Statement on the SAS Curriculum Revision

The AAUP-Penn Executive Committee writes to express serious shared-governance concerns regarding the current process for the School of Arts & Sciences (SAS) curricular reform. We are particularly concerned with the exclusion of non-tenure track (NTT) faculty from the design of the proposed curriculum and from the upcoming vote scheduled for April 15-17. While there may be improvements reflected in the proposed curriculum, the absence of full NTT participation renders the decision-making process fundamentally flawed and leaves a “no” vote as the only option to address these flaws.

Under the “One Faculty” principle, AAUP defines as “faculty” all those whose appointments consist primarily of teaching or research activities at a professional level, regardless of title or rank. Curricular and other academic decisions benefit from the participation of all faculty and at all levels. At Penn, NTT faculty constitute 62% percent of the faculty body and are responsible for teaching many of the courses affected by the SAS curricular reform. In some departments, such as languages, the proposed changes might impact enrollment to the extent that some of these faculty may risk losing their jobs. Despite the essential role of NTT faculty in undergraduate education, NTT faculty have not been treated as equal partners in this important and necessary curriculum reform. In addition to being excluded from the formal voting process, in some departments, NTT faculty are also excluded from faculty meetings and thus have had little to no opportunity to participate at all. When NTT faculty are excluded, the faculty, students, and staff all lose the opportunity to benefit from this wider input.

The AAUP-Penn Executive Committee cannot support governance structures that do not reflect the needs and voices of all affected faculty. While the proposed curriculum may have benefits for some programs, allowing it to be enacted without meaningful participation from all faculty constituencies violates the principle of shared governance and undermines the collective voice of all faculty. In response, all faculty, at all ranks and across all Penn’s schools, should work to reject and remake governance systems which divide the faculty and privilege some at the expense of others. In the specific case of the upcoming vote in SAS, we encourage standing faculty who do have a voice in this process to use that position of power to refuse to accept a curriculum revision process which disenfranchises NTT faculty.