Faculty Members Quit Albright; Protest President’s Dishonesty

Nearly half-dozen faculty members have quit Albright College, protesting the academic dishonesty of its president.

Albright College president Henry Zimon has been accused of misrepresenting his academic credentials at the time he was hired. Col. Zimon falsely claimed authorship of two books, neither of which has been published, as well as of making several other misleading claims in his resume.

Dr John Hinshaw, assistant professor of history, who quit the college last year to join Lebanon Valley College, Annville, Penn., said in a statement, “It would be difficult to overstate the dismay of the junior faculty, and several of the senior faculty, to the systematic lies and half truths of Henry Zimon and his administrative and academic allies.”

Maurice Methot, assistant professor of digital media, who also resigned last year and moved to Emerson College, Boston, Mass., said: “The Zimon affair was a decisive factor in my decision to leave Albright. How could anyone, faculty and students alike, not be profoundly disturbed by the events surrounding Colonel Zimon’s presidency.”

At least three other faculty members resigned from the college this year, citing their disgust over Col. Zimon’s academic dishonesty. Dr Carmen Salsbury, assistant professor of biology, wrote in her resignation letter: “The ongoing controversy surrounding Dr. Zimon’s appointment as president has created a hostile sometimes embarrassing work environment. The seriousness of the allegations against Dr. Zimon cannot and should not be minimized, especially within the academic area where quality and legitimacy are solely based on the honesty, integrity, and intellectual accomplishments of its constituents.”

Dr Margaret Paton Walsh, assistant professor of history, stated in her resignation letter: “President Zimon's record here is marked by what can at best be considered a devastating lack of frankness. Not only do serious questions remain about his curriculum vitae and the issue of enrollment figures and college rankings, but in faculty meetings President Zimon seems remarkably unwilling to discuss even the simplest and, presumably, uncontroversial questions honestly and openly with the faculty.”

And Dr Lourdes Giordani, assistant professor of cultural ecology, who resigned to join the State University of New York, New Platz, the coming academic year, said: “The college does not have a credible president. Hank Zimon never bothered to explain to the campus community why he lied in his c.v..”

These faculty resignations come on the heels of the resignation last year of a long-time member of the Albright College Board of Trustees, Dr. J. Matthew Simon, former president of Point Park College, Pittsburgh, Penn., in protest at the trustees’ handling of the Zimon controversy. “Events of the past year make it difficult for me, in good conscience, to remain a member of the Board,” Dr Simon wrote in his resignation letter. “Board members have a ‘duty to care’ that requires the exercise of independent and informed judgment. It appears that present ‘spin control’ is precluding my efforts at obtaining the information and verification I need to function responsibly and effectively as a member of the Board of Trustees.”

The college was unable to hire a provost this year as candidates for the position raised questions about the president’s credentials. One of the three finalists for the position wrote: "I am concerned and surprised about the issue and the responses to be sure (prior to my interview I obtained copies of the articles from the Chronicle of Higher Education website).... In any event, I certainly intend to continue to ask the Search Committee and the President himself about this matter. Should the College and I deem it appropriate to continue to move my candidacy forward in the search, I will need a better understanding of the situation, the actions taken in response and particularly the faculty perspective on the matter."

RESIGNATION LETTER OF CARMEN SALSBURY, BIOLOGY

Tom Brogan Interim Dean of Academic Affairs

Dear Tom,

I am writing this letter to officially resign from the full-time, tenure track position I currently hold in the Department of Biology at Albright College. I have accepted a similar position at another institution beginning in the fall of 2001.

My decision to leave Albright was not an easy one. In many ways, my time at Albright has been very rewarding both professionally and personally. From the day that I arrived on campus, I was truly impressed by the quality and dedication of Albright's faculty. I still remain impressed today and it has been an honor to work and learn as a fellow colleague with so many individuals that I respect. The members of the Biology Department have been tremendously supportive and always a pleasure to work with. I have benefited greatly by the flexibility afforded me in my teaching schedule and requirements. Without question, it was rewarding to be a part of such a rigorous, dedicated, friendly, and student-centered department. I have also thoroughly enjoyed the many students that I have had the pleasure to teach and interact with. The small, friendly feel of Albright and the personal student attention has made teaching at Albright a gratifying experience that will be hard to replicate elsewhere.

