Present:
Committee Members: Hadi Esfahani, Robin Kar, Richard Laugesen, David O’Brien, Robert Parker, Curtis Perry, Daniel Steward, Leslie Struble, Carol Symes, Carol Tilley, H. F. Williamson
Guest: Verena Erlenbusch-Anderson
The meeting began at about 12:30 p.m. with Symes presiding.
(1) Welcome and Introductions.
Symes welcomed the attendees noting that there were two new attendees to the meeting. The first was Curtis Perry, a new member of the Policy Committee. The second was Verena Erlenbusch-Anderson, currently a member of the Department of Political Science, attending as a guest.
(2) Review of the Minutes for the September 10, 2026 Meeting of Policy Committee.
A motion to approve the minutes was made by Parker, seconded by Struble, and approved unanimously.
(3) President’s Report.
Symes noted that in September we discussed the plans for meeting with administrators, not only the Chancellor and/or the Provost as is the usual practice, but also with Deans of key Colleges, particularly those less well-represented in the Chapter membership. We would be interested in what they consider to be their most significant concerns particularly with regard to our interests in academic freedom and shared governance.
The first appointment will be with Germán Bollero, Dean of ACES from 2 to 2:30 PM on November 3. The second will be Claire Stewart, Dean of Libraries, who will join us at 1 PM at our regular meeting in December. Rashid Bashir, Dean of the Granger College of Engineering, would also like to meet with us probably with one of his Associate Deans.
(4) Planning for Meetings with Campus Administrators.
Symes led a discussion of the specific plans for meeting with these Deans and the types of questions we plan to ask each of them. There was strong agreement with the suggestion from O’Brien and Parker that we refer to the results of the survey by Esfahani to initiate questions on how conditions today compare with those at the time of the survey. For example, we could send Dean Bashir the link to the survey as part of the response to his request to see a list of the topics we hope to cover with him. More generally, we would hope to persuade the Deans that it is in the interest of their colleges and departments to be represented among our membership and on our policy committee.
Perry noted that it’s always best to start with the assumption that we and the Deans have shared interests in making sure these matters work well at the department level. Laugesen noted that given the large role that external funding plays in Colleges such as ACES and Engineering, we might ask those Deans about their concerns about academic freedom in terms of how it affects such corporate research contracts. Parker suggested that we ask if there is anything we can do to help their faculty understand the principles of academic freedom. Struble added that we have and could continue to host workshops for faculty on these topics. Symes agreed and wondered whether it would also be useful to have a workshop for executive officers.
(5) President’s Report (continued).
Symes next noted that she will be talking with a faculty member from Anthropology about joining the Policy Committee. She concluded her report by mentioning the notice that Laugesen had sent about the October 13th panel sponsored by the CFA on “Higher Education Under Attack” and that one of the panelists was Todd Wolfson, President of the national AAUP.
(6) Developments on Mutual Defense Compact for Protection of Academic Freedom and Tenure (Big Ten).
Symes provided background on this topic including the dialogue among Big 10 AAUP Chapters to consider such issues in general and the situation at the University of Oregon in particular. There was a lengthy discussion of whether or not we want to be involved in this document and, if we do, what revisions must be made before we sign off. Symes again concluded the discussion by noting that we are not being asked to edit or vote on the document at this time. Instead, the discussion will enable her to present more effectively our thoughts when she is asked.
(7) Report from Liaison from the NTFC Local #6546.
Steward noted there was nothing urgent to report and that the group appreciated receiving a copy of the letter regarding the Call to Action issued by Secretary McMahon to help them determine whether they want to act in response to her action. He also reported that NTFC members had helped provide protection for people at the Native American House who were being harassed by an opposing group.
(8) Report on the Chapter Web Site.
Tilley reported that she is continuing with the task of setting up a different account and transfer backup so she can then transfer the entire website infrastructure into a new account. She will probably be doing a small bit of reorganization to simplify a couple of elements of the site.
(9) Meeting with Campus Administrators (continued).
Symes noted that we will be discussing plans for meeting with senior administrators particularly after our meetings with Deans. Laugesen and Parker pointed out that such meetings are valuable to remind them not only of the importance of academic freedom and shared governance but also that we are a resource with whom they can consult.
These meetings are also a response to their inquiries about what they can do for the AAUP. Laugesen suggested that one starting point for these conversations could be to bring forward and discuss the conclusions drawn in the “Report on AAUP-Illinois Faculty Governance Survey 2019” prepared by Esfahani. We could ask them how we might help if they feel changes are still needed.
(10) New Faculty Governance Survey.
It was suggested that we could ask senior administrator whether, as Esfahani suggested, we can do another survey to compare the situation now with what existed then. Perry supported the proposal noting that since the campus is invested in the idea of climate surveys, this would be a way to reinforce the importance of shared governance and procedural inclusion.
Tilley added that she is aware that this is a concern of the Provost’s office since the Faculty Advisory Committee has been invited to lead a meeting with campus Executive Officers in January, essentially about the problems that FAC deals with regularly, a lot of which are truly governance-related.
Esfahani reviewed the procedures adopted for the previous survey and suggested what might be done to make this iteration more effective such as having Deans play a role in supporting participation by department heads. He suggested we talk with VP Bernhard to see if he would provide support. Perry noted you could also ask the Deans. Parker noted the importance of being sure they realize that we are only addressing the issues from the Provost’s statement.
(11) Meeting with Campus Administrators (continued).
Symes asked whether it would be useful to have Bernhard attend a meeting, perhaps briefly, to cover this proposal. Struble and Perry noted that this meeting could occur after we have met with a few Deans and included this topic in our discussions with them. Esfahani suggested it might be easier if one or two people met with Bernhard (and perhaps the Provost) who is familiar with the survey to see whether he would still support a similar effort.
(12) Adjournment.
A motion was made, seconded and passed to adjourn the meeting at about 1:42 PM.
The next meeting of the Policy Committee will be the Thursday, November 5 at 12:30 PM. The remaining meeting this fall will be December 3.
Site for “Report on AAUP-Illinois Faculty Governance Survey 2019”