Dye thinks GF needs theory

General faculty listens to short presentations by Dye and Care

Faculty governance made sense to first College President Charles Finney. Of course it did, some members of the faculty say. Finney didn't preside over faculty members with working spouses, children and other things to do.

"I have the general sense there isn't much interest in faculty governance anymore," said Professor of Philosophy Norm Care.

Care, among others, is interested in trying to revive the sort of faculty governance envisioned in the so-called "Finney Compact." The Compact, penned by Finney in 1835, stipulated his acceptance of the presidency on the creation of faculty governance.

Care gave it the old college try this week, participating in an open dialogue on faculty governance with College President Nancy Dye. The dialogue was the centerpiece of Tuesday's General Faculty (GF) meeting.

"It was interesting to try to do what we tried to do," Care said. "That's not the ordinary mode of discussion."

Care and Dye delivered short prepared statements to an audience of about 100 faculty members. (see pg. 11)

Care reflected on his years at Oberlin, recalling a time when College faculty governance thrived. Care was swiftly initiated into the ranks of the Oberlin faculty in 1965.

"I was stunned," Care said. "Not only did I work at Oberlin...I also was a member of the faculty of Oberlin College. And this in fact, so it turned out, meant something. My heart went out to Oberlin on the spot. It was, as the kids say today, awesome."

Care said he believes faculty governance is an integral part of the Oberlin character, although it has deteriorated in recent years. He offered five suggestions for revitalizing faculty governance, including socializing new faculty members, creating better instruments of institutional memory and treating faculty members with respect.

"We need to be less clever and bombastic and obtuse, and more trusting and generous," Care said. "One can seek clarification of something without excessive pretense of non-understanding."

The remark was enough to draw laughter and send faculty heads turning toward suspected culprits.

"At this point, I dig in my heels, say the obvious, and hope for the best," Care said. "Without strong governance, Oberlin will, I believe, become more ordinary than we want it to be."

Dye's speech focused on the need to develop a theory of faculty governance.

"I must admit that I don't find the Finney Compact, even in its most developed manifestations, a sufficient guide to governing a complex and multifaceted institution of higher learning," Dye said. "Here is why: it does not illuminate in full or very useful ways the governance question that most persistently vexes Oberlinians. That question is, simply, 'who gets to decide what?'"

Care responded with a technique that would make the brown bag pedagogy group cringe: he drew on the blackboard.

"I'm much struck by Nancy Dye's notion that we're missing a theory of governance. What I had in mind was this," Care said with a flourish of chalk. "May I say this is something of a theory?"

Professor of Art Bill Hood was the first to speak after the presentation.

"I find myself kind of, oh, I don't know, like in the sixth grade when you knew Mrs. Cox was going to have a unit on the French and Indian War and there would be film strips," Hood said. "We need fun and companionship. I have a hunch if we continue to talk about it some solution will present itself. I hope we will be future oriented."

Despite Hood's plea, two members of the history faculty drew analogies from the past.

"I am a reluctant Madisonian," Professor of History Gary Kornblith said. "Federalist 10 is a division of authority. It's not just checks and balances, which I must say we practice very well. We're going to have to discuss spheres faculty doesn't really care to decide upon. We have to clarify what is it faculty is good at talking about."

"I think it might be useful to focus on disagreeing," Professor of History Geoffrey Blodgett said. "That's what Madison was writing about. Not so much theory but case law."

Care said he isn't optimistic about the future of faculty governance. Asked after the meeting what he expects to happen next, he said, "nothing."

The GF meeting concluded with discussion of legislation intended to clarify the procedures of the Professional Conduct Review Committee. The proposal was returned to committee.