Posts Tagged ‘Campus Solidarity Working Group’

Live blogging from the Nov. 29 VSA Council Meeting

November 29th, 2009 by Ruby Cramer, Editor in Chief

7:00 p.m. | Attendance

7:03 | Report from the Committee on Curricular Policies (CCP) from Academics and Strong: Academics explains that the Committee has been researching peer institutions that administer their Course Evaluation Questionnaires (CEQs) online. The College has been exploring this option with the hope  that students would complete the CEQs more thoughtfully at their leisure at home, rather than in the last or second to last day of class. Academics also said that she is on the sub-committee that is looking into team teaching. This year, there are a minimum of 34 team-taught classes; last year there were 42 and the year beforethere were 52. ”The decrease already happened last year,” says Academics.

7:12 | Academics introduces a memorandum which, she explains, attempts to “walk the line between endorsing the sentiment presented in [the letter written by Judy Nichols] last week,” and also clarify inaccuracies, says Academics in reference to the letter that was drafted by Adjunct Associate Professor of English Judy Nichols and presented to the Council on Nov. 22 by representatives from the Campus Solidarity Working Group. During that meeting, members of the Council endorsed the letter in a 16 to 5 vote which followed at least three hours of discussion. “Ms. Nichols’ letter criticized the reductions in tenure lines, adjunct and visiting faculty members, and course sections as a result of the financial crisis,” reads the letter. “The document demonstrated a clear concern for the long-term health of Vassar’s multidisciplinary curriculum, our flexible course offerings, and our retention of excellent scholars and teachers. The Council voted to endorse this letter because we believe these are core properties of a Vassar education that our constituents value deeply.”

“Beyond these sentiments,” it continues, “which earned the support of the majority of Council, we feel it is our responsibility to acknowledge the inaccuracies within Ms. Nichols’ letter. As representatives, deep sympathy with a problematic or a cause cannot be an excuse to avoid the facts. The document presents a problematic interpretation of Vassar’s financial planning. We seek to highlight just some of the instances where the letter marshals false or incomplete evidence to make its case.”

7:25 | Noyes: “I really think we should vote on this letter tonight. We’re not going to agree on every single point of this memorandum, and I think that’s okay. I think that part of the point of this is that we all have different opinions.”

7: 30 | Operations explains that one of the concerns of last week’s endorsement was that constituents weren’t consulted before the Council voted in support of Nichols’ letter. “That’s not really an issue this week,” notes Operations, since the memorandum addresses actions of the Council and therefore only speaks for the Council members themselves, not their constituents.

7:36 | 2010: “It seems a little bit like we’re backpedaling or that we’re criticizing their letter.”

7:43 | According to the letter, the Dean of the Faculty released the information to the Executive Board that to the best of his knowledge 10 fewer sections will be offered next year, a much lower figure than the 30 to 40 estimated earlier this year.

8:00 | Council members propose small amendments to the wording of particular paragraphs or sections of the memorandum.

8:40 | Five-minute recess

8:58 | The Council unanimously endorses the memorandum, which will be sent to the Board of Trustees on Wednesday, Dec. 2.

A copy of the memorandum can be found at the bottom of this post.

9:08 | Allocation of $1000 from Mid Hudson Valley Fund to Hip Hop 101: Motion passes.

9:09 | Allocation of $1295 from Mid Hudson Valley Fund to Town Houses: Motion passes.

9:11 | Allocation of $875 from Great Works Fund to Vassar Public Art Committee: Motion passes.

9:14 | Open Discussion. Council adjourned.

—–

ACADEMICS MEMORANDUM

From: The Vassar Student Association Council

To: The Board of Trustees and Students of Vassar College

Cc: President Catharine Hill, Dean of the Faculty Jonathan Chenette, Dean of Planning and Academic Affairs Rachel Kitzinger, Dean of the College Christopher Roellke, Vice President for Finance and Administration Elizabeth Eismeier, Vice President for Development Cathy Baer, Vice President for Computing and Information Services Bret Ingerman, Vice President for College Relations Susan DeKrey, Chair of the Faculty Policy and Conference Committee Steve Rock

Date: November 29, 2009

We, the VSA Council, wish to elaborate on our 11.22.09 endorsement of the Campus Solidarity Working Group’s letter to the Board of Trustees. The letter, written by Adjunct Associate Professor of English Judy Nichols, was presented to Council by a group of five students. After a heated discussion of nearly four hours, Council voted 15-6 to endorse the document. We seek here to frame this endorsement in the context of our nuanced discussion.

