Andrews University President, Two Vice Presidents, Resign


Niels-Erik Andreasen has submitted his resignation from the office of the president of Andrews University, effective immediately. This resignation was accepted, with regret, by the Board. Even with this decision, he will continue to serve and advise Andrews while he seeks another position and the work of identifying his replacement begins.

Patricia Mutch, vice president for academic administration, and Edward Wines, vice president of financial administration, also submitted their resignations. The Board also accepted these resignations, with regret, to be effective June 30. Their work over the next few months will provide administrative direction for the university as theirs and the president’s replacements are identified.

In accepting their resignations, the Board commended these individuals for guiding the university during a significant and challenging time in the university’s history.

Here is some additional material that was not cited in the above post:

"n March 6, the Andrews University Board of Trustees held its spring meeting on the campus of Andrews University. An executive session of the Board that day very carefully examined the recent strategic direction of the university and its related plans for the future. As it discussed these issues, the Board felt that the university needed to explore the opportunities that would be offered by new leadership and the ability it would provide to implement a new strategic direction that fulfills the mission and vision of the university."

This, as well as the citation in the first post comes from a news item reported by the REVIEW.

This is a tragedy for the University.

I understand Dr. Andreasen's letter of resignation was a total shock and surprise to the Board.

There was a "Board/Faculty/Retirees dinner and games" scheduled for after the Board meeting on Monday night, but the games were canceled because everyone was so sad. Several were weeping.

Dr. Andreasen has been one of the strongest presidents that university has seen. He must have thought long and hard before doing this. I understand the problems are mainly financial.

IMHO, the General Conference better get busy and rescue that university. It's brought our church into extremely high standing among similar universities in the country. Now is not the time to let it flounder.

Um, did somebody like delete my post invisibly here or something? I posted asking for a description in plain ordinary language what all of this means. I am not able to comprehend all the "formal speech" used here. What is going wrong at AU and why are all these important staff resigning? Does this mean I should cancel my plans to go there this fall? Someone help me out here, I don't understand this stuff. Thanks.

Nico:

The only authorative information I have is the announcement in the on-line REVIEW.

Reading between those lines, it looks to me like the governing board wanted some kind of change in direction. Yet, I do not see any indication that they asked for them to resign. Perhaps (?) they did? Perhaps the three who resigned simply sensed that a change in direction was desired, and therefore submitted their resignation without being asked?

In any case, I also do not understand what is going on.

This is also the time of year they renew contracts for the following school year.

If anyone wants to read the REVIEW announcemet, here it is:

http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=414

Yeah, I read it ... I just don't know what it MEANS.

I don't (yet) have any insided information, though I expect some before long.


However, the bureaucratic death sentence is contained in this clause:

Quote:

---

the Board felt that the university needed to explore the opportunities that would be offered by new leadership

---

That's the bureaucratic equivalent of leaving the guy alone with a loaded revolver. It may have been a shock to the faculty, but it shouldn't have been to the board. Usually, "new leadership" requires new leaders.

As an alumnus of AU, this concerns me greatly. All my information was how excellent Andreason was as Pres.

Losing three top people at once will cause considerable shock to the system.

Yeah, that's about all I can make of it, too, without knowing particulars, which obviously I don't know.

Ed as an alumnus do you have any contacts from whom you might learn details? I'm planning to go there this fall to finish my (long-abandoned) degree and I need to know if whatever is happening is something that should warrant a change of plans -- even if no one tells me what the "WHAT" is I need to know if it's anything I should be changing my plans over.

Ed:

That is exactly the reason I believe that someone wanted new leadership, plus that the top three resigned.

But the question is WHY ... since everyone seemed to appreciate Andreason and have nothing but good to say regarding his leadership?