In spite of the many positive aspects of my time at Albright, I have grown increasingly concerned over the last two years about the growing animosity between the administration, the board of trustees, and the faculty, the financial stability of the institution, and the future direction of the college. The ongoing controversy surrounding Dr. Zimon's appointment as president has created a hostile sometimes embarrassing work environment. The seriousness of the allegations against Dr. Zimon cannot and should not be minimized, especially within the academic arena where quality and legitimacy are solely based on the honesty, integrity, and intellectual accomplishments of its constituents. However, the way in which the controversy has been handled by the current administration and the board of trustees suggests that neither party truly embraces the principles on which academia is founded. It is terribly troubling to me and many other concerned and dedicated faculty that the administration and the board have resisted nearly every attempt by the faculty to address these issues in the open. The faculty passed resolutions (Nov. 3 and Dec. 14, 2000) asking for an outside investigation and mediation but the resolutions were ignored as were several verbal requests for clarification made during faculty meetings. The administration and the board continued to deny our requests even after the details of the controversy and additional allegations against Dr. Zimon were raised in articles published in The Chronicle of Higher Education (Oct. 22 and Nov. 12, 2000 issues). Thus, rather than work together in concert with an objective party to attempt to heal the community and move beyond the controversy, the administration and the board have chosen to ignore our requests and to operate under a cloak of secrecy and intimidation. This sends a strong message to the faculty that not only are our concerns unrecognized but that our goals and objectives for the institution are strongly at odds with those of the administration and the board. Further, such a strategy for dealing with conflict does nothing to rebuild lines of communication and understanding but rather, it fuels the growing contempt between all parties involved. As a result, I am very concerned about Albright's ability to continue to provide a quality-learning environment for its students and to foster the growth and success of all its constituents within an atmosphere so steeped in animosity and lack of respect.

I understand that the financial stability of many small colleges is a concern in today's market; however, indicators seem to suggest that Albright is at a much greater risk than many other comparable institutions. The recent article in the Philadelphia Inquirer (Jan. 28, 2001; first of a six part series) raises some serious concerns about Albright's future. Also, it has been my observation that Albright is one of the few schools in our competitor group that has not substantially expanded and upgraded its facilities in the last decade. For example, nearly every small competitor school has either a new science facility in place or is in the process of building one. It is a troubling indicator that Albright has not been able to capitalize on the strong economic growth of the past several years and now we are faced with trying to catch up while at the same time dealing with millions of dollars in deferred maintenance. It is also unsettling that faculty cost of living raises are so contingent on the exact numbers of incoming students that we must sign our contracts without said raises in "good faith" that the raises will be forthcoming in the fall of the next academic year. I know of no other institution that asks this of their faculty and staff. These financial indicator's considered in the absence of substantial fund raising activity by the current administration, can only be interpreted as strong warning signs of Albright's precarious financial future.

Finally, the course of events over the last two years has led me to contemplate the future direction of Albright College and to assess whether the college is moving in a direction consistent with my personal and professional values. Recently the college newspaper, The Albrightian, was seized and the newspaper office was raided by the administration because the issue contained an article that did not cast Albright College in a favorable light. I fail to see how such behavior can be justified or seen as anything but blatant censorship. In a similar vein, the administration has consistently attempted to squelch free and open discussion of important issues within the college. The new electronic communication policy imposed on the faculty and staff is but one example of this. In particular, this policy is being used to target some of the more outspoken faculty members and this is a very dangerous precedent indeed. I view these actions by the administration and the board as a serious infringement of academic freedom and civil liberties. Perhaps even more troubling is that these actions are symptomatic of an authoritarian mentality within the administration that creates an atmosphere fundamentally in conflict with the liberal arts mission of the college.

In closing, I would like to emphasize that these concerns are the product of my own personal experiences on campus and I am perturbed by the apparent perception among administrators and some senior faculty that such complaints are the work solely of a small group of dissident faculty members. Rather I believe that they are indicative of more broad-based concerns of the faculty as a whole. This administrative perception is consistently used as an excuse to avoid confronting the problems that I have outlined above. As a result, I have decided that in the interests of my own professional career I should move on. I will always wish the best for Albright College and I can only hope that my departure, and that of other younger faculty members, might encourage the college to engage these issues more seriously.

Respectfully,

Carmen M. Salsbury, Ph.D.

Cc: Dr. Henry Zimon, President of Albright College Mr. Salvatore Cutrona, Director of the Board of Trustees of Albright College Dr. Karen Campbell, Chair of Biology, Albright College

RESIGNATION LETTER OF MARGARET PATON WALSH, HISTORY

Dear John,

I am writing to explain my decision to withdraw from the twentieth-century U.S. history search at Albright College this year. I have made that decision because I realized finally, without doubt, that I would not accept the job if offered it and given that, I don't wish to waste my colleagues time by pursuing the interview process. Although I have really enjoyed teaching in the history department and think highly of many of my colleagues, I must also admit to a great deal of ambivalence and concern about the college, stemming primarily from my view of the administration and its relationship with the faculty.

The administration here at Albright College seems to me to be fundamentally at odds both with the faculty and with the traditional purposes and character of a liberal arts college. President Zimon's record here is marked by what can at best be considered a devastating lack of frankness. Not only do serious questions remain about his curriculum vitae and the issue of enrollment figures and college rankings, but in faculty meetings President Zimon seems remarkably unwilling to discuss even the simplest and, presumably, uncontroversial questions honestly and openly with the faculty. To my knowledge, the administration has made no response to the faculty's resolution concerning the student newspaper, other than the President's own, rather underhanded, attempt to overturn the resolution at the faculty meeting in December. Apparently faculty concerns are not important enough to warrant a public response or an attempt at resolution. The result of this is to create an adversarial relationship between the faculty and administration unlike any in my experience. The administration's dismissal of faculty concerns also reinforces a sense of impotence that seems pervasive amongst the faculty and is perhaps one reason for poor attendance at faculty meetings. In addition, the story in this week's Philadelphia Inquirer suggesting that the economic condition of the college has declined in the past year does not bode well for the long-term financial future of Albright.

