November 21, 2017

AAUP Update: 2014-15 Election Results

Happy End-of-the-Year Everyone,

Thanks to those of you who were able to make it to the AAUP closing meeting on Tuesday. For those of you who were unable to attend, I wanted to give a quick AAUP Executive Committee election update.  Here are the final results:

AAUP executive committee for 2014-2015

Elected Positions:

President – Harry Zarin (G)
Treasurer – Bill Talbot (R)
Secretary – Erica Hepworth (TP)
Vice President for Takoma Park/Silver Spring – Robin Flanary
Vice President for Rockville – Michael Gurevitz
Vice President for Germantown – Bryant Davis

Appointed Positions:

Grievance Officer – Tim Kirkner (R)
Member At Large – Sharon Piper (G)
Member At Large – Steve Thurston (R)
Past-President – Rick Penn (R)

We want to thank everyone for your support over this past year.  We have another exciting year coming up with the full negotiation approaching and we have a terrific group of representatives who are up for the challenge.

On a personal note,  I want to thank the executive committee for their tremendous support and encouragement over the past year.  I am very proud of the work we accomplished.  I want to give special thanks to Rose Sachs, who has been a superb mentor, motivator, resource, and friend.  Rose is retiring this year and we will all greatly miss her presence at the college.  I will be maintaining my role as department chair, so I will no longer be able to participate within the executive committee.  I will miss the work and the camaraderie, but I hope to take the valuable lessons I’ve learned into other important areas of the college.

Have a great summer!

Best,

Dan

AAUP Update: Negotiations

As stated at the closing meeting, please send any comments or suggestions to my private email,  talbot98@verizon.net

Have a great summer!

Bill Talbot, Professor, CPA
AAUP Chief Negotiator
Montgomery College, HU 248
240.567.5014
bill.talbot@montgomerycollege.edu

AAUP Update: Department Chair Position Announcement

Hello Colleagues,

By now you have probably read the chair position announcement and have been planning accordingly. There have been many questions surrounding the announcement and the entire academic restructuring. Some of those questions have been addressed in our previous email and some have been discussed in the recent email sent by Faculty Council. This email will serve to comment on additional issues and concerns concerning this new position.

The academic restructuring process began two years ago in April of 2012. Since then it has gone through many twists and turns. While many of us, including the AAUP, were opposed to the kinds of changes that were being proposed we, nonetheless, participated in the process in the hopes of creating change that was best for students and faculty. We found the first proposals submitted ill advised, confusing, and possibly damaging to our institution and made that known to the administration on numerous occasions. The first wave of the chair piece of the academic reconstruction removed the chairs from the faculty by converting the position to administrators. Of course, we wondered at the time how the administration planned to justify the addition of 30 to 40 new administrators and the loss of 30 to 40 full-time faculty members. Many standing chairs during that period worried that if we did not fill these positions, individuals from outside of the college would be brought in to run our departments. The AAUP, working with the chapter attorney, researched legal avenues to challenge these restructuring proposals. – to no avail. As time progressed, more proposals came into the picture (i.e. the Chairs group proposal). While these proposals were unable to challenge some of the basic demands that administrative leaders were asking for, they, nonetheless, provided some much-improved alternatives to the restructuring process.

While the request for restructuring was not born from the faculty, the final proposal does represent the work of many different groups within the college. After much time and effort we find ourselves with a proposal that Dr. Pollard has accepted. The administration will begin implementing this proposal over the summer. The final proposal has elements of previous work from the last two years as well as some brand new additions. During the past several months, and under the new leadership of Dr. Rai, both the process and the outcomes have changed dramatically. The process has become far more inclusive, allowing for the voice of the faculty, and, for the first time since this all began, the perspective of the union. Some of the significant outcomes that have been gained through this relationship include:

Chair Side Letter: The creation of an important side letter in our contract that allows Department Chairs to return to their faculty position with all accrued salary in tact. The only way that a chair can be fired, rather than returned to the faculty, is if s/he does something egregious. This is true of every college employee. So although the chairs cannot be represented by the union, they have the contractual protection of returning to the bargaining unit at any time during their term(s) – so long as they complete the current semester.
Chair as Faculty: It is significant that the position of chair has been changed from administrative to faculty, albeit non-bargaining.
Workload: The chairs are afforded three weeks of paid vacation in addition to winter and spring breaks and there will be flexibility in interpretation of the 40-hour work week.
Retirement Benefits: During the time a faculty member is chair, the 12 month salary will count towards retirement; as it stands now, overload ESH and summer ESH are not figured in retirement benefits.

