Lincoln University's Faculty Senate voted Tuesday to seek changes in administrators' plans for a "program review" of LU's course offerings.
"Department review is integral to effective academic planning at the department, college, and university level. Its major objective is to improve academic programs through ongoing self-assessment as provided for in the reaccreditation process," university provost and academic affairs vice president Said Sewell explained in a 19-page plan recently distributed to faculty.
"It fosters a strong and positive sense of each department's identity and contribution to the educational mission of Lincoln University."
Bryan Salmons, the Faculty Senate chairman and head of LU's English, Foreign Languages, and Journalism department, said Lincoln's teachers aren't against the idea of program review but, "you can't convince people who have been around higher education very long that program review doesn't lead to hard choices. It just does. ...
"Program review - in my experience and, I think, in the experience of many faculty members who have been around the block a few times - always leads to significant alterations, if not eliminations per se, of specific programs."
So, by a 45-12 vote, with seven abstentions, faculty members approved a three-part resolution asking Sewell for changes in his proposed review process, including:
• "That Dr. Sewell solicit faculty-elected representatives of the Review Committee annually, with at least one faculty representative from each area currently under review. Fair faculty representation is crucial to establishing trust in the program review process."
• "That Dr. Sewell work with the reconstituted Review Committee to revise the program review criteria to make it suitable to review programs at Lincoln University."
• "To develop a reliable system for reviewing programs against the modified criteria."
Salmons began the hour-long meeting by reporting he had been encouraged to open negotiations with Sewell, but his meeting with the provost "did not end in any satisfactory resolution."
Before the vote, some faculty voiced concern the proposed review criteria would be used "to rank programs against each other," while others said the ranking would be "against comparative schools" or specific course criteria.
In an interview, Salmons noted the Faculty Senate has been part of a "shared governance" concept at Lincoln for more than a decade, where rules approved by the curators give faculty a "voice" in university operations.
"The thing becomes all the more contentious when people realize hard choices are going to result from a particular process," he said. "It becomes exponentially more important that people feel like, "I had a say. I had a voice. My department or program had an input on these decisions.'"
The Senate, by unanimous voice votes, approved two other resolutions modifying course offerings in the school's general education requirements.
Why should faculty be involved in those kind of specific decisions?
"It involves issues of faculty loading and faculty responsibilities," Salmons said, noting it's another part of the "shared governance" concept. "It's a curricular issue, and it's just considered good form to send it through the Senate. ...
"Usually that ensures that you get better buy-in - although, not always."
The resolutions eventually will be presented to LU's Curators, who are scheduled to meet again Feb. 11.