An open letter to KCOM alumni and friends from a group of former KCOM clinical faculty
Most alumni are unaware of many significant events that have occurred at KCOM since last spring. Sanitized and abbreviated versions of various issues have been released by KCOM. However, we believe it is our duty, as fellow alumni and former faculty, to share our perspective of the events of the past year so others may understand why we believe KCOM is now in crisis. We convey this message with the highest respect for our college, alumni, and profession.
REPLACEMENT OF DEAN ROSS BY MICHAEL KUCHERA, D.O.
In 1997, the board of trustee’s appointed Dr. James McGovern, president of KCOM. Prior to his arrival at Kirksville he had little, if any, prior experience with osteopathic medicine. Shortly after his arrival, he organized a “Convocation for a New Century” in St. Louis. In our opinion, goals the college derived from this meeting appeared to be determined by the administration, rather than being derived from needs and concerns of physicians and alumni. Subsequent actions taken by his administration began to raise serious concerns from faculty and students.
The first significant event was the removal of the previous dean, Syd Ross, D.O., who had elevated the college to a significant level in published national rankings. He was dismissed under questionable circumstances that appeared not to be in the best interests of the college. Dr. Mike Kuchera was chosen as the new dean after a surprisingly cursory search. Dr. Kuchera had little clinical faculty support outside the OMT department. At the time of his appointment to the dean’s position, he was the interim dean. Many concerns were raised among the clinical faculty as to Dr. Kuchera’s qualifications, among them a lack of residency training and clinical experience limited to manipulation. His credentials also ran contrary to the AOA’s requirements for a chief academic officer of an osteopathic college.
With support of the President, the new dean began to revise the college’s curriculum to increase manipulative medicine (OMT) hours taught in the first two years at KCOM, by now the single largest component of the curriculum. Many of these hours contained redundant material. This displacement of teaching hours in the first two years at KCOM caused a need to reduce clinical medicine teaching at the college. This caused further unrest among many faculty as to where the inexperienced dean was guiding the college’s program. Projects started at this time such as the “Healer Within” exhibit and a master’s degree program diverted limited human resources and scarce funds away from the primary mission of KCOM - training osteopathic physicians! The masters program started with a projected deficit of greater than $1,000,000 and the exhibit cost approximately $700,000. Concerns of the clinical faculty how these actions would affect the quality and finances of the college did not appear to bother Dr. Kuchera.
CLINICAL FACULTY ATTEMPTS TO APPROACH THE ADMINISTRATION AND BOARD
After a long series of meetings and conversations, it became apparent that clinical faculty concerns were neither taken seriously nor given any regard by the new administration. Starting in October 1999, the clinical faculty representative, Dr. Jack Bragg, began to make many of these issues known to the board of trustees. Similar to our reception at the college, most board member’s were indifferent, although a few D.O’s on the board seemed sympathetic to our concerns.
Shortly thereafter in the spring of 2000, the administration initiated policies that further concerned the clinical faculty. Specifically, the new administration began an initiative to gain faculty support for an increase in class sizes. To support their request to the AOA, the administration falsely declared this had the support of the clinical faculty. In fact, due to limited resources available to the college and decreasing post-graduate programs available for our graduates, many clinical faculty members felt such a move by the college would be highly irresponsible! A majority of physicians were strongly against the proposal and were incensed at this false misrepresentation of their true position.
During this time, the new administration also made unfair faculty appointments regarding academic rank. The dean supported placement of various individuals into administrative/faculty positions with little or no regard, in our opinion, to adequate credentials, prior service to the college, or to academic rank. This was done without regard to existing faculty who had served the college for many years. Significantly, this was also made over the recommendations of the executive committee of the faculty that proposes academic promotions. Additionally, the dean also actively pursued preferential treatment of students who suffered from academic failure or behavioral problems over the objections and recommendations of the promotion board. While these activities were occurring, administration officials began to pressure the clinical faculty representative to alter his board report to describe the administration in a better light. The clinical faculty representative, Dr. Jack Bragg, refused.