 |
| Re-organization Model a la Jacobs, et al. |
 |
| Alternate Re-Organization Model |
 |
| Organization Model |
Bloggie hopes to facilitate open discussions about forthcoming college mergers. It seems to Bloggie that already some are attempting to contain and herd these discussions in self serving directions. We need fewer not more bureaucrats. But perhaps in this space we can have a free range discussion of what faculty (not just a select few) and students would like to see.
Bloggie, for one, would like to see a reunited college with a new dean, nationally searched-for, ideally, but in any case, not someone with a lot of old baggage, and not some one with a history of soul-selling; simplified requirements that would included freedom from burdensome language requirements for students (substituted for by research methods or other advanced analytic classes that may be more relevant to life in Toledo and environs); strong independent, adaptable departments capable of interdisciplinary efforts and degree programs; and also a strong Honors program!
What do you think?
Amendment: Bloggie has added relevant materials below and will add additional relevant materials if they become available. Bloggie apologizes for format changes caused by reproducing documents here. These are Draft Documents. An additional document was added below as of 31 Jan.
Document 1.
-
January 2016
The
faculty of the current College of Languages, Literature, and Social Sciences is
keenly interested in and excited by the prospect of a new college, for which we
suggest the name (to be determined).
The
intriguing challenge we have before us is the shaping of fourteen diverse
departments and nine programs into a rich and unified entity, one that is
deftly responsive to change, to student need, and to the exigencies of higher
education in the 21st century.
The arts, the humanities, the social and behavioral sciences, and
interdisciplinary programs should be unified in their commitment to
understanding and demonstrating how our disciplines, in their traditions and
their innovations, help create the future. The new college has the potential to
become a locus and a guide for the rest of the University in promoting the
value of liberal education, appealing to students’ curiosity and desire for
knowledge and creative expression, their wish to understand how ideas fit
together across disciplines, their inclination to enrich their professional and
practical ambitions with a sense of the great mosaic of human inquiry. It is consistent with the University’s
mission that that students find a place here to develop intellectual agility
and moral understanding, to educate their creativity, their senses, and their
emotions as well as their minds, to develop strategies for best navigating the
flood of information and entertainment that technology delivers, to learn to
balance action and contemplation, to practice the crucial lifelong skills of
listening, employing qualitative and quantitative empirical analyses, weighing
evidence, problem solving, and articulating complex thoughts, plans, and ideas.
These are high-order skills that have practical value that will not erode as
the 21st century progresses.
They are essential in the development of new information and are
applicable in every field of investigation as well as business and the
professions. In creating a new college, faculty and administration can
re-envision our mutual goals, and find innovative and active ways to deepen and
enrich our students’ educational journey.
A new college must be the central space in which our students think in
ways that may or may not be immediately utilitarian, but ultimately and for the
long run lead to increased knowledge and problem solving abilities and thus
prove indispensable in a globalized world.
A
University is constantly created and recreated. President Gaber’s invitation to
the faculty to participate in this particular recreation should be seized as a
healing of unnecessary fracturing and as a hope for the future. The Arts, the
Humanities, and the Social Sciences must recognize each other as allies and
collaborators: what promotes the visibility, vibrancy, and value of one
promotes the visibility, vibrancy, and value of all. We can mutually reimagine
and strengthen ties between departments and programs, our relationships to the
community, and our associations with other colleges, departments and programs
at UT. We can, and will, also pursue donor and alumni relationships across
disciplines.
Curriculum:
We
propose an interim year (Fall 2016, Spring 2017) in which divergent college
curricular requirements for students remain in place (those of CoCA and LLSS),
to allow the appropriate faculty-governing units of the new college time to
decide upon college-wide requirements, to be instituted in Fall 2017.
Student
Services and Recruitment:
Tri-College Student Services, which currently
serves students in the colleges of CA, LS and SM, has improved upon its
academic advising coverage in recent months with the addition of
department-specific advisers in larger fields (Biology, Communication,
Psychology), increasing both access and flexibility for students. One of the areas still in need of attention
is new student recruitment (DHS, Transfer, Non-Traditional students etc.). Currently, professional advisers take on some
recruitment responsibilities as a percentage of their job duties. Advising and student recruitment are both
critical components to enrollment and retention efforts, and both demand
full-time attention. A full-time
recruiter trained in our disciplines and eloquent in presentations to
prospective students on and off-campus would be a critical addition in services
to ensure both visibility and growth of a new college.
Faculty
Governance:
The
two most significant entities for faculty governance in the new college will be
the College Council and the College Committee on Academic Personnel (CCAP).
The
College Council will be the primary body of faculty governance in the new
college. It will have the responsibility for overseeing the college curriculum
and for approving any proposed changes to department and program curriculums.
The Council advises the dean on a range of issues and receives regular reports
from the dean. The Council is also responsible for making or approving faculty
appointments to a range of committees, including the college technology committee,
and it conducts elections for faculty representation on CCAP.
The
College Council should consist of: 1) Eight at-large representatives drawn from
and elected by the tenure and tenure track faculty in the College; four
lecturer faculty drawn from and elected by the lecturer faculty in the College;
three student representatives appointed by Student Government; and two tenure
or tenure track faculty representatives from each department in the College.
Departments may also send one addition representative for every ten tenure and
tenure track faculty members over ten.
In
the spring of every academic year, the Council elects a Chair, Vice-Chair and
Secretary from its membership. Traditionally the Chair serves for one year and
the Vice-Chair moves to the Chair position. An Executive Committee sets meeting
agendas and performs a range of other duties. The Executive Committee composed
of the three officers, the past Chair, and two other council members (approved
by the entire council). The Executive Committee should attempt to maintain some
balance of membership among the Arts, the Humanities and the Social Sciences,
but such representation is not a rule.
CCAP
in the new college will be composed of six tenured faculty members elected by
the tenure and tenure track faculty in the College. CCAP evaluates faculty
members at the three, four and five year pre- tenure reviews, tenure, promotion
and their five year professional assessments as outlined in the collective
bargaining agreement. CCAP membership will include two members each from the
Arts, the Humanities and the Social Sciences. Each member serves a two-year
term, and the terms for members in each of the subdivisions should be
staggered.
The
membership of CCAP in the first year of the College should consist of one
member each from the Arts, the Humanities and the Social Sciences who have
served on the previous year's CCAPs (in LLSS or CoCA). This will ensure some
consistency in the reviews from the previous year. The remaining three members
should be newly elected in the spring term.
