, and find common ground. When I met with AAUP leadership a year ago and was asked to improve transparency, trust, and communication, I offered a solution: an invitation for faculty to add two faculty representatives as observers in board and committee meetings for a two-year trial. I believe this initiative is the best way to improve communication and transparency. These representatives have offered valuable input and context. I hope they have seen firsthand the difficult circumstances the administration and board are navigating to make Roanoke College as successful and relevant as possible while keeping student success at the forefront of all we do. In a recent meeting with the leadership of AAUP, I asked for a written statement that describes their goals and objectives. I find it frustrating that the administration’s goals are clear, as are mine as chairman, while AAUP remains silent.
Where do we go from here? Most of the faculty members I speak with start or end our conversations with the same question: How can I help? I am always humbled by this question, realizing that the necessary actions to adjust the teaching load are deeply unpopular but necessary. My request to faculty who want to help is simple: be engaged, be forward thinking, and be heard, in a professional manner. Some faculty members continue to air their grievances in the classroom, which I find unprofessional and disrespectful of our students’ time and tuition dollars. While this behavior is limited to a minority group, it does cast a
shadow over the entire faculty. If faculty members want to help, they should begin by holding their peers accountable for the appropriate decorum expected of community members.
Difficult circumstances demand thoughtful minds engaged in constructive conversations. Neither the administration nor the board is opposed to diverse opinions. We must acknowledge that, as an institution and community, oftentimes we must make decisions at a pace that will feel uncomfortable to some. We must approach our challenges with novel and agile solutions. To think that we can bury our heads in the sand and wait for a new day is simply unrealistic.
As we continue navigating these challenging times, I remain optimistic about the future of Roanoke College. While we face difficult decisions and changes, undeniable green shoots are on the horizon. The dedication of our faculty, staff, and students, combined with the hard work we’ve put into adapting and evolving, will set the stage for a thriving and dynamic future. Roanoke College is a place we all deeply care about, and with commitment, collaboration, and perseverance, we can ensure it becomes the best version of itself. Together, we will rise to meet the challenges ahead and build a college that will inspire and succeed for generations to come.
Sincerely,
Malon Courts
