Colleen Conway, a professor of music education, recently began her 2020-21 term as chair of the nine-member Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs, as well as the 74-member Senate Assembly and the Faculty Senate. The Faculty Senate includes all professorial faculty, librarians, full-time research faculty, executive officers and deans.
Conway has been at the University of Michigan since 2001. She teaches undergraduate courses that prepare students to be instrumental music teachers in P-12 schools and graduate courses in research design and curriculum for music education. She is editor-in-chief of Arts Education Policy Review and has published eight books and more than 100 articles in music education research journals.
Conway provided the following answers to questions about topics that the central faculty governance system will address this year, as well as its role in the university decision-making process.
Q: How do you view SACUA’s role in developing and guiding university policy?
SACUA meets weekly to discuss issues that impact faculty experiences and university policy. We have regular visits from the president and the provost, as well as vice presidents and other university administrators. In addition, 11 of our Senate Assembly committees meet regularly with vice presidents.
The SACUA chair, vice chair and Faculty Senate Office director meet in private meetings with the president and the provost, and SACUA members meet regularly with members of the Board of Regents. All of these interactions help to facilitate SACUA’s role in developing and guiding university policy.
Just since May, we have had the opportunity to contribute to policies regarding the new Standing Judicial Committee put in place by the changes to Regents Bylaw 5.09, and a SACUA subcommittee worked to help create a standardized syllabus statement regarding student compliance with public health measures for the next academic year.
Q: What are SACUA’s priorities for the coming year?
SACUA will continue to prioritize communication between faculty governance and the faculty at large.
The Fall Planning Survey sent by the Faculty Senate Office in June had over 850 responses, and the town hall co-sponsored by SACUA with the President’s Office in July offered us the opportunity to communicate with over 600 faculty who attended during the town hall and over 120 faculty in break-out sessions.
In addition, we are setting strong goals to strengthen communication channels for all the Senate Assembly committees. The director and chair are meeting with committee chairs and executive officers to set charges for these committees that are manageable and measurable. The Faculty Senate Office will be in regular communication with committees.
SACUA will continue to examine policies and procedures within the Office for Institutional Equity. This has been a concern and priority for SACUA, and given recent concerns in the press regarding the OIE, we will continue to work in this area.
We will also continue to work with Academic Human Resources to better prepare faculty grievance monitors, and to bring clarity to grievances processes overall. SACUA will be reviewing and considering changes to policy brought about by implementation of Title IX regulations that were released late in the spring.
The interim umbrella policy (on sexual misconduct) will continue to receive SACUA’s attention until its anticipated adoption in July 2021. SACUA understands that the current climate is unpredictable and volatile and is prepared to prioritize and engage with critical issues as they emerge in the coming year.
Q: What do you see as the primary issues for U-M faculty as the university deals with challenges growing out of the coronavirus pandemic?
It seems impossible to predict what lies ahead for faculty with regard to the pandemic. We feel fortunate that the president has kept lines of communication open with SACUA regarding pandemic-related concerns.
We hope to be able to participate fully and communicate regularly with the administration and the Board of Regents with regard to the difficult decisions that may need to be made regarding the University of Michigan.
We want to continue to assure that due process is followed in all decisions, pandemic-related or not, and that faculty concerns are considered during the decision-making process.
Q: What can central faculty governance do to support faculty members amid those pandemic-related challenges?
As we have set the charges for each of the faculty governance committees, we had put extra energy into considering pandemic-related concerns (access to technology, child care, health and well-being, fairness, equity, inclusion).
We formed a subcommittee to consider the charge of every committee in relation to Black Lives Matter, and we aim to communicate regularly with all faculty through their Senate Assembly representatives to gather information from faculty regarding their concerns this year.
We have also been encouraging faculty to contact the Faculty Senate Office through the contact form on the website with feedback or concerns so that we may be aware of issues that faculty members across campus may be facing.
Q: How do you view SACUA’s relationship with the administration and the process of conveying the faculty voice to decision-makers?
As mentioned previously, SACUA has successfully developed opportunities to share the voice of faculty with decision-makers. It is critical that we continue to be proactive so that we may gather and share feedback while issues are being discussed and before decisions are made.
We do believe SACUA is considered while many decisions are being considered, although certainly not all requests are honored and implemented. We are encouraged by the progress we have made in our relationships with decision-makers.
Q: What does SACUA do well now, and what are some areas that need improvement?
The nine members of SACUA and its secretary are very dedicated to serving the University of Michigan faculty. We have 100 percent attendance at every SACUA meeting and quick and thoughtful interactions via email every week in between our meetings.
We continue to work to ensure that same level of engagement in the 74-member Senate Assembly, and to remind Senate Assembly members that they play a critical role in bringing issues from Senate Assembly back to their units, as well as bringing issues from their units back to Senate Assembly. Senate Assembly members are the real connectors in central faculty governance bringing faculty interests from across campus to issues under discussion.
Q: How do you plan to engage more people in faculty governance?
We are pleased this year to have fully staffed all of our Senate Assembly committees through a recruitment strategy that solicited faculty volunteers by targeting all members of Faculty Senate.
We are also tracking committee terms to be mindful of the length of commitments people have made to encourage three-year terms for members and one-year terms for chairs. We believe this approach will give more people the opportunity to participate, and to serve in a leadership role on a Senate Assembly committee.
By participating on a Senate Assembly committee, faculty can establish eligibility to run for a seat on SACUA. Broadening the base of faculty eligible to run for a seat on SACUA will expand the opportunity for people to get engaged in a very central way.
Technology has also facilitated increased participation in central faculty governance. Even before the move to Zoom meetings, we were working to record Senate Assembly meetings and make recordings available to those who could not attend in person.
The move to Zoom meetings seems to have led to higher levels of participation at Senate Assembly as well as Senate meetings, so we intend to continue to explore how we can leverage technology to engage more people in faculty governance going forward.
