20 September, 2006.

Colleagues of the College of Humanities and Natural Sciences,
The following are some of the concerns expressed by a group of some
15 CHUNS faculty which they would like to share with you and the
administration and hope they might be used in a fruitful dialogue among
ourselves and with the President and Academic Vice President especially in
the meeting on Thursday. This group does not pretend to express the concerns
of every member of CHUNS or even a majority but it hopes that our colleagues
might resonate with many of them. These faculty members hope that any
concerns that we have not addressed will be presented by our colleagues at
the meeting.
The group shared some 35 concerns with each other. Many of them had
multiple parts. The following are 18 of what were considered our most urgent
concerns. Leo A. Nicoll, S.J.

1] Would the President stand by his statement of 22 May, namely "After
reviewing everything, I am confident in the analysis and the work that Dr.
Harris and his staff did in this <Pathways> area."

2] Is it true that SCAP unanimously recommended twice keeping the College of
Arts and Sciences as a single unit?

3] Why was SCAP's unanimous recommendation that no new college be
established rejected?

4] Do you agree that SCAP did not approve the termination of the Computer
Science major and the sequences in Communications?

5] Given the requirement that for every program reinstated, another program
of equal value had to be cut, SCAP asked for both whole numbers and
percentages of the $$$ savings on each program proposed to be cut. Why was
this information not provided?

6] Did the University declare financial exigency?
As per Chapter 9, regarding procedures for termination because of
financial exigency, did the University Senate, in cooperation with your
office, formulate criteria identifying a bona fide state of financial
exigency?
Did you feel financial exigency was imminent?
If so, did you constitute an ad hoc Exigency Planning Committee (EPC)
as required in the Faculty Handbook?

7] Did you follow the Faculty Handbook, Chapter 9, section E.2, which states
that ³Before the administration issues notice to a faculty member of its
intention to terminate an appointment because of formal discontinuance of a
program or department of instruction, the University will make every effort
to place the faculty member concerned in another suitable position²?

8] What was the reaction of the Administration to the mistakes in statistics
and violations in process delineated in the SCAP letter of May 10, by the
members of Arts and Sciences on May 12, and by the Senate document ³A Call
for Conversations and a Critique of Pathways²? e.g., that the terminated
departments were not the least profitable in the University?

9] Why was the vote of no confidence of the meeting of Arts and Sciences on
11 May 2006 (70-2-4)
brushed aside by the Administration? And why was the University
Senate's vote of no confidence ignored?

10] How can the Administration possibly maintain that the Pathways plan was
the result of intensive study by SCAP and the Senate? Why has most
opposition to Pathways come from members of SCAP and the Senate and even
from members of the President's ad hoc committee for Pathways?

11] Before Pathways was publicly introduced, how many faculty from the
division of Natural Sciences were consulted concerning the impact that the
suspension of the physics program would have on the rest of the division?
How many faculty from the humanities division were consulted about the
impact of the suspension/termination of language and communication programs?

12] Why was the Senate asked to elect persons to advise the President as
faculty representatives of his committee when these persons were never
consulted on substantive matters?

13] Did you refuse to speak with the AAUP special committee?
What will you do if the AAUP sanctions the University and censures the
University administration?

14] Given the mistrust and large numbers of very dissatisfied faculty, what
concrete things do you plan to do that might help rebuild a working
relationship?

15] Why did two departments terminate tenured Ph.Ds qualified to teach
needed courses and hire part-timers to teach those courses contrary to the
Handbook (Section 9.E.2)?

16] The President has repeatedly said that he wants to move forward and look
towards the future and not dwell on the past. Does the President believe
that how he has led this university in the past will serve as a good example
of how he will lead this university in the future?

17] Taking into consideration current enrollments, the loss of students due
to program cuts and suspensions, and implementation costs, how much money
does Pathways save the University this year and will the President provide
supporting documentation?

18What is the President's vision of the University?