DAN QUAGLIANA
News Editor
On March 18 at 8:43 p.m., Fredonia’s Executive Vice President and Provost Dr. David Starrett sent out an email to all students, faculty and staff, announcing that the 13 majors that were announced to be considered for discontinuation in December have officially been discontinued.
“Good evening,” the email began. “I am writing to keep you informed about the proposed program deactivation, the formal review process and what happens next.”
The email continued, explaining that, “After careful consideration of the arguments for and against the proposal, and following the agreed-upon timeline and our responsibility to keep our campus updated, I want to inform you of the final decisions made by the [President’s] Cabinet:
- We will discontinue the 13 majors on the original list
- We will keep associated minors
- We will keep necessary lower or upper division courses as needed for general education or other service within and outside of the affected departments
- Departments have the option to develop new relevant programs based on student demand and other market needs. In fact, those conversations with department chairs or program coordinators are already underway.
The deactivation of these 13 majors, which currently enroll 70 first majors and 22 second majors, will go into effect no later than June 5. Any student admitted to or enrolled in one of the majors before this date will be able to obtain their degrees in these majors. After June 5, 2024, the university will not recruit students for or admit students to these degree programs.”
The provost emphasized that students still enrolled in these majors will be given the opportunity to graduate. He also stated that a major’s, “inclusion on this list does NOT reflect poorly on that major’s quality or its dedicated faculty and staff.”
“We want to acknowledge the trepidation during this process, and the disappointment people may have regarding these decisions,” he wrote. “These decisions have not been made lightly, but have been made for the common goal we all share: ensuring that the university is responsive to student demand, directing our energies towards building degrees that students are seeking, the long-term financial health of SUNY Fredonia and the success of our students.”
Responding to recent criticism regarding Fredonia’s perceived shift to a vocational, STEM-based university, Starrett said, “Our commitment to a well-rounded liberal arts education remains strong … Even with these program discontinuations, over 80% of Fredonia’s undergraduate degree programs are in the liberal arts. Over 25% are in the arts, over 25% are in the sciences, and over 25% are in the other humanities.”
In the last few months, the university has added a Master of Business Administration, a master’s degree in clinical mental health counseling and a Bachelor of Science in nursing. They haven’t added any new majors or programs in the liberal arts or humanities.
“We will work together to ensure a bright future, utilizing our strategic plan as our guide to move us forward,” the email finished.
Almost immediately, the decisions made by the provost, President Stephen Kolison and other administrators were met with widespread condemnation from the campus community.
“How they did it was so one-sided,” said Dr. Jeanette McVicker, a professor in the English department and the university senator for interdisciplinary studies. “They didn’t answer most of the questions [people asked them] and now they just know they didn’t tell anyone anything. And they have not looked at [faculty] as partners in any way.”
She went on to explain that, “Faculty have been told, ever since President Kolison arrived [in 2020], that the problem is faculty salaries … And, so, you know, I don’t think faculty feel respected … We’re not invited to any conversations.”
According to the minutes taken during the Senate meeting on Feb. 26, President Kolison said that, “We’re talking about $7 million of the $10 million deficit being negotiated raises.” In this context, “negotiated raises” are pay raises for faculty that they negotiated to receive.
“If that alone were to be addressed, as SUNY is requesting,” Kolison said, “our situation would be much more manageable.”
In order to actually get a statement out to campus, McVicker introduced a resolution at the most recent University Senate meeting on March 18 that condemns the Program Deactivation Review Process (PDRP) at SUNY Fredonia.
“THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED,” the resolution says, “that the Fredonia University Senate finds this entire process not only a resounding failure of shared governance, but that it has felt shut out of providing any meaningful feedback that would speak to the ‘big picture’ issues of how these program deactivations will 1) actually address the budget deficit; 2) contribute in any positive way to a more vibrant academic program array or to a ‘distinctive identity’ for the campus; 3) prevent harm to remaining programs, many of which are partners with the targeted majors and will themselves become precarious as a result of these deactivations; 4) prevent harm to the institution’s mission, tradition and reputation; and
“THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Fredonia University Senate strongly opposes all administration-initiated program deactivations, and particularly condemns the absence of a dialogic process with campus stakeholders, the lack of clear administrative communication, the abrogation of faculty control of curriculum, the lack of adequate data or rationale, and the refusal to address the damage to Fredonia as an institution without such programs.”
