"We are pleased to announce the publication of volume 11 of the AAUP's Journal of Academic Freedom. The journal features scholarship on academic freedom and on its relation to shared governance, tenure, and collective bargaining. This year's volume considers the opposing visions of the governed campus and the "managed campus." As the introduction to the volume argues, "in its extreme manifestation, the managed campus is a graveyard for academic freedom. And when the faculty role in decision-making is undermined, it may well lead to the early graves of faculty, staff, and students forced to return to campus without adequate protections."
The volume’s nine essays and a PowerPoint afterword address a wide range of topics, including broad analyses of managerial practices; discussions of their impact on specific populations such as international, first-generation, and low-income students; and case studies that chronicle past and present work to assert the importance of shared governance and that examine threats to, or blatant disregard for, the faculty role in decision-making. While contributors represent a wide range of academic fields, one noteworthy contributor is an adorable stuffed-bear "brand ambassador." Access the complete volume at https://www.aaup.org/JAF11.
We are also excited to share a new call for papers, “Practices of Academic Freedom in Times of Austerity," for the twelfth volume of the journal, scheduled for publication in fall 2021. 
—Rachel Ida Buff, Faculty Editor
The Journal of Academic Freedom is supported by funding from the AAUP Foundation.

We are heading into a new academic year in turbulent times. The coronavirus global pandemic has drastically altered our lives, our jobs, and the lives of our students and our staff colleagues, with no end in sight. The murders of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd, among others, and now Jacob Blake fighting for his life in Wisconsin, have put systemic institutionalized racism in the United States into stark relief.
If you're not a member already, will you join us in mobilizing to ensure that higher education is a public good available to all in this country? In the past few weeks, we have seen a number of colleges and universities move ahead with reopening in person for the fall semester. Rather than relying on scientific expertise regarding the pandemic and the likelihood of transmission in a residential campus environment and its surrounding community, administrations and boards of trustees have engaged in magical thinking. Few institutions appear to be doing enough testing, and, somehow, they expect all students to follow strict rules at all times. Reopening decisions are being driven by the bottom line instead of the health and safety of students, faculty, staff, and all campus workers.
The outcomes from these decisions and the lack of planning behind these decisions was predictable: a spike in cases on campus; the difficulty in feeding and housing students who must quarantine; the deficiency in mitigating risks for others due to a lack of testing and robust contact tracing; and a hasty retreat to remote learning, sending potentially infected students back to their families and communities. For most administrations and boards, the top priority is the bottom line. They continue to embrace the corporate model and to further a decades-long assault on higher education as a common good.
Disturbing instances of blatant police violence against and harassment of Black people, including on our campuses, continues. Just within the last few weeks, a Black faculty member at Santa Clara University reported that campus police knocked on her door and demanded proof that she lives in her own house, after harassing her brother as he worked on a laptop outside.
The problems we face are serious and will not be easily resolved. Some good news is that faculty are mobilizing across ranks and with other academic workers and students to forward antiracist activism and to ensure that hastily implemented austerity measures do not become the new normal. Here are just a few examples of faculty activism that are making me optimistic this Labor Day:

• After a long, intensive campaign by a broad coalition of faculty, students, staff, and alumni at Portland State University, the administration has agreed to disarm campus police.
  
• The national AAUP has convened a working group to draft a report on the role of police on campus, including whether it is appropriate for institutions of higher education to have their own police forces; how systemic racism affects campus policing; changes needed to ensure that campuses are safe and welcoming for diverse peoples, especially Black, indigenous and other peoples of color; and how AAUP chapters and members can best work in solidarity with student groups, community social justice organizations, and unions on this issue.
  
• Our faculty union at Rutgers University has been working closely with a coalition of other campus unions to center racial justice and to ensure health and safety and to negotiate with the administration on proposed cuts. “This is not something that naturally occurred,” one chapter leader told the Chronicle of Higher Education. “It’s a big investment and big strategic change to decide to build power together.”
  
• The George Mason University AAUP chapter brought to light the fact that several Virginia universities entered into no-bid contracts with a company to provide students with COVID-19 tests that are not approved for that use.
  
• New memberships in the AAUP are up this summer, signaling a new wave of campus activism. At our August meeting, the AAUP Council authorized charters for twenty-five new or reactivated AAUP chapters. Will your campus be next?
  

This Labor Day, I ask you to join me and other AAUP members in recommitting to doing the hard work of ensuring that higher education is a public good available to all in this country. You can share our Labor Day graphic to help spread the message that solidarity will see us through.


In solidarity,
Irene Mulvey
AAUP President
P.S. And remember to check out the resources and information on our racial justice and coronavirus pages.

Summer 2020 | Vol. 106, No. 3 
The Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors is published annually as the summer issue of Academe. This year's Bulletin features an academic freedom and tenure investigative report, a statement in defense of knowledge and higher education, and a research report on the adoption of AAUP policies in faculty handbooks and collective bargaining agreements.
Follow the links in this email below or read the whole issue at https://www.aaup.org/issue/summer-2020-bulletin.

ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND TENURE INVESTIGATIVE REPORT
Pacific Lutheran University (Washington)

POLICY DOCUMENTS
In Defense of Knowledge and Higher Education
Association Procedures in Academic Freedom and Tenure Cases
Standards for Investigations in the Area of College and University Governance

RESEARCH REPORTS
Annual Report on the Economic Status of the Profession, 2019–20
Policies on Academic Freedom, Dismissal for Cause, Financial Exigency, and Program Discontinuance

ANNUAL REPORTS AND OTHER BUSINESS
Report of Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure, 2019–20
Report of the Committee on College and University Governance, 2019–20
2020 Biennial Meeting Postponed
AAUP Officers and Council, 2019–20
Officers and Committees of the AAUP-CBC, 2019
Board of Directors and Committees of the AAUP Foundation, 2019–20
Committees of the AAUP, 2019–20
 

As we head into August, we have election results, new research, and a chance to take action on behalf of the members at Akron-AAUP. More below.

Officer and Council Election Results
In a mail ballot election, AAUP chapter and section delegates elected Irene Mulvey of Fairfield University as the new president of the 105-year-old faculty-led organization. Paul Davis of Cincinnati State Technical and Community College was elected as vice president, and Christopher Sinclair of the University of Oregon was elected as secretary-treasurer. Chapter and section delegates also elected Nivedita Majumdar and Glinda Rawls as at-large Council members.
Watch the 2020 AAUP officer and Council candidate campaign speeches here.

Report on Prevalence of AAUP Policies 
The AAUP released a new research report, Policies on Academic Freedom, Dismissal for Cause, Financial Exigency, and Program Discontinuance, that examines the prevalence of AAUP-supported policies in faculty handbooks and collective bargaining agreements at four-year institutions that have a tenure system. The report can be found here: https://www.aaup.org/news/report-prevalence-aaup-policies.

Database Transition 
The AAUP is launching a series of upgrades to our online systems between Friday, July 31, and Monday, August 3. During this time, you will be unable to log in to your account to access member-only content on our website (all other content will be available). Notices about the changeover will also be posted on our website.
The changes are happening because the AAUP is moving to a new member database. All members will receive an email tomorrow about the changeover and another email Monday, August 3, with log-in credentials. At a later date our membership department will be in touch with chapter leaders to discuss how you will interact with our newly updated database system. Stay tuned.

Stand with Akron-AAUP 
The Akron-AAUP needs our help. On July 15, the University of Akron Board of Trustees, at the recommendation of President Gary Miller, terminated 97 full-time faculty positions, 96 of which were part of the Akron-AAUP bargaining unit, and 70 of which were tenured professors. The chapter has launched a letter-writing campaign to the trustees and president telling them to rescind the decision or resign their positions. 
The administration reopened the collective bargaining agreement with the faculty union by invoking the "force majeure" section of the contract. Akron-AAUP has contested the use of force majeure. They also have presented the administration with various alternatives to eliminating these positions, such as reductions in administrative salaries and reforming athletics expenditures. However, the administration rejected such proposals outright.
Send a letter here.

Summer Institute Online 
Our Summer Institute Online webinar series began on July 7 and will continue through August 4, with at least two webinars each week. The 90-minute sessions covered a wide range of topics, from fighting efforts to sideline faculty governance to supporting student protests to pushing back against austerity budgets. There were also two opportunities for attendees to share the challenges they’ve faced and the successes they’ve had in shared governance and organizing in small-group discussions.
The closing plenary on August 4 from 1:00 to 2:30 pm EDT, “Rebuilding Higher Education as a Common Good,” will discuss a vision of various paths forward for higher education: “The COVID-19 pandemic, the looming depression, and the national uprising against systemic racism have shown us that reform in higher education is needed now more than ever. How can we rebuild higher education around the pillars of equity, affordability, and quality? How can we better realize the role of our system of higher education in sustaining democratic society?”
The panelists are: 

• Momin Rahman, Cochair of the Equity Committee for the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT)
• Christopher Newfield, University of California, Santa Barbara faculty and author of The Great Mistake: How We Wrecked Public Universities and How We Can Fix Them
• Annelise Orleck, Copresident of Dartmouth College AAUP
• Todd Wolfson, President of Rutgers University AAUP-AFT
• Moderator: Julie Schmid, Executive Director of the AAUP

Click here to sign up.

AAUP Opposes Exclusion of International Students
The AAUP issued a statement on July 13 about the Department of Homeland Security’s July 6 ruling regarding international students and the upcoming academic year. The statement called on the Trump administration “to allow all international students to obtain or retain visas to continue their education at US institutions, regardless of whether they participate remotely, in person, or through a hybrid model and regardless of whether they are studying inside or outside the United States, during this unprecedented global health crisis.” 
On July 13, the AAUP joined an amicus brief in support of a legal challenge filed by Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to prevent DHS’s July 6 directive, which rescinds a prior COVID-19 exemption for international students participating in online education, from taking effect so that thousands of international students can continue to participate in educational opportunities in the United States, even if their course of study is online. Even though DHS agreed to withdraw their July 6 directive, ICE has now issued guidance excluding new international students from entering the US to participate in remote learning at US institutions. AAUP joined 45 other higher education associations, and signed on to a letter last week to Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf seeking assurances that all students with a valid visa will be allowed to enter the country in time for the fall semester.

