West Virginia University Math Department appeal chaos drives wedge between faculty and administrators

Oct. 10—MORGANTOWN — At the Sept. 11 West Virginia University Faculty Senate meeting, Assistant Professor of Mathematics Ela Celikbas took up the microphone in defense of her field.

Only a few days prior, the math department had filed its appeal against the incoming reductions and the university was slow-dripping its decisions to the public.

The math appeal that the School of Mathematical and Data Sciences made was one that Celikbas was prepared to defend. However, what she wasn't prepared for was when WVU President Gordon Gee told her that the school made no appeal. What came next shocked her even more.

"Mathematics is essential to the sciences," Gee said. "English is essential to the humanities. Those are two fundamental beliefs that I have. But saying all that, I don't believe every aspect of math is essential."

Gee's comments fueled rampant confusion that was already taking place within the department. It also further damaged morale and trust in his leadership from several members of the math faculty. Many members of the School of Mathematical and Data Sciences had added their own input to the appeal during its drafting.

According to Celikbas, the department's proposal focused on modifying what currently existed, bringing it inline with the goals of the university's academic transformation, a plan to cut $45 million off the university's deficit. However, she said the options the university provided for the appeal were less than accommodating.

"Apparently there was a Qualtrics form sent to our director," Celikbas said. "I believe no one in the math department saw this form but we were told because of the way the form was designed, there were only limited options to choose from: are you recommending a new program or are you not appealing your program? They obviously considered maintaining the old program and expanding it to include data science and statistics as a new program."

One member of the School of Mathematical and Data Sciences faculty familiar with the appeal process asked to have their name withheld out of concern due to the cuts. They said the hope was that the university would be amenable to a plan that broadened and included more applied math in the graduate program.

Despite that modified approach, the university at the time argued this didn't count as appealing the termination of the graduate program.

"I say it's splitting hairs, which is why so many of the math faculty got mad when they said they didn't appeal," the SMDS member said.

However, Eberly College Assistant Dean for Graduate Studies Jessica Deshler clarified that much of the confusion over what was appealed and what wasn't is due to the fact that multiple recommendations were made for programs and faculty numbers, and that recommendations around the graduate programs created the most confusion.

"What we appealed was the discontinuation of doctoral level instruction in the mathematical sciences at WVU," Deshler wrote in an email. "The result was that we have approval to submit the intent to plan for this new Ph.D."

Deshler explained that the graduate programs, as they had existed, needed comprehensive review. Instead of appealing to keep the current degree open, she wrote that the School of Mathematical and Data Sciences instead proposed a new Ph.D program, going a step further past the approval to plan a new master's degree in applied math that the department already had. She added that the entire SMDS faculty saw and provided feedback on the appeal document before it was submitted.

Vice Provost and Chairman of the Appeal Committee, Paul Kreider, said that every department, not just math, appealed a reduction in faculty based on the university's enrollment declines. But not every department appealed discontinuing programs.

"What was explicitly stated in math was that they are appealing the reduction in faculty, and they are not appealing the discontinuation of the Ph. D. program," Kreider said. "But they are appealing the ability to continue offering graduate level instruction in math at a later date. That's what's in the notes. That's what's the appeal."

Although he said the School of Mathematical and Data Sciences didn't appeal the Ph.D program, they did make a case for creating a new Ph.D. in applied mathematics and data science. Since the current Ph.D. program wasn't technically appealed, it goes away.

The ensuing chaos resulting from the university's communications and the appeal process has left several in the School of Mathematical and Data Sciences with a high degree of skepticism toward the university's official position. Another member of SMDS's faculty expressed concern about the selection of the department's representative toward the appeal committee, which was Deshler. He too asked for his name to be withheld.

"To the dismay of many people, she said, 'Well, this is where we are, let's see how we're gonna do all these things they are asking for," the faculty member said. "And then people started asking, 'Wait a minute, there are people in here who want to fight this. We're fighting this well. What are we doing?' And she said, 'Well, my main mission is to save as many jobs as possible.'"

What didn't help was that Deshler, at the behest of the university, took over from the original faculty member who was organizing the appeal, Physics and Astronomy Professor Earl Scime.

"Jessica is a good person, and she's put basically in an impossible spot," he said. "As for my impression, her number one priority was to try and preserve as many of the faculty positions as she possibly could. And I think she did that in all sincerity, and worked hard at that."

Nonetheless, the university's actions have created a rift not just between the faculty and administration, but also their immediate leadership. The faculty member from earlier called the entire process a sham, one which the university didn't even care to be subtle about.

The drama around the appeal process also raises questions about what kind of utility math possesses in modern education. At the heart of the debate is theoretical math versus applied math. At a press conference on Sept. 15 where the board of governors approved the cuts to the university's programs, one of the administrators said that the university can't be everything to everyone, in response to a question of where in terms of importance the school sees theoretical and applied math.

It intends to focus on improving the results for undergraduate math success.

"I think it would be a far reaching assumption to think that because we're thinking of how we apply math that we're totally giving up the theoretical side," Kreider said. "I don't see it that way. But it's the application of what we learn and the theories we learn, is really where everything is going."

However, Gee instilled severe doubts within Celikbas and others at SMDS as to the level of understanding that the school's administration has when it comes to math after his dismissal regarding the theoretical aspects of the discipline at the Sept. 11 meeting.

"Gee responded to my comments saying that WVU does not need every aspect of mathematics and needs to focus on more modern math such as data science and national security, implying that theoretical math is not modern," Celikbas said. "I don't think he or anyone at the Provost's Office making these decisions knows how much math, including theoretical math, is needed in these areas."

Reach Esteban at efernandez@timeswv.com