Configuration
of Schools:
Schools
are an affiliation of departments or programs that provides a framework for
supporting creative, boundary-crossing inquiry among students and faculty.
Schools facilitate collaboration among existing programs and provide guidance
and support as new programs are envisioned and established. Schools may have a
director appointed by the college dean from the faculty of the participating
departments and programs. The director facilitates the collaborative endeavors
of the participating departments and programs. Schools may have an operating
budget as allocated by the college dean. Because schools are comprised of
faculty with tenure homes in the participating programs and departments, schools
are not eligible for representation on the college council. Schools may propose
and develop new courses, majors and graduate programs but are not exempt from
college curriculum requirements.
Organizational Chart:
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
Department of Art
Department of Communications
Department of Economics
Department of English
Department of Foreign Languages
Department of Geography and Planning
Department of History
School of Interdisciplinary Studies
Department of Music
Department of Philosophy
Department of Political Science & Public
Administration
Department of Psychology
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Department of Theatre and Film
Department of Women’s and Gender Studies
|
DDo
DDoIt is assumed that the Dean will assign responsibilities to the Associate Deans
|
Arts Proposal-Restructuring
NOVEMBER 17, 2015
COCA COUNCIL – ARTS REPRESENTATIVES
ARTS DEPARTMENT CHAIRS
This document is submitted in the spirit of cooperation by the above mentioned on behalf of the students, faculty and staff that are the Arts at the University.
This document is submitted in the spirit of cooperation by the above mentioned on behalf of the students, faculty and staff that are the Arts at the University.
1. College of Visual and Performing Arts
At the November 5th meeting of the CoCA College Council, the faculty of the Department of Communication expressed interest in removing itself from the arts departments under the future configuration of LLSS and CoCA. Respecting the Department of Communication wishes, the arts are presenting their restructuring plans independent of the Department of Communication.
Our first choice would be to return to the initial arts organizational structure that resulted from the division of Art and Sciences in 2010, to be a College of Visual and Performing Arts.
By returning to the College of Visual and Performing Arts we can maintain status with other colleges. Returning to our former, uniquely identified status we can avoid a college restructuring that challenges faculty trust and morale, and which may be confusing in regards to donors, and our internal and external identity.
2. School of Visual and Performing Arts (SVPA)
With the restructuring of CoCA into a larger, newly defined, umbrella entity with the College of Languages, Literature and Social Sciences, the Arts request the designation of School. The School of Visual and Performing Arts will be defined as an academic unit that administers instruction, research, and service in common, albeit diverse disciplinary fields. The faculty of the school shall include all those members of the University faculty who have been appointed to the constituent departments. The departments are defined as the Department of Art, the Department of Music, and the Department of Theatre and Film.
The school shall have the fullest measure of autonomy consistent with its function and responsibility within the college, subject to the provisions of the CBA and the University of Toledo policies. A Director shall function as the principal administrative officer and shall be responsible to the Dean of the appropriate College for the activities of the school.
Director of the School of Visual and Performing Arts - Duties and Responsibilities
At the November 5th meeting of the CoCA College Council, the faculty of the Department of Communication expressed interest in removing itself from the arts departments under the future configuration of LLSS and CoCA. Respecting the Department of Communication wishes, the arts are presenting their restructuring plans independent of the Department of Communication.
Our first choice would be to return to the initial arts organizational structure that resulted from the division of Art and Sciences in 2010, to be a College of Visual and Performing Arts.
By returning to the College of Visual and Performing Arts we can maintain status with other colleges. Returning to our former, uniquely identified status we can avoid a college restructuring that challenges faculty trust and morale, and which may be confusing in regards to donors, and our internal and external identity.
2. School of Visual and Performing Arts (SVPA)
With the restructuring of CoCA into a larger, newly defined, umbrella entity with the College of Languages, Literature and Social Sciences, the Arts request the designation of School. The School of Visual and Performing Arts will be defined as an academic unit that administers instruction, research, and service in common, albeit diverse disciplinary fields. The faculty of the school shall include all those members of the University faculty who have been appointed to the constituent departments. The departments are defined as the Department of Art, the Department of Music, and the Department of Theatre and Film.
The school shall have the fullest measure of autonomy consistent with its function and responsibility within the college, subject to the provisions of the CBA and the University of Toledo policies. A Director shall function as the principal administrative officer and shall be responsible to the Dean of the appropriate College for the activities of the school.
Director of the School of Visual and Performing Arts - Duties and Responsibilities
-
Budgetary management of the School of Visual and Performing Arts. Serve as the fiscal
officer of the school, with the responsibility for preparing the budget in consultation
with the division/program unit or department Chairs; allocate resources to the
division/program units or departments; monitor the administration of operating and
personnel budgets; and supervise the use of resources, including facilities, equipment,
and supplies;
-
Work with department chairs and faculty SVPA Advisory Board for the efficient
operation of the school;
-
Appoint whatever administrative personnel appear to be requisite to the effective
functioning of the school office; and assign the respective functions of all personnel
working in the school;
-
Management of the work of the SVPA secretarial staff, IT assigned personnel, PR
Specialist, Outreach and Retention Specialist, and other support staff, including annual
staff personnel evaluations;
-
Develop and build on donor relationships together with the department chairs, the Dean
and the Office of Institutional Advancement;
2
-
Continue development of partnerships with external agencies and organizations
consistent with the SVPA’s mission. (Toledo Area Cultural Leaders, Ohio Arts Council,
Toledo Museum of Art, Toledo Symphony Orchestra, Toledo Opera, WGTE, Glacity
Theatre Collective, etc.);
-
Provide academic leadership for the instructional, research, service, and administrative
personnel of the school. Serve in an advisory capacity to the Dean in the recruitment,
selection, employment, in-service training, tenure promotion, non-reappointment, and
dismissal of academic personnel, performing duties that are in keeping with the CBA;
-
Coordinate with Plant Operations and the Facility Manager of the work on the SVPA
building and grounds maintenance;
-
Implement and update, in consultation with the SVPA Council, a long-term plan for the
SVPA;
-
Secure internal and external support of the SVPA mission and programs;
-
Develop and work with an extended Advisory Committee, consisting of University of
Toledo faculty members and community representatives;
-
Continue development of interdisciplinary partnerships with faculty across the
University to facilitate undergraduate and graduate activities, while increasing the
recognition of the SVPA;
-
Perform or delegate and monitor the development of the curricula and programs of
instruction, sharing this responsibility with committees of the school and with
divisions/program units or departments;
-
Supervise any graduate programs within the school. The designated graduate
coordinator shall administer the graduate program;
-
Teach at least one course or graduate seminar per academic year. This may be arranged
in consultation with the chair of the director’s home department;
-
Adhere to University hiring, personnel evaluation and other Human Resources
procedures; support the University’s and the College’s strategic goals; and observe
appropriate chains of communication when requesting support or expressing other
needs associated with the SVPA and its staff;
-
Prepare and submit to the Dean an annual report on the SVPA’s activities.
