Minutes
President
Bollinger convened the meeting at
1. President Bollinger began by
noting his delight that Alan Brinkley had agreed to serve as Provost, beginning
He then expressed his deep appreciation for all that
President Bollinger commented on four items:
· He indicated that the budget was where he
had expected it to be. He noted that
· He reported that he is moving forward with
the planning process for campus expansion.
Space is a critical issue and he has established campus and community
advisory groups on the topic. He noted
that this is a topic on which we have to think broadly—what is possible for
growth contiguous to the existing footprint and, if this were possible, what
would be the architectural character and impact of this new space. The committees must also imagine space
solutions as perhaps being elsewhere in
· Midnight’s
Children was a tremendous experience for
· Nicholas Lemann has accepted the deanship of
the
President Bollinger invited
faculty to share any thoughts they might have on the recent free speech occurrences. Professor Arac observed that the President,
Provost and Vice President had responded very appropriately and had been very
supportive of the fundamental right of freedom of speech. Professor Foner reminded faculty that they
now can expect even incidental remarks to find their way into the broader arena
with the instant and sweeping communication capabilities made possible by email
and the web. He cautioned that the
institution must be sure that it does not let these often very organized
campaigns somehow intimidate faculty and abridge deeply held fundamental
rights. Professor Dirks rose to add his
appreciation for the administration’s strong support for the principle of
freedom of speech.
In response to a question
from Professor Sisman asking whether there are limits
beyond which freedom of speech should be protected, President Bollinger summarized
his thinking about these issues.
Professor Helfand then asked under what circumstances the President
would feel compelled to comment on the content of a faculty member’s
remarks. In response President Bollinger
indicated that he rarely would; however, in the recent instance, while
recognizing that it had the potential to have a chilling effect, he felt he
needed to give his own personal opinion on the matter. President Bollinger then acknowledged in
response to a question from Professor Jervis that it was not clear how best to
handle a faculty member’s intolerance of a student’s position that differs from
her/his own. Professor Higgins noted
that opposing points of view can sometimes be used to stimulate enlightened
dialogue and intellectual development. In
the worst sense, it can fall to the depths of dogma. Professor Katznelson noted the challenge
arising from the duality of the nature of the discourse fostered within the
academy and the way in which the public thinks about freedom of speech. President Bollinger reported that he is
thinking of naming a faculty committee to consider the issue of academic
freedom and its intersection with freedom of speech. He noted that there is a widely-held belief
that the academy is out of step with the broader society and that it is
incumbent upon universities to do a better job of communicating their beliefs
and principles to the broader society.
2. It was moved, seconded and
approved by majority vote that the minutes of the meeting on
3. Professor Andrew Nathan,
chair of the Executive Committee of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, presented
its report.
● He
indicated that ECFAS had been discussing the topic of freedom of speech even
before the most recent incident. He
noted that ECFAS applauded Provost Jonathan Cole’s
December 2002 letter as a learned discourse on freedom of speech. Prompted by that, the Executive Committee,
even before the recent the teach-in, voted to adopt a resolution speaking to
the importance of the protection of freedom of speech on the campus; a copy of
the resolution has been posted on the ECFAS website. He went on to add ECFAS’s vote of thanks to
the President, Provost and Vice President for their support of the principle of
free speech. In response to Professor
Sisman’s question about whether ECFAS had endorsed the application of the
principles in Provost Cole’s letter to situations beyond
● ECFAS
has devoted extensive time to discussing ways of expanding its role. In particular, they have been focusing on
ways to increase communication between the faculty and the Arts and Sciences
administration and the faculty and the broader university administration. ECFAS has met with numerous
administrators and found them open and welcoming of faculty comment and input. ECFAS is now exploring informal ways to
increase this communication. It intends
to meet with the president prior to every faculty meeting. It wishes to continue its monthly meeting
with the Vice President and deans, and to meet regularly with the Provost. He noted that within the Arts and Sciences
there is already a quite robust faculty governance structure, but that ECFAS intends to develop committees that would be more
actively involved with the central administration too. Professor Nathan invited individuals to
indicate their interest in participating.
As part of efforts to expand the functioning of ECFAS, it is generating
a questionnaire soliciting faculty input on structure and priorities for
ECFAS. The questionnaire will be
distributed in the fall semester.
● Professor
Nathan thanked the outgoing members of the Executive Committee for their
contributions to this year’s activities.
He reminded those who had not yet done so to be sure to cast their
ballot for the new members.
● It was moved, seconded and approved by majority vote that
4. Professor Andrew Nathan in
his capacity as committee co-chair presented the report of the Faculty Budget
Group. He reminded the faculty that the
Faculty Budget Group is comprised of three members of ECFAS and the six members
of the Steering Committee of the Chairs.
