Friday, March 17, 1972
THE MICHIGAN DAILY
Page Five
PAID SUPPLEMENT
RIGHTS and
RESPO
SI
I
IT ES REPORT
[continued]
(Continued from Thursday's paper):,>
igan faculty to determine policies af- Goals and Operation of CAA ticipation in decision-making, parti- to provide relevant data. (Memorandum University of Michigan, it was decided lation to the third choice, "do
fecting their own professional a n d! cularly in academic affairs. See A 1 that an examination of its contribu- know." for 59 per cent of 256 resp
Seven committees have not been dl- economic interests and the administra- a faculty group working on specific pendix C to the Report of the Senate- Speaking of the respective roles of tions to faculty well-being might pro- ents chose this answer for the C
rectly referred to in this report. The tion's ability to enjoy a cooperative. areas of educational policy such as Assembly Committee on the Rights & the Vice President and the Commit- vide more useful insights concerning mittee on Academic Affairs while
Regentally established Tenure Com- collegial relationship with faculty tenure, enrollment size, and fellow- Responsibilities of the Faculty, 1971.] tee, another one former member of the effectiveness of faculty participa- 39 per cent elected that response
mittee is a standby committee, rarely would seem to lie on a diminishing ship programs, it was not until a re- In response to the query, "What do CAA expresses the view that since the tion in University decision-making than CESF.
used. The Civil Liberties Board includes course. organization in 1959 that the basis for you think the faculty role should be Vice President has the responsibility of a study of almost any other advisory Faculty impressions of the influ
students and is a case by Itself, though The committee believes that the sub- the present Academic Affairs Commit- in academic affairs?", and given the taking action, whether he takes action body. of the CESF, and of its assignm
sone aspects of its situation parallel stantive and structural changes it re- tee came about. Five subcommittees five options, "almost always deter- on or against the advice of the Com- then, vary greatly. The most favors
what has been shown of other com- commends will serve to support values of a larger Educational Policies Com- mine," "usually determine," "recom- mittee is his prerogative. (Memorandum Procedureestimate of the Influence of C
mittees. The work of the Classified fundamental to the very existence of a mittee were proposed in 1959. Reports mend to administration, but I a t t e r 8) The same member states that, on the The first step was to examine the comes from that segment of the fac
Research Committee and the Research university community and to advance dealing with separate areas of academic I should decide," "not usually involved," whole, the Vice President has quite annual reports, of the Committee on assumed to be most informed at
Policies Committee has already been constructive changes in its life. life were requested. Committees on the and "no role," 73 per cent of the wisely agreed with the Committee, a the Economic Status of the Faculty. faculty governance, 97 past or pres
heavily exposed during the spring of Role of the University in the Educa- sample of 250 said "almost always" and not surprising circumstance since he 1596-57 through 1969-70. A list of Senate Assembly members.
1971. The Student Relations Commit- COMMITTEE PROCEDURES AND tional System of the State, Staff Ex- 22 per cent said "usually." No one ( and most of the members of CAA are the topics mentioned in the reports,
tee has been reorganizing since the ACKNOWLEDGMENTS cellence, Student Quality. Improvement voted for the last two options and rational and experienced persons of by academic year, was compiled and Achievements of CESF
establishment of a vice presidency in of Instruction, and A Center for the only 5 per cent for "recommend." broad views. It is also the product an attempt was made to describe the Over a period of fifteen years,
this area. Relations of the Academic From March 3 to June 8, 1971 the Study of the University were proposed. Whof this member's experiences with the treatment the Committee accorded each CESF has become a body designed
Services and Financial Affairs commit- committee held fifteen meetings, with The first four of these were imple-;about the rle is ei Committee that while the Committee item in terms of a (1) mention (2) re collect and disseminate informat
tees to the vice presidents are similar numerous consultations in between mented and were operational until fair' are examined in terms of replies h been presented with alternatives es quest for study, (3) general request, re offer advice of member experts
relwat comit ees, dodzeote col n throughout the summer. Several 11963. each dealing effectively with its by scos a xmnd olees fe un eits e adtain h ai suso 4 pcfcrqus.As oe eomn oiisadpirte,
tdozen persons were interviewed by in- specific subject matter. The topics foud to have hige percentages than have been discussed and the result has were occasions when the Committee in a limited way, to represent the
C. Faculty Participation: Past, Present, dividual members of the committee. A were uniform and specific and the sub- the result for the whole group (73 per been a rational choice of alternatives. indicated that a proposal had been cuity on economic matters.
and Future substantial bibliography was read and committees acted for the mutual bene- cent), [School and college percentages Concerning the allegation that the accepted or that it was made again
discussed. The committee studied the fit of faculty and administration, with aie not given if the total number of Vice President has dominated CAA, the The second step was to conduct a From 1956 through 1970 CESF
exesv 90r respodgen fo the uita wasmess saeCmitemebrsy:"h series of interviews with former chair- (ports consisted of statistics on sale
1. AAUP Study: The University of extensive 1970 report from Michigan neither group having exclusive domin- respondents from the unit was less same Committee member says: "The of th om i fre benefits, obtained from
State University on the same sub- ion over the initiation of an issue, than ten. in favor of the category Vice-President is a man of great abil- men ande Office of Staff Benefits and of Inst
i Ject and other reports and contracts ' At the suggestion of then Vice-Presi- "almost always determine." The L.S.&A. ity and he speaks very freely. On the Wilam Haber, Douglas Kahn, Diktheir euvaent
In 1970-71 AAUP's nationwide survey from around the country. It found dent Heyns, these subcommittees were percentage was 80, and Engineering, 75, other hand, members of the Committee Leabo, James Morgan, Harold Shapiro, the times with oextrapolations by
on "Faculty Participation in College these documents lacking in specific either assigned separate committee j Public Health, 91, Business Administra- are in no way in awe of the Vice-Presi- and Stanley Siegel.] They were asked tertimeith
and University Government." long- relevance to local circumstances need- status (e.g., the Role of the University tion, 80, and Education, 733.3. Three dent, and in my experience have not to verify and interpret the impressions pert members.