We believe it is important to acknowledge these positive changes in the position and in the process; yet there are still concerns. Our hope is that as the restructuring is evaluated overtime, further changes will occur and some of these concerns will be ameliorated. Issues of concern include:

Compensation: The salary scale, while significant for some, does not make the move to the new department chair as enticing as we would like for some of our most qualified faculty. We believe that there are more equitable compensation systems that would consider past experiences brought to the position and take into account the possibility of salary enhancement for other positions in the reconstruction.
Timeline: The aggressive timeline that has been established may affect the ability to make thoughtful decisions.
Workload: The workload facing these new positions, particularly in larger and/or more complex departments will be enormous.
Grievances: The new department chair role is a grievable position.
Impact on Full-Time Faculty: Removing 36 chairs from the bargaining unit will weaken the chapter by over 7% and signficantly change the FT/PT ratio.
Governance: While we believe that the new chairs should have a significant role in governance, that role should not compromise or dilute the role of the full-time faculty

While we do not agree with every detail of the Academic Reconstruction and despite our concerns, our belief is that Dr. Rai is ultimately committed to our students and is focused on strengthening our departments. If all goes well, the chairs will come from the department faculty, retain faculty status, and return to the department in their faculty positions. Moreover, we have been assured that all pieces of the academic restructure will be carefully monitored and evaluated. We will continue to watch to ensure that this occurs.

We believe that the best possible scenario at this point is that department chairs are identified in round one: eligible faculty from our own departments who are nominated and supported by the faculty in the departments. Raiding other campuses for candidates and/or bringing in external candidates, we believe, could devastate departments and cause harm to our students and the institution. It is important to keep asking questions and to keep holding the administration accountable. Removing the chairs from the bargaining unit is not the decision we supported; it is however, the decision with which we must live. At this time, after many meetings and much discussion, we have essentially been given the opportunity to produce our own leadership. We ask that each of you who meets the requirements in teaching/counseling and leadership experience think carefully and decide, given the information at hand, whether the chair position is one that fits your life plan at this time.

On behalf of the AAUP Executive Committee,

Dan

Dan Wilson, Associate Professor
President – AAUP
Chair – Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Criminal Justice
Suite 224 (Room 234) Humanities Building
Montgomery College – Rockville, MD
240-567-7486 (Office)

AAUP Update: Side Letters & More!

Hello MC Faculty,

We have a few quick updates on academic restructuring, the ongoing negotiations of two key side letters, and the upcoming county council budget meeting.

1. Academic Restructuring: Department Chairs – Many of you have been patiently waiting for the official posting to full-time faculty of the position description and selection process of the new department chair position that will begin, presumably, on July 1.  We anticipate this posting will be forthcoming early next week.  This posting will include the job description, job requirements, necessary qualifications, salary grade, etc.  Please be on the look-out for this email.

2. Side Letter: Department Chairs – We have completed the side letter dealing with the new role of the department chair.  We understand that this was an important issue for many of you in answering, among other things, how much protection a department chair would have under the new system.  Below, you will find the side letter in its entirety (it is very short).  You may view the official document on our website under the “chapter documents” tab. http://mcaaup.org/?page_id=58

The side letter:

This confirms the understanding between the College and the Chapter regarding Department Chairs. When a faculty member accepts the appointment of Department Chair, the employee will leave the AAUP bargaining unit for the duration of the term(s) as Department Chair.  The evaluation cycle as a bargaining faculty member will be suspended, and the employee will be evaluated annually on duties as Department Chair.

A Department Chair’s term may end due to expiration, voluntary resignation, or removal based on performance.  A Department Chair may resign during the course of the term provided that he or she completes a full semester.  Except in cases where the Department Chair is subject to dismissal for cause unrelated to performance, upon conclusion of the appointment, the employee will return to his or her bargaining faculty position. Compensation and benefits will return to the ten-month faculty salary and will include all salary adjustments and increases in rank that would have been attained during their time as Department Chair.  The faculty member’s evaluation cycle will resume from the point where it was suspended at the time of appointment as Department Chair.

