2010-2011 University Senate
Monday, November 15, 2010
3:00 pm, Alumni House
Eric Lifshin, Chair
Minutes
Present:
J. Philippe Abraham, Sandra Austin, Hassaram Bakhru, Robert Bangert-Drowns, Brea Barthel,
Steve Beditz, Paulino Berrios, Tom Bessette, R. Scott Birge, JoAnne Carson, Sue Faerman,
Nicholas Fahrenkopf, Patrick Ferlo, Susanna Fessler, Cynthia Fox, Timothy Groves, Kristen
Hessler, Richard Johnson, Daniel Keyser, Laurence Kranich, Winifred Kutchukian, Vincent
LaBella, William Lanford, Hamilton Lankford, Fernando Leiva, Eric Lifshin, Andi Lyons, JoAnne
Malatesta, Richard Matyi, Candace Merbler, Gwendolyn Moore, John Murphy, Robert Nakamura,
Nancy Newman, Heidi Nicholls, Stepehn North, Julie Novkov, Susan Phillips, John Pipkin,
Tremayne Price, R. Michael Range, Katie Reed, Joan Savitt, John Schmidt, Benjamin Shaw,
Leonard Slade, Joette Stefl-Mabry, Christine Wagner, Daniel White, Kevin Williams, Rongwei Yang
Guests:
Bret Benjamin, Susan Blood, Cassandra Bouzi, Eloise Brière, Jean-Francois Brière, Sarah Cohen,
Anthony DeBlasi, Colin Donnarman, Jackie Hayes, Janell Hobson, Joane MacMillan, Ryan Lennon,
Veronique Martin, Win Means, Elizabeth Moran, James Palicha, Maria Reyes, Kathleen S. Amy
Savage, Lotfi Sayahi, Timothy Sergay, Amelia Simonson, James Stanford, Barbara Sutton, Annie
Vanderboom, J. Weh, Bill Whalen, David Wills, Mary Beth Winn
In addition to the above attendees, several members of the local media attended including reporters from FOX23
News, WNYT, YNN, The Business Review, The Daily Gazette, The Legislative Gazette, and The Times Union.
The meeting was convened at 2:57 pm.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR MEETING OF OCTOBER 18, 2010
The minutes of October 18 were approved with minor additions.
SENATE CHAIR’S REPORT – ERIC LIFSHIN
Chair Lifshin began his report by referring to the Senate Response Concerning Deactivations. The document was
compiled by the Senate councils in response to President Philip’s request for comments as outlined in his memo of
October 1 sent to the Senate Chair. Council chairs were asked to discuss the response with their respective council
members and to provide an appropriate statement. Some of the councils did not feel the issue was pertinent to their
mission but in some case the responses were extensive. The cover letter acknowledges the work done by the
councils and committees to work on a tight deadline. He said the Senate has the opportunity today to decide on the
message it wishes to deliver to the President through the compiled responses as well as various resolutions that will
be introduced. Chair Lifshin provided an overview of the agenda and said there will be a period for additional
comments prior to discussing new business.
OTHER REPORTS
UFS (UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATOR’S REPORT) –DANIEL D. WHITE, J. PHILIPPE ABRAHAM
& SHADI SHAHEDIPOUR-SANDVIK, SUNY SENATORS
The report was sent separately.
GSO (GRADUATE STUDENT ORGANIZATION)
– HEIDI NICHOLLS, GSO
REPRESENTATIVE
The GSO has been contacted by graduate students from the French department looking for someone to both talk to them about the current
status of the department and potential courses of legal advice/action they could take. They were directed to contact Dean Williams.
SA (STUDENT ASSOCIATION)
– JUSTIN WAX JACOBS, PRESIDENT STUDENT
ASSOCIATION
Tremayne Price, Chair of the Student Association Senate, reported that this Thursday, November 18, the Student Association
will present its FallFest. The event will feature Third Eye Blind and MIRK and will be held in the SEFUC Arena.
COUNCIL/COMMITTEE REPORTS
CAA (Council on Academic Assessment) – Richard Matyi, Chair
The CAA will be meeting on Wednesday, November 17, with the major agenda item being a discussion of upcoming program
reviews
CAFFECoR (Committee on Academic Freedom, Freedom of Expression, and
Community Responsibility) – Pradeep Haldar, Chair
Response to President’s request on budget cuts: This does not appear to be an activity directly related to the mission of CAFFECoR,
however, if there are any affects on Academic Freedom of Freedom of Expression, the committee will be ready to take-up the case.
