Shelbie Harris
News Editor
Ensuring effective communication between faculty, student and administrative bodies is integral to maintaining successful higher education institutions.
Though communication breakdowns are at times inevitable, members of Idaho State University’s Faculty Senate are working closely with faculty and administrative members to improve trust and bridge various gaps.
“There are some historical events that have caused major disruption on campus,” said Clayn Lambert, a faculty senate co-chair and senior instructor for the College of Technology. “Those were the culmination of many other sub-events that resulted in these watershed moments, which have created a great sense of distrust and discomfort amongst faculty.”
According to Lambert, it’s easier to endorse those who support what is happening on campus compared to those who disagree, but naysayers still have needs the faculty senate and administrative bodies must address.
The senate plays a unique role as the voice of the faculty in raising initiatives and concerns to the administration, and like politics, getting everyone on the same page can be difficult.
“We combat distrust by building a sense of confidence, a sense of trust and building on the idea that some don’t have to agree for me to still have their best interests in mind,” Lambert said. “I think that is the direction we are currently headed.”
It’s been four years since a series of disputes led to a vote of no confidence in ISU President Arthur Vailas in February 2011, which in turn led to the State Board of Education (SBOE) dissolving the faculty senate.
Since then, the faculty senate worked to reconfigure bylaws and implement a senate constitution, but after faculty or administrative constituents struck down the proposal on multiple occasions, the SBOE ultimately reversed the requirement for a constitution in June 2015.
“[The faculty senate] tried to come up with a constitution that would be acceptable to both administration and faculty,” said Lyle Castle, the vice provost and dean of the ISU campus in Idaho Falls, “and what it turns out is that right now there is a big gap between those two. I think the faculty senate is ever so gradually gaining credibility with the faculty, but what’s really necessary is time.”
In the past 30 or 40 years, there has been a nationwide increase in the proportion of administrators to faculty and students; faculty and student levels have stayed fairly level relative to one another, but the proportion of administrators increased significantly.
Many academic institutions across the nation moved to a more businesslike, corporate approach as opposed to the more traditional model of previous years. Perhaps this is due to a lack of state appropriated funds, or perhaps this approach has led to the decrease in funding.
“It’s up to the taxpayers and their elected representatives to choose what they deem to be higher priorities,” said Thomas Ottaway, the dean for the college of business. “The result is a declining funding base for higher education, and that has to be offset by either increasing grant overhead money, by some sort of entrepreneurial approach to a new revenue stream, or by increasing tuition and fees.”
According to Dotty Sammons, faculty senate co-chair and associate professor for the College of Education, ISU is moving towards a business model, and she agrees there is a consensus that wise evaluation of resources and budgets is necessary, but faculty members don’t want to be treated as though they work at a for-profit organization.
In the past five years, several faculty members voiced opinions regarding the administration and the direction ISU was headed. The termination of a handful of employees followed, which cannot be proven to be directly related, however many faculty believe this to be the case.
Multiple faculty members were contacted and asked to articulate their opinion regarding the communication between faculty senate and the faculty majority, as well as administrative bodies, but for fear of retaliation they declined to comment.
Perhaps those opposed to changes brought forth by the Vailas administration, imagined a tumultuous, acrimonious and turbulent relationship between the communicative bodies of ISU, but regardless over the past five years, things have settled and progress appears to be imminent.
“I think there is a pendulum when it comes to higher education, just like any institution that’s widespread,” Lambert said. “It will tend to swing back-and-forth between extremes of individual freedom versus corporate identity, and I think you’re seeing the pendulum swinging.”
