The Downward Spiral: Activism Thwarts Imminent Disaster at OBU

This weekend, we'll examine what the incremental devolution of a Christian liberal arts university looks like.  I like the way Veronica has organized her posts into brief, topical series (see posts on administration here, here, and here; students' experiences under the new regime here, here, here, here, and here; gender here, here, and here; and diversity here, here, here, and here).  I'm going to follow that pattern this weekend as we look at schools that have been taken over and are in various stages of destruction at the hands of state convention power brokers and their lakeys in university administration.

But before we turn to our attention to Baptist colleges that fundamentalists are presently wrecking, I think we've finally earned the right to brag a little.  In the midst of all the sinking ships and in the context of non-denominational colleges supplanting Baptist ones as leaders in Christian higher education, OBU refuses to lay down and die the death that all six SBC seminaries and many Baptist colleges suffered at the hands of the Takeover architects and their henchmen.

Activism On Many Fronts
Here's how it all started.  When a very accomplished, well-loved, and exceedingly devoted Christian philosopher was forced out of his position at OBU (the administration offered him a steaming pile of crap instead of the contract he deserved according to basic fairness and the Faculty Handbook), the faculty quickly realized something was badly amiss.  About a year ago, once it became clear that the administration wanted to scale back philosophy (a core discipline in the liberal arts) and replace it with "Christian apologetics," a group of concerned students started an underground newspaper to raise awareness of this unprecedented new direction and to protest the negative changes.  After another professor was unjustly forced out, faculty anger intensified.  An alumni petition circulated, further raising awareness about OBU's alarming and unprecedented new direction.  Retired faculty documented the administration's abuses and stood up for their friends and former colleagues.  Only after all that did Save OBU emerge.

Eight or nine months ago, OBU's path to becoming just another marginally accredited preacher boy camp and teacher/nurse vo-tech looked like a sure thing.  It would take time, of course, but the wheels were in motion.  Today, that march has slowed almost to a halt.  Sure, the provost might still be screening applicants with his theological, social, and political litmus tests.  Apparently the new policy is mainline Protestants need not apply.  He's still the chief academic officer, but now literally thousands of OBU stakeholders know how grossly he overestimated his mandate, such as it was.  His zeal for waging ideological warfare is most unwelcome at OBU, and  he has definitely backed down for now (faculty report that he barely spoke in a recent meeting for fear of being "misinterpreted" later).

Claiming a Victory in the Battle, but the War Rages On
There will be no ideologically-motivated firings this summer.  Too many people are paying attention now.  I seriously doubt they will override any faculty search committees this year, either.  Dr. Norman's wholesale disregard for faculty committees' expertise and judgment has created a huge embarrassment for the university and an impediment to maintaining an excellent faculty over the long term.  We will closely monitor the process this year.  Even amid the excitement (distraction?) of adding programs and conducting a capital campaign, administrators have had to focus more deliberately on their relationships with students and faculty -- relationships they took for granted and carelessly sacrificed in order to please people in the BGCO who have long had it out for the OBU religion department which, in spite of being thoroughly conservative by any objective standard, just isn't conservative enough for today's post-Takeover BGCO.  President Whitlock has endured a "brutal" trustees' executive session and has had to abandon other plans in order to demonstrate that he is on campus showing leadership and proving that he understands the difference between a liberal arts college and a Bible academy.  Just as President Brister once complained, "Anthony thinks he's my boss," we trust that President Whitlock now knows that there are a lot of people not named Rev. Dr. Anthony Jordan whose opinions also matter.

So yes, we're claiming a victory, albeit a tentative one.  As we'll see over the next few days, it's nothing short of remarkable that we've disrupted the fundamentalists' agenda for OBU.  But the way we've done it is just as remarkable.  We have no staff and no budget.  A few writers have shared their time and skills.  A few people have donated $30 for Facebook and Google ad campaigns.  And hundreds of stakeholders have shared information, expressed interest and support through Facebook and Twitter, and spread the word to classmates, colleagues, and friends.  Also, there are so many things we could have done but haven't.  We have not sought any media attention.  We have not encouraged the wrongfully dismissed professors to seek legal recourse or financial damages against OBU for their shameful treatment.  We have not contacted major donors or encouraged anyone to stop giving to OBU.  We remain hopeful that providing information, offering commentary/analysis, and slowly building a movement are superior to hardball tactics.

The Bad News: Things Will Get Worse
Just because we don't expect any firings this year does not mean we are out of the woods.  The provost's office still seems intent on incrementally remaking the faculty in the image of the post-Takeover SBC and BGCO.  We still face a dramatically limited faculty applicant pool and the constant threat that OBU will hire based on ideological purity rather than accomplishment or academic promise.  We will continue not to have a legitimate bookstore on campus.  Whether President Whitlock continues to give his blessing to Dr. Norman's war on OBU and his weapons for waging it remains to be seen.  But it will be impossible to drive a wedge between those two.

The only thing keeping OBU from going down the path of schools we'll discuss over the next few days is YOU.  Our network of concerned stakeholders is large and growing -- and we are ever on alert.  We're confident that the trustees would not abide another unethical dismissal by the administration.  But mainly we're confident that if administrators forced someone else out, they will awaken a sleeping giant.  The Bison Nation is not prepared to sit idly by while their beloved OBU is destroyed from the inside, its legacy of excellence in Christian liberal arts education dismantled piece by piece.

The moment we let up -- the moment we think we've won -- the agenda we're opposing will start moving again.  This will continue indefinitely as long as the BGCO is in charge.  As we'll see over the next few days, the pressure to make Baptist colleges fundamentalist always originates within the state convention.  After we see how badly some of these schools have suffered, we trust that our argument for independence from the BGCO will be more persuasive than ever.