The committee has reviewed a request that indicated a student’s freedom of speech may have been violated. However, after careful
review, the committee felt this was not the case and didn’t find it necessary to pursue. The committee is following up on the Community
Rights & Responsibilities Document.
CERS (Committee on Ethics in Research and Scholarship) – John Monfasani, Chair
CERS met with the University Council, John Reilly, in September and October, and successfully resolved almost all outstanding
issues. An exchange of drafts via email may be all that is now needed in order to agree upon a final text. If not, one more meeting
should do the trick. So I am confident that CERS will be able to bring the revised CERS text to the SEC and then to the Senate before
the end of the semester.
COR (Council on Research) – James Castracane, Chair
COR met in a special session to discuss the deactivation plans announced by the President. A statement was formulated and submitted to
Senate Chair Lifshin to include in his response to the President. The next regular meeting will be on November 17th.
It should be noted that the applications for the FRAP A awards are due to the VP Research from the Deans on November 19th.
CPCA (Council on Promotions and Continuing Appointments) – Vincent LaBella, Chair
CPCA reviewed several more cases. We passed along a resolution to the sec chair regarding the enrolment suspension. We are working
with the provost to draft a message to send to all deans and dept chairs to reaffirm our commitment to process all T&P cases as we
normally would during this time.
GAC (Graduate Academic Council) – Laurence Kranich, Chair
On November 9, GAC met with the Provost and the Dean of CAS to discuss the President’s proposed deactivation of graduate programs.
The discussion focused on the criteria used to select the designated programs, the data upon which the decision was based, the
consultative process, and the academic merits of the proposal.
GOV (Governance Council) – Susanna Fessler, Chair
The Governance Council met on Friday, October 29, 2010. A regular meeting time for the rest of the semester was confirmed. GOV
listened to guests Larry Kranich and Richard Matyi (chairs of GAC and CAA respectively) about an issue of CAA’s role in program
reviews. No action was taken, but the GAC and CAA chairs were charged with producing a written clarification (if necessary) for the
Charter, which GOV will review. GOV listened to guest Brett Bowles (of LLC), who came to speak about the program deactivations
recently announced by the President. The official GOV response to the President’s memo will be drafted over the next few days, in time
for the SEC meeting on Monday, November 1. Also, GOV has completed drafting two proposals to amend the Charter (one on CPCA
chairship, and one on Council Chairs), which will be forwarded to the SEC.
Chair Fessler reported that GOV forwarded its nominations for the Excellence Awards Selection Committees to the
President’s office.
LISC (Council on Libraries, Information Systems, and Computing) – Shadi
Shahedipour-Sandvik, Chair
LISC met on Oct. 18th. The two committees of LISC were formed and their members elected chairs. The Library Committee members
from LISC are: Laura Schultz, chair; Ruth Scipione; Bruce Dudek; Gwen Moore and Nancy Newman. The IT Committee members are:
Michael Jaromin, Chair; Bruce Dudek; Ed Waltz, Karen Brown and Brian Butcher. The two chairs will set up their own meetings and
report back to LISC. Each committee will identify a couple topics that would make an impact and push it forward. The Dean of
Libraries, Mary Casserly informed the Council that October 18-24, 2010 is Open Access Week, a discussion on the need for barrier-free
access to scholarship. CIO Chris Haile reported that ITS is in the planning stages of a Blackboard upgrade for summer and fall 2011.
Also, in conjunction with other departments, a business intelligence system is being reviewed as an analytical tool for a more
sophisticated way to do business at the campus. ITS, in conjunction with CAS and the Library, have formed a team to review IT services
and find a way to work more collaboratively in delivering support and customer services to the campus. In addition, Red Dot, the
campus’s web content management software, in the process of being upgraded.
It was noted that the classrooms have reached a milestone in that there are 31 seats in every classroom and wired for technology. This
shows great progress with technology in the classrooms and shouldn’t be left unnoticed or unrecognized. LISC is scheduled to meet on
Nov. 15th, 2010.
UAC (Undergraduate Academic Council) – JoAnne Malatesta, Chair
The UAC met on November 3rd and November 10th.
On Nov. 3rd Professor Brett Bowles from the French Department joined the UAC to discuss implications for undergraduate education
should the 5 programs proposed for deactivation become deactivated. He presented data regarding course offerings, available seats, and
number of majors. Additionally, there was discussion about the implications for other programs and departments should coursework in
these areas no longer be available. In other business, the UAC has begun to examine a number of policies pertinent to undergraduate
education including: the review of restricted majors, retention of FARE files, S/U grading, and cross-registration. A number of Bills are
currently being reviewed by the Curriculum Committee and should be presented to the SEC in the near future.
