Jerome Greene Hall, meeting place of the University Senate

Jerome Greene Hall, as usual, was the place to be yesterday afternoon. The place was packed with both senators and literary references, which was the perfect mix for Bwogger Nadra Rahman. 

February’s University Senate session was brief, centering mostly on faculty initiatives and concerns. While the Student Affairs Committee (SAC) updated the Senate on student space and mental health initiatives, no new proposals were introduced on their end. The star of the event had to be the letter written by Faculty Affairs Committee (FAC) co-Chairs Robert Pollack and Letty Moss-Salentijn, in response to PrezBo’s email on President Trump’s refugee and immigration policy.

“We Know No One at Columbia Who Is Not Upset”
PrezBo’s letter, sent on 1:00 am on January 29, positions the University as a defender of core American values, and in particular, of students affected by the so-called Muslim Ban: “It is also true that the University, as an institution in the society, must step forward to object when policies and state action conflict with its fundamental values, and especially when they bespeak purposes and a mentality that are at odds with our basic mission.” He added, “We have learned that generalized fears of threats to our security do not justify exceptions to our founding ideals.”

In response to these sentiments, Pollack and Moss-Salentijn crafted a letter “from the heart,” which was endorsed unanimously by FAC last month. The letter begins with references to 1984 and Fahrenheit 451 (of course), but eventually meanders to the thesis, which is that faculty members need space to assuage their anxieties and to express themselves in this uncertain political climate:

We know no one at Columbia who is not upset, chronically and deeply, since the election. We know this is true of the Administration, and your letter certainly embodies this distress. We know it is true of our students, and the cluster of suicides this month can have no other meaning. But what of ourselves, and what of our colleagues; that is, what of the faculty?

The letter contains three suggestions, which, in the words of Cornel West, are meant to foster “radical tenderness and militant kindness.” They are:

• A Columbia website that links to critical resources on our freedoms.
• The organization of times, places, and administrative permission for faculty to “admit to our fears in the presence of the rest of the university community . . . without fear of any negative consequences.”
• Opening up visible public spaces on campus for discussion, such as Low Rotunda and Roone Auditorium. Oddly enough, the letter addresses the fact that professors cannot enter dorm lounges without a special pass, calling the restriction “ironic, sad and easily fixed.”

The central objection to the letter, raised by Executive VP for University Life Suzanne Goldberg, was that there were a “diversity of opinions” on the political landscape and the letter seemed to paint all the faculty as distressed and anxious, particularly with the line “We know no one at Columbia who is not upset…” One faculty senator said, “I have colleagues who think this is the greatest thing—I’d like to say since sliced bread but I don’t like sliced bread.” (The same senator, later on: “We’re on the side of truth and virtue, but…”) Goldberg did, however, also bring up the post-election discussions organized for students, and appreciated the letter’s focus on the importance of physical gathering spaces for conversation, in addition to online spaces. The other objection to the letter was that it seemed to connect the recent spate of student suicides to the political environment, which might be disingenuous. Pollack, for his part, felt that while there might be diverse opinions, some Trump initiatives—such as requiring basic research to contribute to the national interest—were “threatening to the idea of a free university.”

In general, members were amenable to the idea of creating community and room for conversation. A representative from Barnard thought it might be useful to consider the faculty forums at Barnard, where, apart from administrators or students, faculty have an informal environment in which they can vent, discuss, and debate—although she noted such a practice would be difficult to implement in a group the size of Columbia’s faculty. Senator Sharyn O’Halloran, Chair of the Executive Committee, urged committees to work together to create social spaces that would prevent members of the community from feeling isolated.

Trump and Transgender Students
Though it wasn’t on the agenda, Goldberg referenced a memo just recently posted to the University Life website, written in response to the Trump administration’s withdrawal of rights for transgender people. The current University policy, which is that an individual may use whatever bathroom is consistent with their gender identity, will remain in place; temporary signs will be put up outside bathrooms around campus reiterating this stance. In answering questions, Goldberg affirmed that the policy would be circulated by SAC leadership, deans, and faculty, and that additionally, the signage would be particularly important in making “Columbia’s commitment visible.” She emphasized the difference between Trump’s immigration orders, which deeply affect the campus community, and this most recent step by the Trump administration, which is not coercive and will not be adopted by the University.

Student Space and Mental Health
Columbia College Senator Josh Schenk provided an update to SAC’s drive for more student space. He acknowledged the “renewed focus on student wellness, community building” and connected the need for better community cohesion and integration with the lack of available meeting space for students. Schenk is currently meeting with administrators and other student councils to find and discuss possible sites for student lounges, and tentatively plans to present a series of recommendations at the next plenary.

(Later in the plenary, a faculty senator from the Medical Center voiced a complaint about the lack of space on that campus as well. To this, Pollack said: “Space having been privatized, perhaps it is time to socialize some of it.”)

Here, Columbia College Senator Sean Ryan stepped in, affirming SAC’s interest in advancing a comprehensive mental health agenda. While he had nothing concrete to report, Ryan did not want the issue to lose “momentum,” reminding attendees of the Mailman School of Public Health student who recently committed suicide. Before reaffirming the committee’s desire to receive feedback, he commented that “We will see a really large-scale university coordination around these issues.”

Faculty Grievance Procedures
Moss-Salentijn presented on new developments in the faculty grievance process, often made murky because most proceedings are confidential and—”As a result, most people really don’t know what’s going on.” The procedure doesn’t break new policy ground (and was described as “dull” by Moss-Salentijn), but seeks to clarify the process in plain language. The document, intended to be publicized, lays out three mechanisms for addressing grievances:

1. Going up the academic chain of command in an informal manner.
2. Receiving confidential counseling from the ombuds officer.
3. Pursuing an internal grievance process conducted by FAC, “designed to provide a straightforward and independent review of a faculty member’s complaint, without the time, expense, and conflict of litigation.” Moss-Salentijn made sure to note that faculty could consult with a lawyer, but could not continue with the grievance process if they started litigation.

A final update: the FAC subcommittee that had coordinated with the Provost’s office to review faculty benefits has been reorganized so that the respective subcommittees are united—allowing for faculty to have more of a say in benefits, and earlier in the process.

Bits and Pieces

• When asked why the letter to PrezBo mentioned faculty access to student dorms, Pollack said faculty used to have complete access but it became “a bit dicey when coeducation came.” He thought the policy should be reconsidered because faculty learn from students and encouraging conversation is always productive.
• FAC is investigating the usage of the title of “Professor” at the Medical Center to see whether or not the so-called professors are tenured; in short, they seek to answer what it means to be called a professor.
• At some point in the meeting, a single red balloon drifted down to the senate floor: a melancholy rejoinder to whatever point had been made—or a reminder of the beautiful day outside?

Jerome Greene Hall via Columbia University Facilities