Late on the night of Tuesday, Feb. 25, Asbury Twitter erupted as students expressed frustration over recent news that Worship Arts program coordinator and assistant professor Dr. Jon Roller would not be returning to Asbury in the fall.
Every professor undergoes a faculty review per regulations and processes outlined in the Asbury faculty manual. Roller was undergoing this evaluation, but his contract was not renewed.
After receiving the news of his contract’s discontinuation, Roller took time to meet with both alumni in the Lexington area and his current students to inform them of the news. Asbury’s administrators prefer news of a professor’s departure come from a personal source and therefore leave it up to professors to share news as they see fit. This includes cases of retirement, resignation or dismissal.
However, due to the reaction on Twitter, students became the main source of information. Tweets caused worry and gossip to spread; secondhand sources became gospel and 140 characters were aimed directly at administrators.
By Wednesday, students of the Worship Arts department were not the only ones reacting. News quickly spread that assistant professor of Music Education and Voice, Dr. Jill Campbell, another professor up for tenure this year, would not have her contract renewed. Students and supporters of both Roller and Campbell discussed the matter on Twitter, in the Student Center and across campus.
But Roller and Campbell are not the only faculty members not to have their contracts renewed. They were, however, at the epicenter of student reaction and confusion. What baffled students the most was the perceived lack of reason, which left students hurt, angry and concluding that it was Roller and Campbell’s support of LGBTQ students on campus that made then unfit for Asbury’s community.
In an effort to clear up misinformation and provide clarity, a question and answer forum was held Feb. 26. Asbury President Dr. Kevin Brown, Provost Dr. Timothy Wooster, Dean of the School of Communication Arts and Media Communication Dr. Jim Owens and Chair of the Communications, Worship and Theatre Arts Department Dr. Jim Shores were all in attendance.
Brown and Wooster spent the majority of the meeting answering student concerns including those from outside the Worship Arts community. However, both acknowledged that this is an “asymmetrical situation” based on the information they could disclose.
“If I was in your place, I would be frustrated too,” Brown said.
Administrators held a “listening session” on Tuesday, March 3, in the Student Center during which students were given an opportunity to publicly tell their stories and address their concerns. Halfway through the meeting, Brown, Wooster and vice president of Student Development, Dr. Sarah Baldwin, took the microphone to respond to students. Although the session brought to light personal concerns over the current treatment of LGBTQ students at Asbury, no new information was shared regarding the faculty contracts.
Though not explicitly stated by any administrator, this uneven distribution of information is due primarily to privacy laws. To avoid legal recourse, the university protects privacy with generic information.
The university is not bound to reveal the exact reasons for non-renewal of a contract. When signing an appointment letter, faculty members must agree to terms of employment, which include supporting the educational and spiritual objectives of the university and affirming his or her adherence to Asbury’s Statement of Faith, Human Sexuality Statement and Lifestyle Standards of the Asbury Community.
Asbury’s human resources has a “Notice of Privacy Practices” form available online, but it only addresses health privacy according to Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) regulations. The employee handbook found online lists 15 permissible reasons for involuntary termination, which is clarified as that “of any employee at any time with or without cause, with the exception of employees who are issued contracts.”
During both meetings with students, Wooster repeatedly mentioned the detailed processes of faculty review and standards upheld in the faculty manual, but did not specify which conditions were taken into consideration. The complete faculty manual is complex and lengthy; Wooster specifically brought up section 400, dealing with faculty appointments and employment expectations.
Section 400.4 outlines evaluation of faculty and states: “Before a faculty member is granted tenure or a three-year rolling appointment, evaluation of faculty performance will occur involving the following components: classroom observations and Dean and/or Department Chair evaluation, course evaluations, portfolio, professional development plan, and re-appointment letter.”
Detailed under section 300, the Tenure and Promotion Committee is a subset of the Faculty Assembly outlined in the faculty constitution; this committee is responsible for reviewing promotion materials and may request an interview with the faculty member under evaluation. The committee’s recommendation is then sent to the provost and the faculty member no later than Jan. 15, and both the president and provost review the recommendation.
If the recommendation is positive, promotion material will be forwarded to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees for their recommendation. If the recommendation is negative, but the president and provost do not agree, promotion material is still forwarded to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Board of Trustees. The faculty member will be notified by the provost of the final decision. If the recommendation is negative and the president and provost agree, the provost will notify the faculty member and the promotion process ends.
Administrators present at the March 3 meeting, which was supposed to be a closed “family-style” discussion, asked that anyone not part of the Asbury community leave, and attendees were told not to record the session to respect privacy. However, an audio recording went up on Twitter later that evening through an account under the name “Asbury Activist,” which had been circulating tweets supporting Roller and Campbell. The anonymous account, which was created on Feb. 25, was taken down March 4.
An opinion piece was also published on March 4 by the Lexington Herald-Leader synopsizing the past week’s events and indirectly tying them to other political topics such as racism and slavery. The article did not have any statements from Roller or Campbell, nor did it include the remarks of any current students (apart from tweets) or professors, or official statements from the university. For more on this article, see this week’s editorial.
There has been no public statement of clarification on the matter from the university.