AAUP Signs on to Rulemaking Petitions 
The AAUP signed onto two petitions to renew as part of the US Copyright Office rulemaking, the process of renewing and/or seeking modification to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The first, a petition by the UCI Intellectual Property, Arts, and Technology Clinic, University of California, Irvine School of Law seeks renewal of the expanded exemption for multimedia e-books which would permit authors of multimedia e-books to circumvent the Content Scramble System on DVDs, the Advanced Access Content System on Blu-ray discs, and encryption and authentication protocols on digitally transmitted video in order to make fair use of motion picture content in multimedia e-books, not just for film criticism.
The second, a petition by the American University Washington College of Law, on behalf of Peter Decherney, professor of cinema studies and English at the University of Pennsylvania, et al. seeks renewal of the exemption for audiovisual works (including excerpts from motion pictures, television programs, music videos, and video games) embodied in physical media (such as DVDs protected by the Content Scramble System) and Blu-ray Discs (protected by the Advanced Access Content System) or TPM-protected online distribution services or streaming media, where the circumvention is accomplished by college and university students or faculty (including teaching and research assistants) for the purpose of criticism or comment.

https://academeblog.org/2020/07/23/anti-faculty-coup-at-national-university
BY ALARMED FACULTY MEMBERS AT NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

This spring and summer of COVID has witnessed a perhaps unprecedented assault on faculty rights, as institution after institution, claiming some sort of exigency, have laid off both contingent and tenured faculty members, restructured programs, and short-circuited established institutions of shared governance.  In many cases the challenges are indeed extraordinary.  But, as the AAUP has noted, “too often administrations invoke broader fiscal collapse as a justification for implementing, without meaningful faculty participation in the decision-making process, a variety of measures that undermine the mission of the institution and threaten the working conditions of faculty, academic professionals, graduate employees, and other campus staff.”  One of the most alarming such cases is at National University in San Diego, California.  There, in a breathtaking series of moves, the administration and board have almost overnight not only reversed years of shared governance experience, but virtually eviscerated the faculty’s power over the curriculum and eroded, if not destroyed, its academic freedom.  National University is not claiming any negative financial impact from the COVID crisis but is nevertheless using the emergency situation created by the crisis to institute the sweeping changes outlined below.  This report from faculty activists at National University is posted anonymously out of fear of retaliation.  

In October 2019, National University (NU) announced that it received a gift of $350 million from T. Denny Sanford. These funds, the University’s administration declared in an article published by the Associated Press, would help the university to better fulfill its mission of expanding access to higher education for adult learners. In February 2020, the University received a 10-year reaccreditation by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, though with warnings about the nature of its governing board structures and its approach to “change management.”

Nevertheless, in the following months, the University has undertaken a series of sudden unilateral moves to cut staff, faculty, and programs; cancel all full-time faculty contracts; and dismantle all existing shared governance structures. The stated justifications for these moves have included a need for greater “nimbleness” in responding to a changing higher education landscape, a need for more efficiency, a desire to reduce tuition costs for students, and (of course) the COVID-19 crisis. It is important to point out that throughout its 50-year history NU has been an extraordinarily “nimble” institution. It has responded to changing conditions by targeting the needs of a diverse adult population offering one course at a time, adopting distance learning in the late 1990s, updating delivery modes with each generation of new technology, innovating in andragogy [the method and practice of teaching adult learners], synchronous and asynchronous delivery, virtual labs, systematic assessment of learning outcomes, building outstanding digital library services, and integrating a dedicated team of part-time faculty. All this was accomplished through a fertile partnership between a full-time and part-time faculty and administration and staff, rendering the excuses for current moves given by administration spurious.
In March, the Chancellor of the National University System, an affiliation of the flagship non-profit National University and several recently-acquired non-traditional institutions, announced that a number of university functions, including student enrollment, information technology, marketing, and the library, would be consolidated with other affiliates. Most of these would be outsourced to National Education Partners, a for-profit entity now-owned by the National University System and run by a former member of the National University Board of Trustees (the University’s Board and the System Board are essentially identical). No faculty were consulted or informed ahead of time of these plans.

Beginning in April, the University also accelerated the cancellation of roughly a third of its academic programs, using a process that bypassed the review and approval processes established in the Faculty- and Board-approved Faculty Policies. Cancellation of a program was one of the grounds under the Faculty Policies for terminating faculty positions, as was faculty “fit” with a reorganized University.