The Faculty Budget Group met throughout the budget preparation period,
and discussed a number of issues and received in depth explanations of all
aspects of the planned submission. He
noted that faculty involvement in the budget process through the mechanism of
the Faculty Budget Group was a very useful process, although one that did not
lend itself readily to conveying summaries of its operations to the broader
faculty. It is his hope that, as more
serve, the information base gained by participating in the Faculty Budget Group
will ripple out through the Arts and Sciences faculty. At the same time, Professor Nathan
acknowledged that the Faculty Budget Group could do yet more, primarily through
greater involvement in the priority setting process. The Faculty Budget Group intends to start
meeting in the fall with the Vice President for Arts and Sciences even before
the planning parameters are received from the Office of Management and
Budget. It sees the Faculty Budget Group
as one very important mechanism for increasing faculty involvement in the Arts
and Sciences operation.
Vice President Cohen then
took the microphone to respond to questions about specific items in the
budget. Vice President Cohen noted that
the Faculty Budget Group, along with the two annual reports on the budget to
the entire Arts and Sciences faculty, are the principle mechanisms for ensuring
greater budgetary transparency. In many
respects, the budget is a policy document, so it is important that more and
more faculty understand it.
While acknowledging that the
Arts and Sciences is operating in a very constrained
financial environment, Vice President Cohen reported that the budget is
projected to close again in balance at the end of FY 03. He acknowledged, however, that crafting the
FY 04-08 budget had been an extremely challenging process. In the end, the Arts and Sciences was able to submit a balanced budget for FY 04 and FY
05. He reminded the faculty that at this
time last year, deficits had been projected for FY 06 and 07 because the Arts
and Sciences had not been able to fully absorb the set-aside required for the
site acquisition reserve. Those deficits
have been carried forward into the FY 04-FY 08 budget. He went on to note that, as currently
forecast, in FY 08 the operating budget is projected to be in balance with all
but $1.2 million of the cumulative deficit curtailed. At the same time, he cautioned faculty that
it is not really possible to speak with any confidence beyond the next one-to-two
years.
Returning to the topic of
the site acquisition reserve, Vice President Cohen noted that the Arts and
Sciences had been permitted to use those funds to capitalize on some recent
space expansion opportunities. With a fairly
modest dollar investment, the Arts and Sciences will be able to provide
adequate space for the following five departments—Religion, EALAC, MEALAC,
Statistics and Mathematics.
The instructional budget for
faculty salaries is grown at 4% for each year of the FY 04-08 submission. Vice President Cohen reminded faculty that
the October Faculty Size and Effort Report had shown growth in faculty size
this year. He noted that faculty size is
expected to grow again next year. While
this growth is already built into the FY 04-08 budget submission, it was not
possible to build in resources for enhancing eminence. Any actions beyond maintaining steady state
would require additional investments.
While on the topic of investments, Vice President Cohen expressed the
appreciation of the Arts and Sciences for the special bridging supplement that
was provided to Economics by President Bollinger.
In closing, Vice President
Cohen echoed President Bollinger’s observation that all institutions of higher
education are suffering in this more fiscally-constrained time. He observed that he had hoped to pass on to
his successor a five-year balanced budget, but had been able to manage only a
two-year balanced budget. He reflected,
however, that life would have been considerably different if he had had even a
two-year balanced budget upon assuming his Vice Presidency.
5. Professor David Freedberg
presented a report from the Vice Presidential search committee. He indicated that the committee was hard at
work. He noted that they had been
diligent and committed in their efforts and thanked the Arts and Sciences
faculty for all of the nominations and input that they had provided to the
committee. Professor Freedberg indicated
that the committee was at the point of interviewing candidates and hoped to
forward a slate to the Provost and President by mid-May.
6. Vice President Cohen took a
few minutes to reflect on the eight years since his first faculty meeting in
1995. He indicated that these eight
years had been enormously rewarding and that he wished to acknowledge the unwavering
support that he had received from both Presidents Rupp and Bollinger. He acknowledged his special thanks to Provost
Cole for his deep commitment to the Arts and Sciences and his unflagging
devotion to ensuring its strength and stability. He closed by expressing his gratitude to the
faculty, noting that it had been a very special privilege to work with them.
7. New Business:
Professor Patricia Grieve
rose to speak on behalf of the chairs of the 29 departments of the Arts and
Sciences. Speaking for the chairs, she
requested that a motion recording their recognition of
Professor Robert Jervis rose
to request that a motion formally acknowledging the extraordinary contributions
of Provost Cole also be entered into the record. Professor Jervis noted in particular the
contributions to ensuring the quality and stature of the institution that Provost
Cole had made through the ad hoc system.
Professor Elaine Sisman rose to second the
motion, citing the manner in which he had guided
President Bollinger, by consensus, adjourned the meeting at
Prepared
by
Roxie R. Smith