archive-org.com » ORG » A » AAUP.ORG

Total: 1208

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • Ten Decades of AAUP Investigations | AAUP
    of new officers and Council members In 1955 the Council charged a special committee of eight professors with assessing the general issues of concern and the particular issues in cases at eighteen institutions of alleged pro Communist activity and of refusal to testify against others In its report issued in 1956 and a supplementary report two years later the special committee published findings in all of the cases and received praise for restoring the AAUP s good name 1965 74 University of California at Los Angeles 1971 In the richness of its complex subject matter and in the thoroughness skill and value of the investigating committee s analysis of the many issues presented this report yields to no other that the AAUP has produced Because its content cannot be summarized in a single paragraph a few comments will have to suffice Despite the report s title the resulting censure was directed against the University of California Board of Regents The UCLA chancellor with faculty support had declined to act against the assistant professor whose dismissal the regent sought whereupon they took the matter out of his hands During its site visits the investigating committee interviewed a collection of prominent Californians Among them were regent chair William French Smith who was to become President Richard Nixon s attorney general and Governor Ronald Reagan a regent ex officio When the investigating committee submitted its report to Committee A an unrelated episode led to criminal charges against the assistant professor and a draft of the report with an invitation for comments was delivered to her jail cell When initial discussion of potential censure removal occurred she had broken parole and was a fugitive from justice Years later legally cleared she applied for and obtained a full time position at the University of California Santa Cruz She had been granted tenure by the time censure was removed and she recently retired at the rank of full professor 1975 84 State University of New York 1977 Among all the AAUP investigations only the 1956 McCarthy era special committee undertaking that involved eighteen institutions was larger in scope than the 1977 SUNY endeavor The State University of New York at the time consisted of four university centers two medical centers fourteen four year colleges three specialized colleges six two year agricultural and technical colleges four statutory colleges at Cornell and one at Alfred The SUNY budget for 1976 77 referring to a need to respond creatively to fiscal restraints called for the abolition of 528 positions throughout the system With faculty appointment terminations being announced and implemented at campus after campus an AAUP investigating committee visited eight of them and documented departures from AAUP supported standards In all 62 tenured faculty members suffered termination of appointment with 29 of them eventually reinstated 103 nontenured faculty members received notice of termination with 34 later reinstated The need for these mass actions was unclear no financial exigency was declared and the number of full time SUNY faculty members

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/article/ten-decades-aaup-investigations (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive


  • A Century of Change | AAUP
    for cause only after the institution has afforded a proper hearing and carried the burden of proof The 1940 statement draws legitimacy on these and other points from its joint parentage It would behoove the Association going forward to seek occasional opportunities for similar collaboration with administrative groups Occasionally a faculty member will overstate the scope of academic freedom asserting for example a right to disregard established grading practices or to ignore topics that a department requires all instructors to cover in a multisection course Curiously the Western Association of Schools and Colleges maintains in its Handbook of Accreditation that academic freedom protects not only faculty and students but also staff While college business officers for example deserve an opportunity to express professional opinions academic freedom is not the mantle shielding them from adverse consequences With the Association s guidance each succeeding generation must reach an understanding of academic freedom Changes in Tenure Tenure is surely the strongest protection for academic freedom The 1940 Statement of Principles supports a maximum probationary period of seven years which the academic community widely recognizes at least for appointees eligible for tenure The endpoint of tenure has changed since the Association s founding Beginning in 1967 Congress took a series of steps raising the mandatory retirement age for American employees Debate raged over the impact of these changes on higher education If professors could choose their own retirement dates would academic freedom and the tenure system survive Could the academy continue its progress toward diversity The AAUP argued in favor of eliminating mandatory retirement suggesting that academic institutions substitute reliance on retirement incentives and if needed the occasional dismissal of a tenured professor for cause As of January 1 1994 Congress eliminated mandatory retirement for tenured faculty The sky has not fallen in the intervening two decades Research intensive institutions most often see an uptick in the average age of their faculty stalling the entry of new scholars Suggesting however that older faculty members are less productive or current in their disciplines than their younger colleagues perpetuates ageist stereotypes Proceedings for the dismissal of tenured faculty may have increased slightly although assuredly not to the level of widespread abuse The challenge today and for the foreseeable future will be protecting the academic freedom of faculty members who will never be eligible for tenure The teaching of controversial subjects may be a fool s errand for those who would thereby put their livelihoods at risk As a society we become the poorer for it Shared Governance and Ethics In Origins of the Association an address on the occasion of the AAUP s fiftieth anniversary in 