From dmonroe@med.unc.edu Wed Apr 12 14:43:16 2006 Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 14:40:07 -0400 From: Dougald Monroe To: Andrew J Perrin Subject: Re: Request for Information from Candidates for Faculty Office Dr. Perrin, Please find below responses to the questions you sent. Sincerely Dougald Monroe -- Dougald M. Monroe Associate Professor University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine Division of Hematology/Oncology 932 Mary Ellen Jones Bldg. Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7035 phone: 1 919 966-3312 fax: 1 919 966-7639 email: dmonroe@med.unc.edu To Whom it May Concern - I am writing to you as a candidate for Faculty Chair, Faculty Council, or another important elected office. I realize this is a busy time, but I and some other concerned faculty would like to learn more about the candidates' ideas on several important issues before we vote. I would very much appreciate it if you could provide responses to the questions below. Feel free to add more ideas or information as you like. I will forward your responses on to other interested faculty, and I will also post them to an informal website for the purpose at http://perrin.socsci.unc.edu/fg . Thank you in advance for your time. Since balloting begins this Wednesday (April 12), I would prefer to receive your response by then. If, however, you can't make that time, I'll be happy to post and forward your ideas whenever you can get them to me. 1.) To what extent to you believe faculty interests differ from those of administrators? I do not believe that faculty interests necessarily differ from those of administrators. I do think that, because of the demands of their job, administrators may become very focused on fiscal issues while focusing less on intellectual issues. By contrast, intellectual issues are what drive the thinking of the faculty I associate with. I do not see that this difference in focus has to be a conflict, it can be a dialog to the benefit of faculty and administration; but it has to be an ongoing dialog with a commitment by both sides (all sides if students and staff are included) to listen to the other. 2.) How should we maintain academic integrity in the face of increasing financial pressures? I admit to taking a somewhat simple-minded approach to this problem. We maintain academic integrity by deciding that we will. This may mean we (the University) cannot grow as fast as possible or get all the available money or in some other way be limited. But I submit that academic integrity is one of the highest goals of the University and is worth some limitations on our operations. 3.) What are your views on increasing inequalities within the faculty based on, for example, tenure-track vs. fixed term appointments and differing salary levels? I am not sure I am informed enough about the inequalities within the faculty to have an informed opinion. Philosophically the idea that all faculty have the same mission (teaching, research, service) and should therefore have their salaries fit within a (possibly broad) range seems fair and reasonable. However, and this is a big however for me, I do not see salaries as a zero sum game and therefore do not see any need to keep salaries uniform as a goal in and of itself. Overall, I think the best answer I can give to this is that if elected to the Faculty Council I am going to have to learn about this issue. 4.) How would you respond on behalf of the faculty if you found out that administrators had circumvented serious faculty consultation to pursue major outside funding for a controversial new curriculum? I would rather focus on how to avoid having that situation arise. Given that, I am assuming you mean circumvent in some way that bypasses existing mechanisms for faculty input. The reason I would imagine for trying to circumvent faculty input is that some aspect of the outside funding would be objectionable to some of the University community (here meaning faculty, students, and staff). So, in this hypothetical, I would protest to the administration to see if they would initiate the faculty dialog that should have been ongoing anyway; if they would not, and if I believed that the subversion of the process would harm the greater University community, I would move my protest to whatever public arena I could find that would listen. 5.) Would you prefer to see a faculty governance system that is focused on prominent University issues (e.g., academic freedom and educational policy) or one that is more focused on faculty's specific needs (e.g., benefits and salary)? Or, alternatively, how would you seek to balance the two? I think the answer to this is similar to the answer to question 1. Different parts of the University community, while all wanting the University to do well, may have different focuses. My personal interest is in University issues (academic freedom and educational policy). I see faculty needs not as a thing unto themself but rather I see serving faculty needs as part of the mechanism by which University issues are advanced. Once again, thank you for your time. Very best wishes, Andrew Perrin ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew J Perrin - andrew_perrin@unc.edu - http://perrin.socsci.unc.edu Assistant Professor of Sociology; Book Review Editor, _Social Forces_ University of North Carolina - CB#3210, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3210 USA New Book: http://www.press.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/hfs.cgi/00/178592.ctl