Remarks for the Board of Governors Meeting, December 8, 2001 (David F.
Gruber)
I am David Gruber; I am a Professor of Philosophy here at Truman and one of
the Rectors in the Residential Colleges. Much of my service work to the
profession is through my activism with the American Association of University
Professors; I recently completed my second term as president of the Missouri
Conference and I am presently serving in my sixth year on the Association’s
National Council and second year on its Executive Committee.
Academic freedom and shared governance, as the essential structures necessary
for our profession to ensure the quality of its work and the flourishing of
higher education, are the hallmark principles of our Association. (The 1940
Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure http://www.aaup.org/publications/Redbook/1940stat.htm
is always relevant, but let me stress here the 1966 Statement on Government
of Colleges and Universities, http://www.aaup.org/publications/Redbook/Govern.htm
which was developed jointly by the AAUP, the American Council on Education, and
the Association of Governing Boards of Colleges and Universities.)
My colleagues have told you this morning of the opportunity missed for
faculty participation in this decision, of a process off track in that faculty
could not exercise their professional responsibilities to deliberate on the
academic and curricular dimensions of a proposal to change the structure of
courses taught in the summer. Decisions in a university should be developed from
a variety of perspectives; there can be little doubt that the process was flawed
in this case.
However, I would like to suggest a broader, perhaps more troubling
implication that has occurred to me in the juxtaposition of the recent problem
and the current long-range planning efforts of the University. I would like to
focus on how we explicate the “public” element of the University’s
mission. Too often lately, “student learning” has been reduced to a
focus on being “student centered,” almost to suggest more the model of
satiated consumers than educated citizens. Too often, the conversation reduces
“public” to “affordable,” which then means “cheap
tuition” much more than it would seem to mean “a responsibility to
educate a engaged citizen leaders.”
Certainly there are financial dimensions to the scheduling of summer courses,
but even there the faculty, speaking through the Faculty Senate, has a
responsibility to advise relative to academic and curricular impacts. More
importantly, the current proposal to restructure summer courses has extensive
and pervasive academic dimensions: the scheduling and selection of courses,
content and pedagogy decisions, and perhaps most importantly implications for
how faculty commit their time and structure their work during the summer, when
we not only teach but also update our courses and keep ourselves current and
active in our scholarship.
If we become so pre-occupied with budgetary constraints-and with purchasing
schools, hospitals, and fire stations-that we forget even to ask questions about
academic quality and student learning-questions at the heart of faculty concern
and effort, as expressed through shared governance–then we are in danger of
forgetting the values at the core of our mission. Reflective practice that stays
focused on the academic aspirations of this University would be insistent that
such important structural decisions fully include the deliberations and
commitment of the faculty.
Comments added at the Board Meeting.
Perhaps the remarks of my colleagues this morning have not been an
efficient use of the Board’s meeting time, but I think this has been an
important session, an opportunity for Board members to witness the important
discussion on the academic dimensions of this decision, a discussion that should
have taken place before this proposal was ready to bring to the Board.
One of my colleagues this morning I believe has stated that our task as
faculty members is two-fold: teaching and research. Let me refer you to the
statement of Faculty Roles and Responsibilities, which was passed by the Faculty
Senate. That statement rightly emphasizes a crucial third dimension of our
roles: that of service, which includes the citizenship by which we participate
in decisions, particularly on academic and curricular matters, and by which we
take our share of the responsibility for the values and structures of the
university community. The discussion this morning should not be about whether
the faculty lost an entitlement; it should be about whether the faculty
exercised its civic responsibility.