The Auburn University Board of Trustees on Friday gave itself full control over course offerings, curriculum, degree requirements and academic credentials while ending shared governance at Alabama’s land-grant university. Faculty say they have serious concerns about the policies and a number of unanswered questions about what the changes will mean in practice.
The two policies, passed unanimously without debate, mimic what Alabama House Bill 580 would require of other federal agencies when it takes effect in October. As a land-grant institution created and governed by the state Constitution, Auburn is not bound by the law, but lawmakers have made veiled threats to punish noncompliance with the law anyway by withholding federal funding for abusive institutions. The university appears to be taking a page out of the playbook of Texas public institutions by violating the new state law, experts say.
As of next Friday, the current Faculty Senate is being dissolved. It already had only an advisory role, but its replacement—the President’s Advisory Council on Education—is “a shift from faculty-led governance to policy-driven consultation,” the Auburn chapter of the American Association of University Professors said in a statement. The council will “provide advice and opinion, at the request and direction of the President, on matters relating to academic policy, academic governance, and the academic work of the University,” as well as “confidential” advice on other matters, according to the policy. The body may not issue public statements on behalf of the university.
The council will include two faculty members from each college—one elected by the college faculty and one appointed by the president—and “additional members appointed by the President, who may include faculty or non-faculty members whose skills, institutional role, or perspective may assist the work of the Council,” the policy states. In appointing, President Christopher Roberts may consider “academic discipline, rank, position, research activity, teaching experience, administrative experience, accreditation expertise, commitments to student success, institutional service, collaboration, and other factors.”
Mark Criley, senior program officer in the AAUP’s department of academic freedom, employment and governance, called the changes “the end of shared governance” at Auburn.
“If you design this organization and select a portion of its membership, then you’re missing out on honest, transparent, and informed intellectual judgment,” Criley said. He is particularly concerned about the term “collaboration”, which suggests that faculty members who ask difficult questions or often challenge leadership may not be appointed, he said.
The policy leaves many questions unanswered, the Auburn AAUP said in a statement, including whether the existing faculty charter will remain in effect; what it means for promotion, tenure and dismissal processes; and what safeguards, if any, are in place for counterintelligence.
A second policy approved Friday gives the board “superior authority” over the curriculum, course offerings and degree requirements at Auburn. “It is intended to promote academic transparency, quality, accountability, institutional alignment, responsible management of the public trust, and appropriate faculty collaboration while maintaining clear lines of authority for making final institutional decisions,” according to board documents. Trustees are already using their new authority to direct the provost to create a community requirement for all students that includes at least one US history course and one civics class.
The board “recognizes the critical role of faculty expertise in curriculum development, course design, course review, evaluation, and continuous improvement,” the policy states. It goes on to say that faculty have primary responsibility for “delivering” academic programs and that Auburn’s curriculum development processes should allow faculty to provide advice and recommendations, but that “curriculum and courses are subordinate institutional matters …
The policy also appears to waive any potential challenge from Auburn’s accreditor: “No external policy, recommendation, practice, act, or procedure shall limit the authority of the Board in matters of institutional curriculum and academic policy or require the University to act contrary to law or Board policy,” the policy states. Auburn’s accreditor, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges, requires faculty to have primary responsibility for the “content, quality and effectiveness” of the curriculum.
Auburn faculty members learned of the proposed changes when the board’s meeting agenda and materials were posted online Thursday morning, a month after the end of the spring semester and a week after the materials were to be made public. Virginia Davis, chair of the Faculty Senate and non-voting faculty representative on the board, referred to the short notice in her remarks during Friday’s vote.
“Anytime you want to do something or make policy, you really need to include people who live that role. And my concern here today is that the faculty hasn’t really had the opportunity to provide that,” said Davis. “I’m worried that there will be negative effects on research, teaching and work. I know you have the best intentions, but I’m worried that because there wasn’t enough time to engage the faculty members involved, it’s going to set us back in big ways.”
In its statement, the AAUP of Auburn echoed Davis’ sentiments.
“These policies were adopted without any meaningful input from the faculty, despite the fact that the faculty – not the Board – do academic work every day. Faculty are not employees in a corporate structure to be governed by subordinate authority. They are professionals tasked with teaching and developing knowledge, and that work depends on collaboration, shared governance, and the strong protection of Auburn academic freedom. “When these conditions become weak, they are unintentional – and they may be and rotation – the results are not only possible, but possible.”
Auburn attorney Vini Nathan told faculty that implementation of the new policies will begin in the coming weeks, according to an email obtained by. Within Higher Ed.
“This project will include timelines, processes, and direction for curriculum review, course approval, syllabi expectations, core curriculum review, and the formation of the President’s Academic Advisory Council,” Nathan wrote. “Auburn is underpinned by knowledgeable faculty, commitment, and academics that support the excellence of our teaching, research, and service to students. As this project moves forward, it will be guided by academic quality, intellectual excellence, academic excellence, and clear communication so that the resulting processes reflect both the institutional mission and the long-standing values that shape Auburn’s academic community.”
