Related Materials:
A motion calling for a vote of no-confidence in three top UNL administrators was withdrawn by the faculty member who offered it at the March meeting of the Faculty Senate. In its place, however, the Senate received a new motion calling on the administrators to explain how they will foster shared governance.
At the March meeting, Susan VanderPlas of the statistics department moved for a vote of no-confidence in Executive Vice Chancellor Mark Button, Vice Chancellor of IANR Tiffany Heng-Moss and Interim Vice Chancellor of Research and Innovation Jennifer Nelson. VanderPlas cited their roles in devising the system and metrics used last year to eliminate four departments and dismiss dozens of tenured and untenured faculty.
VanderPlas said she continued to believe those responsible for how last year’s budget cuts were managed should be held accountable but concluded the motion was no longer the best way to accomplish that.
“The threat of a no-confidence vote brought UNL administrators into dialogue with the faculty, and in that, it was effective,” VanderPlas said, noting that it had prompted NU President Jeffrey Gold and Interim Chancellor Kathy Ankerson to engage in talks with the Senate Executive Committee and other faculty groups.
The request to withdraw the motion required the approval of the full Senate, which voted to do so.
L.J. McElravy of the agricultural leadership, education and communication department
offered a new motion that asks the same three administrators to explain “how they would specifically engage in fostering shared governance and creating plans to that effect.” The administrators would be asked to report to the Senate Executive Committee within 30 days on their plans.
Aaron PeeksMease of the sociology department said he had shared McElravy’s motion with his colleagues. They thought it had less bite than the no-confidence motion but perhaps more legs, he said.
“Also in my experience, when you are dealing with an administration that refuses to acknowledge any past wrongs, it is very hard to move forward with somebody like that,” PeeksMease said. Administrators are eager to talk about the future and moving forward, he said, because that relieves them of responsibility for past actions.
The issue of accountability came up later during the open mic session. Wes Peterson of agricultural economics said, “I will not have trust in this administration, any in this administration, until I hear somebody admitted that the administration screwed up and takes responsibility and promises never to do it again.” The budget problems that led to the drastic program cuts made last year, Peterson said, were the result of decisions taken by administrators in years past, not by actions of any faculty members.
Tim Gay of the physics and astronomy department asked if there were any thoughts as to what President Gold or others could do to restore the trust of the faculty.
John Shrader, president of the Faculty Senate, said administrators needed to respond to the narrative “outside of campus, down the street and in other places” that the faulty were responsible for the problems of the university.
“The narrative is that we are apparently out of our minds,” Shrader said, “because we do stuff like this (no-confidence votes) and that we are the negative, you know, negatively affecting the reputation of the university.” The reality is the faculty had to take extraordinary measures at the end of the fall semester to remedy a leadership issue, Shrader said.
Because the April 7 meeting was the last one for some senators and new senators will be taking their places at the April 28 meeting, McElravy’s motion would not automatically carry over to the next meeting. Shrader said the Senate needed to vote to refer the motion to the Executive Committee, which could then bring it to the floor at the April 28 meeting for a vote. A motion to do so was passed.
In other business, the Faculty Senate heard
- A report from the Information Technologies and Services Committee. Michael Hempel of the electrical and computer engineering department delivered the report. One of the major items the committee has been dealing with is the federal requirement that all electronic class materials meet Americans with Disabilities Act requirements for accessibility. The deadline for complying with the federal requirements is this month. The committee has been focused on providing clear directions and sustained practices to insure that faculty are complying with the requirements, he said. In remarks at the beginning of the Senate meeting, Interim Chancellor Kathy Ankerson also stressed the importance of making sure UNL was in compliance with the ADA requirements.
- A report from the Ad Hoc Metrics Committee, which was formed in February to review the metrics developed by NU President Gold for the system’s strategic plan. The chair of the committee, Elizabeth Lewis of the department of teaching, learning and teacher education, said a question many had about the metrics was whether they were intended for making formative assessments or would be used as tools to eliminate departments. She said the committee had been assured the metrics would not be used to make direct evaluations of individual departments. The committee recommended that Executive Vice President David Jackson report annually to the Faculty Senate on the metrics and their use. It also recommended that the UNL chancellor and executive vice chancellor report on how the campus has performed on the metrics.