Associate Dean in the Newly Formed College Entity
The SVPA requires an associate dean from the School to serve in the college office so that representation in the dean’s office is balanced and fair.
In order to function in the highest possible manner and with a recognized level of University support, the following conditions are considered essential:
• CoCA Dean’s - Operating Budget $80,800
Transfer the current college dean’s operating budget to the SVPA. The SVPA Director would be responsible for the expenditures and allotments to departments, programming, PR efforts and communications. (No additional operating funds were added when the
3
Department of Communication joined the arts in 2013, therefore the CoCA dean’s budget
transfers to the SVPA in full.)
• Arts Tech Fees – Retain dedicated arts tech fees, which provide 2-3 lab rotations per year and allow us to allocate dollars beyond the rotations to state-of-the-art equipment for the departmental media programs. The amount of funding we control as the School of Visual and Performing Arts far exceeds the limited allocations we received as departments in A&S.
Tech Fee funding level to be determined by the SVPA; IT Tech Support – Bradley Volk to remain the same;
• Arts Departments’ Carry-forward funds - retain for the SVPA;
• LLSS upper-division course fee - No assessment of the fee for SVPA students. SVPA students currently pay large lab fees for their studio and lab courses. The addition of this fee would be detrimental to the students;
• Curricular autonomy - Retain oversight within the SVPA. Current college-level requirements remain as established by CVPA and then CoCA;
• Space Allocation - Maintain responsibility for the School’s dedicated spaces;
• Administrative staff - Retain an administrative assistant for the Director of the SVPA,
the PR Specialist and the Outreach and Retention Specialist.
In order to function in the highest possible manner and with a recognized level of University support, we make following additional requests:
• Faculty Lines – While we would like to retain control over faculty lines, we recognize and respect that this is a dean’s prerogative and request that in addition to the chairs, the Director also be consulted regarding faculty lines;
•
Art and Music Education – We request moving the Art and Music Education majors from JHCOE to SVPA. Faculty are and have been in the art and music departments, approximately 80% of the course work is in the art and music disciplines. Licensure and education service classes would remain with the JHCOE.
• Arts Tech Fees – Retain dedicated arts tech fees, which provide 2-3 lab rotations per year and allow us to allocate dollars beyond the rotations to state-of-the-art equipment for the departmental media programs. The amount of funding we control as the School of Visual and Performing Arts far exceeds the limited allocations we received as departments in A&S.
Tech Fee funding level to be determined by the SVPA; IT Tech Support – Bradley Volk to remain the same;
• Arts Departments’ Carry-forward funds - retain for the SVPA;
• LLSS upper-division course fee - No assessment of the fee for SVPA students. SVPA students currently pay large lab fees for their studio and lab courses. The addition of this fee would be detrimental to the students;
• Curricular autonomy - Retain oversight within the SVPA. Current college-level requirements remain as established by CVPA and then CoCA;
• Space Allocation - Maintain responsibility for the School’s dedicated spaces;
• Administrative staff - Retain an administrative assistant for the Director of the SVPA,
the PR Specialist and the Outreach and Retention Specialist.
In order to function in the highest possible manner and with a recognized level of University support, we make following additional requests:
• Faculty Lines – While we would like to retain control over faculty lines, we recognize and respect that this is a dean’s prerogative and request that in addition to the chairs, the Director also be consulted regarding faculty lines;
•
Art and Music Education – We request moving the Art and Music Education majors from JHCOE to SVPA. Faculty are and have been in the art and music departments, approximately 80% of the course work is in the art and music disciplines. Licensure and education service classes would remain with the JHCOE.
4
Document 3.
Document 3.
16 October 2015
Dr. Sharon L. Gaber
President
University of Toledo
2801 Bancroft. Toledo, OH
43606
Dear President Gaber:
I write to you on behalf of
the faculty of the Department of Communication regarding the forthcoming reorganization
of colleges. Communication faculty have discussed a set of preferences that we
respectfully offer to you:
· We strongly support your reorganization initiative.
· Our
consensus and first choice, if possible, is to separate from COCA (College of
Communication and Arts) and the various Art and Music Departments in favor of
an independent Department of Communication under the auspices of a larger
organizational umbrella, the exact
name of which would be less important than its efficient functionality.
· Our larger goal is in time to form a highly marketable
and visible School of Communication, still under the auspices of the more
organizationally efficient umbrella discussed above. We believe that in this
way our new curriculum and faculty initiatives will best be deployed.
· We would hope via this School of Communication to best
bring our considerable resources (with nearly 400 current majors) to bear in
such as way to complement teaching, research and service needs of 21st
Century.
· Allow the Communication Department to remain headquartered
in Sullivan Hall, with broadcast facilities in Rocket Hall, to minimize costly
disruption of the sort incurred less than two years ago when we were removed
from Arts and Sciences. Communication faculty and staff already occupy
approximately 70-80 percent of Sullivan Hall. If this is not convenient, we
would prefer as much as possible to occupy the same space as a Department.
· Another possibility, not our first choice, would be to
align Communication as a separate and independent Department within the
Business School. Some might consider this a natural fit, although the exact
nature of such a relationship is more problematic than our above stated preference
and would need to be extensively worked out. Pragmatic, informal alignments, though,
are much easier to achieve and have already been suggested and are under
discussion.
Again, we strongly support
you and look forward to growth and success at University of Toledo.
Sincerely,
Professors Brian Anse Patrick
and David E. Tucker
Department of Communication
Elected Departmental
Representatives to the COCA Council
Document #4.