Ms. Nichols’ letter—the second in a series of similar documents—criticized the reductions in tenure lines, adjunct and visiting faculty members, and course sections as a result of the financial crisis. The document demonstrated a clear concern for the long-term health of Vassar’s multidisciplinary curriculum, our flexible course offerings, and our retention of excellent scholars and teachers. The Council voted to endorse this letter because we believe these are core properties of a Vassar education that our constituents value deeply.

Our endorsement of this letter was, to some extent, a reflection of the mood of the student body. Council is comprised of 24 full-time students. We study in every academic department. We compete on varsity athletics teams. We do research with our professors, learn from the life experiences of our staff, and benefit from the multifaceted diversity within our own student body. Council’s views on Vassar parallels the views of our 2,450 constituents. Many Council members felt that they lacked accurate financial information; many felt unsure of the future of their department or their favorite professor; many felt annoyed that, while members of the Executive Board are routinely consulted on confidential financial planning, the broader student community is left in the dark until after decisions have been reached. These feelings, reflected by our 15-6 endorsement, are all reflective of broader concerns on campus.

We also respect the student contingent of the Solidarity Group who attended our meeting. We are their representatives, and it is our responsibility to channel their feelings to the College’s decision-making bodies. Even if we disagree on policy and approach, we applaud these students for caring about our College so deeply. Indeed, a consistent frustration among Council members is that surprisingly few constituents come to us with institutional concerns—unfortunate, in a financial climate inevitably filled with such concerns. We are often discouraged when students are apathetic about the state of the College, and do not seek information easily available through campus-wide e-mails, our VSA site, the Economy site, or The Miscellany News. We admire the commitment of the students in the Solidarity Group and appreciate their efforts to make Vassar a more conscientious, egalitarian institution.

Nevertheless, we harbor no unrealistic expectations that Vassar can remain unchanged. In this economic climate, the VSA Council is fully aware that the curriculum we all value must shrink. So too must our teaching staff. However, as members of the community, we cannot help but feel saddened when our teachers are let go. And as representatives of the student body, we cannot help but agree with the Solidarity Group’s sincere concern for the effect of the financial crisis on academic life and on the lives of community members.

Beyond these sentiments, which earned the support of the majority of Council, we feel it is our responsibility to acknowledge some of the many inaccuracies within Ms. Nichols’ letter. In its accusatory and hyperbolic tone, the document presents a problematic interpretation of Vassar’s careful financial planning. We seek to highlight just some of the instances where the letter marshals false or incomplete evidence to make its case.

The letter makes several inaccurate claims about the staffing and curricula of specific departments. Computer Science will actually be teaching four more course sections next fall compared to this year.[1] Film too will be one course ahead of the level of staffing they requested for 2010-11 because a new tenure-track appointee would have had a reduced course load in the first year.[2] As for the languages, the Dean of the Faculty office has indeed asked that tenure-line faculty members engage in teaching at the 100-level on a regular basis. Students at the 100-level deserve and benefit from contact with our tenured scholars, and our tenure-line faculty benefit from regular engagement with the challenges and rewards of teaching at that level. We disagree with the letter’s implication that this trend is negative. Further, we take issue with the letter’s baseless accusation that the administration has illegally forced faculty members to retire. While the College’s financial situation has no-doubt resulted in some retirement-age faculty feeling pressure to leave the institution, we have no reason to believe that the administration is the source of that pressure.

Most significantly, beyond these specific points, the letter conveys both implicitly and explicitly that decisions have been made by a small group of administrators without regard to community input. This is misleading. While our Senior Officers (most of whom are also teaching faculty) have directed financial planning, students and faculty also had direct input into decision-making. Two elected students—the VSA President and VSA Vice President for Operations—sit as full members on the Priorities and Planning Committee. The members of this group sit as equals, debating the College’s many noble aspirations alongside its financial restraints. The students, faculty, and administrators come together with optimism for what Vassar should be and realism for what Vassar can be. Through this committee, we have had (and continue to have) substantive and specific input into the financial decision-making process. On curricular issues, the VSA Vice President for Academics sits on the Advisory Group for the Allocation of Faculty Resources (AGAFR) and the Committee on Curricular Policies (CCP), and is a vocal advocate for multidisciplinary programs, the reduction of administrative course releases, and the general maintenance of our broad and diverse curriculum. The letter fails to acknowledge the substantive input that students have had into the current financial plan through their elected representatives.