In a series of letters sent to faculty in May, National University President David Andrews announced an imminent “rightsizing” of the full-time faculty (the full-time student to faculty ratio already numbered in the several hundred to one prior to this change). No data was given to define rightsizing. He also announced the cancellation of all existing faculty contracts. Faculty at National University worked without tenure but, in amendments to the Faculty Policies, they had secured long-term contracts of up to ten years based on rank and a reappointment system that operated on a shared governance model. After dozens of faculty took early retirement offers following announcements of these upcoming changes, over 40 additional full-time faculty were summarily terminated without following the criteria or procedures outlined in the Faculty Policies. The effect was a roughly 20% reduction in full time faculty positions. One department alone has lost ten of its thirty-two full time faculty over two years while enrollments are growing significantly.

On May 22, the President announced that all remaining faculty contracts, along with the Faculty Policies and the Faculty Senate, would cease to be honored by the administration as of July 1, when new contracts would come into effect. On June 15, an “Interim Faculty Handbook” was issued. It contained no terms of appointment; no processes for reappointment, promotion or raises; no standards of performance; no mention of academic freedom. It contained no provision for elected faculty governance bodies, including the Faculty Senate and Graduate and Undergraduate Councils, which had overseen faculty work and welfare and curriculum at NU for over twenty-five years. Instead, the Handbook created a University Senate made up of five top administrators and five faculty appointed by the administration to operate as a new shared governance body. A similarly appointed Academic Affairs Committee would oversee the drafting of a permanent Faculty Handbook and become the university-wide curriculum committee, replacing the faculty-elected Graduate and Undergraduate Councils. What it did contain is alarming. In one section it seeks to define a new job description for university professor, relegating the historical role of scholar/teacher to that of providing content and delegating course design and teaching approach to centralized instructional designers not qualified in the field. The document states,
Academic programs will be jointly administered by a program director (full time faculty member) and an andragogy lead (staff or faculty member with appropriate expertise in andragogy, instructional design, and student support). The Program Lead and Subject Matter Experts (full-time faculty) will have authority over program learning outcomes, course learning outcomes, and student learning outcomes. Subject Matter Experts will have the responsibility for assuring program learning outcomes, course learning outcomes, and student learning outcomes are aligned with workforce relevance. Andragogy leads and instructional experts will oversee the design of learning experiences and instructional delivery. The instructor of record for each course will be assigned after the course design and delivery mechanisms have been established.

President Andrews has repeatedly assured the University community that the institution is in sound financial health, and this is undoubtedly true. Even prior to the Sanford gift, the University held over $650 million dollars in reserves (until recently called a “quasi-endowment”) and had total assets of over $1 billion. This financial strength has been taken advantage of by the System: in 2018, the System used the National University reserves as collateral to purchase the for-profit Northcentral University, most of which it converted to a non-profit entity and part of which it converted to the for-profit National Education Partners. In April, National University also received $2.28 million in CARES Act stimulus funds.

While many universities in the U.S. may suffer a decline in enrollments in the upcoming months, this was never a likely scenario at National University. Over 70% of NU courses were held online before the onset of the coronavirus—in-person classes being held in the month of March across California were transitioned to the online format with only administrative adjustments, without a need for redesign or new trainings. In his April communication, the President noted, “We were very fortunate to have extensive experience in distributed work and online learning…. Early indicators suggest we are successfully continuing our core functions with little disruption to students. Students are applying and enrolling, taking courses, and making progress toward degrees and credentials.” In a video message to the faculty on July 10, 2020, the President said, “we are financially strong.” Because it offers classes on a flexible schedule at a reasonable price, NU has historically seen enrollment growth in periods of economic decline. Enrollments at NU are up 20-30% year-over-year. Yet, instead of continuing in a prosperous direction that provided programmatic options and faculty-driven curriculum, the University has moved to a for-profit and precision learning model, while terminating dozens of faculty, rewriting the contracts of those who remain, and abolishing a long-established system of shared governance.

Faculty have been taken by surprise by these attacks. But we have responded and organized. The Faculty Senate, in one of its final actions of the academic year, voted to send a complaint to the regional accreditor, WSCUC. The Faculty Senate conducted new elections and has refused to dissolve as an advisory body that represents the faculty voice at NU. Membership of the NU AAUP advocacy chapter has grown so rapidly that the chapter’s letter to the President garnered a defensive response from the administration that was sent to all faculty.

We believe the actions taken at NU are dangerous on two levels. At the organizational level there are already indications that the changes proposed have created a highly toxic level of uncertainty and demoralization. The institution is already in chaos as contradictions, bad decision, confusion and anxiety mount. Top-down decisions that violate long-established principles of good academic practice undermine the capacity of the institution to serve its students and employees. These moves should be resisted to avoid more systemic damage on a global societal level. The changes being attempted at NU are aimed at redefining the role of the university and deconstructing the professional role of scholars and other knowledge creators. It delegitimizes academic culture which seeks new knowledge and the advancement of society and the public welfare and promotes a commercial culture model aimed at mass production of trained workers as cheaply and profitably as possible. Though NU has until now combined both goals, holding as a core value that opportunities for personal development should not be limited to those who can afford more elite schools, recent and planned moves by administration with no input from faculty at more than window-dressing level make it clear that the academic values held by a committed professional faculty are no longer central to its mission.