Lesser known: the academic advisor of the theology department is leaving too. He told me when I contacted him about going over my transcript etc. to see what I should take for classes in order to graduate. He said he was waiting to hear about a position in the Phillippines which makes me wonder whether he was bailing on AU for some unknown reason or whether he simply saw an opportunity elsewhere and felt called there instead. I didn't ask, because at the time I didn't know anything was amiss, but (much to everyone's dismay) I can often "read the air" on things and I "read" that something more was going on than met the eye.
People generally don't like it when I "out" the "something more" and so because he was a stranger to me I didn't pursue it. But now -- as usual! -- more info comes to light giving me cause to think no, that was NOT all in my head ... so yeah some FACTS rather than just wondering (without even a sufficient groundwork for speculation to keep my brain occupied! ) would be a good thing right about now ...

Nico,

Two of my best friends are dept. heads at the Seminary. Both are on sabbatical right now, but will be returning soon.


As far as your plans, I doubt this will have any significant impact on undergraduates in the short term. The key word in all these announcements is "strategic." Those are long term objectives which shouldn't affect undergrads, especially in areas like Religion.

If it were my kids planning to go there, I wouldn't hesitate to follow through on those plans over this.

Understand, Andrews is like an large SDA center. You get all kinds there, and doing business with Adventists can test your faith. I personally hate the humidity.

At the same time, the seminary makes Andrews one of our most cosmopolitan schools; people from all over the world attend there. And just as you can find the cranks, you have the opportunity to meet beautiful Christian Adventists from all over the world. I enjoyed my time there.

My source is a retired staff member, who attended the Faculty/Board/Retirees' dinner and who heard the news first-hand. She emailed me Monday night. I didn't want to be the first to break the news here.

But it was a total shock and surprise when the president arrived at the board meeting, submitted his letter of resignation and then left the meeting. At first they thought he had moved away. It's obvious he's been planning this. But as Stan says, the spring board meeting is always the meeting at which faculty and staff hiring is done.

The president and his wife are friends of mine. I have not called them about this since I know it must be a very difficult time for them right now.

Nico, I would not worry about your education. The university has strong credentials. Hopefully your department will remain pretty much intact, even though the advisor might leave. Let me assure you, that university is a cosmopolitan campus, with the brightest and best students from around the WORLD. They've recently raised their admission standards [SAT scores, for example] and are also giving scholarships to undergrads who remain for the entire four years. They are doing very creative stuff there.

The graduate schools have always been strong.

OK, thanks for the input, Ed & Jeannie. I'm glad, because I'm rather looking forward to going there.

Update:

I've now heard from another friend on campus, a high-level administrative assistant, who says there's such a sense of sadness on the campus - it is hard to describe. It feels as though there has been a death in the family. Please remember us [them] in your prayers.

Also: I have registered my vehement objection to the language used in the press release prepared by University Relations and reprinted in the Adventist Review. It implies that the Board asked Dr. Andreasen for his resignation -- which is a total fabrication. It was Dr. A's resignation, along with his suggesting to the Board that there could/should be a new "realignment" which caused the [shocked, surprised] board to reluctantly accept his resignation.

My contact there on campus said my feeling is shared by many, and that University Relations may be coming out with a correction. (I have no assurance of the latter -- but they should.)

Nico, I also think this primarily involves the Seminary, and not the undergraduate college.

Update from another forum


Dr. Niels-Erik Andreasen to Serve as President of Andrews University until June 30

A specially called meeting of the Andrews University Board of Trustees convened on March 9 at 7:00 pm. The Board took an action asking Dr. Niels-Erik Andreasen to continue serving as president of the university for the remainder of its fiscal year, ending June 30. Andreasen agreed to the request.

Andreasen had served as president of the university for 12 years until his resignation at the regular Board meeting on March 6.

At a break during that meeting, the leadership of the board asked Dr. Andreasen for his resignation and he agreed. When he wrote his resignation letter, Andreasen stated that it would be "effective immediately." Apparently, it was that phrase which was the root of a misunderstanding between Andreasen and the Board. Andreasen thought the Board was wishing for his resignation to be immediate while the Board, upon receipt of his letter, assumed that it was Andreasen's wish for a quick conclusion.

