Editor’s Note: This article contains reference to suicide. Information in this article, originally published April 1, 2025, has been updated to better reflect the meetings Stephen Porter was excluded from.

In November, Marshall Brain II, then director of NC State’s Engineering Entrepreneurs Program, died by suicide in his Centennial Campus office. Hours before he was found by University police, Brain sent an email to his colleagues entitled, “I want to help you understand.”

The 12-page email documents Brain’s perspective on the sequence of events that resulted in his resignation. Brain highlighted what he perceived as retaliation, structural manipulation and an unapproachable power hierarchy within the administration at NC State. 

Technician has confirmed the validity of the emails Brain linked through public records. Though holes remain as to the whole picture of Brain’s dismissal and conduct of administrators within his department, his allegations and sentiments were familiar to many throughout the University community. 

Parker Sexton, a 2024 computer engineering graduate, received mentorship from Brain as a recipient of the entrepreneuring-geared Miller Fellowship. Sexton was “shocked” to hear of Brain’s death, but said he had seen more than enough examples of things not being handled well within the department and at the University.

“I think conversations about Dr. Brain’s passing are more focused on the systemic issues,” Sexton said. “Those conversations have a lot less to do with, ‘It’s shocking and surprising to hear about his passing,’ but the things that he said in his email and sort of the reaction of the community and the allegations. I don’t hear a lot of shock and surprise surrounding those things … because [people have] similar experiences felt with obviously much less, lower stakes and less significant things.”

Kelly Mae Allen is a graduate student studying electrical and computer engineering who got her undergraduate degree from the same department. Allen said there is widespread disappointment within the department for the University’s response to Brain’s death. 

“It was an initial shock,” Allen said. “And now I just haven’t stopped thinking about it. It just bothers me more and more whenever I think about it. And then, how quickly they took down his web page. How quickly the administration just kind of hid everything, you know. It made the words in the email and all the weirdness around it even more weird.”

The University has not issued a public statement about Brain’s death. The College of Engineering posted an obituary for Brain on Dec. 17, almost a month after his death. 

University spokesperson Mick Kulikowski said in an email statement that NC State follows a postvention policy for campus deaths.

“NC State balances community needs and the risk of suicide contagion with transparent and sensitive communications to those closely impacted,” Kulikowski wrote. “You can find more information on the University’s response following the loss of someone in our community in our postvention plan that’s informed by national best practices and research, including guidance from the Higher Education Mental Health Alliance.”

Students and faculty across NC State’s campus report similar themes of retribution and top-down administrative culture, as well as an overarching fear to speak out against the administration. 

Top-down culture

Dror Baron, an associate professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering — the same department as Brain — said Brain’s narrative reflects a wider sentiment of cultural issues at the University. 

“It all rings a bell,” Baron said. “The whole method — how the administrators, they know everything best and nobody else understands anything. They represent the truth, and they won’t hesitate to punish a person if they feel like it. So basically, it’s a dictatorial atmosphere.”

Stakeholders throughout NC State say the University operates with a strong top-down direction, a structure that creates difficulties for faculty and staff seeking to voice feedback about University operations. 

Harald Ade, a distinguished professor in the Department of Physics, spearheaded an effort to send Chancellor Randy Woodson an open letter in 2023 expressing “deep concerns regarding the status of essential functions at NC State.”

“Clearly the processes that we have are fundamentally ill-suited to the size of a modern institution like NC State, and therefore we will fail the future of the institution unless we make radical changes,” Ade said. “I firmly believe that. We have a system that is not designed for a modern university.”

The letter, which amassed more than 240 signatures from faculty and staff, outlined issues with the administration of research financing, human resources and an “operational approach that values compliance” from faculty instead of collaboration. A corresponding letter from the Research Leadership Academy similarly called the “core problem as being cultural,” wherein a “culture of oversight” leaves faculty feeling their voices aren’t being heard.

One of the comments in an appendix to the letter providing specific examples of problems from anonymous faculty members read, “I’m over it and will be leaving the University. I just can’t do my job here anymore.”

Danesha Seth Carley, an associate professor of horticultural science and director of the NSF Center for Integrated Pest Management, was a signatory of the letter and was involved in the discussions that prompted it. Carley said she lost a million-dollar grant because of how the contract was handled at the University level, resulting in her having to lay off staff.

“I love NC State, love the people I work with, but the layers of bureaucracy make it really difficult sometimes to come in and feel like I’m making a difference,” Carley said. “And sometimes I get bogged down in the inefficiency within the system and the incompetence that I’m up against, and that keeps me from doing the best job I can do to begin advanced science, right? And so I can get frustrated, and I think a lot of people do because of that.” 

Sandra Yuter, a distinguished professor in the Marine, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Department and signatory of the letter, conducted another anonymous survey in the summer of 2024 to provide further feedback on the issues highlighted. Yuter said anonymous feedback is essential to getting a full range of input. 

“I have talked to a large number of staff, a large number of junior faculty, about it,” Yuter said. “They feel uncomfortable, basically, speaking up, particularly if they’re indicating there are problems. I think it varies a lot depending on individual managers and the organization you’re in, but based on what I’ve seen, that fear is not misplaced.”

In response to the letter, the chancellor created three task forces which prompted nine pilot projects to improve research infrastructure and be implemented in the fiscal year 2025. 

