Meeting of the Faculty Senate
February 6, 2007
Report by Senator Lapsley
Open Meeting on Early Child Development Center (ECDC)
The Faculty Senate has a representative on a university task force that is charged with studying the role and function of the ECDC, which is child-care facility on campus (near the Library parking lot). The Senate heard a report on the work of the committee.
The ECDC is not owned by the University. It is an independent entity, although the University subsidizes its operation to the tune of about $100,000 a year (mostly taking the form of in-kind contribution to maintenance and the provision of a rent-free facility).
On the insistence of Fr. Malloy, the facility determines admittance by lottery in order to insure equality of access across the university community. This means that the children of faculty have no “edge” over, say, the children of maintenance or clerical staff. This seems to cause a problem at the time of faculty recruiting when departments tout the availability of on-campus child-care as a benefit. It is not a benefit.
There was considerable discussion about the importance of child care facilities for women faculty, but also for fathers; and how younger faculty are forced to make complex and difficult decisions about how to balance starting a family with the tenure clock. I suggested that ECDC should give preferential consideration to junior, untenured faculty, insofar as accessibility was being defined as a “tenure issue.” My suggestion was met with stony silence.
There was discussion about the relative merits of the ECDC facility and the child care facility on the St. Mary’s campus. The operations are run by the same people, and there is no difference between the facilities with respect to quality of staff and other operational concerns---the only real difference is the greater distance required by ND faculty to drop-off and pick up their children if they were placed at St. Mary’s. Apparently, there is space of ND faculty at St. Mary’s, although it is (of course) at greater distance, and the facility is not as attractive.
Consensus seemed to emerge on the following points:
· There is no sentiment to urge abandoning equality of access with respect to ECDC admissions.
· It was generally agreed that the task force should press central administration on expanding the present facility (the EVP had noted that the University was “comfortable” with the level of its current subsidy).
Student Affairs Sub-Committee Meeting
The sub-committee was briefed on the workings of the University Honor Code. We learned that there are perhaps as many as 7 different codes on campus (not all of them are necessarily “honor” codes); that many faculty are not reporting violations (perhaps because this stays on the student’s record for 7 years post-graduation). The committee wondered whether there should be an honor code for the entire university community. The committee will also explore with the ND Police Service the contingency plans for classroom emergencies, and what should be expected of faculty under such conditions.