Department cuts won't be reconsidered

Dean ignores faculty vote School of Arts and Sciences Dean Rosemary Stevens said yesterday she will not re-evaluate the fate of the Religious Studies and Regional Sciences departments, even though the SAS faculty voted last week to urge her to do just that. Citing a need to avoid further delay in the implementation process, Stevens said she hopes to forward her proposals to Interim Provost Marvin Lazerson within the next week. "After careful consideration, I see no purpose in delaying," she said. "We would learn very little from the formal process of internal and external review that would change the basic proposals and, meanwhile, delay could be very deleterious for faculty and students." In an advisory vote last Thursday, the faculty urged Stevens to postpone making her recommendations to Lazerson until internal and external review committees look into the proposed cuts. Faculty voted against a review for the American Civilization Department, also slated to be disbanded. Since last month, when Stevens announced her proposal to disband the American Civilization, Regional Science and Religious Studies departments, she has been bombarded with requests to postpone or rescind her proposals. But, Stevens said, she sees change "as a forceful lever for invention." "I believe that the process of analysis has raised questions on all sides and it's now time to move ahead," she said. Many University groups have disagreed with this contention. The Undergraduate Assembly, Graduate and Professional Student Assembly and University chapter of the American Association of University Professors have all taken a stand against the cuts. Stevens said that, to some degree, this reflects a misunderstanding of the proposal. She has repeatedly said the changes will not affect undergraduate education. Current course offerings would remain the same if the proposals are enacted, she said, and interdisciplinary programs, like International Relations, would take the place of the departments slated for elimination. "I believe that the process of analysis has raised questions on all sides and it's time to move ahead," she said. But departments affected by the cuts have expressed dismay about Stevens decision. "I told her it's a big mistake," Religious Studies Chairperson Ann Matter said. "I think this will set the course for the destruction of the study of religion as a discipline at Penn." Matter added she has not given up hope that the Religious Studies Department will be saved. "We still are talking to [Stevens]," she said. "We are hoping that she won't go ahead with this proposal as it is." Stevens said she hopes to obtain approval by the University Trustees – who have the final say on the proposals – by January at the latest. She added that task forces are already being formed to work with faculty members from the affected departments to make arrangements for their transfer to other departments. Regional Science Chairperson Stephen Gale said he had not heard about Stevens' decision, but added he is not surprised by it. "In the process of deliberation and consultation, a faculty vote is considered to be pretty important," he said. "It is rare that a dean would specifically counter a vote by the faculty." Matter said she has developed two alternatives to disbanding the Religious Studies Department, but to date neither has been accepted. "What is particularly disastrous about this proposal is the idea of splitting up the faculty and putting them in all different departments when creating a program," she said. Her alternatives include merging the department with another department or putting the department, as a small group, within a larger department. Matter said her cause is "not a battle about winning and losing." "What we're interested in doing is protecting the future of our field at Penn," she said. "What concerns us about the administration's proposal is that they haven't thought about that." Gale said he would not be surprised if faculty members leave the University after the cuts take effect. He said what has kept them here is the ability to work together within a department. He added that the whole process has been "distressing." "It is distressing that the process in this case has been so far removed from what is considered a form of collegiality," he said. Stevens said she is interested in hearing faculty suggestions on implementation and wants to get moving on her proposals. "Very good questions have been brought up which would effect the implementation in a good and creative way," she said. "If you're going to do something, do it."