ULC (University Life Council) – Danielle Leonard, Chair
ULC met twice since the 10/18 Meeting of the SEC.
On Wednesday, October 27th 2010 ULC discussed President Philip’s memo asking for the Senate’s comments on the deactivation of
academic programs. We considered how the President’s decision adversely impacts “university community conditions that affect the
overall health, safety, and well being of students, faculty, and staff.” While somewhat difficult to quantify, the fear, anxiety, and overall
stress felt by our community is great and has resulted in an atmosphere of uncertainty and low morale that must be addressed by the
administration as UA continues to feel the impact of these losses.
On Tuesday, November 9th 2010 ULC invited members of the newly formed Veteran Education Team to discuss Veteran Services on
campus. While there are many services in place now and more that we can expect to emerge in the near future, we heard concerns about
the coordination of services and about a lack of awareness of veteran’s issues on the part of the campus community. In the coming weeks,
ULC will consider how services might be better coordinated and awareness of veteran’s issues raised campus-wide.
UPPC (University Planning and Policy Council) – R. Michael Range, Chair
UPPC met on Friday, October 29, 2010. 1. Certificate in Information Security proposed by the School of Business. This was initially
discussed at the 9/17 meeting, when it was tabled, pending further information. Since then, Professor Goel had submitted additional
material to the Council. He and Professor Bromley were present for the discussion. It was emphasized that, as in the past, offerings of
relevant courses will be subject to availability of sufficient external funding to cover costs, and that offerings in summer would be fully
covered by tuition. A federal grant will cover the costs of developing the on-line components of the program. The Council voted
unanimously to approve the proposal. 2. Strategic Plan. Provost Phillips shared brief summary versions as well as the final full version
of the Stategic Plan. There was some discussion about whether the Strategic Plan should be formally reviewed by the Senate. UPPC
agreed that given governance’s substantial representation on the SP Committee and the extensive opportunities for feedback, such review
would not be necessary. Instead, it was emphasized that governance should be involved in reviewing and approving any proposed
specific implementation steps. The Provost agreed to this. 3. The Council resumed discussion of the proposed deactivation of programs
in the Humanities. There was agreement about the difficulties in commenting about one specific item that is part of a much larger
reduction plan, when no specific details about the whole package were available. The Provost shared some data about reductions in AA,
but was not yet ready to share the breakdown by schools/colleges, except for the figures separating CAS and all other S/C. On a
percentage basis, it is planned that in 10-12 CAS will take a 7.5% reduction, all other S/C 6.8%, and Academic Support Units 11.8%.
The Council continued its discussions via e-mail and finalized a document which was sent to the Senate Chair as UPPC response to the
president’s request for comments on the deactivation.
Comments Regarding Deactivation of Academic Programs:
Chair Lifshin received additional requests to speak today to further address the recent announcement to suspend
admissions to programs in the College of Arts and Sciences. He reminded those present that what’s decided today
will affect everyone here as well as the University’s reputation. He asked that we proceed in a direction that
fosters unity instead of being divisive.
The following prepared statements were read.
English Department Statement of Opposition to President Philip’s Proposed Budget Cut read by Stephen
North, Distinguish Teaching Professor:
The Department of English writes to express its strong opposition to President Philip’s announcement on October
1, 2010 to suspend admissions to five programs in the Humanities—French, Russian, Italian, Theatre, and Classics
—with the aim of deactivation and the likely departure or termination of twenty faculty members, fourteen of
whom are tenured.
The deactivation of these programs will directly affect English. We have faculty members with shared
appointments in these programs. We have a language requirement for our doctoral program that depends heavily
on offerings in the deactivated language programs, including Classics. Our faculty and students (both
undergraduate and graduate) have long collaborated with Theatre, affording our students the essential opportunity
to understand drama as a distinctly performative, rather than purely literary, art form. Given the interrelated nature
of Humanistic study, our interdisciplinary programs, from our doctoral Concentration in Cultural, Transcultural,
and Global Studies to our undergraduate Medieval/Renaissance Studies program, will be impaired by the loss of
the faculty in the deactivated programs. In the same way that disciplines such as Physics rely upon their students’
preparation in Mathematics, we in English depend upon our students’ preparation in other arts, literatures, cultures,
and languages. And, of course, we will be under pressure to increase our class sizes, and thereby diminish
instructional quality, in order to achieve the cost savings intended by the budget cuts.