range budgetary planning was last in ed, so proceeded to forge its own in- in the Educational System of the State units which had lower percentages than hesitated to speak just as freely as he gained from the study of the commit- The very origin of CESF was a sig
relative amount of faculty participa- dependent report. became a standing committee advisory the general faculty responses (73 per does. There have been frequent meet- tee reports, to comment on the mis- ficant achievement in itself, for
tion in a list of 31 items. Individual Former SACUA chairmen Joseph to then Vice-President Niehuss), or cent), were Medicine at 58, Dentistry at ings without him, and for a while it sion of the Committee as they under- not only established the right of
faculty salaries was next to last, and appeared re merged into a new Educational 50, and Law at 71 per cent, although was the deliberate policy of the Com- stood it, and to make recommendations faculty to be informed in some de
short-range budgetary planning (1-3 before the full committee, as did Pro- Policies Committee which was to be an all of them were at 50 per cent or over. mittee to meet without him. The Com- about its future operation. Former about its collective economic sta
years) next up the line, then relatiye fessors Wilfred Kaplan and W il l i a m advisory committee to the Vice-Pres.. When the respondents were divided mittee's functions have by no means Vice President Marvin Niehuss was but also created the machinery to
staff sixes of disciplines, faculty salary Porter, and Vice-President Allan dent for Academic Affairs. The latter into two groups - 155 representative been dominated by the Administration, also interviewed at this time. vide data for, at the least, a retros]
cales, programs for buildings and fa- Smith. Full information was obtained committee served as a clearing house members of the faculty and 95 Assembly and the Committee has frequently se- The next step was to submit a first tive view of the comparative status
culties, choice of president and' deans, on the aims and activities of the ma- for those matters coming from or going members - the responses of the more lected issues it wanted to discuss.' draft of a report to former members the Michigan faculty.
and determination of average teach- jor bargaining agents, on related labor to(Memorandum 8) of the Committee on the Economic Year after year great efforts
ing loads. In order, faculty had most law, and on collective bargaining pro- Affairs, as well as being the standing bers) were even more favorable to "aL CAA has also experienced problems Status of the Faculty (hereinafter call- put forth, for the most part by 1
to do with deciding on academic per- cedures. An effort was also made to committee advisory to Vice-President most always" and "usually," 76 as co- of implementation. Perhaps because it ed CESF) and to other informed mem- chairmen, in the presentation of r
formance of students, curriculum, de- survey the activities of all the major Heyns. It usually met twice a month. pared with 71 per cent. While this dif- has not had a well-defined mission, a bers of the University, including cer- vant and concise explanations of
gree requirements, membership a n d faculty committees serving the entire once in each of these capacities. The ference was not statistically significant, clear course of action has not always tain executive officers, for comment changing economic status of the
specification of departmental commit- University faculty, Vice President used the committee as on no other aspect of University de- been associated with a recommenda- and criticism. A number of written culty, especially in relation to ot
tees, types of degrees offered, and es- a sounding board and consulted with cision-making were the results so tion. The Assembly and/or SACUA have statements were received [James Gate, Institutions AAUP data have
tablishment of new educational p r o- Professor Eggertsen undertook t h e it regularly. During the mid 1960's. strongly favorable to faculty determina- not followed a uniform policy in' sup- Dick Leabo, James Morgan, Cecil Nesbit, supplemented and for the past
grams, Authority of faculty in govern- intensive investigations into the work and accompanying a change in the tion of policy. porting recommendations. They have Alan Polasky, F. M. Scherer, Stanley years comparisons among UM ca
ment was 13th down the line. of the committees on Academic Af- functions of the Vice President f o r Stanley years cndpao'isgns an TeM c
fairs and on Economic Status of the Academic Affairs, came a shift in em- TlIhe views of those who believe that Asometimes ailed to discuss reports of E. Seashore, Stanley Siegel, Robert Sup- scho
On the matter of faculty authority y reported in Appendix A and phasis for the Committee. While be- CAA should influence University policy CAA or to distribute them to the en-er, Gerhard Weinberg.] and several in- The data preseted over the pe
iversiy o gan score h- B. He also provided useful data on fore the reorganization many of the and that the present ability of the tire faculty. dividual and group discussions were indicate that the University of Mi
in the upper quartile of responses current faculty attitudes through the group's assigned functions were on faculty to do so in one way or another The result is that the work of CAA 'condteeone
rakn h muto aut ee-fhas sometimes been ignored without While an effort has been made fairlygafcuthshdalelofcn
ranking the amount of faculty deter- questionnaire reported in Appendix Senate oriented issues, as well as ad- is not great enough, are supported by aseis accored onype.t refle and iporae the viws status enjoyed by few at o
mination and joint action, as was true C. ministrative ones, the reorganization 'the responses to another question explanation and is accorded only per- t reflect and icorporate the views state universities. If economic be
in most items, with the especially not- seems to have created a committee which asked about the ability of the functory attention in decision-making and recollections of all persons who ment could be traced to the work
able exceptions of relative staff sizes Professor Terrence Tice was charged which became, with important excep- individual member of the faculty to Follow-up machinery often works on Iwere consulted, the responsibility for the Committee, there would be 1
of disciplines, programs for buildings with organizing committee business, tions, a forum for issues Initiated by influence the Vice President for Ace- an ad hoc basis depending on the the form and substance of this report doubt that CESF had served the fa
joand facilities, and short- and long- gathering resources, drafting, and doing the administration deiaic Affairs. The options selected by interests of groups in and outside the is that of the writers. To the fullest 'ty well.
