Brennan LaBrie
News Editor
Ben Leschensky
Reporter
The long and arduous Faculty Joint Committee (FJC) process is in its final stage, and the Pacific Lutheran University community can anticipate a slew of faculty and program reductions.
On Friday, March 19, President Allan Belton sent his formal recommendations – based on those of the FJC and the Provost – to the Board of Regents for review. The President’s recommendations come after months of FJC meetings, where the 20-person committee – in consultation with faculty, the Provost and members of the administration – reviewed all of PLU’s academic units and deliberated on reductions to faculty positions. As discussed in student forums on the FJC process, the process is a faculty one, and students do not play a role in the deliberations. The Board will release their final decision on March 29th at 9:00 a.m.
The reductions in faculty positions could be wide in scope and severe in nature, according to a copy of the FJC’s recommendations acquired by The Mast through a source who had received the information. If President Belton made no drastic changes to these recommendations put on his desk, the Board will review proposed cuts that range from 35 to 50 full-time faculty positions. These proposed cuts represent savings between $2.5 million and $4 million for the university, but the higher the savings, the harsher the cuts.
The recommended cuts will impact a number of academic divisions at PLU. The highest number of recommended reductions are in the Division of Humanities, followed by the School of Arts and Communication. The Division of Social Sciences and Natural Sciences will likely see fewer cuts than the previous two, with a smattering of cuts across other schools and divisions. The recommendations show that the School of Business and the School of Education and Kinesiology face very few cuts. The School of Nursing – a major part of PLU’s five year Strategic Plan – is not expected to lose any faculty. Health sciences, including Biology and Chemistry, are relatively unscathed by recommended reductions. There are no recommended cuts listed for Interdisciplinary programs.
Belton explained during previous student forums that his recommendations could be “the same, or different, or some combination of the recommendations,” adding that “the Board of Regents has the final say.” While both he and the Board have the discretion to make changes to the recommendations, he doesn’t anticipate this happening, based on previous FJC processes and a belief in the committee’s judgement.
The committee’s proposed cuts fall into three tiers: Tier 1 represents the least severe reductions and is the FJC’s suggested course of action; Tier 2 represents more damaging reductions that should be avoided if possible; and Tier 3 represents the most harmful reductions and should only be considered as a last resort.
The committee – which is composed of elected faculty from each academic division at PLU – was unanimous in its final recommendations, and said it completed the process with the intention of inflicting the least amount of harm on PLU, according to the FJC documents.
“If they are carried out in their totality, all three tiers of reductions will devastate the university,” the copy of the recommendations states.
Some academic units have no change in recommended cuts between the three tiers, whereas others face increased cuts in the higher tiers. Across all the majors and minors listed in the FJC’s recommended cuts, a majority of them won’t result in discontinued academic programs. The committee – which is composed of elected faculty from each academic division at PLU – was unanimous in its final recommendations, and said it completed the process with the intention of inflicting the least amount of harm on PLU, according to the FJC documents.
The committee was convened by PLU in November to address financial exigency, which the Faculty Handbook defines as a “demonstrably bona fide situation in which the university faces an imminent financial crisis which threatens the survival of the institution as a whole and which cannot reasonably be alleviated by less drastic means.” The PLU FJC page credits this financial exigency to “rising costs, decreasing revenue and a smaller pool of applicants,” due to nationwide demographic trends. Despite its negative implications on faculty, students and the university during the short term, PLU believes that the process ensures its long-term survival.
Doing the Math
The recommended faculty cuts prepared by the FJC are listed in terms of FTE, or full-time equivalent positions. In the context of PLU faculty, a full FTE position equates to 6 classes taught over the course of an academic year. Faculty who teach less than this amount are denoted as a decimal amount less than one, correlating to the number of classes they teach.
Let’s say Program X has 8 FTE positions. This is equivalent to 48 classes per year (8 FTE faculty members times 6 classes). If the FJC recommends that 3.5 FTE positions be cut as part of their suggested reductions, the program will be reduced to 4.5 FTE positions, meaning that there will be 21 fewer classes in that program (3.5 FTE faculty members times 6 classes). Granted, classes may double their occupancy numbers or make adjustments to curriculum, but since professors can’t teach more than six classes per year, many classes in Program X could be eliminated.
Tier 1 – the committee’s suggested course of action – recommends about 35 faculty cuts, according to the FJC documents. This option, which is the least damaging to the university, could roughly equate to 210 classes being cut at PLU (35 FTE faculty members times 6 classes) although increased class sizes and other maneuvers could reduce this number.