Moreover, the letter implies that Vassar’s financial planning was reached haphazardly—that the senior administration hacked away at the budget without care for the curriculum or respect for the College’s employees. In fact, we recognize that the process was thoughtful and deliberative. Dean of the Faculty Jon Chenette has worked (and continues to work) with departments to ensure that we are making academic reductions in ways that will affect the broader curriculum as little as possible. We recognize that some members of the community, including some members of our own Council, object to staffing decisions in certain areas. However, the Senior Officers, CCP and AGAFR reached these decisions after long and careful consideration. This important work should not be dismissed.

We agree wholeheartedly with the document’s concern for the curriculum, and are pleased that since the Council’s endorsement, the most recent estimates suggest that the curriculum will lose only 10 course sections next fall, rather than the 30 previously estimated. It is important to realize that the damage done to the curriculum by these changes is not nearly as catastrophic as Ms. Nichols’ letter implies. By almost any measure, Vassar’s curriculum will remain flexible and diverse.

We would also like to clarify the conditions under which Council voted to endorse the letter. The members of the Solidarity Group told Council that Ms. Nichols planned to send her letter on Wednesday, November 25. As we later discovered, she did not plan to send it until Wednesday, December 2. This false date essentially prevented us from delaying the vote by one week to consider the motion in greater depth. While we do not believe that we were intentionally misled, this significant miscommunication put pressure on Council to act quickly. Many representatives saw this as a choice between “doing something” to advocate for the curriculum or “doing nothing.” Under this tight timeframe, the majority of Council elected to endorse the document. In some cases, this endorsement was more for the sentiments behind it than for the facts underlying it.

The feelings we express here are nuanced, but the issues facing the College are complex enough that such nuance is required. Unlike the Solidarity Group’s letter, we lack a unified thesis. We are instead left with competing and simultaneous thoughts—irreparable sadness for the loss of professors and staff, concern for our characteristically dynamic curriculum, profound respect for the College’s senior leadership, and a determination to mend our community and build an unshakable foundation for Vassar’s next 150 years.

[1] The following information is drawn largely from the Schedule of Classes and sheds light on the appropriateness of the staffing levels approved for Computer Science. CMPU offered 23 class sections in 2008-09, and is offering 17 this year. Most of the reduction involved cutting back on under-subscribed multi-section courses. CMPU is offering 14 different courses this year, as compared to 16 last year. All areas of the curriculum required for the major are well represented. None of the class sections have reached their maximum size. In 2008-09, 13 of the 23 CMPU course sections had fewer than 10 students; this year only 3 of the 17 have fewer than 10. The total number of students served in this year’s 17 sections exceeds the number served in last year’s 23. Because of these healthier enrollments, the College is adding sections back for next year. The Computer Science department has been approved for 22 teaching equivalencies next year — four more than this year. Note that teaching equivalencies differ slightly from course sections because of the way labs count into faculty teaching loads.

[2] Film is indeed losing a tenured retiree, and that line may indeed be restored in the future. For the short term, the College is replacing all the courses that person would have taught by a combination of other types of appointments. Overall, the department will be one course ahead of the level of staffing they requested for 2010-11 because a new tenure-track appointee would have had a reduced course load in the first year.

  • Leave a comment »

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Live blogging from the Nov. 22 VSA Council Meeting

November 22nd, 2009 by Ruby Cramer, Editor in Chief

7:03 p.m. | Attendance.

7:05 | Sustainability Forum, with special guests Director of Marketing and Sustainability Ken Oldehoff, co-Chairs of the Vassar Greens Vanessa Raditz ‘12 and Laura Livingston ‘12, as well as Greens member Xiaoyuan Ren ‘13.

7:10 | Oldehoff on composting in the Retreat: “It started off slow, but it really has taken off,” said Oldehoff, who continued, saying that during the 2008-2009 academic year, the average weight per day of composted materials was 559 pounds throughout all dining facilities on campus. “Because of doing the composting in the Retreat, we’re up to 704 pounds,” he said.

7:17 | Oldehoff:  ”We want to research to see what the carbon footprint was in 1996, and as a goal the College is hoping to go back to that point. Last year, Sightlines came out and told us what our carbon footprint was, and we’re going to look for ways to bring it back down to about 15 years ago.”

