GSE document praises former dean Lazerson

A Graduate School of Education internal faculty review prepared last year for former Provost Michael Aiken presents a more positive image of the school's former dean, Interim Provost Marvin Lazerson, than have recent reports from some of the school's senior faculty. Over the course of the last two months, seven GSE faculty members interviewed by The Daily Pennsylvanian said that the school was in a state of chaos. They said that an internal academic war has exacerbated previously existing problems at the school, such as the exploitation of female administrators and faculty members and the neglect of students. Many of these faculty members said Lazerson's unwillingness to become involved in what he perceived as "faculty matters" contributed to tensions and conflict at the school. Lazerson himself said he gives himself a "D minus for effort and a C plus for success" at solving the internal strife at GSE. But, the Consultative Review Committee's report on the reappointment of Lazerson as GSE's dean paints a very different picture of Lazerson's leadership. Lazerson said last week that he feels the report presents a more balanced look at his tenure as dean. "As a result of our inquiry, we unanimously and enthusiastically recommend that Marvin Lazerson be reappointed as Dean until July 31, 1996," the report states. "The respect and admiration for Dean Lazerson, expressed by his appointment as Acting Provost, is widely shared by the GSE community." The five-member review committee submitted its report to Aiken in late April 1993, after months of information gathering. As part of its investigation, the committee surveyed faculty and students and met with GSE Board of Overseers Chairperson Gloria Chisum. The report states that when Lazerson assumed the GSE deanship, he and Aiken outlined several goals for the school. These included increasing the school's financial base, more involvement within the University and Philadelphia communities and increasing the school's prestige and status nationwide. "Under Dean Lazerson's leadership, GSE made extraordinary strides towards achieving these goals," the report states. At the time of the report, GSE was leading the University in surplus funds, had endowed several professor and department chairs, received increased grant money and established a Board of Overseers. The committee also praises Lazerson for recruiting prominent faculty members and developing the school's reputation. And according to their report, Lazerson was successful in mentoring younger faculty members and helping faculty members receive grants, and was accessible to faculty members despite a "hectic schedule." The report also confirms many of the negative attributes of Lazerson's tenure about which senior faculty members complained over the past month. Noting that Lazerson "believes strongly that a faculty should govern itself with minimal interference from the administration," the report states that this philosophy caused major problems "on at least two occasions." "When serious friction began to develop within a major division three years ago, Dean Lazerson removed himself at a critical juncture, leaving faculty members alone to fight it out," the report states. "As a consequence, the division split apart and an important, large, and prestigious doctoral program was dropped." And the report notes that this split, between the Psychology in Education and the Educational Leadership divisions of GSE, has not ended the conflict between the two academic factions. "To a large extent, the faculty is still divided into 'them' versus 'us' camps," the document states. "Because of the cleavage, several faculty members are virtual nonparticipants in the School." The second incident described in the report deals with a Psychology in Education faculty committee which was preparing to hire a new faculty member without following proper search procedures. "Dean Lazerson's failure to intervene in a search until there was a large groundswell of opposition, from outside as well as inside the school, created deep animosity among the faculty that remains unhealed to this day," the report states. Many GSE faculty felt Lazerson "did not distinguish adequately between interference and leadership," the report continues. "Had he intervened earlier in these incidents, the injurious fallout might have been avoided." The report criticizes Lazerson for not creating "a fully informed participatory community" at the school. As an example, it cites the fact that many faculty members did not know the school had a $1 million surplus until it was reported on in the media. The report concludes by recommending that Lazerson take a more active role in internal leadership when he returns to the school. Lazerson has said that when he is finished with his term as interim provost in July, he will return to GSE as a faculty member and not as dean. The search for a new permanent dean is ongoing.