“If they are carried out in their totality, all three tiers of reductions will devastate the university.” – Copy of FJC Recommendation Documents
How Recommended Reductions are Made
The FJC’s process for recommending faculty reductions follows a retention priority system, which is described in detail in the Faculty Handbook. In order to understand how the system works, an understanding of the tenure process is required.
When faculty members are hired at PLU, they are hired into either the non-tenure track or the tenure track. If hired into the non-tenure track, faculty sign new contracts with the university each year and are known as an “Instructor” or “Lecturer.” If faculty are hired into the tenure-track, they are hired into a six-year contract and are denoted as an “Assistant Professor.” After six years, tenure track professors have the opportunity to prove their teaching, scholarship and service as worthy of a lifetime appointment at the university. If not, their contract ends and they leave. Tenured professors can then move up in rank to “Associate Professor” (which is not guaranteed, even if granted tenure), and to the rank of “Full Professor” after an additional period of time.
To tie this back to the FJC process, tenured faculty members have a greater retention priority over their non-tenured colleagues. In cases where tenured faculty members must be cut, however, a points system is utilized.
“For service on the faculty of Pacific Lutheran University, a member shall accrue 3 points for each year at the rank of instructor, 4 points for each year at the rank of assistant professor, 5 points for each year at the rank of associate professor, and 6 points for each year at the rank of professor,” as described by the Faculty Handbook. Professors with seniority – or the highest number of points – are most secure in their positions, and least likely to be impacted by the FJC’s recommended cuts.
However, a recent amendment to the Faculty Handbook gives the president the power – in consultation with affected units and the provost, and with the approval from the FJC – to make exceptions to faculty reductions if they endanger PLU’s Diversity, Justice, and Sustainability (DJS) standards, or if the cuts threaten curricular needs. The new amendment gives President Belton greater flexibility in making decisions on faculty reductions. This amendment was passed by the Faculty Assembly on February 19th, which Bridget Yaden, Chair of the Faculty, confirmed during the February 23 student forum.
According to the new amendment, “a pre-tenure faculty member, or a tenured faculty member with fewer points, might be retained in preference to a tenured faculty member with more points of the same academic unit.” In other words, tenured faculty members potentially face the same risk of losing their job as their non-tenured or pre-tenure colleagues if it is deemed best for the future of the academic program or for DJS commitments.
Here’s an example of a potential situation in which the new amendment might be justified. Imagine Professor A has the title of Full Professor and has accrued more points in their department than Professor B, an Associate Professor. However, if Professor A is close to retirement, a decision – in consultation with Professor A – could be made to retain Professor B because they represent a better long-term option for that department’s curricular needs.
In other words, tenured faculty members potentially face the same risk of losing their job as their non-tenured or pre-tenure colleagues if it is deemed best for the future of the academic program or for DJS commitments.
Information for Students
“Our commitment to student success is as strong as it has ever been, and we are committed to accommodating students who are enrolled in affected units,” the Office of the Provost’s FAQ page writes.
Students were first alerted to the FJC process in early-February, and expressed concerns during student forums about how their academics and ability to graduate with their current degree may be impacted by FJC cuts. However, the FAQ page and panelists during student forums assures students that they will be supported in completing their degree.
The page adds that while the exact forms of support have yet to be determined, other universities making similar reductions commonly “sunset” academic programs over time. This means that while no new students can declare a major or minor in a program that has been discontinued, those who declared before the discontinuation are guaranteed completion. This could take the form of guided independent study in some scenarios.
“You can support [Faculty] by letting them know you appreciate them. Show that you understand they may have distractions outside of classes and students. The work they are doing to respond to the FJC is directly related to the care they have for PLU students.”
In the meantime, The Office of the Provost encourages students to reach out to professors who have had an impact on them to express their support and gratitude during this difficult and emotional time.
“Acknowledge that your professors may be taking on extra work responding to the FJC process (such as writing reports) and may be experiencing a wide range of emotions right now in this difficult process,” the page says. “You can support them by letting them know you appreciate them. Show that you understand they may have distractions outside of classes and students. The work they are doing to respond to the FJC is directly related to the care they have for PLU students.”
For more information on how the FJC process will affect students, visit the FAQ page. Current students can click on the ePass protected link “Resources For Students” on the right side of the page for further information.
Questions to the Office of the Provost can be sent via a sidebox on the FAQ page, or directly to provost@plu.edu. Questions to President Belton can be sent to president@plu.edu
For a recap of the first student forum on the FJC process, click here. To read more on the second set of forums and the student calls for transparency, click here.
