An embattled Ohio University journalism professor was treated unfairly in being labeled a “bully,” a Faculty Senate panel found.
Last month, journalism professor Bill Reader appealed a reprimand he received from OU charging him with bullying and unprofessional conduct related to his tenure battle in 2009–10. Reader successfully fought for tenure against allegations that he harassed colleagues.
Faculty Senate’s Professional Relations Committee sent a report to President Roderick McDavis, dated Feb. 15. In the report, the seven-member committee voted overwhelmingly to recommend the charges against Reader be dismissed “on grounds of serious procedural irregularities.”
“The procedural irregularities in this case are startling and problematic enough that to do otherwise would compromise the integrity of us all, faculty and administration alike, and set a bad precedence,” according to the report.
The report lambasted the prolonged proceedings, calling them “unfair.” The long process also made it difficult to verify all pertinent evidence was submitted at the right time, according to the report. It also criticized some of the taped witness accounts used as evidence against Reader.
“The (Professional Ethics Committee) considers the taped witnesses direct evidence. The PRC is far less amenable to this understanding of them. In fact, three of the four of us who focused on these interviews adamantly believe they do not rise above ‘hearsay,’” according to the report. “… there is no evidence from the report that any of the complainants were directly threatened.”
The committee concluded the use of such evidence as the backbone of the case against Reader “leads to an appearance of inconsistency and unfairness.”
Reader responded positively to the committee’s report hoping it would lead to changes in the way OU investigates professional ethics violations.
“I thank the members of the Faculty Senate PRC for its decision but also for its integrity and careful consideration of all of the evidence,” Reader said in a statement via e-mail. “I am especially grateful that they have enumerated the many serious procedural problems that have tainted this case almost from the beginning, problems I had pointed out to the administration repeatedly over the past two years.”
In his statement, Reader also implored Faculty Senate to establish clearer guidelines for due process in the faculty handbook.
“As with my tenure appeal, which also was rife with procedural problems within my college, the Faculty Senate PRC’s findings also demonstrate the benefit of the appeal process at Ohio University — that these matters will be considered by independent bodies of impartial faculty members who are not susceptible to departmental politics or the prejudice and whims of deans,” Reader said.
The process is ongoing at the administrative level, and in the meantime, Reader has continued to teach, said Bob Stewart, director of the E.W. Scripps School of Journalism.
Becky Watts, chief of staff to McDavis, would not comment on the document saying only that the president is reviewing it and that McDavis’ final decision will come during the next few weeks.
tn336706@ohiou.edu
@ThePostCampus