gathe ridgresy"pcenindrafting andt).isgpthemadminystrtkon.udd ric Affa.r2. T" , se faculty. Altogether, the lack of im - extent possible the written statem ents
range budgetary planning (0 per cent). ,supplementary- background research.' 250 respondents were "extreme.7pepeenaon rcdushsrdcdadtentsmde foalofr- Uftutey teeis esn
A relatively high degree of consultation Other committee members contributed Perhaps due to shifts in purposes cent. "muc," 17 per cent, "some," 40 plementation procedures has reduced enc the notes made of oral confer- Unfortunately there is reason
was reported by both the administra- to and discussed the drafting at various each committee from 1967 to the pre- per cent, "ittle" 26 per cem. and the impact CAA might otherwise have ences have been compiled and placed uween the activity of the Commi
tion and 'the Ann Arbor chapter for stages. Some committee sessions were sent has felt it advisable to define its "note,1per cent. pe It itr had. o on file in the office of the Senate Ad- an the ec icty of fac'
all of these exceptions but budgetary devoted to this task. The chairman, goals anew, and has relied on its that very much the same responses Lembers has ao be a o to fisfor comuttion bypersons ac-
planning, where the two sources agreed Professor John Reed, and Professor chairman and the Vice President for t emembers has also been an obstacle to fairs for consultation by persons ac members at Michigan. Perhaps C
that there is little or no faculty par- I Tice edited the penultimate draft, Academic Affairs for guidance. Some red to other executive officers the effective functioning of the Com- corded permission to use them. has had little influence one way or
ticipation. On dismissal for cause and which then was considered by the full examples of changes in focus are: b notedth atat rese there mee Little or no staff support has All of the former members of CESF other, for other factors may have
appointment of academic deans, the committee and approved. Care was tak- t t bl t ish of who replied to the invitation to react a
dministration and chapter answers en to provide exact and comprehensive "With some regrets it was decided sno comparably st ronfor teitae ofnCAA t twe aenou t fit drat arett
1differed, 'the administration supposing information, so that faculty w o ut 1 d Ithat the Committee should operate ihe wiut't ud nvriyplcyPooasfrteFtr fCAt the onentsa ontheis dratoge
hihdere fdeemnain rjinnhv finance, research, and state rela- 'The most objective possible analysis wihtegnrlcnlsosadtn state universities, (2) the overall fix
a hghdegee~fdetrmnaionorjont av agood basis for making consld - both .as a Sub-Committee of tbona as is expressed with regard to of such materials as are available for of the report. Seven of them suggested cniino h saeo ihgn
action by the faltthe chapter ered judgments of their own and so SACUA and as an advisory com-codtn.fthsaefMihg,
cco e n seb embrs d mAtUA to ts V Pd enty o r academic affairs. this report, (including what might be changes in interpretation or comment- fluent in the early sixties and less
clatmnonly ' hihdg fcnhae aeqate foeby ebrs taking Academi Afais. Ite mustreidn besifhrtotattog termed minority views) leads to the ed upon the meaning of the findings in recent years, and () a political
sultation. have adequate background for taking Academic Affairs. It must e said here. too. that though conclusion that the best interests of for the future conduct of the activity mate increasingly favorable to the s
These findings corroborate what has action on the several recommendations. From the 1967-68 Report. the differences are again not statis- the faculty would be served through of CESE port of the broad educational bas
been reported in earlier sections of this The Committee takes this opportunity " tically significant, the Assembly re- the assignment to CAA of the follow- the expense of excellence at the p
reot.and in the three appended to thank the. many persons who con- "The main function of this Coin- spondents were only slightly more in- Am iuity fteMsino h h xes feclec ttep
report nd h trbtek to mts pfrsns pheased mittee is to consult with and ad- dined to rate their ability to influ- ing missions: (1) to review and make Ambigty of the Mission of tie mid's top. The links between the o
studies tributed to its efforts. It is pleased iteVice-President for Academic recommendations about any and all Comittee on the Economic ation of these variables and the w
to rescognize that only a few minor vi ence the Vice President for Academic issues related to academic affairs and Status of the Faculty of CESF are difficult to find,
2. Faculty. Attitude at the University. additions seemed indicated in view of Affairs with respect to academic Affairs "Extreme," for the comparable ()to isusrtdexercise roaespniiity aforpbPrhap the chie difcly cuCmEe, ater aficl, is hardly m
of Michigan the considerable information made matters of University-wide signi- percentages, were 10 (Assembly) to 5') to ofeall resposinfor for pub- Perhaps the chief difficulty the nt- Committee, after all, is hard"
vaabehrghTeIsiueo n- ficance." (non-Assembly) "much" 13-19, "some" Influtncenlir all reports and for focussing ;ered in an attempt to assess the in- powerful than King Canute. (
Results of a questionnaire returned tinavailable throEducation Iconference Con- f From the 1968-69 Report. 43-37. "little" 13-6 per cent f influence of the total faculty in fluence of CESF in University policy- Memorandum Number 2, in the i
by some 250 Universit of Michi an Ltheir implementation. making arose from uncertainties about of SACUA).