From: Van Hoy, Jerry
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 12:37 PM
To: # LLSS - MC - Staff - PSA; # LLSS - MC - Staff - CWA; # LLSS - MC - Faculty - Visiting Faculty; # LLSS - MC - Faculty - Lecturers; # LLSS - MC - Faculty - Full-time/Tenure Track
Cc: Barlowe, Jamie; Schneider, Barbara; Mckether, Willie; Hintz, Adam R.
Subject: Request for comments on the college reorganization proposal
Sent: Wednesday, January 06, 2016 12:37 PM
To: # LLSS - MC - Staff - PSA; # LLSS - MC - Staff - CWA; # LLSS - MC - Faculty - Visiting Faculty; # LLSS - MC - Faculty - Lecturers; # LLSS - MC - Faculty - Full-time/Tenure Track
Cc: Barlowe, Jamie; Schneider, Barbara; Mckether, Willie; Hintz, Adam R.
Subject: Request for comments on the college reorganization proposal
Dear LLSS colleagues,
Attached to this message is the current draft proposal for a new college created by the combination of the colleges of Communication and the Arts (CoCA) and Languages, Literature and Social Sciences (LLSS). This proposal was written by the LLSS Council Committee on College Reorganization and has been revised based on faculty comments sent to the committee as well as feedback received at LLSS Council meetings.
We are soliciting your comments and suggestions for the reorganization proposal. We want to be sure that all staff and faculty have an opportunity to help shape--and improve--the proposal.
When you read the new college proposal please keep the following in mind.
1. The departments of Art, Music and Theatre and Film have proposed a School of Visual and Performing Arts (SVPA) that would be part of a new college created by merging CoCA and LLSS. Their proposal is attached to this message.
2. While the SVPA proposal focuses only on creating a school, the LLSS Council Committee on College Reorganization proposal attempts to envision the structure of the larger college.
3. We expect that a final proposal will be developed together with CoCA's Council. Thus, our proposal expresses the committee's views about the new college as a starting point for these joint discussions.
Please send your comments and suggestions to Jerry Van Hoy (jerry.vanhoy@utoledo.edu) by January 15, 2016. Thank you for helping us produce the best proposal possible.
Best regards,
--Jerry
LLSS Council Chair, 2015-16
Attached to this message is the current draft proposal for a new college created by the combination of the colleges of Communication and the Arts (CoCA) and Languages, Literature and Social Sciences (LLSS). This proposal was written by the LLSS Council Committee on College Reorganization and has been revised based on faculty comments sent to the committee as well as feedback received at LLSS Council meetings.
We are soliciting your comments and suggestions for the reorganization proposal. We want to be sure that all staff and faculty have an opportunity to help shape--and improve--the proposal.
When you read the new college proposal please keep the following in mind.
1. The departments of Art, Music and Theatre and Film have proposed a School of Visual and Performing Arts (SVPA) that would be part of a new college created by merging CoCA and LLSS. Their proposal is attached to this message.
2. While the SVPA proposal focuses only on creating a school, the LLSS Council Committee on College Reorganization proposal attempts to envision the structure of the larger college.
3. We expect that a final proposal will be developed together with CoCA's Council. Thus, our proposal expresses the committee's views about the new college as a starting point for these joint discussions.
Please send your comments and suggestions to Jerry Van Hoy (jerry.vanhoy@utoledo.edu) by January 15, 2016. Thank you for helping us produce the best proposal possible.
Best regards,
--Jerry
LLSS Council Chair, 2015-16
Jerry Van Hoy, PhD
The University of Toledo
Associate Professor, Sociology, (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/sa/)
Director, Master of Liberal Studies Program (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/mls/)
Co-Director, Program in Law & Social Thought (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/lst/)
Director, Politics, Law & Society Living Learning Community
419-530-2807 (SA); 419-530-7257 (MLS);419-530-7268 (LST)
The University of Toledo
Associate Professor, Sociology, (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/sa/)
Director, Master of Liberal Studies Program (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/mls/)
Co-Director, Program in Law & Social Thought (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/lst/)
Director, Politics, Law & Society Living Learning Community
419-530-2807 (SA); 419-530-7257 (MLS);419-530-7268 (LST)
From: Patrick, Brian
Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 9:53 AM
To: Van Hoy, Jerry
Cc: Wilkinson, Jeffrey; Bollman, Lisa Marie; Tucker, David E.
Subject: Comments on LLSS Reorg Committee document
Sent: Friday, January 08, 2016 9:53 AM
To: Van Hoy, Jerry
Cc: Wilkinson, Jeffrey; Bollman, Lisa Marie; Tucker, David E.
Subject: Comments on LLSS Reorg Committee document
Jerry:
Happy New Year!
couple of points and concerns from senior faculty in the Department of Communication (Note, there no "s" at the end of "Communication" :)
We have made curricular changes concerning the foreign language requirement, reducing it. And we might want to reduce it still more because we perceive the requirement as (1) needlessly onerous to our students, who tend not to master these languages anyway, and (2) a disincentive to enrollment, in effect driving students away to other colleges/units. We suspect it may be the same in social sciences. In any case members of the department don't want to live under the tyranny of the foreign language department, despite how much we may praise and extol the benefits of foreign language training. The assurance in the reorganization document that this will be settled later in the new college council is not all that assuring. Personally I suggest a set of alternatives for degree requirements that would include a communication or social science degree with foreign language, and one without language, with the foreign language substituted with more higher level 3000-4000 level analytical type or seminar classes, or social statistics or math (not remedial!) or logic. Other possibilities exist of course. But we wish to preserve our curricular changes in the new college. We also have many students admitted on the basis of a reduced foreign language requirement and must honor this contract, so to speak. There is as a matter of stability.
Also I attach our message to the president, voted on by the communication department, and which has been largely unacknowledged in the process of formal reorganization discussions. As you see, our eventual goal is to form a school, but without ancillary bureaucracy.
I am also concerned about budget. We would like to see some sort of responsibility-based budgeting wherein COMM and other departments reap/keep what they sow to some fair extent. COMM faculty have for long perceived the department as a cash cow for larger organizational units.
I would very much like to attend future meetings of the LSSS reorganization committee as a delegate of the COMM department.
Last comment on the name of the new college I have no strong preference, but I wonder about the use of the term "Liberal Arts" as some have suggested. My guess is that a major portion of the population has no idea what this term means, and think it something to do with "arts" in in the sense of drawing or pastels. I suggest some brainstorming on this, although personally I could live with a nominal College of Liberal Arts, even if it had not math and sciences. We would just have some explaining to do our public profile.