7:30 | Oldhoff explained that recently there has been a problem with student stealing from the Retreat and with illicitly entering the All Campus Dining Center without swiping in. Town Houses encouraged all members of the Council to send an e-mail to their constituencies alerting them of the problem and discouraging it from worsening.

8:03 | Motion to allocate $8000 from the Speakers and Lecturers Fund to No Such Organization passed.

8:04 | Presentation of a letter to the Vassar College Board of Trustees drafted by Judith Nichols, Adjunct Associate Professor of English, by representatives from the Campus Solidarity Working Group. John Joyce ‘12 of the group explained that the letter was not written or drafted by the Working Group; rather, the Group supports the letter and attended the VSA Council Meeting in hopes of attaining signatures from Council members. “We want members of the VSA to sign on and start having a more active voice in this process,” said Nathan Orians ‘10, a member of the Working Group. Thus far, there are about ten pages of signatures in support of the letter. Three pages are compiled of faculty signatures—the remaining eight are made up of students and alumnae/i.

The letter in question can be found at the end of this post.

8:10 | Operations explained that members of the Council can sign the letter as individuals not representing their constituencies, or the entire Council can by a majority of 60 percent vote to “endorse” the letter as if it were a proposal.

8:34 | Orians urged Council to endorse the letter, saying that by signing on the VSA would be echoing the general tone of respect that the Campus Solidarity Group and various faculty have been advocating for.

8:47 | Joyce: The purpose “of this letter is to preserve the curriculum that we all came for…[and to] tell [the College] that we’re not okay with the changes that are being made.”

To read more about last night’s Council, see News Editor Jillian Scharr’s article, “By a vote of 15 to 6, VSA endorses letter criticizing 2009-2010 curriculum plans: Members of Council overlook inaccuracies in support of intended sentiment.”

—-

Dear Vassar Trustees,

We write you again as a large group of faculty, students, students’ parents, staff and alumnae/i who are concerned that the financial adjustments currently being implemented to protect the college’s endowment will in the long run seriously compromise the curriculum that has made Vassar a successful and respected institution of higher learning. In an October 25th article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, President Catherine Bond Hill stated that  cutting 79 positions at Vassar College is not a “paradigm shift” but rather “an adjustment to the cost structure.”  We respectfully disagree.  We fear that the academic integrity of the institution is at risk from financial policies that, in addition to eroding fair labor practices and laying off long-term employees, reduce or eliminate vital course offerings and compromise richness and breadth of the curriculum. The real crisis facing the college is not short-term financial losses, grievous as those may be, but the long-term loss of Vassar’s academic uniqueness, diversity, identity and vision.

Last year the college reduced course offerings by sixty sections. This year Vassar students are noting the ways the cuts are making admission into courses needed for majors much more difficult. Multidisciplinary courses, which in past years have allowed Vassar to maintain a cutting edge, are being seriously threatened. Damage to the dynamic curriculum will certainly limit students’ engagement in new disciplines, discourses and methodologies. We expect the erosion of the multidisciplinary programs to have a serious impact on the attraction and retention of new faculty.

One of the ways Vassar has developed dynamic multidisciplinary programs is through on-going employment of non-tenure-track faculty, many of whom teach, advise and participate in the committee work of the college. This past week, the Dean of the Faculty, Jon Chenette, announced in a faculty meeting that up to fourteen non-tenure-track faculty will be notified that their contracts will not be renewed and their positions will be terminated. “Thank you for your service,” he said to the non-tenure-track professors who will be losing their jobs or their health benefits. We are told that these reductions will be permanent, regardless of economic recovery.

Meanwhile, Vassar faculty have lost responsibility for the curriculum. This began last year when American Sign Language was erased from the course offerings and Arabic language courses were reduced without much consultation or dialogue. As courses disappear, so do professors who specialize in areas not covered by tenured and tenure-track faculty.

The high number of students seeking admission to Vassar and the high level of student satisfaction at the college are linked, in part, to the vitality and flexibility of the Vassar curriculum. Small class sizes and attention to students through advising have been crucial as well. It is troubling to us that the current administration seeks to save money by constricting multidisciplinary programs, shrinking departmental offerings, and reducing the number of faculty through pressuring faculty toward retirement and terminating or reducing non-tenure-track faculty contracts. This year only three of eight open tenure-track lines are being filled at Vassar. The college that helped produce Elizabeth Bishop, Edna St. Vincent Millay, Mary McCarthy, as well as many great actors, artists and musicians, seems to be reducing its willingness to support the arts.  Even as the economy improves and the recession comes to an end, Vassar is in danger of losing its brand.