To add to these problems is the apparent unwillingness of the trustees to address themselves to significant problems in the college's public image or to attempt to improve institutional morale. Their investigation of the questions surrounding President Zimon's curriculum vitae seemed perfunctory at best and they ignored faculty requests for independent investigation and mediation. This is hardly reassuring as to the prospects for improved relations between the faculty and administration in the future.

Conflict between faculty and administrators is, of course, hardly unique to Albright College, but the situation here seems to me to be unusually bad and raises serious questions in my mind as to whether this is a good place for me to be. As a result, I have decided to withdraw from the interview process. I hope that you will understand my position, especially that this is not a personal reflection either on my experiences in the history department or my opinion of my faculty colleagues or the students here at Albright.

Yours sincerely,

Margaret Paton-Walsh

cc, Tom Brogan, Interim Academic Dean

STATEMENT OF PROFESSOR JOHN HINSHAW, HISTORY

The fact that the board of trustees and some faculty facilitated the serious frauds of Henry Zimon was certainly a factor in my leaving Albright for LVC. Albright's problems, from my perspective, ran deeper than Zimon's academic misdeeds, but Zimon certainly highlighted the lax ethical and academic standards of the institution. It would be difficult to overstate the dismay of the junior faculty, and several of the senior faculty, to the systematic lies and half truths of Henry Zimon and his administrative and academic allies. If Albright had been a better run college, I would not have looked for another job as I was told that I would have an excellent chance of moving to the tenure track position when Dale Yoder retired.

Albright's past reputation was such that the chair of LVC's search committee assumed that I was simply looking for a raise by applying to a "lesser" institution. I now teach four classes a semester instead of three, but I am thankful every time I step onto campus, into my classroom, or have any contact with the administration.

John Hinshaw
History Department
Lebanon Valley College
Annville, PA

STATEMENT OF PROFESSOR MAURICE METHOT, DIGITAL MEDIA

When I decided to leave Albright College at the end of my second semester, I made my decision public in the form of an email message addressed to the faculty. In my message I cited the Colonel Zimon controversy as one of the factors contributing to my decision, adding that I would address the subject separately in a subsequent message.

As I wrote in my initial message, there were a number of factors prompting my decision, not the least of which was the fact that my family and many of my friends live in the New England area. Nevertheless, as I said in numerous personal conversations with various Albright faculty, it was an extremely difficult choice to make. My wife and I had recently purchased a house in Reading, and as parents of a six month old girl and two year old boy, we were both exhausted. The appeal of returning to New England was equal to our desire to stay put. What's more, Albright was, with a few specific exceptions, a positive experience for me. I met many wonderful students, developed some valued friendships among faculty, and enjoyed unlimited support in my efforts to create a program in Digital Media at Albright. So why did I decide to leave?

The Zimon affair was a decisive factor in my decision to leave Albright. How could anyone, faculty and students alike, not be profoundly disturbed by the events surrounding Colonel Zimon's presidency? It seemed obvious that the situation would soon polarize the faculty, and lead to an atmosphere of cynicism and disillusionment among students and teachers alike. Academic cultures are as susceptible to political maneuver, dishonesty, and outright corruption as any other. But I have always valued academia as a safe haven for open discourse where ethical standards are valued above all else. Albright seemed doomed to me. Even if its financial difficulties were resolved, I felt that the hypocrisy, animosity, and mistrust, which had already become primary vectors in faculty meetings, would soon find their way into the classroom. I love teaching. I wanted no part of this mess.

I sincerely hope Albright trustees come to their collective senses. I sincerely hope that Colonel Zimon comes to his senses and simply resigns before he damages the college beyond repair.

Sincerely,

Maurice Methot
Assistant Professor
Visual and Media Arts
Emerson College
Boston, Mass

STATEMENT OF LOURDES GIORDANI ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, CULTURAL ECOLOGY

The college does not have a credible president. Hank Zimon never bothered to explain to the campus community why he lied in his c.v. He never offered an apology either. Instead, he generated an atmosphere of paranoia, distrust, and secrecy. Professors feared that their e-mail was being intercepted. Some thought that their phones were not secure. One colleague even told me that the campus had become "a toxic environment" since Zimon's arrival. As you can see, this type of environment is not conducive to learning.

You may remember that the student newspaper was confiscated one time. Why? The administration did not like what a student wrote about declining academic standards at Albright (which turned out to be true).

In sum, I got tired of all this mess. Few members of the faculty wanted to work hard to change things around and save the college. Most faculty criticized the president behind closed doors, when it was safe. Their hypocrisy became tiring and boring. I felt that I was wasting time and energy. Yet, I do have fond memories of the regular staff like the cooks at Jake's place, the custodians, and the security officers. But I am glad that I left Albright.