January 24, 2008

Dear Kutztown University faculty, staff and students:

Last week the APSCUF-KU executive committee announced its consideration of a vote of no confidence.

I am obviously disappointed by this news. I am keenly aware that communication in a large organization is always challenging. As a result, throughout my term as president I have always been open to meeting with APSCUF-KU representatives to discuss any issues of interest or concern. Recently the Provost and I initiated a monthly informal breakfast meeting with the leadership of both APSCUF-KU and University Senate. Evidently, based on the action taken by the APSCUF-KU Executive Committee, our efforts to enhance communication have not been successful. I hope we can continue to develop both formal and informal channels of communication, and I welcome any of your suggestions and advice on how to do it in a better way.

This administration and I have been working in conjunction with all of our constituents to continuously improve our university. Over the last five years we have faced the challenge of dwindling resources and continuous growth; yet we have consistently put our academic needs ahead of any others. In the last couple of years we have released 93 tenure lines, an unprecedented number for our institution. To do that, we have had to make some very difficult, and in some cases unpopular, decisions. And I have made mistakes. The way I handled the announcement about the Early Learning Center is one. But I am always open to hearing concerns and differing viewpoints, and value the input I receive. Thus I heard the many voices about the Center and modified my decision (more about it later). As a state-owned institution, all decisions we make must be consistent with the guidelines and directives established by PASSHE and must ultimately be framed by our mission, fiscal constraints, and physical resources available.

I have thoroughly reviewed the document that the Executive Committee of APSCUF-KU has sent to the faculty. I am concerned about the information that was presented in it, and I desire that everyone has the facts regarding these issues. With this in mind, allow me to touch on some of the items presented by the APSCUF-KU executive committee:

Erosion of Academic Quality

Academic Forum

I think it is imperative to address this concern by providing some clarifications and facts about the Academic Forum and large class sections at KU in general. In the spring of 2007, I did in fact indicate that 3% of courses would be held in the academic forum. The figure I was provided at the time was based on the number of all sections taught (including items such as independent studies, individualized instruction, etc.), rather than strictly class sections. The percentage of class sections taught in the academic forum was 5.79% (76 of the 1,312 classes offered). In the fall of 2007, 91 of our 1,408 class sections were held in the Academic Forum. That represents 6.46% of our class sections being taught in the facility, which still falls well below the 20% stated in the APSCUF-KU document.

In terms of the actual class size in the Academic Forum: in the spring of 2007, there were 30 class sections of 50-99 students taught in this new facility, compared to 34 in the fall 2007. There were 33 class sections of 100-149 students in spring 2007 and 46 in the fall 2007.

Campus wide, the data indicates a corresponding increase in small undergraduate class sections from Fall 2006 to Fall 2007. In Fall 2006, there were 48 classes with 5 to 9 students, compared to 67 in Fall 2007. Class sections with 10 to 19 students increased from 250 to 320. The number of large class sections varies between fall 2006 and fall 2007. For instance, the number of class sections with 50 to 99 students has dropped from 99 to 87, while class sections of 100 to 149 have increased from 26 to 57.

The Provost has been working with the faculty teaching in the Forum to provide assistance. Last year we implemented a pilot program to hire undergraduate students to help with numerous tasks in the classroom; we have also informed APSCUF-KU in a Meet and Discuss meeting of the decision to implement a program to hire graduate students to help faculty proctor mid-term and final exams starting this semester (by the way, these two programs are available to all faculty teaching a hundred or more students, in any buildings on campus).

It is important to consider that our faculty has effectively delivered instruction through large classes for many years prior to the construction of the Academic Forum. I am confident that if we work together, effective pedagogies can also be achieved in this facility and across campus.

Fourth Tier Status

Concerning our fourth tier status, it is a fact that there was an error in the data reported to U.S. News and World Report last year. Although it is hard to gauge if the correct data would have changed our status, my bigger concern is the process that the publication uses to rank institutions such as KU. The rankings are partially based on subjective information, and are not in line with the accountability plan initiatives established by PASSHE. As I indicated during the Strategic Planning Retreat, our goal is to be like the “ranked” (what used to be tier 2) institutions. The Provost will lead a sub-committee of the Strategic Planning and Resources Committee to understand the differences between KU and the ranked PASSHE institutions, and we will charter a plan to make sure we get there.

