Iowa Academe
Summer 1998

Spring meeting: Molotsky and Gruber tell how strong chapters empower faculty
Ed Kottick wins Brody Award
Letters: writers thank Ed Kottick for helping them save their jobs
From the President, Warren Zemke
Flower warns of external pressures on higher education

Spring meeting: Molotsky and Gruber tell how strong chapters empower faculty

Both speakers at the spring meeting of the Iowa Conference dispensed practical advice on how to develop and strengthen AAUP chapters to give faculty a voice in institutional decision-making.

Hosted by AAUP members at St. Ambrose University in Davenport, the April 18 meeting featured two speakers with national credentials: Iris Molotsky, AAUP’s director of membership development, and David Gruber, president of the Missouri Conference and member of AAUP’s National Council. Gruber, a professor of philosophy at Truman State University in Kirksville, was filling in for ASC chair John Hopper, who cancelled because of ill health.

Speaking first, Molotsky stressed the reason why all faculty should join the AAUP—the need for professors to transcend disciplinary boundaries and see themselves as members of a single profession forming a united front against the ever-increasing number of threats to American higher education. Among these threats are the alarming increase in non-tenure-track appointments, the "corporatization" of higher education, a corresponding decline in shared governance, and the nationwide attack on the tenure system.

Molotsky said that all of us have "a responsibility today for where the academy goes tomorrow." By becoming AAUP members, we start to shoulder our share of that responsibility by joining forces with one of the few national organizations that are actively opposing the forces that imperil higher education.

Molotsky urged her listeners to recruit new members and especially to focus on building strong chapters on campus. "You need an AAUP chapter," Molotsky said, "when there isn’t a crisis to make sure there won’t be a crisis in the future." The chapter "ultimately becomes the voice of the faculty" because it, unlike the faculty senate and other "official" bodies, is independent of the governance structure and has "only faculty interests at heart."

But numbers count. "If you don’t speak for a significant number of faculty, your voice will not be heard," Molotsky said. And again she encouraged her listeners to work on recruiting new members.

Molotsky pointed out that chapters to be effective also have to be visible. And she listed several ways for chapters to establish a presence on campus. The most useful of these is the chapter newsletter, which she called "one of the chapter’s most important functions."

Other means of achieving visibility are

•extending a welcome to new faculty on campus,
•establishing ties to the local press,
•sending out press releases to provide an unofficial perspective on campus events, and
•setting up mentoring programs and/or workshops for junior faculty going through the evaluation process.

David Gruber re-emphasized several of Molotsky’s points. In particular, he stressed the importance of numbers. the effectiveness of a chapter newsletter, and the necessity of maintaining "a low, steady profile and visibility on campus, even if that only involves writing a letter asking new faculty to join AAUP."

Gruber also talked about the resources available from the Association of State Conferences (ASC). He recommended the annual summer institutes that the ASC sponsors. "The summer institutes offer practical and hands-on support for people working on the local level," Gruber said. They allow participants, who often toil alone on small campuses, "to come into contact with people who have had successes and who are vital and energized."

Finally, Gruber said that there is funding available from the ASC to support attendance at the summer institutes—up to $1,500 per conference for underwriting participation by chapter representatives.

The University of Iowa has presented its 1998 Michael J. Brody Award for Faculty Excellence in Service to Edward L. Kottick, professor emeritus of music and long-time Iowa AAUP activist.

Kottick, who retired from the university in 1992, was recognized in large part for his AAUP activities, especially his work on behalf of Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure. Committee A members advise faculty who feel that their basic academic rights have been violated, typically in the tenure and promotion process.

Kottick served for many years on both the University of Iowa Committee A and the Iowa Conference Committee A and chaired both committees.

Kottick was also President of the University of Iowa chapter of the AAUP and a member of its executive committee. Over the years, he has been a staunch advocate for a strong Iowa Conference. In 1992 the conference named him the first recipient of the Edward S. Allen Award for Service to Iowa Higher Education.

For personal accounts of the kind of service for which Professor Kottick has been recognized, see the testimonial letters on page 2.

(Upon the news of Ed Kottick’s selection for the Brody Award, Iowa Academe received letters from two Iowa faculty members who wished to show their appreciation to Ed by telling the story of how he had helped them in his capacity as a member of Iowa Committee A.

The names of both writers have been withheld upon request.)

