This past Friday, the University of Denver’s Faculty Senate began voting on a motion to express no confidence in Chancellor Jeremy Haefner publicly.
According to The Washington Post, the results of ‘votes of no confidence’ show mixed results. How effective are no-confidence votes? Many observers dismiss them as merely symbolic, an acute symptom of chronic faculty unrest. But the report cited above suggests they have more power than simply a show of angry hands. Of the 235 no-confidence votes between 1989 and 2022, a little more than half (51%) of the leaders who were the target of the vote left office within a year. A separate study of 57 no-confidence votes found that in 32 of those cases, the campus leader was out of office within six months.
The current momentum to force a university-wide vote of no confidence in DU Chancellor Jeremy Haefner is ill-founded and poorly timed. Colleges – public and private alike – are facing headwinds in the ever-changing landscape of higher education. Now is the time to reach common ground and move forward together – students, parents, faculty, staff, and alumni working together to make the DU experience as rich and valuable as possible. While public votes of no confidence may provide a level of immediate emotional satisfaction to those who feel aggrieved, they do little to address the underlying issues and bring people together.
Various colleges and departments within DU have joined in votes of no confidence, citing disagreements with the “4D Experience,” the Kennedy Mountain Campus, staff cuts, the Chancellor’s competitive compensation, and even the initial hiring process that made Haefner the Chancellor in 2019.
On the flip side, Haefner ably led DU through the COVID-19 tumult, elevated institutional research that earned DU its R1 designation, fundraising via The Denver Difference, refocused on science and technology through STEM Horizons, and the addition of the Kennedy Mountain Campus that, according to reliable sources, operates at no cost to DU. He remains accessible and engaged around campus as we conclude the 2024-25 academic calendar.
There remains mixed acceptance of the formal 4D Experience for student growth and development – deepen intellect, support well-being, discover character, and design careers and lives of purpose. Though it’s impossible to argue that these aren’t attributes students should aspire to both during and after their time at DU.
Have there been missteps and communication breakdowns? Absolutely. However, the ever-changing external environment is contributing to the turmoil. Declining demographics for college admittance, rising expenses across the board, and general cynicism about higher education are outside of DU’s control. As with any business transformation – yes, DU is a business – the University faces some uncomfortable changes. They can feel threatening to an institution and its stakeholders, members of an institution that has operated under largely the same model for generations.
Chancellors and Presidents of universities are easy targets. However, rarely are their actions taken in a vacuum. The reason chancellors are compensated so well at every institution is that they are the vital touch point between the trustees, staff, faculty, parents, students, and alumni, all with their own distinct interests. By all accounts, Haefner is compensated competitively, and part of his role is to absorb the pressure from those very same stakeholders. He may lead on some initiatives while being the intermediary between the Trustees and stakeholders on others. It’s a balancing act that comes at a personal and professional cost along with a handsome monetary reward.
No doubt, the DU administration can do better – but so can the faculty. Usually, the types of issues that lead to such votes of no confidence center on money, respect, and doing more with less. Now more than ever, colleges must work closely with key stakeholders to align with and meet the changing educational demands of higher education in a changing, competitive environment.
Just when parents and students seek confidence in the institution, a very public vote of no confidence does little for the Chancellor or the faculty and does absolutely nothing for the students. DU’s vision statement touts engagement and inclusiveness – something a vote of no confidence seems to lack. A public display of disunity and dysfunction is a major miscalculation, especially at this time. Hopefully, the Chancellor, along with the new provost replacing Mary Clark, can rein in the public displays of disunity, open channels for challenging private dialogue, and restore trust in an institution when it is needed the most.
Haefner has done better than any DU Chancellor since Ritchie. And the Board is 100% behind Haefner.
Let him finish the job he set out to do…
Funny that the Faculty Senate didn’t “no confidence” Chopp who was completely useless.
DU needs to start cutting faculty. Send the Faculty Senate rabble rousers out the door first
Haefner’s failures are what, exactly? As far as I’m concerned he’s an effective leader of the campus and, thankfully, a pragmatist who recognizes the macro-level forces that are reshaping higher education.
