University of Virginia Library

Bowers Denies Prejudice
In England Non-Promotion

By Pete Shea
Cavalier Daily Staff Writer

"I may say unequivocally,
in my opinion, the fact that
James England had been active
in student relations had
absolutely nothing to do with
the Faculty Committee's
action and to suggest that it
did is an insult to the Faculty
Committee," said Fredson
Bowers concerning the England
promotion case.

Mr. Bowers, Dean of the
Faculty, had no other
comment except that he felt
those persons who have been
questioning the decision are
misinformed.

No Vacancies

Mr. Bowers said that one
fallacious belief is that there
was an opening in the
Mathematics Department for
an Associate Professor that was to
have been Mr. England. He stated
that there are "never any vacancies
in a particular department. A
position may be open but no law
says that department must fill
it from its own personnel."

In order to clarify the University's
policy on promotions, Mr.
Bowers said that he is considering
writing and distributing a precise
description of that policy for the
faculty. If he does so, Mr. Bowers
said, he would distribute the
description before the commencement
ceremonies.

As of yesterday morning, Mr.
Bowers had not received any
request from the American Association
of University Professors,
which, as reported in Friday's
Cavalier Daily, passed a motion
asking him to "Make a clarifying
statement to the faculty" on the
promotion policy at today's faculty
meeting.

Mr. Bowers said that he did not
consider the newspaper's report of
the motion the proper channels for
the request and that, despite the
recent furor over the England case,
he did not intend to raise the
promotion question at this afternoon's
meeting.

He said that there is not time to
discuss the affair; that there was
too much business on the agenda
already. The faculty chairmen all
know what the general matters are
concerning the policy, Mr. Bowers
claimed, and that there should not
have been such an uproar. However,
he feels that if he does draw up the
description, it should clarify the
question.

Three Methods

Mr. Bowers explained that there
are three methods which can be
used for promotion from assistant
to associate professor or from
associate to full. This is "so nobody
gets blocked," Mr. Bowers explained.

The usual way is that the
department, through its chairman,
presents the candidates record with
a detailed report to a faculty
committee concerning promotions.
The committee then reviews the
case, interviewing the chairman and
anyone else whose opinion would
be valuable, such as a scholar from
outside the University.

Advisory Function

The committee's function is
purely advisory to the Dean of the
Faculty who then makes his recommendation
to the Provo. If
the recommendation of the committee
and the Dean differ, that of
the committee is also forwarded.
The Provost in turn then makes his
recommendation to the President
who then decides.

The other two ways to promotion
are originated by the
recommendation of the chairman
of the department alone or of any
member of the faculty in any
department. The case then follows
through the same steps.

Mr. Bowers said that the Provost
makes the final recommendation
since only he knows how many
ranks in the table of organization
are open. The University as a whole
has a set number of ranks in that
table.

According to Mr. Bowers, the
reason for the complicated procedure
is that the administration
feels that the faculty committee
should consider the merits of a case
only. Whether there is a position is
an administrative decision. A
second reason is that the departments
and the committee may be
"overly generous or premature."

'Due Course'

Mr. Bowers explained that the
"due course" of promotions is for a
teacher to be appointed an assistant
professor for a three year period
and that he should be elected for a
second three year term after that. If
he is deserving, he would then
become an associate professor for
six more years until he was
promoted to a full professorship.

Mr. Bowers said that "most
people beat the gun," and that this
has caused an "inflation such that
in recent years the due course gets
short-circuited."

The Dean of the Faculty appoints
the committee concerning
promotions. There are five to seven
full professors on it and the
majority of the membership is
changed each year. Its members
remain as anonymous as possible in
order to protect them from the
pressures and possible recriminations
of the faculty and students,
Mr. Bowers explained.

Inferior Position

The committee judges a promotion
case on the teaching ability
and the scholarship of the candidate.
Th is done, according to
Mr. Bowers, so that all members
can instruct a Ph.D. as well as an
undergraduate. If the graduate
faculty were noticeably superior to
that in the undergraduate schools,
the undergraduates would be placed
in an inferior position.

Mr. Bowers agreed that the
Faculty Handbook that was mentioned
at the AAUP meeting would
be desirable.

According to several AAUP
members, the handbook was originally
proposed by the faculty of the
College of Arts and Sciences at a
meeting in 1965. A committee was
appointed to draw one up but it
was decided that such a book was
needed for the entire University.
The matter fell into the hands of
the Provost and the committee
disbanded.

The call for the handbook was
again raised this year. Provost
Frank Hereford is in the process of
appointing a committee to study
the matter.