1965 the eminent Columbia University history professor Walter Metzger found much to celebrate in the Association s steadfast defense of academic freedom At the same time he raised some challenges Where was work on shared governance and what about ethics These issues he explained had concerned the founders Yet they subsequently attracted little attention within the Association which instead devoted most of its energy to academic freedom Metzger expressed the hope that fifty years later the Association could mark a positive midcourse correction We can surely do so for shared governance The AAUP now has an investigative process for governance violations a companion list of sanctioned institutions and an abiding commitment to collective bargaining as a means of advancing shared governance The huzzahs are more muted for the Association s efforts in professional ethics The year after Metzger s call the Association adopted the Statement on Professional Ethics intended to serve as a reminder of the variety of responsibilities assumed by all members of the profession It offers important counsel on how professors should approach their academic endeavors their colleagues and their students In its website s section on Professional Ethics the AAUP explains that its work in the area of professional ethics is primarily educative to inform members of the higher education community about principles of professional ethics and to encourage their observance If the Association s website is a primary outreach tool one observes with some dismay that as of this writing most of the items among the handful of ethics resources are at least a decade old Calling institutions to account for their failings in academic freedom or governance seems more congenial than turning attention inward to the profession Metzger raised the prospect of the Association s developing sanctions for faculty who commit professional improprieties This however does not appear to be even remotely in the cards for reasons of appetite scope and resources Is the Association content merely to protect members of the professoriate Surely not Faculty members seeking assistance are frequently told that their situations do not present potential violations of Association policy Two academic freedom investigations in the past century have resulted in published reports that exonerated the administration coincidentally both involved the same institution Northwestern University in 1962 and 1988 The Association has never filed an amicus brief supporting an administration that faithfully followed AAUP policy in dismissing a professor such a step however might be too much even for the founders to bear Academic Freedom and the Law How well have the courts protected academic freedom over the past century Even posing that question might startle the Association s founders for whom a link between academic freedom and the law might seem strange Judicial reactions to academic freedom have followed a twisted if not tortured path Consider first that academic freedom and the First Amendment are not coextensive The First Amendment limits only the actions of government and hence does not reach a private institution s relationship with its faculty At private institutions academic freedom is typically enforced under contract law The First Amendment covers many types of public employees from gardeners to generals Faculty at public colleges and universities may or may not merit a special place in the free speech realm The US Supreme Court first explicitly mentioned academic freedom in 1952 in a dissenting opinion by Justice William Douglas

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/article/century-change (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • How Did We Get Here? | AAUP
    encourage action consistent with AAUP policy by local faculty providing that they did not attempt investigations of local dismissals which required impartial investigation by the national Committee A which was charged with developing policies on academic freedom and tenure and implementing them by investigating violations By 1939 the Association had three hundred chapters but noting that many were isolated little groups general secretary Ralph Himstead repeated the caution that it was inadvisable for chapters to attempt to investigate or to assist in the investigation of local academic freedom and tenure cases Members of local groups are too close to such situations to view them with the degree of objectivity which the gravity of the controversy may warrant Almost twenty years after his critique of local AAUP chapter activism when some Association members were attracted to the growing union movement arising out of the Depression and the Wagner Act Lovejoy explained in Professional Association or Trade Union 1938 why he believed that trade unionism and alliance with either the American Federation of Labor or the Congress of Industrial Organizations would be inappropriate for faculty Lovejoy acknowledged that the Association was analogous to a trade union in that the economic status of faculty is legally the same as that of most industrial workers We are employees of corporations private or public not like most doctors and lawyers independent entrepreneurs Moreover he observed this leads to disputes between faculty and their institutions But he argued faculty and trustees unlike employees and employers generally are joint custodians of higher education Even when the Association seeks to protect the private interests of its members in their own jobs it does this because it recognizes that the major issue in certain of these individual controversies is the maintenance of professional standards and of the conditions without which the special function of the profession cannot in the long run be truly performed Accordingly a faculty association should focus on the defense of the freedom of the salaried scholar Combining or allying with trade unionism would diminish and weaken that professional commitment Lovejoy failed to foresee as Weber had twenty years earlier the corporatization of the academy and the consequent radical increase in the proportion of contingent appointees But this lack of foresight should not obscure the Association s accomplishments 1940 Statement Two years after Lovejoy s rejection of trade unionism the Association achieved its greatest success when it negotiated an agreement on the 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure with administration representatives from the Association of American Colleges Metzger has noted that the new policy also incorporated protections for probationary appointees that for a time made the AAUP s policies applicable to the substantial majority of the professoriate The Association s focus on national rather than local activities and collective bargaining had achieved its primary objective Even as late as 1965 as the AAUP celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of its founding the Association remained the preeminent faculty association in numbers as well as reputation The founders approach had proved far more successful than AFT trade unionism in organizing and defending faculty Groundwork for Collective Bargaining Nonetheless the years leading up to 1965 were not easy Despite the assault on academic freedom that characterized the McCarthy era from 1949 to 1956 the Association failed to issue a single report The AAUP membership was increasingly critical of the Association s failure to pursue investigations and finally forced the resignation of the general secretary Ralph Himstead in 1954 The Association then established a Special Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure and the Quest for National Security that acted on most of the outstanding cases resulting from political constraints A constitutional revision that reflected the membership s rebellion elaborated the role of the membership acting through the Association s elected Council and the annual meeting and also provided for the first time for state and regional conferences of chapters The state conference would gradually emerge as a recurrent source of activist pressures on the staff and leadership of the Association The increased activism lay the groundwork for the Association s entry into collective bargaining The studies and debates that led to the Association s formal endorsement of faculty bargaining in 1972 began in December 1964 at an AAUP Conference on the Representation of Economic Interests The debate turned especially on the issue of exclusive representation Clyde Summers argued that collective bargaining and exclusive representation were not essential to the establishment of appropriate rules and reiterated the long standing view that exclusive representation would undercut effective shared governance Jack Barbash countered that exclusive representation would not preempt individual faculty speech and that exclusive representation and bargaining would provide the basis for written contractual rights for the faculty Further he argued the very administrators who are attacking union methods are themselves actively contributing to making a factory type operation out of the university Ralph Brown added in the all too revealing language of the time the prescient observation that if the AAUP does not take steps to protect the rights and interests of the sub faculty they will probably create their own organization and obtain consideration of their demands Although the attendees at the conference rejected faculty bargaining the Association began informally accepting and then gradually encouraging the pursuit of bargaining by some chapters as well as establishing a standing Committee N on the Representation of Economic and Professional Interests in 1970 Philo Hutcheson finds the immediate impetus for the AAUP s increasingly serious consideration of collective bargaining in the rapid expansion of AFT and National Education Association NEA bargaining in the 1960s following state enabling legislation He also notes growing concern with unsatisfactory governance relationships associated with the rapid growth of higher education The 1970 decision of the National Labor Relations Board NLRB to take jurisdiction over collective bargaining of employees of private nonprofit employers was especially important to the AAUP because of the organization s relative strength at single campus four year independent colleges and universities Finally faculty strikes notably one at St John s University in New York that preceded collective bargaining led a growing number of AAUP members and leaders to recognize the professional legitimacy of bargaining and strikes The St John s strike probably the first major faculty strike against a university administration in the United States began in early January 1966 less than a month after the administration had summarily suspended twenty two members of the faculty and notified them and eleven others that they would be released at the end of their contracts The dismissals were carried out without a hearing the AAUP s investigation concluded in violation of the professors academic freedom While the Association responded in its usual manner to the violations of academic freedom that prompted the strike conducting a formal investigation that led to the administration s censure later that same year it did not initially support the strike action On January 6 1966 with the approval of the Association s governing Council the AAUP s executive committee declared that the AAUP has never looked upon the strike as an appropriate mechanism for resolving academic controversies or violations of academic principles and standards Regardless of an immediate situation it is in the best long run interests of the institution and the academic community to use approaches and procedures developed by that community to meet its own objectives and needs Accordingly the Association does not endorse a strike against an academic institution Dramatic Reversal Yet by April 1968 in the wake of the academic freedom strike at St John s and another at the Catholic University of America the Association had dramatically reversed its position That month the Council issued its Statement on Faculty Participation in Strikes declaring that situations may arise affecting a college or university which so flagrantly violate academic freedom of students as well as of faculty or the principles of academic government and which are so resistant to rational methods of discussion persuasion and conciliation that faculty members may feel impelled to express their condemnation by withholding their services either individually or in concert with others Then following a 1971 Summer Study