BAP
Document #5
Welcome back everyone. I am sure that you are wondering what s happening with the merger discussion between CoCA and LLSS. Here is a rundown of the information at this time.
From: Jerry Van Hoy:
At our last Council meeting it was decided that our proposal should be sent to all LLSS faculty and staff for comment before we give to you and begin meeting together. I expect that the current version will be sent to LLSS faculty and staff this week with a deadline for comments by the end of the first week of classes. At that point we should be ready to share it with our colleagues in CoCA (and the Provost and President) and begin work towards a coauthored proposal.
From Dean Barlowe:
During finals week, LLSS faculty council, the dean’s office, and representatives from Tri-College Student Services reviewed the proposal written by the reorganization committee appointed by the executive committee of the Council.
Revisions were suggested, and some have been completed.
As I understand it, the proposal will be reviewed again next week, broader distribution of the revised document to LLSS faculty and staff will occur, and a meeting will be set up with CoCA to discuss the two proposals.
From myself to John Barrett on January 4, 2016:
On November 30, Ray Marchionni, Chair of CoCA Council sent the proposal from the arts and the Department of Communication request as well to Dr. Gaber, and I then forwarded it to you and Jamie. I sent Ray an email today to see if he has received anything from anyone in LLSS. Still waiting on his reply. I briefly spoke with Jamie before the holidays and she indicated that they were working on a document. I believe the plan is for a meeting between the two entities to be held after everyone returns from the semester break.
Will keep yo updated.
Debra A. Davis, Dean
College of Communication and the Arts
University of Toledo
Sullivan Hall Suite 1200
2801 West Bancroft
Toledo, Ohio 43606
Van Hoy, Jerry
Actions
To:
Cc:
Monday, January 25, 2016 4:00 PM
Hi Brian,
Happy New Year to you too! I am sorry for taking so long to get back to you. The beginning of the semester has been more hectic than usual.
The LLSS Reorg Committee is just finishing final revisions to our proposal. The next step is for some of us in LLSS to meet with you and the other faculty in CoCA to work out a reasonable merger plan. Today I sent a message to Ray Marchionni suggesting that the LLSS Council EC meet with the CoCA Council to begin this work. I expect that Communication will be fully participating in this process.
I understand that having to wait until there is a new college and a new college council to settle any foreign language issues is unsettling. It is equally unsettling for the Department of Foreign Languages as it is for you. However, we do not see any way to avoid this and maintain faculty governance over curriculum. The new college council will be the only council that has the authority to debate and vote on any changes to the new college's curriculum.
Students will complete the requirements they had when they entered UT based on their catalog year. Any changes to college requirements (CoCA's or LLSS's) will only affect new students. It could be a year or two before any new requirements are put in place as many faculty in LLSS would like to try to create a liberal arts curriculum for the new college that would spread the requirements across more departments. We can certainly write into the final proposal that all current CoCA requirements (for CoCA students) and all current LLSS requirements (for LLSS students) will remain in place until a new college curriculum is implemented.
The LLSS proposal says little about the new college--or department--budgets. In part this is because we are told that the budget is the purview of the administration. Nonetheless, the final proposal can certainly make recommendations about proper funding of departments.
Finally, the LLSS Reorg Committee is not recommending a name for the new college in the current version of our proposal. I don't know who gets to pick the college name, but if it is faculty and staff we can solicit ideas from CoCA and LLSS.
I hope we will all be meeting together soon.
Best,
--Jerry
LLSS Council Chair, 2015-16
Happy New Year to you too! I am sorry for taking so long to get back to you. The beginning of the semester has been more hectic than usual.
The LLSS Reorg Committee is just finishing final revisions to our proposal. The next step is for some of us in LLSS to meet with you and the other faculty in CoCA to work out a reasonable merger plan. Today I sent a message to Ray Marchionni suggesting that the LLSS Council EC meet with the CoCA Council to begin this work. I expect that Communication will be fully participating in this process.
I understand that having to wait until there is a new college and a new college council to settle any foreign language issues is unsettling. It is equally unsettling for the Department of Foreign Languages as it is for you. However, we do not see any way to avoid this and maintain faculty governance over curriculum. The new college council will be the only council that has the authority to debate and vote on any changes to the new college's curriculum.
Students will complete the requirements they had when they entered UT based on their catalog year. Any changes to college requirements (CoCA's or LLSS's) will only affect new students. It could be a year or two before any new requirements are put in place as many faculty in LLSS would like to try to create a liberal arts curriculum for the new college that would spread the requirements across more departments. We can certainly write into the final proposal that all current CoCA requirements (for CoCA students) and all current LLSS requirements (for LLSS students) will remain in place until a new college curriculum is implemented.
The LLSS proposal says little about the new college--or department--budgets. In part this is because we are told that the budget is the purview of the administration. Nonetheless, the final proposal can certainly make recommendations about proper funding of departments.
Finally, the LLSS Reorg Committee is not recommending a name for the new college in the current version of our proposal. I don't know who gets to pick the college name, but if it is faculty and staff we can solicit ideas from CoCA and LLSS.
I hope we will all be meeting together soon.
Best,
--Jerry
LLSS Council Chair, 2015-16
Jerry Van Hoy, PhD
The University of Toledo
Associate Professor, Sociology, (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/sa/)
Director, Master of Liberal Studies Program (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/mls/)
Co-Director, Program in Law & Social Thought (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/lst/)
Director, Politics, Law & Society Living Learning Community
419-530-2807 (SA); 419-530-7257 (MLS);419-530-7268 (LST)
The University of Toledo
Associate Professor, Sociology, (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/sa/)
Director, Master of Liberal Studies Program (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/mls/)
Co-Director, Program in Law & Social Thought (http://www.utoledo.edu/llss/lst/)
Director, Politics, Law & Society Living Learning Community
419-530-2807 (SA); 419-530-7257 (MLS);419-530-7268 (LST)
45 comments:
Make sure that when the provost finalists tour the campus, they visit the library so they can see the strong commitment of the administration and faculty to the academic life of students.
Boggie, the students have already indicated what they want -- a damn library that offers meaningful and plentiful study and meeting spaces!!
And exactly what do the first two comments on this board entitled "College Merger Discussions" have to do with that topic?????
