The past few months have been turbulent ones for the University of Toledo, capable of wrenching the institution from its foundations and inspiring ruinous upheaval. Many faculty members feel disenfranchised as of late at UT, cut out from the decision-making process that so intimately affects their careers and livelihoods. Aside from that, the administration has repeatedly pursued plans that seemingly seek to cripple the College of Arts and Sciences, turning it into nominally existent academic entity equipped to offer only a bare-bones-list of course offerings that can, at best, simply complement a STEMM education.
In order to truly improve this university - or at least to keep it functioning adequately - all parties involved must have a hand in planning UT's future. It is undeniable that there are important advancements that can be made here at UT, even though the idea of improving a "failing liberal arts education" is ridiculous and dangerous. In order to even come close to accomplishing these goals and maybe moving UT ahead in national ranks, no matter the direction, there must be shared faculty and administrative governance. A marginalized faculty will, at best, simply not cooperate with an oppressive administration and become stressed, creating a nightmarish bureaucratic tug-of-war game and an unhealthy atmosphere for student education. At the worst, it will encourage faculty members to leave this university and continue their careers elsewhere.
Shared governance is especially crucial at a time like this, though, with union negotiations between the university and the faculty members proceeding and an haphazard deadline of July 1 for department mergers hanging over the heads of faculty members and administrators. In this spirit, a combined Faculty Senate incorporating members from the Main Campus and the Health Science Campus stands as a grand opportunity to develop a shared faculty voice for dialogue with the administration on how to operate UT. The Faculty Senate, consisting of 64 members justly apportioned according to number of faculty members in each college, will give UT President Lloyd Jacobs one prominent faculty authority with which to establish a dialogue. He might find this streamlined and consolidated approach to UT operation more agreeable, given his distaste for excessive and multiple operations as outlined in his second annual address.
To truly enfranchise this new Faculty Senate, though, the board of trustees along with UT's administration must give faculty members a place at the table. This year, unlike previous ones, Faculty Senate has not had representation on the board of trustees. This exclusion robs the trustees of a crucial insight into campus dynamics and the faculty members of a significant mechanism for expressing their grievances.
If such precautions are taken and warnings are heeded, UT's future will improve significantly as all those attached to the university will work together for a common vision. If the reckless re-engineering as pursued by the administration continues, however, an impassable divide might come to wrench this university apart - and it might happen soon.
Be the first to comment on this article!