Yeah, I would think it probably is the standard and happens all the time that way. That said, I don't think it's reasonable to judge and punish individuals with individual circumstances based upon what people "usually" do. In this case, maybe you still do to preserve the reputation of The University, but you graciously negotiate the exit terms and you certainly don't claim to be telepathic and know "what really happened" while doing so in order to save face and be able to claim it was done for substantiated cause, when it wasn't. If you want to be classy and terminate to save The University embarrassment, you shouldn't play underhanded games to save a few bucks while besmirching the individual you are exiting. Plus, calling him a liar and a wife abuser, as that quote by The University basically does, now forces Beard to try and sue them to clear his name. They left him no dignified out and if he wants to work again, he must try and clear his name and prove he was unjustly terminated.
Speaking of which, I'm struggling with the immunity protection issue. These public schools sign contracts promising to perform in certain ways and obliging themselves. I can see an understandable intent for negligence protection in the statute and I can see value in not having to defend thousands of lawsuits, but protection from consequences for one's own willful misconduct does not seem like a reasonable standard.