11 April 2022

a student newspaper of the University of Tulsa

April 11, 2022 - Issue 21 - Volume 107

True Commitment, Three Years Later

- Timeline of Events, page 3 - Students recollect True Committment, page 5 - Professors reflect on changes, page 6

Page 2

The Collegian

11 April 2022

What exactly was True Commitment?

The plan sought to consolidate many programs while eliminating ones that were underperforming.

Logan Guthrie Commentary Editor The graduating seniors at the University of Tulsa and some students from the following classes will remember the bold restructuring plan that the university first proposed in 2019 known as True Commitment. Many look back on this proposal with anger, but amongst many of the student body, they have only heard about it in retrospect, not really knowing what their upper classmates were talking about.

True Commitment was a plan originally announced by former TU President Gerard Clancy on April 11, 2019 sometimes referred to as “The TU Reorganization.” The plan was created in response to recommendations by a university committee known as the PPRC, Provost’s Program Review Committee. In the most basic sense, True Commitment planned to restructure all departments of the Kendall College of Arts and Sciences into four divisions; require the A&S faculty to teach a new general education curriculum known as “University Studies”; consolidate the Business, Law and Health Sciences schools into one “profes-

graphic by Unversity of Tulsa, retrieved through TUplan.org Images in this article are from “The Academic Strategy for The University of Tulsa Based upon the Provost’s Program Review Committee Recommendations 2018-2019”

Law all programs were planned to be cut except Juris Doctor, J.D. and the Law, Policy, & Social Justice, Minor as well as the Sustainable Energy & Resources (SERL) Certificate, which would be restructured as a concentration of the J.D. program.

“... the PPRC’s first priorities were in the elimination of low enrollment programs and restructuring of others.” sional super college”; and eliminate 40% of the academic programs of the university.

These eliminations would span all levels of college education up to a Ph.D. The PPRC itself was a committee consisting of representatives from the faculty of all colleges within TU. Dean Robin Ploeger from the Oxley College of Health Sciences, the president of the TU Faculty Senate Stephen Galoob, Faculty Senate Vice President Dan Crunkleton (ex officio), Provost Janet Levitt (ex officio), the Executive Vice President Kevan Buck (ex officio) and Treasurer Tracy Suter (ex officio) also had placements in the committee. Other faculty could also be invited ex officio according to the guidelines outlined in the True Commitment Plan.

These committee members were chosen by the provost and other administrators, with no general vote from the faculty as to who would represent their views.

According to the Academic strategy document with the proposed changes, the PPRC’s first priorities were in the elimination of low enrollment programs and restructuring of others. For Arts and Sciences, 31 programs were planned to be cut across the college and three others restructured.

For the College of Engineering and Natural Sciences, 15 cuts were planned and 12 restructures. For the College of Business, 10 cuts were planned. No cuts or restructuring was planned for the Oxley College of Health Sciences. Finally, for the College of

The PPRC had several of what they referred to as “Starting Assumptions” that comprised the foundation of their True Commitment Plan: 1) All students that were currently in an eliminated or restructured degree program would be able to finish their degree and that these programs would be open still to students who were enrolling in the fall of 2019.

2) The suggestions of True Commitment would align with the Greater Commitment Strategic Plan: 2017-2022 by creating a common entry path for undergrads that supports a variety of academic pursuits.

3) The PPRC was formed in response to the Higher Learning Commission’s assessment of TU as being stretched too thin and not being driven by strategic decisionmaking. The HLC assessment has not been made accessible to the public. What has been stated is that the document addressed a “build it and they will come” operating mentality at TU, and an unsustainable academic cost structure. TU was spending on average $25,000 per student with only $15,000 in tuition revenue per student, and thus hard choices and trade-offs needed to be made and were being addressed by the PPRC. 4) All decisions of the PPRC were informed by both qualitative and quantitative data from several sources, although mostly sourced from deans, department chairs and program leads. Although public documents

mention these statistics, none of the actual data is publicly available outside the PPRC. 5) This data was revealing of a real identity of TU as “predominantly an undergraduate institution, focused on STEM and professional education (business, health and law).”

6) Well-informed shared governance was key moving forward. According to the Academic Strategy document, “The PPRC [was] a model of well-informed shared governance,” because of its access to the relevant data which has not been made public knowledge.

