Dear Faculty Colleagues,
I am highly aware that the Reports to Faculty Senate From the EPPC and the UBC (combined into one document) that were emailed to the faculty immediately after the 4/19/2011 faculty senate meeting has raised concerns amongst many of you, particularly with respect to the EPPC section concerning potential consolidation options.
Please note that this document, while initially labeled as a “joint” report, is in reality separate reports developed and presented separately by the EPPC and UBC to the Faculty Senate. Within a timeframe of approximately 6 weeks, the EPPC’s charge from Chancellor Ballard was to develop very preliminary, and modifiable, starting drafts of prioritization criteria and consolidation/realignment options to present to the entire faculty for open discussion as well as to present to the UBC for potential budgetary analysis. Thus, although the EPPC and UBC reports were presented together, it was not the intent for UBC to have analyzed the EPPC reports (concerning matters such as cost analyses and other budgetary issues) by the time the EPPC presented its reports to the Senate on April 19.
It cannot be emphasized enough that the two EPPC reports are very initial drafts of modifiable options that represent a starting point for discussion only. These documents, or modifications thereof, will be vetted at many levels (faculty, deans, higher administration, other offices, etc.).
To reduce anxiety and ensure that everyone is as informed as possible, I respectfully suggest that everyone do the following prior to responding to the report:
- Please closely read the attached Preface to EPPC Faculty Senate Report, which highlights some important points that I made when presenting the EPPC reports to the Faculty Senate on April 19.
- Please closely read the “General Notes”, “Potential Benefits”, and “Potential Weaknesses or Barriers to Change” sections on pages 10-11 (contained within the Consolidation Report section of the Joint Report).
- Please consult with your individual faculty senators if they were at the Senate meeting on April 19. They will be able to provide much information about concerns that were discussed that day (and will continue to be discussed in the future) that are not currently contained within these reports.
I assure you that any and all input sent to me concerning these reports will be forwarded to the EPPC and Program Prioritization Committee for full consideration.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Scott Gordon, Chair
Educational Policies and Planning Committee
gordonsc@ecu.edu
Attachments:
Reports to Faculty Senate From the EPPC and the UBC,
Preface to EPPC Faculty Senate Report
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
1. So why was the document in question initially referred to as a ‘joint’ report in both Lori Lee’s 4/19/11 e-mail and your 4/20/11 e-mail? Doesn’t ‘joint’ mean ‘joint’?
2. Why does the EPPC report have no cost analysis of its proposed changes?
3. Casual empiricism suggests that growth in the administrative side of ECU has not be in proportion to the growth of the student population; its growth rate has exceeded the student population growth rate. A simple benchmark would be to compute the ‘administrative excess’ as the difference between actual administrative growth and administrative growth proportional to student population growth; it should be a straightforward exercise to compute this. The budgetary target would be to eliminate the ‘administrative excess.’
I am extremely concerned about the EPPC plan the way it has been presented is very disturbing. No one in the School of Music was consulted about this proposed reorganization. Were any schools or departments consulted? This plan is not helpful or reasonable and is not at all in the best interests of our students or of the university. It will not save money and will lose students. I believe we can do much better if we actually work together and create a plan that quantifies and prioritizes our needs.
best business news blogs