Historical Newspapers of South Carolina

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

Ward: Ot] From Page One school. In talking to potential recruits, Reiser said, he would stress the "positive" features at the USC Law Center. Presumably, this means the physical facilities and the quality of the staff and students. If these recruits ask questions about the law school administration, what is he going to tell them? No comment, smiled Reiser. It is not just Walter Reiser who is uncertain about the law school administration. Professors Barvick, Hindes, Jacobs, Weidner, Sullivan and Zimmer all ex pressed a lack of confidence in the leadership at the law center. One could, possibly, discount this uneasiness as coming from people who were directly affected by this year's tenure decisions. The problem is that other professors, too are protesting. "I am not interested," said one law professor, "in playing the role of a partisan in the kind of in ternecine struggle which has absorbed the energies of the faculty for the past few years." W e are here said Ward, to contribute to legal scholarship - "not to fight political battles. You do have divisions within the faculty," said Reiser, "it is a very unhealthy situation." Before the dissent over this year's tenure dicision, there had been several other areas of disagreement among the law &zano' .6o JM&NSA(4150 0404Si 0/d o .Anajusto$dd e go cea(6bes eAciAim-!f*.5 } 3"e S A&wm(o Ahes) L8O yws IM' ier facult faculty. Opinions differed about the standards of addmission to the law school. Views conflicted regarding curriculum changes. There was some dispute said Harry Haynsworth, whether the law center should have a graduate school or stay at the un dergraduate level. But, explains Ward, this was nothing unusual. These were "policy disputes. We could have lived with them." The consensus is that it was the tenure decisions that brought matters to a head. Charles Randall, a member of the tenure committee, would not say anything about the reasons behind the controversial decisions. David Means, chairman of the tenure committee, has earlier refused comment. Law Center Dean Robert Foster said the Sept. 11 , press release covers the "whole story." This press release does not say specifically SwA00fU ERCL BI dSke FE IC I ANGK* s/!vl) f memoers Thomas Ward William Toal why Sullivan, Zimmer, Toal, and Barvick were refused tenure. All four professors maintain there was enough evidence before the committee to promote and give them tenure. Ward and Reiser agree. So do many members of the tenure committee off the record. One committee member described the group as "very bright and very good." While, outside the tenure committee, there is general agreement that the four professors involved a were reasonably competent and popular, there is deep bafflement over why they were dismissed. abud EAT THE UNIATVRSI9TY DIN consideri "I speculate about a number of possibilities," said Sullivan. "I have had run-ins with people concerning hiring minorities and women professors on the faculty." Zimmer also disagreed with the administration "on several areas of particular hotness," Among them, Zimmer said, was the issue of student access to faculty meetings, the hiring of blacks and women and in the curriculum changes. It is quickly pointed out, however, Professors Ward and Thames have also frequently disagreed with the ad ministration. Both received tenure this year. "If there is any etbab ON CAMPI TNG SER VICES'" ng leaving kind of retaliation," said Ward, "it has to be more sophisticated than that." One member of the tenure committee suggested it could be the "style" of these professors that may have offended other members of the committee. Complaining about the committee's "injunction of silence" this professor was scared to be identified because he felt he could be subject to "disciplinary proceedings" by the tenure committee. It is also possible, this source continued, some members of the tenure committee were jealous of othese younger professors. Feeling their "preeminence supplanted among students," these members tried to "clean house." Another hypothesis has it that a number of young professors were forced out because their inclusion among the tenured faculty would change the present distribution of power. It was felt, according to this conjecture, once tenured, this group would interfere with the direction the older professors had planned for the law school. Reiser disagrees with this notion. So do at least two other members on the tenure committee. Continued on Page Four acmg 'HE PEOPLE PLEA S1RS'