on't 1958-59, it was addressed to the people
nd- of Michigan and their elected repre-
om- sentatives. In 1969-70, CESF attempted
only to communicate with the faculty. While
for in several years the report was given
the label of "confidential", it was
nce thought mainly to be furnished to the
ent, administration for use in Lansing.
able The lack of a specific mandate to CESF
uESF it is believed by some Committee mem-
silty bers, has led the group to be reactive
sout rather than positive. Executive officers
ent have tended to take issues to CESF
when they were thought to be pressing
ones or, often, to report what had al-
the ready been done, or to present limited
to options.
ion. It has become usual for the Commit-
to tee to meet only when such issues were
and, brought to it, except that a number
fa- of sessions have been called as the
time for the report drew near. Meet-
re- ings to consider economic issues pre-
sented by the Administration have been
lary rare in recent years. In 1970-71, for
the example, CESF was not called upon to
s at advise on the impact of the three per
ext cent budget cut on the economic status
of the faculty. The administration may
have consulted other groups, for it
gni- I might well be expected to wonder, un-
it der present circumstances, "What group
the do we consult about what problems."
tail Perhaps also due to a lack of clarity
tus, of purpose, some recommendations ap-
pro- pear vague and naive, as in 1959-60,
pec- when someone not defined was asked
s of to provide more money for the faculty.
Uncertainty about function may, also
were, be partly responsible for the alleged
he: ease with which CESF sometimes un-
ele- I critically agreed with policies recom.
the mended to it. It may also have been
fa- in part responsible for a failure to
ther study salaries in relation to the total
een budget or to the adoption of a salary
few, schedule.
pus Since confusion has existed concern
ade ing the goals of CESF, and especially
riod about what was meant by its "advis-
chi- ory" role, it is hardly surprising that
om- no formal mechanisms for the further
ther discussion or implementation of its
ter- recommendations has come into exist-
of ence, or that little coordination of its
ittle activity through Senate Assembly me-
cul- chanisms has occurred.
The same doubts about purpose, ac-
to companied by a feeling of ineffective-
be- ness, may have caused some CESF
ttee members to feel that they were treat-
ulty ed paternalistically, as p e r s o n s who
ESF could not understand issues so com-
the plex - that only officers who devoted
had full time to them in all their ramifi-
sal- cations could do so. One executive of-
days ficer reminded members that they be-
iong longed to a minority group. Another,
isal according to the complaint of a re-
af- cent chairman, was uncooperative in
s s making economic information available.
cli-
up- It must be noted here that the frus-
at tration of CESF members may have
yra- arisen in part because of their inabil-
per- ity to negotiate with the approval of
ork the faculty. Faculty preference until
The now seems not to have favored CESF
more as a negotiating or bargaining commit-
See tee. (Memorandum 3)
files The Future of the Committee
.y ava j uvry u unga Fult.Pwr Collective Bargainn
faculty are detailed in a report to be on Campus," held in Ann Arbor Sep- fTios
attached here (Appendix C). Among tember 17-18, 1971. The conference re-Efunctions:
form jSenate Assembly members still port, scheduled for publication early 1. advises the Vice President for
available, 95 responded - over half of in 1972, will be available to supple- Academic Affairs on matters which
those who had served since its incep- ment this report and other material he refers to the Committee and it
,ion in' 1964-65. The remainder were i to be kept on file in several UM meets regularly with him.
chosen at random. Contrary to expec- libraries. 2. considers other subjects relating
tations, on most items the two groups.to educational policy and makes
differe.d little in their replies. :.;:.:.:.::::.::::
.... ?.::;: <a ;,'Jfld ti t h Virg Pra i_
When 256 respondents answered the
question. "Does the Committee on Aca-
demic Affairs have a significant role
to play in decisions governing educa-
tional policy made at the Unversity?",
only 25 per cent' said "yes". Sixteen
per cent said "no" and 59 per cent said
"don't know." It is important to note
here that the differences between 159
non-Assembly and 97 Assembly re-
spondents, significant to the one per
cent level, were "yes" 23 to 28, "no"
11 to 24, and "don't know" 65-48 per
cent. The group thought to be more
knowledgeable, then, rated the influ-
ence of CAA significantly higher than
non-Assembly members.