3:06 You should fix that, seeing you are paying attention. Please contribute something on the relevant subject. One might say, though, that the present vaguely college-like fragments are related to the problem represented by the library--busy beaver administrators looking to pad resumes with sexy programs and initiatives, but not having a clue about substance. Ambition triumphs over function! Let's not do that again.
Excuse me for being old fashioned, but when I think of a university, I think of teachers, scholars, libraries, laboratories, study sessions, bull sessions in dorm rooms—not new org charts, college reshuffles, and the drama of “who’s up and who’s down.”
Sorry that I lament for the days when I could go to a library and be assured of finding a place to study.
Not the case at the UT, however, where half of the entire second floor of the library has been off limits for the entire academic year for renovations that from all appearances have come to a complete halt. I guess the student body studies wherever Wi-Fi is good.
And barely a peep has been heard from the faculty—or the administration for that matter— on behalf of students.
Why the faculty hasn’t spoken out? Aren’t faculty members supposed to be the primary gatekeepers of quality and excellence at UT?
Isn’t UT supposed to be about creating, incorporating, disseminating and preserving new knowledge, about challenging assumptions and demanding clear thinking?
Frankly, administration and faculty look slightly more on the ball than FIFA.
UT’s college organization discussions have the ring of a 60s tribute band— trying to reclaim past glory with a new lineup, a tug of irrelevant nostalgia, and —yes, here comes the cliché— a rearranging-deck-chairs-on-the-Titanic feel.
Here's a suggestion: Think of the discussions as a baffling waste of time. a huge distraction for a faculty that continually puts its own interests first, an unproductive focus on small, hollow stuff when there are big underlying problems that need to be addressed—solving the problem of declining student enrollment, maintaining academic resources, improving UT’s national reputation, solving a big budget deficit, and increasing research funding.
Perhaps the faculty would benefit from introspection about what truly makes a UT education valuable.
If UT hopes to ever move forward, these are the real issues the UT’s leadership needs to debate clearly, seriously and publicly.
Is Brian Patrick the chair of Department of Communications, chair of their college council, selected by Department Chair or elected by their faculty to represent them? Or as the original creator of this Blog and still one of its regular contributors, is he a sole voice from Communications expressing his own opinion? We know the other players and their positions/roles, what is his? Inquiring minds would like to know.
It seems to Bloggie that certain people insist that their insider views on reorganization are more equal than others. Is the re-organization then, to be the exclusive monopoly of deans and chairs?
Bringing Communication into the Arts was a dumb decision but taking it into a business-college environment is not going to change that. Broadcasting and journalism are a part of the interdisciplinary Humanities field with focus on critical thinking and analysis, not just art work and crap technology that disappears by the time they graduate. Some journalists will at some point may end up focusing on businesses, arts, science, or technology, so crosslisted courses (business/arts/medicine/sciences/should be offered to prepare students for a challenging career. Graduating them from a business or arts college is not going to do that. Bringing Communication back into the interdisciplinary humanities field will, but let the students focusing on the artistic side (media production) have some arts classes count toward the degree.
For the Good Anonymous saying "Sorry that I lament for the days when I could go to a library and be assured of finding a place to study."
You should not apologize to have a quality library. UT's Library has been ruined by the likes of Jacobs, Gaboury, Scarborough, Prior, and probably others. Those who care about the library, take charge in its future, and minimize the influence of student government which seems to promote the idea that the library is the food-social zone, not one for the purpose of critical thinking. Some may even think it is where segway scooters would be allowed. It is banned for now, but just wait till you have elements in SG that think walking is too much distraction.
Teaching faculty should be the #1 factor along with library faculty to shape the future of the library and bring it back from the downward spiral. Library faculty are dedicated to help teaching faculty, so engage them into your teaching and research activities. This is from someone who has been in both lines of work.
My 25 cents, with what may be numerous errors and omissions. Once upon a time, Jacobs decided to smite A&S (insert backstory). He sent forth his sinister henchman and future university president and A&S was rendered asunder or smote or whatever and the arts and math were sent their merry ways. Except that COA could not stand alone or whatever (insert backstory), and so A&S was smote again, and the unstable child, COA, was given a boon, Communications, and henceforth became known as COCA. And the college lived not really happily ever after, until a new president arrived, and the winds which had blown apart colleges now started blowing them back together again. And the wind revealed Communications did not want to be part of COCA (insert backstory), and that's a fact. LLSS started imaging a return to the good ole days of A&S, except that Math has said that it won't return to A&S, no way. Life is good in Math. Communications wants to return to A&S or LLSS or whatever, and COA will only return to A&S or LLSS if it's allowed to join as a "school" with it's own budget, dean, and degree requirements. The deal breaker being the foreign language requirement, which COCA did away with and which LLSS insists must be reinstated. That about right?
January 17, 2016 at 4:47 PM everyone is entitled to a voice and opinion, just wanted to confirm that Brian Patrick was expressing his own and not as a representative of his college or department. The COCA and CLLSS draft proposals have been developed by groups of faculty and included chairs and Deans. As to individual opinions they are welcome and should be expressed but identified as such since there are hundreds of those within the colleges, yet it will be possible to only develop one final merger proposal for which not everyone is going to be happy with or support. His voice is simply one among many and given his often disruptive and unproductive history of actions including on college council and in creating this blog, his views carry little weight and support of others who are tired of his behavior which is not helpful or insightful, basically no one listens to him.
When the final college merger proposal is complete, make sure to have UT’s general counsel review it so that includes that time-honored codicil giving the dean unlimited power to preserve order in time of campus emergencies.
Since when did any recent dean have unlimited power? The Provost directed the Deans and controlled all important decisions in academic units under his authority, especially personal and budget - a situation that remains to this day.
It seems to me, that part of the issue is where Communucations fits better, with the Arts or the Humanities and Social Sciences. Rather than merge two colleges to accomodate Communication, why not split the Communication department in half. Journalism and related specialties to LLSS and the technical broadcast Film stuff in to College of the Arts?
Am I the only one who finds it interesting that a Communication faculty member would be so dismissive of the requirement for their students to actually understand a second language, such as Spanish? Given current state of US and international media of all forms, and growth of Spanish population in the US, why restrict and limit career opportunities of your students, unless you somehow actually believe that English alone will dominate communication of all forms in the coming decades. What are your peer Communication programs at other institutions doing in regards to language preparation, should you be at least keeping up with the competition and providing better stronger career opportunities for your students?
