Reporter Volume 26, No.24 April 13, 1995 Boris Albini, M.D. Over the past decade, the SUNY system has experienced mounting pressures from without and from within. Rapidly developing technologies; changes in the perception of higher education in the general public; and the move towards an increasingly managerial administrative style; these are just some of the factors involved. The persistent erosion of the state's financial support for our institution has now culminated in a proposed cut of over 30 percent of state support. As a result, financial concerns and business efficiency have become sometimes the overriding concerns. With them often come distrust and discord among faculty members and academic units, and, ultimately, fragmentation of scope and identity. Despite these difficulties and despite the advisory status and limited power of the Faculty Senate, I am convinced that it can contribute most significantly to achieving the best outcome of what the New York Times of Feb. 22, 1995 calls "budget-cutting era reshaping of state universities." The Senate is the natural conduit of communication between faculty and administration; it can help to render decision-making more transparent; it can recruit and focus a gamut of faculty talent and experience, and thus foster cohesion, collegiality and integration. Should the budgetary cuts indeed be implemented in anything approaching their current magnitude, it seems prudent for the Senate to provide additional organizational structures to assure efficacious information gathering and prompt deliberation, and assist actively our administration in the final decision-making process. In my opinion, the most important projects for the Faculty Senate deliberations over the next few years are the following. First, the Senate should involve itself in exploring sources for financial revenue other than the state. Since faculty, together with the staff, will be the primary agents in such efforts, they seem best able to plan them. Second, and closely linked to the first item, the Senate should discuss the best approaches to assure survival of the basic principles of academic life, i.e., collegiality, academic freedom, faculty governance, and fair and due process, as well as honesty in education and scholarship. After all, our primary goals are education, research -- i.e., the pursuit of knowledge -- and community service. Procurement of money is important, but only as a means to achieve these academic goals. Third, the Senate should do its best to improve the quality of life on campus -- at and off work. A truly positive atmosphere of mutual respect and the possibility to discuss even controversial issues openly, will help this great institution survive any challenge. Indeed, in a positive atmosphere, we will accomplish much more, even with much less budgetary resources. As to myself, I have received my M.D. degree from the University of Vienna, Austria, and have also a master's degree in musical composition. I have worked in Buffalo for 20 years, and I am a professor of Microbiology and research professor of Medicine. My interest in research has resulted in over a hundred papers and reviews, as well as four books. In 1991, I was a visiting professor at Innsbruck, Austria, and Padua, Italy on a Fulbright Scholar. I have had the fortune to serve on our Faculty Senate over the last eight years and have represented my department in the medical school's Faculty Council. I am aware of how modest my abilities are when compared to the challenges of the position. However, I am most willing to speak out for the faculty and cooperate with the administration and other constituencies of our great institutions; and I am more than eager to continue learning. Stephen C. Halpern During the 22 years that I have been at UB, faculty influence over the institution has diminished, academic units have less control over their own affairs, and power has become more concentrated in the hands of a larger and less accountable administrative structure. In short, UB operates less and less along the traditional lines of academic collegiality and decentralization and more and more along the lines of a hierarchical business corporation. The Faculty Senate has been ineffective in protecting against these developments. If elected, my first objective would be to eliminate the existing Senate structure. It simply doesn't work. I would try to replace it with a system that provided a meaningful role for faculty in governing UB. To that end, I would move to convene a Faculty Senate Governance Committee, composed of faculty and administrators, and charged to study the most successful models across the nation of faculty participation in institutional governance. The Committee would be asked to issue a report by May 1996 proposing a new system to replace the Faculty Senate. I am not sure that it is possible to undo the powerful changes in higher education that have made a faculty voice so insignificant a force on campuses, but it is imperative to try to do so. Although students, and administrators to a lesser extent, come and go, faculty are the most permanent, core component of any university. By virtue of the longevity of our attachment to the institution, we have the greatest stake in it. By virtue of the centrality of our tasks, we have the greatest impact on it. If we do our jobs as teachers and scholars well, the institution will flourish; if we do not, nothing else -- not efficient administrators or brilliant students -- can compensate for that failure. In sum, the reputation and performance of the faculty is the most important measure of the greatness of any institution of higher education. Given that, it is especially striking that faculty have been relegated to marginal, ineffective roles in the running of those institutions. There are greater pressures on faculty than ever before from state bureaucracies and university administrators. Efforts by administrators, politicians and others to reevaluate the prerogatives and responsibilities of faculty will continue largely because faculty have failed to do that job themselves. We have not been hard enough on ourselves in evaluating our performance, rethinking