To make it possible for CAA to ac- its mission, however described in by- The Committee seems to have had Based on the above analysis of the
complish these mistakes, it is sug- laws, directions, and precedent, greatest effect in the designation of strengths and weaknesses of CESF, and
gested that one of the two following For the mogt part, the perception of ways to utilize dollars available so that upon the assumptions (1) that the
CAA procedures be established: former members is that the function the largest number of faculty members faculty will not soon decide to enter
1. CAA should be expected systema- of CESF was to study and report about would gain most, whether from t a x- into a collective bargaining agreement
tically and fully to inform the As- factors which affect the economic well- j exempt fringe benefits or from salary and (2) that changing financial reah-
sembly of its recommendations, made being of the faculty and to offer ad- 'increments. ties will make it ecesasryfor the
independently and upon its own initia- vice on such matters when requested ' In attempts to maximize after-tax its economic status through the
tive. to do so by the administration. At faculty incomes, subject to budgetary trengthening of its present mechan-
2. It should be vigilant in following the same time some Committee mem- constraints, CESF has made analyses, isms, suggestions for the operation of
up the outcomes of its recommenda- bers assert that CESF participated in and arrived at conclusions, on the basis CESF, made by its members and oth-
tions and should insist on publication a form of collective negotiations on of such questions as the following: er informed persons Include:
of explanations for departures from some issues. Others feel that even
its advice.'2 when this took place the advice given -Hwmnartkigfladn-I
-t d'was that sought b athehadministration. age of University contributions to a Alternative One
The chief motive for the study was
to discover to what extend the faculty
is satisfied with the influence it now
exerts' on University policy. The find-
ings show that the majority of faculty
is disatisfied with its present role in
'decision-making. Only 'In relation to
the offices of the dean (51 per cent)
and the departmental chairman (79
per cent) do faculty members feel they
exert "extreme" or "much" influence.
About" 73 per cent believe that the
faculty' should "always" determine pol-
icy on academic affairs," '22 per cent
thought ."almost always," for a total
of 95 per cent. Less than half respond-
4isimilarly regarding economic con-
cerns"
When' asked through what agencies
(neaningful faculty participation is
now exerted, 54 per cent indicated de-
partmental meetings, 54 per cent
SACUA, 39 per cent Senate Assembly,
36 per cent ad hoc faculty commit-
tees, and 33 per cent standing faculty
committees.
While, according to the study, the
majority of faculty desire greater in-
fluence in University governance and
are, to a lesser extent, unhappy with
their present economic situation, their
feelings are mixed as to whether sub-
stantial changes should be made or as
to what kind. Apparently faculty mem-
bers await further information and
adership from Senate Assembly before
'they are willing to commit themselves
or their representatives to change.
At the begining of Fall Term, 1971,
the evidence would not seem to indi-
APPENDIX A
The Committee on Academic
Affairs, 1959-70
Purpose
recommen a ons to te vice Presi-
dent for Academic Affairs or SACUA.
3. advises SACUA on matters relat-
ing to educational policy which
SACUA refers to it."
From Minutes of the Com-
mittee - October 24, 1968.
Achievements
j
1
I
i
3. It should be able to rely on the
Assembly for support of the CAA re-
commendations accepted . by the As-
sometimes to reinforce decisions al-
ready taken.
Inth sDespite some indications to the con-Esembly. .I The reports of the CESF them-
This examination of the perform- In the past tin years, the Committee trary, the evidence seems to show that ,eII selves record that there were differ-
ance of the Senate-Assembly Commit- for Academic Affairs, together w I t h (1) the faculty believes strongly in its ences in goals from one year to the
tee on Academic Affairs (hereafter its predecessors, has accomplished much responsibility to determine University 1. CAA must no longer be called or next. There was uncertainty about
called CAA) was undertaken as a part of what it set out to do. An assess- academic policy, (2) it feels that it regarded as "advisory". i the audience to which the report should;
of the work of the Committee created ment of its achievement must depend exerts less influence on the Office of 2. It should become an "executive' be addressed-to the legislature, the
by the Assembly in March, 1971, called on the goals each group set for itself. Academic Affairs than this expectation body to act with the administration in administration and Board of Regents,
the Committee on the Rights and Re- Not the least important of its con- 'would seem to call for (though it rates the same way that school and college or to the faculty.