7) All programs outside of academics were also reviewed, leading to a vote for a cap on the subisdy from the university towards the athletics program as well as stopping “... the periodic practice of using TU’s budget as a financial backstop for Gilcrease’s budget.”

8) The PPRC would be an ongoing committee to meet and reassess the state of TU

tucollegian@tucollegian.com editor in chief

Justin Klopfer managing editor

Adam Walsh news editor

Shelby Hiens sports editor

Callie Hummel variety editor

Julianne Tran commentary editor

Logan Guthrie satire editor

Anna Johns photo & graphics editor

Amy Polovich

business & advertising manager

Madeleine Goodman social media & web manager

Maddie Walters copy editor

Jihan Aldada

from year to year. This of course did not become the case as the committee was disbanded and a new committee has been implemented for such reviews.

One of the biggest opposition to the proposal was concern for a lack of faculty input outside of those who were on the committee. The rollout of the plan became very controversial as the majority of the faculty was invited to the general faculty and staff meeting but not told which programs would be cut until 8 am the day of the meeting, who in turn informed their students of the decisions.

While some changes have been implemented at the University of Tulsa, True Commitment in its final form was not. All of the colleges still exist in some capacity as separate entities within the university, though many of the programs are indeed no longer offered at TU as of writing.

@TUCOLLEGIAN

The Collegian is the student newspaper of the University of Tulsa. It is distributed Mondays during the fall and spring semesters, except during holidays and final exam weeks. The University of Tulsa does not discriminate on the basis of personal status or group characteristics including but not limited to the classes protected under federal and state law. Inquiries regarding implementation of this policy may be addressed to the Office of Human Resources, 800 South Tucker Drive, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74104-9700. (918)631-2616. Requests for accomodation of disabilities may be addressed to the university’s 504 Coordinator, Dr. Tawny Rigsby.

(918)631-3814. To ensure availability of an interpreter, five to seven days notice is needed; 48 hours is recommended for all other accomodations.

Advertising Policy: Advertising appearing in this publication does not imply approval or endorsement by the University of Tulsa or the Collegian for the products or services advertised. For advertising information, email the Collegian at advertising @tucollegian.org. The deadline for advertising is noon on the Friday prior to publication.

Letter Policy: Letters to the editor must be less than 500 words and can be sent to tucollegian@tucollegian. org. Under no circumstances will anonymous letters be published. The name of the person submitting the letter must be published with the letter. We reserve the right to edit or reject all letters. The deadline for letters is 5 p.m. on the Friday prior to publication.

Editing Policy: The Collegian reserves the right to edit all copy submitted by all writers. This editing my take place in many forms, including grammar corrections, changes in paragraph structure or even the addition or removal of sections of content.

Editorial Policy: Columnists are solely responsible for the content of their columns. Opinions expressed in columns may not represent the opinions of the Collegian staff, the administrative policies of the University of Tulsa, the views of the student body or our advertisers.

11 April 2022

The Collegian

Higher Learning Commission (HLC) report raises concerns over TU’s lack of program review, strategically-driven decision making and shared governance.

Provost Program Review Committee (PPRC) established to remedy problems raised by the HLC report, requiring members to sign non-disclosure agreements.

Program data is collected for review, with the intention to cut programs

PPRC finalizes suggestions with deans of respective colleges.

Board of Trustees approves PPRC’s suggestions.

1. Affected faculty informed of program elimination.

2. All faculty are called to a meeting where True Commmitment is unveiled.

3. True Commitment document is made public online.

Upset students and faculty congregate in Kendall Hall to react and discuss ways of preventing the eliminations.

Upset students held a mock funeral for eliminated programs on the New U.

Faculty vote no confidence in President Clancy and Provost Levit.

President Gerard Clancy steps down as University President, citing health reasons.

Students vote no confidence in Interim President Levit.

TU unveils new Strategic Plan.

Brad Carson selected as new TU President, to take office on June 1.

George Justice announced as new TU provost.

Page 3

The Collegian

Page 4

11 April 2022

Economic data relating to True Commitment

TU professor Matthew Hendricks analyzed the expenditures of the university over the years and compared them to other institutions.