**You will note that Department Chairs can return to the bargaining unit at any time (provided that it is not in the midst of a semester – for obvious reasons – and that the person was originally part of the bargaining unit, i.e. not an external hire) and that the faculty member will be afforded all increases in pay/rank that would have accrued if they had never left the bargaining unit.  Also, as a matter of clarification, Department Chairs are not officially administrators/staff, they are non-bargining faculty.

3. Side Letter: Distance LearningThe negotiations for the update to our distance learning side letter are going very well and the letter is just about completed. We will finalize the last set of changes at our next meeting on April 9. It has been a great example of not so much a good negotiation but rather a collegial work group. As soon as it is completed and signed we will update you and post it to our website.

4. County Council Operating Budget HearingOn April 9 at 7pm the County Council will hold operating budget hearings. The hearings are held in the 3rd floor hearing room of the Council Office Building at 100 Maryland Avenue in Rockville. Parking is available at the rear of the building off of Monroe Street. As President Pollard noted in her March 17th email, the Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett supports an $11 million dollar increase in funding. While this is certainly encouraging it is still $7.9 million short of our $18.9 million request.  The hearing is an opportunity for us to show support of our institution and to encourage the county council to provide full funding of the MC budget to help provide the necessary resources to fully serve our students, faculty, and staff. An AAUP representative will be testifying as will various other members of the college. We STRONGLY encourage you to attend the hearings, dressed in your latest MC garb, to demonstrate to the council your support of Montgomery College!

That’s all for now. Thank you for reading and we will see you soon. Have a great second half of the spring semester.

On behalf of the AAUP Executive Committee,

Dan

AAUP Update:

Hello Colleagues,
The purpose of this email is to provide you with brief updates on academic restructuring and contract violations.

1.  Academic Restructuring – Hopefully many of you have had a chance to look over the final recommendation reports put forth by the academic restructuring workgroups. If not, please visit http://cms.montgomerycollege.edu/EDU/Department.aspx?id=43665 and click on “academic restructuring.” I have heard from many of you concerning how these changes may impact your individual departmental situations.  While I continue to convey these concerns during my own interactions, the remainder of this month represents your time to officially give feedback to the group reports (there is an email link on the same page the group reports are located).  It is vital that the groups hear your thoughts in order for this process to be as encompassing as possible.
We also want to point out that Dr. Rai has met with both me and the AAUP executive committee.  We have been very impressed with his willingness to listen to our concerns and to help build a mutually respectful relationship.  This kind of communication will help us move forward in a productive manner and, we believe, will help protect and strengthen our institution.
2.  Contract Violations – As reported in our last update, we were awaiting the official response from the college concerning potential contract violations in distance learning.  These violations centered around the creation and use of DL courses that were not specifically addressed in the DL side letter (i.e. MOOCs).  As we are all aware, technology in education is expanding rapidly and some of the new learning instruments have yet to be addressed in the contract.  Some of the more obvious concerns surrounding these alternative types of courses are issues of credit disbursement, faculty ESH options, curriculum/departmental oversight, class size, etc. Thus far, these courses have been under the direction of the office of Distance Education Learning Technologies (DELT).  The ESH awarded for creating and teaching massive online courses has been provided by DELT. Because of this, and the nature of these types of courses, we assert that these courses are considered distance courses. The consulting attorney for the college disagreed with this assessment.  Their official response is as follows:
“the College’s position is that the creation and presentation of the MOOC was not something contemplated or addressed in the Distance Learning Side Letter, but was something within the scope of Section 5.3(B) of the Agreement”
Section 5.3(B) of our contract reads:
Where, under this agreement, faculty members perform activities assigned by Management, not otherwise set forth in this Article, which Management determines are to be measured in terms of equivalent semester hours for purposes of Section 5.1 (A) of this Article, one (1) equivalent semester hour shall be equal to fifty (50) clock hours of such assigned activities, except that one (1) equivalent semester hour shall be equal to forty (40) clock hours of such assigned activities when defined and budgeted by Management as Advising Cadre, Instructional Improvement, Curriculum Development, Program Development, Scholarly Effort, or Special Projects equivalent semester hours. Not more than six (6) equivalent semester hours per semester attributable to coaching activities shall be recognized for the purpose of fulfilling the thirty (30) equivalent semester hour standard minimum workload specified in Section 5.1 (A) of this Article.
We found the use of 5.3(B) extremely odd because it essentially states that MOOC-type classes are not considered distance learning classes even though they follow and look similar to what most of us would consider a distance learning course, and they are under the direction of our distance learning department/personnel.  It seems impossible to argue that a course taught online and paid for by distance learning could not be considered a DL course.
The AAUP would like to stress that we realize the potential these new types of courses have, and we also recognize that these courses could be greatly beneficial for our students, faculty, and college as a whole.  However, we do want to ensure that the details of these courses are clearly outlined in our contract to help protect our members.
On behalf of the AAUP executive committee,
Dan

