Since her appointment in December 2013, Dr. Gwendolyn Boyd has dealt with unfavorable attention with the Accrediting agency which put Alabama State University on warning for 6 violations. Two months later in Aug. 2014 ASU faculty expresses solid support for Boyd, however; in May of 2015 ASU trustees gave Dr. Boyd low marks on her performance. In Sept. of 2015 ASU trustees gave Boyd a three-year extension. However, On Nov. 4, 2016 the Board voted to suspend Dr. Boyd from her position, stating she was charged with failure to maintain the confidence of the board. Boyd was disappointed and caught off guard by the accusation, but; understood it was the board’s decision to make.
The trustees sought council and authorized their attorneys to …show more content…
We discussed in class the importance of transparency and what drives decision making. We also discussed procedures and how they should be followed in order to protect everyone’s interest. If Trustees are to be trusted as the name implies, how do you not provide the president with information which drove your decision? It is my opinion that the decision of the board was reckless and not thought out. It almost seemed as if they were trying to build a case against Boyd by advising council to draw up charges against her before having any definitive facts. Investigations are done regularly when there is suspicion of wrong doing, but; the person being accused is made aware of what the accusations are. In this case the board did not do that, and; in my opinion procedure was not followed. I feel the board had an obligation to be upfront and transparent with the president, it’s not enough to put the president on administrative leave without explanation; it leaves the college open for a lawsuit. The board has a responsibility to protect the university, not put them in a position that could threaten the health and well-being of the
The trustees sought council and authorized their attorneys to …show more content…
We discussed in class the importance of transparency and what drives decision making. We also discussed procedures and how they should be followed in order to protect everyone’s interest. If Trustees are to be trusted as the name implies, how do you not provide the president with information which drove your decision? It is my opinion that the decision of the board was reckless and not thought out. It almost seemed as if they were trying to build a case against Boyd by advising council to draw up charges against her before having any definitive facts. Investigations are done regularly when there is suspicion of wrong doing, but; the person being accused is made aware of what the accusations are. In this case the board did not do that, and; in my opinion procedure was not followed. I feel the board had an obligation to be upfront and transparent with the president, it’s not enough to put the president on administrative leave without explanation; it leaves the college open for a lawsuit. The board has a responsibility to protect the university, not put them in a position that could threaten the health and well-being of the