TCAC
July 2000 Report Index
Index to Appendices
ONE UNIVERSITY/THREE CAMPUSES--this is the new reality that guides the efforts of this advisory committee. TCAC members understand that this conundrum will require some fundamental rethinking. The Provost's charge to this committee is to "encourage collaboration and linkages between and among the campuses" in the interest of better serving the needs of students. The challenges are many and I salute the Committee and your chair, Norm Rose, for your hard work.
The governing organizations of the faculty of the three campuses have also been collaborating in an effort to establish new linkages among the campuses, an endeavor that involves reworking the structure of faculty governance in light of a three campus system. Today, I want to bring you up to date with what has been happening among the three faculty organizations (the Faculty Senate, Bothell's General Faculty Organization, and UWT's Faculty Assembly) in our work to establish this new governance structure. First, however, I want to articulate a series of principles that are guiding our efforts to reformulate the relationship among our three campus faculties.
PRINCIPLES:
There are four principles that guide our efforts, each a paradox requiring recognition and balancing of valued polarities. Each is a reflection of the over-arching challenge of developing a three-campus system in one university.
1) One faculty/three faculties:
We are all faculty of the University of Washington. All faculty appointments, tenure and promotions are approved by the Provost and the President. Yet, faculty appointments are made to the individual campuses and are not transferable to another campus. Tenure is campus-specific as well and, to a degree, so are the criteria for promotion and tenure. UWS faculty frequently sit on the promotion and tenure committees of UWB and UWT faculty. UWT and UWB faculty are eligible for graduate faculty appointment and have participated in graduate education at UWS.
2) One Senate/three faculty organizations:
Eligible voting faculty on all three campuses are governed by the Senate and participate in the Senate's governing process. Faculty from the three campuses vote on the Senate legislation which specifically requires the faculty's approval. Currently, UWB and UWT each have a voting member in the Senate and ex officio (without vote) representation on the Senate Executive Committee. UWB and UWT may attend council and committee meetings when those bodies are discussing matters that pertain to our campuses (although mechanisms for ensuring this access are inadequate). On the other hand, the faculties at UWB and UWT have been authorized to form their own faculty organizations and these organizations participate fully in the governance of their respective campuses. Thus, the ambiguity embodied in one university/three campuses is replicated in one Senate/three faculty organizations. Working with this ambiguity (note, I do not say "resolving" the ambiguity) is a key challenge for faculty governance in the years ahead.
3) One Faculty Code/Three Handbooks:
This paradox has been a source of some confusion. Faculty at all three campuses are all clearly governed by the Faculty Code and the more inclusive University of Washington Handbook. Yet, both coordinate campuses have been authorized to develop our own Handbooks which contain what amounts to our own campus faculty codes. The ambiguity is derived, on the one hand, from the clear delegation of authority to the coordinate campus faculties to implement the Code with provisions in our Handbook which are specific to our campus faculties and, on the other hand, the requirement that such provisions in the Handbooks be consistent with the UW Faculty Code. The faculty at UWT and UWB will retain our own Handbooks. We consider them essential to our ability to participate in the shared governance of our campuses. For example, like the highly decentralized structure of schools and colleges at UWS (with which the campus faculties were originally analogized), the coordinate campus faculties are authorized by our Handbooks to participate in the formulation of academic policy specific to our campuses. As I will discuss momentarily, this delegation is contingent on a requirement of consistency with the "general welfare" or "general policies" of the University of Washington. In instances where there is a claimed conflict or inconsistency with the general welfare, the President, ultimately, resolves the matter. Faculty at all three campuses recognize that managing the inherent tensions of one code/three handbooks will require close attention.
4) Consistent academic policies for the University of Washington/variable policies responsive to campus needs and requirements:
From a faculty perspective, the "general welfare" of the university, foremost being about the welfare of our students, is itself ambiguous, an achievement of a mix of two polarities. On the one hand, the name of the University of Washington, which appears on the diplomas of students at all three compasses, and the reputation of the University, which is a primary reason for choosing this institution over others, are consistent with providing our students with an education of the highest quality. Faculty at the coordinate campuses do not want to make the compromises that would turn their campuses into second rate institutions; they are committed to offering their students an education deserving of the name, University of Washington. Therefore, the "general welfare" with respect to the teaching mission of the University of Washington is to create a consistent set of standards so that students can expect a UW education, no matter which campus they attend. In the words of the TCAC Report of Aug. 1999, "From the viewpoint of the students, employers, legislators, alumni, and the public-at-large, the quality of education and, of course, the prestige attached to the concomitant diplomas, must remain homogenous across the campuses." (Executive Summary, p.2) I also remind you that students now take and will increasingly be taking courses across campuses.
