TEXT OF PRESIDENT McCORMICK'S JULY 13,
2010 RESPONSE TO THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON CHARGE S-0805,
SENATE REPRESENTATION BY FULL-TIME, NON-TENURE-TRACK FACULTY:
I am
writing in response to the Report and Recommendations on Charge S-0805 on Senate Representation by Full-time,
Non-tenure-track Faculty, as adopted by the University Senate on January 29,
2010, upon the recommendation of the University Structure and Governance
Committee. Please express my thanks to
the members of the Committee.
While I applaud the Senate’s goals
of inclusiveness and clarity in proposing these changes in faculty
representation to the Senate, I do not believe this particular proposal advances
either goal. Full-time, non-tenure-track
faculty, or annuals as they are referred to in the regulations governing Senate
membership, are already eligible to run as voting Senators, under University
Policy 50.2.1.B.(5) and C.(1). The
current regulations group annual faculty with part-time lecturers, reflective
of the common interests of importance to both groups. Including annuals within the pool of eligible
tenured and tenure-track faculty Senators, as proposed by the Senate
resolution, seems less in keeping with the principle of representation around a
shared community of interests. Further,
the resolution allows annual faculty to run for election to the Senate either
with full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty or with part-time lecturers; while the report discourages
“double-dipping,” it only states that no one person can run in more than one
election or hold more than one seat at a time.
Such dual eligibility renders the status of annuals more confusing
rather than less so. Additional
ambiguity stems from the fact that academic departments university-wide differ
in the extent to which they consider annuals to be members of the faculty and
therefore differ in the corresponding rights and privileges granted them. Adopting the proposed system of representation
would introduce additional inconsistency, as some departments would likely
allow annuals to represent their full-time tenured and tenured-track faculty,
while others would not. Overall,
adopting the proposed revised system of faculty representation seems likely to
decrease rather than increase the clarity and consistency of the Senate’s rules
regarding faculty representation.
For these reasons, I respectfully
decline to accept the Senate’s revisions of the regulations governing
eligibility for faculty Senator elections as currently proposed.
Sincerely yours,
Richard L. McCormick
c: Steve Diner, Chancellor, Newark Campus
Philip Furmanski, Executive Vice President for Academic
Affairs
Wendell Pritchett, Chancellor, Camden Campus