Students, staff, faculty and the administration at our University understand the importance of maintaining justice on campus before attempting to do so in the world. We maintain the Campus Climate Log, recycle and exhibit environmental consciousness, express concern over our staff’s salaries and working conditions, keep the student body knowledgeable and active in both local and worldwide issues, and even have our student residential staff go through a social justice curriculum.

We do all of these things with the understanding that if we cannot achieve justice within our own community there is no possibility for realizing it across the globe. We keep watch and correct our own prejudices, shortcomings and failures in the hope that we students will export this attitude to the world upon graduation—and in setting an example, give hope for change by demonstrating that it is possible for an institution and community to improve.

We students thus feel that it is our duty to bring to light the case of Professor Marcello Simonetta. Professor Simonetta has been teaching here for seven years. He has published prodigiously, including two books—twice the Argus has covered his achievements (“Professors garner international publicity,” Feb. 27, 2004, Volume CXXXIX, Number 32, and “Simonetta solves centuries old Medici mystery,” March 26, 2004, Volume CXXXIX, Number 34). We enjoy his classes for the quality of his teaching and his ability to engage complex topics in a detailed yet fun way. We have found him approachable and helpful as both a professor and an advisor. He is also the only native speaker of Italian in the Italian Studies department. Yet despite being the kind of professor the University should be trying to keep, Professor Simonetta was not only turned down for tenure, but the way in which it was done can only leave one concerned about the administration’s ethics.

Professor Simonetta passed all stages of the tenure process with a majority of votes. After the first stage of voting—even though he was abroad running the Eastern College Consortium (ECCO) program in Bologna—he returned to the University to defend his case when requested. Afterwards the majority of the votes were again in his favor. Interestingly, for reasons unknown, this did not settle his case.

Sometime late spring, the professor received a phone call from the vice president of Academic Affairs regarding rumors that his last book had not been written by him. The professor was shocked by this absurd and groundless accusation, but nonetheless defended himself against it. This phone call, however, highlights the obscure, irrelevant and baseless factors that were allowed to impact Professor Simonetta’s case—factors that took advantage of the fact that Professor Simonetta was abroad and unable to defend himself from attempts to sully his reputation.

Yet the final injustice came with a letter from the president, who with two sentences informed the professor that he would not recommend his promotion to the trustees—effectively ruling against his tenure. The professor asked to meet with the president—not even to be given a chance to argue his case, but simply to find out why the president had come to his decision. His request was refused.

We feel that Professor Simonetta deserves tenure and request that his case be reviewed. Though it would not correct the unfair and irresponsible way in which the professor’s case was handled, we expect at the very least that the professor be given the fair, just and honest treatment that he has earned. We ask the president, the vice president and the faculty involved in his case to review their decisions and to explain and justify them to both the professor and the community.

Sincerely,

David Wen Riccardi-Zhu