It has just come to our attention that a resolution has been prepared for presentation at the next meeting of the Faculty Senate on November 2. The reported wording of the resolution is as follows:
Archive for the ‘The Schools’ Category
On a collision course
Wednesday, October 7th, 2009Thoughts on Restructuring Research
Sunday, October 4th, 2009There are certain things that make us who we are. To me, these include the Wisconsin Idea, the Union terrace, faculty governance and the strong administrative tie between research and graduate education. Changes in any of these fundamental characteristics affect who we are as an institute and a community.
Change is appropriate when it addresses real problems or better aligns us with a new vision for the university. To address some stated problems, the Chancellor and Provost are proposing a new structure of research administration, one that aligns more with the structure of the Chancellor’s previous institution, Cornell, than with our history as a successful research campus. This plan implements directions from above, and is not grounded in new ideas and directions from our faculty and researchers. Top down leadership breeds good followers; we want to build good initiators. The proposed new structure changes who we are as an institute. (more…)
Another skeptical take on restructuring
Saturday, October 3rd, 2009(This contribution originally appeared as a Reader Reply on October 1, 2009 and was subsequently upgraded to an Article. – Ed.)
I also attended the “town meetings” in Science Hall on 30 September and in the Health Sciences Learning Center on 1 October. On each occasion, the Provost made a presentation and responded to questions and comments from the floor about his proposal to create a new office of research headed by a vice chancellor and to eliminate almost all research functions from the Graduate School. This would mean that the Dean of the Graduate School would no longer have the second function and working title of Vice Chancellor for Research. I agree fully with the previous post, “A skeptical audience for restructuring.”
There is pretty good evidence — from earlier presentations that were later retracted — that the Provost made an effort to push a reorganization through with no written plan and no faculty input by the end of September. Early in October he would have gone straight to UW System to get permission for his new Vice Chancellor for Research position. At that point the game would have been up.
Putting things in perspective – and a cautionary tale
Saturday, October 3rd, 2009For all of the passion that the current restructuring issue has been arousing recently (at least among those of us who are following it), we can be thankful that the overall environment at UW-Madison remains relatively congenial, mutually respectful, and universally dedicated to the goal of maintaining the best-possible research and educational programs even in the face of challenges both internal and external. In order to preserve those qualities, it is essential that there never be a breach of trust and respect between the faculty, staff, and administration of the type that has afflicted a few of our peer institutions. In particular, we draw our readers’ attention to the following website, which superficially has a similar function to this one but which apparently emerged from a far more dysfunctional and distrustful environment: the University of Arizona’s UA Defender.
It is our sincere belief and hope that wiser heads will always prevail at UW-Madison and that both the administration and the faculty and staff will always choose productive collaboration over destructive confrontation.
- the Editors
A skeptical audience for restructuring
Wednesday, September 30th, 2009The second town-hall style meeting was held today concerning the proposed restructuring of the Graduate School to split off its research-related functions into a separate administrative unit. (If this issue is not yet on your radar screen, it should be — see here and here).
The meeting was well-attended, primarily by folks from Letters and Sciences this time since L&S was the nominal sponsor of this particular event.
Provost Paul DeLuca built his pitch around the following contentions: (1) our “research structure is broken,” and, therefore, (2) only the creation of a new administrative hierarchy, headed by a Vice Chancellor for Research who reports directly to the Chancellor, can save the University from the threat of a major meltdown.
If it ain’t broke … fix it?
Monday, September 28th, 2009UW-Madison Provost Paul DeLuca, Jr., has proposed a restructuring of the graduate school that would split its research function from graduate education. While the details of the proposed changes remain hazy (update: some details are now clarified in the video linked to below), it is clear that the consequences could be far-reaching in terms of impact on both the research and graduate education missions of the University. It is essential that faculty and staff pay close attention to this issue and exercise their right to weigh in on this decision under the established UW tradition of shared governance.