University of Virginia Library

Rod MacDonald

The Ritter Case

Faculty promotions are an important
thing to those members of
academe who make their living by
carving out professional careers at
major universities. Both those who
win the promotions and those who
dole them out know their importance
as rewards that make or
break the reputation of the faculty.

So each year, just about this
time, some faculty members are
refused promotions they consider
their just due, and begin looking
around for greener pastures. Two
years ago the economics department
lost two of its top men,
Gordon Tulloch and James Buchanan.
Last year Kenneth Ross left
the sociology department. This year
the case of Alan I. Ritter, assistant
professor of government and
foreign affairs, will provide the
annual controversy.

Mr. Ritter was told when recruited
that the University's GFA
department is a nationally known
(which it is) one in which he could
rise to a full professorship in due
time. This year his appointment for
tenure came up, and the tenure
committee of the department
turned him down. With his contract
due to expire after the 1971-72
session, he has another year here;

Unknown Reasons

As with all such cases, no one
except the men who turned him
down will ever know all the reasons
for the refusal. Ostensibly, according
to a student investigating the
case, Mr. Ritter was not considered
a high-priority case, and the department
is in a financial squeeze. As a
result, the tenure committee felt it
could better allocate its funds to
another post, and promoted other
people, Mr. Ritter's specialty is
political theory, and last year the
department recruited Dante Geronimo
to cover that area. While Mr.
Ritter was on his rise, Mr. Geronimo
was installed, and the tenure
committee apparently thought the
need was filled without necessitating
the former's promotion.

Teaching Marks

Some students have also reported
that the tenure committee
held a negative view of Mr. Ritter's
teaching ability. It was learned that
the committee had not consulted
students or the students curriculum
report (an evaluation of each course
and the lecturer's ability) on Mr.
Ritter's competence, so the source
of the negative appraisal is unknown.
The curriculum report gave
Mr. Ritter fairly good marks,
particularly in his non-required
graduate level course.

The controversial nature of the
non-promotion, however, lies in
that misty domain of faculty
politics. Several students, notably
those who are planning to petition
the department on Mr. Ritter's
behalf, claim the real reason for the
refusal lies in this area. Mr. Ritter's
political views are well known: he is
anti-war, a strong supporter of the
Virginia Weekly and black student
groups, and spoke last year at the
counter-Sesquicentennial ceremonies
given on the Rotunda steps.

'Old U.'

But his tenured colleagues, who
make up the promotions committee,
include among them some
strong champions of the "Old U."
- Robert Harris and Robert Morgan.
Both wield sizeable power in
the University faculty, reportedly
have great influence in the departmental
faculty, and are considered
authoritarian by their students.
Both are considered opposed, moreover,
to faculty expressions of
activism such as Mr. Ritter's, and it
is thought by several observers that
their influence was the determining
factor in refusing his promotion.

Conservative Backlash

Politics would be less important
in this case if they were unrelated
to a faculty issue. According to
some of the liberal professors,
however, the recent curriculum
reform and the drive to abolish
comprehensive examinations has
led to a sizeable backlash among
the entrenched professors. The
government department's undergraduate
student committee recommended
dropping undergraduate
comps this year, but the faculty
voted to retain them. The vote was
revealing - a majority of the
department's faculty voted to drop
comps, but included in the minority
vote were those of the tenured
professors, whose votes count
more. Comps were retained. A
possible rationale emerges for not
granting Mr. Ritter his expected
tenure: the minority conservatives,
holding out against numerical supremacy,
will not allow a professor
who represents the opposite viewpoint
to share their security.

Real Losers

The real losers, if the reason for
refusing Mr. Ritter's promotion was
indeed politics, are the students.
Thus, a group of government
students are petitioning David Jordan,
chairman of the department,
to reconsider the affair. The students
are also concerned about the
lack of rapport with the department,
which they claim makes
decisions without consulting them.
It is hoped Mr. Jordan will study
the petition in an impartial light,
free from undue pressure from his
colleagues.

As one student pointed out, it is
interesting to examine the professors
who have left the University
under such circumstances, for they
all represent a political fringe.
Messrs. Tulloch and Buchanan were
on the Goldwater right, and Messrs.
Ross and Ritter supported radical
left groups, In the former cases,
moreover, Robert Harris was again
prominently involved as Dean of
the College Faculty at the time.
The comparisons seem too easy, of
course, but professors who mind
their manners and make it with the
Colonnade Club circuit seldom find
themselves being denied promotions.

Further Step

This writer urges a further step
for the supporters of Mr. Ritter,
and that is to have him recommended
for promotion to Dean
David Shannon. As faculty dean he
would be expected to give the
matter a fair hearing, for he is not
tied to the faculty fiefdoms, that
may characterize this case. If his
office, which must review all
promotions anyway, finds the political
theory post adequately filled,
or finds Mr. Ritter unsuited for the
post, the matter will at least have
had a fair appraisal; if he is found
qualified for a necessary post, he
will get his just promotion. This
course would, of course, put a
burden on Mr. Ritter in his
relations with his senior colleagues;
but he should stay here and pursue
the matter. Rising faculty members
should be judged on more than
their popularity with aging colleagues;
and the University community
deserves to be assured that
they are. Mr. Ritter, by pursuing his
case, can at least make the University
study the situation.