University Times

This year’s election for the University Senate presidency pits current Senate Vice President Irene Hanson Frieze, professor of psychology, business administration and women’s studies, against the chair of the Senate’s educational policies committee (EPC), Evelyn O. Talbott, professor of epidemiology at the Graduate School of Public Health.

Each candidate has served on Faculty Assembly and Senate Council. Each professor also has amassed a lengthy vita of service on Senate committees as well as University and school-specific task forces, steering committees, and planning and budgeting groups.

(Full descriptions of the candidates’ academic and service-oriented experience, as well as their position statements, accompany the University Senate election ballots mailed to faculty recently. April 26 is the deadline for returning completed ballots for the officers of the Senate to the Senate office, 1234 Cathedral of Learning; April 28 is the deadline for returning ballots for Senate standing committees. For the complete slate of candidates see March 31 University Times.)

Last week, University Times reporter Peter Hart asked Frieze and Talbott to reply in writing to the following questions.

What would you hope to accomplish as Senate president?

FRIEZE: As I outlined in my position statement, I have several goals that I would like to accomplish as Senate president. My first goal is to continue the long tradition of shared governance between faculty, staff, students and senior administrators by working with all these groups on issues of concern. Most recently, this has involved my working with faculty, students and administrators, as well as with City Councilman Bill Peduto, to keep the food trucks in Oakland, once they were scheduled for removal from Schenley Plaza.

I have also been working with the Senate ad hoc committee for the support and advancement of women at Pitt this year (and would continue to do this next year) to help develop mentoring programs for faculty and staff, and to update policies relating to sexual harassment.

Communication about issues of concern to the campus community is another continuing goal, and one that I have been addressing the last two years through revival of the Senate Matters column in the University Times, with invited guest columnists. We will also continue to work with senior administration in providing a voice for faculty concerns regarding the IRB (Institutional Review Board).

A major role of the Senate president is to be an advocate for faculty concerns and I look forward to serving in this role.

TALBOTT: As Senate president one of the most important functions is to foster communication between the faculty and administration within each school and department of the University. In addition, I believe the Senate should provide a forum for discussion of issues arising within the University as a whole. I believe in shared governance and open communication between all of the schools within the University.

The University is a world-renowned institution for undergraduate and graduate education as well as a major research university. With these resources come substantial opportunities for joint collaboration for our faculties and educational opportunities for our students. It is therefore incumbent upon the Senate and its president to facilitate such efforts by reaching out to encourage discourse concerning our shared mission and common goals.

I would welcome the opportunity to institute an open forum to discuss any issue that is brought before the University Senate and would strive to promote faculty participation in University governance and improved communication between the faculty and administration. The University has a very divergent faculty and this represents a challenge.

What are the most important issues facing the Senate in the next year?

FRIEZE: Fortunately, our current president, Nick Bircher, is leaving the Senate in very good shape. Our current Senate officers (including me as vice president) have excellent communication with our senior administrators and with staff and students. I hope to maintain this open and productive communication with all parts of the University community, with Nick’s assistance as past president.

In addition, I feel that we need to look more at how our internal communication as an organization is functioning. We need to develop closer connections between members of Faculty Assembly and the very important standing committees of the Senate.

TALBOTT: The University needs to maintain competitive salaries and benefits for its faculty in order to continue to attract the best and the brightest of teachers and researchers at all academic ranks. This should be a priority of the University. I think the Senate should also be keenly aware of health care benefits contracts and negotiations and help the faculty to understand the nuances of each plan.

At the other end of the spectrum is the issue of the shrinking financial resources at the state and federal level. Federal monies and funding levels are lower than preceding years. The state has repeatedly refused to increase funding to the University, necessitating tuition increases. The Senate should not be afraid to lobby for increased funding.

The University should have a strong commitment to faculty/staff development, upgrading of curriculum and classrooms, and maintaining access to high-quality computer technology and training for students.

The Senate, as an advisory body, does not wield actual decision-making power. Would you like to see the role of the Senate strengthened? If so, how?

FRIEZE: Although we do not have formal decision-making power, Senate officers, members of Faculty Assembly and members of Senate committees are very able to communicate our concerns directly to the administrators who make the final decisions about various issues. As I have participated over many years in various Senate committees, I have seen the degree of influence we do have and the respect with which our concerns are listened to by the administration. Our role is much stronger than many may realize. I strongly believe that we in the Senate have the ability and the responsibility to make a difference in our University and in its shared governance.

TALBOTT: In general I agree with the advisory role of the Senate. I believe that deans and chairpersons of departments have an important responsibility to have a shared vision of their school and should include the faculty in this vision.

Since 2001, I have been the chairperson of the educational policies committee and since 1999 I have served as a representative of that committee on the University budget policies committee. I have always believed that the Senate was an excellent forum in which to report on important issues and findings of these committees. An open dialogue is important in the presentation of findings and recommendations of the standing committees. With over 4,000 full-time faculty on the main and branch campuses it may be time to re-visit the number of representatives for each of the standing committees in order to enhance participation.

Are standing Senate committees effective in airing particular problems and working toward solutions?

FRIEZE: Yes! We have had the experience of strong committees that have worked off-line to bring potential solutions to the Faculty Assembly and to Senate Council and to our administrators for many years. I do hope that you enjoy your lunch at the food trucks — one example of shared governance at work!

TALBOTT: EPC has had the opportunity to address several questions raised by the graduate and undergraduate faculty within the School of Engineering, Arts and Sciences, the College of General Studies, etc. These issues have included harassment issues relative to minority students and diversity; part-time faculty surveys to determine the degree of satisfaction within the teaching environment and satisfaction with resources and the decision-making process within respective departments; student-teacher ratios in language recitation laboratories, and room-scheduling and classroom availability issues.

In all of these cases, I believe that faculty acted with collegiality in their approach to fact-finding and in finding solutions. Reports were submitted to the [Senate’s] on-line site and to the Senate as a whole. The goal of the representatives was always to create the best student and faculty experience. The faculty should be reminded that the standing committees are an important part of the communication process for issues related to the teaching and research environment, as well as the community, and that it is important to be involved in this process.

Do you feel there is true collegiality between faculty and administration? How do you rate the performance of the senior administration in the past year?

FRIEZE: Under the leadership of Mark Nordenberg as chancellor, the Senate officers are listened to with respect by Mark and his senior staff. Within the various Senate committees, the relevant administrator is able to discuss issues of concern directly with the committee members and there is great opportunity for faculty input. I would give Mark and all his staff “A” grades.

TALBOTT: In any business, profit or non-profit, the group that makes fiscal decisions is hard pressed to keep everyone happy. There are tough decisions in these times. Based again on my experience with the standing committees I would rate the communication and effectiveness of the senior administration as reasonable. My sense is that the administration has proceeded with openness and has been generally willing to listen to the needs of the individual schools and departments. Given the overall collegiality, I do believe that this relationship could be improved by a commitment of the administration to involve faculty in decision-making early in the process.

Regardless of who wins the election, a woman will become president of the Senate. Do you see yourself as a role model for women at Pitt? What are some of the issues facing women at Pitt?

FRIEZE: I was delighted to see the slate of candidates for this election. We have not had a woman as Senate president for many years — not since Barbara Shore held this position in the 1980s.

Women need to be more visible on campus, especially in important leadership roles such as Senate president. No matter who wins, the new president will be an important role model for women at Pitt next year. We have very few visible women in senior administrative positions and working to get more is an important goal.

TALBOTT: As a voter, it would have made no difference to me that a man or a woman was running for this office. I believe at an academic institution like the University, gender with regard to serving in office is a non-issue. As the two candidates are female, the woman who is elected will most certainly be a positive role model for all women in academics who aspire to become part of the governmental advisory process.

