Senate Resolution on Hilo Program
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
Aeby, Aune, Baker, Bley-Vroman, Bopp, Brown, Caron, Chen, Chopey, Cohn, Cox, Dator, Dawson, DeMattos, Fryer, Fujimoto, Gibson, Grace, Hawkins, Herring, Hilgers, Kasuya, Kazman, Kipnis, Lee,L, Lorenzo, Lu, Lukas, Magaard, Mark, McGranaghan, McKimmy, Moore, Mottl, Nielsen, Nishida, Nunokawa, Ramsey, Richardson, Robinow, Ross, Rutter, Satsuma, Schroeder, Shiramizu, Singh, Singleton, Skouge, Staff, Stodden, Tiles, Valliant, Warn-Cramer, Wilmeth, Yates,
Ex Officio: Peter Englert, Neal Smatresk
Desser, Haning, Inazu, Speitel, Uchida,
Allen, Bridges, Cannon, Judd, Kim, Lee,CN, Lee,MT, Liebert, Lowry, Paull, Teves, Ward, Yu, Yue Yuen, Zaleski
Others who signed in:
Denise Antolini, Paul Chandler, Gerald Meredith, John Cusick, Joy Logan, Lynne Higa, Jeanne Oka, Ronaele Whittington, David Stegenga, Karen Lee, Tom Bingham, James Cartwright, Star Davis, Mary Tiles, Sharon Ouchi, David Flynn, Mike Forman, Sophia McMillen, Dennis Carroll, David Hiple, Ray Allen, Sandy Dennis, Gregg Lizenbery, Megumi Taniguchi, Ray Yeh, Catherine Fulford, William O'Grady, Robert Littman, Ruth Horie, Eric Szarmes, JMJ Madey, David Chin, Alan Mags, Ron Cambra, Susan Chandler, Swee Berkey, Catherine Thomas, Dharm Bhawuk, Helen Sokugawa, Louise Kubo, Myrtle Yamada, Douglas Bomberger, Mamo Kim,Teresa Bill, Dean Alegado, Melodee Metzgar, Paula Morelli, Rodney Sakaguchi,
Chairman Tom Schroeder called the meeting to order at 4:15 PM following the conclusion of the Manoa Faculty Congress.
Several amendments to the minutes of September 15, 2004 were made. The minutes were then approved as corrected.
The order of the agenda was altered to allow committee reports to be made at the beginning of the meeting.
David Ross, Chair of the Committee on Academic Policy and Planning (CAPP) offered the first report. He began with requests by the Manoa Chancellor and more recently by the University President to respond to their draft plans for reorganization.
Report on the UH Manoa Reorganization
CAPP met with the Chancellor and his staff to discuss some issues relating to the latest version of this proposal. We are in the process of formulating more questions and recommendations, and will transmit them to both the VCAA and the SEC when we are done. We are encouraged that the Manoa administration so far appears genuinely responsive to our concerns and suggestions.
Report on the UH System Reorganization
CAPP has not had the opportunity to review the system reorganization, as we were informed of its existence only minutes before our October meeting. We object strenuously to what appears to be system policy to avoid genuine faculty consultation by offering such proposals to the faculty senate only at the last possible minute, with a review deadline measured in days.
Chair Schroeder thanked Prof. Ross for his report and added that in its most recent meetings with the Chancellor and President, the SEC has made the same point, and has again given the administrators copies of the document that describes how consultation between the administration and the Senate should be carried out.
There was no further discussion of the CAPP reports on reorganization so Prof. Ross read the CAPP report on the University of Hawaii at Hilo proposal for the Doctorate in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization and Feeder Programs:
CAPP Report on the UHH proposal for the Doctorate in Hawaiian and Indigenous Language and Culture Revitalization and Feeder Programs
The UHMFS Committee on Academic Policy and Planning is delighted that programs at our sister institution UHH have strengthened to the point where some are now in a position to contemplate granting the Ph.D. degree. We also support the basic idea that there should be an opportunity for students to undertake doctoral-level work in Hawaiian and indigenous language, literature, culture, and related fields. We agree that the University of Hawaii is a natural venue for such study.
