Provost Leslie Cornick avoided a resolution for a vote of no confidence at the last Academic Senate meeting Thursday. While the senators discussed the feedback from their constituents, none of the senators moved forward with a motion to change the resolution from a discussion item to an action item, which would have forced a vote to take place.
A vote of no confidence would be presented as a sign from faculty, staff and students that they have lost faith in the provost to execute the duties of her position. The last vote of no confidence was against President Paul Zingg in 2015 – which passed.
The resolution – brought by Senator Timothy Sistrunk – presented several concerns constituents had, focusing mainly on the “reimagining academic affairs” initiative which seeks to restructure the university’s seven college model and the academic affair model.
According to Cornick, the restructuring initiative is meant to help reduce the deficit, increase enrollment and improve collaboration between colleges, while allowing for more opportunities for cross training.
Cornick has said that this process is a collaborative one meant to gather feedback to better understand what the community wants. In Phase 2, Cornick added more times for students to offer feedback and has renamed the proposed colleges to reflect the frustrations from students not seeing the name of their college being represented.
These are some of the accusations from the resolution:
- The Special Action Team had inadequate representation
- The three student representatives on the SAT didn’t receive financial compensation
- A change of narrative about the restructuring process
- Ignoring SAT recommendation during “most” of Phase 2 and Phase 3
- Lack of transparency
- Attempted to schedule webinar during spring break
- Limited interactions with students
- Failing to consult staff and address staff over concerns of impacted workload and job security
The resolution also criticized what they feel is ongoing miscommunication, citing a “… vague announcement that seems to indicate a pause in the reorganization effort, but which is fundamentally unclear regarding for how long, and has led to further confusion and concern over the process.”
The feedback from constituents that senators shared:
- Senator Qingzhang Ma from the college of business:
- Majority in support of vote of no confidence.
- Constituents shared major concerns such as about 2 million dollars in programs were “swept” away without consultation.
- The change from the COB digital marketing partner Everspring to consulting firm EAB with minimal consultation.
- COB has been without a permanent dean for two years and it has negatively impacted the COB.
- Senator Teresa Traver from college of humanities and fine arts:
- 66% of people who responded to the feedback form said they wanted a vote of no confidence on the provost this semester.
- People expressed confusion and frustration with the “reimagining of academic affairs” initiative.
- Senator Logan Smith of the college of agriculture and faculty development office:
- Didn’t receive support for the resolution from the majority of staff and tenure track and tenured faculty.
- Lecturers were in favor of no confidence vote.
- Constituents shared frustrations but were in favor of collaboration moving forward.
- Senator Catherine Lemmi from the college of communication and education:
- Sent email out to constituents and received seven people urging to vote yes and one to vote no.
- Constituents mentioned fears of retaliation and shared that they were personally impacted by issues mentioned in the resolution.
- Associated Students President and Senator Chris Sullivan:
- Addressed resolution where it mentions that student representatives of the SAT didn’t receive financial compensation. Sullivan shared that students were unable to receive compensation due to them already being awarded it as part of their duties – which they receive compensation for.
- Vice Chair Amy Magnus who represents the college of behavioral sciences:
- Sent a survey and received 60 out of about 200 responses.
- Questioned the intention of the proposal asking who the authors were and the desired goal of the proposal.
- 82% strongly disagree or somewhat disagree that the provost has effectively led academic affairs.
- 76% strongly agree or somewhat agree with the resolutions content.
- 67% said Magnus should vote yes on the resolution if it was voted on.
- Constituents pointed out a lack of clarity, communication and transparency along with mistreatment of SAT and dissatisfaction with shared governance.
- Library Senator Patrick Newell:
- At a faculty meeting constituents encourage Newell to vote yes on the resolution.
A common theme throughout the senators presenting feedback was their constituents feeling a fear of retaliation, no names gathered in the feedback was presented during the meeting.
Some senators shared frustration with the proposal, asking what specific acts the provost has done to qualify for a no confidence vote. Some senators said that the provost was receiving undue flack for circumstances outside her control, such as budget.
Other senators pushed back, Sistrunk said that it was important to note that a vote of no confidence doesn’t mean the provost has lost her job, rather it means that the community has lost faith in her ability to execute the duties of her office. Sistrunk noted that per the senators’ feedback, the majority of respondents had already lost faith.
In her opening remarks, Provost Cornick shared that she had grown to love the Chico community and that the year had brought challenges and opportunities.
Cornick said that it was important to find a common path and that they needed to be allies rather than adversaries. She welcomed questions but chose not to speak to the resolution itself.
In final remarks Cornick said that she will work to connect more with the campus community in the fall semester to solicit feedback on the best path forward. As of now, the “reimagining academic affairs” initiative has been put on pause.
While the resolution was never put to a vote in this Academic Senate meeting, it still may be discussed or voted on in next semesters meetings.
“We have more challenges ahead and we will not always agree on the path forward,” Cornick said. “What I can promise you is that I will continue to put students and our university first.”
Chris Hutton can be reached at [email protected] or [email protected]