Callie Hummel Sports Editor The data shows the slow shift towards more administration spending as the University of Tulsa allocated less money to instruction in relation to the average of their peer schools, even though TU has the second highest amount of instructional staff. The average of private schools takes into account 21 peer institutions.

Spending a high percentage of university money on administration instead of instruction is a key factor in a university’s inefficiency. In

2013, TU had a period in which their administrative spending was higher than the instructional spending. This means for every dollar a student pays in tuition fees, more of that dollar is going to administrator salaries than the student’s education.

The auxiliary expenses for TU, the upkeep of buildings, had TU losing an average of $25 million per year from 2017-2020 while its peer institutions earned a positive average net profit — total income subtracting expenses and depreciation. This is in part because TU has multiple buildings on campus that aren’t being used, but have to be kept in good condition.

courtesy utulsapolisci on Facebook Occurring in 2019, Dr. Hendricks’s presentation drew much attention from concerned students and facutly.

photo by Elise Ramsey This student chalk drawing reads, “What would you say if an econ professor told you we’re one of the least efficient universities in the country and we could balance our budget w/o cutting programs?”

11 April 2022

The Collegian

Page 5

A&S double-major reflects on witnessed protests As current students protested True Commitment, potential students began to worry. Margaret Laprarie shares her experience.

Margaret Laprarie Student Writer Picture this: You’re a scared high school senior visiting the college you plan to attend in the fall. You’re not entirely sure what you want to study, but considering a few options; all of them are in the arts and sciences. You’re at the college for an admissions event, with hundreds of other kids and their parents. You’re walking around on your campus tour, and the tour guide (an engineering major who hasn’t been able to speak to any of the arts-related opportunities on campus) gets asked about the large chalk drawings on the sidewalk advertising a “Fu-

considering arts management and you’re interested in German. Not a single word about the proposed plan to make German and French majors take all of their upper level courses abroad, and not any mention of all of the liberal arts programs soon to leave the university, according to this “True Commitment” plan.

This is the exact experience I had visiting the TU campus right after True Commitment was announced. When my dad and I returned from Tulsa that evening we started doing some research for ourselves, not convinced that this whole thing was as subtle as the school was trying so hard to make it seem. Sure enough, dozens of articles were already available, and the plan itself was posted proudly on the TU website. So here I was, a senior about to graduate and commit to attending TU in the fall, just now discovering that many of the programs I was interested in might cease to exist in the next several years.

about it as much as I did. Not to mention my newly developed passion for German culture and art, I also knew I wanted to keep studying the language. While looking at other colleges I often imagined German as my one and only major rather than something I would add on to arts management.

I was already less-than-thrilled to most likely be attending TU, crossing my fingers that I would get off the waitlist at one of the smaller liberal arts schools I had my eye on.

But I thought I would be okay at TU; we had had so many visits from them at my high school, I’d even visited the campus once before to attend a dinner for potential students. Why would they spend so much time trying to attract students attending a liberal arts highschool, when several of these programs were about to be cut or significantly changed at their own institution? How soon was this change going to happen? And even if it rolled out over the years I was there and could still get the degree I wanted, what

“So here I was ... just now discovering that many of the programs I was interested in might cease to exist in the next several years.” neral” taking place on campus that same day.

The tour guide stutters a bit; he rushes to tell the group that it’s just a small protest some students are holding because the school has suggested getting rid of a few programs. It doesn’t seem like a big deal, and the tour moves on. But there’s something that seems a little weird about it, and you can tell that the tour guide is working hard to steer the group’s attention elsewhere.

As the day goes on and you move from one event to the next, you start hearing talk of something called “True Commitment.”

It sounds like some sort of plan to phase out most of the liberal arts on campus, but you’re not exactly sure because no one will discuss it outright. Every admissions counselor you talk to, every professor, even the President of the University just keeps smiling and telling you how great it is that you’re

The high school I attended in Oklahoma City was focused almost entirely on visual and performing arts programs, and I spent my years there involved in theater, art classes, choir and seeing my peers at local arts festivals and events. We offered the IB program and all the APs as well, and there was plenty of opportunity if academics were more your speed. At the end of the day, we were an arts school and that’s what I loved so much about being there. Even after I decided that I’d rather participate in IB than one of the various visual and performing arts majors, I loved watching the other students paint murals in the halls, put on musicals and showcase their passions. By the time I was ready to graduate, I had decided that even if I didn’t want to necessarily be the one making the art, I wanted to spend all my time around art with people who cared

would it look like to hold a degree from a program that no longer existed?