However, we are reminded that BOR policy explicitly and unambiguously decrees that Manoa will be the only campus within the system to offer the doctoral degree (see attachments). We do not believe this policy to be arbitrary or careless, but rather believe that it reflects a deep understanding on the part of the Regents as to the academic and administrative requirements for such programs. Degree programs do not thrive in isolation; the academic and administrative infrastructure to support them is considerable, and go well beyond the immediate, visible needs of staffing one particular department. The State of Hawaii has already made a substantial investment over many years in such infrastructure here at Manoa, and in the absence of an overwhelming argument to the contrary we question the wisdom of establishing a new program in such a way as to deliberately make access to this infrastructure impossible.
We are disappointed that the system has not sought a solution which would enable establishment of such a degree within the spirit of BOR policy and best academic practice, but instead has chosen to dismiss the Board's requirement as unimportant.
We have serious concerns with the way that this program was brought to our attention and the attention of stakeholder departments at Manoa. It is the judgment of this committee that any decisions about the highest degree given by the University of Hawaii need wider input and very serious thought and discussion.
We want to emphasize that the committee has not had the proposal long enough to give it the level of review which new program proposals merit. Our brief discussions were therefore not about the substance of the proposal, but rather about the general concept of a Ph.D. program at UH Hilo; in particular, our recommendations should be read as a judgment on the logistics of this proposal and the process by which it is being ushered through the system, and not as a criticism of our Hilo colleagues.
In conclusion, it is the sense of this committee that this proposal ought not be approved in its present form, but that the parties involved should find a way to make such a program conform to BOR policy. We are optimistic that creative minds can find a way to carry this out without damage to the general vision of the proposers, and that synergy with related doctoral programs already established at Manoa will make the final product much better. We have long recognized that there is remarkable intellectual talent spread throughout the UH system, and anticipate that a clever approach to this program's establishment might serve as a precedent, to make it easier for Hawaii's research students to tap into that expertise.
There was a motion for the Senate to endorse the report. This led to a lengthy discussion. (Note: This discussion consumed the rest of the Senate meeting so that it was not possible for there to be other committee reports, the Chair's report, or consideration of any other topic on the agenda.)
Initial discussion focused on whether the proposal had followed Board of Regent (BOR) procedures for creating doctoral programs or not. No "permission to plan" document has been found. The proposal was reviewed neither by the Manoa Graduate Division nor by any of the many departments at UHM that might be able to contribute to a graduate program in Hawaiian and indigenous languages and cultures. While Hilo apparently has, with BOR permission, created its own Graduate Division in order to offer graduate courses, the BOR policy stating that only the Manoa Campus may offer doctorates appears still to stand. Thus the UHH proposal appears to contravene BOR policy.
Since the motion asked the Senate to "endorse" the CAPP proposal rather than "receive" it, there were several attempts to modify the wording of the report to fit the desires of the members of the Senate. Several noted that the matter was urgent since the Board of Regents Academic Affairs committee meeting was scheduled for the next day, and the Senate wished to present its collective judgement to the BOR in the form of a resolution before the Regents acted on the proposal (and a related proposal to create a doctorate in Pharmacology at Hilo that the Senate did not have time to consider).
According to Senate rules, a resolution must be introduced in one meeting and then passed in the next. In order to get a resolution to the BOR the next day, the Senate suspended that rule by a vote of 37 for, two against, and two abstaining.
After considerable discussion, the following resolution was put before the Senate.
Whereas the Manoa Faculty Senate is disturbed by apparent procedural irregularities in the doctoral proposals of the University of Hawaii at Hilo; and
Whereas the Senate endorses the wisdom of the Board of Regents' policy that prohibits doctoral programs outside of Manoa; and
Whereas the Senate agrees that there be cooperation between Manoa and Hilo in strengthening graduate offerings;
Therefore be it resolved that the Manoa Faculty Senate asks the Board of Regents to take no action on the doctoral proposals of the University of Hawaii at Hilo.
A motion was made to remove the first "Whereas" and begin the Resolution with the second. This was defeated by a vote of 14 for, 15 against, and no abstentions.
The resolution as originally submitted then was adopted by a vote of 32 for, 0 against and 1 abstain.
Robert Bley-Vroman will attend the BOR meeting in Hilo and will present the Resolution to the Regents.
A motion to adjourn was seconded at 5:39. With unanimous approval, the Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m.