In March of 1994, I was called into my department chair’s office and informed that the president, dean, and department chair had received student complaints indicating that I was "absent, disrespectful to students, disorganized, and professionally incompetent." I was also informed that I was being evaluated by the faculty personnel committee. This faculty evaluation process had been established prior to my knowledge of any student complaints.

After fifteen years of positive student evaluations, I knew things were not copacetic. I walked out of his office and called my lawyer in order to protect my rights.

I soon realized that I was in need of extensive assistance, and, at the recommendation of a faculty colleague, I called the AAUP. Dr. Mearl Kilmore, then president of the Iowa Conference of the AAUP, recommended that I call Dr. Ed Kottick, chair of Iowa Committee A.

I spent the next year basically in constant contact with Dr. Kottick—from two to three times a day to at least once a week. We drafted memos, consulted, and wrote an extensive 200-page rebuttal. Yes, I literally cried, and he listened.

Four-and-one-half years have passed, during which time I learned that without the support and assistance of Dr. Kottick, I would not have been able to address the issues of due process, sex discrimination, and differential treatment that I was facing.

Dr. Kottick gave freely of his time, never once saying that he was too busy to speak with me. He graciously attended meetings, identified discrepancies, and, most of all, provided moral support as I fought for my professional and personal integrity.

Without the assistance of Ed Kottick, I would not have known where and when to seek legal advice nor how to avail myself of the proper procedures. Most of all, I would have lacked the moral support to carry on the fight.

I learned from him as a colleague and can only repay him by helping someone else who is confronted with a similar situation. He is indeed a professional in the most positive sense of the word while continually being sensitive to the human aspects of such situations. AAUP is fortunate to have him as a leader and the University of Iowa as an emeritus professor.

Dr. Kottick has become a close personal friend as a result of this horrible experience. I believe from the bottom of my heart that I would not have a job, nor would my personal and professional integrity have been restored, without his help. Words can never express the respect, admiration, and love I feel for this man. And I know that I am only one of many that he has helped through the years.

—Name withheld

We academics remember as if it were yesterday how hard we studied, researched, and wrote to finish our doctoral course work, our comprehensive written and oral examinations, and each chapter of our dissertations. Naively, many of us thought that all we needed to do after finding a teaching job was to be the best possible teachers we could be and to stay professionally active—preparing and giving papers and occasionally getting something published—in order to received tenure and be eligible for promotion.

Doing or accomplishing all these things is important to us and our careers, but unfortunately it is not enough. All that work is a necessary but not a sufficient condition to keep our jobs.

What we also need to understand is the "emperor’s new clothes syndrome." That is, there may be at least one top-level university officer who would do almost anything, including ignoring AAUP Redbook standards to get rid of someone who has incurred his or her animosity by daring to voice criticisms.

We didn’t have an AAUP chapter on my campus when I received an unexpected official letter of termination several years ago. Since I had been tenured over ten years, had received pretty good teaching evaluations, had given many papers, and had published extensively, I knew that being categorized as "incompetent" was a smoke screen.

Rather, my real crime was protesting to the university president because I had found in my personnel file a letter written by one of my administrators attacking my teaching performance and my character. It had been given to the faculty personnel committee but not to me—thus depriving me of any opportunity to defend myself.

After several months of futilely attempting to obtain assistance on campus, I finally met some Iowa AAUP representatives and presented my situation to them, which led to my being referred to Iowa Committee A and thus to Ed Kottick.

Although I met with several lawyers who were helpful, by far the best advice and support came from Ed. He did more than take me into his home, show some interest, and serve me a cup of coffee. He also suggested that I use the legal angle as a last resort and try to use AAUP principles to resolve the problem myself. His key point was that my presence and contribution as a committed teacher was something that money couldn’t buy. He gave me good advice about how to approach the various administrators involved: that I, like any faculty member, was entitled to due process and academic freedom—regardless of the claims or accusations against me. Ed’s advice worked.

Thanks so much, Ed Kottick, for being there for me when I needed someone who understood university administrators, Machiavelli, and myself. At the end of the day, Ed and his experience with both academe and the AAUP enabled me to have the opportunity to be an even better teacher and mentor for my students.

—Name withheld

Well, that was different! There was no eloquent speaker imploring us to be alarmed about the growing use of part-time faculty on our campuses, no impassioned cry to recognize the recent threats to tenure and shared governance, no argument that post-tenure review is just another subtle attack on tenure, and no insightful warning that we had better pay attention to vague sexual harassment policies that could easily undermine academic freedom.