The damage to our curriculum represents a serious threat to the liberal arts. The following represents but a few of the changes and cuts that departments and programs are being asked to make.

•Though student interest in computer science has jumped because of availability of employment in the tech sector, Vassar cut staffing by one third last year. Cutting of release time, failure to replace faculty and cutting of staff make it impossible to supervise student projects, adequately staff computer laboratory sessions, and administer the complex equipment and staffing of the program adequately. Majors are having trouble completing requirements for this major.

•Despite the current world situation, the Religion Department is being asked to reduce the position of  its only Islamicist to part-time. Vassar is the only the college in the top 25 liberal arts colleges not to have a  tenure-track position in Islam.

•There is increasing pressure on language departments to provide elementary language courses at the expense of advanced literary and cultural study. Raising course enrollment limits in language classes to accommodate reduced staffing and student need leads to compromises in pedagogy that Vassar faculty should not have to make. Staffing reductions also put at risk JYA programs administered through Vassar and involving faculty members of language departments. This will further impoverish the curriculum and also result in direct financial losses to the college, as our students pursuing study away options will take their tuition and financial aid money to other institutions.

*The department of Drama has a tenure track position on hold and had one adjunct not renewed.  Drama had a retirement at the end of last year and the dean allowed the department to replace him temporarily with two people to share the one position for three years. (The department will have two major retirements this year but it looks like they will be able to fully replace the courses these retirements remove from the curriculum.) It should be noted that all of these changes are in the creative side of the department—and will have a huge impact on the quantity and quality of production work, and an equally strong impact on advising and mentoring of students.

* The department of Film has a very large number of majors, yet it remains understaffed in comparison to other departments. The department will lose several courses, as well as a tenure track line next year. Courses taught in film by two faculty members from other departments will be lost next year when those two faculty members no longer teach at the college (because of retirement in one case or adjunct faculty termination in the other).  The administration has refused to authorize a tenure-track replacement for the position of a retiring faculty member, someone who supervises independent projects in screen writing and oversees numerous screenplay theses.  This position may be replaced in the future. The department of Film will not be as excellent as it has been in the past.

•The department of English has been asked to eliminate ten sections from its offerings.  The department may not be able to make the cuts without some loss of long time contributing non-tenure track faculty. The suggested reductions have been linked specifically to professors who teach creative writing and whose contracts are coming due this summer. Likewise, the central role the department has played in offering Freshmen Writing Seminars may be imperiled.

•The department of Physics and Astronomy has been affected in three major ways due to staffing constraints. Introductory physics courses next year (and in the foreseeable future) will be capped for a total enrollment of 72 each semester – current enrollment in Physics 113 is over 100. This will affect other science majors and premed students the most. For the first time in the history of Vassar, students will be closed out of this course. Participation in multidisciplinary programs or cross-listed courses with other departments is severely restricted. Finally, the number of courses for non-physics majors offered is being cut and only one course per year is likely to be offered.

We need to stop this damage before it is too late. We ask you to join us in demanding the protection of the curriculum that is the core of Vassar’s educational mission. We are seeking your help in supporting our administrators in canceling lay-offs and canceling teacher contract termination.

  • 3 Comments »

Tags: , , , , ,

Campus Solidarity Working Group holds second major demonstration outside Main Building

November 19th, 2009 by Jillian Scharr, News Editor

Today, Nov. 18, the Campus Solidarity Working Group demonstrated in front of Main Circle at 3 o’clock. The protestors, many of them bearing signs and dressed in red, cheered several speakers from both the student body and the college staff. Then they marched around the campus, cheering to the beat of a bucket and a pan: “We’ve had enough; can’t take no more!” After the march, the protestors regrouped in front of Main and sat in the lobby in silence, holding up signs to explain their intent to express solidarity with “silenced voices” in the Vassar community.

Vassar alumna and Field Work Office Administrative Assistant Robin Laurita ‘05, one of the speakers, quoted President Barack Obama’s inaugural address: “the time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit and to choose our better history.”