sponsibilities of Faculty Members, 1971. tributions has resided 'in its role as its influence over academic affairs with executive committees now join with That views of the functions of the
That part of its charge to which this communication link between admin- deans and chairmen as much greater), deans in governance. CESF have been inconsistent is to be
study most relates reads, 'whether Uni- istration and faculty. Perhaps depend- and (3) only one-fourth thinks that 113. Measures initiated by faculty or seen from the fact that while some
versity of Michigan faculty government ing on the leadership exerted by the CAA exerts significant influence on administration which involve academic former members (and at least one
can be expected to meet current chal- Vice President for Academic Affairs I decision-making through CAA. Over I affairs should be put into effect only executive officer) asked that the CESF
lenges in its present or revised form." and/or the Chairman, the issues which half, however, feel inadequately in- by and with the advice and consent of not be judged for its influence inI
were presented to the group w e r e formed about the role of CAA to make the CAA. bargaining for the faculty, other mem-
Since the Committee on Academic either comprehensive or selective. How- a "yes" or "no" answer, including 48 The most vigorous statement provid- bers (and at least two executive of-I
Affairs has had a prominent place in ever, uniformly from the early quad- per cent of the Assembly respondants ed by a Committee member in favor ficers assert that the work of the
y governance at the University rant of subcommittees, the Committeeof anCommithe tebinfof th eEstg -
of Michigan, it was decided that an has been able to make in-depth studies Problems or Purpose and o principles which support both of the CESF has been decisive in setting po1
examination of its activities m i g h t of the issues before it and to present Implementation alternatives cited immediately above icy on scern to the faculty.t
provide useful insights concerning the se to both faculty and administa-reads
effectiveness of faculty participation tion with clarity, conciseness, and valid- The lack of a clearly defined function "The Vice President himself has An example of a policy on which the
in University decision-making. - ity. From 1963, examples of comprehen- for CAA seems to have caused prob- no single, finite function, but uses CESF recommendation was scrupulous-
Procedure 'sive reports Include: Report on the lems in year to year operation for Coin-' the resources of a large fuiLtime greatler salr incrase toh doed I
"Academic Calendar 1965-66," "Physical mittee members who believe (1) that staff to administer operations of a greoer ranksy Atlease formersCoin-
The first step was to examine the Education at the University 1967-68,' faculty representatives should exercise large organization. His account- l iwer ranks. At least one former Com-
annual reports of the CommIttee, 1959 "Salary Differentials 1969," "R.O.T.C.' far greater intiative than they now ability cannot be transferred to mte met er h e CES vi
through 1970. The second step was - Its Relationship to the University do, (2) that CAA should prepare mea- committees and therefore he would the market, rather than the CESF view,
to conduct interviews with former 1969," "Student Participation in Aca- sures, not merely be consulted about not automatically delegate a n y avice meely afirme apl thatE
chairme and members of the Com- demic Affairs 1969," and a compre- them, and (3), that the Committee powers to groups not under his con- advice merely affirmed a policy that
mittee. They were asked to verify hensive "Teaching Fellow Survey' shouldexercise independence in t h e trol. This phenomenon has been had to be adopted at the time
and interpret the impressions gained 1970." choice of problems for study and inImanifested wihmenhstems
1970" mnifetedwith many 'citizen' tom Thus, while it is clear that the work
from the study of the Committee re- the conduct of its business. mittees and boards . . . Invariably, of the CESF has been conceived primar-
ports, to comment on the mission of For issues'initiateddexplicitlydor in- ' mittees and boards ,'. .'Invariably,
cate discontent sufficiently widespread the Committee as they understood it iplicitly by the administration, it ap-; While this view was clearly and most a full-time bureaucrat (administra- i
or sufficiently focussed on matters and to make recommendations about pears that the committee has adequate- recently expressed in the 1970-71 Re- tor) will manipulate groups of part- vce in this role, it is also clear that
of economic status to move anything its future operation. ly fulfilled its self-perceived advisory port of the Committee on Academic time amateurs in a total subver-
like 30 to 50 per cent of faculty toward role. In its response to critical issues I Affairs to the Senate Assembly, [It sion of any democratic pretense- itha accepted en usuasly as fne
collective bargaining. Knowledge that The next step was to submit a first brought to it, it has served what a ; reads as follows: "The Committee con. even to the extent of not inform- tiating committee, usually about fringe
me national wage and price freeze draft of a report to former members former member has called a "fire en- sidered a variety of subjects at its ing them of their full rights and I benefits and salary policy on less than
Would not prohibit the total staff's re- of the Committee and to other in- gine function." From its ' inception, biweekly meetings but few were of responsibilities or powers. In gen- an overall basis. Although it miy not
ceiving an average 6.5 per cent in- formed members of the University, in- however, with some variance from year large importance to the academic qual- eral, the committees are consistent- be fair to critlcisze the CESF for a
crease in' compensation this year has cluding some executive officers, for to year, regular and comprehensive pre- ity of the University. Only occasionally ly (and not always subtly) advised and on ore sgnificant on ores ise
undoubtedly augmented the "wait and comment and criticism. A number of sentation of issues gave the group more was it consulted on matters of policy that they are powerless and a l1 iodas not had a mandate so t ba
see" attitude of many faculty mem- written statements were received and than this limited function when vice- by the Office of the Vice-President for authority lies with the bureaucrat hasno ha ua manaso to dr
bers. Meanwhile, there are also sev- several individual and group discus. presidents actively and systematically Academic Affairs. In the absence both . I see no unique variances in the a ts rctan oinablity t
eral quarters where such news in no sions were conducted. [Oral and writ- sought advice from the committee on 'of continuing informal relations with Academic Affairs Committee, a n d sos ac d evoicedbyr farulty
way dampens the intent to push for ten communications which have been a wide range of items. the staff of that office and of an in- policy comments on it can apply bers of the CESF.
change. considered for this report were received dependent staff of its own, it is diffi- elsewhere."
