Archives
FSEC discusses grievance procedures
By DONNA BUDNIEWSKI
Reporter Assistant Editor
The Faculty Senate Executive Committee, during its last meeting of the semester yesterday, heard an interim report about efforts to streamline, clarify and strengthen undergraduate and graduate grievance and academic integrity policies.
William H. Baumer, professor of philosophy and chair of the Faculty Senate Grading Committee, said that it may be some time before the revised policies are ready for the senate to review, but he relayed some of the concerns motivating the scrutiny that grievance and academic integrity policies are undergoing.
Kerry Grant, vice provost for academic affairs and dean of the graduate school, said the review is part of a broader effort to return to department and decanal units the responsibility for academic quality and decision-making. "It has been possible in the past for a student to actually by-pass the department and decanal review and come directly to the vice provost with a complaint," said Grant, "but that will no longer be possible."
A faculty committee formed in the department or decanal unit will be charged with reviewing complaints brought by students and rendering a decision, which then will be sent to Grant's office for final review and to ensure that due process has been maintained throughout the procedure.
Baumer emphasized that maintaining students' rights and ensuring that due process procedures have been followed is key to any change in current policies, as well as encouraging and strengthening opportunities for significant consultation between faculty and students as a way of resolving problems before they become actionable through formal procedures. "We may extend that level of consultation as far as the level of associate and assistant deans," said Baumer.
While a significant number of the grievances filed are by students bringing complaints against a faculty member, one area of grievance not often discussed, said Baumer, is the harassment of faculty members by students in the classroom or lab, which, according to Grant, can take an inordinate amount of time to resolve under current procedures. He noted that when a serious case of harassment by a student against a faculty member arose last year in the College of Arts and Sciences, efforts to resolve the problem "dragged on a long time." He said the administration is hoping to form a committee that would respond immediately to such cases.
There currently is no provision in academic grievance procedures that provides for immediate suspension of a student if a faculty member is being threatened. "You should be able to get someone out of class," said Grant. "We need quicker action."
While violent incidents may not be on the rise at UB, they are across the nation, said Baumer, and as a result, administrators and the Grading Committee are trying to craft policies that are proactive, rather than reactive.
Grant said they want to be able to respond to a threat against a faculty member in one to two days, or before the next class meeting.
If a faculty member is concerned or feeling threatened, he or she can contact University Police, said Grant. Although UB public safety officers have full police powers, calling them doesn't necessarily mean the student will be arrested, as some faculty fear, he explained. University police can issue a citation, rather than arrest a student, which refers the matter to Student Affairs for action.
There also is recourse for faculty members when they anticipate a situation becoming volatile, such as telling a graduate student that he or she can no longer continue in the program.
Grant said a plainclothes officer can sit in or outside the classroom or office in such situations as a means of protection and support.
Baumer said he wants to see policies that are "clean and, above all, as simple and as comprehensive as possible," with as much commonality in the grievance and academic integrity procedures as possible.
On behalf of the students, Baumer said both administrators and the Grading Committee are intent on maintaining and ensuring that anyone who is charged with a grievance has the opportunity to defend himself or herself, based on the evidence.