It’s hard to set foot on campus these days without hearing the “G” word. Unfortunately, most people–including those in the press–have no clear idea what ‘governance’ in this context means, or, for that matter, just what the faculty are looking to fix. Plain and simply, the faculty would like to have a voice in where the Institute is headed. I think it’s fair for people who have such a vested interest in Rensselaer to have more than what they have now, which is nothing.
Part of the problem begins with the misuse of the Office of the Provost. I don’t mean to single out Bob Palazzo, because the problem certainly predates him. As the Chief Academic Officer, the Provost shouldn’t be a hack for the President. Unfortunately, instead of being a listening ear, the Provost is merely a hatchet. Provosts under Shirley Jackson have lacked the independence to an extent I’ve never seen at another school. Most recently, the process by which the new Provost was selected was a charade. If the search committee’s recommendations were truly considered, Shirley Jackson would have gone with someone else. Those involved wanted anyone but Bob Palazzo, as they feared he would be controlled by Dr. Jackson.
Two years ago, a survey was circulated about this topic by the Faculty Senate. I don’t have the full text in front of me, but it essentially asked the faculty about such radical ideas as having the faculty elect a trustee (a practice Cornell allows) and forming a union. Shirley Jackson ordered then-Provost Bud Peterson to order the Faculty Senate to destroy the survey results, and being no more than a hired gun for Jackson, Peterson complied. We all agree this was an outrageous overstepping of boundaries, but the only way to prevent such actions from happening again is to improve the governance structure.
There have been plenty of other actions and practices by the Administration which have led to great concern amongst the faculty. When the graduate tuition system was changed several years ago, many of us lost good graduate students who we could no longer fund. Lacking an avenue to influence this policy, we watched countless students make the painful decision to abandon the pursuit of advanced degrees. At the same time, we’ve watched tens of millions of dollars being thrown into arts and sports complexes while the strength of the Administration’s commitment to science and engineering becomes increasingly subject to debate. Keep in mind that all of this is occurring as the Institute incurs a record amount of debt, of which Shirley Jackson personally assumes no liability whatsoever.
To conclude, I love RPI. I have given it many years, and I want nothing but the best for this school. As such, I believe we need to give the people who share that best interest–the faculty–a bigger say in where things are headed here. Before it’s too late.