As far as general faculty participation from Theodore Buttrey, Bernard Gal- Some committee members would en- cult for m The existence of an uncertainty (even j
'in University governance is concerned, ler, Marvin Niehuss, J. E. Rowe, Wil- large the concept of a "fire eigineven to be aware of, much less to in- othether s rengt s ited above to be among faculty members) about the role
it is not entirely clear, from results 1am E. M. Lands, Bradford Perkins, function to Include one called the ence, the development of academic effecti he cit e, ton of CESF Is clearly revealed in respons-
of the study to what extent the dis John W. Henderson, W. J. McKeachie, "decorative." They feel that while the policies and programs in the Univer of the in m king e on es to an item included in a question-
content is directed toward the central Edward Bordin, Horace Davenport, Les- group is called upon when needed, -the sity." most Committee members of cdemi affairs, Cos: May, 1ssued to faculty members in
administratlon or toward all-University ter Colwell, James C. O'Neill, and A. w determination of that need is else- 'aca affai dA shoul n May, 1971. An analysis of the results of
adminrstrktron odtrinto ofar thatverit nedI 1le other years who responded to the re- 1. Maintain and direct its own in- t(i us~nar nur odce
faculty governance, or toward executive rkee is th e lte n ihece__ quest for criticism and comment on the 'dependent and continuing fact-finding- the Comie onteigtsond
leadership within the schools and col- While an effort has been made ob-' first draft of this report agreed with I agency through the use of part- or Responsibilities of the Faculty, 1971,
leges, or toward leadership in the sev- jectively to reflect and incorporate the although the impression is sometimes the claims of this 1970-71 communica- Ifull-time personnel. etitled "Faculty Participation in Uni-
eral departments, The departments and views and recollections of all persons wrongly given that the voice of the tion of CAA to the Senate-Assembly. It 2. Produce factual, well-documented. versity Decision-Makn at the Univer-
schools and colleges remain t h e who were consulted, the responsibility faculty is being expressed. An example is their belief that the interests of the and comprehensive reports. sity of Michigan," appears as an ap-
nprmary reference points for almost for the form and substance of this i Office of Academic Affairs have "com- 3. Make clear and well-supported re- pendix to th i t of the lat-
all faculty in both economic and aca- report is that of the writers. To the is the presentation of the University pletely dominated the meetings" and commendations. e group) ite mireport ( endix C)
demic matters. Yet the faculty ex- fullest extent possible the writte response to the recent HEW mandate have defined the function of CAA 4. Address reports to each audience In respo se to the query "Does th
pects constructive enabling leadership statements and notes made of oral on women, which was presented to the I through the ability to select and screen of concern. Committee on the Economic Status of
from the central administration, par- conferences have been compiled and group before submission to issues. They expressed the view that 5. Maintain a system of "tracking" its the Faculty have significant influence
ticularly in budgeting and finance, placed on file in the office of the Secty the office has reduced the influence 'recommmendaitons- on decisions affecting faculty remun-
3. Future Prospects Senate Advisory Committee on Uni- Y COn.-, of CAA through the selection of other 6. Use publications and meetings of eration?" 25 per cent of the total1
versity Affairs for consultation by ap- pleted 'form. groups instead of CAA for advice - faculty members to explain its recom- sample of 256 respondents said "yes"
Events are moving too swiftly in the propriate faculty committees. In m1hsthe Deans Conference, for example mendations, to obtain criticisms of and 36 per cent said "no".
y. Ipol- o While most of the former members them, and to obtain the support neces-
cs, labor law, University governance, been presented with alternatives by CAA has not usually selected the prob- sary for adoptionThe replies from the sample of 97
and c~aor aUivriygoenne of CAA who were consulted said (1) j afrOtiIdpin
and collective 'bargaining to permit that the fact presented hirst ) the Administration and, some members lems for discussion, the Committee has 7. Obtaim coordination with other faculty members who had been or were
accurate prediction even if all the thatt ts presented in the first kd not been able to establish a compre- m s fro members of the Senate Assembly were
accurat preicio evenec ifd all 'the thysyse oslc rmteper committees from the Senate Assembly.
relevant data were in. Some have ar- aft were to om te preai hensive set of issues for continuous CA.E. R.T more favorable to the influence of'
gudta olciv agiigi ofered n ith cote ande(2)etatn theyE saakd sletC.Tice3.e et ad"e"
gued that collective bargaining - concurred with the interpretations Of- ranged set of options. Thus, the Com- j review and that members have become CESF, since 36 per cent said "yes",
feug in besiidsradatoevr two members asked that ,;;>:k'-;;; ,;;;;;,;:" as compared<o>: :;a: with the affirmative ai-
ing to be so widespread as to be vir- rdm ,tw mmbr sdthtmittee has had influence on a decision- "reactors" rather than initiators. As a :.............. Igiiggglggggggas compared iihteafraiea-
changes in chronology be made and mite ha a mfum m eiin "cors"ene rather thaoirtars Aeibrs ai swers of the sample of 159 non-Assem-,
tually inevitables even for institutions two others disagreed with committee making level, but sometimes only after consequence, in our former member's'
likeD "N E'I of Mihgn n1iw tws feunl omte bly members, only 19 per cent of whomi
like the University of Michigan. Un- colleagues about the nature of rela- initial decisions on alternatives and whichm fiddled while Ronme bumne APPENDIX B resyoned "es The difherences be-n
questionably, massive changes In gov- tionships that have existed between their importance h (Memorandum tween the groups, significant to the
yningsucr and in pcdre - A dadni ierrenthr pranehave been made else- (Mmrn; no. 9). The Committee on the Economic tentegopsgiiat1 te
~rnlg srueureand n poceure af j CA ad aminstrtiverepesetatvesStatus of the Faculty, 1955-70 one per cent level, is one of the few
nerting faculty economic status are The present report seeks also to re- where. While this point of view seems to item pont wh , suen a feec
uderway throughou tecountry. tu fleet the views of those who disagreed Faculty View of CAA be that held by most of the former I g.....ss.sbn
a substantial rol in thi T ha t with the majority of respondents on From this brief review of the work members of CAA who responded to an sembly respondents-
e s. o wha the issue of relationships and on the invitation to participate in the analysis, Purpose r
extent increased experience will pro- genera tone of the first draft of theconcluded that while That the faculty, even so divided, be-
duce further reasons and pressures sup- report. (Memorandum 1 and 8). 'o CAAthe group has exercised influence on is not unanimous. This examination of the performance lieves that the CESF exerts signifi-
nortive of collective bargaining remains t group h er d i)fluenceno oq nf f win ra n. ... >f the Senate Assembly Committee on ant infuence.relati'e to that exerted ,
particular fringe benefit? 1. The mission of CESF must be pre-
-How many will be able to shift cisely stated and expanded.