Since December, when the program discontinuations were announced, the administration has repeatedly shown enrollment data as justification, but they have “not provided any evidence of costs or likely savings” as a result of the cuts, according to political science professor Dr. Jonathan Chausovsky.
Chausovsky, who is the university senator for the Politics and International Affairs Department, also introduced a resolution at the last Senate meeting. This one aims for “SUNY University Faculty Senate (UFS) leadership under Keith Landa to begin the consultation process concerning the Fredonia Administration.”
“The administration has, at times, indicated that non-budget concerns are driving the process, while at other times pointing to budget concerns, and in the process has not provided a consistent explanation,” Chausovsky wrote as justification for his resolution.
“They’ve even admitted, basically, ‘Well, we know it’s not going to save us any money,’” he said.
SUNY University Faculty Senate functions much like Fredonia’s own University Senate, but on a SUNY-wide scale. Each SUNY college or university sends one Senator to UFS to represent them. Currently, Fredonia’s senator is Dr. Rob Deemer, a professor of music composition and the chair of the Department of Theatre and Dance.
The consultation process is a major step that faculty can initiate when they are sufficiently dissatisfied with the administration.
“A campus consultation is a process that leverages shared governance expertise across SUNY to assist a campus experiencing appreciable governance issues,” reads UFS’ handbook. “It should be viewed as a faculty-to-faculty process that can be utilized proactively to prevent a major communication breakdown between groups of faculty, between faculty and other campus constituencies, or between faculty and campus administration.”
In short, UFS will create a two-to-three person consultation committee, which will then travel to Fredonia to assess the situation and the current dynamic between faculty and administration. The committee will talk to both administration and faculty members to gauge the situation and mend the perceived rift, if possible.
“This is a mechanism for trying to improve a situation, not to walk away from it,” McVicker explained.
If this doesn’t work, it is possible that University Senate could request a UFS visitation at some point in the future, in which a few members of UFS would, “expect to meet with the campus president, the CGL(s), and key members of both the administration and shared governance bodies. Faculty, staff, students or others in the larger campus community (for example, alumni, donors or college council members) may also meet with the Visitation Committee.”
Generally, UFS visitations are not requested unless a vote of no confidence in the president by Senate is imminent. A decision to hold a vote of that nature would be made after the Visitation Committee returns their findings.
While Chausovsky doesn’t think the process should go that far yet, he does think that, “This has not been healthy … Just look at the tenor of the [Senate] meeting on Feb. 5.” At that meeting, Senators and members of the administration were openly arguing with each other, almost coming to the point of shouting.
“Some of you may know that the department and our amazing department chair responded to the proposed gutting of our programs with a revised curriculum. That’s the paradigm shift you’re looking for, that actually cuts more programs,” said sculpture professor Peter Tucker during the meeting.
“We have proposed two degrees instead of the nine that we currently offer. I hope that the administration will seriously consider our proposal, which adds efficiency and actually saves money. I’m hoping that you’re taking that seriously. Because Potsdam has announced they’re firing people and I’d like to know if you’re going to be doing that and if I’ll have a job next year,” he said, referencing SUNY Potsdam’s similar program removals and the fact that sculpture is one of the programs being discontinued.
“I just want to express how utterly disgusted I am with the administration. Why are they here? They don’t seem to give a crap. I really want them to leave,” Tucker ended.
“There’ve been people like myself who’ve been upset for quite some time,” Chausovsky said. “It’s a multi-level charade. The [SUNY] chancellor[, John King,] is engaged in a charade … And it’s been done in a way that is actually going to be harmful to us. But it’s not going to save money, and neither are the cuts … They can’t say that any of them lead to a line item cut in accounts payable.”
McVicker agrees, saying that, “[The administration] keeps alluding to some plan, some knowledge that [they] have, but [they] don’t share it.”