TO: Virginia Horvath, President,
Terry Brown, Provost, Andy Karafa, Dean, Carmen
Rivera, Associate Dean,
Tracy Horth, Secretary
FROM:
Stephen Kershnar, Chair, Ray
Belliotti, Neil Feit, and Dale Tuggy
RE: Elimination
of the Philosophy Department
DATE:
April 4, 2017
Part One:
Opposition to Elimination
In his recent Right Serving Right
Sizing memorandum, Dean Karafa wrote as follows about the Department of Philosophy.
[A]
reorganization of CLAS is worth exploring. For example, as noted above,
Philosophy’s enrollment has steadily declined and is now at 10 primary majors.
(There are 9 secondary majors.) The work of the faculty has done to further
streamline an already structurally simple program and revise its schedule to
meet student demand is commendable. Unfortunately, it is likely not enough to
stem the decline. (Declining enrollment is common across the country.) An
examination of merging this department with another within CLAS is worth
consideration.
The
philosophy department strongly opposes its elimination, which would be the
result of the sort of merger Dean Karafa describes. Below are our reasons
against elimination.
It is worth noting that some members
of the department were told about the plan to dissolve it (and move the faculty
into the English Department) well before Right Serving Right Sizing. If this information
was accurate, then it seems that this plan is not a response to the
Right Serving Right Sizing study. We do not know if this was done for financial
reasons, to get back at faculty that have opposed administration initiatives,
or another reason.[1] If
there was a discussion of this merger, we do not know why the philosophy
faculty were not included in the discussion.
Part Two: Reasons against
Elimination
Reason #1: Minimal
Savings and Substantial Costs
The
savings generated by eliminating the philosophy department are small. The
savings amount to the cost of three additional classes annually (assuming a
philosophy professor does not serve as an associate chair), yearly chair
stipend, and in the long term, an addition to the previous chair’s base. In the
short term, this is roughly $13,000 per year (= [($3,000/class) x 3 classes] +
$4,000 stipend). These savings are not great. When compared to the negative statewide
attention that the campus will receive for eliminating the department, the
negative national attention and protests on philosophical/academic blogs and
related venues, and the risk of damaging a cheap and efficient academic department,
even these expected costs of elimination far exceed the benefits.
On
Sunday, April 2, we sent an informational email to philosophy department
chairpersons in the SUNY system regarding Dean Karafa’s suggestion. We are
waiting for more responses, but as we finalize this memo just two days later,
we have already received support – including a willingness to write public
letters protesting our elimination – from six of our SUNY comprehensive peer
departments. Other departments have the issue on upcoming agendas.
Note
that every one of Fredonia’s SUNY competitors has an independent philosophy
department. See the comprehensive colleges (Brockport, Buffalo State, Cortland,
Geneseo, New Paltz, Oneonta, Oswego, Plattsburgh, Potsdam, Purchase) and the
university centers (Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, and Stony Brook). If President
Horvath and Provost Brown decide to eliminate the department, this will expose
Fredonia as conspicuously imprudent, in a way that is inconsistent with our
stated vision as a “premier public university.” A public university without a
philosophy department is a lower-tier institution that does not take the
liberal arts seriously.
Moreover,
the department is cheap and efficient. The
Data Notebook data indicate that the department’s direct instructional cost per
SCH is $224, which is below the institution average of $244. We suspect that
since Ray Belliotti was on a half-year sabbatical in Fall 2014 (with full pay
while contingent faculty staffed courses) the numbers for the department are
even better in a typical year. The department’s student-faculty ratio (FTE
students taught/FTE faculty) of 19.3 also compares favorably with the
institutional average, 14.1.
The
philosophy department’s efficiency is noticeably better than the campus and,
often, better than the national average. Please see Appendix #1. This is
particularly impressive given that our small faculty needs to offer a
substantial number of upper level courses for majors and minors. The same is
true with enrollment. The philosophy department performs better than the
institution and, importantly, already meets the enrollment-ratio goal. Please
see Appendix #2. Dean Karafa’s focus on majors
(especially primary majors), while
not unimportant, is pernicious in the absence of attention to these other,
relevant, data.
One
way to see how cheap the department is by noting that the university spends considerably
more money per administrator, business professor, and higher level police
officer than per philosophy professor.[2]
Please see Appendix #3.
Another
cost has to do with the philosophy department’s unique focus and culture. Our
department focuses on providing a rigorous, deep, and balanced education in philosophy.
It also has a strong history of research excellence. (Consider the noteworthy
research done by such extraordinary professors as Ray Belliotti, Randy Dipert,
and Tibor Machan.) The department also has a friendly, positive culture. The
concern is that this unique focus and culture will be lost if the department is
eliminated by being merged into another department. This is especially true if
the philosophy subsumed into a larger department. The concern is still greater
if the department is plagued with internal strife (see, for example, English).
Reason #2: Program
Performance
The
department has fewer majors than normal, but previously it had an impressive
number of majors per tenure-track faculty. Here is the recent history. The
number of majors is down considerably, but there is little reason to believe
that it will remain down. To roughly the extent that the administration is
optimistic about reversing the decline in overall enrollment, it should be
optimistic about the number of philosophy majors.
