DO YOU KNOW?
The position of top University of Michigan administrators on involving faculty in the decision-making process?
Despite the recent endorsement by University of Michigan President Lee C. Bollinger and Provost Nancy E. Cantor of the Principles of Faculty Involvement in Institutional and Academic Unit Governance at the University of Michigan, Provost Cantor ignored requests for widespread faculty discussion,and, with Medical School Interim Dean A. Lorris Betz, asked the University's Regents on Friday, March 19, 1998, to modify their Bylaw Sec. 11.13 which defines the composition of the Executive Faculty of the Medical School. The Board of Regents promptly, unanimously, and with minimal discussion adopted the Bylaw changes. Because of profound and potentially grave effects that this action might have on the composition of the professoriate and upon tenure at the University of Michigan, the Provost and the Interim Dean had been asked to postpone their request until there might be widespread discussion throughout the University community.
The request the request for postponement was made in the form of motions unanimously adopted by the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs (SACUA, the executive committee of the Faculty Senate), the Academic Affairs Advisory Committee (the faculty committee advisory to the Provost and Vice-President for Academic Affairs), and the Executive Committee of the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor AAUP Chapter. In addition, at its monthly meeting on Monday, March 16, 1998, the Senate Assembly (the elected representatives of the Faculty Senate) endorsed by a large majority the request for postponement of action by the Regents that was made by SACUA. An article on this action by Provost Cantor and the Board of Regents appeared in the March 24th edition of The Chronicle of Higher Education, Academe Today (click here to read that article).
Click hereto view a statement that Professor Louis G. D'Alecy, Chair of the Faculty Senate, sent to the Regents prior to their meeting. Click here to view the motion that was adopted by the Executive Committee of the local AAUP Chapter and sent to the Provost.
You might wish to communicate your concerns about this action directly with the Board of Regents (email@example.com), Provost Cantor (firstname.lastname@example.org), Professor D'Alecy (email@example.com)or to the AAUP Chapter's Executive Committee (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Also, Thomas M. Dunn, Professor of Chemistry and Chairman of the Committee on the Economic Status of the Faculty (CESF), presented to the Senate Assembly at its March meeting a draft of a statement entitled Compensation Policy Guidelines for Faculty and Primary Research Scientists. This statement had been endorsed unanimously by SACUA. Click hereto view the proposed compensation policy. Please send your comments to Professor Dunn (email@example.com).
The true position of University of Michigan top administrators on the recruitment and retention of students, faculty and staff from underrepresented groups.
The Regents and top administrators of the University of Michigan are defending themselves in court over affirmative action policies and procedures related to student admissions at the same time that they are being sued by former faculty members for racial discrimination. The Center for Equal Opportunity, a Washington D.C.-based think-tank, published on January 26, 1998, a report that concluded that the University of Michigan uses race-based criteria in undergraduate admissions more than any other state school. That same day the University of Michigan Senate Assembly, the legislative body of the University's Faculty Senate, overwhelmingly endored a strong statement entitled "The Value of Diversity." Click here to view that statement.
The Center for Equal Opportunity is affiliated with the Center for Individual Rights, the Washington D.C.-based law firm that won the Hopwood case against affirmative action in admissions at the University of Texas, and which has filed two class-action lawsuits late in 1997 against the University of Michigan in federal district court in Detroit, Michigan, claiming that the University of Michigan and its Law School discriminate against white students in its admissions procedures. At least four faculty members have filed suit against the University of Michigan in which they claim that the University is biased against African-American faculty members. Click here to view news reports and other information with respect to these lawsuits.
Click here to view presentations and publications related to the affirmative action debate by faculty of the University of Michigan or by invited speakers who have addressed this topic at the University of Michigan. To read comments by individual faculty members click here.
"The AAUP has become deeply involved in the national debate over "post-tenure review." At the AAUP's 1997 Annual Meeting, a report entitled On Post-Tenure Reviewwas presented that had been approved by Committee A in May, 1997, and approved for publication with an invitation for comments by the Association's Council in June, 1997. To view the positions of the two candidates for national AAUP President on tenure and post-tenure review click here.
Click hereto view (a) a critique of AAUP report on post-tenure review prepared by Charles J. Parrish, President of the Michigan Conference and Professor of Political Science at Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan and (b) a response to Professor Parrish's commentary by James Perley, national President of the AAUP. University of Michigan President Lee C. Bollinger, in his first annual addressto the Faculty Senate Assembly in October, 1997, expressed opposition to changing current practices and procedures for reviewing tenured faculty members. Both he and University of Michigan Provost Nancy E. Cantor made similar commentsat a subsequent meeting of the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs (SACUA), the executive committee of the Faculty Senate. At its meeting of January 28, 1998, the Chapter's Executive Committee unanimously adopted a position statement on the national AAUP's report on post-tenure review.
To resolve disputes with University administrators, University of Michigan faculty members are turning to local and federal courts with increasing frequency.
Click here to view advice that a University of Michigan professor offers to faculty members who might consider bringing suit against university administrators.
Click here to view a report of a special subcommittee, appointed by the Chapter's President, to review three current cases of faculty members who find themselves involved in such litigation and who have sought the assistance of the AAUP.
Return to Chapter Home Page