ADVERTISEMENT

UNL faculty offers support for Iowa colleagues' fight against regents

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
79,360
62,365
113
Bruce Harreld is set to become the 21st president at the University of Iowa next month, a whirlwind appointment that faculty at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln say highlights the importance of shared governance within a public university system.

Harreld, a former IBM executive who also taught at Harvard Business School and Northwestern University, was appointed by the University of Iowa Board of Regents last month against the recommendation of the university’s faculty, staff and students, Iowa Faculty Senate President Christina Bohannan said.

“The bottom line is we were told this was going to be an open, transparent process and faculty, staff and student input would matter a good deal,” Bohannan said. “It was completely disregarded as far as we can tell, and the regents went in another direction.”

Faculty said Harreld didn't have the necessary qualifications to lead a university and feared he would abandon shared governance for a more corporate structure, while regents said his experience leading organizations outside academia would bring new life to Iowa.

Bohannan led the Iowa Faculty Senate in a vote of "no confidence" in the regents' leadership, and similar votes were cast by student groups active on the Iowa City campus.

The issue spilled over into a meeting of faculty governance leaders at the University of Illinois, too, where several universities -- UNL included -- voiced concern about the loss of shared governance, said John Bender, a professor in the College of Journalism and Mass Communications at UNL and president of the UNL Faculty Senate.

“The Iowa situation is one of several that showed rather widespread concerns about shared governance, with an emphasis on the role faculty play in those decisions,” Bender said.

Last week, UNL’s Faculty Senate approved a resolution of support for its colleagues in Iowa, calling on the Iowa Board of Regents “to adhere to the principles of shared university governance and to ethical behavior and transparency.”

“Principles of shared governance dictate that the voice of the faculty, which carries out the core mission of the university, is accorded considerable weight in all important decisions of university governance,” the resolution states.

The vote isn’t a knock against any of the recent administrative searches conducted within the University of Nebraska system, Bender said.

“Some people were concerned on how this would be taken by the Board of Regents here in Nebraska, but we see what happened at Iowa as being in stark contrast to the way things are done here,” Bender said. “The (NU) Board of Regents has consistently conducted itself in a manner that takes into account the desires and interests of the faculty, and we hope that continues.”

Referring to the search that led to the hiring of Hank Bounds earlier this year, Bender said, “I think the search that was conducted for the president was a good example of how this should be done. We knew who the finalists were, we were able to hear them and submit our thoughts about them afterwards.”



The search for a new chancellor at UNL has also been set up with shared governance in mind, Bender said, as several faculty members have been appointed to a search advisory committee charged with assisting search firm Isaacson, Miller in recruiting and vetting candidates.

Bounds, who started in April, is committed to shared governance and engaging various stakeholder groups in the search for a chancellor to replace Harvey Perlman, who will retire in June, spokeswoman Melissa Lee said in an email.

“Faculty are represented on the search advisory committee, their input was solicited during the development of the position profile, and they will be encouraged to attend public forums with the finalists and share their thoughts,” Lee said. “Feedback from faculty members is an important part of this process.”

The chancellor position has been advertised, while a job description is forthcoming following several meetings between search consultants and UNL stakeholders.

“The Faculty Senate had a role in submitting some recommendations on that committee both for faculty members and others, and a plurality of the members of that advisory committee are faculty members,” Bender said. “At this point, we’re very pleased with the shape that it is taking.”

Bohannan said while it's unclear how the "no confidence" vote will color the faculty's future interactions with regents at Iowa, the campus is ready to begin working with Harreld.

"We're at a point where we want to move the institution forward," she said, "and we've come to a point where we want to separate the issues we had with the process and try to move forward."

http://journalstar.com/news/local/e...cle_75651c90-7248-52f1-a0bf-a84b208a6f4f.html
 
It is just killing you that a con got the position isn't it? You are one strange little dude Ciggy. If a Republican wins the presidential election you going to be OK?
 
A faculty at a second rate school offering their support. Let me know when Kirkwood jumps in.
 
It is just killing you that a con got the position isn't it? You are one strange little dude Ciggy. If a Republican wins the presidential election you going to be OK?
Harreld's not a died-in-the-wool conservative. In fact, if you've read his CV, bios from various business publications, his own writings, he's much more aligned with a libertarian philosophy. My personal belief is that while Harreld's certainly not the popular choice among us I honestly don't think he's going to be as much of a pawn of Branstad and Rastetter as some may think.

The point people keep missing is not the selection of Harreld specifically, but rather the lack of transparency and lies perpetrated by Rastetter and the BoR.

This whole fiasco is a black eye on the University of Iowa, and whether lay people understand it of not it's a big negative among those in the field.
 
He is more qualified to President of the University of Iowa than

Berry Obama was to be President of the United States!

Hey but thats different to liberals!
 
Harreld's not a died-in-the-wool conservative. In fact, if you've read his CV, bios from various business publications, his own writings, he's much more aligned with a libertarian philosophy. My personal belief is that while Harreld's certainly not the popular choice among us I honestly don't think he's going to be as much of a pawn of Branstad and Rastetter as some may think.

The point people keep missing is not the selection of Harreld specifically, but rather the lack of transparency and lies perpetrated by Rastetter and the BoR.

This whole fiasco is a black eye on the University of Iowa, and whether lay people understand it of not it's a big negative among those in the field.
First, saying that he's more of a libertarian doesn't really cheer me up that much.

Second, the fact that Brandstad and Rastetter plucked him out of obscurity and then orchestrated a massive scam to select him president tells me THEY think he's a pawn, and if he doesn't think so, he better figure it out pretty damn quick. Those two lads take no prisoners.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Liberals cant lose their status or tenure! I mean just raise tuition again so the liberal fat cats can keep their jobs doing nothing!!!!
 