Table 1. Majors
|
Year
|
Number
Majors
|
|
2008
|
33
|
|
2009
|
43
|
|
2010
|
38
|
|
2011
|
42
|
|
2012
|
36
|
|
2013
|
32
|
|
2014
|
22
|
|
2015
|
17
|
|
2016
|
19
|
|
Average
|
33 majors per year
|
The
lower recent numbers should take into account (a) the 24% decrease in the
number of students at the university, (b) the decrease in humanities and other departments
more generally, and (c) the elimination by the administration of the large section
of our introductory class that was our best recruiting tool.[3]
Our
placement is excellent. A significant number of graduates over the past four
years are now attending (or have recently finished) top notch law schools and philosophy
programs. Two of these students are at Ph.D. programs at Indiana and Syracuse
(ranked in the top 25 and 40 in the nation, respectively) on free rides. Others
are at Minnesota law, Arizona Law, Wake Forest Law (on free rides), and others
are at Brooklyn and Albany Law, and four others are at philosophy or other MA
programs. In the past decade or so, our students have attended the following
excellent law schools and MBA programs (Penn, Duke, William & Mary,
Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana, Rutgers, Ohio State, Wake Forest, Case Western,
Brooklyn, Syracuse, and SUNY-Buffalo) and strong graduate programs (Duke,
Indiana, Syracuse, University of Missouri, Northern Illinois University, Ohio
University, University of Victoria, and University of Miami).
Reason #3:
National Climate
The dean made the following argument
with regard to a few interdisciplinary majors.
Other majors and minors have
less-than-obvious homes. The majors Women’s and Gender Studies and American
Studies and minor Ethnic Studies are good examples of this. … Given the
national climate; our students need the content. Unfortunately, few are getting
it, at least not from the curriculum. Many are impacted by the outreach (e.g.,
national speakers) made possible by the area’s budget.
While
we are not entirely clear what “national climate” refers to, it seems that
whatever argument can be made for students needing these interdisciplinary
majors applies to philosophy as well. What students need now is the sort of
critical thinking about regional, national, and global affairs that is the
primary focus of a philosophy course or program. Eliminating the philosophy
department will diminish its ability to provide greatly needed content and
skills to students.
Part Three:
Conclusion
In summary, the philosophy
department does not think that its elimination is good for students or the
university. It endangers the unique focus and culture, the savings are minimal,
and the department has over the last decade done a good job of generating
majors and graduates, as well as contributing significantly to general
education in the humanities and western civilization.
Appendix #1:
Efficiency
Table 2. Efficiency
|
Area
|
Department
(percentage
compared to institution)
|
Institution
|
National Average
|
Comment
|
|
% Undergraduate SCH taught be
tenure-track faculty
|
55% (106%)
|
52%
|
54%
|
This is impressive given that the
tenure-track faculty have to teach the higher-level classes that typically
have fewer students than the introductory classes.
|
|
SCH per faculty FTE (all categories)
|
289 (140%)
|
207
|
249
|
This speaks for itself.
|
|
Direct instructional expenditure
per FTE Student
|
$6,731
(6%
better)
|
$7,167
|
$5,075
|
This is true even though the
department has only four tenure-track professors, all of whom are senior
professors.
|
|
Direct instructional cost
(Expenditure) per SCH
|
$224
(8%
better)
|
$244
|
$169
|
See above.
|
|
Direct instructional cost
(Expenditure) per FTE SCH (without FB)
|
$183
(7%
better)
|
$197
|
N/A
|
See above.
|
Appendix #2: Enrollment
Table 3. Enrollment
|
Area
|
Department
(Fall 2013-Spring 2016 Avg.)
[Percentage compared to
institution]
|
Institution
|
Goal
|
Comment
|
|
Enrollment Ratio
|
87.98%
[3.5%
better]
|
85.00%
|
85.00
|
|
|
Balanced Course Ratio
|
42.07%
[31%
better]
|
32%
|
60%
|
This is a very favorable
comparison.
|
|
Enrollment Cap
|
34
(Fall 2011-Spring 2016)
[31%
better]
|
26
|
N/A
|
See above.
|
|
Average Enrollment
|
29.5
(Fall 2011-Spring 2016)
[40%
better]
|
21
|
N/A
|
See above
|
Appendix #3:
Salaries
Table 4. Sample Salaries*
|
Arnavut,
Ziya
|
Prof,
CS
|
$107,222
|
|
Belliotti,
Raymond
|
DTP,
Philosophy
|
$137,773
|
|
Boisjoly,
Russell
|
Dean,
Business
|
$161,
362
|
|
Burns,
Ann
|
Police
Chief
|
$123,078
|
|
Cornell,
Charles
|
Incubator
|
$78,
593
|
|
Daley,
Michael
|
HR
Director
|
$121,529
|
|
Feit,
Neil
|
DTP,
Philosophy
|
$81,837
|
|
Givner,
Christine
|
Dean,
Education
|
$152,162
|
|
Hall,
Linda
|
Prof.,
Business
|
$141,362
|
|
Horowitz,
Judith
|
Assoc.