by University of Pennsylvania law professor Robert Gorman who had been engaged as a consultant the Association s executive committee submitted a confidential report to the Council that endorsed collective bargaining but presented two alternate approaches Both approaches supported vigorous pursuit of collective bargaining to promote AAUP supported principles and procedural standards Under the first model the AAUP would incorporate collective bargaining as an integral activity of the Association under the second the Association would bifurcate with one component pursuing the traditional role and the other collective bargaining The dispute turned not only on which approach would best protect the professional policies of the Association but also on legal concerns about the conflicting status of charitable organizations and unions a conflict that has recently led the Association to trifurcate A resulting report to the membership also included oppositional statements from the Association s president and first vice president both dissenters from the recommendation to endorse bargaining and from the chair of Committee A with backing from all but one member of the committee The opposition argued that entry into collective bargaining would obstruct the Association s ability to promote its principles on campuses affiliated with other unions diminish administration support for AAUP principles and procedural standards lead to the loss of professionally oriented members and transform the AAUP into the American Association of University Professionals On October 31 1971 the Council voted to pursue collective bargaining as a major additional way of realizing the Association s goals in higher education In June 1972 the annual meeting voted overwhelmingly to endorse bargaining The following year the annual meeting endorsed a Council Statement on Collective Bargaining which declared that collective bargaining is an effective instrument for achieving such basic purposes of the Association as academic freedom and tenure due process and sound academic government The statement argued that the AAUP had a unique ability to shape academic bargaining in a manner consistent with Association supported principles The AAUP s involvement in collective bargaining had already begun at Belleville Area College now Southwest Illinois College in 1967 Three years later Rutgers University St John s University and Oakland University became the first three AAUP represented university faculties In 1971 when the AAUP Council formally endorsed collective bargaining three more AAUP representatives were certified Then in 1972 when the annual meeting approved the Council s recommendation the AAUP obtained certification as the faculty bargaining agent at eight additional four year institutions four private and four public including Wayne State University where I joined the new AAUP union when the AAUP defeated the AFT local of which I had been a leader By December 1975 AAUP representation had expanded to include faculty at thirty five colleges and universities about half the present number In 1973 collective bargaining chapters had established the Collective Bargaining Caucus In 1975 they formed the Collective Bargaining Congress CBC which following the pattern of the Assembly of State Conferences received ex officio seats on the Council and later the Council s executive committee Internal Conflicts My document based historical reflections to this point will now shift more toward a memoir substantially shaped by my personal experience and selective recollections In 1974 former Committee A chair William van Alstyne who had opposed collective bargaining defeated two bargaining supporters for the AAUP presidency The CBC leadership supported Van Alstyne with a view toward unifying the Association Nonetheless the ensuing ten years as collective bargaining membership and state conference activism grew and competition with the NEA and the AFT intensified witnessed mounting organizational strain Although collective bargaining membership expanded rapidly overall AAUP membership continued to decline precipitously from seventy eight thousand in 1969 to sixty thousand in 1976 The justified concern that entering bargaining would drive away some non bargaining members was somewhat countered by the reality that the failure to enter bargaining was already draining membership on those campuses that chose to bargain through other representatives and by the demand of many existing members that the AAUP provide representation Although entering bargaining stemmed some of these losses the Association lost many professionally oriented anti bargaining members especially in the more elite institutions as well as those members whose campuses chose other bargaining agents The combination of increasing expenditures declining revenue and shifting membership composition heightened political instability within the organization The Association sought to stabilize membership and revenue by participating in large scale joint venture agreements with the NEA University of Hawaii Kent State University and California State University and the AFT the Association of Pennsylvania State Colleges and Universities and the Professional Staff Congress at the City University of New York But the reduced dues and large voting blocs entailed in these arrangements exacerbated both the political and the financial problems Nonetheless the Association rejected overtures for a merger with the NEA in favor of maintaining an uneasy balance between the AFT and NEA alliances The political and budgetary disarray contributed to rapid staff turnover Five different general secretaries were appointed between 1974 and 1984 compared with only two between 1958 and 1974 and two between 1984 and 2004 Two critical US Supreme Court decisions intensified internal conflicts In 1980 the court s decision in NLRB v Yeshiva denied faculty a protected right to bargain in private universities This decision was inimical to not only faculty bargaining but also the core principles of the Association In the words of Justice William Brennan s dissent The notion that a faculty member s professional competence could depend on his undivided loyalty to management is antithetical to the whole concept of academic freedom Moreover the decision disproportionately impaired the development of AAUP bargaining because the AAUP was more competitive at private than at public universities owing to the concern of many faculty members at the latter institutions for the political support of organized labor and the difficulty of organizing statewide systems The consequent need to focus on public sector organizing reinforced the argument in favor of joint ventures with their attendant difficulties Shortly thereafter the Supreme Court granted certiorari in the Knight case in which the Minnesota NEA argued that the union s exclusive right to bargain and have access to meet and confer procedures trumped the claims of individual faculty members to participate in a shared governance system independent of bargaining The Association s committee charged with formulating collective bargaining policy prepared an amicus brief in support of independent shared governance which it argued would in the long term enhance faculty collective bargaining The brief however was not submitted to the leadership of the CBC in a timely manner The CBC rejected the brief but despite these objections and following a controversial parliamentary ruling at the annual meeting that prevented a motion to require a proportional vote in which the CBC position would likely have prevailed the Association filed the brief The CBC chair wrote to the court claiming that the brief did not properly speak for the Association While one can doubt that the justices ever saw the CBC chair s letter the court ruled that although the system of shared governance it had cited in finding the Yeshiva faculty to be managers was desirable such a governance arrangement was not constitutionally protected and therefore the Minnesota NEA union s position prevailed Achieving Stability In 1984 the Association s internal tensions culminated in a sharply contested election for president another search for a general secretary and serious discussions of organizational bifurcation In the election a moderate collective bargaining presidential candidate lost to a state conference candidate Paul Walter But at the same time the search committee chaired by professor Walter selected me a former CBC chair and unsuccessful union based presidential candidate in a previous election as the first general secretary with a collective bargaining background The president and the general secretary with the concurrence of the Council agreed on a common agenda to stabilize membership and finances reduce the political and financial problems associated with the joint ventures and avoid bifurcation Two controversial decisions related to collective bargaining helped restore balance First the Association censured the administration of Temple University for laying off several long term non tenure track faculty in violation of national AAUP policy despite the fact that the layoffs were consistent with Temple s AAUP negotiated collective bargaining agreement and were defended by a long time CBC leader and national officer This action reassured many traditional members that collective bargaining would not subvert the AAUP s long standing commitment to fundamental principles of academic freedom and tenure Second the Council s executive committee accepted my recommendation to appoint the CBC chair who had disowned the AAUP s amicus brief in the Knight case as the first director of collective bargaining selected from the Association s collective bargaining leadership This appointment reassured members from unionized chapters Further in 1988 the AAUP adopted the Statement on Academic Government for Institutions Engaged in Collective Bargaining affirming that collective bargaining should not replace but rather should ensure effective traditional forms of shared governance As a practical matter the Association renegotiated the various joint venture collective bargaining chapter arrangements on the principle that votes and dues should be proportional These actions temporarily alleviated the internal organizational stress but contributed to a further decline in membership to just above forty thousand about half the Association s peak membership at the time of the decision to enter bargaining The AAUP also explored but rejected both merger and joint projects with the NEA leading to a worsening relationship between the two organizations At the same time the AAUP which had earlier established a close relationship with one major AFT affiliated faculty union in New York State the PSC CUNY worked out a joint venture with another the United University Professions State University of New York leading to a period of increased but uneasy cooperation with the AFT nationally The Association also

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/article/how-did-we-get-here (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Love or Money | AAUP
    programs with fundraising titles like The Campaign for Creativity or Exceeding All Expectations that make great fodder for alumni speeches addresses to the Board of Trustees the regional and even national press the administrators touting such schemes know they will not really improve the education offered Lombardi citing pressure from clueless trustees also scorns the empty rhetoric of Dynamic Disruptive change and new initiatives with innovative programs On the grounds of lack of effect or waste of resources these authors also agree on three subjects that have generated rhetoric and work at every type of institution in recent years strategic planning technology and assessment Strategic planning is dismissed across the board as a faddish corollary of administrative grand plans and sweeping visions a rationalist s utopia as Chambliss and Takacs put it inevitably in practice a profound waste of time and money in its attempts to microengineer human behavior The books shared lack of enthusiasm for the rush to online learning has predictably different bases Lombardi arguing that wise university leaders resist the wild waves of technological innovation until the experience of others in the marketplace permits a realistic cost benefit analysis is concerned about the finances Chambliss and Takacs doubt the contribution to education online video lectures too often go unattended or if watched will not be studied In both works the implementation of elaborate new forms of assessment imposed by political forces through accreditation