Editorial

Tripathi: judge, jury and academic executioner

Questions remain unanswered for the School of Informatics

When Provost Satish Tripathi called an abrupt meeting in June requesting the presence of every School of Informatics faculty member, he served up the startling announcement that one of UB's newest schools would be no more. And while students, staff and the community were surprised by such a development, what was more startling was the way in which Tripathi went about making this shocking idea a reality.

With very little faculty input, no consultation with the UB Faculty Senate and flagrant exclusion of local leader participation, the provost came to the conclusion that the school needed to be dissolved.

Members of the school's founding committee were left in the dark about the decision-making process. Dean Penniman, who served for almost the entirety of the school's existence, was forced to resign as a result of Tripathi's plan for closure. Aside from not soliciting the valuable input of people directly involved in the school, Tripathi has still not provided adequate proof or reasoning behind his decision.

As provost, Tripathi has the right to regulate and disband academic programs that could be detrimental to a student's learning experience, so the actual act of dissolving the school is his right; but the arrogance and impudence to not consult integral members of the program and to keep most of his motives under wraps is highly unprofessional and outrageous act for a man of his position.

In a controversy filled with resignations, questionable management and administrative sneakiness only one question sticks out: What exactly was Tripathi thinking when he sprung his plan on the school?

We are not asking for the closing or opening (or eventual re-opening) of the School of Informatics. We are not addressing whether such a collection of disciplines is academically beneficial, and we are not even saying that Tripathi's assessment is necessarily wrong.

The way in which it was done, however, should turn some heads and stir some questions for our provost.

All the facts of the matter are still in the air and the reasons behind Tripathi's decisions remain an enigmatic question mark. Due to the lack of public information provided by his office it would be an inane step to formulate an opinion about the fate of the School of Informatics, but the actions of Tripathi are quite a different story.

Although the provost has a great deal to explain about his questionable methods of seeking input and consultation (or lack thereof), at least he has informed us that his decision was four months in the making - that is surely enough time to measure all the advantages and disadvantages of dissolving a multi-million dollar investment.

Last year the Faculty Senate Executive Committee spent a few months debating over what brand of clickers - remotes used to answer PowerPoint questions in a lecture hall - should be used as a university-wide standard. Yes, this monumental undertaking took months; so how exactly is four months enough time for investigation and deliberation for a decision of this magnitude?

In light of UB2020 and the growing support for a university master plan, programs that seek new ideas and encourage participation from all walks of life have found a new surge of advocacy at UB. Tripathi's blatant disregard for others and his rash behavior set a bad example for what UB is trying to do for future growth, and the provost certainly chose a terrible time to make such gross, arbitrary decisions both for the school and the university as a whole.