I consider academic standards at KU to be the cornerstone of our institution. This has been reflected in the recent increase of accredited programs, the addition of new academic programs, and a strong emphasis on our honors program, including the designation of an honors facility. This is also evident, as already mentioned, by the approval of 93 additional or new tenure track lines since 2006. The Provost recently added $1,000 to the supply budget for all instructional departments and we have also increased the professional development pool by adding $25,000 to the existing $69,000.

Deteriorating Working Conditions

Space

The quality of faculty and staff working conditions on our campus is of primary importance. We have been working to provide the best environment possible, given available funding and the challenges presented by older facilities.  The campus master plans are developed to address our space needs and have resulted in significant improvements to our facilities. For example, the construction of the new Boehm Science Center complex along with the renovation and expansion of the Sharadin Arts building provide many faculty an individual, private office whereas before, many were sharing inadequate spaces. I am working to expedite the replacement of Lytle Hall. In addition, planning efforts completed last semester will result in the creation of new faculty offices in Old Main by the fall 2008 semester.

Health

The University has been proactive in the control of conditions that can lead to mold growth and water leaks. Given the age of the HVAC systems in some of the buildings, molds have occurred during hot, humid conditions. Our staff has responded quickly in the past to correct any problems. This response includes the verification of conditions, development of corrective action plans, execution of emergency contracts, and follow up of remediation efforts. These efforts will continue as we strive to offer a healthy, safe, and secure campus.

Recently, concerns about fumes emerging from a drain in Risley Hall were brought to our attention. Facilities responded with an immediate correction and subsequently acted to permanently solve the problem. After the correction was made, extensive air quality test were conducted by an external contractor to ensure a safe environment. At no time was Risley considered anything but safe for all campus constituents.

Heat

The University has a limited number of classroom facilities that experience uncomfortable temperature variances at certain times during the year. These deficiencies are well known and I have instructed Facilities to resolve these issues in a timely manner. Issues cited related to the newly renovated rooms in Sharadin were temporary conditions that were resolved as quickly as possible. 

Information Technology

Technology is an evolving an ever changing area. In the next couple of weeks an external consultant will be on campus, to help us understand the technology challenges we face and offer suggestions on ways to enhance our services to the campus community.

Violations of the Contract and University Governance System

In my relationship with the faculty, I have always honored and followed their contract and strongly believe in the University governance system. The governance system facilitates communication and dialogue and helps in bringing important issues to the forefront. I truly believe that collegial discussion generated by our system is important in helping us keep KU a prominent institution of higher education.

Commonalities

Concerning commonalities, the Chancellor’s office informed the system universities on November 22, 2005, that the Commonalities Document was being issued to the Chief Academic Officers so that they may discuss academic policy impact prior to releasing it to other campus constituencies. During 2006, the Chancellor’s office took the document before various groups, including APSCUF, for their feedback. Representatives from the KU Campus Management Implementation Team were asked to complete an analysis of the impact this document would have on our existing policies. The Provost issued this summary to the University faculty in October 2006 to solicit concerns. Many concerns regarding the impact of the policy changes included in the document were forwarded to the Chancellor’s office based on faculty input.

I do need to clarify that I never “refused” to buy software to address this issue. I stated that we needed to wait to find out what the software would allow. Details regarding functionality and interface capabilities of the SAP student systems have not yet been released to the universities. Until these capabilities are released, we cannot make a determination on the feasibility of funding -or finding- software to maintain compliance with local policies.

General Education Reform

General Education reform was endorsed in the 1998 Middle States report and reviewed by the University’s General Education Committee. The committee was composed of members from all areas of the university governance system. This committee was tasked to serve as the voice of the KU faculty, as reflected in the minutes of the General Education Reform Taskforce. My goal was to have the input of the entire faculty, and thus we hired an external firm to conduct a vote on the proposal. The vote showed a lack of support among the faculty for this model. Hence, it never moved forward through the respective University governance process. I do hope that APSCUF-KU and the administration can work together in the next few months to create a General Education model that will enhance our students’ academic growth.

Sexual Harassment Policy

Our Legal Counsel Office advised us on the need to have a new, clear Sexual Harassment Policy. The Policy is a legal document, and is a management responsibility. A copy of the proposed policy was provided to representatives of APSCUF-KU, and subsequent discussions were held. The final policy was determined by management, and was carefully designed, following legal advice, to comply with the collective bargaining agreement.

Due Process

The University follows the Collective Bargaining Agreement in regard to the faculty’s rights to due process. I take this responsibility very seriously. I am not aware of any violation of any faculty member’s right to due process.

