Administrators at the U. of Tulsa have come under heavy fire for the university’s plan to cut 40 percent of its academic programming, primarily in the liberal arts.
The University of Tulsa’s Board of Trustees voted on Thursday to deal what some see as a fatal blow to a faculty group’s last-ditch effort to limit the effect of the Oklahoma university’s controversial academic-restructuring plan.
Tulsa administrators championed the plan as a bold, necessary step toward a future they see as increasingly STEM-focused and financially fickle.
The board’s decision effectively reaffirmed the “True Commitment,” a plan that has drawn fire from faculty members and students, partly because it will slash 40 percent of academic programming, and also because of the heavy-handed tactics students and faculty members say have been used to quell criticism.
We’re sorry. Something went wrong.
We are unable to fully display the content of this page.
The most likely cause of this is a content blocker on your computer or network. Please make sure your computer, VPN, or network allows
javascript and allows content to be delivered from c950.chronicle.com and chronicle.blueconic.net.
Once javascript and access to those URLs are allowed, please refresh this page.
You may then be asked to log in or create an account if you don't already have one.
If you continue to experience issues, contact us at 202-466-1032 or help@chronicle.com
S.P. Moran, Wikimedia
Administrators at the U. of Tulsa have come under heavy fire for the university’s plan to cut 40 percent of its academic programming, primarily in the liberal arts.
The University of Tulsa’s Board of Trustees voted on Thursday to deal what some see as a fatal blow to a faculty group’s last-ditch effort to limit the effect of the Oklahoma university’s controversial academic-restructuring plan.
Tulsa administrators championed the plan as a bold, necessary step toward a future they see as increasingly STEM-focused and financially fickle.
The board’s decision effectively reaffirmed the “True Commitment,” a plan that has drawn fire from faculty members and students, partly because it will slash 40 percent of academic programming, and also because of the heavy-handed tactics students and faculty members say have been used to quell criticism.
“Simply put, the board remains resolute in its opinion the recommendations in the Strategic Plan and True Commitment remain our best path forward,” Gerard P. Clancy, Tulsa’s president, wrote in a campuswide email. “While we welcome suggestions for improvement through established pathways, there will be no ‘repeal’ or ‘rollback’ of True Commitment.”
ADVERTISEMENT
Tulsa administrators have championed the plan, which was announced in April, as a bold, necessary step toward a future they see as increasingly STEM-focused and financially fickle. But many faculty members, particularly those in the arts and humanities, have criticized it and accused the university of repeatedly violating shared-governance principles in creating it.
Following months of outcry on the campus, the administration gave the faculty 30 days to propose amendments to the plan. Those 30 days gave rise to a Faculty Senate resolution that endorsed a limited number of program closures at Tulsa — programs like the university’s minor in ancient Greek and its Ph.D. in mathematics.
The senate would accept those closures, however, only if Tulsa agreed to take all academic-related stipulations of the True Commitment through faculty-elected committees, and then the full Faculty Senate; and if university leaders would consent to an audit of administrative expenses.
In a recent interview with The Chronicle, Clancy stressed that the True Commitment is not a static plan, and that he and Janet K. Levit, the provost, are open to “constructive criticism” in the future. True Commitment task forces are set to meet through the end of the year.