Dan Wilson, Associate Professor
President – AAUP
Chair – Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Criminal Justice
Suite 224 (Room 234) Humanities Building
Montgomery College – Rockville, MD
240-567-7486 (Office)

AAUP Update: Welcome Back!

Hello Colleagues and welcome to the beginning of our Spring 2014 semester,

We are off to a very wintery start which, at this time, has required us to cancel our mid-year meeting. The purpose of this email is to provide you with brief updates on personnel changes, contract violations, and academic restructuring.

1. Personnel Changes – On November 15 2014, the interim Vice President of Academic Affairs, Dr. Sanjay Rai, announced his appointment of interim associate senior vice president for academic affairs, Ms. Carolyn Terry.  The AAUP executive committee wishes to congratulate Ms. Terry on her new appointment. Ms. Terry has been a full-time faculty member in the English discipline, a department chair of English, and, of course, the dean of humanities at the Rockville Campus. She has shown a strong  understanding of academia, an ability to lead, and dedication to students in both her faculty and administrative roles.  As we have stated in previous emails, oftentimes the most effective administrators come from the Montgomery College faculty, and we are pleased to see Ms. Terry as a key voice in creating a strong and stable office of the vice president. We wish the best of luck to Ms. Terry in her new position.

2.  Contract Violations – As reported in previous updates, early in the fall semester we noticed two potential contract violations.  One of these violations dealt with the lengthening of our academic calendar and the other concerned distance learning.  After a semester long debate about the nature of these violations, we, along with our legal counsel, met with representatives of the college and their legal counsel on January 10.  Regarding the calendar issue, there still seems to be some disagreement on the methods used to count the number of days in an academic year.  Both parties agreed to reevaluate their methods.  Regarding the distance education issue, both parties agreed that implementation of new methods of distance education not covered in our current contract (specifically, our distance learning side letter) will be put on hold until representatives from the faculty and the administration can update the side letter to reflect these new technological instructional delivery systems. This group has already been formed and has begun scheduling dates in order to finish the update quickly and efficiently.  At the end of our meeting we asked HR to provide an official written response to the violations. We are still awaiting that response and we will update you once it is received.

3.  Academic Restructuring – Many of you are anxious to see the final results of the recommendations put forth by the academic restructuring workgroups.  The amount of work that has gone into each one of the workgroups is extraordinary with many participants putting in extra time throughout the holiday break.  Dr. Rai and his office has done a tremendous job organizing the recommendations into a single coherent vision for our college.  Since mid-November we have witnessed great efforts to make the restructuring process more inclusive and more responsive.  The final recommendation reports will be released and discussed this week, and the representatives of AAUP are eager to hear your thoughts.  While we still disagree with the motive and reasoning behind moving department chairs out of the AAUP bargaining unit, we are encouraged by some of the compromises we have seen and are excited about moving forward.  We will be meeting with Dr. Rai early on in the spring semester to deal more directly with changes that impact the contractual side of the restructuring and, of course, many of the changes will need to ultimately be decided during our negotiations next year.

On behalf of the AAUP executive committee,

Dan

Dan Wilson, Associate Professor
President – AAUP
Chair – Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Criminal Justice
Suite 224 (Room 234) Humanities Building
Montgomery College – Rockville, MD
240-567-7486 (Office)

AAUP Update: Personnel Changes P.2

Happy Thanksgiving Colleagues!

