Dear fellow faculty,

As I read, and deleted, the emails concerning the debate over a no confidence vote, I sit here in amazement wondering if I am, indeed, the Kutztown University Senate President this year. The statistics and information introduced into the current debate by our former Senate President, Bill Bateman, have not been offered to me at any time. There has not been a discussion between the administration and myself where data has been provided to support any decision that was made all year. For example, this past Wednesday afternoon the Senate executive committee brought the issue of +/- implementation up to Dr. Cevallos and asked what the exact amount it would cost to implement the system before the systemwide SAP system comes online, the answer was that it was too expensive and he would not support implementing the system now. I am still left without a number-I can follow this up a third, forth time....but I am no where near the vacinity of a number yet in this discussion.  So, I am left here thinking: Why did Bill have access to this type of information and I do not?

There has been a great deal of communication this year. There have been many discussions between Dr. Cevallos and myself, Dr. Gambone and myself, and a few discussions between the three of us. But, why the stalemate? When I began as Senate president and felt the tension in the air between the Dr. Gambone and Dr. Cevallos, I asked a lot of questions to understand what had happened in the past to prevent effective, positive communications. Both individuals appeared entrenched in their own set of beliefs about the university, shared governance, and interpretations of the APSCUF contract. I also learned quickly that our former Senate president, Bill Bateman, had agreed with the administration on most issues, rather than the union. On one note, specifically, I saw Bill and Mike work closely together--that was on the issue of commonalities. Both Senate and APSCUF were in agreement that the PASSHE initiated changes to encourage systemwide changes would not leave a positive result for Kutztown University.

So, okay...I needed, and spent an inordinate amount of time following up on these conversations, only to find out that there was much more to be discovered. My search for a complete story concerning university issues included talking to individual managers, staff, students and faculty, as wells as soliciting data from the office of Institutional Research, and attending committee meetings. Dr. Cevallos has told me from our first one-on-one meeting that everything he shared with me is not confidential. As Senate president, I have shared everything I learned with my fellow Senators in a public forum each month. I trust that information is shared with all of their constituents. I believe this approach is different than the past senate president's approach.  I have been a member of the Senate during Bill's last term and, as a Senator, I have never been privy to the information that was just shared via email. I find out my numbers by contacting individual offices, asking for data, and have sat on a Friday with administrative reports in an attempt to find out which side is most accurately representing the real issue in each of the contested areas. You see, the University Senate is charged with the duty of addressing issues effecting academics and sometimes, but trying to be included on the front end of an issue (instead of being reactive) feels like jumping on a big wave that will appear on the horizon at any time. Too many times, as Senators, we feel like a Tsunami has hit us without war ning. I blame this feeling on Dr. Cevallos, and the past leadership of APSCUF and the University Senate.

While I have not attended any meetings this semester that included both Dr. Gambone and Dr. Cevallos (seems large ice and snow storms drop on the assigned days), no change or movement has occurred. There has been no attempt, by either side, to resolve the issues at-hand in concert with the University Senate. Why? I am reminded by both Dr. Cevallos and Dr. Gambone, that the University Senate is an advisory body without the ability to create and implement a decision on this campus. My fellow faculty members, the test of what decision will and will not hold up in court has become the measure of a university body's ability to be included in university governance! This is why I have stayed out of the debate to this point........

Last Senate meeting, I feel the Senate, specifically the position of Senate president, was thrown into this debate. There was a motion at the last Senate meeting to recommend that the Senate president be given full release-time to continue the work that has begun to uncover all of the information that is needed to (1) understand the decisions that have been made at our university, and (2) have a pressence at the table where decisions are being made. This motion was defeated by one vote last month. I, personally, do not believe full-time release time is neccesary to run a University Senate. BUT, I supported the motion because the stalemate this university is currently experiencing is detrimental to everyone. AND, maybe someday soon, all data will be shared with all parties, all perspectives on a decision will be shared with all parties, and all constituencies will be included at the table. I am hoping that Dr. Donner will continue with his tabled motio n for the University Senate President to receive full-time release time over the summer. I hope that he might amend that motion to only include this upcoming summer.

I believe there is an exciting possibility that exists to restore the cooperative, positive, shared governance atmosphere that Kutztown University once benefitted from. Within the last few days, Dr. Cevallos has sent all of us an open invitation to start on a new foot and make this place better in the future. Fifteen minutes before his emailed letter was sent across the campus (at a Senate Executive Meeting), he stated he was against giving additional release time over the summer. That action, he stated, would require a faculty referendum and he supported the creation of a task force to look into the concept and implementation of shared governance at out university. I will not support the Senate creating a task force to explore changes in our governance system until the current problems are dealt with. In the last two weeks, I still feel stonewalled in a few administrative offices where moving into a more positive future has been the mantra. 

As Senate president, I do not feel it is my place to support or be against a vote of no confidence. This debate wages between APSCUF and the adminstration. The University Senate inclusively represents the faculty, students, staff, and administration. President Cevallos has told me, on many occaisions, that he favors a faculty Senate. I disagree. APSCUF is the only group on campus that exclusively represents the faculty. I believe the University Senate has become a place where any Senator, from any constituency, can initiate discussions on important issues in a very public forum. Every month there seems to be a few motions considered, and one motion for positive change has passed. It is my job, as president of this organization, to make sure these motions are implemented.

I see a letter reaching out by Dr. Cevallos. I commend him for initiating a fresh, new, positive beginning. I see a vote of no confidence scheduled for this week by APSCUF. I commend them for trying to resolve many issues over the last two years and their willingness to come to the table at the last minute to resolve issues with the administration (before the vote). As president of the advisory Senate, my advice would be that a plan to resolve every issue on the table be created and a strict timeline be adhered to. Wouldn't it be wonderful to begin the 2008-2009 academic year in a cooperative, positive Kutztown University? (Dr. Cevallos, this would require a full-time, summer effort from the APSCUF, the Senate president, as well as yourself).

 

Sincerely,

Maria Sanelli

PS-there has been a lot of data shared to defend a variety of views online, from my year's research on KU's pressing issues, I can see sheds of accuracy in many individuals' approaches. But, please let me say that it is impossible to contextualize the data that is being presented. No one is shading the facts, but as we all know as academics, there are other sides to the story. All sides need to be at the table to take a more accurate look at our realistic troubles as this institution.