Cause for Concern

So Tuesday we had a long and arduous faculty meeting. There was much debate--not really at each other--about the changing face of the university and the seemingly endless amount of "action step" coming from the administration without resources or support. We were invited by the administration to "begin a conversation" related to teaching and research. There are certain goals the admins would like to see put in place, but we are left to our own devices and our own budgets to figure out how to accomplish these goals. Now on the surface, it sounds really nice what they are asking us to aim for; however, there are significant pedagogical and research implications given the massive amounts of majors in our department. While some departments will be able to adopt this change quickly, a change for us means that we take a hit in some other area.

Now, as per usual, I don't say anything in these meetings. Rarely. Although I feel my voice is valued, I often feel I lack the institutional and departmental history needed to say something significant. Ordinarily, Chair seems okay with this. But tonight I and two of the newest faculty members received a note from Chair that indicated we might want to speak up on this because we actually had more to lose on this issue than some of the senior faculty. I suddenly felt like I missed something. I'm absolutely unclear how this carries more weight for us. I'm going to have to talk to the other new faculty members--hopefully they can clue me in before I speak with Chair.

4 comments:

RageyOne said...

It definitely sounds like there is a hidden comment in there somewhere.

Bardiac said...

I don't know your chair, but there's a way innocent possibility. You have more at stake because you will be in the department further into the future than anyone else. At least, I expect that might be the chair's thought. (Which means the chair expects that you'll earn tenure and be valued departmental members for a long time to come. Those are good things.)

When I was on a search committee, early on where I am now, the committee divided on which candidate to recommend for a hire. The two junior members supported X, the two senior members supported Y. The most senior member said at our final meeting that he would support the choice of the junior members because we would be working with the new hire longer, and he felt we had more at stake. The other senior member agreed, and we recommended X as a unified committee.

That taught me a lot about how really good senior people act. So if your chair is good in that way, maybe that's what s/he's after? I hope so, anyway, because that attitude is exactly what one wants in a senior faculty person.

BrightStar (B*) said...

I was going to say what bardiac said... the decision impacts junior faculty more because they'll have to live with the decision long after senior folks retire!

Mon said...

Thanks for the perspective. I was (and still am a bit) confused primarily because it is the type of decision (reducing everyone's plate when it comes to teaching) that I didn't think was going to be the source of so much debate. I think I was also confused by Chair's comment because the proposal won't effect me--I'm already on the plan the admins are proposing. What I did learn yesterday was that I may be the only one--I thought the other newer faculty were on the same page with me but apparently not. So although they have the same research responsibilities that I do, their teaching is more aligned with the more senior members of the department. I think you both are correct in Chair's thinking on this comment. But given that my situation is so different from everybody else in the department, I'm still unsure how much (or how little) I should speak up on this issue...