THE DAVID R. KELLER CHAPTER OF THE AAUP / AFT AT UVU

Different social organizations require different organizational structures. Corporations, militaries, and religions benefit from a hierarchical command-and-control organizational structure, where the leader is believed to have special skills and the greatest expertise of any other person in the organization to make difficult decisions and exhibit vision. This sort of hierarchical command-and-control organizational structure is not appropriate for other social organizations, such as democratic bodies. In democratic bodies, there is no one person whose judgment is considered absolute and definitive. Institutions of higher education are the latter type of social organization. Inappropriately and unfortunately, at UVU and across the nation, administrations have adopted the former model. This is a grave error, because leadership on campus based on corporate style command-and-control snubs the expertise of the faculty. Professors are professionals whose judgment ought to be trusted, and...

When AAUP President Cary Nelson visited Utah last fall, my wife Anina and I had the pleasure of taking him out to Antelope Island (“I thought the salt lake was in the middle of the city”). On the drive there, I told Cary about the workload policy (ACHE, WCHE, ICHE) that had been implemented at our institution as the result of a task force chaired by deans Henrie and Rushforth. I remarked on the absurdity of foisting a mechanistic metric on the faculty workday and the antithetical nature of such a corporatized practice in the Academy. Cary agreed, noting that the type of person who gravitates towards academe and away from corporate America typically likes the flexibility and freedom of self-directed employment, rather than punching a time clock and sitting in a cubicle 9-5 under the eye of a watchful boss. And therein lies the difference in worldview between our academic affairs administration and the faculty: we look upon ourselves as members of a wider academic community who pa...

I add to David's fine essay the thought that members of the university administration who act unilaterally and without regard to due process may be a fourth major threat to academic freedom. In that regard, let me include the following in this discussion. After stating the particulars of a case in which a faculty member on tenure track was fired without the due process required by policy, we ended our recent letter to UVU administrators with the following more general statement: Issues like this make a difference in our ability to act responsibly as faculty and administrators of the university. We hope to continue to work with you on matters of academic freedom and due process, and trust that this case can be dealt with in a speedy and fair manner. Finally, this case follows a disturbing pattern we have noted previously. Professor Hyunme Lee, for instance, also from the Art Department and also under the deanship of Kathie Debenham, was not given due process in ...

Freedom of inquiry, unfettered by political pressure, is the élan vital of the academic enterprise. Professors are professionals, and part of the essence of being a “professional” is possessing public trust. The trust granted to us, the professoriate, is academic freedom. Claims to academic freedom are legitimate if the inquiry furthers understanding of the condition of humanity and/or the processes of nature. Defense of academic freedom is a central focus of our campus chapter of the American Association of University Professors (UVU-AAUP). As an issue which transcends the partisan politics of town hall, academic freedom is neither “liberal” nor “conservative.” Inaccurately identified with the left by the right, the brute reality is that no professor is immune from interference, meddling, subversion, and suppression of academic work for non-academic pretexts. Violation of the academic freedom of “conservative” professors is as much as a possibility as violation of the academic f...

In a meeting of chairs in University College on Wednesday, I suggested that we should advocate doubling adjunct salaries. This would, it seemed to me, address several problems currently plaguing the university. 1. It would put the university in a better moral position. Exploitation of the people who work for you, the people who bring in the tenure dollars you operate on, is immoral. 2. It would make it less profitable to teach up to 86% (History) or 69% (English) or 80% (Humanities) of your classes with adjunct professors. If it is less profitable to do so, then it's easier to think about how to hire more full-time professors, even in hard economic times. 3. Absent the cash cow that adjuncts are, we would think better about more fully staffing departments. A larger set of full-timers leads to a better sharing of committee work and to better teaching. Forrest Williams liked the idea, and added the thought that if department chairs all refused to open new sections with adjuncts, anno...

A very interesting discussion, I think, about teaching as contingent faculty http://jj-english-lectureships.blogspot.com/

Westminster loses revered professor Doug Wright » Philosopher of the arts-engaged students, faced cancer without insurance. By Brian Maffly The Salt Lake Tribune Updated: 12/04/2009 04:46:21 PM MST Doug Wright, a Westminster College philosophy professor revered for his ability to show students and colleagues the artistic wonder of everyday life, has succumbed to cancer. Many Westminster students claimed Wright as an important mentor in their lives. Jennifer Niedfeldt, an honors student from Salt Lake City, took four of Wright's courses, including his famous "Meaning and Movement in the Arts." "He used humor to connect with other people. He was the least judgmental person you would ever meet. Even if he didn't know you, he had this love of you and what you could be," said Niedfeldt, who graduated in May with a degree in environmental studies. "He would find that small, vulnerable part of a person and make them feel really safe." Wright, who died las...