On May 1, Rebekah Modrak, professor of art and design in the Penny W. Stamps School of Art & Design, began her 2024-25 term as chair of the nine-member Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs, as well as the 77-member Senate Assembly and the Faculty Senate.
The Faculty Senate includes all tenure-track professorial faculty, librarians, research faculty, clinical professors, lecturers, archivists, curators, executive officers and deans.
Modrak has been at the University of Michigan since 2003. She is an artist and writer whose practice is at the intersections of art, activism and creative resistance to consumer culture.
Modrak 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: What topics or issues will SACUA prioritize or address this year?
This year, SACUA will follow up on the faculty salary study and the requirement by some schools for faculty to record class activities, which appears to infringe on academic freedom and student consent.
Faculty are not empowered at the University of Michigan, largely as a result of unchecked administrative overreach. In July, the Regents amended the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities. Now, the university may file a complaint against a student; a student panel can only review the case if both the student and the complainant (the university) agree.
The regents eliminated the faculty/student appeals board, potentially allowing a lone “Resolution Officer” to decide a student’s future. The regents discussed these changes in private session, disregarding the amendment process, which calls for oversight by the Student Relations Advisory Committee, a faculty committee.
In addition, despite SACUA’s protestations last year about the overbroad, punitive nature of the Disruptive Activities Policy draft and the lack of faculty consultation, the administration in July implemented a new Facilities SPG 601.41, with similar language prohibiting individuals from “disrupt(ing) University activities or operations” or obstructing paths. SPG 601.41 conflicts with SPG 601.01 that protects freedom of speech and will chill future protests.
Q: What do you see as the biggest challenges for SACUA and central faculty governance in the coming year?
Continuing with the theme of administrative overreach, tenure cases with unanimous support at the department/college level and the recommendations of Grievance Hearing Boards who unanimously found in favor of the faculty are being overturned in the Office of the Provost.
Many faculty members aren’t aware of the grievance process until a crisis occurs, but it’s been the only check/balance for faculty subjected to devastating, professionally damaging violations. This already inequitable process now seems to be further corrupted. In addition to the tenure issues, SACUA is seeing cases of faculty sanctions — pay, sabbatical and surgical privilege freezes — without peer review or due process in schools across our campus.
This summer, the Faculty Senate Office submitted a comprehensive set of recommendations for changes to the grievance process to the Office of the Provost. SACUA will strongly advocate for reforms this year. But I and some other members of SACUA are increasingly aware that the only way to protect faculty and to ensure shared governance is through the creation of a union.
Q: How do you view SACUA’s role in developing and guiding university policy, and what will be your approach to carrying out that role?
Faculty leaders can become entangled in reacting to problems rather than generating initiatives. Last year ended with a divisive campus, and several SACUA members articulated the need to model respectful, albeit contentious, conversations.
The FSO developed Political Speech and the Public Square, a forum to present informed perspectives across four biweekly Tuesday lunchtimes leading up to the election. Students, staff and faculty can sign up to speak for two minutes in the Diag on a weekly theme related to “What’s at stake for me in the 2024 election.” The first event on Sept. 10 will focus on climate policy.
SACUA also recognized the need for faculty to meet colleagues from other disciplines as a means to feel connected. This summer, the FSO laid the foundation for faculty to build these networks with new fall initiatives that include a Faculty Mixer on Sept. 18.
We partnered with the Office of the Provost to develop a series of on-campus Faculty Work Retreats — each providing two hours of quiet work time followed by lunch with colleagues to help faculty protect research or creative work time, and we resurrected Innovate Brew — Ross School professor Bill Lovejoy’s initiative in which research-active faculty can sign up to be paired with colleagues from outside their field for a 30-minute coffee.
In May, we created the Ethical Investment Committee, led by associate professor Sara Soderstrom, to document how other universities implement ethical investment, to develop a proposed process for university members to voice concerns with U-M investments, and to recommend key metrics to be applied to the university’s investments.
Q: How do you view SACUA’s relationship with the administration and the process of conveying the faculty voice to decision makers?
The regents should seek as much direct communication from faculty via SACUA as possible. Faculty are the backbone of the university. We’re where the “rubber meets the road.”
Collectively, we understand the shifting realities of education and academia. We’re knowledgeable about our history and invested in the future. Executive officers and deans don’t necessarily represent faculty views.
We’re recommending that the SACUA chair have a standing appointment during regent meetings to report on issues facing faculty, a practice afforded to Central Student Government. In October, SACUA will host the Regent Candidate Forum at the Michigan Theater so faculty members can meet the 2024 candidates for the Board of Regents.
Provost McCauley has been extremely dedicated to providing a forum for faculty voice with monthly meetings all summer that will continue throughout 2024-25.
Communications between the faculty and President Ono have been more problematic. There’s a long tradition of 10 monthly meetings during the academic year between the SACUA chair and the president. This was upended last year when President Ono met with the SACUA chair only six times; he offered only six meetings this year.
We’ve asked that the president respect and maintain the traditions of shared governance at the university.
Q: What does SACUA do well now, and what are any areas that need improvements?
We have a remarkable group of fully engaged SACUA members with representation from clinical faculty, research faculty and faculty from all three campuses. The current SACUA members are fierce protectors of faculty governance and academic freedom on campus. SACUA’s secret power is the talented, exceptional staff in the FSO, led by director Luke McCarthy.
Improvements? We need more funding. To be able to develop initiatives and events to support our 7,300 faculty members, we need a more substantial budget.
Q: It’s been a year since the Faculty Senate expanded to include clinical professors, archivists, curators and lecturers. Has that changed the focus or conduct of central faculty governance, and if so, how?
We’re working to ensure that the voices ofallfaculty play a part in faculty governance.
For the first time, we have a clinical assistant professor, Soumya Rangarajan, on SACUA. In the late spring, SACUA members identified better integration of all faculty as a key goal, and we invited the president of the Lecturers’ Employee Organization, Kirsten Herold, to present her assessment of the LEO negotiations.
We’re working to improve representation on the Senate committees. The Faculty Senate meeting for all 7,300 faculty members will be Nov. 4, from 3:15-5:15 p.m. We invite and encourage all faculty to join us!
