View from the Rules Committee

This semester, I was elected to the Rules Committee of the Faculty Senate and have been serving now for a few weeks. Originally, I had planned to summarize the meetings in my blog, as I've often done for other things. But the meetings are long and complicated -- and it's hard to summarize discussions concisely without running the risk of misquoting people, or putting words in their mouth. But I am starting to gain some insight into what the Faculty Senate can do.

Some early experiences I had with the Senate showed me its limitations. A good example was the effort to get the campus to implement a "Teaching, Learning, Technology Roundtable" (TLTR) as a mechanism for stakeholders to have input into technology decisions. When I arrived on the campus, many people complained that technology decisions seemed to be made in some kind of smoke-filled back room and then simply imposed on the students and faculty. (This is perhaps an exaggeration, but with an element of truth: there was little transparency.) We proposed the TLTR model in the Faculty Senate University Computing and Electronic Communications Committee and passed a resolution. The motion came before the Senate and was approved. The administration gave an administrator a new title, Vice Chancellor for Instructional Technology. He held private luncheons for administrators for a year and a half, and then retired. And that was the end of it. One faculty member, who discovered that the "Committee" discussing instructional technology had no (zero) faculty, kicked up a fuss, and got himself invited. But it was (I thought) a lesson in the lack of power of the Senate to make something happen. (And we're still talking about the same problem -- I hope to raise it with the Chancellor again on Tuesday). But I've learned something about what the Senate can and can't do.

The Senate can't really make things happen. What it *can* do is raise questions. The Faculty Senate can be the conscience for the campus: identifying problems and raising concerns. If you try to push it to get out in front and start picking the solutions, you're going to be frustrated.

We've had some good, fruitful discussions. There's a new "Champion Center" going in next to the Mullins Center. A Faculty Senate committee looked at the siting and made some suggestions about ways that the new development could address existing problems in that area: lack of public bathrooms, an accessible path from the road to the playing fields, etc.

In some areas, the administration has refused to discuss issues. When the idea of reconsidering the change to FBS Football was raised, the Chancellor indicated in no uncertain terms that the topic was not open to discussion. When the topic was raised that the funds saved by switching from 3 to 4 credits had been diverted from supporting the Integrative Experience (IE), the Provost pushed back angrily saying that the monies had been provided to the Deans and that Departments needed to address themselves to their college for support. This is a particular issue in Biology (and other large departments) for which the Integrative Experience is, essentially, an unfunded mandate and has produced solutions that represent substantial compromises to the vision that the IE initially represented.

This evening, I took Alisa for dinner at Hillside with the Chancellor and the Rules Committee. There was a lot of good conversation about many topics. I got a chance to make a pitch for the excellent education in the Biology Department, to talk about town-gown relations, and even to say something about my Esperanto activity (he brought it up, because I had given him a copy of Premitaj Floroj at the first meeting after I joined the Rules Committee).

The Chancellor has been thinking about town-gown and has good ideas. One concern that I've had is that much of the town-gown relationship happens through a small handful of people: the chair of the select board, the two police chiefs, and a handful of key administrators. There are a few larger events, but they tend to be social in nature (a town-gown reception at Hillside, the block-party in Amherst). I would like to see a more substantive event that brings together more people to explain the existing relationship, broaden the base of stakeholders, and explore ideas for improving the interaction.