We wanted to make public this faculty protest of the actions of the administration and Board of Trustees. Given the recent mass layoffs at NU, the abrogation of our previous long-term, and the lack of a tenure system, we are
​
Alarmed Faculty Members at NU (names not provided out of fear of retaliation)

Last week, the higher education community reeled from the shock of a new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ruling that bars international students from being in the United States if they are enrolled in institutions that will only offer online instruction this fall. This news came at a time when many colleges and universities had already made announcements about the new academic year, which meant that plans for remote learning made with public health in mind would have the unintended effect of excluding international students.

Yesterday, the AAUP released a statement about the ruling. It begins,
The Department of Homeland Security’s July 6 ruling regarding international students and the upcoming 2020–21 academic year is but the latest example of the Trump administration’s callous cruelty, especially toward immigrants and those it deems “other.” The American Association of University Professors thus joins many other higher education organizations and colleagues in the labor movement in calling on the administration to allow all international students to obtain or retain visas to continue their education at US institutions, regardless of whether they participate remotely, in person, or through a hybrid model and regardless of whether they are studying inside or outside the United States, during this unprecedented global health crisis.Read the full statement.

The AAUP also joined over seventy other higher education organizations yesterday in submitting an amicus brief, prepared by the American Council on Education (ACE), in support of a legal challenge filed by Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology against the DHS in the US District Court in Massachusetts. The challenge seeks to prevent the DHS directive from taking effect so that thousands of international students can continue to participate in educational opportunities in the United States, even if their course of study is online. The amicus brief notes that “with the stroke of a pen, the global standing of our nation and its preeminent higher educational system will needlessly suffer again from exclusionary policies that—contrary to long-held national values of openness and interconnection—single out international students and arbitrarily threaten their eligibility to collaborate, learn, and share their many talents at American colleges and universities.” You can find the amicus brief and a summary here.

On Friday the AAUP, along with dozens of other higher education organizations, signed on to a letter from ACE president Ted Mitchell to Chad Wolf, the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. The letter states, “We urge the administration to rethink its position and offer international students and institutions the flexibility necessary to safely navigate resuming their educational activities in the midst of this crisis in ways that take into account the health and safety of our students and staff in the upcoming academic year.” Read the full letter.

The national AAUP will continue to work with other higher education organizations, our organizing partner AFT, and our chapters and state conferences to ensure that campuses can move forward in the fall with reopening plans that are safe for and inclusive of all members of the higher education community.

If you're not already a member, you can support work like this by joining the AAUP today.

In solidarity,
Julie Schmid
Executive Director
P.S. On Friday we also released early an article from the upcoming Journal of Academic Freedom with a pertinent analysis of how US immigration laws influence campus and impose enforcement roles on colleges and universities. Read Abigail Boggs’s “On Borders and Academic Freedom: Noncitizen Students and the Limits of Rights.”

This week marked the kickoff of our Summer Institute Online, with webinars focusing on issues related to the COVID-19 pandemic. We hope you join! Read on for more on SI Online, our new statement on shared governance during times of crisis, and how you can take action now to urge Congress to fund aid to states and higher education.

Summer Institute Online
The AAUP Summer Institute Online is now underway. Join hundreds of AAUP members from around the country in our special series of training webinars focused specifically on the challenges facing higher education today. Running through August 4, the virtual summer institute features two webinars each week. Our 90-minute sessions will cover a wide range of topics, from campus decisions about reopening to supporting student protests to pushing back against austerity budgets. In addition, hour-long breakout sessions after the governance and organizing webinars will provide a special opportunity for smaller groups of attendees to brainstorm about how to apply the guidance to their chapter’s circumstances. There is also a special plenary panel that will highlight the experiences of frontline health-care providers during the COVID-19 pandemic.
You can view the complete schedule and register for these webinars today.

Principles of Academic Governance during the COVID-19 Pandemic
The AAUP Committee on College and University Governance has released a new statement affirming the principles of academic governance in the face of growing concern over unilateral actions taken by governing boards and administrations during the pandemic. “During this challenging time,” the statement reads, “the committee calls upon administrations and governing boards, in demonstrated commitment to principles of shared governance, to maintain transparency, engage in ‘joint effort,’ and honor the faculty’s decision-making responsibility for academic and faculty personnel matters as the most effective means of weathering the current crisis.”
You can read the full statement here.

Send a Letter to Your Member of Congress
Many of our states and communities continue to face mounting and very serious financial shortfalls as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The ability of states to provide adequate funding for higher education and other public goods will be dependent upon the inclusion of relief for state and local governments in the next federal stimulus package. If you haven't already, you can to write to your US congressional representative and your senators and urge them to include relief for state and local governments in the next stimulus package. Here’s the link to send a letter now.

