Volume 2 Number 2 Spring 1991

PRESIDENT'S NOTES: By Tal Henson

This piece stands as a sort of valedictory for what has been a most interesting year for AAUP. Because of the Curran issue, a number of concerns long held by our chapter have been brought into sharper focus. One might add to this the fact that AAUP has also been raised to more visible heights. This may or may not have increased many people's understanding of what the organization is or what it does, but such AAUP concerns as academic freedom, university governance, and censure have penetrated the awareness of more faculty than ever before. It is regrettable that AAUP assumes a public dimension only in times of trouble and lapses into oblivion when matters go well. That, however, is the nature of the organization, and most of us would be happy to perceive no need for it at all.

Recent disturbances here--the Curran affair and consequent censure of the president--may have created sufficient momentum to produce change. Partly on the basis of an AAUP-sponsored resolution, the University Senate has appointed committees to consider revisions in the faculty handbook and to pursue the vital issue of university governance. Also on the agenda, as it has been for several years, is the challenge of removing the university from censure.

In the view of many, issues involving both academic freedom and university governance stem directly from the Board of Trustees. This body poses a multifaceted problem--mode of selection, size, length of term, perception of the faculty, understanding of the nature of a university, its function therein, conflicts of interest, etc. Underlying the censure of President Martin was a general feeling that primary guilt lay elsewhere. The University Senate Chair's parting remarks clearly expressed concerns that are shared by many. In a recent visit to Auburn, Jordan Kurland, whose function in the national office of AAUP involves him with governance issues across the United States, expressed grave concern over the status of governance and academic freedom here.

All the above may sound negative and pessimistic, and I admit that my year as chapter president has not induced the singing of hosannas. But I am naive enough to believe that Auburn can solve its problems if all members of the university constituency approach each other in good faith with a view to defining their respective roles. It is incumbent upon all of us to work in this direction. How the Board of Trustees handles the presidential search process will go far in determining the relationship of that body with the faculty. Let us hope.
SPRING MEETING:

The AU faculty is cordially invited to attend the Spring quarter meeting of the Auburn chapter of the AAUP. It will be held on Thursday, May 23, 1991, at 7:00 P.M. in Haley 2116. Please note that this will be an evening meeting. The meeting will include elections of chapter officers and reports from members of the Senate ad hoc commitees on revision of the faculty handbook and university governance.

PRINCIPLES AND OBJECTIVES: By Conrad Ross

At the conclusion of the Spring meeting, I will assume the presidency of the AU Chapter of the AAUP for 1991-1992. The current president, Tal Henson, suggested I formulate some goals, as I saw them, for the chapter in the year ahead. I'll attempt to do so here, although the recent decision by President Martin to retire in April 1992 will determine to a considerable degree the principal subject of the chapter's interest--namely, the selection process the Board of Trustees will adopt, how much faculty involvement there will be, and whether or not the Board is truly open to input from the professorate.

In many ways the objectives of the chapter will remain the same. We will continue to follow our principles. It was in the principle of facilitating effective cooperation among teachers and research scholars that the AAUP was formed 75 years ago. Today, we as a faculty believe in and wish to be judged against the principles of academic freedom and its maintenance on our campus, of shared responsibility between faculty and administration in the governance of the academy, of the pursuance of excellence, and of due process. These are the principles I want to see our chapter work for and continue to advance in the year ahead.

Under Tal Henson's leadership we have by resolution in the University Senate achieved a statement calling for the study of the relationship among the faculty, administration, and Board of Trustees. This resolution came immediately following the vote of censure concerning President Martin's conduct of the Curran issue. The Curran affair, along with the continuance of AU on the AAUP list of censured administrations, highlight the need for rethinking the basic roles of faculty, administration, and Board of Trustees in the governance of this university.

To most of the colleagues I have spoken to, it would seem that there is agreement that the notion of defining roles and limits is the best course in leading Auburn to excellence. Yet how we are to get there and who is to lead us are problems that must be faced in the immediate future. That there is little dialogue between the faculty and administration does not contribute to a solution. Because President Martin has become a "lame duck," the quality of leadership coming from the Board of Trustees has become our main concern. Eight years have passed, and AU remains on the list of censured administrations. In fact, the matter has become worse with the Curran issue and the addendum to the AU censureship to be published in the next issue of Academe. Where will the leadership come that will remove the stigma of AAUP censureship and bring AU back into the ranks of the academy?

As professors we are eager to regain credibility in the selection of a new president and we are eager to regain credibility in the academic community. In these regards the AAUP has much to say that should be of benefit to all concerned. The recent (1990) edition of the AAUP Redbook, a collection of the most important policy documents and reports of the AAUP, is available. All administrative officers and all members of our Board of Trsutees should read it. Then they might know the prevailing standards and practices among major American colleges and universities and learn how we can get AU back in the good graces of the academy.