On November 22, 2013, the new interim Vice President of Academic Affairs, Dr. Sanjay Rai, announced his appointment of Acting Vice President and Provost at the Germantown Campus, Ms. Magaret Latimer.  The AAUP executive committee wishes to congratulate Ms. Latimer on her new appointment.  Ms. Latimer has served in many different capacities at the college including part-time and full-time professor, department chair, and associate dean.  As we have seen, often times the most effective administrators come from the Montgomery College faculty and we are pleased to see Ms. Latimer as part of that group. We wish the best of luck to Ms. Latimer in her new position.

I hope you all have a great “mini-break” and that you are able to spend some quality time with family and friends.

On behalf of the AAUP Executive Committee,

 

Dan

AAUP Update: Salary Placement Concerns

Colleagues,

There have been several good questions asked about the faculty salary analysis referenced in the AAUP email of November 18, and I’d like to elaborate on the research that we have done.  This research is still ongoing, and as is common with research the more we investigate, the greater the number of new questions we have.  We know that we don’t have all of the answers (or even all of the questions) yet, so please accept this as an update and not a final answer.

As you may recall, when we are hired our initial salary is based on two factors.  Each year the administration prepares a schedule of starting salaries.  This schedule is not contractual other than to limit these salaries to within the negotiated range.  Generally speaking, starting salaries range from the negotiated minimum to around the middle of the range.  Where within that range the new faculty members are placed depends on the number of placement points they are awarded based on factors such as credentials and experience, among others.

From this, we have identified at least 3 possible causes of pay inequity:

First, within each year, was the schedule consistently applied?  If one person was hired with more points than another, did the first person have at least as high an initial salary?  In some situations the schedule may put two people with different numbers of points at the same starting salary, but it should never put someone with fewer points at a higher salary.

Second, were the new faculty correctly placed on the schedule?  Did each person receive the appropriate number of points, and did all of the deans consistently apply the rubric in determining how many points to assign?

Finally, were there any anomalies in the year-to-year changes in the salary structure that would cause someone hired one year from currently having a lower salary than someone else hired in a subsequent year with the same or fewer points?

As we have had no say in the construction of the initial placement schedule, questions pertaining to whether points are used to reward those attributes which we believe most important and worthy of higher salaries are not addressed here.

Last year, the AAUP requested of the administration copies of the initial salary placement data for all faculty members.  We were provided with binders containing hard copies of this information earlier this semester.  While some of the data is incomplete, we now know for most faculty when they were hired, how many points they were given, and what their starting salary was.  This allows us to address the 1st and 3rd questions above; the second question, as to whether the number of points given each faculty member was in fact correct, and whether the rubric for determining this quantity was consistently applied from unit to unit, we do not know and probably cannot ascertain.

Based on the data made available to us, adjustments to the scale from year to year do not appear to be more favorable than negotiated salary increases.  So for example, a person hired with 5 points in one year would make more the next year due to the negotiated raise than would someone newly hired with 5 points that year.  Ideally, the person would make slightly more than someone hired the next year with _6_ points, as one additional point would be awarded for a year’s worth of experience, and (hopefully) that year of experience at MC should be rewarded to at least the same extent as a year’s work elsewhere.  In most cases this expectation seems to hold.  Comparing current salaries for people hired in one year, or the next year with 1 additional point, or the following year with 2 additional points, and so on, we see definite groupings of salaries.  These groupings show a trend of higher current salaries for those with longer tenure and/or more experience (or other placement points), as expected.  Within these groupings, however, there are fairly wide ranges of salaries, and we are still working on trying to account for these ranges.  It is also worth noting that several faculty with varying levels of experience are currently at the minimum of the salary scale.  This is a consequence of the recent negotiations which significantly raised this minimum, and thereby lifted people from different salaries to this new higher minimum.

In addition to looking at year-to-year trends, we are also investigating consistency of salary placements relative to the number of points within each year.  In fact, there do seem to be some instances of pairs of people hired in the same year where the faculty member initially placed with fewer points currently has the higher salary.  We are still looking into these situations, and trying to determine whether anyone was placed at an unfairly low initial salary, and if so why, or if someone else may have been placed at an unjustified high salary – and, if so, again why?  Or is there some altogether different explanation?  We’ll continue to research this and keep you posted as we learn more.

Rick Penn
Professor of Mathematics
AAUP Past President
Montgomery College, Rockville
240-567-5195

AAUP Updates: BOT Meeting and more!

Hello Colleagues,

I hope this message finds you well and that you are staying warm as we feel the temperatures drop.  The AAUP Executive Committee has a couple of quick but important updates for this week.