agencies is accepted as unavoidable But Lombardi views these assessment instruments as a much too fine grained way of addressing the need and possibilities for measuring quality in the university He outlines instead a more complex set of subjects to be tracked and proposes ways of keeping track For Chambliss and Takacs the systems currently being put into place are too coarse to capture the experience of individual students at the college level All three authors see education as what Lombardi calls a handicraft activity in which the fundamental process involves an instructor engaging students This produces the only limit in the end of Lombardi s economic model Universities represent a special category of individualized transaction that links teachers and students in small numbers to achieve a high touch interaction perceived to be of great value This format does not scale well The limit however is high Lombardi continues Traditional universities rarely grow much beyond an enrollment of forty to fifty thousand students before splitting into smaller subunits that are separately operated and administered Chambliss and Takacs on a much smaller scale concur Good colleges have always been fundamentally human institutions Faculty are central to both accounts yet also differentially peripheral subordinate to administration in the university setting and to students in the college model Here the consequences of their different conceptions of people high quality or good are most apparent Lombardi is emphatic that a university s quality and competitiveness depend on the quality and competitiveness of its faculty He roundly rejects what he refers to as the industrial model of the university

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/article/love-or-money (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • From the Editor: The First Hundred Years | AAUP
    the Academe Blog The Academe Blog is an extension of the magazine exploring a wide range of topics including academic freedom governance of colleges and universities working conditions and more From the Editor The First Hundred Years By B Robert Kreiser The AAUP has reached its centennial year a major achievement in the life cycle of a professional organization Since its founding in 1915 the Association has sought to advance the core principles and values of the academic profession and to shape its governing standards and practices with the goal of ensuring higher education s contribution to the common good While promoting with remarkable success the adoption of its recommended principles and standards the Association has also monitored institutional compliance with them investigated abuses and published reports of its investigations What accounts for the persistent vitality of the AAUP s founding principles and their continuing relevance to American higher education Despite periods of relative inactivity notably a lack of a meaningful response to the assaults on academic freedom during the McCarthy period the Association has remained active in response to changes in the academic environment and in the nature of the professoriate As a result it has regularly developed new policies and standards to help the academic community confront the recurring threats to those core principles The Association s capacity to accomplish what it has done while remaining faithful to its original ideals has stemmed from an ability to attract dedicated volunteer activists to its work In addition since the 1930s the Association has benefited from talented professional staff members with knowledge experience and a commitment to advancing the AAUP s mission The articles in this centennial issue of Academe commemorate the AAUP s admirable past They describe some of the key areas and ways in which the AAUP has advanced standards for the academic profession Robert O Neil s opening article demonstrates the major role the AAUP has played in shaping the law of higher education since the late 1950s by filing amicus briefs in carefully selected cases particularly on issues relating to academic freedom Debra Nails describes the AAUP s procedures for academic freedom and tenure investigations in which dedicated member volunteers work closely with staff to produce widely respected reports that treat serious violations of the AAUP s principles and standards Jordan Kurland s companion article comments on the most noteworthy investigations over the decades Ann Franke provides an overview of the AAUP s century long role in upholding and protecting the principles of academic freedom and tenure Larry Gerber shows how the Association s standards in the area of college and university government have established widely accepted norms of shared governance which seek to ensure the faculty s meaningful involvement in academic decision making Ernst Benjamin recounts the AAUP s initial embrace of and evolving emphasis on collective bargaining as a means of achieving the Association s goals Finally Mary Gray discusses the role played by the AAUP s Committee on Women in the Academic Profession

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/article/editor-first-hundred-years (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • From the President: Governance for a New Era | AAUP
    In higher education there is a difference between price and cost Price is what students pay in the form of tuition and fees Costs consist of the expenses associated with running an institution Costs far exceed tuition revenue particularly at public institutions where state appropriations grants and gifts are also significant sources of revenue ACTA seems solely focused on costs especially those of academic programs While the report recognizes the cost disease that afflicts higher education it never mentions the metastatic growth in administration nor does it recognize this as a by product of corporatization The report mentions only in passing the intercollegiate athletics complex which at the majority of institutions is a huge consumer of resources Indeed even if costs were not increasing tuition would still be rising because of privatization which has led to declining state support for public higher education Privatization is based on the premise that education is an investment in human capital The language of investment and the term human capital tell us