Update on Alumni Council Resignations: Dean Garvey Sends Letters to Alumni and Faculty
December 14th, 2007 by David Bartholomew
Yesterday December 13th, Dean Garvey sent two letters, one addressed to the faculty and another addressed to the alumni, outlining his view of the process that resulted in the restructuring of the Alumni Council. Eagleionline has obtained copies of both letters: the full text of the letter to the faculty can be found here: Letter to Faculty; the full text of the letter to the alumni can be found here: Letter to Alumni.Dean Garvey states in these letters that the results of the survey indicated that BCLS has “an alumni population that is spread across the country, that loves the Law School and would like to be more involved, but feels basically neglected. This was a situation that called for reform” (for a description of the survey results see this article). Dean Garvey compared this reform process to the Philadelphia Convention which produced the Constitution indicating that the former structure of the Alumni Council, like the Articles of Confederation, were inadequate to meet the needs of a growing community.
In the letter to the faculty, Dean Garvey and members of the Task Force, while expressing regret at the conflict that has ensued following the reforms, remained hopeful that the changes would have a positive impact. He stated that “Although those in favor of this new plan understand that change is often hard, and we are saddened by the conflict this process has caused, we feel strongly that the new structure will allow Boston College Law School to grow its alumni relations program for many years to come, and will allow the flexibility to create new initiatives as the need arises.”
The Dean and members of the Task Force also acknowledged that in addition to the reform of the Alumni Council the Administration needs to make significant changes. He indicated Administration has taken a number of steps to address the problem, including the hiring of the new Reunions/Classes full time position, the upgrade of the alumni relations director position, the commitment of substantial funds to a new alumni online community, and increased staff resources directed to alumni relations from various departments at the School. The Dean also stated that he is prepared to make funds available for new programs and initiatives as they arise.
For a previous article breaking the news about the alumni resignations see here. For an article describing the steps leading up to the resignations see here.
Clarification, December 16, 2007 (6:40 p.m.): An observant reader noticed that the letter to the faculty (attached below) was not addressed from Dean Garvey. It is Eagleionline’s understanding that the letter was sent from the members of the Task Force listed on the attached letter and was approved by Dean Garvey. Accordingly, the letter to the faculty represents a joint statement by members of the Task Force and the Dean.
The Staff and Bob Bloom’s letter, though a nice attempt to justify the changes, hardly provides the legal analysis or basis for changing a formal corporate structure (drafted in a way typical of most non-profits) which can be amended to accomodate new needs, to a wholesale move to a Dean’s council which is controlled by the Staff of the law school, governed by documents that not a single corporate lawyer assisted in drafting. Apples to oranges folks. But thanks for trying.
Additionally, the Dean’s letter is a grandiose cover for two documents not worthy of the talents of our JD graduates. Anyone with a basic corporate law background (btw, which not one of the Task Force members practices) can instantly recognize the sub-par product generated by Task Force. Not a single law school, graduate school or other non-profit has such sloppily drafted and ambiguous documents. The comparison to the founding of this nation is laughable, yet goes to the heart of the ego-centric mentality behind the dissolution of the Alumni Council and the replacement with it by a Dean’s council appointed by Stuart House. The message to Alumni from this endeavor is loud and clear. The Administration has a message to deliver and if you’re not an adequate trumpeteer, you’ll be replaced. Bravo. Hardly the reaction of a first rate institution, but quite telling about what BCLS has become.
I do not support the proposed changes in the Alumni Council’s structure. The proposed changes give too much power to Stuart House.
I believe in the idea that people should be reward (with money, power, respect, etc.) when they produce positive returns on our collective investments.
But by virtually all objective measures, Stuart House has not been benefiting students since John Garvey’s tenure started about 7 years ago. Indeed, by these same objective measures, students seem LESS well off under the current administration:
1. Our USNEWS ranking has dropped significantly
2. We remain one of the least funded law schools in our class
3. Many students have expressed grave concern with Dean Garvey “attitude” towards minority groups at the law school.
By these accounts, it seems to me that Dean Garvey should be put on a tighter leash by the Alumni Association (and, for that matter the President of Boston College). But certainly he should not be given MORE authority. And make no mistake, when Dean Garvey appoints the first board of Alumni, he is NOT going to appoint anyone who disagrees with his leadership, or his policies. On the contrary, he is going to stack the board; we would all no doubt do the same.
If the past is prologue to the future, what can students expect from Dean Garvey in the months and years ahead? His administration has not produced solid results in a number of years. Only this year, his administration was cited by Princeton Review as “problematic.” What sort of message does this send to prospective students? A bad message, a very bad message.
I don’t want to be accused of jumping ship (because I really love Boston College) so let me propose a solution of my own:
Set a series of realistic benchmarks for Stuart House to meet in the next X years. If these benchmarks (ranking, consumer perception, quality of faculty hires, etc.) are not achieved, let someone else try his or her hand at being dean.
I am willing to support Stuart House’s proposal to dissolve the Alumni Council, but I will only be satisfied with this concession if it grants something in return. In a very real way, students’ jobs are on the line. We depend upon the reputation of BC Law, and the quality of the education it provides, to get good jobs after graduation and to have the opportunity to become leaders in our profession.
In we depend on BC Law for our jobs, shouldn’t the Dean’s job depend on BC Law’s reputation too?
Class of 2008’s suggestion of benchmarking is a concept worth considering. Perhaps Dean Garvey should be given an opportunity to prove himself and be evaluated based upon the school’s rankings. I’ve heard that the dean tracks how many times each professor’s work is cited by other authors, as a means to evaluate performance and stature of the professors at BCLS. I suppose the rankings would be a similar independent, objective, 3rd party source against which the university administration could evaluate Dean Garvey’s leadership and performance.
Then again, maybe the time has come for leadership change within the law school administration and the alumni association (maybe even the university administration?). The broader law school community (including faculty, students and alumni) seems to be suffering from divisiveness, if nothing else. Better leadership across the board might be necessary to help people focus on common goals.
Here are some ways-aside from the USNews Ranking- by which we could judge Garvey’s performance on a yearly basis:
1) Percent of BCLSers employed at graduation
2) participation rat of Alumni Giving
3) amount of alumni giving
What are some others? How many times professors work gets cited is useless-Garvey has very little control over that (especially when the faculty vetoes the prominent hires he attempts to bring to the school).
It looked like the letter to the Faculty linked here was not from Dean Garvey. Is there an additional letter?
Michelle,
Thanks for the heads up. I will look into this and post a clarification if needed.
Regards,
David
Michelle,
I have added a clarification at the top of the article. The letter was addressed from the faculty and staff members of the Task Force that recommended the changes to the Alumni Council and approved by Dean Garvey.
Regards,
David
I will be attending the BCLS reunion tonight at the Ritz. Will post interesting news tomorrow.
I like what Class of 2008 has to say. When I was at BCLS I often found myself wishing the faculty (and the dean) could be held to objective standards.
To be fair, I think employment rate upon graduation should probably take into account the economy and the rates of other peer schools.