Hello Dean Newcomb,
I hope your semester is going well. Congratulations on the completion of your deanship, and I wish you well as you reenter the academic world.
I am a proud University of Richmond graduate, class of 2010. As I live and work in Richmond, I try to keep my “finger on the pulse” with what happens on campus, and make an effort to read the UR Collegian weekly, for sports and opinion writings from some of my friends.
I was troubled to read an article in this week’s edition, titled “Professor’s departure upsets some students,” which dealt with the university’s decision to terminate the position of Professor Lee Carleton. So I decided to look into the purported reasons for his termination, effective at the end of the 2011 spring semester.
The decision of the university to make “necessary adjustments,” to the composition of the faculty sounds like a reasonable enough explanation for letting go of Prof. Carleton after the 2011 Spring semester, especially in tough financial times. Additionally, with declining enrollment in certain departments within the School of Arts & Sciences, and even greater numbers of students seeking degrees from the Robins School, I can understand the need to trim department budgets. However, any recent stroll through the picturesque, beautiful campus reveals gleaming buildings, new plasma screens on every hall, and meticulously manicured grounds. The recently completed Robins Stadium, Queally Hall, Carole Weinstein International Center and numerous improvements to roads and footpaths across campus are evidence that the University of Richmond budget has surely not been placed under any sort of austerity plan.
If Prof. Carleton was not eliminated for financial and budgetary reasons, then certainly there are other reasons that led to his termination.
Perhaps Prof. Carleton was not fulfilling his duties as a professor, faculty adviser and valued member of the Richmond community? Let’s take a look at Carleton’s various pursuits while at Richmond. First, The Collegian describes how Carleton served as the faculty adviser for Earth Lodge, which includes instructing a course for the residents of the program. Testimony from Earth Lodge participants reveals that almost forty former and current student members of the Richmond community met immediately upon hearing the news of Carleton’s termination, and spoke glowingly of his role as the Earth Lodge faculty adviser. I would be more than happy to locate for you several professors about whom far fewer than that number of students would speak glowingly at a meeting, even if pizza were to be served. So, his termination is clearly not due to failings in this role.
Additionally, The Collegian describes Carleton’s valued role at the Writing Center, where Prof. Carleton was recently removed as the assistant director. Current Writing Center director Dr. Joe Essid also spoke highly of Carleton, and mentioned that his contribution will be missed. Knowing Dr. Essid for the honest person he is, this does not sound like a hollow catch-all of a goodbye. This sounds like someone who is telling the truth — that Prof. Carleton’s contribution will be missed. So, it also becomes clear that Carleton’s termination is not due to inadequate performance in this role either.
Perhaps Carleton was an ineffective instructor? Upon checking Carleton’s profile on www.ratemyprofessor.com, the Web 2.0 gold standard of teacher evaluation, Lee Carleton’s ratings do not indicate an unsuccessful teacher. Rather, the repeated occurrence of words such as “amazing,” “thought-provoking” and “awesome,” in conjunction with Carleton’s “easiness” rating of 2.3 (making him one of the harder graders at UR, according to this rating), demonstrate that Carleton must have been a remarkably gifted instructor.
Finally, perhaps changes in student interest, as well as modifications to the general education curriculum led to what we could crassly call the “obsolescence” of Prof. Carleton. A UR spokeswoman argues that the replacement of Carleton’s English 103 with a First-Year Seminar made Carleton unnecessary. Couldn’t Carleton have just replaced this one course with another course for which UR needed instructors? As freshmen, my class took Core classes that were taught by physics, mathematics, or leadership professors. The diversity of these backgrounds is what made Core a valuable component of the education we received. I am hard-pressed to believe that a professor such as Carleton would have difficulty as an instructor of a First-Year Seminar. The fact that Carleton applied to be an instructor, and was bluntly told he was not needed renders this explanation of Carleton’s termination untenable as well.
Dean Newcomb, I have run through every possible explanation in my mind for which the University could have terminated Professor Lee Carleton, and at each step of the way, I have encountered evidence to the contrary. As a student, and member of the University of Richmond community, I never directly took a class under Lee Carleton, nor did I work directly with him at the Writing Center, or through his work as editor for “A Moment in Time,” an NPR broadcast radio show at the University of Richmond. I have only known what I have heard from others — that he is an incredibly talented instructor and valuable member of the community.
In stark contrast to the bright sunny weather gracing the beautiful grounds on which the University of Richmond sits, there is a shadow somewhere on campus. This shadow is a dark corner or hidden back room where the decision to fire Lee Carleton was made, and the reasons are not public because they involve personal politics, inflated egos and cold, Machiavellian power-mongering. I am going to find out what happened in that dark corner, and I’m going to tell everyone.
If you would like to prove me wrong, then just answer my simple question:
What is the real reason the University of Richmond terminated Professor Lee Carleton?
My best,
Dan Letovsky
University of Richmond Class of 2010
Loading ...