These were questions that I had to keep asking well into my first semester at TU. I was almost positive I wanted one of my majors to be German, but I was waiting to see whether or not I would have to take all of my upper level courses abroad, meaning I would spend at least 3 years in Germany.

At that rate, why wouldn’t I just go and get my degree at a German university for free!

And what would it be like to participate in a program that the school clearly did not care for much at all?

Luckily, ridiculous changes like this one were abandoned along with the rest of True Commitment, but it didn’t feel great to know that I had chosen a school under the guise that I could get the degree I wanted, only to find out once I got there that that

Faculty and students were not happy with the strategic plan TU attempted to implement in 2019.

having “deeply flawed” statistics and justifications that were “more concerned with saving face than being honest.”

SA voted in favor of the resolution.

Around this time, votes of no confidence in the True Commitment plan also took place in the College of Law and faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences.

During the following fall semester, protests ignited once more. At the start of the year, faculty and students joined for another assembly in Kendall Hall. The event was designed to inspire the continuation of protests and explain the current situation to freshmen. There, alumni including Green, Ramsey, and Haley Ashworth promoted their protest group called Students for Responsible Change (SRC), an organization

was shooting itself in the foot,” she says.

Chalked statements varied from “TU has world-class faculty looking for new jobs” to “What would you say if an econ professor told you we’re one of the least efficient universities in the country, and we could balance our budget without cutting programs?”

Beginning in January 2020, the SRC began a petition that called for a no confidence vote in President Gerard Clancy and Provost Janet Levit — similar to the earlier votes held by faculty and SA. One of the members of the SRC realized that any student can propose a referendum if they could receive a certain percentage of the student body to sign off on it. The group spent days collecting signatures and ultimately received over 300 names.

photo by Elise Ramsey Chalk drawings protesting True Commitment were made all over TU’s campus.

might not be true. It also didn’t feel great to realize how undervalued the liberal arts had become at TU, something that I have continued to experience in my time as a student. Ultimately I don’t regret deciding to attend TU, but I don’t think it is a decision I would have made knowing everything that I know now. I love my programs, my professors, my friends and my peers but I often hesitate to recommend TU to students who want to study the liberal arts. From the moment I became a student and realized what True Commitment actually was and where the priorities at our university most often actually lie, I’ve felt like I have to fight to make sure that people take me seriously. To let them know that even though my majors don’t fit neatly into the four STEM letters and may not put me in a six figure job right out of college, they are just as important as the ones that do, and absolutely worth offering to students both present and future. And not just offering, but nurturing, encouraging and showing the same amount of attention that the other programs are given. I have seen so many improvements in these areas over the last three years, I have even been the one to make a fuss until such improvements are realized, but the ghost of True Commitment seems to still be lingering on campus, and we have a long way to go.

Fervent student backlash recounted Anna Johns Satire Editor As soon as TU’s administration released the True Commitment mission statement, faculty, alumni and students immediately resisted this planned restructuring of the university. Community backlash continued for months following the announcement.

From passionate outcries at student protests to chalk demanding resignations, the souring between students and administration felt palpable, resulting in growing resentment and ultimately a vote of no confidence.

On April 12, students and faculty swiftly held a protest meeting in Kendall Hall that functioned as an open-mic rally. The attendees passionately offered testimonies on the benefits of liberal arts education to an equally enthusiastic and disgruntled crowd. President Gerard Clancy’s email stated that True Commitment’s changes only affected 6% of students, and the students who made up this percentage instantly reclaimed this marginalization. “We are the 6%,” multiple speakers at this event had cried, and the slogan made its way onto shirts and protest signs.

“When True Commitment first dropped, everyone was just in shock,” says College of Arts and Sciences alumnus Elise Ramsey.

A petition, titled “Saving the Heart and Soul of the University of Tulsa,” followed True Commitment’s public exposure. The post outlined community concerns and demanded for the administration to reverse this decision. “This dismemberment of the liberal arts studies is nothing short of reprehensible,” wrote the petition’s creator, Michael Orcutt, “and the process by which these departments were gutted was confusing, riddled with false numbers and misinformation.” As of writing, the petition has 8,302 signatures.

