Humanities Center at Johns Hopkins under threat (and a petition)

A philosophy graduate student at Johns Hopkins University writes:

I am a member of the philosophy department at Johns Hopkins University writing to alert you to some rather disturbing events happening in the university. In short, the university’s administration is attempting to shut down an academic department without transparency, due-process, or clear justification. The department in question is the Humanities Center, an interdisciplinary department that has been part of the university since the 1960s. The issues between the administration and the department have been developing for several years, but they have just recently been made public. Several members of the department of philosophy, including myself, feel that the administration’s handling of the situation ought to be publicized as much as possible to discourage this kind of malfeasance both now and in the future.

Here is a brief description of the situation (further details can be found on this website, which has been set up in support of the Center):

Roughly three years ago, two senior members of the Humanities Center’s faculty announced plans to retire. The department requested permission to conduct searches to replace the retiring faculty. The dean at the time, Katherine Newman, told the department that any decision regarding new hires would be up to her successor, since she was planning to leave Hopkins that same year. Her replacement was Beverly Wendland, a member of the biology faculty. Dean Wendland informed the Center that she would not be considering either of their hiring requests until the department underwent a review, despite the fact that it had been recently reviewed twice (in 2008-2009 and 2011-2012). In both cases, the reviews were generally positive.

The department agreed to the dean’s request and was reviewed by both an internal and an external committee. The reviews, which have been made available online, were positive, praising the quality of the faculty, the unique interdisciplinary research opportunities, and the graduate placement record. They also made several suggestions to the department, including an increase in undergraduate engagement and the replacement of the retiring faculty. In accordance with the recommendations, the department submitted a proposal for an undergraduate major. Following the reviews, Dean Wendland did not immediately authorize the faculty searches. Eventually, she told the department that she would not be granting any senior hires, but that they could re-write their proposals for the junior level. Additionally, she told the department that it would need to change its name.

The name of the Humanities Center became an issue due to the fact that $10,000,000 was recently given by the children of the founder of Rite-Aid to Johns Hopkins in order to found a “Humanities Institute” (story here; website here). The worry expressed by the dean is that there could be confusion over the newly established institute if the Humanities Center were to retain its traditional name. However, despite their similar names, the Humanities Institute is fundamentally different in both structure and function from the Humanities Center; it is not intended as a replacement. The institute does not house any faculty or graduate students, nor does it provide any courses. Instead, its primary duty is to distributes grants and provide support for speakers, conferences, visiting researchers, and other interdisciplinary projects across a number of different departments throughout the university.

The Humanities Center agreed to all the dean’s conditions, including the name change and the junior hires. However, these concessions apparently did not satisfy the dean, who appears to be more interested in finding ways to restrict the Center, rather than develop it. Dean Wendland eventually communicated that neither of the requested faculty hires would be authorized at this time, which led to a meeting between Humanities Center faculty members and the president of the university to inform him of the situation with the dean.

Several months later, in June 2016, Dean Wendland emailed a letter to the faculty and students of the Humanities Center informing them that, once again, a committee would be reviewing their department. However, this time the committee would be tasked with providing a recommendation to the dean about whether the department should be permanently closed or remain in operation. The final decision regarding the department’s future will be made by the dean in December 2016. If the decision is made to close the department, the Humanities Center will be closed by July 2017. Most of the dean’s letter is vague. It mainly consists of lengthy quotations taken from previous departmental reviews that have been stripped of their original context. Significantly, the letter provides no reasonable justification for why the Humanities Center should be reviewed for possible closure, aside from a few brief references to mission and budgetary considerations.

As it stands, the Humanities Center is undergoing the review process outlined in the dean’s letter. However, there is little evidence that this committee is anything more than an attempt to legitimate a decision that has already been made. In my opinion, public awareness of the Center’s predicament is one of the main things that can help the department at this point. Previous reviews have made it clear that there are no major issues internal to the department. On the contrary, the reviews have been highly supportive. Furthermore, the department has agreed to all requests made by the dean, who has responded by merely changing her demands. Therefore, it appears that someone (or some group) is attempting to oust the department for reasons that have not been revealed publicly.

To summarize, there are several particular concerning aspects to the events that have culminated in the Humanities Center’s current situation:

• That essentially one person will be deciding the fate of an academic department with a long and distinguished history at a major research university.
• That despite the department's compliance with all requests made by the dean, the dean has not relented in attempting to restrict and now close the department.
• That a well-established department with positive reviews and general academic success is being threatened with closure, without any real due-process.
• That there has been little administrative transparency throughout the events precipitating the possible closing of the department.
• That the dean has not provided clear and compelling justification for her decision to potentially close the department.
• That the university is considering shutting down a department that consists of one of the most diverse faculties in the school of arts and sciences (70% of the current faculty are women).

I bring this matter to your attention because you have a history of helping raise awareness of injustices committed within academic institutions, particularly regarding administrative matters. If you could please publicize this situation on your blog, it would be appreciated. Please also alert your readers to this online petition, which they can sign in support of the Humanities Center.