Dialogue — it’s something many faculty members at Syracuse University say doesn’t happen enough.

The SU administration presented “Navigating the Changing Landscape,” a series of presentations that discuss the development of the university’s academic strategy in a new era of higher education.

“Recently, we’ve been seeing that higher education is changing. There are a lot of exciting things happening right now,” said Eric Spina, vice chancellor and provost. “The presentations were to show the faculty community that this landscape is changing, and calling on them to work with the administration to better the university.”

Though many faculty members want to work with the administration to create changes that will benefit the entire community, the presentations have left a number of questions, namely why these changes are happening now, who is initiating the changes and when they will go into effect.

Spina stressed that the ideas in the presentations are not yet developed and are catalysts for conversations about the future within the SU community. The presentations emphasize the idea of agility, he said, meaning the university should respond quickly to future opportunities.

The new realities of higher education include increasing financial pressures and increasing national competition, according to the presentation.

Spina and Chancellor Nancy Cantor led the presentations, the last of which took place on Monday. Cantor, who will leave SU at the end of next year, is and will continue to be heavily involved in the dialogue, Spina said.

“Even though she’ll be chancellor for another year, she wouldn’t be doing her job if she wasn’t thinking about the future of SU,” he said.

As a part of the anticipated changes, the administration hopes to “differentiate faculty portfolios” by establishing different expectations for faculty members in terms of teaching and research. This idea, according to the presentation, will allow faculty to contribute optimally in both areas.

Faculty members would not be separated into only research and teaching professors, Spina said. Some professors will have a large spectrum with an equal emphasis on teaching and research, while others will have a narrower spectrum, he said.

“We just want to identify how each faculty member can contribute the best way they can to the university,” he said.

But English professor Claudia Klaver said this idea could enable the university to take advantage of faculty who are “not superstars of research.”

Klaver said she is concerned that the faculty members who emphasis research will become a “privileged class,” which could lead to further divide within departments.

Regarding other anticipated changes, the administration also plans to explore new programs and instructional models for students through the development of massive open online courses, three-year degrees and an online consortium, according to the presentation.

MOOCs are online classes available to students with minimal involvement from professors. Students typically watch short video lectures and then complete assignments that are graded electronically.

Experimenting with MOOCs could extend SU’s brand and reputation while improving effectiveness within the university, according to the presentation.

But not all faculty members agree.

“I think (MOOCs) are the flavor of the month,” said Pat Cihon, a law and public policy professor who attended the presentation early in the semester. “I just think the university wants to use the current cutting edge technology.”

Cihon, who has experience with MOOCs, said the online courses work for specific types of classes. He added that only about 10 percent of users complete the online classes.  

A three-year degree program, another exploratory concept proposed in the presentation, could improve affordability and accessibility for students while demonstrating the administration’s “agility” goal. Since the administration recognizes many programs at SU can’t be completed in three years, Spina said he hopes to emphasize online education and summer courses.

Likewise, the administration hopes SU will explore the idea of an “all-University and college-specific consortia” to weigh the strengths of the online courses against the university’s strength, according to the presentation. This program is expected to launch next fall.

In reaction to the presentations, several SU professors organized a faculty forum to define a response to the ideas in the presentation.

“The purpose of the forum was to really start a conversation about the ideas and avoid a potential unilateral dialogue,” said Cihon, who is also one of the forum organizers.

About 100 faculty members attended this forum, which was held April 22, to air grievances about the “Changing Landscapes” presentation. Professors expressed concerns about the vagueness of the presentation, the effect of online courses on students’ education and the timing of the presentation in light of Cantor’s upcoming departure.

One concern was shared by attendees: Representation of faculty members is crucial in making decisions in terms of the university’s future.

The next faculty forum will be held May 6 from 3-5 p.m. in the Hall of Languages in Room 500. The goal is to make initial recommendations to the administration, said Klaver, also a faculty forum organizer.

Attendees will break into five groups to define issues regarding each topic raised in the “Changing Landscapes” presentation. These include SU’s financial future in terms of budgetary transparency; the determination of faculty positions in terms of part-time, non-tenure-track, tenure-track ratios; the role of online courses in faculty members’ curricula; the importance of shared governance; and defining SU faculty values, Klaver said.

“I hope the central administration is excited that faculty wants to be involved and see us as a resource,” Klaver said. “It’s important that they listen to how faculty identify and define the current problems.”

She added that several faculty members are planning to start a blog for the SU community about general issues the university faces, as well as issues addressed in the “Changing Landscapes” presentation.

Cihon suggested the conversation could be furthered through increased faculty participation in task forces.

About three months ago, a task force called “Advancing New Pedagogies” was formed to advance teaching and learning methodologies. The task force includes faculty representatives from each college and key staff members, Spina said at Monday’s “Changing Landscapes” presentation. He added that the task force will give preliminary reports to Spina on June 1.

The task force, Cihon said, has the potential to provide a false appearance of faculty involvement. The administration could dominate decision-making so that the task force operates “top-down,” he said.

“It might be more window-dressing than actual representation,” he said.

A dialogue between faculty and the administration won’t be easy, said philosophy professor Robert Van Gulick, adding that an effective dialogue between the two parties hasn’t occurred in the past eight years.

The faculty forum, he said, was the first attempt.

“Faculty need to learn how to talk,” Van Gulick said. “Most aren’t used to talking about these type of issues.”

It’s important for the student body, as well as faculty, to get involved in the conversation to produce effective policies, he said.

“It’s not going to be different unless we make it different,” Van Gulick said. “The faculty and students need to step up and find their voice.”

 — Asst. News Editor Jessica Iannetta contributed reporting to this article.

Published on April 30, 2013 at 2:20 am

Contact Meredith: mhnewman@syr.edu | @MerNewman93