Dear Colleagues:

Dr. Prevost has brought to my attention that in the minutes of yesterday's
faculty meeting, I characterized the current search for UTC chancellor as
"closed" in my synopsis of her report as it appears at the bottom of this
e-mail. My recollection is that I did hear Dr. Prevost say, "The search is
supposed to be closed, but some names have gotten out through the news
media" and "The search must remain closed in order to attract good
candidates."  She now says that she did not use the word "closed" in her
report.

While I strive in my minutes for 100% accuracy, I was not provided with a
written text of the report at any time, nor was it projected upon the
onstage screen while it was being delivered. Thus, while I welcome
corrections and requests for clarification, I would like to add a bit of
clarification myself:  I am a secretary taking minutes, not a court
reporter making a transcript.

My understanding of "open" vs. "closed" searches is that in an "open"
search, all of the candidates names are disclosed, while in an "closed"
search, the candidates names are not disclosed until the final interviewees
are chosen.  These are the definitions of "open search" and "closed search"
that I was using in my synopsis of Dr. Prevost's report (see bottom of
e-mail); however, she informed me this morning that my use of these terms
in this way is not accurate.

Finally, may I call upon anyone who has expertise in this area to enlighten
me regarding the correct definition of "open search" and "closed search."
Unfortunately, I left the meeting I had with Dr. Prevost in her office this
morning without a clear understanding of what these terms mean or how they
are appropriately used.  But perhaps this is because I totalled my car
coming home from the university last night and was not able to focus on our
discussion as sharply as I otherwise might have been able to do.  My head
is a bit clearer now and I may be a little more capable of benefiting from
such instruction.

Thanks,
Marcia

 "Verbie Prevost, who is chairing the Chancellor's Search Committee,
thanked the faculty for their support.  We have a diverse group of good
candidates.  The Search has a website.  The deadline is February 25.  The
pool will be narrowed and interviews will be held March 14.  Rumors have
been circulating that a chancellor has already been chosen, that John
Peterson has a candidate picked out, etc.  These rumors are not true.  This
is truly a UTC search.  We have been promised and given autonomy. The
search committee has total control of who goes into the pool and Dr.
Peterson will make the choice from the list of finalists.  The Search is
supposed to be closed but some names have gotten out through the news
media.  Dr. Prevost will not talk publically about the search or confirm
that someone is or is not a candidate.  The committee is now meeting with
the consultant to examine the files and make notes on the candidates.  The
committee is not meeting as a whole. Complete confidentiality is being
maintained.  The search must remain closed in order to attract good
candidates. Please trust the large and representative search committee to
find a good chancellor from the current pool of thirty.  As soon as the
list of interviewees is firm, their names will be made available on the
website.  At that time, if any faculty have colleagues at institutions
where the candidates are working, the search committee would appreciate
their imput.  All candidates will have an open session with faculty and
staff, as well as students and some smaller groups.  Please keep your
calendar as free as possible during the week of March 14 so that you can
participate as much as possible in the search process.  An on-line
evaluation form will be available for faculty to use."