Furthermore, we are concerned that these cuts will lead to an erosion of the University’s public mission. Contrary
to many well-publicized reports, the Humanities as such are not imperiled; they continue to thrive at elite private
institutions across the country. Under threat is the notion that all of New York’s citizens deserve access to
Humanistic study and the types of critical and communicative capacities it fosters. What must be defended, now
more than ever, are the positions that 1. UAlbany must retain and foster a rigorous, comprehensive research focus
in Humanities; and that 2. these educational opportunities remain part of an affordable, accessible, public
education.
The announcement of these cuts has elicited concern and outrage from academics and interested observers across
the state, the country, and the world. And for good reason. The proposed cuts to Humanities programs will
irrevocably compromise UAlbany’s status as a public research institution and in turn undermine our University’s
national and international reputation. As Rosemary G. Feal, executive director of the Modern Language
Association, recently noted: "the advanced study of the languages, literatures, and cultures of the French-, Italian-,
and Russian-speaking world are essential components of a liberal arts education in a university setting. While these
are financially difficult times for the SUNY system, an institution of the caliber of the University at Albany should
honor its claim to offer students a comprehensive, world-class education." We join our principal professional
organizations—the Modern Language Association, and the Association of Departments of English—in calling for
the restoration of the suspended programs, and the location of alternative ways to close the budget gap.
Universities, this one included, are academic institutions first and foremost. When faced with budget cuts, the first
and unassailable principle must be: no elimination of academic programs. As a faculty, then, we resolve as follows:
that President Philip’s proposal to suspend academic programs be rescinded and that all full- and part-time
faculty, graduate students, staff members, and indeed the programs themselves be retained.
that any program deactivations set in place under the current budget crisis of 2010-11 be considered
temporary and reversible.
that, if President Philip cannot find other places to make the necessary cuts for this year’s budget, he make
public a line-by-line budget to all faculty, staff, and students, and open a transparent process of
participatory budgeting in which all aspects of the University’s budgets are open for review.
that SUNY administration along with faculty, staff, and students return to the State in the upcoming
legislative session and fight for the restoration of public funds necessary to provide for these essential
programs.
We recognize the difficult financial situation currently facing the University. Budgets, however, are not merely
numerical; they reflect and express institutional priorities and values. Grossly disproportionate to any quantitative
savings achieved, the disastrous qualitative impact of eliminating five entire programs in the Humanities
diminishes our University’s reputation and its capacity to deliver comprehensive and rigorous education.
Considerable damage has already been done; however, staying the course will only worsen the situation. We ask
that President Philip and the University Administration take the courageous but necessary steps to reverse their
decision to suspend academic programs, and reconsider the process by which the decision was reached. We are
confident that, given complete budgetary disclosure, the University community as a whole will be able to find
collaborative and creative solutions that close the current budget gaps while still remaining true to UAlbany’s core
mission as a public research university. We look forward to working with the Administration to identify such
solutions.
Prepared statement read by Professor Brett Bowles, French Studies
Dear Colleagues,
As many of you know, during the past six weeks I have been an outspoken critic of the program deactivations, the
governance process that preceded them, the criterion of "comparatively low enrollments" used to justify them, and
the devaluation of the Humanities that they represent. Today I want to leave these issues aside and propose a basis
for consensus that engages directly with the fiscal realities of our situation.
First of all, the budget crisis we are facing is real and it is severe. During the past three years, our state allocation
has been cut by $33 million, more than the total endowment of this institution. Our administrators have presented
the deactivation of academic programs, now and in the future, as an inevitable fiscal necessity based on the
principle of making "deep, strategic cuts" to preserve areas of strength, with strength defined as the ability to
produce revenue or to operate with maximum cost efficiency.
So let us look at the program deactivation in those dispassionate, objective terms. We have been told that the
deactivation of these five programs is necessary to save the College of Arts & Sciences $2 million. That figure
strikes most of us as enormous, but in fact it represents 1.25% of the state allocation to this campus for 2010-11,
and less than one-half of 1% of the university's total operating budget for this year when external revenue is added
to the state allocation.
As for the notion that the program deactivations will save $2 million, the truth is that they will cost the university
several times that amount. Consider the following three examples.
There is an alumnus of our Russian program, Mr. Ronald Bustin, who has stated that he will revoke a $7.5 million
gift to the university provided for in his will if the deactivations stand. How many more future alumni donors will
we lose if we set the precedent of eliminating academic programs?