Flyers appeared around campus for a funeral walk on April 19. This processional service, complete with a homemade coffin, invited students to mourn the cut programs.

Participants wore black, held signs decrying True Commitment and gave speeches expounding upon the worth of the humanities.

On April 16, members of the Student Association Senate, including Cheyenne Green, penned a bill that called for a vote of no confidence in the True Commitment Plan. This resolution, titled “Not Mad, Just Disappointed,” was authored after receiving concern from over 200 constituents. The document condemns the “lack of empathy” from the administration and expresses support for the professors who they felt were undervalued and disrespected. The Senators additionally criticize True Commitment for

“‘... changes of the university ... should be done with the proper values of university-shared governance ...’” that worked to foster student awareness and offer a planning center for more coordinated backlash.

“One of the first things we did was name ourselves Students for Responsible Change,” says Ramsey. “We weren’t opposed to fundamental changes of the university, but we felt that they should be done with the proper values of university-shared governance and consultation of faculty.

True Commitment was an irresponsible approach.”

One of the loudest protest methods from the SRC came in the form of chalk; around campus, protest statements criticized True Commitment and the administration.

“There were a lot of statements being made by administration that claimed students supported True Commitment, and those who didn’t were outliers or in the pocket of dissenting faculty,” explains Ramsey. “Obviously, the chalk isn’t a way to combat all of those narratives, but it was a way to get attention.”

Members of the group who were Political Science majors had offered advice regarding civil disobedience and methods of protesting. “They pointed out a lot of successful resistances are multifaceted in that there is a segment of the organization focused on being fundamentally unreasonable — getting attention, drumming up anger and reminding people that this is actually happening,” Ramsey continues. “The other facet of successful resistance was a reasonable body that would swoop in and do the negotiation aspect.”

Ramsey participated in chalking around campus because she deeply cares about liberal arts education and felt indignant toward the proceedings of the university. “It was hard to say that the place we cared about

“Our biggest obstacle in collecting signatures wasn’t that students didn’t know or didn’t care. It was the fear of administration retaliation if their names were listed on a petition,” claims Ramsey.

In February 2020, students could digitally vote whether they had confidence in Interim President Janet Levit. The student body ultimately voted no confidence by a margin of 805 to 264, with a total of 1,069 students voting. The turnout rate, 26%, may seem underwhelming, but at the time, the vote was the highest participation rate on record for student elections.

Chalk statements around campus reminded students of the results from these various votes of no confidence, but multiple members of the SRC, including Ramsey, repeat-

edly witnessed the Physical Plant hosing the chalk. The response? Protestors chalked an accusation in front of the entrance to Collins Hall, writing, “We were censored for speaking out!”

Despite graduating in Fall 2020, Ramsey remains passionate about the SRC’s mission. “If you’re going to sit on a board of people for the university, you should listen to the students and faculty that you’re going to represent,” she says.

Ramsey continues, “While True Commitment was scrapped and administration has largely changed hands, the board still has members that did not talk to students, failed to listen to the people they represented and did not seem to care about the organization with which they’re entrusted.”

In a written statement, Green says, “It’s been so nice to see liberal arts proponents in the new administration and university leadership. The work is far from over in ensuring that tenure track faculty who retired in the True Commitment era are replaced and faculty retirement benefits — which were cut in the Plan — are restored. Students cannot effectively learn when their teachers aren’t properly advocated for. For a university with a $1.36 billion endowment, TU still has significant work to do.”

Though the resistant campus climate during True Commitment has largely faded, the backlash serves as a reminder of the devotion from passionate students and faculty who advocated for liberal arts. Issues brought forth from True Commitment, especially with the administration’s upcoming vote on faculty retirement, are still relevant and deserve recognition. Further retrospective reading — a list of alumni statements, criticisms from professional associations in higher education and more student outcry — is presented on tuplan.org.

Students congregated in Kendall Hall to discuss the value of the liberal arts.

photo by Ethan Veenker

Page 6

The Collegian

11 April 2022

Language programs during and after True Commitment Several language majors and minors are no longer offered at TU, though hopes remain high for rebuilding.