After that meeting, some trustees talked further with Andreasen and recognized the misunderstanding that had emerged. They, in turn, asked Elder Gerald Karst, chair of the Board of Trustees and general vice president of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, to call a special meeting to ask for clarification.

The meeting was called and the Board voted overwhelmingly to ask Dr. Andreasen to serve in his current capacity until June 30, to help ensure stability and continuity in the university's operations as new leadership is identified and put in place.

"Dr. Andreasen is a gifted thinker and servant leader who has given valuable leadership to Andrews for more than a decade," says Elder Karst "Although the board has determined that Andrews needs some of the opportunities that could be offered by new leadership, I'm pleased that Dr. Andreasen will be staying by for the remainder of this school year."

On March 6, the board's requested resignations of Dr. Andreasen, along with two vice presidents, followed a number of years of strategic discussions that began following significant financial losses for the university during the 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 fiscal years.

While improvements had been made, the board felt that the modest growth in revenue and student populations during these years did not match the scope and speed needed to equip the university for successful long-term operations and growth.

A 13-member presidential search committee will now be appointed, and will be made up of board members, university faculty, staff, alumni and student representatives.

The full board will meet again before the end of March to complete voting and endorsement of new faculty and staff appointments, the budget for the 2006-2007 fiscal year, and other unfinished business from its March 6 agenda.

The speech

http://adventistforum.com/Andreasen.mp3

if you want to email that link to a friend use
this

http://adventistforum.com/ubbtreads/showthreaded.php/Cat/0/Number/209415/an//page/0/vc/1

I would not be to concerned. Whatever the reasons these men have the highest recommendations and they can go on to get other jobs within our outside the church. It may be they decided it was time to move on for political or whatever reasons.

Interesting: it's very clear from what Dr Andreassen says that he didn't jump, he was pushed, and that the decision came from the board to him (suggesting that the board was, in fact, *not* shocked and surprised). The very, very long applause for him is telling.

If there wasn't a scandal, perhaps there is one in the very disparate versions of events being given out: everyone seems very keen to avoid being the ones who initiated the change...

I guess it comes down to whether people feel that the Board in fact has a coherent vision for the future direction of the University. It'll be interesting to see how they articulate that.

The rumormill is working... it includes heading up or building a seminary in Loma Linda/ La Serria area...

Bravus--my DH and I were also commenting on the very, very long applause.

M

If there was going to be another Seminary, and only IF, I would think it would be better off outside of the USA because of those nasty visa problems and the extra expense of living there...

That has been an issue of discussion for several decades. The General Conference has generally opposed it, or it would have happened.

Okay, I can see Stan's point--knowing the visa restrictions and financial strain of getting to the US from "out there" it would make sense to have another seminary elsewhere. Wonder why they haven't done so? Greg, do you know why the GC would oppose an outside the US seminary?

M

I miss-communicated.

The GC has opposed a Seminary at Loma Linda.

We do have several Seminaries in other countries. The one in Russia is probably the best known one.

Others include:

The Chech Republic
Croatia
Bangladesh
Angola
Philippines*
Cuba
South Korea*
Africa (Several)
Sri Lanka
Brazil*
Pakistan
Germany*
Myanmar
Netherlands
Singapore
Sweden
Tanzania

NOTES: Those listed with a (*) are well recognized and somewhat equivalent to our Seminary at Andrews. Other listings are include schools that are college-level, and even Jr. College level, but they meet the needs of the countries that they serve.

How does a Seminary differ from a regular University that grants Phd's in somekind of Religious Studies?

Unless otherwise staed, my response will be limited to the situation in North America.

Seminaries, in general terms, train people to minister in congregations, and graduate schools of religion train people to work in other settings, such as teaching on the graduate level (or even secondary and college). As a result, they typically issue two differing types of degrees.

