NEWS
ASM plans action against UW provost
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Leah Schubert:
- Magnetic field sought by researchers (January 25, 2005)
Related Stories:
- ASM accuses UW of 'side-stepping' (November 11, 2004)
- Regents return ASM chancellor complaint (March 30, 2005)
- UW narrows down Dean of Education finalists (April 1, 2005)
- UW System presidential search committees announced; Santiago to be UWM chancellor (March 8, 2004)
- Peter Spear named new provost (July 9, 2001)
by Leah Schubert
Tuesday, February 15, 2005
The Associated Students of Madison announced plans last week to bring disagreements to the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents about student government’s exclusion from appointing two student representatives on the Dean of Education Search and Screen Committee, the purpose of which is to determine the new head of the Madison program.
ASM believes Provost Peter Spear illegitimately appointed two students to the committee without the student government’s input.
ASM Shared Governance Chair Eyal Halamish said ASM should have been allowed to appoint the student representatives. By excluding ASM from the decision, Halamish said Spear violated the Wisconsin State Constitution. Wisconsin State Statute 36.09(5) states students have the right to govern over student policies and student issues. Halamish pointed to the cases Milwaukee v. Baum (1976) and Oshkosh v. Board of Regents (1978) to further clarify the rights of student governments.
“The last time a Dean of Education Search and Screen committee was formed, [the administration] turned to ASM for student appointees,” Halamish said.
Spear said the administration’s understanding was to go to the most local regent representative group to appoint the students for the committee.
Halamish said David Musolf, the secretary of the faculty, went to the Office of Education Academic Services student advisory board and the Graduate Student Collaborative to select students from the school for the committee. Halamish argued these were not appropriate sources for the task.
Spear said there is a concern regarding the criteria for appointing students, which have never been clearly defined.
“The issue here is knowing when to go to local student groups and when to go to ASM,” he said.
The ASM Shared Governance Committee met with Spear last Tuesday to further discuss the disagreement.
“We had a very productive meeting,” Spear said. “It took us a long way towards a resolution.”
Halamish, despite calling the meeting “absolutely successful,” still seeks intervention from the Board of Regents.
Spear said his major concern involves what to do with the students currently sitting on the committee. He said it is undesirable to tell the students to step down and allow ASM’s appointed students to take over.
“The [current] students have already put in so much time and work,” Spear explained. “The new students would have to come in cold.”
Spear said it would be inefficient for ASM’s selections to read and learn all the files necessary to “catch up” with what the current student representatives have already accomplished.
“It’s not fair for the students,” Spear said, “I don’t think anyone’s interests would be served.”
Halamish acknowledged the problem, but added “the blunder was made by the provost. The students shouldn’t have to suffer.”
Halamish suggested the best solution would be to allow all four students to sit on the committee.
Spear said he hopes this situation will lead to a better understanding of how to avoid disagreements and confusion in the future.
“We agree there was a misunderstanding,” Spear said, “but no disrespect was meant towards ASM.”
Anonymous (February 15, 2005 @ 2:29pm):
Shared governance is required. ASM is not. There is not one statute or law that says ASM gets to speak for students, as opposed to any other student or student organization.