Dr. Sanjay Goel, Professor of Business and Research Director of the New York State Center for Information
Forensics, recently received a $390,000 grant from the US Department of Education to train students in
international computer security. That program is to be jointly administered by UAlbany and Moscow State
Technical University, which will provide matching funds. The grant requires students to achieve a high level of
proficiency in Russian; Dr. Goel himself is currently taking a Russian class on campus.
http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/UAlbany-adds-program-amid-cuts-799034.php He has stated that the
project's expenses will rise dramatically if he and his students have to seek Russian language training off campus.
Finally, it should be known that five senior faculty in the affected language programs were already planning to
retire within the next two years, the same time frame for the proposed deactivations. Their combined salaries total
just over $500,000. That figure did not enter into the deactivation decisions because administrators did not consult
with my department, Languages, Literatures & Cultures, between May and October 1.
The bottom line is that deactivating five degree programs to save $2 million will in fact cost the university several
times that amount, to say nothing of the damage done to UAlbany's reputation, to other surviving academic
programs, and our ability to recruit and retain quality students and faculty. In both fiscal and intellectual terms,
there is nothing strategic about these program deactivations.
If we can agree that the primary mission of our university is academics, and that deep, strategic cuts are necessary
in response to the budget crisis, let us also endorse the common-sense principle of deactivating all possible non-
academic programs prior to deactivating academic ones. Following this logic, it will not be enough simply to
review expenses and cost efficiency in administration and Athletics, or to enact proportional cuts to those and other
non-academic areas, as Provost Phillips and President Philip have recently proposed.
Since 2005-06, the state allocation to Intercollegiate Athletics at UAlbany has grown by 26%, an increase far
greater than any other single unit of the university. This year our Athletics Department is receiving over $4 million
in state money, as well as $6-7 million from the mandatory athletics fee that students pay, and roughly another $2
million in external revenue. One partial, sustainable solution to the budget crisis would be to reabsorb the state
allocation to athletics for academic purposes, and fund Athletics using the student fees they collect and the
substantial external revenue that they generate. There is a clear precedent for doing so, one that has been
implemented by institutions such as the University of California at Berkeley, which will eliminate four NCAA
sports at the end of this year, and Hofstra University, which eliminated its football program last year. In short, let
us apply a business model of cost-efficiency to Athletics.
I made a proposal to this effect in the Times Union last week. http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Level-
the-playing-field-cut-UAlbany-sports-792637.php Since then Professor Hal Lawson from the School of Education
has drafted a similar proposal (see attached) that adds depth and detail to what I wrote. He has shared that proposal
with Provost Phillips and Lee McElroy, Vice President of Athletics Administration. Professor Lawson and I offer
these proposals together not as a ready-made solution, but as a point of consensus and a basis for dialogue.
The budget crisis facing us is real and it is massive. But this crisis is not strictly budgetary. It is just as much a
crisis of vision, of priorities, and of political will--for each of us individually and for all of us collectively. Today
we and the Senate must choose between two paths: the first is resignation to the cannibalization of academic
programs; the second, more difficult path, is collective action to find other solutions. I ask that all UAlbany faculty,
students, and staff join together in choosing the second path, to find truly strategic, sustainable cost-saving
solutions that will preserve the academic mission and reputation of our great university.
Prepared statement read by Jackie Hayes
I would strongly encourage the Faculty Senate to oppose the deactivation of the 5 programs; Italian, Russian,
French, Theater and Classics. The elimination of these programs would have a devastating impact on our campus,
on students’ ability to access a quality education, and on the core mission of our University. I implore you to resist
these cuts and open a broad, democratic dialogue with the campus community on alternative cost saving measures.
Aside from resisting these immediate and devastating cuts, I would also call on the Faculty Senate to endorse and
call for a full campus mobilization that demands New York State restore public funding to SUNY.
Understandably, there has been disillusionment with depending on the state for funding. State funding has been
criticized due to its slowness, its lack of commitment, the fact that has been pulled away from our campuses in
large, devastating sums with little awareness of the impact it is having on our community. But the take away lesson
from 30 years of disinvestment in SUNY is not that public funding is a failed model, but that we have failed to
adequately place the public in these decisions and in the execution of a public mission. Our challenge in the midst
of this crisis is to navigate, to map out how we the teachers, the students, the campus community, the public can
demand a place in these decisions and demand that budget decisions are made according to our priorities.
Alongside the current dismal picture of SUNY funding over the last 3 decades is also another narrative. When we
look at the buildings, the programs, our campus we should see staring back at us the public investment of hundreds
of thousands of working class New Yorkers who paid to build up this campus to where it is today. Embedded in
that funding is also a mission and a mandate to provide affordable, accessible public education to all New Yorkers.
I come from one of those working class families and if it were not for SUNY, I could not afford to go to college.
