Faculty Beat is Worried About the State of the World
Faculty gathered on Monday, January 27, for the first meeting of the spring semester. Topics discussed included responding to the Trump presidency, streamlining the approval process for study abroad credits, and continued discussion of distribution requirements.
President Audrey Bilger opened by saying, “I seem to often have terrible, sad things to say at faculty meetings.” She referenced her email from earlier that day regarding the impacts of the Southern California wildfires and the Trump presidency, and reiterated that the Reed administration is there to support the campus community. She then turned the meeting over to Dean of the Faculty Kathy Oleson.
Oleson similarly expressed her support in the wake of the wildfires and the recent executive orders. “My heart is breaking as I’m thinking about these various things,” she said, adding that the administration is working together to protect and support members of the community. Additionally, the Presidential Council for Campus Climate was working on messaging regarding ways to respond to the executive orders while leaning into the college’s values around DEI and freedom of speech, which was sent out a few days after the meeting. Kerry Cohen from the HCC also reached out offering to come to classes and provide support. Finally, Oleson said she’s working on times outside of faculty meetings for faculty to gather as a community.
She introduced Milyon Trulove, Vice President and Dean of Admission and Financial Aid, who delivered several updates. First, he thanked faculty for everything they’ve done to help with the admissions process, and asked for more responses to an email asking faculty to help out. He also followed up on the recent announcement about the Reed Promise Initiative, which will guarantee tuition-free education for families earning under $100k in Washington or Oregon, plus transfer students. Trulove clarified that Reed will continue to meet 100% of demonstrated need, and the Reed Promise Initiative is not any different than what Reed currently offers: students from families earning under $100k already have their full tuition covered. This initiative is just trying to make this clearer and simpler to understand. One professor asked, if this is what we’re doing already, why only make the promise for Oregon and Washington? Trulove explained that they’re starting “in our backyard” in order to see what happens.
Next was Nigel Nicholson, representing the Appeals and Review Committee. He clarified that all faculty are eligible for election to the elected committees, such as the Committee on Advancement and Tenure (CAT), if they are on 0.5 FTE or higher and not on leave the following year, even junior and visiting faculty. Per the bylaws, “Faculty members should regard it as part of their normal responsibilities to make themselves available for service on CAT” (IV.1.A.2). Faculty should only be removing themselves from the ballot if it’s going to be an exceptionally terrible year for them, he said.
Then, Jon Rork had a few announcements from the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL). First, he outlined several ways in which he’s trying to center the CTL’s work into the strategic initiatives of the college. He also shared that CTL and DAC have been organizing programming to get the school ready for May 2026, when regulations will be changing so that everything digital has to be accessible. There’s no reason to believe the Trump administration will change those requirements, he said. Finally, Rork announced the return of the Great Reedie Bake-off, which will be held Mondays 2:00–3:00p.m. in the SU from February 17 to March 3. Get your teams together! A link to sign up can be found in the Campus News email from January 30. He’s also looking for judges: a student, a faculty member, and a staff member.
Kelly Chacón (Chemistry) took the podium next, representing the faculty Committee on Diversity (CoD). CoD is currently being reinstated after a brief hiatus, as the committee took the fall semester to think about what its work would look like moving forward. Chacón spoke about how their personal experience as a first-gen college student and a child of a Mexican immigrant informs their opinions. They urged faculty to stand up for what they believe in; institutional neutrality, they said, is neither ethical nor responsible. “I strongly believe that we would happily go down if it meant sticking to our values in the name of the good we are doing here at Reed, even if we aren’t perfect,” Chacón said. They encouraged faculty to consider what our institutional values are and how we can fight for them.
Chacón concluded, “I also would like to ask our administration to reiterate our institutional stance as a safe sanctuary to all who seek to learn here, which includes better defining what that means as a detailed policy, and how far we will go to defend that policy. I think we all can agree that this is a shared community value.” As they returned to their seat, Chacón received more applause than this Quest reporter has ever seen at a faculty meeting.
Next up was Ann Delehanty with the Committee on Academic Policy and Planning (CAPP) report. She brought forward a proposal from the committee to streamline the approval process for off-campus study credits. There were many pieces to this proposal, but discussion centered around two key parts. One provision would allow the Registrar to apply off-campus courses toward group and division requirements, in consultation with department or division chairs, “as necessary.” A number of professors were hesitant about the idea that the registrar could approve courses without consulting with them. Registrar Jason Maher said that many of these courses are “slam dunks,” and that the Registrar’s Office would continue to get in touch with the department or division if there were any questions. There was some confusion about whether, in practice, the Registrar is already approving classes without checking with departments (yes).
Another key piece of the proposal was that courses, once approved, would remain approved for all future students. A few professors expressed concerns about how this would apply to one-off cases where a class is approved in special circumstances but shouldn’t be approved for everyone. However, most were in support. Kris Anderson (Psychology) said that, as department chair, she’s tired of approving “the same damn course over and over again.” Ultimately, the full proposal was approved, but with a notable amount of opposition.
CAPP also brought a new study abroad program to be approved: Fulbright University Vietnam. It passed easily.
Jan Mieskowski (CAT) was next, with a short announcement that CAT is once again asking faculty to submit comments for their colleagues who are being evaluated, with a deadline of February 14. They don’t have to be long, he reiterated, “you can just say, ‘Jan gave the CAT report, he was totally incoherent, A-.’”
As usual, most of the rest of the meeting was spent discussing the latest updates on distribution requirements. Suzy Renn, representing the Ad Hoc Committee on Distribution Requirements, restated that this is a long process, but they’re on track to approve new requirements in March. Following previous faculty discussions, the committee has settled mostly on a model based around modifying the existing requirements. Renn presented four propositions, amendments to which will be discussed at the next meeting (February 17), followed by a vote either then or at the following meeting (March 10). For more on those propositions and the current status of the updates, see the article on distribution requirements on page xx.
With just a few minutes left for new business, Kate Bredeson (Theatre) asked, given that ICE has been reported at several locations in Oregon recently, what community members should do if they show up. Oleson said ICE should be directed to Community Safety at 28 West. With that, the meeting was adjourned.
The next faculty meeting will be held on February 17. Students interested in attending should contact presidentsoffice@reed.edu.