from payment of their own funds onI 2 Its recommendations should be
such a fringe benefit payment frotf dpresented to the Senate Assembly and
'University funds? 'carried further only with strong sup-
-How many would not take advant- port from that body.
age of increased Univeristy support for 3 CESF, in combination with SACUA
a fringe benefit, preferring to 'have, or some other extant or newly created
for example, 80 cents in their own body, should fuly utilize faculty
pocket than have the University spend strength in urging the adoption of its
a dollar on benefit not desired? (Me- srengmmenduring the adinisfrit
recomnmendat ions upon the administra-
nmorandum 2X tion
The result nas been the implicit con-
construction of a "utility function" f o r Alternative Two
the faculty by CESF. It has meant that
while some members have been worse 1. The mission of CESF must be more
off, the majority have enjoyed an im- precisely stated.
proved statushthrough tax advantages j 2. It must no longer be called, or
gained through direct university bene- regarded as, "advisory."
fit purchase. (Memorandum 2) For 3. It should become an "executive"
most, then, significant advances were committee' to act with the President,
made largely on the basis of CESF ad- or other executive officers, in the sam
vice on group life insurance, retire- way campus school and college execu-
ment, group travel insurance, disabil- tive committees now join with deans in
ity, health programs, and insurance. In governance
these matters, CESF nearly always( r
made determinations within the al- 4. This would mean that measures in-
ready established range of allocations. itiated by faculty or administration
A member of CESF. comments about which affect the economic status of the
improvements in fringe benefits that faculty would be adopted only with the
the Committee may have had less to! agreement of the new CESF.
do with alleged gains than is some- 5. This change in status might be ef-
times claimed, for "certain fringe bene- fected through changes in Regental By-
fits attained by the faculty in the last Laws or adopted through a memorand-
three years were first granted to non- um of agreement.
academic personnel as a result of bar- Whether strengthened in one of these
gaining. They wdre later granted to the ways or in some other way, to be ef-
academic faculty under the policy that fective in raising faculty compensation,
academic fringe benefits should at especially to meet the consequences of
least equal those granted non-academic inflation, CESF must be expected to
personnel." (Memorandum 1) perform such functions as the follow-
In at least two cases CESF acted to ing:
affect priorities related to salary lev- 1. Maintain and direct its own inde-
els. For many years the CESF urged pendent and continuing fact-finding
that priority be given to salary raises agency through the use of full-time
for younger faculty members in order personnel; and press for a full array of
to attract instructors and assistant pro- information that will display the ab-
fessors. That this recommendation has solute and relative status of the fa-
been followed is shown by AAUP rank- culty. Examples: (a) The Committee
ings of AA for these groups, while the must have access to information con-
comparable ranking for, full profes- cerning comparative status changes of
sors has dropped to B. CESF may be administrative, service, and research
accorded more credit for this outcome staff components of the university; (b)
than it deserves since the balance The Committee must seek information
struck may have been largely a reaction with respect to patterns of individual
tocompetitive conditions in the market status changes and the manner in
for academicians. which significant changes may be con-
The recommendations of CESF were cealed within rank averages: (c) The
also followed in the readjustment of Committee must consider changes in
pay patterns when Term III c a m e the'distribution of fractional-time ap-
into being. Committee lore nas it that pointments and the proportions of fa-
the struggle over this issue was sharp culty on full-year and part-year ap-
and that the CESF view prevailed when pointments; (d) The Committee must
it became clear that it represented inquire into faculty income and bene-
strong fapulty opinion. fits derived from their faculty position
On this issue, as on others which and function but not formally part of
affect faculty compensation, CESF has the University's compensation system.
been effective as a channel of com- (Document 3)
munication. The interests of faculty 2. Produce factual, well-documented
have been served by early awareness and comprehensive reports, which fully
of directions of administrative plan- examine alternatives.
ning and the consequent raising of is- 3 Make clear and well-supported re-
sues which might otherwise nave been com edarns-
overlooked. (Memorndum 2) Executive Icommendations.
officers have consulted CESF on eco- 4. Address reports which take into
nomic tissues from time to time,, al- account "opportunity cost and market
though this function seems to have be- forces" with each audience.
come less important in recent years. A ! 5. Attempt a determination of what
recent chairman and long-time member salaries "should be", as the Commit-
of CESF reports:. "We have not been tee attempted to do 'in 1969-70, taking
called upon recently." (Memorandum 7) competition, cost of living, and per
Another members writes: "During the capita income into account, in a move
past three years, one member of Staff away from solely retrospective eval
Benefits Office attended one meeting nations toward predictive forecast.
of the Economic Status Committee It is clear that in the future the
This is the one and only instance of faculty will have to make effective
contact between the Committee and the economic recommendations if any mea-
Administration." (Memorandum 1) -.. ,+a i t. n..Iu-n
}
vv, Live vi cuncctave Liargaining remains 1
i ne views of tnose wno ao not agree
cant umunce reiuiv Lo nacexere.