Yuter said she believes the efforts of the University to address the issues are sincere, but sees reluctance to engage with the broader community. Carley and Ade said they weren’t asked to provide input for any of the University’s efforts.

“I thought it was a predictable way for the University to handle it,” Carley said. “I can’t even tell you just a single action item that came out of any of the task forces, because that’s what we do. We form a task force, we talk about things and then change does not happen. So I have seen nothing positive come out of it.”

“To some extent, the open letter went into a bit of a black hole,” Ade said. “So it all stayed within sort of the paradigm of the prior operational approach, which is hierarchical. I can understand that — if it works — but it hasn’t worked, and that’s why the letter was necessary. The response to the letter has not stepped out of the current failing administrative paradigm.”

Ade said the power dynamic at NC State is asymmetric, and he would like to see an open investigation into Brain’s death from an outside consultant.

“The administration closes ranks and sits out the scandals, and that’s just the generic response, and it doesn’t impact the culture,” Ade said. “It doesn’t get discussed in the department, and these things just keep getting ignored, right? … We can’t have adult-to-adult conversation between the faculty and the administration. It’s always them talking down to us.”

Carley said she was saddened by the news of Brain’s death and the response from the University. 

“I understand the need for the University to sort of circle the wagons and protect itself,” Carley said. “But at the same time, when an institution fails to take faculty concerns — they just sort of sweep it under the rug as much as possible — I feel like it does harm individuals.”

Moreover, Carley sees parallels in Brain’s struggle to navigate through the proper channels of the system without a productive response. 

“As a faculty member, I understand his sort of despair, just from a very high level about trying to push against the system,” Carley said. “How people should feel safe to voice their concerns about ethical issues or accountability issues, and feel safe in that space. I voiced all my concerns. I continued to escalate to talk to my boss, to talk to my boss’s boss, to go up the food chain. I did everything the way you’re supposed to when you have concerns with inefficiency and incompetence in the system.”

Retaliation and retribution

Brain is not the first long-standing faculty member to accuse University administrators of retaliating against them. 

Stephen Porter, a professor in the College of Education, filed a lawsuit against NC State in 2021 alleging he had been retaliated against for protected speech criticizing DEI initiatives at the University. Porter said he faced punitive action that forced him into a program drained of resources and kept him from attending program meetings. 

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Porter in 2023. The majority opinion said Porter’s statements did not amount to protected speech, while the dissenting judge argued the case should go on as it was “plausible” the University retaliated against him. 

Porter said people are “terrified” to speak out against the University.

“Here we seem to have this culture amongst the administrators that either you are loyal or you’re disloyal,” Porter said. “You can’t have a principled criticism of something the administration does. You’re either loyal or disloyal, and if you stand up against the administrator, you immediately get put in the disloyal bucket.”

Porter also said he was not surprised by Brain’s situation. 

“I think people were shocked when that email came out, ‘How could this happen at NC State?’” Porter said. “I got news for you. It happens all the time. It gets swept under the rug.”

Stefan Franzen, a professor in the Department of Chemistry, took legal action against the University in 2016. Franzen alleged NC State retaliated against him for his role as a whistleblower in a near decade-long investigation over former colleagues who falsified data. 

NC State conducted an almost two-year investigation into Franzen for “research misconduct” that was prompted by the same colleagues Franzen had reported for falsification years earlier. The University investigation ended because of “insufficient evidence” and concluded that the allegations against Franzen were likely retaliatory in nature.

Franzen’s court filings posit he had suffered damages to his reputation and research during this period, where he says he was “isolated” by the University and blocked from receiving records relevant to the investigation. NC State and Franzen settled in mediation in 2017.

Franzen said he faced rumor-mongering and criticism from within his department and from the administration throughout his whistleblower process. “They were more concerned with how to keep me quiet than actually resolving the issue,” Franzen said. 

Franzen was the subject of additional investigations in the years prior; none of which found him responsible for wrongdoing. 

“They decided a long time ago, I was just a rotten egg in the batch,” Franzen said. “And that they would try to, in essence, earlier, very actively try to get me to leave, right? I mean, do things like, investigate me [multiple] times. Okay, that’s a pretty clear message, right? When all of it was obviously retaliatory, right?”

Franzen is also situated in Dabney Hall, a building whose occupied renovation has drawn criticism from faculty in the Department of Chemistry. 

“And this is, unfortunately, just the way that our university has been run for so long,” Franzen said. “What they’re describing is to a tee what I experienced. It’s complete indifference to reality, complete indifference to the mission of the University … and complete disrespect for faculty.”

If you or someone you know is having difficulty processing grief or having a mental health emergency, the Counseling Center can be reached 24 hours a day at 919-515-2423. If you are in a crisis situation and need immediate help, please call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 988. In the case of a life-threatening emergency, call 911.

The Counseling Center’s website offers free online screenings, a plethora of self-help resources regarding mental health and wellness concerns and a comprehensive list of campus services available for those who need guidance. To view an exhaustive list, visit https://wellness.ncsu.edu/resources/.

If you’re seeking professional counseling or other mental health services on campus, visit the Counseling Center’s Getting Started page at https://counseling.dasa.ncsu.edu/get-started/make-an-appointment/ to complete paperwork, set up an appointment and more.