Asbury Faculty and Administration Wonder #8

Now the 8th installment. You might note that conversations continue under previous Asbury posts.

The flurry of reports and narratives dating from 1 September 2006 has shed light on and generated heat regarding the critical situation in which Asbury Theological Seminary now finds itself. We are left with a number of questions. This is the eighth.

We wonder how decisions regarding President Greenway’s performance could be based on a review process that was flawed at each step of the way — from the preparation of a survey instrument to the conducting of the survey to the evaluation of the survey results.

Based on reports received from the Vice-Chair of the Board, we conclude that the review process adopted by the Board Chair-appointed ad hoc review committee was defective in especially two respects.

First, in spite of Board Policies to the contrary, the focus of the review was not on President Greenway’s performance vis-a-vis the objectives set for him by the Board of Trustees in the context of his 2005 evaluation.

Second, the research process did not meet the minimal standards expected of qualitative research.

(1) The survey questions were ill-designed and not tied to President Greenway’s performance.

(2) A small number of the some 2000 persons (viz., students, staff, faculty, administration) from whom survey participants might have been chosen were selected without attention to achieving either a genuinely representative or random sample. Since the final list of participants was chosen by only one person, the Board Chair, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the choice of participants reflects a subjectivity inappropriate to qualitative research.

(3) Rather than analyzing the data according to the protocols of qualitative research, the Board Chair prepared what the Vice-Chair characterized as a "cut and paste" summary. We wonder how a process, so egregiously flawed from start to finish, could have been allowed to serve as the basis of President Greenway’s performance review.

Signed:
Kenneth A. Boyd, Ph.D., Professor of Instructional Design
Allan Coppedge, Ph.D., Ralph Waldo Beeson Professor of Christian Theology
Ronald K. Crandall, D.Th.P., McCreless Professor of Evangelism and Sundo Kim Professor of Evangelism and Practical Theology
Richard L. Gray, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Leadership and Christian Ministry
Joel B. Green, Ph.D., Professor of New Testament Interpretation
Chuck Gutenson, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Philosophical Theology
Virginia Todd Holeman, Ph.D., Professor of Counseling
Eunice L. Irwin, Ph.D., Associate Professor: Mission and Contextual Theology
Randy Jessen, D.Min., Dean, Beeson International Center for Biblical Preaching and Church Leadership
C. Reginald Johnson, Ph.D., Roy and Weezie Anderson Professor of Prayer and Spiritual Formation
Hugo Magallanes, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Church in Society
Terry C. Muck, Ph.D., Professor of Missions and World Religions
M. Robert Mulholland Jr., Ph.D., Professor of New Testament
Ruth Anne Reese, Ph.D., Professor of New Testament
Lester Ruth, Ph.D., Lily May Jarvis Professor of Christian Worship
Michael A. Rynkiewich, Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology
Daryl Smith, Ed.D., Associate Professor of Mentored Ministry and Christian Leadership
Catherine Stonehouse, Ph.D., Orlean Bullard Beeson Professor of Christian Discipleship
David L. Thompson, Ph.D., F.M. and Ada Thompson Professor of Biblical Studies
Thomas F. Tumblin, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Christian Leadership
Jerry L. Walls, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy of Religion
Ben Witherington III, Ph.D., Professor of New Testament
Laurence W. Wood, Ph.D., Frank Paul Morris Professor of Systematic Theology