Faculty Senate – February 15, 2023
Agenda for Faculty Senate Meeting
February 15, 2023 – 3:30-5:00PM
Physical location: Schwartz Auditorium, Rockefeller Hall
Contact your department Faculty Senator for the zoom link.
Gayogo̱hó꞉nǫʼ Land Acknowledgement
Call to order
Approval of Minutes: December 14, 2022
Senate Speaker Jonathan Ochshorn, Emeritus Professor of Architecture [4 minutes]
Senate Announcements and Updates
Industrial and Labor Relations School to combine two departments: Labor Relations, Law and History with International and Comparative Labor
Dean Alex Colvin, Industrial and Labor Relations School [5 minutes]
Eve De Rosa, Dean of Faculty, Chair of the University Faculty Committee, Psychology
Chelsea Specht, Associate Dean of Faculty, Chair of the Nominations and Elections Committee, Plant Biology [5 minutes]
Q&A [10 minutes]
S.C. Johnson College of Business Tenure Clock Harmonization
Suzanne Shu, Dean of Faculty and Research for S.C. Johnson College of Business
Presentation of the Resolution – Suzanne Shu [5 minutes]
Discussion of the Resolution [10 minutes]
Requesting that the University Provide Funds for an MD Gynecologist at Cornell Health
Presentation of the Resolution – Arielle Johnson, Graduate Student, School of Integrative Plant Science Plant Biology [5 minutes]
Discussion of the Resolution [10 minutes]
Academic Freedom in the Global Hubs
Presentation — Eve De Rosa, Dean of Faculty Background [5 minutes]
Senator Richard Bensel [10 minutes]
Senate Discussion [15 minutes]
Good of the Order [5 minutes]
Adjournment [1 minute]
Senate Speaker Jonathan Ochshorn, Emeritus Professor of Architecture
Log Out
I want to bring to people’s attention key comments from the CAPP committee for consideration before casting a vote:
• The resolution is seen as addressing a political question vs. an academic issue
• Why does the resolution bothers to single out China instead of simply being more generally toward authoritarian regimes which embody specific characteristics?
• What is the point of the resolution given that Cornell cannot confer any “rights” to citizens of another country in that country or what “necessary steps” Cornell could take to “ensure…freedom of speech” in an authoritarian country that doesn’t tolerate free speech. Given that, it was suggested that Cornell could emphasize its principles but note that since it cannot protect the citizens in those countries who follow those principles, the resolution could state a desire to closely monitor whether the university’s academic freedom policies have traction in a given country, and if not to take some kind of action (whatever that might be.)
As stated in CAPP comments, because Cornell does not have the authority to confer any rights to citizens from another country, this resolution does nothing but create an exclusive, in place of an inclusive environment for Cornelian of Chinese origin. Given that anti-Asian hate is still looming in this country, more cultural sensitivity is anticipated from fellow Cornelians.
Also, I could not help wondering whether there would be more resolutions coming about other countries.
I want to bring to people’s attention key comments from the CAPP committee for consideration before casting a vote:
• The resolution is seen as addressing a political question vs. an academic issue
• Why does the resolution bothers to single out China instead of simply being more generally toward authoritarian regimes which embody specific characteristics?
• What is the point of the resolution given that Cornell cannot confer any “rights” to citizens of another country in that country or what “necessary steps” Cornell could take to “ensure…freedom of speech” in an authoritarian country that doesn’t tolerate free speech. Given that, it was suggested that Cornell could emphasize its principles but note that since it cannot protect the citizens in those countries who follow those principles, the resolution could state a desire to closely monitor whether the university’s academic freedom policies have traction in a given country, and if not to take some kind of action (whatever that might be.)
As stated in CAPP comments, because Cornell does not have the authority to confer any rights to citizens from another country, this resolution does nothing but create an exclusive, in place of an inclusive environment for Cornelian of Chinese origin. Given that anti-Asian hate is still looming in this country, more cultural sensitivity is anticipated from fellow Cornelians.
Also, I could not help wondering whether there would be more resolutions coming about other countries.
On the “Resolution on Academic Freedom in Cornell Programs in China and Other Parts of the Global Hubs System”
This is a really tough decision to vote no on this, especially given that I was a co-sponsor on this resolution.
In principle, I fully support this resolution. When dealing with universities in countries with authoritarian regimes, Cornell should only do with eyes wide open.
However, in speaking with my Chinese colleagues, I’ve come to realize that there is a potential for insult and creating a feeling of non-belonging at Cornell. Furthermore, it’s important to realize that academics in China are not representatives Chinese government.
As a result of this, I, and my department, can’t support the resolution in its current form.
However, I would be very happy to support a revised version of this resolution that does not call out any single nation.