In Defense of My Dean

I don’t write this lightly. I am writing because silence, in this case, would be a form of complicity, and because when institutions act without clarity, rumor rushes in to fill the vacuum. That serves no one. Not the campus. Not the students. Certainly not the people who were harmed by this process.

Dr. MaryTheresa Seig has served as a dean at Bemidji State University since 2020. She assumed that role at the exact moment higher education was being thrown into chaos: COVID, campus closures, social unrest, enrollment shocks, budget contractions, and a complete rethinking of how universities function in a post-pandemic world. She was not a passive observer in that process. She was a critical stakeholder in the total reorganization of the university that followed the post-COVID enrollment decline.

People may have had different experiences with different administrators over the years. I can only speak to mine. I say this without hesitation: MaryTheresa was the best supervisor I have ever had. She was responsive. She was supportive. She was engaged deeply in my work and in the work of the campus. She didn’t manage from a distance. She showed up. Literally.

During staffing crises in the School of Music, when we were stretched thin and still trying to provide meaningful artistic experiences for students, MaryTheresa didn’t send encouragement emails and then disappear. She brought her family. They ran box office. They ushered. They helped support students in their journey toward artistic excellence. That is servant leadership. It is rare to see leaders willing to climb down into the trenches and help dig. It is rarer still to see them do it without fanfare, without credit-seeking, and without complaint. That kind of leadership deserves recognition and respect, not erasure.

Instead, MaryTheresa was removed from her position on the first day back of the Spring semester. No cause was given. No explanation was offered, to her, or to the campus. In the days that followed, as confusion spread, vague justifications were floated. None were clear. None were honest. None explained why two deans, both still employed, both still on payroll, were abruptly removed from their roles without warning. The vacuum of information became so severe that the Provost had to address an early rumor that the deans had been “removed by ICE.”

That is not a joke. That is what happens when large, destabilizing decisions are made without transparency. Let me be very clear about one thing, because clarity matters here: the deans were removed from their at-will administrative positions without cause. Had they been removed with cause, they would not be eligible for reassignment. The fact that reassignment is being sought is itself evidence of that reality. And that is where this situation becomes deeply offensive.

MaryTheresa—and Dean Bell—are now effectively hostages to the process. They are dependent on their ability to remain silent in order to maintain their reassignment and continued employment. The very structure of this outcome obfuscates truth, discourages accountability, and encourages quiet compliance over integrity. This is not how a healthy institution behaves.

When leadership decisions are made unilaterally, without explanation, and without regard for the human cost, the result is chaos, not stability. Rumors replace facts. Mistrust replaces confidence. People begin to wonder who is safe, who is next, and whether professionalism is still a value the institution intends to uphold. This is why I am compelled to speak.

In higher education (and everywhere) people deserve to work in a safe, respectful, professional environment. They deserve transparency when decisions impact their lives and reputations. They deserve leadership that understands that dignity is not a luxury, it is a baseline obligation.

The deans did not deserve this process. The campus did not deserve the confusion that followed. The students certainly did not benefit from the chaos created by a decision that was neither explained nor contextualized.

This post is not an act of defiance. It is an act of defense, of a colleague, of decency, and of the principle that how we treat people matters, especially when power is involved.

Silence would have been easier.

But silence, here, would have been wrong.