{ title: 'The Spectrum (Buffalo, N.Y.) 1955-current, January 22, 1979, Page 1, Image 1', download_links: [ { link: 'http://www.loc.gov/rss/ndnp/ndnp.xml', label: 'application/rss+xml', meta: 'News about NYS Historic Newspapers - RSS Feed', }, { link: '/lccn/np00130006/1979-01-22/ed-1/seq-1/png/', label: 'image/png', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/np00130006/1979-01-22/ed-1/seq-1.pdf', label: 'application/pdf', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/np00130006/1979-01-22/ed-1/seq-1/ocr.xml', label: 'application/xml', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/np00130006/1979-01-22/ed-1/seq-1/ocr.txt', label: 'text/plain', meta: '', }, ] }
Image provided by: University at Buffalo
Peradotto recommends delaying implementation of Springer report by Daniel S. Parker News Editor Carnegie Unit awards one credit for each hour spentin the classroom per week. Both men told The Spectrum that “Logistical” problems are at the source of their recommendation to delay implementation. The new system would throw a haze of uncertainty over degree requirements, student course loads, class size, faculty teaching loads, bus runs and class scheduling. If implementation is delayed, • dozens of departments in all areas of the University will have to readjust curricula newly-designed to comply with the Carnegie Unit. Many courses that would have been devalued to three credits will be thrown into limbo. Departmental course listings were to have been completed by this Thrusday. Incomplete info In a stunning reversal of what appeared to be firm, unchangeable plans. Dean of Undergraduate Education John Peradotto and his assistant Walter Kunz have recommended that implementation of the Springer report be delayed until the fall of 1980. The two men will meet today with University President Robert L. Ketter and the Academic Cabinet to urge that the adoption of the Carnegie Unit as an academic base — scheduled for next fall —\ be delayed a year in order to study the complexities such a massive change will bring to the undergraduate program. “The reports were too skimpy Peradotto said. “I am suggesting postponing implementation until 1980 until we have a clear chance to analyze potential problems ” Kunz said If Peradotto and Kunz - both centrally involved in smoothing the difficulties the change will bring - successfully delay implementation. The Faculty Senate’s Springer Report on credit/contact hours will not go into effect until nearly three years after its passage in December of 1977. Peradotto said his decision to suggest postponing implementation for one year was sparked when he began looking through departmental reports compiled by the University’s seven faculties. These reports were due in the DUE office on January 15, although not all faculties made the deadlines. Those that did apparently provided incomplete information. “They were too skimpy,” Peradotto —continued on page 18— \They didn’t indicate how major requirements would be changed.’’ Logistical problems The surprising turnaround by Peradatto and Kunz comes days after hard study on how to implement the so-called “Carnegie' Unit” began. The Vol. 29, No. 50 Monday, 22 January 1979 State University of New York at Buffalo English Dept, faces faculty and pay cuts ■Created’ in 1977 evaluating the administrative process in October of 1976. Most of the research was interviews with administrators of every rank. The committee took the reallocation of faculty lines as a “prism” through which to view the decision-making process. Mandated faculty monitor committee not yet established by Elena Cacavas Campus Editor Flow poor The committee’s findings confirmed many long-standing suspicions about the Administration. Ironically, University President Robert L. Ketter was on leave during most of the group’s research. The committee found that many of the interviewees felt decisions were “capricious” in nature; i.e. based on personalities and friendships. Information flow from top to bottom was poor, the report stated, and there was a widespread feeling that the central administration (then Hayes Hall) was becoming increasingly “insular. 1 \ An English Department meeting was unofficially adjourned Friday when angry members stormed - out in disgust following a highly controversial decision made by Dean of Arts and Letters George Levine. The exodus occured when Levine announced he would implement a plan which will result in greater allocations for the English Department but will reduce the income of some faculty members by 15-20 percent. The plan calls for the incorporation of the Millard Fillmore College (MFC) English program into the English Department. by Mark Meitzer and Jay Rosen A Faculty Senate committee -on Administrative Evaluation, designed to provide a permanent faculty check on Capen Hall, has yet to be constituted although legislation creating it was passed by the Senate in April of 1977. Faculty Senate Chairman Newton Carver has hesitated on naming members to the committee, although he conceeded that the group must eventually be constituted unless the Senate Executive Committee “can talk their way out of it.” At a special meeting of the Department’s Executive Committee last Monday, Levine announced the threat of 39 faculty cuts within Arts and Letters — ten to be assumed by English. Line cuts vary with resource allocations (set on the basis of student/faculty ratios). According to Department Chairman Gale Carrithers, English operates at a ratio of 13.1-1. The state budget