“I believed that [the administration] would commit themselves to these ideas,” said Laurita; “[would] make Vassar College a pioneer in these difficult economic times. It was only within a few weeks that the true mission of the executive administrators would begin to take hold in my psyche.” Laurita continued, “I’m asking the students, as an alumn to upcoming alumns, take back your mission statement! Do not allow a select few to come in here and dismantle what Vassar has stood for historically.” Laurita then displayed the cap and gown she had worn on her graduation day. “I’m aking you to stand up and show what [this] means to you,” she said tearfully, gesturing to the robe. “You be the leader…take back your mission statement!”

Dean of the College Christopher Roellke commented on the administration’s recent relationship with the Working Group. “We received a very cordial response to our response,” he said of their latest correspondence. “It was a very polite, diplomatic email but the bottom line is they still want their demands to stand.” Roellke commented that this tone of voice is “a 180-degree turn into [a direction] which is extraordinarily positive.”

Science Support Technician and business agent for the Communication Workers of America Union Carl Bertsche also spoke at the rally, announcing that the Union proposed a plan for staff reductions to the administration where six people would still have been laid off, but “there would have been due attrition, and the union would have taken the hit. The College could have had what they wanted; we would have had job security…and all our folks would enjoy the holidays with their families.” However, according to Bertsche, “[the administration] told us basically to ‘stick it.’ Now,” he continued, “We’re on a position with the moral high ground.”

Roellke was unaware of the proposal of which Bertsche spoke. “We’re ready to hear any and all grievances,” he said. “If we made an error in the contract we certainly want to follow the proper protocol.” He also explained that the College is working with the laid-off staff and that “an effort is being made to try to place them elsewhere in the College.” According to Roellke, the way that the administration approached the cuts was to “determine functions that the college could do without.” Knowing this, he said, several departments left vacant positions open in the hopes that staff whose posts were eliminated would be moved into the available positions.

“It isn’t about six people here or the 14 adjuncts who are not going to be renewed…this is an institution of higher learning, where you’re supposed to be able to treat people properly,” said Bertsche. “There’s four groups of people on campus here, and a large amount want [the senior officers] to do business in a different way.”

  • Leave a comment »

Tags: , , ,

Campus Solidarity Working Group organizes ‘Teach-In’

November 13th, 2009 by Jillian Scharr, News Editor

The Campus Solidarity Working Group organized a ‘Teach-In’ on Tuesday, Nov. 10, in the Retreat.

The event began at approximately 11:20 a.m., and the formal program ended at 2:15 p.m. After further announcements inviting the listeners to the group’s weekly meetings, the Working Group began packing up the stage.

The group also passed out fliers outlining the group’s concerns and goals. “In order to help the administration build a more ethical plan for the future,” the flier read, “we have formed a coalition of students, staff and faculty…to push the administration to increase Vassar’s financial transparency. This will allow all members of the Vassar community to effectively brainstorm alternative solutions to this economic downturn, and help in the financial planning process directly.”

“We’re not a profit-making institution,” said Visiting Associate Professor of English Karen Robertson. “At Vassar we’ve had a growth in the number of non-tenured track faculty…the style of the institution has been to see all faculty members as engaged in the community of scholars.”

“There’s an open curriculum that you read in the catalogue, but there’s also a secret curriculum,” continued Robertson. “What are the secret lesson we’re teaching by the way we treat people at Vassar. The laying of…says that those who are marginalized, those with lesser pay and lower status do not matter. [It] teaches students the value of plutocracy.”

“The answer is Vassar students,” said Professor of Hispanic Studies Andrew Bush, cautioning; “I would ask you so what are you learning that makes you run the world the way it’s being run? What is it we’re teaching that makes that possible? …You should be asking some questions about the nature of your education and think about what you’d like….if you’ll excuse my saying so, you [might someday] find yourself on the same board making the same decisions you don’t like today.”

“Many of the faculty are reluctant to speak at this gathering, which is troubling to me,” said Adjunct Assistant Professor of English Julia Rose, speculating that some teachers declined to participate due to concerns over their job, or because they felt that it was an inappropriate medium for communicating their opinions to students.

Other faculty who participated were: Professors of English Beth Darlington and Michael Joyce, and Adjunct Associate Professor of English Judith Nichols, as well as several students involved with the Working Group.

“As a piece, it is designed to open up paths of discussion that the administration has been saying we’re not doing well,” said the Campus Solidarity Working Group in a group statement. “We’re embracing their critique,” they continued, expressing hope that the administration will return their dialogue.

“It’s something we can be proud of as a group,” they continued, seeing it “as part of a larger style,” and “an effort to bring academic life and social life together.”