that we should not expect public support After all the only businesses truly deserving of public support are the Wall Street banks and defense contractors that live at the public trough The central causes of eroding quality and reduced access are skyrocketing tuition at public institutions rising student debt and the fact that a large and increasing majority of faculty members work on contingent contracts All these problems stem directly from the erosion of state support for higher education Public and private institutions both suffer from the cost disease but tuition at private institutions while high has not been rising much faster than the overall rate of inflation In contrast tuition is going through the roof at public institutions where state support has been diminishing for decades but never more dramatically than over this past decade The ACTA report commends the AAUP for protecting the academic freedom of faculty but accuses us of failing to guard the academic freedom of students This of course is part of ACTA s agenda to promote intellectual diversity a solution in search of a problem The report calls on trustees to create mechanisms that allow students to complain when they believe they are unfairly treated because of their political religious or social beliefs and practices But it does not raise the problems of racism sexual assault and harassment or the dearth of women in certain fields especially in the STEM disciplines that many institutions seem to have targeted as centers of excellence The report bemoans the cancellation of talks by a few high profile speakers and calls for trustees to reach down into academic departments if they believe a department places limitations on the representation of disciplinary fields and academic viewpoints But there is no mention of David and Charles Koch s using their foundations to promote their political agenda by donating money with strings attached or of the conflict of interest created when universities accept corporate funding for research while knowing that the wrong results

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/article/president-governance-new-era (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Centennial Edition of the AAUP Redbook | AAUP
    the AAUP By joining the AAUP you help shape the future of our profession In addition there are practical benefits such as discounts insurance programs and a subscription to Academe including the annual report on faculty compensation Click here to read more about the benefits of an AAUP membership Learn more Current Issue Previous Issues Contact Advertising Submissions Subscriptions Check out the current issue Visit the Academe Blog The Academe Blog is an extension of the magazine exploring a wide range of topics including academic freedom governance of colleges and universities working conditions and more Centennial Edition of the AAUP Redbook By Hans Joerg Tiede The 2015 edition of Policy Documents and Reports commonly known as the Redbook is being published in January by Johns Hopkins University Press Appearing in its eleventh edition it is also being published for the first time as an e book Since 1968 the Redbook has presented the most central and most frequently cited policy statements and reports of the Association in a convenient format Through each edition the Redbook has been updated to serve as a useful guide on current issues in higher education while continuing to provide an overview of the long standing and fundamental standards supported by the Association and to a significant extent by the profession The format of the Redbook has been revised to make it more user friendly It has been reorganized into a larger number of thematically grouped sections and a new introductory essay on incorporating the AAUP s principles and recommended standards into the institution s regulations was added in order to provide a road map to the Redbook Recognizing the centennial of the AAUP in 2015 the Redbook opens with the 1915 Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom and Academic Tenure the founding document of the

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/article/centennial-edition-aaup-redbook (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Partnership Agreement | AAUP
    By joining the AAUP you help shape the future of our profession In addition there are practical benefits such as discounts insurance programs and a subscription to Academe including the annual report on faculty compensation Click here to read more about the benefits of an AAUP membership Learn more Current Issue Previous Issues Contact Advertising Submissions Subscriptions Check out the current issue Visit the Academe Blog The Academe Blog is an extension of the magazine exploring a wide range of topics including academic freedom governance of colleges and universities working conditions and more Partnership Agreement By Edward J Graham The AAUP and the Council of University of California Faculty Associations CUCFA have agreed to work together as partner organizations in defense and promotion of academic freedom shared university governance and the economic security of all those engaged in teaching and research in higher education In a formal agreement approved by the governing bodies of both organizations the faculty groups agreed to join together as independent but allied and cooperating entities CUCFA is a coordinating agency for the faculty associations on nine of the ten separate campuses of the University of California Under the arrangement with the AAUP which will last for three years and is renewable individual members of the nine campus faculty associations affiliated with CUCFA will be eligible to join the AAUP at special dues rates payable through their campus association CUCFA will contribute financially to the AAUP and the AAUP will provide the California associations with certain support services The two organizations will promote each other s activities and will plan a joint membership organizing drive at all ten University of California campuses The University of California has an exceptionally strong tradition of faculty activism dating back to the loyalty oath controversy of the 1950s and the

    Original URL path: http://www.aaup.org/article/partnership-agreement (2016-02-13)
    Open archived version from archive



  •