Last year the Southwestern College governing board evaluated Superintendent Dr. Raj K. Chopra and, to the dismay of faculty and students, awarded him a $15,000 raise. Evaluation time has come up again and faculty have devised an evaluation of their own. The result is a resounding "F".
About 160 full-time faculty and adjunct instructors participated in a 44-page survey that graded Chopraa in seven areas: professional development, professional knowledge and expertise, leadership, relationship with faculty and faculty organizations, commitment to instruction, shared governance and communication skills. In six of the seven categories, Chopra received a failing grade. Of all grades given to Chopra, 87 percent were "F's".
Articulation Officer Veronica Burton said the governing board took no input from faculty while evaluating Chopra last year. She said she hopes this survey will be used by the board to produce a more well-rounded evaluation of the superintendent.
Faculty and Chopra began butting heads soon after his start in August 2007. They have accused him of minimizing their voice in the decisions made on campus, calling the superintendent an "autocratic" boss. All faculty and classified organizations have voted no confidence in the embattled superintendent. In November some faculty members helped spur efforts of a community-driven recall for three of the five governing board members who have consistently backed Chopra.
Board members have defended the superintendent, saying his "no business as usual" style of management has kept the college afloat during the current recession. They cited that he had filled in for two vacant, six-figure vice president positions to save the college big money as part of the reason for their positive evaluation last year, which resulted in a 7.9 percent raise.
Faculty leaders said the board's evaluation was lacking in procedure and transparency.
"(The governing board) couldn't articulate what the process was in the first place," said faculty union vice president Andrew MacNeill, "because they didn't have one."
The survey explored many areas, most of which Chopra performed poorly in. His scores were particularly dismal in regard to shared governance, a hot topic especially since the accreditation commission addressed it as a problem area in January. Perhaps the most telling gauge of faculty opinion is seen through the seven-page open comment section, only two of which had anything remotely positive to say.
"The deception, hostility and strong-arm tactics that were clear violations of civil rights, have created a climate of distrust, fear, and resentment which are crippling to the harmony of our campus," said one survey participant. "The sooner we can replace the current Superintendent-President and the Board members who lack vision and the willingness to work collegially with faculty, staff, and students, the better our chances to preserve our college."
Valerie Goodwin-Colbert, academic senate president, said the survey was an objective way for the governing board members to hear the voice of SWC employees while evaluating Chopra.
Governing board trustee Nick Aguilar said the Academic Senate's opinion is valued but was unable to comment on Chopra's evaluation because it is categorized as a confidential personnel matter.
Be the first to comment on this article!