For the most part, campus administration controversies are usually of interest only to those who attend or work at that particular school.
The academic world is very inward-looking, and the general public gives it a pass most of the time.
Which brings us to the mysterious case of Arvind Gupta, who resigned unexpectedly as the president of the University of B.C., just one year into what was supposed to be a five-year term. Rather than being confined to the leafy campus, though, the controversy has generated widespread media coverage.
His abrupt departure – for reasons unknown, which is at the heart of this controversy – has touched off a chain reaction of outrage among some parts of the UBC community, unfounded suggestions of racism, accusations that academic freedom is under siege, and dire warnings that the university’s entire reputation is now somehow perilously close to going down the toilet.
High drama indeed.
Gupta alienated people. He bruised some egos. Dismissed some staff. Didn’t consult with the board of governors. Or so goes the rumor mill. His supporters paint a completely different picture, though.
UBC, like many other schools, has a history of some rather explosive controversies. In the mid-1990s, the political science department found itself facing accusations of sexism and racism.
As well, according to a 2012 investigation by the campus paper The Ubyssey, more than a dozen complaints against UBC have been filed to the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal by various students and professors, with most dealing with gender equity issues.
Certainly, on social media, some professors are alleging far bigger troubles than simply the resignation of the university president.
Gupta and the university signed mutual non-disclosure agreements that covered his departure. These are legally-binding contracts.
Unless someone on the board, or Gupta himself, finds a way around those agreements and spills the beans (which seems unlikely), then the mystery will remain a mystery.
There is, of course, one possible solution: Gupta and the board both agree to waive those deals. If both parties agree to shine a light on this affair, it can be done.
If the threat to the university’s integrity is indeed so great because of this mess (and I think that threat is a tad overstated), it can be argued it is incumbent on both parties to drop the veil of secrecy.
School’s almost in folks. Time to get on with it.
Keith Baldrey is chief political reporter for Global B.C.
