By Sophie Lange, Managing Editor
President Bob Iuliano opened Thursday’s faculty meeting by summarizing the town hall meeting, held twice a year, that occurred on Wednesday. In the fall meeting, they typically discuss the key objectives for the upcoming year.
“One is executing on the existing priorities,” Iuliano said. “We did an awful lot last year, from the new majors to the residence halls to so much more. We want to make sure that we are doing everything we can to deliver that as dynamically as possible.”
Second, he emphasized the importance of the project led by Jamie Yates, titled Gettysburg 2.0, which will be the future of how the college communicates with prospective students. Third, he discussed the college’s continued focus on financial stability. He explained that the college will need to continue examining its organization and technology use, among other things, in a consistent manner with its mission and obligations to students. Finally, Iuliano spoke about the current educational environment in a national context, including the changing relationship between higher education and the government.
“I will repeat what I said to you all at our first faculty meeting, and I said again yesterday, the best solution to this problem is for us to pay attention to the basics here,” Iuliano said. “When people want to challenge what happens in American higher education, let’s just continue to educate our students in the way we educate our students every day and get them ready for a world of impact that they do.”
He also emphasized the importance of community as a defining characteristic of the college.
Additionally, Iuliano addressed concerns about the reasons for the college’s recent update to its visual identity. The previous mark did not translate well on digital platforms, and because of the high volume of people who get their information online about Gettysburg, the college decided to update it. The college also chose this time for the change due to its proximity to both the public phase of the campaign as well as the bicentennial.
“In everything that we do, we’re trying to send a message up to the world that we are moving, adapting, evolving with the times. The updated mark helped do some of that,” Iuliano explained.
The process required consultation and collaboration with students, faculty and staff, and used funds set aside specifically for marketing.
Iuliano also announced a $4.7 million gift from former trustee Sherrin Baky-Nessler, which brought the campaign total to almost $100 million.
Provost’s Report
Provost Jamila Bookwala ceded her time to Chair of French and Italian Jack Murphy to discuss the Study Abroad Working Group.
Discussion of the Study Abroad Program
Murphy introduced the objectives of the Study Abroad Working Group, whose overarching aim is to reimagine study abroad programming at the college. The group also aims to enhance student participation and faculty engagement while ensuring the financial sustainability of study abroad programs at Gettysburg for the future.
Presently, the group meets every other week, where they examine existing program data, investigate various models for study abroad programs and brainstorm ideas. This semester, they will also meet with individual departments and programs that require participation in study abroad, including those that already require it and those that plan to require it in the future, in an effort to understand the needs and concerns. In the spring, they plan to finalize their recommendations and meet with the full faculty to both share what they are considering and gather any additional input before making their final recommendations to the president in March.
“I’m committed to making this process as transparent and as inclusive as possible. This work is too important to rush and too important to be alone. Study abroad. Changes lives, mine, yours, our students, our charge is to ensure that it remains accessible, excellent and sustainable,” Murphy said.
Introduction of the Vice President of Admissions
Iuliano introduced the new Vice President of Admissions Robert Schwartz ’92 during the faculty meeting, allowing Schwartz to speak and answer questions from faculty.
During his remarks, Schwartz spoke about his personal connection to the college as a multi-generational alumnus and his commitment to the college’s mission as a result.
“These are challenging times. We’ve talked about this… All those things are manifestly real, and you can see it in the data, and I see it every day. It can lead one to an existential question, maybe nothing we do matters,” Schwartz said. “And I would counter that, I would say that every single thing we do matters—that the entire continuum against which we operate. From a student prospect journey—all the one percents and the two percents and the three percents that we can find in that journey—those matter incredibly, and that’s the work that my team is going to embark upon.”
Then, the floor was opened up for questions. Several professors asked about the college’s ability to attract historically underrepresented students to Gettysburg, especially given the recent government restrictions placed on diversity, equity and inclusion.
“I think finding people for whom this is a different kind of place is part of the challenge we face, but we also face a change in fundamental demography in the United States, and the idea that we can continue to find the classes that we need and that we deserve here from a traditional subset of suburban audiences is false, because America has changed,” Schwartz replied. “One of the challenges… is, how do we make sure that we’re extending the way we search for those populations,… but in kind of the new emerging upper middle and middle class across the country?”
Schwartz emphasized that Gettysburg will need to think innovatively and collaborate with community-based organizations, as well as search beyond the traditional audiences where they previously focused the most effort in terms of recruitment. He also mentioned the use of data integration as part of the strategy to improve outreach and engagement efforts, particularly with diverse groups of prospective students.
Vote on Shortening the Suspension Period
The faculty voted in favor of shortening the suspension period. This matter had been discussed at the faculty meeting on Sept. 11, but the motion was tabled.
Discussion on Shortening the Drop/Add Period
The Faculty Council presented the concern that the drop-add period of two weeks is too long.
“This is the main concern that we’re hearing, and that students miss four to six or more class sessions if they join a class at the end of week two,” said Chairperson of the Faculty Council and Chairperson of the German Department Kerry Wallach. “In raising this issue today, Faculty Council is just hoping to open up and initiate a robust discussion about the length of the drop-add period.”
Registrar Brian Reese and Dean of Academic Advising and Student Success Josef Brandauer then gave a presentation on the history and rationale of the proposed changes. The last changes to the length of the add-drop period were made in 2010 and went into effect in 2011, when the decision was made to change the length from 12 class days to ten.
Currently, the Office of Registrar encourages students to make any changes to their schedules within the first week of classes, but students face challenges such as financial holds and ASE petitions that bar them from making changes to their schedules until the second week of classes. To remedy this situation, Brandauer discussed potential solutions where students must obtain instructor approval in the second week of classes to add or drop courses, or where the add and drop deadlines are two different days, with the drop period being longer than the add period.
Chairperson of Theater Arts Susan Russell asked for data regarding when the majority of drop/adds occur. She also commented on the challenges that smaller departments face in terms of reaching size caps in classes and how reducing the drop-add period would likely worsen these pressures.
Several other professors from various departments expressed that they felt the drop-add period was too long due to the amount of work that students could potentially have to do to catch up should they add the class on the second Friday.
Another professor discussed the issues with the seat numbers that differ for class years and how that can prevent underclassmen from getting into a class that they need to take. Additionally, another professor suggested different drop-add deadlines for first-year students.
The discussion did not produce a motion at this time.
Director of the Sunderman Conservatory James Day mentioned that many professors felt there was pressure to allow students to join a course during the second week.
On that topic, Brandauer said, “We had one case in the Center for Student Success, where I needed to send emails to instructors, and it was related to visa issues, and essentially, their schedules are wiped out… But we generally don’t. We really try not to overstep, because we’re concerned about pressurizing.”
(Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this article misspelled the mentioned former trustee’s name – E. Prieto)