our role and judging how well we use the autonomy and job security that we do have. Consequently, in partnership with the UUP, I propose establishing a joint UUP-Faculty Senate Task Force on Faculty Responsibilities. Within a year of its formation that Task Force would issue a statement proposing how faculty in each department or professional school should develop a faculty-controlled mechanism for identifying faculty responsibilities and monitoring how and whether faculty meet those responsibilities. I recognize that many of my colleagues will oppose this idea. Yet it is in our interest to evaluate ourselves both because it is the right thing to do and because if we do not, we can be sure that others, less understanding of what we do, will press to do that job for us. Claude Welch In running for Chair of the Faculty Senate, I wish to stress three points: 1) my commitment to effective faculty government at all levels, in which accountability plays an important part, 2) my intention to seek widespread consultation, to address serious issues confronting the University, and 3) my experience in governance, notably through the Senate. Accountability is central to leadership in an academic setting. Accountability should be a general principle in our University. Senior academic leaders are accountable to their faculty colleagues; we as faculty are accountable to our students for effective teaching at all levels; we are accountable to academic community and our professions or disciplines for quality research; as members of the public sector, we are broadly accountable to the community in which we live and work. I believe that accountability includes evaluation of performance. Accordingly, I intend to stress, within the areas of responsibility given by custom and University policies, meaningful assessment of how well all members of the academic community perform. If elected Chair, I would be responsible for the Senate's effective operations, in particular for its committees, their reports, and the overall conduct of Senate business. Consultation is essential; however, it may be severely tested as the University experiences continued severe reductions in direct support from the State. Times of cuts threaten the basic academic fabric. The Faculty Senate must ensure that decisions made by our colleagues in major administrative positions occur as a result of systematic, reasoned, extensive discussion with faculty. The Faculty Senate is the faculty's key University-wide voice. It has its greatest impact through persuasive reports, cogent debates, and willingness to press strongly for academic values at this period of rethinking SUNY priorities and funding. If elected Chair, I would represent the faculty as a whole, through widespread, open consultation. I would ensure that faculty views are fully and effectively represented in all appropriate settings. I would ensure as best I can that all proposals for meeting the current crisis, as well as other proposals for change, are thoroughly examined by the Senate. Experience counts. I have long been involved with the Faculty Senate. I chaired it from 1985 to 1987, and took the lead in establishing committees on Budget Priorities, Student Affairs, and Teaching Quality. I have served on the Executive Committee for more than half my 15 years at this University. From 1989 to 1995, I was elected campus-wide as one of four Senators on the SUNY Faculty Senate; this stint included two one-year terms on its executive committee. Since arriving at Buffalo as an assistant professor in 1964, I have served at various times as an academic administrator (e.g., as Dean of the so-called University College in 1967-70, as associate vice president for academic affairs 1976-80, and as Chair of Political Science 1980-83), as Chair of several University committees (including the President's Review Board on Appointments, Promotions and Tenure; the Undergraduate College Curriculum Committee; search committees for three deans), and as member of many others. This experience, combined with my concerns for accountability and consultation, should make the Faculty Senate a more effective institution under my leadership. Michael J. Cowen No one can foresee what the changed political climate will mean to UB in the next two years. What is clear is that the Faculty Senate and its Chair must ensure the emergence from exigency of an institution which is still devoted to excellence in research and learning. To do this, the Chair of the Faculty Senate will need to be a quick learner, a keen listener, a strong advocate, a mediator and a facilitator. Most of all, the Chair must possess the ability to evaluate the Administration's proposals dealing with the budget crisis, to suggest improvements, and to rally the faculty when necessary. My experience in departmental administration, on University committees, and in the Senate has prepared me for this task. As tuition rises, the University will be under increasing pressure to provide a more caring, less impersonal environment for our students. (Indeed, we ought to have been doing this regardless of budgetary problems.) I have spent the past 10 years as Undergraduate Director promoting exactly such an environment in the Department of Mathematics. Furthermore, as a member of the curriculum committees of both DUAS and Arts & Sciences, I have been an advocate for treating our students less arbitrarily. In addition to an abiding interest in undergraduate and graduate education, I have been a strong proponent of the administrative and instructional uses of computer technology. I am Chair of the Faculty Senate Computing Services Committee, grappling with the Computing Center. This experience has given me an understanding of the service side of the University and its relationship to academic programs. In my professional life I am a theoretician, schooled in analytical thinking and problem-solving. But I also know this is not enough: dealing with people takes common sense, understanding, and sensitivity. The combination of critical thinking, pragmatism, and skill at interpersonal relationships is my greatest strength. That is why you should elect me Chair of the Senate.