From dwaugh@u.washington.edu Fri Apr 7 19:42:09 PDT 1995 >From PVTON@ttacs1.ttu.edu Fri Apr 7 19:42:09 1995 Return-Path: Received: from mx5.u.washington.edu by lists.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW95.02/UW-NDC Revision: 2.32 ) id AA14356; Fri, 7 Apr 95 19:42:09 -0700 Received: from ttacs1.ttu.edu by mx5.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW95.02/UW-NDC Revision: 2.31 ) id AA02903; Fri, 7 Apr 95 19:42:07 -0700 Received: from ttacs.ttu.edu by ttacs.ttu.edu (PMDF V4.3-10 #8407) id <01HP2M82TYTS8ZFEE8@ttacs.ttu.edu>; Fri, 07 Apr 1995 21:42:14 -0600 (CST) Date: Fri, 07 Apr 1995 21:42:12 -0600 (CST) From: PVTON@ttacs1.ttu.edu Subject: Slavic Dept. cut (fwd) To: slavic-uw@u.washington.edu Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 07 Apr 1995 18:38:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Daniel Waugh To: reecasf@u.washington.edu Cc: charlo@u.washington.edu, nan@u.washington.edu, dmiles@u.washington.edu, nlardy@u.washington.edu, PVTON@ttacs.ttu.edu Subject: Slavic Dept. cut I am sending this to REECAS faculty, and to the various student groups for which I have lists (REECAS grad and undergrad, history, polysci, central asia, geography). Will someone please forward it to Slavic Dept. students and to the uw-slavic list. I am not going to go into the issue of injustice or rationality here but rather try to summarize the essential points that came out in my conversation with Associate Dean Dunn this afternoon. To the extent that this repeats information you have already received, I apologize in advance. The Slavic Department is being terminated as an independent administrative entity. Six positions from the department will be retained as a unit but placed in some yet-to-be determined new home as part of something else. The reason that the new home has not yet been determined is that the administration felt it could not enter into negotiations on the matter without tipping its hand as to what it was considering. So that matter is still quite open, and presumably Slavic faculty have some say as to where it might be. Those six positions include two of the current Russian literature positions, the two senior lecturers, and the two Assistant Professors who are East European specialists. The remaining faculty will go to other departments--the tenured linguists to Linguistics, the remaining tenured literature specialists presumably to Comparative Literature. Which of the literature professors end up in which place is up to them and the current Slavic faculty to figure out. The goal in the first instance in creating this new sub-department of six is that there be a place where a range and various levels of necessary languages (and presumably at least some literature) be taught, and this did provide a means of keeping the current Assistant Professors, whose records and promise are valued highly by the administration. It is an unusual arrangement, and this "compromise" was not easily arrived at (the situation that we all consider terrible could have been even worse--that is, the assistant professor positions could have been eliminated). The administration is making the commitment that the Assistant Professors will be fully eligible to proceed toward tenure in the same way that they would have if the current departmental structure had been preserved. Furthermore, the administration is making the commitment to preserve at least these six positions in the new configuration (that is, if any of the six leaves, retires, or whatever, that slot would be filled). There is even the possibility that somewhere down the line, an open position elsewhere could be added to this sub-unit, but presumably never with the expectation that a fully independent Slavic Dept. would be re-constituted. I raised the issue of whether this new entity really would be able to cover even the language teaching needs--e.g., at least four years of Russian with a sufficient number of sections--that is, would it not need some TAs. The answer was that indeed TAs would be needed, but it was not clear how the funding would be found. We did not discuss the issue of whether TAs could be found to do the job once the current group of graduate students leaves. The intent seems to be that there will be an undergraduate degree and probably an M.A., but that there would no longer be a Ph.D. program in Slavic literature or linguistics. I have no idea what those degrees might be called or really would involve, and the issue of what the possible curriculum is for students in this new entity is something that those who would inhabit it will have to determine. Presumably the faculty who end up in Linguistics or Comp. Lit. could continue to teach courses in their area of specialization (assuming those departments consented). One option that may be explored is to create a Ph.D. program analogous to the one that recently was created in Middle East Studies (under the direct administration of the Grad. School, in that case, not under NEL&C). That is, this would be a "studies" degree that presumably would be broader than a literature or linguistics degree but could accomodate people with, say, a desire to focus in the first instance on language and literature. I raised the question of whether such a degree would be viable/marketable; the response was that there was need to study how the MES one is working out. We discussed issues of the impact on the Title VI grant; I insisted that there was no way of whitewashing this to pretend we had not been seriously undercut. I am writing a letter to Ann Schneider, our program officer at the Dept. of Education, in which I am going to argue that we should not be reduced in the remaining two years of the current grant, because we can still fulfill the promises we made for the projects for which we have received funding. Since the question of a possible home in the Jackson School came up, I gave my personal opinion that such an arrangement needed to be explored but that I had no idea whether the Jackson School would accept it. I did emphasize that I personally am fed up with administrative obligations and am definitely not seeking more onerous ones. I also indicated, as I have in conversations with some REECAS faculty recently, that possibly spinning off the REECAS B.A. into the new entity that emerges from the rubble might make some sense, since it could help strengthen its identity as a viable program. In such a scenario, presumably the current REECAS M.A. would stay where it is. Obviously there are many important issues not addressed here. We did not go into the question of whether the new arrangement really would serve the needs of current majors so that they be able to finish their degrees. The assumption seems to be that the current faculty would be around for that to happen, although at the same time, it is clear that a lot of curriculum is going to have to be dismantled (again, we did not really get into that issue; Dunn made clear that the Slavists will need to start working on a plan to resolve some of these issues). I assume that if one of the faculty remaining outside of the "rump Slavic" sub-unit were to leave sooner, there would indeed be no replacement; and that obviously could create a serious problem, especially for any current graduate students. The issue of when the new alignment would become fully operable was not adequately addressed, except that they want it to be in place by the end of the current fiscal year. One of the unanswered questions here (it does need to be asked) concerns when students would be able to become majors in this new entity, and whether any of the pending graduate applications (if the individuals are applying for an M.A.) can be accepted. My guess is that until the new alignment is fixed, the freeze will still be on. It is clear that they expect there may be an appeal, but equally clear they expect it will not succeed. Although I do not remember the exact wording on this part of the exchange, Dunn himself raised the issue of whether a bailout might happen and indicated he saw no way that would likely happen. Whatever their current information from Olympia is, they consider it is not optimistic; my guess is, as we have suspected all along, even some largess from there is not going to make them discover they can save the department. I expect to be at my machine much of the weekend and will respond if you have any questions, or you can try calling me (543-4686). Dan Waugh .