Black Professor’s Suit Says Racial Bias Cost Him His Job

Three years ago, the chairman of the communication arts department at Azusa Pacific University predicted in a written evaluation that Prof. Robert Foreman would be “recognized as an outstanding teacher soon.”

Foreman said he never received another evaluation from the department chairman. But subsequent student evaluations also were highly favorable, he said, and he was enthusiastic as he began this school year--his third at the university.

“I felt after two years that I understood the school, understood the student body, our department and our program better,” Foreman said in an interview. “This was the year that I felt I was going to make an even greater contribution to the institution.”

Only Full-Time Black

But a few months ago, Foreman, the only full-time black professor at Azusa Pacific, learned that this will be his last year at the university. His one-year contract has not been renewed because of what university officials said was Foreman’s inability to teach upper division courses and student complaints regarding his classroom conduct.

Now Foreman has filed a civil lawsuit in Pomona Superior Court against the private Christian university, two of its administrators and the department chairman. The suit charges racial harassment, retaliation and wrongful discharge based on race. It seeks unspecified monetary damages as well as Foreman’s reinstatement to his teaching post.

University officials, who said they want to avoid trying the case in the newspapers, said racial discrimination was not a factor in their decision not renew Foreman’s contract. A trial date will be set next month.

The case, in which Foreman has gained the support of local branches of both the Urban League and the National Assn. for the Advancement of Colored People, has created controversy on the 2,000-student campus. Longtime faculty member Lorin Soderwall, upset over the university’s treatment of Foreman, persuaded his wife, attorney Molly MacLeod, to represent Foreman.

“There’s a lot of anger in our department and in the school as a whole,” said Soderwall, a professor for 21 years in the department of communication arts. “I’m very uneasy because the school tends to be irrational when someone challenges its authority. Already people aren’t talking to me. I’ll probably be ostracized because of this.”

Letters of Support

Foreman said he is perplexed by the whole matter. His last day of teaching--May 31--will come after three years of overwhelmingly positive student evaluations that rank him in the top 5% of the 100-member full-time faculty. In addition, letters of support written by colleagues, which were provided to The Times by MacLeod, describe Foreman as an excellent instructor with a promising future at the university.

“I’ve never encountered any racial problems in my previous jobs in Iowa and Ohio,” said Foreman, 29. “It was the last thing I expected when coming to a melting pot like Southern California.”

Foreman said he learned the reasons for the university’s action last week, only after a university official showed The Times a letter he plans to send to Foreman. The letter gives eight reasons for Foreman’s dismissal, including inconsistent classroom behavior, emotional outbursts directed at students and hostile reaction to the evaluation of his work.

The statement cites no specific incidents to support the allegations. University officials declined to elaborate, except to say that the letter will form the basis for their response to Foreman’s lawsuit. That response must be filed with the court by May 5.

Student Problems Cited

“All we can say publicly is that when the facts are known it will be very clear that this university does not discriminate and has not discriminated against Mr. Foreman,” said Hank Bode, the university’s vice president and treasurer. “Our decision to not renew Mr. Foreman’s one-year contract was simply a case of continuing problems students were having with him.”

In his lawsuit, Foreman alleges that James Hedges, the communication arts department chairman who recommended dismissal, made racially derisive remarks from the outset of Foreman’s employment in the fall of 1982. At a department meeting just before the 1982 school year, the suit alleges, Hedges introduced Foreman to his new colleagues as the university’s “token black.”

A few weeks later, according to the lawsuit, Hedges suggested that Foreman could supply “the watermelon” as part of the refreshments for a departmental function.

“The remarks really disturbed me,” said Soderwall, who overheard both comments. “It singled Bob out, and it was demeaning.”

‘Very Rational Answer’

Hedges’ secretary referred all questions on the case to Bode. Bode said he had discussed the remarks with Hedges and that the department chairman had “a very, very rational answer for the remarks. Unfortunately, I can’t give you that answer.”

At the end of Foreman’s first semester, Hedges wrote a formal evaluation generally praising the new teacher as “committed” and “open to growth.” That evaluation, along with follow-up reports and student evaulations, were obtained from MacLeod.

When Foreman objected to parts of Hedges’ evaluation that were critical, the department chairman acknowledged in a memo that he had overstated his concerns.

“I must agree there is basis for revision of the ‘official’ report,” Hedges stated in a February, 1982, memo. “My intention was all positive. The statements were unduly occupied with qualified approval.”

In a revised evaluation, Hedges said Foreman was a teacher who brought “enthusiasm and excitement to his subject matter. . . . I expect him to be recognized as an outstanding teacher soon. Student evaluations support that prediction.”

Violation of Policy

Foreman said--and Bode confirmed--that Foreman never received a subsequent evaluation from Hedges, a violation of university policy that requires yearly faculty evaluations. Copies of evaluations from students in 1983 and 1984 generally commend him as an effective communicator with a command of the subject matter in both lower and upper division communications courses, as well as in graduate-level courses.

“His ratings have been excellent,” said Frank Donnelly, chairman of the university’s psychology department, who helped develop and measure the rating scale used by Azusa students to rank the faculty members. “Robert rated better than 95% of the faculty.”

Foreman said the first indication that some students had objected to his classroom manner came in a memo last Sept. 20 from Hedges that criticized Foreman for overreacting in two separate instances to students’ misbehavior.

“Continued instances of temper outbursts or other such excessive responses to students would make it impossible for you to continue your work here effectively and thus would constitute basis for removal from your teaching assignment,” Hedges wrote.

Challenge to Authority

Foreman said Hedges exaggerated the incidents and that they amounted to nothing more than him trying to exert control over students during the first few weeks of the new school year, a time when some students challenge a teacher’s authority.

“All I did was ask that two students who were disrupting the class meet with me after school,” Foreman said. “I read them the section of the syllabus that describes appropriate classroom conduct and then dismissed them.”

Foreman said he feared the memo would be used as a pretext to fire him. He said he met with Hedges and asked that the memo be expunged from his personnel file because it overstated the student complaints. Foreman said Hedges refused. Foreman contacted his attorney, MacLeod, who recommended that he exhaust his faculty grievance procedures before filing a complaint with the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing.

MacLeod said a university committee made up of faculty members and department chairmen supported Hedges’ decision to include the memo in Foreman’s personnel file.

Veiled Threat in Letter

In November, as Foreman was preparing to file a complaint with the fair employment agency, he said his attorney received a letter from the university’s attorney requesting that Foreman detail his side of the story. The letter concluded with what Foreman says was a veiled threat to fire him if he pursued the matter with the state agency.

“You must realize that your client’s usefulness as a teacher would be curtailed if not destroyed by publicity and litigation in this matter,” Virgil J. Butler, the university’s attorney, wrote to MacLeod.

On Nov. 7, Foreman filed a complaint with the state, alleging harassment because of race. Two months later, on Jan. 29, he said he received a letter from Don Grant, vice president and dean of the university, telling him that his contract would not be renewed. Foreman’s lawsuit has superseded the complaint to the state.

“The retaliation against my client is made clear by the fact that when he did complain to the DFEH, he was fired,” MacLeod said. “This is a clear case of racial discrimination.”