From: Graeme R Forbes <graeme.forbes@Colorado.EDU> Date: November 20, 2013 1:06:15 PM MST To: phil-tenure faculty <philtenure@lists.

Colorado.EDU>, "" <> Cc: Mary J Kraus <>, "" <> Subject: APA Report, strictly confidential Reply-To: Graeme R Forbes <>
Dear all (where all = t/tt faculty + regular Instructors, i.e., voting faculty): The report of the site-visit panel arrived in my email 2 days ago. The Provost and Dean also received a copy. I distributed it initially to the Climate Committee, and am now giving it broader distribution. You will find a hard copy in your mailbox. The report should not be shown to anyone else. It should not be scanned and emailed to anyone else. It should not even be discussed with people to whom this email is not addressed, tho' I suppose that's asking a lot. BUT: be aware that if this report leaks beyond the department and becomes a local, or worse, national, scandal, the continued existence of this department is improbable. It will be McGinnII, with potentially very much worse consequences for us. The Press Office has been informed of the situation. Apparently, we have quite good relations with some local reporters. Unfortunately, it's what was described to me as a "career-making opportunity" for them. Please mark your calendars for a department meeting on Monday December 2nd at 10am. The Provost and the Deans will attend (this time or even day may shift to accommodate their schedules). I will find out later whether the meeting is to be here or in Regent. Some further items. (1) When you read the report, you will see on p.11 the recommendation that "the Dean should appoint a new chair for the Department from outside the unit, preferably someone at the university who has had extensive administrative experience and is well respected by the faculty". The Dean told me this morning that this recommendation will not be implemented immediately. However, after the December 4th meeting, the Dean's office will create a website where people can vote confidentially on whether or not to appoint an external Chair. (The same system was used for Religious Studies this year.) (2) There will be no graduate admissions process this year. We will get normal funding, and may use the extra money to increase support for our current students, e.g., by offering some of them another RA-ship. (3) If in the opinion of the Administration (or external Chair should there be one), insufficient progress on improving matters has been made by the end of the summer, we will request not to be ranked in the Philosophical Gourmet's new rankings in the Fall. (There wouldn't be much point in a ranking anyway, since I think we would again not be allowed to recruit.) (4) Once you've read the report, you will no doubt wish to share your impressions or discuss it

with others receiving this email. Do *not* use any of the department listservs for this, not even phil-discuss. Address your comments directly to a few specific individuals, not the whole department. If I see discussion of the report developing on any department listserv, I'll shut the listserv down. If I see any email of the kind the report complains about, I will have the author's account deleted. (5) Finally, I think some of us will have a critical response to some parts of the report. It would be unwise to convey such responses to the Deans or other administration officials. **Under no circumstances** should anyone attempt to engage the members of the site visit panel. Please understand that we are walking on eggshells here. In some parts of the Administration this report has made the idea of dissolving the department appealing, and I do not mean in a jokey sort of way. GF

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful