New Principal Search Process Raises Doubts

In an effort to include faculty members on the selection of the upcoming Interim Principal, the trustees sent all faculty members a second online survey, which closed on Monday, May 7, to solicit their opinions on the three candidates—Director of Student Well-Being Christina Palmer, Head of the Doane Stuart School Pamela Clarke and former Academy trustee and alumnus William Rawson

In an email sent to the faculty, Interim Principal Search Chair and Trustee Claudine Gay stated that each candidate “prepare[d] a personal statement that conveys their qualifications for the position, their views on the critical issues facing the Academy at this moment of transition, and their ideas for how to address those issues.”

“It would have been good to have a bit more information about the candidates, a résumé would have been nice, ” History department chair William Jordan said.

After reading the candidate statements, faculty members were allowed to anonymously write their thoughts on each applicant. According to President of the Trustees Tony Downer ’75, the trustees received over 100 responses. “The feedback was thoughtful, constructive, insightful and reflected the myriad of perspectives, opinions and voices present in our community,” he said.

Students were also able to weigh in on the conversation. At the Student Council meeting on Tuesday, May 8th, students discussed the candidate statements and took a straw vote for the best candidate at the end. With the exception of two students, there was a unanimous consensus that Rawson was the most qualified. The secretaries, lowers Ayush Noori and Audrey Vanderslice, took notes to be sent to the trustees as student input.

Some faculty members, however, felt that the Trustees could have provided more information about each candidate. “It would have been good to have a bit more information about the candidates, a résumé would have been nice, ” History department chair William Jordan said. “There weren’t any specific directions. I just filled out my thoughts based on what I thought of the three candidates by looking at the three statements which wasn’t a lot to go on.”

Modern Languages Instructor Terra* wished that the faculty could have met the candidates. “It’s always helpful to meet candidates in person rather than just [read] something they’ve written,” she said. “If you see a resume or application, if you don’t know the person there may be a big difference between what you see and what you experience in a conversation.”

According to Downer, the faculty and staff voices had great impact on the decision process. “Beyond their representation on the Interim Principal Advisory Committee, the faculty and staff provided volumes of input, both in the first stage of the process during which issues, priorities and candidates were discussed, and in the second stage when the community was invited to comment on the slate of finalists,” he said.

However, although they were given a platform to display their views, many faculty members still felt that their voices had no impact on the process.

Jordan felt that it was “hard” to know the faculty body’s impact on the decision. The faculty had meetings with the trustees and the opportunity to state their opinions verbally, through email, and through a survey. “The faculty has a voice; I have no idea if the voices are being heard,” he said.

Moreover, the Interim Principal Advisory Committee stopped working with the trustees after they developed a final list of three candidates. “The Interim Principal Advisory Committee completed its mission when it presented to the Trustees a proposed slate of finalist candidates for the Trustees’ consideration. The Committee played an invaluable part in the process by reaching out to the community, soliciting feedback, reviewing that feedback, and conveying its perspectives and recommendations to the Trustees.” Downer said. Gay declined to comment at this time.

“[The trustees] asked for our input prior to them developing the shortlist of finalists,” Interim Advisory Council member Margaret Foley said. “I guess they now are in the process of handling the information with that short list.”

According to Terra, many of the faculty members were unaware of this recent development. “That leads to a sense that the process was not transparent,” she said. “I did know that faculty members have been asking for greater transparency in administrative decisions.”

Additionally, the Trustees never returned the results of an earlier survey in which they asked the faculty whether the interim principal should come from within or outside the Exeter community, further contributing to a perceived lack of transparency. “You can’t know that your voice was heard if the process is not transparent,” Terra added.

Physics Instructor Tatiana Waterman felt differently. “The involvement from faculty and staff was plenty and enough in my opinion,” she said. “Eventually I have confidence that the trustees will make their decision wisely and efficiently with all this input.”

At the same time, some believe that the search process itself has dragged on for too long. “On the one hand, I think the faculty committee should be involved all the way through,” Jordan said. “On the other hand, I didn’t think a committee was even necessary at the beginning; I would have been happy for the trustees to pick someone without a long process because it’s an interim position.”

“The school year’s almost over and it would have been nice to have a longer period of transition [for the interim principal],” Jordan added. ”I would have been happy if the trustees made a decision in a more efficient way.”