But, the scene is changing with growing student debt, rising tuition, disappearing programs. I personally will
graduate with over $60,000 of debt. This is completely unacceptable. The state has a responsibility to support and
fund higher education and we, the campus community, must hold them to that responsibility. So I would strongly
encourage the Faculty Senate to not only vote against these devastating cuts, but to also demand that New York
State uphold its responsibility to our campus and to all New Yorkers.
Presentation by UPPC Chair Michael Range, Mathematics and Statistics
Chair Range distributed the table which appears at the end of these minutes and also referred to the data shared at
the last meeting. He said the spreadsheet shows the difference in proposed reductions presented by the
administration and also shows the All Funds allocations which provide a source of additional resources for
administrative units.
PROVOST’S REPORT by SUSAN PHILLIPS
Provost Phillips reported on behalf of President Philip who sent his apologies for not being able to attend. The
Provost talked about many of the conversations she has been hearing across campus and acknowledged that some
were difficult to hear. A vigorous phase of conversation will continue as part of the consultation process. The
President and Provost have had many conversations since the announcement in October with faculty and staff,
academic departments, SEC, University Council, local business leaders and many parties from around the globe.
The Provost described the budget process taking place in terms of viewing an iceberg. She referred to a handout
she provided and discussed the reduction during 2008-09 and 2009-10, the visible part of the iceberg. During this
period of cuts, four over the two year period, the University lost positions, most coming from people who retired or
left for other positions, affecting those left to assume more responsibility. She referred to targeted reductions for
2010-11 and 2011-12 as the part of the iceberg that’s not visible. The next reduction is estimated for $13 million
bringing our total reduction to approximately $32.3 million. Additional information can be found on the UAlbany
Budget Updates web page.
Provost Phillips said it was important to realize that similar measures are being taken at universities in other states
as well as other SUNYs. The bottom line is we have 30% less of our budget. She referred to an e-mail sent earlier
in the day announcing that the University’s base budget would be reduced by an additional $1.7 million as part of
the mid-year reduction. At the State level, New York’s future is grim. The state comptroller announced that the
state deficit will be close to $10 billion. The University will continue to work with the State legislature and unions
to address the situation. The University has stepped up its effort to increase the number of out of state students and
to increase entrepreneurial options. The end of the year energy conservation period will continue this year in an
effort to save money as well as conserve resources. A faculty forum has been scheduled to address budget
concerns and going forward. Both President Philip and Provost Phillip look forward to agreeable positions on both
sides.
The Provost said the Strategic Plan provides focus in considering what will happen in the future. The plan outlines
six key goals and it will be formally unveiled in the next several months. A steering committee will be assembled
to implement the plan over the next several years.
University Wide Announcements:
Provost Phillip recognized the work of Stephen North on the General Education Task Force. Members of
his team submitted a proposal to participate in a multi-campus collaboration from the American Association
of Colleges and Universities focused on developing General Education for the Global Century. Their
proposal was accepted for participation along with thirty-one other colleges and universities.
University Development has been successful in generating support for our students. Fund raising has
increased substantially.
Construction is taking place on the new resident halls. Suggestions for naming the dorms include Liberty
Place and Minerva Terrace.
The Provost announced that Winter Commencement will take place on December 5 and hoped that all
would participate and attend.
Question and Answers:
Q: Will public and private partnerships be revealed to the faculty before they are finalized?
The Provost said she believed that the appropriate venues will be consulted.
Q: Is the $1.7 million reduction announced today in addition to the $13 million estimate?
Provost Phillips described it as a down payment in the reductions for 2011-12.
NEW BUSINESS
Vote on Senate Response Comments on Deactivation:
Chair Lifshin asked Senate members to consider whether the cover letter and the collection of comments addressed
the response to President Philip’s request. A motion was made and seconded to accept the comments and it was
open for discussion. Chair Lifshin informed the Senate that comments made today would be added to the
document before forwarding to the President. There was brief discussion. Professor Fox expressed confusion
over the process and asked how the Senate response was different from the resolutions that were being introduced.
Chair Lifshin indicated that the resolutions were the position of the Senate. SUNY Senator White provided
clarification by using a process that occurred during the spring semester as an example. He referred to the
legislation introduced by GAC to suspend admissions to graduate programs in Russian and Russian translation.
The bill went through the SEC and was brought to the Senate and vote on. The bill then went to the President for
signature, and upon his recommendation the program could be deactivated by the Board of Trustees and NYS
Education Department. There were no further comments and a motion was made and seconded to vote on the
Senate Response. The resulting vote approved the response which will be forwarded to President Philip.
