Purdue University’s announce- ment that it will be forming a committee to search for the replacement of Chancellor Wartell has rallied the community behind his bid to stay for two more years.
Purdue rules state that executive staff must retire within the fiscal year of their 65th birthday if they have been in the position for more than two years. But what is the reasoning behind forcing retirement based on age?
Robert Barrrett, professor of Information systems and leader of the faculty senate believes the law is antiquated. When the rule was laid down, the retirement age was 65, but that has since changed. Barrett cited the continued productivity of individuals after the retirement age as making the rule ineffectual.
Wartell has been asked to retire because of his age and only that reason. His productivity and ability to perform his job have not been a factor. In fact, with the accomplishments under his belt, including expansion of the campus, degree offerings and the university endowment, it is obvious that the chancellor’s productivity has not lagged.
And the nature of the resolution asking for an extension is not excessive. The faculty senate has asked that Wartell be given a two year extension on his retirement so that he can finish up some strategic initiatives put in place during his career as chancellor and lead the university into it’s 50th anniversary.
According to Barrett, the chancellor has the support of about 90 percent of the faculty and a large portion of the Fort Wayne community, making him an invaluable asset to the planning and execution of the anniversary activities.
It was asked by Professor Anne Argast during the senate meeting whether IPFW wanted to be known as a “forward-looking institution or a backward looking place.”
It is clear that with this resolution, the faculty is looking forward. They would like the plans that have already been laid out, which are intended to reach their completion by the university’s 50th year, to be executed effectively, and believe that Wartell, with 19 years as chancellor, is in the best position to do so.
Why mess with a good thing? Wartell should be allowed to stay on as chancellor for two more years. Past statistics would suggest that not only will his leadership in planning for the anniversary be beneficial to the university, but will probably further develop the university in a way that is beneficial to current and future students.
