Who decides What and How: Dean Abernathy’s Backroom
The “Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy!” seeds of CISE destruction:
Mark Law proposes degrading CISE graduate research faculty status:
Abernathy-style “Shared” Governance: Administrators decide on faculty voting rights:
These emails were sunshined as part of a public records request. They are from the former Chairman Mark Law of ECE (Electrical and Computer Engineering), to Dean Abernathy. ECE is the department with which CISE was supposed to make a Memorandum of Understanding about forming a school on Friday (4/27). The faculties had been forced to rush this decision through in 2 days. CISE has now been told that the Dean has taken over the writing of the MOU (Memorandum of Understanding).
The first email was written a week before Dean Abernathy announced the March 12 townhall meeting to “discuss” her Strategic (read unequitable) Budget cut proposal.
(Former ECE chair, now Associate Dean) Mark Law provides spin for destroying CISE by citing a news article. University of Florida already appears in the cited news article, presumably for having destroyed Nuclear Engineering in the past couple of years.
Before and during the March 12 townhall meeting, the Dean was formally requested to (a) release budget documents for the units in the college so that faculty could generate alternate plans and (b) release details of her own proposal for comment (c) take minutes at the townhall meeting. The Dean did not do so. At the townhall meeting, the Dean said that TAs would be cut, the CISE department would be affected disproportionately, and that her budget cut proposal was due at the Provost Glover’s office on March 16.
In the second email Mark Law details how research faculty will be stripped of their research activities, ability to apply for grants, ability to supervise PhD students, possibly their graduate faculty status, and have their teaching loads hugely increased to teach up to 4 courses a semester (this is more than most 4-yr colleges’ teaching load). Strangely, this email that sets out the restructuring is copied to William Heitman, of the College of Engineering’s newly centralized fiscal office, presumably in order to provide a budgetary justification of these draconian changes of faculty assignment that would otherwise have to follow established rules of contract and constitution.Which motivates which? Does the Budget cut motivate the Restructuring? Or Vice Versa?
The third email is an amazing discussion between Dean Abernathy and Mark Law about which faculty members should have which voting rights. This is outside the purview of administrators’ decision making; it is for the faculty groups to decide.