An AAUP faculty meeting was
held on Thursday, April 11, 2013 and attended by 80 faculty. The following document provides a summary of
the comments, organized by topic area.
The name of each speaker was not recorded so that all could speak
freely.
The meeting began at 4:25 pm
with opening remarks on the AAUP, a summary of conversations held between the
President of our AAUP chapter and departments/programs, and a statement of the
purpose of this meeting. The focus of
this meeting was university governance. The
following bulleted items summarize the major points that were raised. They do not necessarily represent the
perspectives of AAUP.
Elected committee
power. Elected governance committees
lack real power. Committees function in
an advisory role rather than in a decision-making role. Advice that is asked for is not taken
seriously. This is discouraging and
disenfranchising. The activities of
various committees need to be better coordinated.
Appointed task
forces. The proliferation of appointed
task forces undermines our committee structure.
Faculty
meetings. The structure of the monthly
faculty meetings is dominated by the administration.
Faculty
disengagement from university governance.
Faculty have become less involved in university governance for a variety
of reasons—concerns towards the effectiveness of committees, inadequate amount
of time, and prioritization of other interests and responsibilities.
Recollections
from the past. Faculty had a stronger
voice and greater power in the past.
This has gradually eroded for a variety of reasons.
Faculty
time. There is insufficient time to
manage an increasing workload. This
negatively impacts involvement in governance.
A four-course load is needed.
Relationship with
the administration. The administration
was viewed as too top-down. Faculty feel
managed and not listened to.
Provost and Dean
of the Faculty. As Colgate has become
more complex, it is questionable whether a singular Provost and Dean of the
faculty is appropriate. The Provost
should represent the President’s interests.
The Dean of the Faculty should represent the interests of the
faculty. It is difficult for a single
individual to represent both interests.
The hiring of external Deans may decrease representation of faculty
viewpoints.
Time in office
for the President and Dean of the Faculty.
It was noted that both are fairly new to their positions. We owe them some trust and time to see how
matters develop. We should sit with them
and work things out in constructive ways.
Board of
Trustees. Concerns were raised towards
the composition of the Board, the interests that they represent, and their
involvement in matters of the faculty (e.g., the curriculum). Our goals are not consistent with the
business model of the Board of Trustees.
The Board does not need to manage the curriculum of an institution.
Departmental and
institutional hierarchies. There is an
increased level of surveillance in the work that faculty do, especially junior
faculty. There is an application of
rules that interfere with effective mentoring between junior and senior
faculty. There is a need to practice
trust among ourselves as colleagues.
Action. Faculty were interested in concrete steps
that could be taken by the AAUP. How
might faculty claim a particular power?
The AAUP should forge constructive strategies. Perhaps a direct line with the Board of
Trustees could be developed. We need to
start with collective items, not items that could be perceived as to our own
narrow benefit (e.g., a four-course load).
We must be stakeholders in the institution.
Assertion of
faculty voice. Faculty are not using our
full voice. We need to better assert
what is ours. Nothing should be off the
table for the faculty. Hiring and the
faculty are the domain of the faculty.
We need not change our governance structure, but we need to assert
ourselves and make our committee structure more vibrant.
Faculty
power. It was noted that faculty are in
positions of power across campus (e.g., department chairs, division directors,
and associate deans). We need to make
better use of our power. We are not
fully utilizing our Full Professors. We
need to support our faculty administrators, even when they make a difficult and
unpopular decision.
Faculty Affairs
Committee. The role of the FAC in
setting faculty meeting agenda and in carrying out its various functions was
discussed. Perhaps the FAC is too small
to carry out all of its functions.
Tone. The tone of our discussions and AAUP
communications is important. Our tone
need not signify opposition to the administration. There may be value in reaching out and
working with the administration.
Kindness in tone, but firmness is needed.
Resurrection of
Colgate’s chapter of the AAUP. The
revitalization of our chapter of the AAUP is appreciated. The AAUP may provide a needed mechanism for
identifying key issues and channeling our energy.
Unity. We must not divide ourselves from one
another.
The meeting concluded at 5:45
pm.
-- Prepared by Rick Geier,
Secretary of the Colgate University Chapter of the AAUP
1 comment:
We'd like to create a culture of discourse via these comments, so please feel free to share your opinions (they can be anonymous).
Post a Comment