Dean of the College Chris Roellke was present for the latter half of the event. “I appreciated this opportunity for members of the community to speak publicly and peacefully about things on their mind,” he said afterward. “That can only be a positive thing.”

“I certainly had some disagreement with some of the content that I did observe and listen to,” he continued. “I think there’s disagreement in the community about what the truth is. I will say as a faculty member myself the opportunity to talk to students about these issues has been very therapeutic.”

For more information on the Working Group and their recent activity, please see the recent Miscellany News article “College Center multimedia installation personalizes cuts”.

  • Leave a comment »

Tags: ,

Administrators respond to demands of Campus Solidarity Working Group

November 5th, 2009 by Molly Turpin, Senior Editor

In a Nov. 3 letter to the Campus Solidarity Working Group, Dean of the College Chris Roellke, Dean of Planning and Academic Affairs Rachel Kitzinger and Dean of the Faculty Jon Chenette provided a written response to each demand made by the group.

The written response comes after an Oct. 30 meeting between about 15 members of the Campus Solidarity Working Group,  Roellke, Kitzinger, Chenette, Professor of Political Science and Chair of the Faculty Policy and Conference Committee Steve Rock, Vassar Student Association (VSA)  President Caitlin Ly ‘10 and VSA Vice President for Operations Brian Farkas ‘10. The meeting was intended to be a discussion clarifying demands, not a negotiation of them.

Members of the Campus Solidarity Working Group wished to video tape the discussion to be publicly available afterwards. The administrators present were hesitant and only agreed to allow the meeting to be taped if the tape would only be shared with members of the Campus Solidarity Working Group. Students present did not to agree to these conditions, and instead read a prepared response to questions about their demands—which had been sent to them prior to the meeting—before ending the meeting.

Along with their response to demands, Roellke, Chenette and Kitzinger also sent a letter to the group outlining their concerns with the group’s tactics of making demands occasionally disruptive proceedings. “We believe your actions are motivated by your deep commitment to your ideals of community you hlod dear,” they wrote. “However, your recent expression of those ideals in the form of demands impairs community by seeking to impose your will outside the representative and governance processes that are in place to ensure that a wide variety of voices inform decision-making.”

“At this point we offer you a written response to demands as the best option available, absent the opportunity for the conversation we had desired. If you wish to pursue a conversation that might provide for mutual understanding and compromise, we remain open to further exchanges,” senior officers wrote in the letter.

The demands included the “reinstatement of eliminated positions and cessation of job eliminations” as well as the inclusion of the unions on campus in all negotiations. The Officers replied that the compensation budget of the College represents too large a percent of the operating budget not to be reduced in the process of restructuring Vassar’s budget. In the response, they explain that because the restructuring of the budget must be permanent, temporary pay cuts across the College would not achieve the desired savings, and permanent pay cuts would render Vassar’s compensation of its employees uncompetitive.

The senior officers also listed measures to reduce the compensation budget that they exercised before eliminating positions, which included replacing vacant positions only when absolutely necessary, pay freezes for administrators earning more than $50,000 annually and a program of retirement incentives.

In response to the demand for direct negotiations with unions, the Officers clarified that there is a formal process for hearing union grievances. “The College stands ready to hear all grievances appealing staffing decisions that have resulted in layoffs, consistent with the established grievance process detailed in each union contract. Several grievances concerning some of the steps the college has taken were already in process prior to the receipt of the ‘list of demands,’” they wrote. ”The grievance process is a time‐tested method of settling disputes between labor and management. Each grievance focuses on addressing the individual request of an employee and how it complies with the mutually agreed up contract.”

Other demands included a thorough review of the new custodial schedule, the re-examination of expiring faculty contracts, financial transparency and an opportunity for members of the community to give suggestions about the financial decisions of the College. The senior officers responded to each one and reminded the group that the College is receptive to ideas through the e-mail address budget@vassar.edu or the Vassar and the Economy web site. According to the senior officers, they have received a variety of useful suggestions but did not feel that it was appropriate to share them publicly as they were not offered with the intention of being public.

In response to the first demand, the senior officers wrote that the College’s commitment is to the long-term fulfillment of the educational mission of the College, “There will be disagreement about what is essential to that mission and how to achieve it, and we welcome and depend upon discussions among members of the community that help to inform all of us about these differences.”

The complete response to the demands of the Campus Solidarity Working Group can be read after the jump:

Read the rest of this entry »

  • Leave a comment »

Tags: , , ,