We’ll be in touch with another COVID-19 update in August. Stay strong, stay safe.

In solidarity,
Julie Schmid
Executive Director, AAUP

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Dr. David Andrews
President
National University
La Jolla, CA 92037

Mr. Thomas Clevinger
Interim Chair
Board of Trustees
National University
La Jolla, CA 92037

By this letter, the California Conference of the American Association of University Professors (CA-AAUP) formally communicates its objection to the continuing violations of shared governance by the administration of National University over the past several years.

These violations have recently culminated in President Andrews’ announcement on May 22, 2020 of the unilateral rescinding of the agreed-upon Faculty Policies and all full-time faculty contracts on June 15 and June 30, 2020 respectively.

These violations, detailed below, show a consistent pattern of unilateral decision-making by the Boards of National University and the National University System* in areas that should involve faculty input and participation according to the principles and guidelines of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), the nation’s leading authority on policies of shared governance and academic freedom. As a “vendor support organization,” the System Board should not be making decisions on curriculum or anything related to faculty work and welfare.

Full-time faculty at National University, of whom there are approximately 240, are not tenured but have long-term contracts of between 2 and 10 years (depending on rank) renewable through a reappointment process detailed in the Faculty Policies. The terms of the appointment letter and the Faculty Policies constitute the faculty member’s contract. The Faculty Policies include detailed requirements for shared governance in accordance with the 1966 AAUP Statement on the Governance of Colleges and Universities, as well as outlining faculty rights and responsibilities, including processes for terminating faculty and due process protections. Violations of shared governance have occurred over the last several years.
As the most recent of these are the most egregious and the most threatening to faculty welfare, we focus on them:

1. Rescinding of All Full-time Faculty Contracts
On May 22, 2020, National University’s President Andrews sent an e-mail to all full-time faculty in which he informed them that their contracts would be unilaterally terminated and rewritten with a start date of July 1, 2020. The letter also stated that these new contracts “would not be covered by” the existing Faculty Policies, which up to now have been incorporated by reference as part of the faculty contract through the faculty appointment letters, and which have been agreed to and voted upon by the National University Faculty Senate, the National University faculty, and the National University Board of Trustees in a process of deliberative shared governance. In place of existing faculty policies, the President’s letter projects that “this new contractual relationship will include an Interim Faculty Handbook, which will be available on June 15, 2020.”

Faculty were not consulted about this decision. Article 10.2 of the agreed upon Faculty Policies sets limits on how the administration can reduce positions and allow early termination of individual faculty appointments after seeking to find new positions for faculty, and Article 16 sets out a shared governance process for amending the Policies. Neither the faculty appointment letters nor the Faculty Policies permit wholesale nullification of faculty contracts nor the rescission of the Faculty Policies themselves.

The President claims that these actions follow from a “charge” from the National University Board of Trustees. These actions were not the result of any shared governance processes as required by WSCUC, the National University Faculty Policies, and the 1966 Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities. In fact, faculty contracts are being violated by these failures to include faculty in “academic decisions.”

The Faculty Senate has repeatedly sought to hold the administration to the requirements of Faculty Policies 10.2 with regard to program closures and the elimination of faculty positions but to no avail. The Senate’s request for formal documentation of the conditions that necessitated the administration’s actions taken pursuant to Article 10.2 as well as the plan developed to reassign the affected faculty members required by Article 10.2.1 went unheeded.

Section 2c of the 1966 Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities, which the AAUP formulated in cooperation with the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB) and the American Council on Education (ACE), maintains that “The allocation of resources among competing demands is central in the formal responsibility of the governing board, in the administrative authority of the president, and in the educational function of the faculty. Each component should therefore have a voice in the determination of short- and long- range priorities, and each should receive appropriate analyses of past budgetary experience, reports on current budgets and expenditures, and short- and long-range budgetary projections... It should here be noted that the building of a strong faculty requires careful joint effort in such actions as staff selection and promotion and the granting of tenure.” Section 3 notes, “In order to fulfill these duties, the board should be aided by, and may insist upon, the development of long-range planning by the administration and faculty.”

2. Unilateral Change to the “Academic Model” of the University
In his letter of May 22, 2020, President Andrews also informed faculty that the most fundamental decisions about reshaping the university’s curriculum and the faculty’s role in governance and curriculum will be taken out of faculty control: “National University’s academic model will be reorganized. The goal of this reorganization is to... move beyond the traditional classroom model. The academic reorganization will have a substantial impact on the faculty  model, program offerings, modality, curriculum development and approval... The delivery model will use a ‘learning team’ approach, with full-time faculty members as subject-matter experts supported by a team of andragogy and student support experts.” There was no consultation with faculty or with faculty shared-governance bodies in making these changes which directly and profoundly affect instruction and student learning throughout the University.

Section 5 of the 1966 Statement affirms that “The faculty has primary responsibility for such fundamental areas as curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction... The... [faculty’s] judgment is central to general educational policy.”

