From Inside Higher Education: “Board chair Brianna Scott directly blamed her fellow trustees for driving Guskiewicz away. “The decision that he made is the direct result of an unsustainable environment created by the unfettered and disruptive behaviors of three of my colleagues on the board,” Scott told Michigan State’s student newspaper, The State News. “These individuals routinely use their positions of public trust, not to govern, but as weapons against our administrators and our presidents.” Read more here.

Sounds like DC politics, doesn’t it? But is it an accurate depiction?

FutureU’s answer: No. Loyalty to administrative calls, imposed by requiring board members to sign a loyalty pledge, isn’t the appropriate way to lead a public institution. We agree with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s (FIRE) interpretation: “That trustees’ criticism might ‘undermine’ the administration or Board decisions does not make it a legitimate target of censorship.”

(Cover photo courtesy IHE)