Share This

Future of UMD Governance hinges on March 5 vote

UEA Head Negoriator: Dave Schimpf

Chancellor Black’s e-mails on Jan. 28 and Feb. 15 announced that the Campus Assembly will vote on a proposed revision to the governance structure at its March 5 meeting (2:00 p.m., Rafters).

The proposed structure would mean that much more responsibility for educational policy is vested in our faculty. Most of us think that is how a university is supposed to work!

I believe that any member of a university’s internal community should be able to talk or write to — and expect respectful listening or reading by — any other member. And consultation with staff and students about proposed changes in educational policy is vital. It is needed in order to consider as many implications of a potential change as we can, because faculty wear blinders as much as any other group does. But faculty should be the ones to decide on what advice to give to administration after considering these views from others and deliberating amongst themselves.

Thus it is essential that every faculty individual who is a voting member of the Assembly does what it takes to be there on March 5 and cast her/his vote. If faculty don’t show up, the proposed structure may not win endorsement.

If you have one or more class conflicts that afternoon, make arrangements to meet those obligations in some other way. If you are not a voting member, see if you can help out a voting colleague who needs such a favor. If you aren’t needed as a sub, be there as a non-voting attendee if your afternoon allows it.

The UMD of the future will owe you for your commitment that day. After decades of suppression of faculty in campus educational policy, this is an opportunity that must be seized.

Once the recommendation of educational policy is properly entrusted to faculty, I hope that we will dig deeply and seek a better education for all of our students. By this I mean a soul-search for a more worthy liberal education component.

The UMD 2011 Strategic Plan is commendable in its avowed goal of “lifelong pursuit of wisdom.” “Wisdom” is a bold ambition that I did not expect in this age. But there is no map for approaching this goal. Indeed, the Plan has no definition of wisdom. This deserves a healthy debate among the faculty, for without congealed thoughts about this there can be no real plan and the statement is a hollow one.

I suggest that faculty write visionary proposals for others to consider. This would help ideas be considered more on their own merits and shortcomings, less likely to rise or fall through the quality of salesmanship by in-person charm, intimidation, or persistence. One hallmark of a better educational program is its continued effectiveness after the departure of the individuals who champion it.

Some of the ancient philosophers might disagree with this valuing of the written idea over the spoken one, but they don’t have a vote here. Of course, it would be good for students to learn about that fundamental argument as part of their university education.