3. Merger of System Management Group (SMG) Affiliate Libraries
On March 9, 2020, the Chancellor of the National University System informed the faculty that all System affiliate libraries were being merged into one central library. Eleven librarians, including the Director (who had been with NU for 40 years) were laid off. This merger occurred without consultation with the faculty. This action has significant implications for academic program quality, the use of library resources in courses, and faculty and student research efforts. The Faculty Senate asked that the President of National University provide the required Service Level Agreements for the Library, Enrollment Management, Information Technology and Human Resources. These Agreements have not been provided.

Important considerations, in addition to those in Section 2c of the 1966 Statement quoted above, are, “Effective planning demands that the broadest possible exchange of information and opinion should be the rule for communication among the components of a college or university. The channels of communication should be established and maintained by joint endeavor. Distinction should be observed between the institutional system of communication and the system of responsibility for the making of decisions.”

Finally, the Joint Statement on Faculty Status of College and University Librarians by Association of College and Research Libraries, the Association of American Colleges (now the Association of American Colleges and Universities), and the AAUP contends that, “The character and quality of an institution of higher learning are shaped in large measure by the nature and accessibility of its library resources as well as the expertise and availability of its librarians. Consequently, all members of the faculty should take an active interest in the operation and development of the library. ...the scope and character of library resources should be taken into account in such important academic decisions as curricular planning and faculty appointments...” Continuing, “Librarians perform a multifaceted role within the academy [by] providing access to information, whether by individual and group instruction, selecting and purchasing resources, digitizing collections, or organizing information. In all of these areas, librarians impart knowledge and skills to students and faculty members both formally and informally and advise and assist faculty members in their scholarly pursuits. They are involved in the research function and conduct research in their own professional interests and in the discharge of their duties. Their scholarly research contributes to the advancement of knowledge valuable to their discipline and institution.”

4. Closure of Academic Centers
National University is a distributed institution with academic centers, where classes were offered and faculty assigned, throughout the State of California and in Henderson, Nevada. In late March, all University buildings were closed due to the COVID-19 outbreak, and several significant centers were closed permanently. These permanent closures occurred without notice or faculty consultation. President Andrews in a Zoom Town Hall on April 9, 2020 noted that while “Some of these decisions [like the closing of academic centers] were being considered  prior to the COVID-19 outbreak but were accelerated by the crisis... Our traditional timeframe for faculty consultation and shared governance was truncated on a number of these issues.” He also acknowledged in the same Town Hall that “Upon closing the Stockton and Bakersfield campuses two years ago, we agreed to a process of sharing information and intentions to close future campuses with faculty and faculty leaders as leases came due.”

That information-sharing did not happen. It is also not credible that there was a careful analysis of each location in a few weeks and that there was no time to consult with the faculty at the locations or with Senate officers to get their input. In fact, with COVID-19, consultation using and conferencing technologies is quite simple and transparent and does not carry the burden of travel.

CA-AAUP believes that administration is using the COVID-19 pandemic as a smokescreen to carry out plans already developed without shared governance, such as but not limited to Academic Center closures, cutting library services and staff, and terminating faculty. This announcement just made what had been an improper de facto practice of violating shared governance de jure.

A joint administrative-faculty taskforce worked hard in Spring 2019 to come up with a clear process by which center closures would be considered and decided upon, including a timeframe for when faculty would be notified of impending closures. This agreed-upon process has been completely ignored by the administration and Academic Center closures were only announced after they were a fait accompli. In a recent faculty meeting, one faculty member learned from colleagues that her center had been closed - nobody in the administration notified her that her office was no longer accessible.

At this recorded town hall, President Andrews also confirmed that the university was in good financial shape, with over $500 million of “reserve”; the University also recently received an unprecedented and widely publicized gift of $350 million dollars from a single donor.

Section 2c of the 1966 Statement recommends that “A second area calling for joint effort in internal operation is that of decisions regarding existing or prospective physical resources. The board, president, and faculty should all seek agreement on basic decisions regarding buildings and other facilities to be used in the educational work of the institution.”

5. “Emergency Powers” Delegated by SMG to Affiliate Presidents
Ahead of President Andrews’ April 9, 2020 Town Hall with faculty, he distributed a Resolution from “the NU and NUS Boards authoriz[ing] Chancellor [of the System] Cunningham to take more definitive action, and to delegate the same authority to affiliate presidents.” The System Management Group (SMG) is not empowered to make decisions for National University. The SMG is a service provider to NU and explicitly does not operate under shared governance, but its Board and Chancellor often make decisions for NU and “system” affiliates, as in the cases noted above.

Section 2a of the 1996 Statement argues that “The variety and complexity of the tasks performed by institutions of higher education produce an inescapable interdependence among governing board, administration, faculty, students, and others. The relationship calls for adequate communication among these components, and full opportunity for appropriate joint planning and effort.”
 