REVISING THE FACULTY HANDBOOK: By Dennis Evans

In light of recent events at Auburn, it seems prophetic that an ad hoc Senate committee has been named to review and revise the AU Faculty Handbook. Much of the handbook is out-of-date, and a number of already-adopted policies and changes need to be incorporated into a revision. Now is an excellent time to do so, with the anticipation of a new university administration, for the faculty to lead the way in seeking revision of the handbook.

Named April 9, the ad hoc committee is chaired by Marcia Jacobson (English) and includes Rebekah Pindzola (Communication Disorders), Gerald Johnson (Political Science), Ethel Jones (Economics), Vice-President Ron Henry, and this writer, Dennis Evans (ACES/Ag Economics and Rural Sociology). The committee had its first meeting April 29 and is expected to be active for at least a year. The committee will have to depend upon recommendations and the work of other Senate committees, special subcommittees, and other entities within the university. This input is important. Our local AAUP chapter can and should have something to say about the revision in handbook policies and procedures and I encourage AAUP members, as well as all concerned AU faculty, to share specific concerns and suggestions with any member of the committee or your Senator.

I want to comment on a few issues I feel are important in revising the handbook. The biggest question in the minds of enlightened Auburn faculty today is the question of AU's commitment to meaningful faculty involvement in university governance. Much controversy here of late has been focused upon this central issue, and it is still unclear as to which direction this issue will go in the future. But as individuals and collectively as a faculty we can work to see that Auburn University moves towards a better balance in its governance practices. Frankly, I would like to see in the faculty handbook a strong and definitive statement by the Board of Trustees and president supporting faculty participation in university governance. The existing statement on faculty participation in university governance (two sentences on page 5 of current handbook) is a poor excuse for a commitment to faculty inputs.

Any revision of the faculty handbook should contain an up-to- date and complete set of guidelines and policies relating to appointments, promotion, and tenure. These subjects comprise the most critical part of a faculty handbook. The existing promotion and tenure guidelines have already been altered and do not reflect the current reality. There also needs to be a clearer definition of who is covered by the policies and guidelines in the handbook. On the face of it, this seems a ridiculously unnecessary concern. The Curran case, however, brought to light a basic question of whether the promotion and tenure policies contained in the faculty handbook applied to potential faculty or already employed faculty only. On a more mundane note, no one at Auburn seems to have a clear definition of who the general faculty are. Currently a small number of tenured faculty members employed by AU academic departments are not members of the general faculty (off-campus Extension faculty who technically are not members of the General Faculty because they are not in residence on the main campus). And what of faculty who may be on international assignments? Are they covered by promotion and tenure guidelines? To add to the confusion, the recent personnel reclassification system has at least temporarily removed a sizable group of previous general faculty members to a sort of limbo.

In revising the handbook we must understand it is an enduring document. We need to address concerns raised by AAUP as a result of its 1983 censure. I understand one AAUP concern was addressed in 1987 with the adoption of a statement regarding de facto tenure in the Promotion and Tenure guidelines. Other AAUP concerns, specifically the appeal process for rank and tenure and rights of faculty in case of financial exigency, will need to be addressed more fully in the revision.

I trust that my own thoughts on issues and concerns related to revising the faculty handbook have stimulated your own thinking on this subject. There are important issues and questions to be resolved in revising the handbook. And you as individual faculty members must let us know what your ideas on a revised handbook are.

STATE CONFERENCE REPORT: By Charlotte Ward

The Annual meeting of the Alabama Conmference of the AAUP was held at the Auburn University Conference Center on April 13, with delegates from all four active chapters reporting on chapter concerns and activities. Following the chapter reports, the problems of politically-appointed trustees, lack of financial support for education in the state, and salary inequities were discussed.

The main business of the day was the confirmation of former president-elect David Vold of the Unversity of Alabama as president and the election of Ed Terry of the University of Alabama as secretary-treasurer, Larry Gerber of AU as president- elect, and Charlotte Borst of UAB as archivist. Dr. Jordan Kurland, Associate General Secretary, gave the after-lunch address, which was attended by several visitors, including Judy Shepherd of the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer. Dr. Kurland cited a number of academic freedom cases in whichthe issues were not clear-cut. For example, how is academic freedom to be balanced with the sensitivities ofindividuals and groups that have historically suffered slights and discrimination within the academic community? How does academic freedom relate to the production and exhibition of art works that may be offensive? The AAUP often faces such questions, and the answers to them are not easy.

The last two years have been a time of revival for the Alabama Conference, thanks mostly to campus problems seen by faculty members as AAUP concerns. There are now four active chapters, compared to two in 1989. Several formerly active chapters, however, including the one at Alabama State University, have ceased to function. And there is still a need for an AAUP voice at the state's junior colleges. It's great to see progress, but we still have a long way to go.