stipulates a 17-1 ratio and the Vice President of Academic Affairs Ronald Bunn — who determines allocations at this University — “will settle for” 15-1, Carrithers said. Since the committee used the reallocation of faculty lines as a research device, its work holds a special significance in light of Vice President for Academic Affairs Ronald F. Bunn’s Academic Plan, which attempts to set the criteria for shifting money between units. Levine presented his plan as an alternative to line depletions. He said the move will raise the English Department’s student/faculty ratio to approximately 25-1, substantially increasing its allocation from the University. Adding MFC “on load,” however, means that additional income - the 15 to 20 percent, a total of $60,000 - gained by faculty members who taught English courses for MFC will no longer be available A standing committee to monitor the administrative process was' one 6f two recommendations contained in the report of an ad hoc committee on administrative evaluation chaired by Psychology Professor Ira Cohen. The Senate passed the recommendations overwhelmingly but 1977-78 Faculty Senate Chairman Jonathan Reichert refused to constitute the committee, raying that it was not his “administrative style” to work with standing committees. “Evaluation of administrative functions is viewed as less than adequate,” the report reads, “.. . The central administration is viewed as purposefully avoiding public disclosure of priorities. The upper-level administration is not perceived as having given serious consideration to a thorough evaluation of administrative actions.” The Cohen committee was careful to point out that it could do no more than “initiate” a review and that without an on-going evaluation of the Administration there would be “no hope of a formal check and balance system between the faculty and Administration.” Hence, the report’s only two recommendations were that the report be forwarded to Ketter for discussion and that a continuing review of the Administration begin with the standing committee — the committee that has yet to be formed. Yet, that which was discussed by Levine on Monday turned out to be more than “presentation” Friday. Executive Committee members were as surprised as their Department colleagues when Levine announced — three-quarters of the way into Friday’s discussion - “The reform is being scheduled for the Fall right now. 1 decided last week that a toss up between extra teaching compensation and having jobs left me no alternative.” Associate Department Chairman Fred See addressed the agitated group, saying, “We can only acltnowledge that we have been put in this position and there is nothing we can do about it.” Within twenty minutes Baldy Hall’s Kiva Room was empty, the meeting never having been formally adjourned. Motion made Carver took office apparently unaware of the report’s existence. At the December 6 Faculty Senate meeting, where Carver announced plans to toughen-up on the Senate’s committee system, a question from the floor , brought out the stagnancy of the Administrative Evaluation Committee. Carver said he knew nothing of the committee report. A motion to direct the Senate Executive Committee to investigate forming the committee was passed unanimously at the December 6 meeting. Ironically, for one and one-half hours before Levine announced his decision, options were discussed. Carrithers proposed increasing the English requirements for undergraduates in order to bring more students into the Department — an effort inherent in the General Education formula — and increasing the number of courses for majors by implementing the three hour/three credit program. Terribly destructive , No guarantee Carver told The Spectrum that two existing Faculty Senate committees already serve some of the functions the Administrative Evaluation Committee would fill. They are the University-wide Committee on Operations and the Academic Planning Committee. Haunted by the threat of line cuts, Levine claimed that without the MFC changes, “I would be unable to make any appointments within Arts and Letters. I could be in the position of notifying faculty who are without, or up for, tenure that they will not be recalled. I would have to institute severe cuts in teaching assistant (TA) lines, and I would have to impliment program retrenchments.” Levine stressed his objection to the alternatives, claiming any of them could be “terribly destructive to this faculty.” He said he believed teaching loads in English should be increased. Levine defended Bunn’s 15 to 1 ratio pointing out that other University centers operate on budgets set at ratios of 17-1 while State Colleges maintain ratios of 20-1. He presented other ratios; Social Sciences are 18-1, Natural Sciences are 19-1, Management is 27-1, and —continued on page 2— But the Executive Committee has been slow to act on the directive. It has yet to nominate any members or discuss the matter extensively. Flence two directives to form the standing committee — the original approval in 1977 and the December 6 resolution — have been effectively ignored. The Cohen committee began work on Carver conceeded that the Senate resolution forces the Executive Committee to name members to the standing committee, but would not say when such action would be tsken. He refused to guarantee that members would be named before the next full Senate meeting February 6. Inside: Love Canal ‘secrets’—P. 7 / The ‘head’ hits London—Centerfold / Basketball Bulls win one—P. 16
