This petition is for alumni and friends of MVNU and includes requests to the Board of Trustees regarding recent events surrounding MVNU personnel and President Castleman.

Seven alumni contributed to this petition. Rather than state a single author, we hope that those who sign the petition will represent a shared and unified voice. 

Dear Board Members,

It is with regret that we write to you that the situation at MVNU has negatively impacted the faith of alumni in our alma mater. The recent actions of the President and the Board of Trustees (BOT) have left us shocked and disheartened. We are deeply concerned by the quantity of quality individuals who have been dismissed from the university since the president's appointment, as well as the manner in which this has occurred. Many of those individuals were not just valuable employees, but positive influences and Christian mentors in our lives and the lives of current students. Please, let us share our thoughts on how we can improve the situation.

Timeline of recent events

• On January 19, it was announced to campus that Dr. Colleen Derr would be taking a newly created position, which is second to the president. 
• On January 20, the entire office of Academic Affairs, including the Chief Academic Officer, as well as the Chief Financial Officer resigned or signaled their intent to resign. The BOT has not addressed why this occurred. But the optics make it appear as if those resignations are linked to Dr. Derr’s appointment and to faculty/staff cuts.
• On January 28, 43 of the 69 faculty present at faculty assembly, voted no confidence in Dr. Castleman (Knox Pages, 2025). 
• On January 31, BOT held a meeting on campus, related to multiple staff members being laid off and several non-renewals of faculty contracts.

To our knowledge, the board has not listened to or properly addressed the concerns raised by faculty in their no confidence vote; instead BOT has summarily dismissed them as the actions of "some individuals" and “orchestrated by certain faculty members who believed their voices were not being heard” (MVNU Board of Trustees, 2025). Such dismissal of the faculty voice and concerns is heartbreaking.

Alumni have the perception that there are significant leadership problems at MVNU which are negatively compromising the operations and the work environment at the university. These heightened events are only one instance in a pattern that stretches back over the past 17 months. During that time, there have been multiple complaints and concerns about the president.

Concerns regarding the multiple complaints against Dr. Castleman

In the BOT’s published statement on Feb. 5, 2025, it was claimed that a third party had investigated concerns related to Dr. Castleman. Following that investigation and report, “The Board determined the complaints of unlawful and unethical activity on behalf of the President were unsubstantiated” (MVNU Board of Trustees, 2025). It is concerning that that determination was made by the BOT rather than the investigating third party.  It was also stated in that same release that there were “problems of perception” related to the president (ibid, 2025). It is not clear what is meant by that.

In support of full transparency, we urge the BOT to release a summary of the third party’s findings. We also request clarification as to which of the multiple grievances filed were investigated by a third party. The published statement makes it appear that all received grievances had been investigated by an external party. Is this correct? We ask the BOT to clarify the steps they have taken to meaningfully address the apparent pattern of behavior by the president that has resulted in so many complaints. 

Further, we would like to know how the specific concerns which faculty raised in their no confidence vote will be addressed. As a reminder, "In their complaint against President Castleman, the faculty cited a hostile work environment, issues with communication, a minimalization of the voice of academics, infringements on academic freedom, and unprofessional/unethical behaviors" (Knox Pages, 2025). These concerns extend beyond just budgetary considerations. Yet, budgetary considerations were the main issue addressed in the Board’s statement (MVNU Board of Trustees, 2025). This neglects and minimizes faculty’s stated concerns. 

Concerns about the recent layoff process

We understand that difficult financial decisions must be made. Our concern is not that cuts are happening, but rather, that they are happening without transparent or defined processes or criteria. It is especially startling that a new position was created at the university and announced to campus during the same week as these cuts–a position which is second to the president and, one would assume, paid at an elevated rate.

Our understanding of the process for the cuts is as follows:

• The Academic Leadership Team (ALT) developed parameters for the cuts.
• Faculty were given an opportunity to provide feedback to those parameters.
• After reviewing faculty feedback, the parameters were adjusted by ALT. The adjusted parameters and a timeline were given to the President’s Cabinet by ALT.
• The parameters and timeline were approved by the President’s Cabinet.
• The majority of faculty positions that were then cut by the president do not align with the approved parameters.

We are concerned that by the President’s Cabinet ignoring these parameters, which they had previously approved, the faculty's role in shared governance has been undermined (MVNU Faculty Handbook, pg. 42). 

As part of a rationale for budget cuts, the BOT states in their release that “MVNU had found itself drifting away from the principles of the Nazarene Church” (MVNU Board of Trustees, 2025). This makes it sound as if certain faculty contracts were not renewed because they did not align with Nazarene principles. However, if this is true, it seems that faculty were not given clarity on which principles they violated or an opportunity to affirm their commitment to those principles. If personnel cuts do not match either the parameters created by ALT and approved by the Cabinet or specifically stated guidelines of the university, why are the cuts occurring?

We are concerned that some of the faculty are being dismissed in retaliation for raising complaints or expressing views found unsatisfactory by the President or the Board. Retaliation for either reason is not consistent with the values for academic freedom expressed in the Faculty Handbook (pg. 50), MVNU’s Whistleblower Policy (2022), or Criteria and Assumed Practices of the Higher Learning Commission, MVNU’s accrediting body (HLC Assumed Practices, A.4, 2023). We have this concern because of the lack of involvement in identifying some of these faculty for dismissal by college deans or administrators and staff in the Office of Academic Affairs and because of the seniority, high positions (two chairs and one dean), and recognized quality of the faculty who were dismissed. 

Implications

Unless the items stated previously are addressed, there could be implications for MVNU’s accreditation. Some of these criteria from the Higher Learning Commission which may apply are as follows: it is expected that the university will operate in a way where the mission is articulated (1.1.A), actions are fair and ethical (2.2.A), there is transparency to the public (2.2.B), academic freedom is valued (2.2.D), and there is collaborative decision making and shared governance (5.5.A) (HLC Accreditation, 2020). 

We want MVNU to be an institution that we can recommend to prospective students and that we can trust with our potential donations. At this time, it is difficult to do either.

Here are our requests:

• That the parameters used to determine which faculty and staff were cut be released. If the administration cannot specify why certain individuals fit the parameters and others did not, we ask that the restructuring be paused until a more robust process is developed with faculty input.
• That the essential Nazarene principles which the board is attempting to return to be officially stated, and that faculty and staff are given an opportunity to express their assent to those values before being summarily dismissed.
• That a summary written by the third party (and not the Board) of the findings of their investigation into the president's actions be released.

MVNU is not a place. It is a people, united by a mission: to provide a Christian education, and to change the world with the love of Christ. We simply request that the board consider extending that love to its employees.

Sincerely,

Alumni and Friends of MVNU

References

HLC Accreditation Criteria (2020). Retrieved from https://www.hlcommission.org/accreditation/policies/criteria/2020-criteria/ 

HLC Assumed Practices (2023). Retrieved from https://www.hlcommission.org/accreditation/policies/assumed-practices/2023-assumed-practices/ 

Knox Pages (Jan. 30, 2025). Retrieved from https://www.knoxpages.com/2025/01/30/mvnu-faculty-cast-vote-of-no-confidence-in-president-carson-castleman/ 

MVNU Board of Trustees (Feb. 5, 2025). Retrieved from https://mvnu.edu/mvnu-board-establishes-plan-for-better-communication-and-reconciliation/ 

MVNU Faculty Handbook (2023). Retrieved from https://mvnu.edu/employment-opportunities/hr-documents/ 

MVNU Whistleblower Policy (2022). Retrieved from https://mvnu.edu/content/uploads/2023/08/whistleblower.pdf