UIUC AAUP Policy Committee
Minutes for Thursday, December 4, 2025 Zoom Meeting
Web site: http://www.aaup-ui.org/
Present: Robin Kar, Richard Laugesen, David O’Brien, Robert Parker, Daniel Steward, Leslie Struble, Carol Tilley
The meeting began at about 12:00 p.m. with Kar presiding.
(1) Welcome and Introductions. Kar welcomed the attendees and thanked them for their service. Since there were no guests today, introductions were not needed.
(2) Review of the Minutes for November 6, 2025 Meeting of Policy Committee. Since there were no responses to his request for substantive comments on the minutes, Kar announced that they were approved by unanimous consent.
(3) President’s Report. Kar covered several key topics in his report.
(a) Upcoming meeting with Campus Leaders including the New Chancellor. The discussion included (i) providing these campus leaders with information on what our interests are and (ii) assigning the individuals who will be preparing this information (e.g., a list of possible topics), as O’Brien and Struble did in the fall.
(b) Meetings along with Symes with Presidents of Other AAUP Chapters. The discussion at these meetings included whether the messages coming from the national office are as effective as we would like. The discussion also brought home (i) the severe problems facing so many campuses and (ii) how grateful we are right now at the University of Illinois that these have not occurred here yet. Parker suggested that they should arrange to have the topics discussed at these meetings reported on in the Chronicle. Kar agreed that it is important to have “our side” in front of those individuals who feel that higher education is elitist and not relevant for them. We concluded with a lengthy discussion on such topics as (i) which groups are being left out of higher education; (ii) how to rebut effectively the numerous attacks on higher education and keep the public aware of the values of higher education. Struble mentioned that she will be leading a discussion on anti-intellectualism and noting, for example, that importance of noting what the higher education does offer such as the ability to do critical thinking. Steward noted the importance of keeping a record of those instances where such positive projects are underway to help circulate them more effectively. Parker pointed out that too often (a) we don’t have the language to describe what we do to the public at large and (b) to those outside academe, teaching a possibly controversial topic will be interpreted as advocacy for that topic. Steward concluded the discussion by noting that implementing changes will be difficult since, given the student-teacher rations that we have, it is not clear how we have time to train our graduate students to work effectively with students.
(4) Action Items
(a) Plans for Policy Committee Meeting with Campus Leaders. Kar returned to this item by noting we assume the meetings with the new Chancellor and the Provost will take place in late January or early February. We plan to prepare an agenda and agree that coverage of any other topics will not occur until those on the agenda are discussed.
(b) Agenda for Policy Committee Meeting with Campus Leaders. Kar suggested that O’Brien and Struble again take the lead on preparing the Agenda. One starting place would be the agendas we have prepared for the meetings with campus leaders in the past including the one with President Killeen and a member of the Board of Trustees last year. O’Brien noted that an obvious subject is how the University is responding to the current national environment and, in particular, Federal attacks on universities. We could ask what they know about what is going on at other Universities regarding these issues. Kar would ask what they feel are the biggest threats to higher education in our state and how they feel we should respond to them. The latter could include asking what we including the faculty need to do to help the public understand the value of public research Universities such as ours. Steward wondered if there might be value in asking how the Chancellor views his predecessor’s plans for the future of the University. Kar suggested that question could include asking what process they are using for this evaluation. Kar concluded the discussion by asking whether we want to ask about Title VI and how they plan to respond to Title VI complaints. Kar concluded the discussion by suggesting that Struble and O’Brien prepare a draft of the questions, and he and Carol will review and edit it.
(5) Adjournment. Kar adjourned the meeting at about 1:05 p.m.
The next meeting is scheduled to be at 11 AM on Thursday, January 22, 2026.