However, what can this "general welfare" mean if not flexible, if not cognizant, for example, of the needs of students at UWB and UWT--mostly older, mostly female students, frequently transferring directly from the community colleges, students who are often "place-bound" and are balancing work, family, and school? As we develop academic policies, we need to pay scrupulous attention to both polarities: when seeking consistent standards, recognize the need for flexibility and delegation to the wisdom of campus faculty; when developing campus-specific policies, recognize the need for consistent standards. The task will be on-going, requiring close collaboration among the shared governance bodies of all three campus faculties. An arrangement that recognizes the need for consistent standards while maximizing flexibility or autonomy is at the heart of current efforts among faculty organizations in developing tri-campus relationships that will work in the interest of students.
Summary of progress-to-date toward the reformulation of faculty governance relationships:
Ever since the demise of the Joint Faculty Council, an interim body that had been designed to handle promotion and tenure matters among what used to be called the Branch Campuses, the faculties of UWB and UWT have sought to replace what had come to be appreciated as its most vital function: a place for generating dialogue, good will and cooperation among our three faculties in the interest of serving all our students in the rapidly evolving three-campus university. Toward that end, in May, 1999, Bothell's General Faculty Organization (GFO) and Tacoma's Faculty Assembly (FA), both passed virtually identical resolutions for the establishment of a Tri-Campus Faculty Conference. This entire academic year has been devoted to moving that proposal forward through the UW Faculty Senate. It has not been easy. Early on, in the Faculty Senate's Faculty Council on Faculty Affairs (FCFA), there were questions and doubts about the problem of One Code/Three Handbooks. Gerry Phillipsen, Chair of the Senate, wisely recognized that the success of the tri-campus legislation in the Senate would require building support among all three faculty and bringing in the President. The Senate leadership (Gerry Phillipsen, Mary Coney, Vice Chair, and Lea Vaughan, Secretary of the Faculty) visited the Bothell and Tacoma campuses, meeting with our Chancellors and faculty organizations. Professors Phillipsen, Coney, Cherry Banks, Chair of Bothell's GFO and myself then met with President McCormick and secured his support for the process and for general principles. The FCFA created a sub-committee, ably chaired by Brad Holt, the next Vice Chair of the Senate. I have worked closely with Professor Holt for several months and we are presently working hard on draft legislation. At UWT, we have also worked with our own Chancellor and Associate Dean, Jim Brown. Just yesterday, the executive committee of UWT's Faculty Assembly approved a set of recommendations concerning the draft legislation. We will have a full FA meeting on the legislation on June 9th, graduation day at UWT. [This meeting has now taken place. The FA endorsed each of the several recommendations the executive committee had adopted. Bothell's GFO will give full consideration to the draft legislation at its first meeting in fall quarter.]
The laborious process of moving the tri-campus legislation through the Senate and gaining approval by faculty vote may take a good part of next autumn and winter quarters. But we are much closer. The process has been worthwhile. Assuming approval by the Senate and the faculty, we will put into place a new arrangement worthy of a three-campus federation. The legislation will surely incorporate four key elements:
In conclusion, while several of the details still need to be worked out before the tri-campus legislation is submitted to the Faculty Senate, first through the FCFA, I believe there is/will be substantive agreement on these core elements. [UWT's Faculty Assembly has fully endorsed them.] Upon the successful completion of this process, we will have put in place a significant restructuring of the relationship between the faculties of a three-campus University of Washington. Moreover, we will have achieved a significant institutional recognition that the University of Washington is composed of three campuses that cannot be simply analogized to schools and colleges, a recognition that campus realities are very different and that policies beneficial to our students will require flexibility and autonomy while at the same time serving the general welfare of the University of Washington as a whole. Most important, the work we have undertaken among our three faculty organizations strongly reinforces the growing understanding that a multi-campus university will require on-going efforts to develop wise policy. I am fully confident that a new kind of collaboration to that end will emerge from our efforts.
TCAC
July 2000 Report Index
Index to Appendices