First, saying that he's more of a libertarian doesn't really cheer me up that much.

Second, the fact that Brandstad and Rastetter plucked him out of obscurity and then orchestrated a massive scam to select him president tells me THEY think he's a pawn, and if he doesn't think so, he better figure it out pretty damn quick. Those two lads take no prisoners.
I don't know. Just based on my readings I think he's perfectly capable of being in charge and making decisions not necessarily in line with those around him.

I still don't like how his selection took place and firmly believe Steinmetz was the best candidate among the 4, but I don't think Harreld will make wholesale changes that will see tenured faculty leaving in droves. If anything, there might be expansion in various revenue generating ventures. Perhaps more corporate participation in research (which can be tricky, since they have a bottom line and not always sympathetic to negative findings). Expansion of patent opportunities, maybe even greater promotion of the UI Foundation. Start up funds for new faculty researchers is another issue that is a huge deal in recruiting.

I also think there could be more oversight and review of individual departments' budget practices. Maybe a decrease in approved sabbaticals (that's really pocket change in the whole scheme of things, but at least it's an effort toward controlling costs).
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Harreld's not a died-in-the-wool conservative.

WOB? I think so.

(Again, though, this is one where you would have to figure out, without tipping off the alleged offender, if the person just did a typo or mispelled, or, if they think that phrase really pertains to death, and not fabric preparation.)
 
WOB? I think so.

(Again, though, this is one where you would have to figure out, without tipping off the alleged offender, if the person just did a typo or mispelled, or, if they think that phrase really pertains to death, and not fabric preparation.)
Call it a WOB if you wish (though it really was a typo). Pretty cool one, I might add :p:cool::D
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
Can someone please explain why the BOR and Branstad are supposedly out to get the U of I, even though they are very pro Iowa in their makeup?
 
Can someone please explain why the BOR and Branstad are supposedly out to get the U of I, even though they are very pro Iowa in their makeup?
It's a difference in philosophies about how a major academic/research/health care institution should be run.

Think about the proposed changes in state-funding for the 3 regent universities. Iowa State and UNI would benefit greatly from such a model at Iowa's expense. Wouldn't that make you a bit suspect about the motives of the BoR?

Also, just because Branstad and Rastetter attended the University of Iowa does not make them by default "pro-Iowa." Both are dyed-in-the-wool :) republicans and know that they are not popular with much of the University community. I'm not saying they would necessarily do things detrimental to Iowa (well, the funding proposal may qualify), but I don't think they're going to go out of their way to do things that benefit the University as a whole. I can see them using this as an opportunity for "experimenting" with a non-traditional university president in a way that can only benefit them. If it works out, they look like geniuses. If Harreld's a bust, they'll just blame it on a lack of cooperation from the Iowa faculty.

I honestly don't think the BoR would have gone this route had this been Iowa State or UNI. I firmly believe they would have gone with a typical academic.
 
Last edited:
It is just killing you that a con got the position isn't it? You are one strange little dude Ciggy. If a Republican wins the presidential election you going to be OK?

Not in the least. Heck, I don't even know what his political leanings are, nor do you, likely. If a conservative was qualified for the position and was selected through and open and transparent search, and was clearly the most qualified candidate, I would have absolutely no problem with the selection. The fact that a clearly unqualified candidate was selected after a sham search over clearly more qualified candidates bothers me, as it should any taxpayer in Iowa or supporter of the University of Iowa..
 
I don't know. Just based on my readings I think he's perfectly capable of being in charge and making decisions not necessarily in line with those around him.

I still don't like how his selection took place and firmly believe Steinmetz was the best candidate among the 4, but I don't think Harreld will make wholesale changes that will see tenured faculty leaving in droves. If anything, there might be expansion in various revenue generating ventures. Perhaps more corporate participation in research (which can be tricky, since they have a bottom line and not always sympathetic to negative findings). Expansion of patent opportunities, maybe even greater promotion of the UI Foundation. Start up funds for new faculty researchers is another issue that is a huge deal in recruiting.

I also think there could be more oversight and review of individual departments' budget practices. Maybe a decrease in approved sabbaticals (that's really pocket change in the whole scheme of things, but at least it's an effort toward controlling costs).
Oh, you could be right. Maybe Harreld is just what we need and Terry and Bruce really DO know what's best for the University of Iowa. However, the fact that they went to the trouble of creating an elaborate sham selection process in the process of installing the guy they want leaves me somewhat suspicious. They could have installed Harreld without wasting time and money on 40 some applicants, however many members of the selection committee and the headhunter.
 
Oh, you could be right. Maybe Harreld is just what we need and Terry and Bruce really DO know what's best for the University of Iowa. However, the fact that they went to the trouble of creating an elaborate sham selection process in the process of installing the guy they want leaves me somewhat suspicious. They could have installed Harreld without wasting time and money on 40 some applicants, however many members of the selection committee and the headhunter.
I totally agree that it was a complete waste of time and money for them to announce this public, "transparent" selection process only to have it be a total sham.

I was mostly just playing devil's advocate. I don't trust Branstad or Rastetter any farther than I can throw them (you can throw Robillard in the mix as well, but that's from personal experience with him). Both Branstad and Rastetter are crooks as far as I'm concerned and I don't think they truly know what's best for the University of Iowa. I'm simply saying that I don't think the hiring of Harreld will necessarily be the death knell of the University of Iowa as we know it. I don't think we'll see any great improvement with him, but I don't think we'll end up looking for hand outs either.

I think I would be a little less concerned had Harreld been given a shorter contract (2-3 years, with an option of renewal) instead of the 5 years up front he was given. He has no upper level academic administrative experience, and frankly his first year or so will mostly be on-the-job training for him.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT