By Ella Prieto, Editor-in-Chief
President’s Report
The Faculty Meeting began with a report on the work of Gettysburg 2.0 by President Bob Iuliano. He updated that the College is currently conducting market research, surveying students admitted last year and those who expressed interest in attending this year. The survey questions are designed to determine what draws students in, as well as what is largely known about the College and how it compares to its competitors, both among similar liberal arts schools and large universities.
While that research is pending, the College is continuing its work groups, co-led by a faculty member and an administrator, to develop additional suggestions for enhancement. In late winter/early spring, market research results should be available, allowing the College to crystallize its ideas about what it should do moving forward, which will then go through the governance process. Ultimately, Iuliano hopes that by Fall 2027, decisions will begin to be implemented.
“We have the tools to meet this moment in a really powerful way,” stated Iuliano. “We don’t know what the future is going to hold, but I’m completely confident we have in our hands that ability to shape that future.”
Provost’s Report
Provost Jamila Bookwala took over the meeting then, thanking the Faculty Council for giving her additional time for her remarks concerning faculty concerns related to the Provost’s Office work. The concerns came from the anonymous employee feedback form.
First, Bookwala addressed complaints about the tone of emails from the Provost’s office.
“I see it as absolutely unacceptable that we in our office be disrespectful or dismissive to any colleague in our communications,” she began. “We don’t have concrete examples of situations for such unacceptable behavior, and therefore we cannot apologize or otherwise rectify the situation individually. However, I take this opportunity to simply apologize to you for communication from me or anyone in the Provost’s Office that been disrespectful or rude toward you.”
Bookwala also mentioned that when the Provost’s Office is delivering disappointing decisions, it can be difficult to do so in a satisfying manner. Still, the Office will work to do better. To do so, Bookwala asked for partnership from the faculty in informing the Office when communication feels dismissive, so they can take direct action.
Additionally, she plans to engage in a holistic review of the Office and its work in the eyes of the faculty to sense the areas that are going well and the areas that can be improved. Next year, the Office is also assessing the changes implemented last year related to course gaps, minimum enrollment and course cancellation, for which they will seek advice from the Faculty Council.
The next concern pertained to faculty retention. Bookwala explained that the Office wants all faculty to remain at the College, but the unprecedented times in academia, particularly in liberal arts colleges, have caused external forces and internal budgetary strains that must be addressed. Often, the College cannot match competing offers. Bookwala has asked the Faculty Finance Committee to help develop a set of guiding principles for retaining faculty so that there are a known philosophy and framework to inform efforts for faculty retention.
Still, efforts to retain faculty have been made, such as an equity adjustment on faculty salaries, built in flexibility in the use of professional development funds and conference travel support, running mentoring circles for faculty at different points in their career and providing financial support for initiatives that enable faculty to strengthen their scholarly development and the College’s reputation.
The faculty also expressed concerns about the Faculty Recruitment Guide that was distributed to Search Committee Chairs this year, particularly the lack of faculty consultation in its creation. Bookwala explained that recruitment practices fall under the Human Resources work that the Provost’s Office does, which is why faculty were not consulted.
“We meant no disrespect to faculty in doing this work, and our goal was certainly not to upset the faculty. I am not implying here that we cannot or should not do more to be with collaborative with faculty,” said Bookwala. “Indeed, we have been trying to be more deliberate and intentional about seeking faculty input in our Office’s work.”
Examples of this collaboration include the efforts in reenvisioning the College’s study abroad program, the increase in lecturer positions on the faculty, and more faculty involvement.
Bookwala ended with what she said to the faculty when she first arrived to the College in Fall 2023.
“It is an honor for me to serve as your Provost, and I wish I could articulate fully how hard our Office works in service of the College. We don’t get everything right, but we are guided by the principles of trying to serve better.”
Report on Tenured Faculty Transferring Departments Policy
Next, Chair of Interdisciplinary Studies Vern Cisney, Chair of Philosophy & Religious Studies Gary Mullen and Chair of East Asian Studies Eleanor Hogan presented their work to create a policy on tenured faculty transferring departments. While this situation is rare, it can be very delicate, so the College wanted to create a structure for it to take place, as there is currently no policy regarding it.
Professor of Environmental Studies Rud Platt asked why a policy is needed instead of handling situations on a case-by-case basis.
Hogan explained that the policy includes a Memorandum of Understanding, which would allow for customization of the cases. Still, a policy is needed to formalize the process and create better understanding.
Associate Professor of Philosophy & Religious Studies David Walsh expressed that he is in favor of the process including departmental voice because of a situation in his own department where a tenured professor left. He felt that the department was not given a thorough explanation on why the switch was happening. Walsh also had the schedule of the policy clarified, with faculty needing to submit for a change by Sept. 15 to take place for the following academic year. This deadline was set to account for staffing issues.
Associate Professor of Spanish Jenifer Dumont worried that there was no way for a tiebreaker to occur if the two departments involved in the transfer disagreed, suggesting that the policy could include a process specifically for negotiations or appeals. Professor of Economics Charles Weise countered that it was important not to have a tie-breaking process, as each department should fully consent.
Lastly, Associate Professor of Asian Studies Yoko Nishimura asked how much information would be shared between all the parties in the transferring process with this new policy. Hogan answered that information sharing is not explicitly laid out in the policy, with Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs Michelle Schmidt adding that individuals votes on the transfer would not be shared, but how each department voted overall would be.
Faculty Announcements
Associate Professor of Chemistry & Biochemistry Michael Wedlock encouraged faculty to join Gettysburg College’s Accessibility Advisory Group, which works to proactively create a welcoming and accessible campus to all community members and visitors.
A representative from the Faculty Development Committee alerted tenured and tenure-track faculty to look out for a letter from them discussing amending the faculty handbook.
Dean of Academic Advising & Student Success Josef Brandauer invited all in attendance to Friday Afternoon Social Hour (FASH).
(Editor’s Note: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated a word of Provost Bookwala’s quote – E. Prieto).
