From a very good piece by Hannah Hoffman in the Statesman Journal (She also had a recent story on PERS, and is now running the excellent “State Worker’s Blog“).
The boom is consistent with enrollment growth. So, how much of the hiring is new faculty? You could ask our clueless provost Jim Bean, but the best data I’ve seen is from the AAUP’s Howard Bunsis and his February report to the UO faculty union organizers. Bean and Berdahl’s failure to give a credible response – or any response – to this report is a big part of the reason we are now unionized. (Whoops – as a comment notes, Bean was actually on “sabbatical” when the vote occurred. Lorraine Davis was acting provost.)
The increase in FT Faculty is largely adjuncts. There’s been very little increase in tenure track numbers at UO:
From 1992 to 2012 the number of students has increased by more than 50% (data here) and the number of tenure track faculty by less than 20%.
Since 2008 the number of students has increased about 20%, the number of tenure track faculty about 10%.
Hey, you can’t blame the union on Bean, he was on “sabbatical”. Anyway I thought you’d now joined the organizing committee?
The Duck athletic department has had many new hires, a count wouldn’t be hard to obtain.
The vice president for research has hired many new administrators. At the same time, the contribution for new faculty hires’ start-up packages from the VPR office has been cut to $50 thousand (for the half million or more dollars needed), with restrictions that it be spent on equipment. Only two of seven science faculty new faculty search requests were approved, and a few faculty are leaving for other institutions, so science faculty will be flat or reduced while the administration balloons.
Is it true that VP Espy was unhappy with the interior decoration of one floor of the brand new Lewis Integrative Science Building and has blown research dollars to have it redecorated?
2 of 7? Which departments made requests and which were approved? Did Espy veto or did CAS?