UHH Faculty Congress Academic Affairs Reorganization Task Force Town Hall Meeting
April 22, 2016
o
Presentation by Chris Frueh (Task Force report appended to Minutes)
 Macro level approach
 CAS, COBE, CAFNRM are the colleges on the table.
 4 E&M positions (3 Deans and 1 Associate Dean)
Retrenchment Concerns
Reorganization may reduce the likelihood of retrenchment
Questions:
Imbalance problems clarification:
 CAS too sprawling, large, complicated to be run effectively
 Size and complexity may be a factor to this problem
 Deans should be more familiar with the disciplines in the college
 Issue of access when the college is too big (over 100 faculty for one dean)
 Why not integrate summer program into regular academic program – why is this not on the
table? There is a Dean there. The problems of CAS should not be others problems.
Discussion:
 Email comments read aloud:
 Supportive comment: Model AA seems to be logical and even. Professional studies have many
common aspects
 Statement from the college of AG faculty senate (appended): Need more evidence that these
models solve the existing problems. Large complex colleges are the norm at large universities.
 Concerned about process – noted that town hall was for reorg. Beginning in august a reorg plan
will be presented to BOR. Need more process to see where we are with this. What do the faculty
really think – CAS Dean S. Brown had asked faculty…Social sciences, ambiguity and doubt.
Humanities was confused. One division was gung ho on the reorg. Within CAS this is a critical
issue.
 Budget Analyst – unit 8 employees – how it affects the faculty, but also supporting structures.
These supporting structures need to be restructured.
 CAS secretary – some of the plans have 2 secretaries, are some of these employees going to be
downgraded. Clerical Staff – Matt answered: “no.”
 HGEA – how this will affect members? Are faculty willing to work alongside HGEA to make this
restructure work? Union for support staff. They need to be involved and have a voice. Matt P:
Admin must consult with relevant unions.
 Drop in students to University – Admissions issue? A lot of US schools are dropping SATs from
their admissions. How to rethink SATs in admissions.
 Feels like a bit of brokenness with the university. There will never be a perfect decision. We
need to address the issue during the Dean transition. Use a line to see both ends of the
spectrum.


















Not sure of what this purpose of the reorganization is. Is it to level the playing field? Seems like
a stupid idea. Every discipline has different needs. If Humanities is concerned about SSH, they
are still a vital part of GE requirements. Kind of a false approach.
Agreement on previous statement: if it’s really up to the faculty members, they should decide
which is best – grassroots effort.
Committee has done well with internal factors. External factors. Negative impact could result if
COBE is included. COBE is ranked high in the nation. If we do the reorg, this could impact the
ranking.
If we do consider externalities, some units feel restrained – Marine Science is recognized. Want
better representation at Chancellor’s level.
It has been a discussion of CAS as too big. Eliminating Division Chairs, Dept. Chairs working with
Dean will have advantages.
Did the Task Force consider breaking CAS into college sizes like CAFNRM? Not feasible, or cost
neutral to work this way. If this was a model, maybe this should be looked at.
No matter what model, there will be dislocation and grumbling…end result should justify doing
it. Want more projected results.
Management class…just by principles of textbook, CAS is a mess. Really unsustainable span of
control. Health of the organization, it’s important that CAS is healthy. Don’t want multiple
competing cultures and programs.
Organization needs to be all encompassing. Should look at totality, not just academics. Should
be more comprehensive.
Much of this was initiated because Natural Sciences wanted to separate from CAS. Initially, they
were told they could not do it. We have 2 Deans in CAS. Humanities & Social Sciences could have
one Dean, and Natural Sciences the other.
CCECS Dean – could become Director? One model uses this: 5 college model.
CCECS should be brought into the whole. Professional schools are something to think about.
Systemic standpoint – not good practice to just focus on one area of organization.
The COBE is accredited, quite an honor. More difficult to retain this accreditation. Lost faculty to
other units. The bigger point is that we have to recruit on a national basis. We have to offer
salaries that are higher to be competitive. There are issues of retaining the quality of the
program. If we try to level down the cost per unit, we need more business students or start
replacing with lecturers. Reaching a point where we can’t continue down that road or lose
accreditation.
The problems have not been adequately articulated. Access may be managed in different ways.
More systematic approach to identify problems before we move to address the problems.
Much more process necessary here. If we have smaller colleges and more access to Deans – is
this really better? The role of the Dean seems to be one more layer telling you what to do rather
than championing the faculty. Revisit the role of the Dean – as a more hard-working advocate
for the faculty.
We are in a place where we have the preferred resources to retain teaching faculty. How to best
manage this reality.
Where are we going with this? Rearranging the chairs of the titanic. Maybe plan where we want
to get to first, then go from there. Cart before the horse.



















Best for faculty, but what is best for students who allow faculty to have positions. Need to look
at what is best for our students.
How many students on Task Force: 1. 7 total on Task Force. Over 10% of Task Force was student.
We are a Faculty Congress Task Force, and deal with academics. If the admin is going to move
forward, we have to work together.
Our job is to look from the faculty perspective.
Student government will be reviewing this in the near future.
Everyone has this since last Thursday morning.
This has been publically in the Faculty Congress.
What is the timeline: when faculty come back from summer and there is a good proposal, it will
go to the relevant unions.
Motion for 2 town hall meetings. Next will be in the fall.
When all of these plans are presented, the admin will devise a plan. The union will look at this
critically and negotiate as needed.
Need more channels for input. Online resources. Currently too many layers between faculty and
upper admin.
Jean welcomed comments, but only received 2. Chris will create a survey monkey for input. Jean
will continue to collect comments. Can edit out identity if needed. Comments can be posted on
congress website.
No plan for a vote since this is an admin responsibility. Possible at Faculty Congress meeting to
raise motion to recommend or endorse a specific model. Motion could be made to let faculty
select. Faculty Congress can only endorse or recommend.
Faculty members, we have tenure and can say what we want. We do not live in an ivory tower
here. Comments can be made without reservation. Need to come together on this.
Maybe we could address lack of representation without going through a reorganization. Maybe
adjust policies in admin. representation.
Present Task Force has completed their charge. This meeting is part of studying the
reorganization. Next Faculty Congress meeting is the last for the year. It is in May. Voting to
have next year’s Faculty Congress seated. Will be up to next year’s Chair to create another Task
Force.
Faculty Congress website has all motions made.
Admin position is that there will be reorganization? Not reorganizing is not an option? Admin
has the option to decide not to reorganize.
Correction: APT not ATP
Adjourned at 4:21pm