The University of Michigan’s Faculty Senate has passed resolutions regarding the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities, modifications to the Standard Practice Guide, a censure of the Board of Regents, and accountability for gender-based violence and discrimination at U-M.
The election saw 2,171 Senate members — 28.6% of eligible electors — cast ballots over three days of electronic voting that followed a Nov. 4 Senate meeting at which several people spoke regarding the measures.
Each resolution is advisory in nature.
more information
“The regents recognize the importance of all of our faculty and remain committed to working constructively with them,” said university spokesperson Colleen Mastony. “The regents will carefully consider these resolutions and will continue to welcome collaboration that strengthens our community and advances the mission of the university.”
The Faculty Senate has nearly 7,600 members, including tenured and tenure-track instructional faculty and research faculty, as well as librarians, clinical faculty, archivists, curators and lecturers I, II, III and IV with at least a 50% appointment, and deans and executive officers from all U-M campuses.
A breakdown of the vote is as follows:
Motion 1 — Pause implementation of the revisions to the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities
Yes, 1,599 No, 394 (178 abstained)
The first motion, previously approved by both the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs and the Senate Assembly, calls on the university to pause changes to the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities that the Board of Regents approved in July.
Motion 2 — Review and modification of the Standard Practice Guides
Yes, 1,688 No, 263 (220 abstained)
The second resolution called on the university to establish a committee of faculty representatives to review and modify the Standard Practice Guides, the policies and procedures that govern staff and faculty.
Motion 3 — Censure of the Board Regents
Yes, 1,387 No, 559 (225 abstained)
The third resolution asked the Faculty Senate to censure the Board of Regents, based in part on the changes made to the SSRR and the recent adoption of a Regents Bylaw on institutional neutrality. It also seeks “regular, scheduled time” for the SACUA chair to speak at Board of Regents meetings and asks that the regents meet with the Senate Assembly, the 77-member legislative arm of U-M’s central faculty governance system.
Motion 4 — Accountability for the handling of gender-based violence and discrimination at the university
Yes, 1,476 No, 364 (331 abstained)
The fourth resolution urged the university to take the problem of gender-based violence “far more seriously.” It asks the university to devote more resources to prevention and to commit to an independent audit every year, as opposed to every four years, as is currently done, according to state law.
The Senate also chose Deirdre Spencer, librarian for arts and humanities, to be its new parliamentarian. She was elected over Sun-Yung Bak, clinical associate professor of dentistry, by a vote of 1,055-616, with 500 abstentions.
The election of a new Senate secretary was postponed to the winter semester due to a lack of candidates. Spencer, who has served as secretary for the past three years, will remain as interim secretary until the position is filled.
Leila Kawar
With a convincing margin of faculty supporting the principles of shared governance underlying all four resolutions, the University of Michigan’s faculty are collectively living into Vision 2034 which has democracy as a core value.
Basit Zafar
The fact that this has never happened before in UM’s history, and that nearly three-quarters of faculty (who voted) chose to censure the regents should be a wake-up call for the central administration. Irreparable damage is being done to the institution and that must stop now. At the end of the day, I hope we all share one common goal: we want UM to prosper. That is only possible if processes are adhered to, principles of shared governance are followed, and all stakeholders are consulted.
Derek Peterson
This is an emphatic vote, and I encourage the upper administration to take seriously the criticisms that these resolutions bring to light. The faculty–not the upper administrators–are at the core of the educational mission of this institution, and we disapprove of the Regents’ efforts to circumvent faculty government.
Charlotte Karem Albrecht
I hope the regents and the administrative leadership of the university really listen to these concerns and make some responsive changes. Please show us that you actually have the best interests of this public university, and its future, in mind.
Silke-Maria Weineck
For those of you new hear, “the regents recognize the importance of all of our faculty” is code for “we do not recognize faculty governance as a representative body.”
Silke-Maria Weineck
*here