COCA and CLLSS are not being merged to accomodate Communication. The merger is due to an interest by the President to reduce number of colleges/deans. Faculty in Communication want no part of an Arts College or even School with a new merged College. The challenge is finding a fit for them in a merged College. Would be helpful if the Communication faculty together thought about what is best for their majors in terms of degrees related to career opportunities. Not sure that Brian Patrick represents anything other then his own views which no one listens to anyways.
The end result here is that I foresee no outcome by which COCA, CLLSS and Communication agree to a merged structure, leaving the Provost and President to force one by the end of March.
And while finessing a merger by the end of March, why not restore NSM College to the fold? Restore A&S College to its pre-Jacob’s era integrity! January 19 1:04 asks "Am I the only one who finds it interesting that a Communication faculty member would be so dismissive of the requirement for their students to actually understand a second language, such as Spanish?" Well NSM College faculty and students should also strive enthusiastically or not to learn to understand and communicate fluently in two or more languages. That way, when they attend national and international conferences around the world on the University's dime, they might actually impress other academics with the notion that the UofT actually has a sophisticated, cosmopolitan competent community of scientists, scholars and students. Foreign language competency is a badge of honor among those who have earned higher education degrees at reputable universities, and it is a builder of self-esteem and credibility for everyone with the gumption to achieve in higher education. President Gaber should actively, enthusiastically promote FL learning across our campuses -- and especially on the main campus -- rather than choose to administer over its demise along the road to further undermining the academic reputation of this university. Restore A&S College at once and support the mandatory learning of foreign languages for all units within the College. Carpe diem!
Leave your bloody paws of NSM. The structure works. The departments are happy. The students are succeeding. Enrollment is up, and we have a world class Dean. Go away.
And nobody in NSM is experiencing the joys and rewards of learning foreign languages. How parochial. How anti-intellectual. Step away from your microscopes, your telescopes and your numerical kaleidoscopes to embrace the humanities. Se réveiller et de sentir les roses.
How many peer NSM departments/colleges in Ohio and US that are comparable to UT have a foreign language requirement? If they do are their enrollments increasing and their students better prepared for professional careers or graduate programs? UT needs to grow enrollment in order to survive and as much as we can tout the merits of a foreign language requirement for NSM, but also all undergraduate majors at UT and UT presenting afford to do so and lose NSM students to other colleges? I graduated from a mid sized public college with a highly ranked NSM degree programs with annual increases in enrollment and high retention/graduation rates and with students who did very well after graduation in career and graduate placement - and they did not have a foreign language requirement. Unless we can show FL adds value, UT can not afford the enrollment barriers it will create against our peers. In an ideal world should all undergraduates have a FL, yes but UT is not living in an ideal world presently, without state support relying on tuition means growing enrollment and better retention/graduation.
I wish our students did not labor under the overly burdensome foreign language requirement either. We lose potential majors to business, social work and criminal justice all of the time because of this issue.
Lun Fardo obviously hasn't experinced the joys of critical thinking and logic. Just becasue NSM doesn't require a foreign language, doesn't mean that none of the NSM students are "experiencing the joys and rewards of learning foreign languages."
You'd be surprised how many NSM faculty and staff members embrace the arts and Humanities.
Proficiency in a foreign language is a huge boon to all students and society as a whole. You understand yourself, your own language, your profession, people and other societies better. It makes you a more well-rounded person all around. You become more tolerant, less provincial and more marketable, with Americans who have meaningful foreign language skills at a premium for jobs. It opens doors. Ask the rest of the world. Only in short-sightedly market driven America is it seen as a liability. So sad.
So you would deprive NSM undergraduate students with the opportunity to succeed in passing a mandatory foreign language requirement? And then in the same breath brag that NSM College "enrollment is up" because those NSM students seduced by the NSM College's foreign-language-requirement-avoidance-strategy "did not labor under the overly burdensome foreign language requirement." Well hooray for your critical thinking and logic! Robbing Peter to pay Paul is no way to continue to run this university if improving academic excellence is its goal. I agree with Fenster: "Restore A&S College at once and support the mandatory learning of foreign languages for all units within the College. Carpe diem!"
“Strange indeed sounds the language of poets and philosophers; stranger still the refusal of science to read and hear its message” Anne Buttimer
If proficiency in a foreign language is a huge boon to all students and society as a whole, why not make it a requirement of all high school degrees?
If proficiency in a foreign language is a huge boon to all students and society as a whole, why is it not a requirement at all four year colleges and all programs across the US (it was not at mine 30 years ago)?
Many top colleges do not make it a requirement for all their majors, yet some are suggesting UT is depriving our students while at our peer institutions, and even school ranked higher, FL is not a requirement of the sciences or many degrees.
May it is because the short-sighted market thinkers who control our legislatures do not think they need to because the rest of the world is doing it quite nicely for them and for free?
I mean it seems that our state government keeps defunding both higher and secondary education for tax cuts to the rich. The economic elites can afford to send their kids to great and challenging schools where they get support to become world class professionals or they can drawvfrom overseas supplies. American middle class public education students seem disadvantaged in this way and the door largely closed to becoming a specialist "drone" of some sort just to get a job.
I strongly support foreign-language requirements at universities.
They greatly expand and strengthen students’ global vistas and multicultural competencies.
I took two years of Latin in college and was a member of the Latin Club, which annually held a toga party as part of its cultural programming.
I met my future wife at one. We were both wearing just bedsheet togas.
Later that night, my global vista was greatly expanded.
Hooray for the foreign languages!!
STOP GRINDING YOUR DAMN AXE and THINK.
No one is being denied the opportunity to take a foregin language at UT. Every student can take a foreign language IF THEY CHOOSE.
Maybe every Foreign Language major should be required to take two years of Calculus.