When I was at DU (undergrad ’00, Daniels ’08) I had a few great professors, and more than a large number of naive armchair activist types who lived in a bubble (I remember the Anthro and English departments being particularly infested at the time).
My sense is the ringleaders of this operation are self-
identifying as faculty bloat in programs that don’t have a good long term outlook.
Are the faculty members who led the Anti-Boone/Pioneer crusade still on payroll?
He picked up a mess from Chancellor Chopp, guided DU through COVID and elevated STEM. If you look at all his accomplishments in 5-6 years, he has accomplished a lot. We need a steady hand like his to steady the University during a challenging time. Putting someone else in his place would be a major step backwards.
He’s doing exactly what he should be doing.
No question…Haefner is the best thing that has happened to DU since Dan Ritchie.
Perspective is needed by those complaining. The cuts to CAHSS were quite minor compared to other schools, his salary is quite normal for private schools of this size, and his handling of the encampment was pretty much par for the course nationally. I would have preferred a bit less tolerance for the protestors, but I think he showed plenty of patience with them.
Haefner overall has been pragmatic and realistic from day 1.
He does not deserve such garbage treatment from malcontents….
Haefner’s failures are what, exactly? OK, let’s count the ways. His tenure has overseen the swelling of the administration into a small bureaucratic empire, complete with dozens of vice chancellors, vice provosts, and other impressively vague titles promoting DEIs of all sorts, each pocketing an average salary north of $300k. Meanwhile, DU’s ranking has nosedived from the top 80s to a proud 124. As for his much-touted “4D Experience”, good luck finding anyone on campus who can explain what it even is. And then the pandemic-era leadership highlight: freezing faculty pay across the board while awarding himself a generous pay raise of nearly 50%, making him one of the best paid university presidents in the country and higher than that of Harvard. But sure, let’s keep wondering what went wrong.
A lot of bootlickers and people who haven’t been on campus in years are chiming in here. The school is bleeding talent and resources to fund things like the 4D Experience and DEI. Colleges are making themselves obsolete, and the chancellor is leading the charge at DU. Like other large corporations, colleges and universities are turning into real estate and finance operations rather than education operations. Keep raising tuition—after all, the federal government will just give students loans to cover it (we’ll see). The board of trustees has their puppet, so of course they’re standing behind their man. “Profits over education” seems to be the board’s mantra. All I see on campus is poor leadership and zero accountability from the administration.
If there is such a groundswell of unrest on campus, maybe consider the chancellor isn’t doing such a great job.
Many of us are in agreement that colleges need to reform – cut the administrative fat and eliminate the overspending on wasteful initiatives. Also, cut the programs that are fluff and do not add value – unfortunately much of that is in arts & sciences (my degree). I have suggested the University post the Golden Rule around campus and cut all the indoctrination overhead. Set up a single committee with students, administrators and faculty. If someone has a complaint, they must first try to resolve directly. If unsuccessful, write up the issue and the Committee would rule on the issue – done!
BTW, I spend a great deal of time on-campus and am impressed by and large with our students and have licked very few boots. The problem in my view is that resistance to change from the faculty who don’t realize that ‘reimagining’ education calls for reform and that may mean more work, curriculum changes and in some cases job cuts. Anyone who works in the private sector sees this every 5-7 years – and yes, it is stressful and painful. A DU education will always be costly because the University does not receive the truckloads of Federal money the other State schools receive. It would be easy to benchmark DU’s overhead and cost per pupil against similar institutions to see how efficient or inefficient DU is in its operational cost-per-student and adjust accordingly.
A symbolic temper tantrum by the faculty does little to resolve the underlying issues. There are two options. Sit down and hash out differences or move on. that is what most people do in the private sector. I hope the parties elect the former and resolve their issues behind closed doors.
A new administrator.
https://www.du.edu/news/introducing-dus-next-provost-elizabeth-loboa?fbclid=IwY2xjawK0VFRleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETEzeklQb3JXSXlIaTVqOFdCAR7aWTkdOX6WAxWrUwz5KWSmknMIw8YtwAt39gFByTQMqwvojM6_fDvsIrbebg_aem_7c63jIUeIlzPB5mGwOlxTg