Provost
|
$124,638
|
|
Horvath,
Virginia
|
President
|
$215,
739
|
|
Huang,
Lei
|
Asst.
Prof, Business
|
$108,959
|
|
Hunter,
Lisa
|
Assoc.
Provost
|
$121,495
|
|
Kearns,
Kevin
|
Academic
Engagement
|
$175,115
|
|
Kershnar,
Stephen
|
DTP,
Philosophy
|
$83,500
|
|
Martin,
Scott
|
Police,
Fredonia
|
$115,502
|
|
McNamara,
Susan
|
Asst.
Prof, Business
|
$116,375
|
|
Miller,
Benjamin
|
Police,
Fredonia
|
$99,371
|
|
Mohammed,
Shazad
|
Assoc.
Prof, Business
|
$105,543
|
|
Prechtl,
Greg
|
Athletic
Dir., Fredonia
|
$113,849
|
|
Robinson,
Richard
|
Prof.,
Fredonia
|
$145,930
|
|
Studley,
Brian
|
Police,
Fredonia
|
$110,069
|
|
Tuggy,
Dale
|
Prof.,
Philosophy
|
$77,
969
|
|
Walters,
Lisa
|
Assoc.
Prof, Business
|
$100,872
|
|
Wheeler,
Clifton
|
Police,
Fredonia
|
$138,017
|
|
Yi,
Taihyeup
|
Assoc.
Prof, Business
|
$115,866
|
*This
appears to include extra pay (for example, summer classes, overtime, and
stipends).
Appendix #4:
Graduation
Table 5. Graduates
|
Period
|
Graduates
per year
|
Number
of graduates
|
|
2013-2016
|
11
students/year
|
32
students
(projected
43 over 4 years)
|
|
2009-2013
|
10
students/year
|
50
students
|
|
1999-2003
|
4.6
students/year
|
23
students
|
|
1989-1993
|
3.2
students/year
|
16
students
|
|
1979-1983
|
2.2
students/year
|
11students
|
[1] A previous dean
told the philosophy department that the administration was aware of their
pattern of questioning the administration and that it made them very unhappy
with the department. The questioning was well within the appropriate range of
academic discussion and governance. Here is what the unhappiness likely rested
on.
·
Administrative
Review.
Dale Tuggy and Steve Kershnar tried to allow the university senate access to
reviews of the administrative divisions. It had long been a right of senators,
but was eliminated by senate chair and English Department chair Bruce Simon.
·
General Education
Program.
Ray Belliotti, Neil Feit, and Kershnar led the opposition to the new general
education program. The senate voted down the first two versions.
·
Enhanced
Presidential Ceremonies. Belliotti was a leading commentator on the greatly
enhanced ceremonies welcoming the appointment of the new president: Virginia
Horvath. The ceremonies were far more than what had been done for previous
presidents.
·
Faculty Voting. Feit and Kershnar
were part of the effort to retain faculty voting on new hires and chairs (it
has been in effect eliminated in the case of hires and there was an attempt to
eliminate it in the case of chair selection). The administration does appear to
have stealthily eliminated the faculty right to vote on new hires, although
this does not appear to be consistent throughout the college. At least two
deans opposed faculty voting on the chair and tried to implement a right of the
administration to vet chair candidates before the faculty were allowed to vote
on them.
·
Free Speech. Kershnar was
denied a promotion by President Hefner and Vice President Horvath. There was
then attempt to negotiate a prior-restraint requirement on his public writings.
The negotiation broke down. Eventually, this was reversed but only after the
college received a lot of bad publicity.
·
Associate Provost. Neil Feit was
among a group of senators to move to recommend against hiring two Associate Provosts in Academic
Affairs, and later (after two were hired) he pressed Associate Provost Horowitz
on the decision to hire a grants development specialist to fill the line left
vacant by Maggie Bryan-Peterson’s departure.
·
Senior
Lectureship.
The department’s request for a full-time position for its long-term contingent
faculty (Chris Pacyga) has consistently been denied, despite the fact that similar
requests were granted for many other departments.
·
UUP Matter. In a case
involving President Hefner’s denying an award to a faculty member who was
chosen by relevant committee, Belliotti and Kershnar pointed out that leading
administrators were saying contradictory things to Hefner and the union. Hefner
appeared to be none too pleased. The next year the faculty member received the
award.
[2]
In contrast
to the attempt to save $13,000, consider over the last few years, the
administration has found the money to fund a new division (including a new vice
president who earned $175,000 last year) and an additional associate provost.
It also hired an administrative team that is almost entirely external to the
university. The last point can be seen in that none of the following came from
the faculty: music director, four deans, two associate provosts, provost, and
president. This adds cost to the university because the people are not
temporarily removed from the faculty salary rolls. Instead, they are added onto
the rolls on top of the faculty.
[3] It is worth
noting that we received inconsistent explanations of why the class was
eliminated. On one version, given from Dean Roger Byrne allegedly on behalf of
President Horvath, the class was simply too large. On a second version, explicitly
given by Provost Brown, the class was not too large, but the course release for
teaching it was intolerable. Regardless of which was the administrative
position, a significant recruiting opportunity has been eliminated.