Senate resolutions in Response to Deactivation Notice:
University Centers Resolution (SUNY Wide)
Resolution on the Suspension of Programs at the University at Albany
SUNY Senator White said this was a rare statement by the SUNY wide Senate. In general, the body avoids
making comments on specific campuses and their administration. It was clear that what had occurred at UAlbany
required a strong statement. It was not unanimous but the resolution was overwhelmingly supported by the SUNY
wide Senate.
Consultation with Governance (SUNY-Wide)
Senator White indicated that the SUNY Senators wanted to make clear to the Chancellor and campus leaderships
that SUNY Senators are very passionate about shared governance, and the sentiment was that shared governance
was not being followed in the case of the UAlbany deactivations. He discussed the process that works on this
campus and referred to a specific incident last spring when the School of Public Health introduced a bill to
deactivate its minor. After a discussion period at the Senate meeting on May 14, a vote defeated the measure.
Senator White said the first resolution was specific to UAlbany but the second one is not.
LLC Resolution:
The following statement was read by Cynthia Fox, Associate Professor, French Studies
This resolution, which I move that we adopt, has been drafted in consultation with a variety of colleagues,
with attention to other documents in circulation such as the Department of English statement (which passed 30-1 in
a secret ballot ) and the CPCA resolution (which passed by a vote of 8-1), and following feedback from the SEC. It
addresses three main areas of concern.
The first is the consultative process. If, prior to the President’s October 1 announcement, the major arena
for discussion was the BAG committees, then the least that can be said is that those groups included only narrow
representation from the humanities, which are now bearing the brunt of the proposed program closings.
Furthermore, a shortcircuiting of the consultative process took place between the conclusion of the BAG
discussions on June 16, which referred only to consolidation, reorganization, or rethinking, and not elimination of
programs, and the October 1 announcement. Symptomatic of that is the degree of revising and backtracking on the
part of the administration since then: from loose talk of retrenchment to the Provost’s latest formulation (in papers
you have before you concerning the tenure and promotion process) of “proposed enrollment suspensions.”
The second concern is the criteria used to select programs for deactivation. The President denies the choice
was his, and refers instead to a process of consultation, even stating in his latest Albany TV interview, that the
programs were “selected by this consultative body,” which, in the context of his previous remarks, appears to refer
to BAG. Public justifications of the choice are limited to lower enrollments, yet clearly, given the comparative
data, other criteria had to have been used. The decision is supposed to have been strategic, yet there is no
explanation of what strategic criteria were used. There is certainly no engagement with the other explicit BAG III
criteria for judging merit, namely reputation and faculty productivity. Reputation and faculty productivity in the
case of certain targeted programs is extraordinary, if measured by securing of grants, international renown, faculty
awards, publications and the like. In the absence of clear explanation of what factors led to the choice of programs
one can only resort to conjecture--more or less cynical and sinister—concerning various types of political
expediency. This is at best, a very poorly conceived and executed strategy.
The third, and major concern, is damage to the university. We have heard a great deal about the need to
build to strength. In the first place strength has been ill-defined; in the second place building to strength is a
strategy that is especially fraught with error at a time when the whole university is severely weakened (pulling
down is easy, rebuilding is extremely difficult); but third, its architects clearly have no idea what they are talking
about. The local, national and international outcry against this decision totally negates any argument that it has
strengthened UAlbany, or indeed SUNY. We have forwarded to the Senate a petition with 13,201 signatures, added
between October 2 and November 1. Those signatures represent all four SUNY research centers and all thirteen
SUNY university colleges; 50 American states, the District of Columbia and one US territory; and 41 foreign
countries representing six continents. The SUNY-Albany situation has given rise to an article in Le Monde and an
hourlong discussion on French radio. A BBC reporter has been on campus, an NPR segment is about to air, and a
New York Times story is expected to appear. The whole world is suddenly within reach, and is watching.
Statements objecting to the decision have been issued by the Modern Language Association (which is the
national professional organization for programs in English and Languages), by the Association of Departments of
English, the Association of Departments of Foreign Languages, and the American Association of University
Professors. We have received over 500 additional letters of support. They are, as expected, from alumni of the
university, students and professors of theatre, classics, and European language programs from around the country
and around the world. But they are also from chaired or distinguished professors of biochemistry and biology, from
concerned citizens of all stripes. They are in turn incredulous and angry, imploring and sarcastic, fretful and
pessimistic, reproachful and collaborative. They all ask, in effect: how can this be happening and how can it
possibly be conceived of as a solution? How can UAlbany regain its health by means of such self-mutilation?