Adjunct Pools

Adjunct pools were created at the request of department chairpersons to assist them in case there was to be an emergency hire or other time constraints in filling a vacancy, as it is done at other PASSHE institutions. The creation of adjunct pools does not bypass the procedure by which the faculty interview and recommend applicants for employment.  In fact, after the ad is placed and applications are received, the faculty review the applications and decide who they wish to certify for possible future employment. When we need to fill a vacancy under time constraints, the faculty reach out to those in the pool, interested candidates are interviewed (by the faculty), and a recommendation is made (by the faculty) as to whether or not to hire the candidate.

Lifelong Learning

Kutztown University’s Center for Lifelong Learning provides a community service, and serves only as a clearing house for offerings that are non-credit bearing. Kutztown University tenure and tenure-track faculty are given the first right of refusal for any and all credit bearing courses run through Lifelong Learning.

Article 11G

Faculty positions were converted using this Article where appropriate. Some of the departments where this process has been recently implemented include English, Math, Political Science, Modern Language Studies, and Psychology.

Mismanagement of Growth

KU has become a popular choice for high school seniors in eastern and central Pennsylvania. This reflects not only the positive changes we have made in recent years, but also the demographics of our growing region as we carry out our mission serving the Commonwealth. We are the public, State-owned University in the region; we have an obligation to educate the citizens of Pennsylvania. I have presented demographic information on numerous occasions. The information, available at the Pennsylvania Department of Education Website indicate that the number of high school graduates planning to attend college is about to level off for our region. This number should be stable for the next eight to ten years, and then we will see a slow decline in the numbers. We have done the best we can to face the challenges associated with our growth, by expanding our academic facilities, residence halls, and more importantly, by the addition of tenure track faculty lines.

SAP

The implementation of a new software package is a very complex, burdensome task.

As I stated previously, the functionality and interface capabilities of the SAP student systems have not yet been released to the universities. We should know more in the very near future.

Budget Decentralization

Regarding budget decentralization, I asked a small group of finance professionals to investigate the technical mechanics of implementing this budgeting at the University. It made sense to me to have the “experts” work on the technical issues. It was not a “refusal” to allow faculty input. On two occasions, the first with the University Senate Executive Committee and the second at a Senate meeting, I indicated that the group would welcome the participation of a faculty member. I also asked this group to meet on a regular basis with the Budget Review Committee of Strategic Planning and Resources Committee. Once their work is done they will report to SPRC and only upon their positive recommendation we will bring the plan to University Senate. Budget decentralization will not be implemented until we are comfortable that all concerns have been appropriately addressed.

Department Budgets

I am the first one to agree that we do not have enough resources for departments. We do the best we can, but I know it is not enough. In spite of these fiscally challenging times, the University was able to ensure that deficit reduction plans did not include any budget cuts of academic departments. At the same time, we were able to modestly increase the base budget equipment funding, and provide modest additional funding for professional development needs. Resources were reallocated in order to provide increases in operating base budgets for academic departments to assist with instructional needs. During the past three fiscal years the University has also allocated approximately $1.5 million dollars for academic accreditation initiatives.

Hiring Process

The faculty hiring process involves support from administrative staff and faculty in order to recruit and hire the best candidates in accordance with legal requirements.  Since our University Budget is sometimes not known until late summer, the timely release of tenure lines presents a challenge.  This year we decided to improve this hiring process by releasing faculty lines in October to allow sufficient time for searches.  Through conversations with faculty, ChairNet, and APSCUF-KU, the Provost has become aware of the challenges that the hiring process poses.  As a result, he will permanently assign a person in his office to become responsible for reviewing and coordinating the hiring process, including making recommendations for changes as needed. As part of this initiative, HR recently made a presentation to ChairNet about new software designed to assist in searches.

Coordination of Admissions and Course Scheduling

More specific data are needed to respond to the concerns regarding the coordination of admissions and course scheduling. We will be glad to address any concerns at that time.

The Early Learning Center

As already mentioned, the situation regarding the Early Learning Center received much public attention last spring. We are working to find an appropriate place for the Center, and we are very close to a resolution on the space issue. A new development affecting our planning is the recently announced change in the certification requirements from the Pennsylvania Department of Education. The faculty in the College of Education will need to discuss these changes as they relate to the future role of ELC.

In closing, I assure you that, together with our faculty and staff, I am committed to fulfilling our mission and vision of being actively dedicated to excellence in learning and to the success of our diverse community of students.

I will continue to be open to discussing all concerns related to our University, and I reiterate the need we have to enhance campus wide communication.

Sincerely,

F. Javier Cevallos

President

cc: Council of Trustees