Update: Good news for shared governance. Going on now, room 402 Alumni Center. I’ll do a little live-blogging.
Kyr introduces them by noting that this is the first time in 4 years we’ve had a President or a Provost willing to meet with the Senate Exec. Discussion is about how to get faculty/staff student input into developing goals, and a strategic plan for achieving them.
“Competitive Excellence” Plan docs are here.
Chuck Triplett then discusses how he’s going review and revise all the policies we inherited from his former employer, OUS. He’s proposing completely rewriting UO’s “policy on policies”, now to be run by a “Policy Advisory Committee”.
His new procedure contains no mention of the UO Senate. Zippo. Under the current policy on policies, the Senate has considerable power. I’m imagining there will be a few questions!
Q: Where are we out of compliance? Who can come after us? CT: Our academic accreditors, who insisted on the policy library. Hubin: We will *not* be subject to the planned accreditation review in 2017. It will be postponed due to the transition.
JB: Where is the Senate in your flow chart? Our Constitution is quite clear on the Senate’s role.
CT: We’ve identified the policies that involve academic matters as commonly understood.
JB: That’s nice, but the Senate Exec gets to decide, not you. I want the Senate Exec written into the process. RS: Yes.
CT: [Words come out, but I don’t hear a commitment to do this.]
Coltrane: Lots of policies, we need to do some triage. PAC will do much of it. Suggests Margie Paris as a faculty member. [?].
Bronet: PAC will be Senate led.
JB: Where’s the list of policies? CT: I’ll send it to you, but it’s just titles.
Coltrane: BTW, We just discovered we never adopted the UO PD complaint and grievance procedure. It will come your way soon.
Pretty good session. Coltrane leaves. Era of good feelings continues.
Next, Carol Stabile on Sexual Violence Task Force.
1) Office of Gender Equity, headed by a VP. Report will explain what resources this would require. [Very expensive. Check the budget and staffing of the VP for Equity and Diversity to get some idea].
2) Senate Committee on Sexual Violence.
3) Support Campus Climate Survey – need that information. Need to assess what programs work, what don’t.
4) Wants to postpone Sorority/Fraternity Rush from fall to winter.
5) Improved implementation. End mandatory reporting. Audit Penny Daugherty’s AAEO office, there have been many complaints. Revise policy on sexual/romantic relationships between faculty and students. Develop proposals for mandatory courses. Funds for SWAT and women’s self defense. Track problems with sexual assaults involving Fraternity and Social Life. No data on which houses are on probation, etc. Let Ombuds office be confidential. Restart Committee on Alcohol and Drugs. More Title IX training for greek life, athletics. New booklet. MOU’s with SAS, Womenspace, EPD.
BH: Why nothing about athletics. This is were all the trouble started? CS: They wouldn’t talk to us. We had no cooperation from them. Locked down tight. BH: Seems like that makes it more important to have recommendations. RK: Yes. JF: Yes, very bad for UO reputation. JB: Make recommendations about athletics. Put them on the spot.
Long discussion about how to deal with the problem of the uncooperative athletics department and the PAGIA.
10/15/2014: Provost Bronet strips Mission Statement of 160over90 brander crap
New draft here. No, don’t click on that link. Trust me, it’s fine. Let’s all move on and hope Bronet posts some of Shelton’s secret budget model docs soon.
9/7/2014 update: Let’s throw “Go Ducks” on the end, and call this turkey done
The UO mission statement blog has now attracted a fair number of rather critical comments, including:
(1) As a UO retiree and graduate (Ph.D., M.A.), I was dismayed by this draft statement. Is the UO still a public university? The only mention, under “Lead,” is to declare that it is a “preeminent public residential research university.” Similarly, under “Define,” we find it placed “in Oregon, the West, on the Pacific Rim, and the world.” Geographically correct (though the syntax needs work), but there is no indication in these packed-together phrases that the university aspires to serve Oregon, its population, or its students in any real sense. … (5) I don’t agree with those who’ve said that the university’s declared mission is unimportant. To me, at least, it matters that the university have recognizable aims, clearly stated. The mission statement is a public document. If I were on the faculty of the university, I’d wonder what this statement demanded of me, and whether I or my department might someday be publicly judged by it.
But probably all for naught, the Trustees are scheduled to vote this week, and they’ve put the original text in the docket.
Update: Administration’s mission of mass distraction accomplished. Faculty take knives to the mission statement in the official JH blog comments, here:
What does “sustainability”—a trendy word I realize we feel must go in there somewhere—mean as a component part of community? (Is it still the Edison Elementary School motto (with hand motions!): “Safe and respectful, including all learners”? Can we follow the lead of Anonymous and think about what we mean by this in a university?)How is “define” as aspect of “vision”? What does it mean to “seek definition”? What does the phrase mean: “seek definition through the recognition”? Can one do that? Does it clarify anything to say “seek definition through the recognition of the quality of…”? Someone needs to fix the punctuation to make the next part flow the way it seems to be intended: “We seek definition through the recognition of the aspiration, passions, and success of our students”? Our students apparently have a singular aspiration and plural passions.
Come on, you know you can’t resist – add your comments here. Or don’t, and instead read up on what really will matter, Brad Shelton’s budget model. Oh, wait, that’s a secret – website hasn’t been updated in a year, and apparently the Senate Budget Committee (report here), the deans, and the department heads are also in the dark. Here’s the projected data for the 2013-14 FY that ended in June. It will be very interesting to see how much more CAS gets taxed this year, and how much more the law school gets subsidized: