FAUST EQUITY INITIATIVE 2010-11

The following documents FAUST's Equity Initiative for 2010-11.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

Equity Initiative Rationale:

One of the most important goals a community can set for itself is equity for all of its members. This goes beyond simple “equality” to include awareness of the challenges that can sometimes face marginalized individuals or groups, and a commitment to seeking ways of improving their position over both the long and short terms. Women’s rights, rights for racialized or disabled people, gay/lesbian/bi-sexual/transgender rights – these are just some key hallmarks of an equitable community. Equity is about fairness, integrity and compassion.

St. Thomas University has long prided itself on the “strong sense of community between faculty, staff, alumni and students that permeates our academic, cultural and social life”. Yet many of us have long been aware that deep-rooted inequities reside at times in the heart of that community. It is now time to start talking more openly about these problems, in order to face and address them. On July 19th, President Cochrane announced the creation of an Advisory Committee on Structure and Climate whose express mandate is “to identify the underlying issues” behind reluctance of many faculty members – and in particular women – to seek appointment to administrative positions at the University. This is just one symptom of what seems to be a larger set of problems besetting our community’s pursuit of equity for all its staff, faculty and students.

FAUST, in cooperation with the Student Union (STUSU), staff (PSAC Local 60701) and St. Thomas University administration, have decided to host a series of conversations aimed at examining all aspects of equity challenges currently existing at STU. These conversations, collectively known as the Equity Initiative, will unfold over the next few weeks. You will be invited to share your own ideas and experiences either privately and anonymously, or in congenial public gatherings.

To initiate the Equity Initiative, FAUST will hold a preliminary discussion session on Friday October 15 at 3:30pm in Ted Daigle Auditorium. All FAUST members are strongly encouraged to come out for what promises to be a very lively, important and long-overdue sharing of experiences, ideas and opinions. Refreshments will be served.

Parallel discussion sessions for staff and students will be announced shortly. Thank you in advance for your participation! We are all in this together, and together we can make STU a better workplace for all.

If you have any questions about the Equity Initiative, or wish to make a written submission encapsulating your concerns in advance of the Friday meeting, please contact the FAUST Professional Officer, Bonnie Huskins, at faust@stu.ca (general questions)or bhuskins@rogers.com (confidential issues). 

__________________________________________________________________________________________

FAUST Equity Initiative 2010:

equity discussion session #1

 

Friday October 15

3:30pmTed Daigle Hall

(later moved to ECH 120)

St. Thomas University

 Minutes of the meeting:

NB: Due to inclement weather, attendance was limited to about a dozen faculty, with some write-in contributions noted.  The meeting was facilitated by UNB professor and CAUT representative Dr. Katy Haralampides.

After a welcome and introductions by the FAUST president, Dr. Haralampides gave an overview of “Equity” issues in the Canadian university sector.  She noted that useful statistics are lacking for many equity-seeking communities, and so quantitative analysis must be augmented by anecdotal and qualitative discussions such as the present forum.   A broad definition of equity objectives, generally relating to achievement of a greater absence of fear and burdening in the workplace, was discussed… more specific elaboration of just what equity is and should be at STU remains up to us.  This is the task of participants in FAUST’s Equity Initiative (EI).

Conversation among FAUST members ensued.  The main topics fell under two broad categories:

1.  University structures
2. An erosion of Equity Committee contributions to hiring at STU over the years was noted.  Equity Committee members are not given adequate training or direction, and their responsibilities remain largely undefined.  As a result they seem to have little impact; it is unclear whether and to what extent STU hiring practices have indeed been guided by equity principles in recent years.  Furthermore it was noted that sexual orientation is not currently considered to be part of the equity committee’s purview.
3. Teaching evaluation procedures at STU, despite longstanding criticism and calls for reform, are widely seen to be problematic.  In particular the current forms seem to reward lecture-based teaching over student-centred teaching; women and minorities also regularly receive lower ratings from students.  Detrimental impact on careers may result.
4. In general, there is a strong perception that (recent improvements notwithstanding) STU administrative offices still lack transparency and an adequately-defined structure; clear written job descriptions for all senior administrators and staff, for example, remain a desideratum.  There is a sense that the administration remains something of a closed community where decisions are regularly made on an ad hoc basis from one crisis to the next.  Furthermore there seems to be a lack of adequate staffing in several areas, and workloads are therefore seen to be unreasonable.  Many faculty, and especially those with child-care responsibilities, are unwilling to enter such an ill-defined, demanding and potentially unsupportive environment.  It was noted, moreover, that women have historically been more than willing to take on leadership roles at STU—within the union for example—and it is only at the level of senior administration that they do not feel welcome.

 

1. University climate
2. A “culture-gap”, often manifested in cases of student unease with professors’ accents or interpersonal style, was noted as a serious concern.  Such (often unconscious) unease, which is also evident between students and among fellow faculty and staff, creates an additional burden upon some professors and has negatively impacted careers in a variety of ways (teaching evaluations, tenure & promotion, access to research funding, etc.).  There is a need for STU as a whole to consider ways of becoming more consciously committed to “valuing” rather than merely “tolerating” difference in terms of community members’ various linguistic, national, cultural, ethnic and/or racial backgrounds. 
3. Insensitivity to “difference” was also noted in other areas as well.  It was noted in particular that more needs to be done to improve accessibility on campus.  “Disability” (as an umbrella category) needs to be taken more seriously as a topic for discussion, awareness and action.
4. Similar concerns were raised about the need to better promote awareness of, sensitivity to, and active acceptance of the GLBTQ presence on campus.

A number of positive suggestions were made regarding ways to address these problems.  It was agreed to continue such discussions in future breakout sessions, and to encourage further written submissions from the FAUST membership.

 

Minutes submitted by Robin Vose 

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Minutes of FAUST’s Equity Initiative 2010 followup caucus #2:

Friday October 29, 2010

HCH 5, 7-9pm

St. Thomas University

 

Minutes of the meeting:

A small turnout for the evening (4 members), but focused and productive discussions ensued nonetheless.  Concern was voiced over the predominance of male voices in the current Presidential Advisory Committee discussions; a plan to hold women-only caucuses of the Committee (for the 4 women faculty members) has been proposed and will go forward.

It was noted that no majority males (aside from the FAUST president, present ex officio) have yet attended any discussion sessions of the EI.  While individual circumstances likely prevented many from attending, the trend nevertheless seems significant and worthy of further consideration.

A suggestion was made that STU should consider hiring an equity professional, to proactively address equity & human rights issues on a regular ongoing basis.  Other universities may provide models to follow.

Though the evening was originally intended to focus on “climate” issues, conversation drifted into discussion of structural problems as well.  The lack of job descriptions for senior admin [and other staff positions, at all levels], was cited as a major concern.  Policies, roles & responsibilities seem lacking and undefined.  Accountability, transparency, and a lack of professionalism were raised again and again as concerns.

The need to speak out loud about these problems was expressed; to clearly identify issues and address them concretely, in public.

Family issues were discussed, and it was noted that childcare obligations prevented many from attending Equity Initiative discussions.  This led to discussion of the perception that workaholism is a de facto requirement for senior management and some other positions;  again the general lack of clear job descriptions was seen as a contributing factor to this.  There was also a sense that STU suffers from a general lack of human resources to get necessary work done; that too much work is either left unaccomplished or taken on as an additional duty by individuals as a result.  As it stands, university work simply cannot be accomplished during normal business hours, and such an atmosphere functions to exclude many faculty—including women above all but not exclusively—from fully participating in some spheres.  In short we at STU do too much with too little… we need an enlarged administrative structure, and a substantial core constituency of them (not just a few isolated individuals) need to be women.  Creation of junior positions such as associate deans might be one way to begin this process.

It was thus argued that there is a need to hire more personnel to fill administrative roles, but also that these had to be academic hires; the current preponderance of non-academic administrative officers needs to be addressed.  It was also noted that faculty going into administrative positions must be replaced with further permanent hires in their departments; that departments should not be penalized because members go into administrative roles.  It was noted that this could be another cause of the current lack of female candidates for administrative positions, as women faculty tend to have many departmental (and/or union) responsibilities & loyalties.  Many women at STU are chairs and program directors, for example.

Another observation suggested that many people are unsure about what equity is, and that this may in part explain a somewhat low engagement with Equity Initiative.  This uncertainty was also asserted to be part of the problem, and it was noted that much work remains to necessary to build awareness.

 A new topic then opened up: it was suggested that there are frequently unacknowledged but quite real and pervasive eurocentric assumptions in teaching that underlie and exacerbate faculty differences and tensions, especially between minorities and majorities.  It was acknowledged that this is a sensitive issue, and hard to talk about without causing offence to colleagues (and potentially infringing academic freedom).  Still it was felt that there are unacknowledged yet clear politico-intellectual (worldview) conflicts between some faculty and departments. 

Such discussions led to further consideration of how some fields and disciplines seem inherently to involve research and teaching of difficult, fraught subject matter which impacts some profs—and especially minorities—on an emotional level that is largely unacknowledged.  Some profs’ work impacts them, and their students, much more deeply than others and this can be harmful to them personally and professionally… this needs to be acknowledged and the inequities of it considered more deeply… even if there is no solution forthcoming.

It was suggested that finding places for affected faculty to connect, and share these experiences, might at least be a starting place.

Continuing in this vein, it was noted that certain fields tend to be “popular” and therefore to potentially lead to positions of privilege in the university.

Respectfully Submitted by Robin Vose, FAUST President

_________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Minutes of FAUST EQUITY INITIATIVE 2010 Followup Caucus #1

Thurs Oct 28, 2010

BMH Faculty lounge

7-9pm  

 

Approximately 10 people attended this caucus meeting.

The first issue of concern to be addressed was the ineffectiveness of the existing Equity Committee. 

One recommendation for improvement wasthe provision of some form of training for committee members. It was pointed out that previous Equity Committees received information on trends and patterns in hiring practices, so that targets could be set for the future. Although it is difficult in the current climate to receive reliable information on such issues, it was agreed that the Equity Committee should implementsome form of education for committee members.

Another recommendation for the improvement of the Equity Committee was to establish a more efficient notification process.  Members suggested that the Equity Committee be notified when a job ad is posted, so that they can prepare for the interviews, rather than scramble at the last minute.
 

The caucus then turned totensions over sexuality and sexual orientation at STU. One caucus member reported that the inclusion of condoms in students’ welcome-back kits this year generated considerable controversy. In the aftermath of this incident, the President of STU promised to install condom machines in every bathroom.  Students have also complained about homophobia and racism in the student residences.

Racial issues on campus provoked a particularly vigorous and productive discussion. Some members reported that racial prejudice posed them additional pedagogical challenges in the classroom, as well as made them targets for racial remarks in student evaluations. It was agreed that the nature of the student body at STU (and in New Brunswick generally) exacerbates the problem. Because many of the students are under-educated and come from a largely homogeneous background, they are often unaware of their prejudices.  It was argued that the STU community must make a protracted effort to generate awareness regarding issues of racial and ethnic intolerance.

How does one go about creating more awareness of equity issues at STU?

It was generally agreed that faculty should address such issues in the classroom, even if it means teaching beyond their comfort level.  One suggestion was to approach faculty members to see how they deal with equity issues in the classroom and in the process assemble a bank of syllabi and alternative evaluation methods. Members also agreed that the official teaching evaluation could also be used more effectively to encourage student commentary on equity issues.

Moreover, many evaluative procedures at STU couldbe and should be revamped to make individuals, departments and committees more accountable when it comes to equity issues.  For example:

 One caucus member recommended a grassroots approach whereby individual departments are encouraged and expected to develop equity initiatives.  As an accountability measure, departmental reviews should incorporate equity performance indicators.