Nope! The spring meeting was a good old-fashioned recruitment session, with all the nuts and bolts.

Our St. Ambrose colleagues, who hosted the meeting with remarkable graciousness and efficiency, perhaps gained the most from the recruitment message. They reconstituted their defunct chapter, and now the new members of St Ambrose AAUP are energized and full of infectious enthusiasm. I expect that we will hear from this chapter and its members for quite some time to come. We need more of the same elsewhere in the Iowa Conference.

Why am I so pleased with the enthusiasm generated at the spring meeting, the willingness to step forward and go public? The answer comes from a perceptive article by Ken Andersen, president of the Illinois Conference.

Published in the spring issue of Illinois Academe and entitled, "Where Have All the Flowers Gone?" Andersen’s article laments the loss of a generation of faculty whose experience and interests prepared them for the work of shared academic governance. "The genius of American higher education has been its utilization of a shared governance model," Andersen writes. Yet, says Andersen, many of today’s faculty are too busy to be concerned about governance on their campuses: "It is becoming increasingly difficult to induce our colleagues to participate in academic governance activity, let alone serve in leadership positions." And what happens when the faculty is not involved in the governance of their institutions? Examples are not difficult to find:

The headlines shouted, "College’s trustees sue 46 faculty members" (Des Moines Register, May 5). For what? For the right to treat the college’s personnel manual, a.k.a. the faculty handbook, as a binding contract of employment and responsibility. The University of Dubuque’s trustees wanted the handbook to be nothing more than a policy statement and to place ultimate authority for tough decisions in their own hands. Think of the time-honored faculty rights that could be overthrown by capricious board decisions: tenure, due process, and academic freedom in and out of the classroom, to name just a few. I’d say the University of Dubuque has a crisis on its hands.

Then there’s the news that the board of regents of the City University of New York voted to phase out remedial education in the system for 11 four-year colleges, beginning September 1999 (The Chronicle of Higher Education, June 5, p. A26).

Students who fail tests in math, reading, or writing will have to successfully complete a free summer program or pass remedial classes at a CUNY community college. "Last year, 13,000 incoming students at the four-year colleges, or about 50 per cent of the total, required some remediation," reported Patrick Healy.

Is this a plot to downsize the four-year colleges of CUNY? Or an effort to transfer remedial education to its community colleges? Either way, it will have a major impact on CUNY, a public university known for its open admissions policy. I’d say CUNY has a crisis on its hands.

So where does AAUP fit in? Iris Molotsky said it well at the spring meeting: "You need an AAUP chapter when there isn’t a crisis to make sure there won’t be a crisis in the future."

A final note: at the business meeting, the conference re-elected Ruth Wachtel (UI) vice president and Jackie Wilkie (Luther) secretary. Re-elected to the executive committee were John Epperson (Simpson), Heimir Geirsson (ISU), and Dolores Hilden (Marycrest). Newly elected to the executive committee was Henry Milam (Drake). Henry replaces David Copenhaver of Westmar. David has faithfully served as an Iowa Conference officer and board member for more than five years. Thank you, David, for your dedication to AAUP.

According to Ruth Flower, the typical college president faces a number of pressures, but the most important are

•the perception that change is necessary solely for the sake of change,
•declining or flat enrollments and sparse sources of outside funding, and
•the call for alternative approaches to tenure.

These pressures, Flower said, may account for the irony that "at a time when American higher education is the best in the world, administrators, legislators, and even the public have turned on faculty."

Flower, who is director of the government relations office of the AAUP, made these comments at a recent meeting of Missouri AAUP.

From an AAUP perspective, she indicated, perhaps the most alarming of these pressures is the call for alternatives to the tenure system. Flower described a proposal for one such alternative, the New Pathways project, a partnership between the American Association for Higher Education and the Pew foundation, which provided the funding.

The project’s report resulted from roundtable discussions (a favorite of the Pew foundation) between representatives of twenty-six institutions. Among the topics debated were leadership, tenure, and the increasing use of part-time faculty. According to Flower, the report’s attitude toward tenure was negative.

While not attractive to the professoriate, Flower said, proposals such as these give college presidents a structured way to respond to demands for change.

Flower noted that the AAUP has not clearly addressed the perception that change is needed in higher education. Nevertheless, she said, in this instance the strength and influence of its position on tenure has "spoiled" the Pathways agenda, at least for now.

(This story was excerpted from the Spring/Summer issue of Missouri Academe.)