Word: vigier
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...department; they made the decisions on hiring and firing, on curriculum and on extracurricular work during an entire academic generation. It is not surprising that the Planning Department changed little during that generation: Nash, a former student of Isaacs, was brought into the department while Isaacs was chairman; Vigier was similarly recruited. All three upheld, and still prefer, a traditional course of study aimed at training planners for government, for large land developments, and to a lesser degree, for the private sector...
Kilbridge's first error, which resulted in Vigier's temporary resignation in 1969 as chairman of the Planning Department, was perhaps an unconscious one. But by working behind the backs of Isaacs, Nash and Vigier to gain control of the department--through meetings and deals with students. Overseers, other faculty and Pusey himself--Kilbridge skirted the guidelines of academic due process. By suggesting to a student-faculty council ways of "getting rid of" he infringed on academic freedom and slandered three colleagues. By first complimenting Hartman on his work as director of the UFS and then turning...
Hartman, who founded the Urban Field Service (UFS) in 1968, was eased out in 1970 by Isaacs, Nash and Vigier primarily because his staunch support of advocacy planning and his political militance against Harvard's housing policies in Cambridge ran counter to their view of what a planner's role in society should be. In recommending that Hartman's contract not be renewed, Nash, who was the department chairman at the time, wrote that "(Hartman's) method of teaching conveys a sense of political strategy (that goes past) the substance of city and regional planning. (His) loyalties to the School...
...must be recognized that the demise of the Planning Department within its field is largely attributable to Isaacs, Nash and Vigier. They were once tagged in a student petition as an "entrenched oligarchy," and many of their colleagues agree that their obstinance during the past 15 years has downgraded the department they controlled. But it is these same three professors who have brought formal grievance proceedings against Kilbridge. By studying their grievances, it becomes obvious that they have suffered considerable injustices themselves during the last two years, and that Kilbridge has done as much, or more, harm to the School...
...came from the Business School where he was professor of Urban Systems, to try to put the School back together. It is hard to know what mandate he received from President Pusey. It might have included the ouster of Hartman, and the subsequent ouster of Isaacs, Nash and Vigier. But regardless of mandates, Kilbridge displayed, during his first year as dean, an incredible ineptness in handling the affairs of the School in general and the Planning Department in particular. Since his arrival, the School's troubles have steadily increased; his actions have given rise to the grievances now before...