But for now -- maybe for today only -- celebrate!  You have truly made a difference.  Tomorrow, we get back to work.

Why Not Sit Down to a Little Fireside Chat?

Obviously, communication attempts initiated by the students did not go well. But what steps were taken?

Some may remember a few events from that academic year called, "Fireside Chats."

In fairness, I do not remember whether administration or SGA pushed for these events. But, either way, these events were presented as an opportunity for students and administration to discuss concerns.

But allow me, for a moment, to give some personal commentary which, I believe, captures the sentiments of many students who were around me in my time at OBU.

First, by the time these events were announced, students had been repeatedly ignored and abused by the president and provost. Trust had already been broken and the current mood on campus did not bode well for discussions at all. Students were under the impression that administration did not care to hear anything they had to say so motivation to go be ignored was understandably low.

Second, instead of empowering students' voices in an official forum, this would be an informal event. Students who had tried to negotiate the available venues to be heard had been bullied and disenfranchised. But, now, the substitute being offered did not give us any sort of real recognition and felt very much like being talked down to.

Third, these events were often scheduled at times which were inconvenient for many students. One, specifically, I remember, was scheduled for the night before a school break. Also, I remember more than one occasion of rescheduling and very little communication about the new times.

Fourth, each chat was supposed to have a designated topic. The first topic was men's housing.

Men's housing.

If I look over the letter to the editor which had come out or think about the things which the five students had presented to the president and provost, I get the feeling that men's housing was not even on the radar. And, if I did want to talk about housing, I probably wouldn't bring those concerns to the president or the provost.

So what are students supposed to do when the overwhelming question is, "Do you support academic freedom?" -- an incredibly important and serious question-- and the only option is an informal "chat?"

There were other times the administration did specifically ask for student input.

That was also the year during which OBU made the decision to restart the football team. Now, let me be clear, I have zero opinion on OBU having a football team or not. (Or, none other than: GO BISON!) At some point before the decision was announced there was an open-mic student forum where students could ask questions and voice concerns. Many felt the administration seemed surprised that the response of the students was not overwhelmingly positive.

Again, no personal opinion. But, after more negative sentiments than positive were expressed, the decision rolled on as if no one had said anything.

Is it the students' job to have an opinion about whether or not the school has the financial ability to support a football team? Probably not.

But this is the bottom line: if you don't want my opinion, don't ask for it. If you don't care what students have to say, don't go through the farce of pretending like their concerns have any sort of value for real decisions. It is disrespectful and a waste of everyone's time.

If the only opinion worth working for is that of the BGCO, why even bother talking to students at all?

OBU Bison Football

As you know, OBU announced today that it hired a head football coach.  The Bison will begin play in 2013.  A lot of you have asked my opinion.  I'm agnostic on this question.  All I can say is, go Bison!

The university engaged in a self-study beginning in 2006.  The committee reported in January 2008.  Part of that report is here.  At the time, we were experiencing a substantial enrollment drop.  A group began studying the feasibility of fielding a football team, in large part to help boost enrollment, particularly male enrollment.  I found parts of the report to be troubling.  But as far as I know (and I don't know much), the football issue received significant attention and scrutiny from a number of very capable and devoted people before a decision was made to proceed.

There are going to be challenges and changes, of course.  But adding a football program can have important advantages, as well.  I'm optimistic.

Now, if boosting male enrollment is a concern, I certainly have some ideas.  First of all, OBU could end its anti-social and reactionary dorm visitation policy.  Sexually repressed 17 year old church kids may not want to come to a college that treats them like they are 12 and is more obsessed with their "purity" than their parents ever were.  Not to mention that this visitation policy creates another horrible problem -- the frequent and gratuitous public displays of affection that OBU students across the generations have loved to hate.  But that's another issue for another day.

Sorry to disappoint those who may have been looking to Save OBU to rail against the decision to add football.  It is not our intent to oppose every decision OBU makes.  It is not our view that everything, or even most things, about OBU are bad.  Rather, we are concerned specifically with issues related to encroaching fundamentalism, authoritarianism, and anti-intellectualism that have been occasionally present for many years but have become painfully obvious recently.  And, as always, we are committed to the proposition that only complete independence and autonomy from the BGCO can ultimately solve these problems.

While we're on the subject, I think I'll just list a few issues that I propose Save OBU not take positions on:

• OBU Athletics (Go Bison!)
• OU-OSU, OU-UT, Braums-Blue Bell, etc. etc.  Not going there...
• Politics.  Most of our supporters are conservatives and Republicans, but we will welcome people across the spectrum.  Even Ron Paul disciples!
• Theology.  Most of our supporters identify as Baptists and/or evangelicals, but again, we have welcomed people from a variety of denominational backgrounds.  Like the pre-Takeover SBC, we do not intend to impose creeds, but rather respect the liberty of individuals' conscience and their soul competency.

We are building a movement that aims to unite rather than divide.  It is going to be difficult enough to bring together so many diverse OBU constituencies: students, alumni, faculty, former faculty, parents, donors, Oklahoma Baptists, etc.  But we have to be united.  It's too easy for powerful people to dismiss a few anonymous students one year, then a few hundred alumni the next year, and then some retired faculty the year after that.  If we are actually going to preserve academic freedom and OBU's great liberal arts tradition by winning independence from the BGCO, we have to be united.  The football issue -- decided years ago -- is not our battle.  It has little, if any, strategic importance to the changes we seek.

Go Bison!