Individual faculty members’ annual reports could be revamped to encourage accountability on equity issues. 

Job descriptions should be more robust in incorporating inclusive language.

 In an attempt to improve the equity climate at STU in a more general sense, it was suggested that STU hold an Equity Initiative every year, perhaps in October, so that people would come to expect it and become more comfortable in contributing to it. It was also agreed that faculty must continue to actively seek out and develop solidarity with students and staff on issues of equity.

 

Respectfully Submitted by

Bonnie Huskins, Professional Officer, FAUST  

______________________________________________________________________________________

MINUTES OF EQUITY INITIATIVE: FINAL PLENARY SESSION

29 November 2010

Kinsella Auditorium

After everyone introduced themselves, FAUST President Robin Vose began the plenary with a few introductory comments about the Equity Initiative. Over the past few weeks, FAUST, in cooperation with the Student Union (STUSU), staff (PSAC Local 60701) and St. Thomas University administration, have been hosting a series of conversations (collectively known as the Equity Initiative) aimed at examining the equity challenges which currently exist at STU.These cross-campus conversations have attracted small numbers, but Vose attributes this, in part, to the reality that the `minority’ concerns by their very nature cannot be expected to engage active “majority” engagement; this does not mean they are unimportant.  He hopes that the Equity Initiative will become normalized as an annual event, and that over time people will become more comfortable about engaging in these conversations. He encouraged the individuals present to take this opportunity to voice their concerns, for the plenary minutes will inform the report and recommendations which will be sent on to the President’s Committee on Structure and Climate. Vose noted that this is an historic opportunity to talk about equity, with the imminent hiring of a new president and a commitment to change on the part of the administration.

Ella Henry, STUSU President, then reported on the equity initiatives being pursued by the Student Union. She noted that some of their equity meetings have also been attended by small numbers, but they have received a number of anonymous email submissions. STUSU is currently discussing strategies about how to engage students; this is an ongoing process.

The inadequacy of institutional support for student accessibility was the first concrete issue to be addressed by plenary participants. Two students noted that the campus’s accessibility centre is severely under-staffed. They desperately need more people and better facilities.  A faculty member at the meeting also complained that there are no guidelines for faculty when attempting to accommodate disabilities in the classroom. It was generally agreed that efforts should be made in the near future to organize a caucus devoted to student accessibility issues.

Discussion then turned to the recent assault of a transgendered student in a STU washroom, and in particular the administration’s response to this incident which was seen as aggressive and reactive. It was observed that the administration’s priority seems to be to minimize negative attention, rather than be proactive about responding to issues and crises. Moreover, students complained that they did not know to whom they should turn for help with equity issues. Those who have attempted to take their concerns to the administration have been met by confusion and disorganization. In other words, there is a structural problem in this area. It was a general recommendation of the plenary that STU hire a trained Equity Officer to address such issues. 

Students also complained about racist and sexist attitudes of fellow students in the classroom and on campus. Some students do not want to walk through the cafeteria because of the slurs they receive. Sexual assault on campus is also an issue, according to the students. The responses to these issues have been inadequate. Residence advisors, for example, have little training in dealing with such issues. The initiative to fund a “safe space” on campus, first presented several years ago, seems to have gone nowhere.  Moreover, when students are first introduced to STU during frosh events, STU is not presented as an open and inclusive institution.

On a somewhat different yet related matter there were also complaints about food options at the cafeteria. It was the general consensus that they do not reflect the agenda of an international and inclusive liberal arts university.

One way that more attention can be brought to equity issues on campus is to make the issues more visible. It was suggested that at a minimum the campus put up more “rainbow” and other equity symbols. It was suggested that part of the money dedicated to the Equity Initiative should be used to make equity buttons for general distribution.  All in all, however, it was recognized that these are just small starting gestures and that much long-term dedication to change is needed.

 

Minutes Respectfully Submitted by

Bonnie Huskins, FAUST Professional Officer and Robin Vose, FAUST President

3 December 2010 

 

 

 

 

________________________________________________________________________________________