Clarity Needed in Charfauros Situation

Until recently this had been a pretty good year for the Oberlin College administration; they certainly met and exceeded any reasonable expectations in their handling of the events of Sept. 11. But the recent handling of Antoinette Charfauros McDaniel’s dismissal is not only disappointing, it is disquieting and signals the possibility of a shift away from the kind of values and thinking that make Oberlin, Oberlin.
This last point deserves some examination. Here at Oberlin, saying that something threatens our Oberlinness or might make Oberlin less Oberlin is a powerful but perhaps overused accusation; it is akin to the Bush administration branding something un-American, or perhaps saying that something helps the terrorists. Point being, you don’t want to be accused of un-Oberlining Oberlin.
But it’s a sticky thing, too, because nearly everyone has their own idea of what Oberlin is, was, and should be. Some people see Oberlin as an institution with a long history of diversity and acceptance; others see that history as a misrepresentation of a better-than-others-but-not-nearly-perfect record. Some see Oberlin becoming more selective and building its science programs as a good thing; others point out the loss of need-blind admissions and Oberlin’s rising popularity as mainstreaming or gentrification.
There have always been these disagreements: some always see progress as the End of Oberlin, some always hearken back to the good old days, which were of course never as good as in retrospect. So how might this be the “real” thing and not just another Chicken Little prophecy?
The reasoning behind the decision not to rehire Charfauros McDaniel was that it was a matter of simple procedure: she was given a year after her hiring to complete a Ph.D., and didn’t do so, but got an extension, the deadline of which she also didn’t meet. Therefore, the College had no choice but to refuse to re-hire her. In its Ph.D. requirement, according to College President Nancy Dye, “Oberlin is no different than any college or university I know.”
Here’s the key point: Oberlin is different. If only for our steadfast insistence that we are different, we are. Insofar as our administrative procedures are written no differently than those of other institutions of higher learning, perhaps we are the same as others. But a key part of Oberlin is that articulation of difference, of Oberlinness, and that begins to get lost when we justify actions because “everybody else is doing it.” It doesn’t really matter if we’re talking about administrative procedure that is normally invisible to students, or about something which affects students’ everyday lives in more visible ways — in this case, words can speak louder than actions.
The actions in this situation, however, do speak quite loudly. Charfauros McDaniel is an incredibly popular professor and a rising star in ethnic studies. She is currently an important member of Oberlin’s faculty, and would be an invaluable part of a Comparative American Studies program, should the department become a reality. At a very basic level, it just doesn’t make sense that Oberlin would want to lose a young professor, loved by students, respected in the field and with a host of accomplishments (including organizing the recent East of California conference) already added to her résumé after a short time at Oberlin.
All this leads to the question: why? Is the College administration really that concerned with enforcing an arbitrary deadline on a relatively arbitrary certification of merit (the Ph.D.)? Has it become involved in a game of chicken and is now unable to swallow its pride, and so is resting on administrative minutiae to justify itself? Or is there something more sinister going on; does the College administration want Charfauros McDaniel out because they disagree with her politics or academic mission? This seems an unlikely scenario, but one doubtless on the minds of many students for whom the administrative procedures argument is unconvincing. So the College administration is faced with a choice: if the rationale behind her dismissal is, indeed, one of procedure, there should be no option but to beg forgiveness and offer her a contract. It is simply ridiculous that a professor of Charfaurous McDaniel’s talent be lost on a technicality. But if there is another agenda at work, the College administration owes it to its students, faculty and indeed itself to own up to that agenda and be straightforward with its rationale. To do any less would be an insult to the College community and Oberlin’s proud tradition, however you might personally view that tradition.