IU faculty no longer have a central role in academic decision-making, according to policies passed at an IU Board of Trustees meeting in June.
These changes come from revisions to IU’s Merger, Reorganization and Elimination of Academic Units and Programs policy. This document guides how academic departments and programs can be created, modified or dissolved.
Previously governed by the 2012 policy, ACA-79, the MRE process emphasized shared governance between IU faculty and administrators. ACA-79 specifically stressed collaborative faculty review and binding protections regarding tenure and contract security.
But the revised policy, BOT-25, represents a fundamental shift. It changes who has a role in the way university programs are assessed to comply with Indiana code. It also reclassifies faculty recommendations as “advisory,” — removing any requirement for administration to take their ideas into consideration.
The IU Bloomington chapter of the American Association of University Professors released an analysis of these changes. When asked for comment, IU spokesperson Teresa Mackin directed the Indiana Daily Student to a June IU Today article, which stated the policy revisions were made to comply with Indiana Code 21-18-9-10.5.
This new law requires the Indiana Commission for Higher Education to review programs with low graduation rates — a move that led IU to eliminate more than 200 degree programs across campuses.
David McDonald, an IU professor and President of IUB’s AAUP chapter, said he believes IU could have complied with state law without overturning shared governance.
“BOT-25 goes further than what the law actually demands,” McDonald said. “This is state legislators and IU administrators working collectively to enact fundamental changes to the way IU operates.”
Below is a summary of the key differences between ACA-79 and BOT-25. A full comparison can be found on the IUB AAUP website.
Initiation
Under BOT-25, MRE processes — such as the elimination of degree programs — must now be submitted to the Academic Leadership Council Executive Committee, a group run by administrators that reports to and advises IU President Pamela Whitten on academic responsibilities. These are not appointed positions, but are instead a combination of cabinet-level leaders and chief academic officers at IU. This applies to all IU campuses.
In the original policy, the process on how to propose changes to degree programs was not explicitly stated.
Consultation with faculty
With BOT-25, consultation for reorganization of academic units and programs no longer requires the input of faculty governance, including Bloomington Faculty Council, Indianapolis Faculty Council and the University Faculty Council. Administrators can invite these groups to participate but can also choose not to participate.
In the ACA-79, faculty and staff governance bodies were included in consultation as early as possible in the MRE process. This policy explained that their “informed input may play a prominent and effective role in planning for change.” None of this is mentioned in the revised policy.
Faculty response
As a part of the ACA-79 MRE review process, the MRE review committee had to receive documentation describing the proposed reorganization and the justifications for it. It also required a financial forecast for the reorganization, including a planned budget.
Now, IU administrators may use their “discretion” on whether to provide any of this documentation.
Tenure and reassignment to new academic home
Tenure at IU protects professors from being fired for their research, teaching or controversial ideas they may want to express.
Both ACA-79 and BOT-25 hold the idea that tenured and tenure-track faculty members will not be terminated as a consequence of MRE reorganization. However, ACA-79 stated reductions in the number of tenured and probationary tenure-track faculty could happen through voluntary reassignment to another IU campus.
Now, administrators can use their “sole discretion” to move faculty to any of IU’s nine major and regional campuses. Relocation is no longer “voluntary.”
It also includes a new clause that states IU may be required to fire tenured faculty to comply with Indiana or federal law, such as Senate Enrolled Act 202. This law requires boards of trustees to implement polices prohibiting faculty members from receiving tenure or promotions if they appear to not be promoting “intellectual diversity.” Tenured faculty members are to be reviewed for five years under this law.
Principles governing reorganization
At the end of both the BOT-25 and ACA-79 policy, there are a few principles that must be honored in all MRE activities at IU.
The original policy explains that there should be no reductions in faculty base pay or changes in contractual rights. Instead, BOT-25 states that the university reserves the right to alter contractual rights to “meet university operational and business needs.” These could include salaries and contract end dates.
The previous version also emphasized an effort to meet the needs of students enrolled in degrees programs that may be cut, including the ability to complete the degree. However, the revised policy does not mention anything about allowing students to complete a degree. It allows the administration to discontinue programs prior to student completion or teach-out to comply with state or federal law.
ACA-79 also allowed faculty to file a grievance with the Faculty Board of Review if they objected to personal consequences of MRE reorganization.
BOT-25 removed this clause completely.
What does this mean for IU?
McDonald said the revised policy could be used as a way to intimidate faculty into compliance with administrative directives. With the threat of being fired or relocated, faculty are placed in vulnerable positions, he added.
Not only are faculty in a tough spot, McDonald said, but students are also affected by the revised policy.
“Administrators are those who don’t teach any classes,” he said. “It’s worth pointing out that the decisions of what students should know, should learn and should study are in the hands folks who don’t actually teach students.”
McDonald said he is concerned that the elimination of degree programs and the revised policy might only be the beginning.
“We don’t know what step two or step three is,” McDonald said. “This could have a transformative effect on Indiana University in ways we can’t even anticipate.”