I agree, and it is an issue for GK12 to higher ed at public institutions across the US. Leaving UT and other state colleges to focus on enrollment via recruitment, retention and graduation, as the most significant source of revenue. Thus programs and curriculum, and overall broader value and experience of a college degree, are but a secondary consideration. Including making it harder and harder for UT as a mid sized public institution with flat or declining enrollment needing to focus on attracting students, and the foreign language requirement is seen as more of a barrier than a benefit to students and their parents seeking cost effective college degrees leading to career opportunities. As a result I do not foresee initiative at UT to spread foreign language, instead the complete opposite - pressure to further roll it back for many undergraduate degrees, which is clearly what COCA and NSM have done and justified. Again if our main peer colleges and competitors are focusing on efforts to attract students (without requiring foreign language) I see it hard to justify from a budget perspective keeping foreign language for many programs including the sciences here at UT. I agree from the broader liberal arts view of a college education, but the reality is forcing UT into a different economic need. And you are not going to convince me that different Deans or cutting administrative positions is the solution to the budget shortfalls. Yes, it should it be done and will come with savings, and provide other potential improvements and benefits in terms of organizational structure, efficiency, and new leadership, but the savings are not going to be in the tens of millions where out budget shortfalls are heading. True enrollment growth (tied to better retention) is the only way to financial stability at UT.
How much has enrollment grown over at COCA? Hmm...let's see, CVPA with its diluted FL requirement did so well it had to bring in Communications to boost its enrollment. So reducing the FL requirement didn't do much. Have the Communication majors increased in number since they left LLSS and enjoyed a reduced FL requirement? Let's hear about the numbers please.
Well, true enrollment growth (tied to better retention) and not pissing the money away on ill-considered ventures, under-utilized ed tech, dubious consultants, collegiate athletics, and administrative bloat might help the budget situation provided that the state doesn't cut funding or add new burdens.
Spare me some of the rhetoric about foreign language being good for the students. It is. But if we were primarily interested in what is good for them, we would require statistics of all students. Stats is useful because it makes you a better consumer of information. We would also require introductory finance, introductory management, and introductory accounting courses too because a basic understanding of these is important in a variety of responsible work contexts in the public, private and nonprofit sectors. The foreign language requirement is really about protecting the interests of the foreign languages department, the humanities more broadly, and the LLSS college as it currently exists. Let's be honest about that.
"First they came for the foreign language instructors and I said nothing because I was not a foreign language instructor...."
No one is going after foreign language instructors (certainly not killing them) so please lay off the hyperbole. Since its existence, including over recent decades, the academy has seen changes to requirements and focusing on certain programs and degrees and less on others, resulting in shifts within academia in terms of specialization needed within the faculty, growth is some while declines in other - current shifts away from foreign languages are no different. And keeping in mind good wise students considering careers always have the option and strong advising to take a foreign language (which again should also be more of a focus in all K12 schools).
I can see that many of the social sciences and humanities do benefit from foreign languages (including communication), so there may be some just justification, or alternatively it certainly could be a requirement for certain degree programs within CLLSS.
But again I would ask for comparison of peer institutions with or without the foreign language requirement for the Arts and NSM. Or where a College of Liberal Arts (with NSM included) at our of our peer institution has a foreign language requirement. What do we need to provide to our students (those who choose to come here) to best prepare them in the career markets they will enter?
The foreign language requirement is about preparing our students for a global work environment. And yes, our students should take statistics and we should make it a requirement. It might make for more educated consumers and voters.
By the way, 5:48am, are your business students taking their stats courses in the Math department, or in COBI?
Many powerful and financial elites make no secret of their disdain for public anything, especially universities, those hot-beds of new ideas and critical thinking. The last thing they want are Americans, that is the wrong kinds of Americans, learning foreign languages and picking up communist and socialist ideas from foreigners, or understanding that not everyone agrees that Americans do everything in the best way. They see no need for public universities, that is unless they can be turned into quasi public-private entities whose sole purpose is to follow directives to do research that promotes their view of the world, the right view, and to develop improved algorithms and training centers that make a well trained, specialized, overworked, insecure, isolated and thus weak work force that spends all its time focusing on increasing their overlords' short term wealth. They want that instead of universities full of people discussing, creating, formulating new and old ideas, questioning values, priorities, and visions of what is really valuable and how, why, and by what means society may articulate and make real a better and healthier society as a whole.
One of the problems at UT is that administrations have set colleges against each other in a divide and conquer strategy that has doubled as race to the curriculum bottom. Of course, this has been encouraged by the rhetoric and rules coming out of Washington and Columbus about retention and a focus on graduating students rather than on actual standards of achievement and learning. When a university's economic future is determined by its retention and graduation rates, guess what happens. It finds ways to make college as easy as possible. Foreign language is hard? Don't make students take it. Math is scary? Give the students a snuggie and let them avoid it. And make sure that we have administrators wag their finger about DWF rates too. To hell with students actually learning something.
Is your tinfoil hat on straight?
Seriously as long as the state continues to defund higher ed in Ohio, passing much of the cost onto students and parents, leading to efforts and incentives to complete a degree faster (many of those mandated by the state via reduction the cost to degree efforts), and potential employers of UT students place no added value on foreign languages, the pressure on colleges and academic programs to reduce or remove the requirement will continue. It really is as simple as that.
Foreign languages aside I see plenty continued evidence at UT and other colleges where the free thinking, open debates, new ideas and critical thinking continues to occur in programs, the classroom, among faculty and students, and in many research initiatives. Examples include social justice, climate change, community engagement, policy development, alternative medicine, music and art, sex trafficking, to just name a few successful teaching and research underway presently at UT - none of which fit into the proposed new model for high ed you are describing.
January 22, 2016 at 8:19 PM I agree but lets also note that the same is happening across higher education all across this country especially impacting small to mid size public colleges (and many private as well). Big focus and push on enrollment, retention and graduation, reducing costs to students while demanding more of programs and colleges while cutting base funding. Something is going to give. None of which is unique to UT (or just due to Ohio policies or UT administration - although policies and approaches from both have not been helping at all).
Dear Students, Faculty and Staff,
“The safety of our students is the highest priority of The University of Toledo and we have no tolerance for violence against them. The University is aware of a recent allegation of a physical altercation between UT students at an off-campus location and we take the matter very seriously. UT Police have been in contact with Toledo Police, who are leading the investigation.”
—January 25, 2016, campuswide email from President Sharon Gaber.
What’s the problem? The students were just having a salty-mouthed, passionate discussion about the merits of a foreign-language requirement in the new arts and humanities college and it got out of hand.
Anon @ 7:02 AM
Not funny. Crawl back under your rock.
.... in the new "Arts and Sciences College" and it got out of hand.
"arts and humanities college"? Talk about redundant.
Post a Comment