On Wednesday, Performing Arts Department Chair Henry Schvey announced that he would be stepping down to professor after 19 years as chair. Student Life has learned that he was asked to step down. The issue had been creating significant controversy among students, and continues to do so, because of widespread speculation among students that University administrators are planning significant – and potentially unpopular – changes to the department.
Some students speculate that the department will shift in focus away from performance toward critical analysis. Despite official word that no curriculum changes will go into immediate effect, Student Life repeatedly heard students express fear that performance classes would be cut in the future. The choice of Rob Henke – current chair of the Comparative Literature program and a person whose professional life has emphasized textual analysis – does not quell the speculation.
Students in the Performing Arts Department have clashed with administrators in the past over performance space as well. In the Feb. 2, 2004 issue of Student Life, a news article (“Faculty responds to performance space criticsms”) documented complains from students in the PAD and Music Department of inadequate facilities. In the April 22, 2005 issue (“Inadequate facilities deserve attention now”), Student Life’s editorial board called on University administrators to upgrade PAD facilities, calling the issue one that deserved “immediate attention.”
Given this history, the speculations of PAD students do not seem unreasonable. But the heights of tension that have been created by these rumors are. The situation regarding Schvey created significant controversy among students in the PAD because the reasons for the move were not made clear; speculation ran wild among students leading up to the announcement.
As though tensions hadn’t yet run high enough, speculation also continues as to the result of an internal review of the PAD conducted last year. What effect that report may or may not have had on the decision to replace Schvey or on the future course of the PAD is unclear, and the administration has refused to make the report available to Student Life.
Although Schvey has done all possible to clear up the rumors that have resulted from all this speculation, he is placed in the difficult situation of being unable to publicly comment on a variety of issues related to this internal document.
The administration has a right to privacy; if the results of all departmental reviews were public, the ability of the reviewers to objectively criticize would be compromised. But in cases such as the recent one involving Schvey, the University ought to be significantly more forthright than it is. Student Life obtained most of the information for its news coverage of this event from Schvey’s comments at Wednesday’s student-faculty meeting – comments that were necessary to control the rampant speculation among students – and from interviews with PAD students. All the while the University has remained tight-lipped on the matter.
The University ought to have publicly announced that Schvey would be asked to step down as well as explained its motivations; well-reasoned justification would have gone far in alleviating students’ concerns about the situation. Instead, rumor ran rampant while the University remained silent.
Lack of information leads to speculation, and speculation leads to misinformation. The University owes it to its student body to be more forthright in its decision-making.