In addition, “AAUP Principles and Standards for the COVID-19 Crisis” lays out AAUP principles when it comes to universities dealing with the COVID-19 crisis and maintaining shared governance and academic freedom. They may be accessed at https://www.aaup.org/aaup-principles-and-standards-covid-19-crisis. In particular the principles state that “The COVID-19 pandemic should not become the occasion for administrations to circumvent widely accepted principles of academic governance, as some faculty members have reported has happened at their institutions.” Quoting the Statement on Government it notes that, “The structure and procedures for faculty participation should be designed, approved, and established by joint action of the components of the institution. Faculty representatives should be selected by the faculty according to procedures determined by the faculty.”

6. Termination of Academic Programs in Violation of Board-Approved Shared Governance Processes
In 2018-19, at the President’s request, a joint Small Program Planning Task Force (SPPT), comprised of faculty and administrators was convened to develop a process for evaluating the viability of and making recommendations for small programs. The Task Force recommended a process that involved careful consideration of multiple factors and discussion with program faculty before deciding whether to terminate small programs or continue to offer and attempt to grow them.

At his April 9, 2020 Town Hall, the President announced that the process would be revived and expedited to generate recommendations for program terminations by June 30, 2020. The process is attempting to short circuit the final report and recommendations developed by the SPPT. No consultation occurred with program faculty. Instead Academic Program Directors (APDs) reported that they are being informed that their programs are slated for termination based solely on annual Students in Program (SIP) numbers. In the climate of expected layoffs, faculty serving as APDs of programs with fewer than 500 student majors are under pressure from Deans to agree to program closures; faculty are discouraged from appealing the decision to the faculty governing bodies, and are informed that the Provost will have the final say in deciding whether to submit programs for termination. Many APDs believe that he has already decided the ones he wants to close before the process is completed. These actions violate the work of the joint administrative and faculty taskforce that spend six months last year developing the process and criteria for closing or reviving small programs.

Section 3 of the 1966 Statement advises, as a best practice, that “The governing board of an institution of higher education, while maintaining a general overview, entrusts the conduct of administration to the administrative officers—the president and the deans—and the conduct of teaching and research to the faculty. The board should undertake appropriate self-limitation.”

Conclusion
In conclusion, CA-AAUP believes that the University administration, the SMG, and their respective (and identical) Boards have repeatedly violated the requirements of shared governance set forth in the University’s own Faculty Policies as well as in the AAUP’s standards. These actions have been accompanied and facilitated by sudden announcements of radical changes to faculty work and the academic structures and processes at the University, such as the President’s letter of May 22, 2020. Though faculty were repeatedly assured by the President that the University is in strong financial shape, these measures have frequently been justified under the guise of financial concerns.

We believe these actions will result in irrevocable, serious, and unnecessary harm to National University and to its faculty and students. In addition, these actions diminish the value of  faculty, and the work they do, as well as the value of higher education whose effective contribution is essential to the economy and society. These one-sided decisions will create a vicious downward cycle.

Accordingly, we strongly recommend that National University comply with its own standards of shared governance and those of the general academic community. This requires the immediate revocation of the President’s letter of May 22, 2020 in its totality and all related announcements and unilateral management plans.

Sincerely,

Steven Filling, President
Jesse Drew,Vice President, University of California
Diane Klein, Vice President, Private Colleges and Universities
Rosalinda Quintanar, Vice President, California State University
Katie Graham, Vice President, California Community Colleges
Jennifer Eagan, California Faculty Association Delegate to CA-AAUP
Kirti Sawhney Celly, California Faculty Association Delegate to CA-AAUP

_____________________
* The legal name of the National University System is the System Management Group, Inc. (SMG). National University is defined as an “affiliate” of that entity. However, the membership of the Board of Trustees of the System and the Boards of Trustees of National University and other affiliate System universities are identical. As a result, the affiliates (such as National University) do not have a genuine separate existence.

The two largest protests in San Francisco and Oakland didn’t involve crowds gathering in front of buildings or marching side-by-side through city streets while chanting and waving colorful signs. Demonstrators instead climbed into cars and trucks, or mounted bikes and other vehicles and formed caravans to parade their way through cities and sometimes surround government buildings or businesses.

The new approach allowed the region’s active social justice movements to continue the May Day tradition of celebrating workers’ rights while complying with physical distance guidelines put in place to slow the spread of the coronavirus. Organizers encouraged people to stay in or on their vehicles, wear masks or face coverings and use hand sanitizer that protest planners provided.

Protesters in Oakland called for protective equipment for essential workers, free health care, equitable education, the withholding of rent and mortgage payments and the release of prisoners at risk of being infected by coronavirus.

The AAUP continues to update the AAUP's coronavirus resources page with new information from the national AAUP, local AAUP chapters, and other organizations. Please write to smink@aaup.org to share news about how your chapter has adapted its organizing work to respond to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Thank you for the work you are doing.

Webinars
Keep up-to-date on AAUP's latest webinars, including the webinar on financial exigency and program elimination, held last week. Slides and links to all past webinars can be found here.