The degrees typically related to congregational ministry include the MDiv (Master of Divinity) and the DMin (Doctor of Ministry). In the context of clergy today, the MDiv. is considered the minimumn degree required to enter the profession--parish ministry, chaplaincy, Federal/State government employment. NOTE: Each (e.g. chaplaincy) will typically have other training/education requirements.

Degrees from graduate schools, and requirements for teaching include: Master of Theology, and higher degrees. NOTE: The Master of Theology is a higher degree than is the typical MA degree.

To have credibility, Seminaries in North America will need to be accredited by the AATS (American Association of Theological Schools).

The standard MDiv. program is a three standard year program, whicn in some settings can be completed in 24 months. Andrews has changed it MDiv. program from what it was when I was working on mine. But, in any case, the MDiv. degree is a combination of academic study, and experience in the acutal parish work. Presently, at Andrews, the typical MDiv. student will do some rotating between Andrews, and work back in the sponsoring Conference. However, I think that they have a modified program for some who are better served by a modified program.

I completed my work in the MDiv. in 29 continueous months, with the experiential part of it obtained in the local Conference in which Andrews is located.

Niels-Erik Andreasen was one of my favorite teachers in college. I took several classes-- Greek, Bible Doctrines, Life and Teachings of Jesus, O.T. Prophets, etc.-- from him at PUC as well as at LLU. I found him to be always very gracious and helpful. He's one of our best Hebrew scholars. I've nothing but respect, admiration, and affection for him and wish him the very best.
I'll always remember his striking illustration of God being something like a boxer who steps into the ring and simply allows His enemy to pummel Him with his fists until he finally collapses and admits to everyone that he's lost the battle against a better man.

Who is Gerald Karst?

What is his pedigree?

All I know is that he's the chairman of the board of Andrews University.

I also know [I've spoken personally with a vice-president at Andrews who (so far, at least) has not been asked to resign] that Gerald Karst committed a totally unethical and immoral act. He on his own, accompanied by his assistant, decided that the University would be better off without Dr. Andreasen -- and it was he who [without board knowledge or approval] went to Dr. Andreasen during the lunch hour of the March 6 board meeting and asked for the President's resignation! This was done totally improperly. Furthermore, when those two returned to the meeting in the afternoon [without admitting their action to the board members], and when Dr. A. did [as Karst had asked him to do] submit his resignation, the board WAS totally shocked and surprised! The board voted to ask Dr. A. to reconsider -- but what did Karst and his cohort do, but state [totally falsely] that Dr. Andreasen will NOT reconsider!
This was done totally by the board chairman, on his own, and without board knowledge or approval.

Then, the board members [many of whom were in tears, as was much of the faculty and staff] found out about this the next day. The board then conducted a telephone conference, and demanded a recall of the board for another in-person meeting. It was at this second in-person meeting of the board that the recent action was taken, to ask Dr. Andreasen to stay till the end of this school year.

The word about Loma Linda University is that it plans to ask Dr. Andreasen to join the administration of LLU as dean of the theology faculty there. [There is a Theology Dept at LLU already.]

The foregoing is news.

Now for my editorial comment.
The AU Board should demand Gerald Karst's removal as board chair.

Gregory--thanks for the clarification. I was really scratching my head, because the first thing that popped into my head was Russia, followed by Philippines and Korea, but then I thought, maybe I was misinformed. I have a friend at the seminary in Russia.

M

I am alwlays glad to clairfy, as I sometimes am misunderstood, or do not say it very well.

Yes, it is possible to get a graduate degree in Religion at LLU, but not the MDiv.

My gues is that this will increase the probability that LLU will move toward a Seminary program.

Thanks for that, Jeannie. That account actually makes all the facts line up - and Dr Andreassen clearly was being very precise and very discrete when he outlined the course of events.

Wow, glad I'm not an Andrews faculty member right now...