We insist that UAlbany’s core mission cannot be sustained without these five programs, and that the set of
priorities that led to their proposed deactivation is misguided. We recognize the university’s dire financial situation,
but we believe that the administration should have explored every other possible alternative before suspending
admissions with a view to discontinuing programs. It is only now that we are told that the administration, and
athletics, will be reviewed, after academic programs have been put on the chopping block. And it is only now that
we understand that after the laudable general principles regarding UAlbany’s recipe for success have been
articulated by bodies such as BAG, precise strategic decisions such as this one will take place under a shroud of
utter secrecy; they will be sudden, swift and merciless. As a result the campus is prey to fear and suspicion, which
the administration seems content to let fester by means of threats of further cuts, and the effective pitting of
colleague against colleague, program against program. We reject those tactics. There are indeed a number of
current examples of how faculty at other institutions--Comparative Literature at Toronto is a topical case--have
come together, rising above fear, suspicion and protectionism, to insist on the absolute priority of the academic
mission of a university, to maintain academic programs above all else. That solidarity and unity in favor of our
shared academic enterprise is what makes a university, and makes it great. I call upon my colleagues and the
Senate to rise to the same challenge and to adopt this resolution opposing the deactivation of academic programs.
Chair Lifshin discussed the procedure for acting on the resolutions. Senator Kranich introduced a motion on behalf
of a constituent that there be a separate count of the votes of the teaching faculty from those of other Senators. The
vote would include only teaching faculty who are members of the Senate. Chair Lifshin opened the motion for
discussion. Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education, Sue Faerman said it was important to keep in mind that
some of those who are eligible to vote representing management also hold teaching ranks. Senator Merbler added
that senators are elected by both professional and teaching faculty. A friendly amendment was introduced to
conduct the vote by a roll call. A motion to accept the amendment was made and seconded. The resulting vote
opposed the amendment. The voting on the resolutions was conducted by all eligible members of the Senate with
the following results:
SUNY Resolution re: Consultation with Governance 38 approved; 6 opposed; 4 abstentions
SUNY Resolution re: The Suspension of Programs at UAlbany: 44 approved; 6 opposed; 4 abstentions
LLC Resolution: 31 approved; 17 opposed; 7 abstentions
Creation of Ad Hoc Committee to Pursue Additional Revenue Streams
Chair Lifshin reported on the discussion that took place at the last SEC meeting to explore alternative methods to
increase our resources and funding through the creation of an ad hoc committee. Chair Lifshin read the proposed
statement that would be sent to the University Community calling for suggestions and volunteers to be part of the
committee. A motion supporting the statement and creation of the committee was made and seconded. The
resulting vote was in favor of creating the committee. The Chair’s statement will be distributed to all faculty and
staff.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4:40 pm.
Respectfully submitted by
Gail Cameron, Recorder
2010-12 Targeted Reductions as percentage of state budget and of all-funds budget
2009-10
State Budget
(Base Allocation)
Source: Finance & Business
2009-10
ALL FUNDS
Source: Bag 3 data
2010-12
Reduction Targets
(preliminary)
% reduction
on 09-10 STATE BUDGET
% reduction
on 09-10 ALL FUNDS
$165,888,970
$439,000,000
($13,533,200)
-8.2%
-3.1%
President's Office
Academic Affairs
Arts and Sciences
All other Schoos/Coll.
Academic Support Units (w/o grad. st. supp.)
Graduate Student Support
$2,116,087
$104,907,571
$37,555,251
$29,897,812
$23,820,072
$13,634,436
$4,579,101
$6,287,472
$16,141,980
$3,769,636
$1,499,184
$3,861,726
$3,519,200
$146,681,957
$2,331,200
$114,360,118
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
$13,711,500
$12,191,700
$33,900,100
$7,817,000
$1,524,900
$15,108,700
$3,827,200
$204,772,418
($218,600)
($9,320,400)
($2,824,000)
($2,080,000)
($2,352,400)
($2,064,000)
($474,400)
($641,600)
($1,637,600)
($339,000)
($152,400)
($394,000)
($355,200)
-$13,533,200
-10.3%
-8.9%
-7.5%
-7.0%
-9.9%
-15.1%
-10.4%
-10.2%
-10.1%
-9.0%
-10.2%
-10.2%
-10.1%
-9.4%
-8.2%
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
-3.5%
-5.3%
-4.8%
-4.3%
-10.0%
-2.6%
-9.3%
Athletics
IT
F&B
Research
Comm. and Media
Student Success
U Development
Totals
(divisions listed above only)