1.  Tonight (11/18) is the Board of Trustees meeting. Our own Joan Gough will be speaking during the open comments period.  PLEASE try to attend and show support for Joan and Montgomery College.  The open session section starts at 8pm.

2. Staff and Administrator “pay for performance” and bonuses:   Brenda Braham, on behalf of Staff Council, submitted a Maryland Public Information Act (FOIA) request to Ms. Porter regarding bonuses for staff and pay for performance for administrators.  The results of the FOIA were forwarded to the AAUP and are as follows:

  • This fiscal year, $431,187.74 will go to administrators for pay that exceeds and far exceeds performance
  • Out of the 83 total number of administrative employees, 72 qualified for pay performance increases (86.7%)
    • 3.5% bonus = 4 administrators
    • 4.5% bonus = 24 administrators
    • 5.5% bonus = 44 administrators
    •                        72 total
  • There are 534 bargaining staff and 692 non-bargaining staff. Out of these 1226 employees, 596 exceeded performance and 306 far exceeded performance. This equals a total of 902 bonuses.
  • Rocky Sorrell, the general counsel for Montgomery College, originally presented this information

The AAUP executive committee find this information troubling to the spirit of ‘equity’ and ‘common employee experience’ as the vast majority of non-faculty received this bonus/pay-for-performance and yet faculty are excluded from eligibility. We hope and urge the administration to discuss restoring equity for all members of the college.

3.  Faculty Salary Placement Inequity:  We have analyzed all of the current salaries of faculty relative to their years of experience and the number of points at which they started on the initial salary placement scale (for prior experience, credentials, etc.)  Most of the data follows the expected trend of showing higher salaries associated with longer tenure at Montgomery College and/or greater numbers of placement points.  At this point, we are still analyzing the data, and we are not yet certain if any of the data represent “outliers” and not appropriate salaries.  Should we find any salaries that we conclude are inappropriately low given the college’s own policies and standards, we will let those faculty members know at that time.

4.  Contract Violations: As fast as the college is changing is as slow as the college is issuing an official response to our two submitted contract violations. Our violations were submitted on September 13, 2013. We have been urging the college for the past two months to resolve these concerns. On November 13, the college’s legal representation stated that it does not have all the facts.  We were very surprised by this response considering the length of time they have had to collect the facts. It appears that the legal counsel for the college is either ignoring or stalling on what we view as major violations of the contract.  We will continue discussions with our counsel on the appropriate legal steps moving forward.

UPDATE: Just before sending this email I did get word that the two attorneys will be meeting. I will update you with the results.

5. Labor/Management Cooperation Committee (LMCC):  Last year, members of the AAUP Executive Committee began attending bi-monthly meetings with representatives of the college to address work related issues.  The goal was to discuss and possibly rectify issues before they became larger problems.  While the meetings were organized with positive intentions the results were mixed.  Some of last year’s issues included the need to separate the qualifications for full-time/part-time awards (still waiting), troubles with online evaluations (the original pilot project became institutionalized with no real analysis of its effectiveness), and raising the distance education size limit from 20 to 25 (the result was a managerial unilateral decision).  As you can see our participation in the LMCC did not impact the above issues.  This year, the LMCC will reconvene and we hope we will be able to more work more collaboratively.  Please keep corresponding with your AAUP representatives as your issues often become talking points at the LMCC meetings.

***This week should be interesting (please see this morning’s email concerning the leadership transition sent by Dr. Pollard). I will be meeting with Dr. Pollard this morning to review these changes  Please look for further updates in the upcoming days.  Thank you and have a great week!

On behalf of the AAUP Executive Committee,

Dan

Dan Wilson, Associate Professor
President – AAUP
Chair – Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Criminal Justice
Suite 224 (Room 234) Humanities Building
Montgomery College – Rockville, MD
240-567-7486 (Office)

 

AAUP Mission & Descriptionhttp://www.aaup.org  http://mcaaup.org

The mission of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) is to advance academic freedom and shared governance, to define fundamental professional values and standards for higher education, and to ensure higher education’s contribution to the common good. Founded in 1915, the AAUP has helped to shape American higher education by developing the standards and procedures that maintain quality in education and academic freedom in this country’s colleges and universities.

Articles