ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND TENURE: NEW MEXICO HIGHLANDS UNIVERSITY1

Academe, May/Jun 2006 by Nails, Debra, Baez, Benjamin, Hollinger, David A, Collins, Linda, Et al

5. The Faculty Role in Institutional Governance (!enerally accepted standards of academic government are enunciated in the Association's 1966 Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities. That document rests on the premise of appropriately shared responsibility and cooperative action among governing board, administration, and faculty in determining educational policy and in resolving educational problems within the academic institution. It also refers to "an inescapable interdependence" in this relationship that requires "adequate communication among these components, and lull opportunity for appropriate joint planning and effort." It provides that the faculty, because "its judgment is central to general educational policy." "has primary responsibility for such fundamental areas as curriculum, subject matter and methods of instruction, research, faculty status, and those aspects of student life which relate to the educational process."

As noted above, in February 2005 a substantial group of tenured faculty members at the university approached the North Central Association with their concerns about a lack of respect for. and perceived infringements of, the faculty role in institutional governance. They charged the administration with having followed a pattern of "ignoring, bypassing, or overruling faculty decisions regarding academic issues." "Mr. Aragon," they wrote,

does not seem to have any understanding of the meaning or importance of shared governance in a university. [He] has repeatedly stated that the university is not a democracy, and that his decisions do not have to include or reflect faculty input. While the faculty recognizes administrative and presidential prerogatives, Mr. Aragon does not acknowledge that there are limitations to this approach, and that it is not in the best interesl of lhe university to repeatedly overrule the faculty. For example. Mr. Aragon has stated to the board of regents that the faculty only play an advisory role in the matter of academic policy, and that the board and administration can set academic policy without the input or approval of the faculty. This is in clear violation of the faculty handbook.

In a second report to the NCA and the AAUP, dated May 17, 2005, which was written to supplement and update the first, the Highlands Faculty Association observed that there had been "no substantive response from the administration to our concerns. The administration acknowledges no mistakes or violations; insists that there are no grounds for objecting to decisions made by the administration and endorsed by the regents, since the regents hold ultimate decision-making authority for the university; and characterizes everyone who disagrees with their policies as malcontents, troublemakers, and perhaps mentally ill."

The investigating committee found that the Faculty Association's reports to the NCA and the AAUP had not overstated the deterioration of academic governance at Highlands in recent years. Several individuals who met with the committee reported the administration's failure to consult with faculty about issues at the very heart of faculty responsibility and expertise: the closure of existing academic programs and the initiation of new ones; administrative appropriation of faculty committee responsibilities (for example, academic petitions and appeals, gracie changes); and arbitrary reassignment of individuals to departments in which they had no experience or knowledge, and their replacement in the classroom by less qualified faculty-sometimes after the teaching term had begun, There were also allegations that the administration had failed to consult meaningfully about the appointment of deans and higher university officers, that it had gerrymandered search committees, and that the terms of its offers to successful non-Hispanic candidates for academic positions were less favorable than those described in the positions advertised. Most of the allegations heard by the investigating committee included ethnic bias as a theme. Manifestly, such actions as those alleged, coupled with the widespread view that outspoken faculu involved in academic governance might sutler administrative retaliation, would, if proven, weaken the possibility for open and critical debate, and for an effective faculty role in the academic life of the university.