I also know Gerry Karst. He has always been a man of great integrity. If the above account is accurate it would be a great shock to me. In my estimation he is and has always been a true man of God.

Well, all I know is that the administration had come in with its revised budget as requested by the board, and the revised budget showed a slashing of some programs and staff in order to meet the goal of a $1.5m profit [sounds like an unreasonable goal to me -- when does a university ever make that kind of profit?! ], and the board meeting was proceeding on schedule. There had been no vote of ANY type against Dr. Andreasen -- only to ask the two VPs to resign at the end of the year [naturally, the financial VP would have been held to account, and the curriculum VP would have been resisting cutting all those programs....] but there had been NO sense on the part of the board members that Dr. A. was doing anything at all but what was totally best for the university.

Now come Karst and his sidekick [name of the Asst. Chmn. has not been revealed to me, not because it's a secret, just wasn't included when we spoke], and totally on their own, without support of any portion of the board, pull this trick. If they'd had such good reasons, why didn't they go through proper channels and present those reasons to the board for a vote? If you ask me, Karst has committed a crime.

Dr. Faehner has spoken with me [I'm one of the "friends" on whom he is calling, as referred to by Dr. Andreasen in his speech] and told me that when the word got out on campus about this lying by Karst the campus went ballistic. [It cannot be called anything else; it was a lie to fail to reveal to the board that Andreasen's resignation was instigated by Karst. And it was a lie to tell the board members that "Dr. Andreasen won't reconsider" when Dr. A. had not even been asked to reconsider.]

All I can say is, being called of God to labor in His vineyard does not confer infallibility. Karst must feel he knows better than anybody else how to operate Andrews University -- which IMHO will prove to be wrong. He'll have to answer for that action in the judgment.

I've forwarded all this to my DH, and we've been discussing what has been posted. If it was indeed David Faehner who told Jeannie everything that happened/didn't happen in the board meeting, this is very out of character for him. My DH knows him, and Dr. F is very well known for keeping his own counsel and keeping his nose clean. Why would he want to jeopardize his own job?

If he told Jeannie this information in confidence as to a friend (perhaps they are friends--I know she said she was friends with Dr. A, perhaps with Dr. F as well? I don't know), perhaps Jeannie has jeopardized his job by posting confidential information here at C/A.

Unless the VP that Jeannie first mentioned talking with was NOT Dr. F, in which case the second post should make clear that he ONLY told her the mood on campus (which would be understandable no matter how Dr. A was asked to resign), not the inside workings of the board.

My DH is just having a really hard time imagining Dave Faehner telling a "friend" of the university (meaning a donor, of course) what happened in the board that day. Stranger thing have happened, though . . . .

M

I would imagine this action was taken in 'executive session'
http://www.andrews.edu/news/2006/3/board_briefing.html

Quote:

---

As it had during its October board meeting, the board went into an executive session (an executive session of the board includes only its non-university members) to more carefully review these plans and to discuss how the university and its administration had been developing and implementing changes for the future.

---

Michelle,

As a reader who knows not you, nor your DH, nor Jeannie nor Dr. A nor Dr. F, how am I supposed to know who is who's friend or not?

Since your DH claims to be a good friend of Dr. F, why doesn't he just call him and get the matter straightened out?

Just thoughts...

Chrys

Chrys--I'll suggest it.

M

Perhaps I didn't make it clear previously, but everything I was told was already common knowledge on campus by that time. Remember, it was already Friday --four days after the fiasco began-- when I heard the official story. There were no "tales told out of school" by anyone.

========

Moral of the Story: One cannot summarily fire a popular university president without expecting the true facts to leak out.

What does DH stand for??

Dear Husband
Dumb Hubby

/Bevin

http://www.atoday.com/6.0.html?&tx_t...Hash=a0b970f030

The above link will give you more information on the situation at Andrews, as reported by ADVENTIST TODAY.