Within my own school, we have several women chairpersons who are excellent. In my department, epidemiology, we also have parity with regard to the ratio of senior tenured women professors to male senior tenured professors.

Within other schools this may not be the case. Salary ranges are an issue at various ranks and gathering the most up-to-date data on this topic would be a priority.

A recent Senate plenary session addressed the roles of women in academia, and efforts related to that are ongoing.

The second issue is one of sexual harassment. I would work diligently with administration to foster an open door within the University at every level (faculty, staff and students) for the most complete reporting and assurance that there will be zero tolerance for such actions.

Is the University’s three-pronged mission of teaching, research and public service in the proper balance?

FRIEZE: I personally feel that the balance is good now. Before Mark took over as chancellor, I felt that we had been neglecting our undergraduate education mission. Now there is much more emphasis on this and I feel that this has had a very positive impact on the University.

TALBOTT: Within the University the mission of teaching in recent years has been given remarkably more emphasis. This is well symbolized by the Advisory Council for Instructional Excellence awards and CIDDE, which provides consultation and tools on curriculum development, web-based instructional tools and teaching approaches.

The Health Sciences have generally considered research funding and research publications as the gold standard for promotion. Research monies play a significant role in providing opportunities for graduates and undergraduates as well to work one-on-one with investigators and gain valuable experience and training. Unfortunately, maintaining a balance particularly within the Health Sciences is problematic as the time constraints to excel at both are often difficult.

If research is to continue to be considered a primary yardstick for promotion, faculty who do research and secure funding should have release time to conduct it properly, and likewise teaching should not take a back seat when both are so important. Public service initiatives include such projects as the School of Education-sponsored National Youth Sports Program and the GSPH Center for Minority Health program, “Healthy Class of 2010,” which currently targets seventh graders in selected Pittsburgh schools. More emphasis should be placed on internships and service-learning projects in the community that are linked to the educational process.

The capital campaign is exceeding all expectations, and research dollars are coming in at record levels. On the other hand, tuition has been going up rapidly; salary increases do not always compensate for inflation; health care costs are being shifted more to employees; Pitt’s commonwealth appropriations have declined. How do you reconcile Pitt’s overall financial health with some of these other concerns?

FRIEZE: With the high endowment, high levels of research funding and rising numbers of students applying to study at Pitt, the University is better able to adjust to declining levels of commonwealth appropriations. None of us is happy with this reality, but we do realize that there are many demands on state funds at this time. As I read the national statistics, we have actually done better in terms of salaries for faculty and staff than many other state institutions. We are also comparable in terms of increases in tuition costs. Although our tuition is expensive, I believe that we offer good value to our students and a quality education for their investment. But we need to help to find ways to stop increasing tuition costs.

TALBOTT: Clearly National Institutes of Health budgets have been reduced because of homeland security and the war in Iraq, making it difficult for researchers to acquire needed funding. State allocations are not likely to be increased to the levels they were in 2001-2002. Tuition is higher than ever.

However, I believe relative to many public and private colleges, the University remains highly competitive and at a reasonable cost for its students. I would like to ensure faculty input relative to the expenditures of the capital campaign so that monies spent are in keeping with the overall mission of the University in maintaining the best educational experience for our students.

Many of the buildings on campus are in desperate need of repair and replacement. Over time, this neglect can cost the University the campus appeal that can affect recruiting of both faculty and students.

Why should faculty vote in University Senate elections?

FRIEZE: Voting is a sacred right and responsibility in a democracy. I always vote in national and local elections. Voting at Pitt is just as important. We all need to exercise our right to select the leaders that best represent our views.

TALBOTT: Only 22-25 percent of all faculty voted in the last election. Clearly we can do better than this. I would take as my charge determining why faculty feel disengaged from the voting process. The faculty should choose a person whom they feel will represent them and who will provide a voice for their concerns. Please take the time to vote.