7/24/2012: That’s Stephen Hsu in Physics, hired by Michigan State as VP for Research. More information on his blog, here. He will be missed.
Michigan had an open, public search with faculty input. The faculty has a formal written agreement with the administration requiring that. The process starts with the President notifying the faculty senate. The contrast with the insider dealing at UO is striking:
- Provost Jim Bean: appointed by Frohnmayer as interim, made permanent by Lariviere without any search.
- VPFA Jamie Moffitt: Got her job after an open search failed and Lariviere appointed her apparently without discussing it with the committee – of which she’d been a member. The search committee had been appointed by Bean and of course had no faculty representation, until people protested.
- VP for Academic Affairs Doug Blandy: An internal search, of sorts. Initially our administration was to not even going to have the candidates do presentations to the faculty. What more do you need to know about JH priorities?
It’s time for the UO Senate to insist that the UO administration adopt the same sorts of rules for faculty input as Michigan State – as a binding policy. And let’s make it retroactive.
UO Matters declares, “It’s time for the UO Senate to insist that the UO administration adopt the same sorts of rules for faculty input as Michigan State – as a binding policy.” Does UO Matters understand how the Senate functions?
Some person or persons (a Senator, a member of the Statutory Faculty, an emeritus professor, or a group thereof) brings to the Senate a proposal that defines a procedure for securing the services of top-level administrators. The Senate might well pass such a Motion. The President might not object, in which case it becomes UO Policy. If Prexy objects, the issue is negotiated between the Senate and Prexy. If negotiations fail, the Assembly is called, etc. Read about in YOUR Constitution!
Now, Dear UOM, you can bring such a proposal yourself, or find a Senator or a Faculty member who will do it. To expect the Senate to do it overlooks a necessary step — a person or persons has to put the ball in play.
I will introduce such a measure in the Senate first thing this fall.
UO Matters declares, “It’s time for the UO Senate to insist that the UO administration adopt the same sorts of rules for faculty input as Michigan State – as a binding policy.” Does UO Matters understand how the Senate functions?
Some person or persons (a Senator, a member of the Statutory Faculty, an emeritus professor, or a group thereof) brings to the Senate a proposal that defines a procedure for securing the services of top-level administrators. The Senate might well pass such a Motion. The President might not object, in which case it becomes UO Policy. If Prexy objects, the issue is negotiated between the Senate and Prexy. If negotiations fail, the Assembly is called, etc. Read about in YOUR Constitution!
Now, Dear UOM, you can bring such a proposal yourself, or find a Senator or a Faculty member who will do it. To expect the Senate to do it overlooks a necessary step — a person or persons has to put the ball in play.
As a former postdoc resident of that booze-soaked campus on the banks of the Red Cedar, don’t over-glamorize MSU as some model of conviviality. It has big, big problems with effective governance, and the statement (with related procedures) are something of fig leaves. Admittedly they actually tend to *follow* their agreements because there aren’t huge differences of opinion, and because the concession doesn’t make a meaningful barrier to administration desires. They’ve been happily businessifying State (please don’t call it Michigan; that’s the “other” school, down in Ann Arbor) and slowly strangling the academic side for over two decades in a way that JH would very much like to emulate.