University address requires transparency

By Sarah Rutledge     10/29/09 7:00pm

Each fall since 2005, President David Leebron has outlined the university's progress over the previous year, and its plan for the next, in his State of the University address to faculty and students. The session, which is coordinated by the Faculty Senate, has always been open to the Rice community and a Thresher reporter has always been present to report on Leebron's remarks for a news article the following week.Not this year.

A Thresher reporter was sent to cover the speech last week at Duncan Hall. After the talk, the reporter was approached by Duane Windsor, the speaker of the Faculty Senate, who instructed him not to share his notes or speak about the speech with anyone. In fact, Windsor - who has the authority to close the meeting to members of the Rice community - had earlier dismissed all members of the media from the room, leaving just members of the faculty and Leebron. (Because this behavior was unprecedented, and due to initial confusion, the Thresher reporter remained at the event.)

For those who didn't attend the event, a PowerPoint presentation will be available through the President's office. It will be filtered for content - not all slides shown in the original presentation will be available to the public. Though changing presentations for the purpose of confidentiality in university matters is not uncommon, shutting students out of the State of the University address is. With just edited slide content to view, students are likely unable to fully understand the changes in store for the university.

---

---

Certainly the abruptness of such a change took those of us at the Thresher by surprise. Though student turnout was generally small, the openness of the event kept us informed of university policy. Last fall, we heard firsthand from Leebron's perspective of the university's financial struggles and planned hiring freeze in the wake of Hurricane Ike and the bleak economic situation. The year before, we kept up with Leebron's plans to establish Rice as a formidable graduate institution.

When questioned about the decision to exclude students from the address, Leebron responded that the Faculty Senate hoped for a more frank discussion, one with greater confidentiality. Windsor also mentioned in an e-mail that "the President might need to report on particular matters, such as the merger process, best restricted to the faculty" and that closing the meeting gave Leebron the ability "to report on confidential/sensitive matters with greater freedom." But what makes this year's discussion so much more volatile than in years past?

Perhaps the title of the speech is a misnomer: Windsor maintains that the meeting is not addressed to the whole university but rather to the faculty. Even if students aren't directly addressed, the unprecedented act of abruptly shutting us out of the meeting - during the meeting - signals yet more policy decisions students are kept unaware of. Though Windsor claims this instance was an exception, what's to keep the Faculty Senate from repeatedly denying us access to this and other meetings?

Leebron spoke to the Student Association on Monday about possible changes, likely a condensed version of his presentation to the faculty. The questions he received after his presentation overwhelmingly concerned specifics of the Rice-Baylor merger, many of which were far too specific for even the former New York lawyer to tackle. How many Baylor professors would move to the Rice campus if the merger goes through? Would there be a huge influx of pre-meds? Would our tuition go up as a result? (By the way, after three years here, let me assure you: Your tuition will go up each year, regardless of the merger. I promise. Your parents don't really need to live in a house, do they?)

But the smaller questions aren't the ones that dictate major changes to the university. For those faculty whose tenure extends far beyond our own, who have had the opportunity to observe trends in their departments and the university, larger issues are a focal point. As students, we are likely to get caught up in the smaller issues and forget about the larger ones. Though some students' involvement with the university may not extend past their graduation day, many more may feel deeply enough about Rice to care about the direction in which it is going - and it's hard to tell, given the small amount of information to which we're privy.

This is a time of great upheaval for students, as well as faculty and staff, at Rice: The addition of two colleges, a large increase in student population, the proposed Rice-Baylor merger and the dreary economic situation threaten to completely change the dynamics of the university as we know it. We want to know the university is being honest and forthcoming with us. And being able to attend the State of the University address at least assured us that degree of transparency.

Leebron's SA presentation painted a picturesque view of the Rice student community. Smiling cheerleaders at football games, beaming students in lab coats and groups of students astutely discussing, no doubt, the latest trends in U.S. foreign policy all dominated the last frames of his PowerPoint presentation. If we are indeed the young adults who make the university the place it is, why are we barred from attending one of the most important administrative talks of the year?

We're told from childhood to act our age. The assumption goes that by modifying our behaviors and appearing more poised, we'll be treated more like adults and be given more responsibility. Well, we're in college, and we're acting our age. So why are we still being treated like children?

Sarah Rutledge is a Martel College senior and Thresher senior editor. Josh Rutenberg contributed to this column.

---