Justin Klopfer Editor-in-Chief The original True Commitment plan eliminated about half of the language programs at TU. B.A.s for Chinese and Russian studies were to be cut, as well as minors in Russian, Latin, Ancient Greek and linguistics. Together, these cuts removed five of the nine degrees offered by the department of Language and Literature. The plan also eliminated the department itself as a distinct unit, grouping it into a new Division of Humanities. All language programs would also begin to rely on study abroad terms for students to gain upper-level credits.

Russian studies, still missing its major and minor programs, has held on through the last three years. No programs are currently offered, though some students among the senior class are still finishing out degrees offered before eliminations, and these classes are still available for any interested students.

TU does still offer a minor in Chinese, requiring 12 credit hours at a 3000 or 4000 level. During the current academic year, students gained these credits through Chinarelated courses in topics like history and economics. These higher level classes were taught in English as cross-listed courses.

Dr. Thomas Buoye, a TU professor and scholar of Chinese legal history, began his time at TU with a visit to China in 1992.

He hoped to create an academic relationship fruitful for the university and Chinese studies. To Buoye’s disappointment, the relationship never fully materialized, partly due to “half-hearted efforts” from TU. Years later, True Commitment’s evisceration of Chinese studies “undermined confidence” in the administration at the time, according to Buoye. He emphasizes that Chinese studies needs a full-time professor solely committed to language instruction and another to cultural learning for the program to thrive. A more robust study abroad program could also bolster this instruction and enrich the program.

TU President Brad Carson, who began his position in June of 2020, has shown significant interest in serious academic study of China. In 2019, he created a 14-part podcast called “Jaw-Jaw,” consisting of insightful interviews with top China experts. One of Carson’s most vocal priorities has been TU’s Cyber programs, a field Carson has acknowledged is highly synergistic with both Chinese and Russian studies. Interim provost Jennifer Airey shares this sentiment, calling Russian and Chinese studies “incredibly important for understanding and navigating the contemporary landscape” and saying TU is “committed to providing students opportunities to engage with these vital areas of study.”

Dr. Karen Peterson, Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, joined TU in 2021 af-

The language offices are currently housed in Oliphant Hall.

ter more than a decade in a similar role at Middle Tennessee State University. She sees True Commitment as a “terrible error” that will require time and effort to rectify. TU still represents a “tremendous opportunity” for both its students and faculty, and it was this opportunity that encouraged her to join TU knowing its recent history. She is immensely thankful to all the faculty and students that have held on through the turmoil.

Serious study of Russia and China is still strong among both faculty and students at TU. A higher-level Chinese language course

photo by Justin Klopfer

will begin to be taught again in the fall. Faculty gaps created in the wake of True Commitment are in the process of being filled.

Existing faculty have remained dedicated to these programs through the storm of the past years. The College of Arts and Sciences, where language programs are housed, currently has more new students for the fall semester than any other college.

Humanities professors express despair, cautiously optimistic Drs. Arnold, Hockett and Prudlo reflect on their experience with True Commitment and the aftermath that followed.

Julianne Tran Variety Editor April 11th was a fateful day for professors in the College of Arts and Sciences. The provost announced the restructuring plan to professors in a meeting where some left deeply distraught, others leaving in tears.

On the second floor of Chapman Hall, news of True Commitment sent a ripple of shock and dismay through the faculty offices.

The proposed plan eliminated liberal arts majors like Philosophy, Religion, Chinese Studies, Russian Studies and Theater along with multiple graduate programs.

For the Philosophy and Religion, Political Science and History departments, professors felt the effects of True Commitment immediately.

“It felt very disrespectful,” recounts Dr. Jon Arnold, associate professor of history and director of Classical Studies. “It was just sort of like, ‘Oh, by the way, these programs are gone now. Good luck.’ It felt like a betrayal of the faculty and the programs we worked so hard to build.”

“We really just didn’t understand how a plan that was so obviously flawed could

hire a new professor of ethics. And what TU did, not just in our department, but across the whole university, was to just let lines go extinct,” Prudlo explains.

This even includes endowed chairs, like the McFarlin Chair of Philosophy, which was never replaced. “[The College of] Arts and Sciences lost a significant portion of our faculty,” Hockett says.

More than losing faculty members, True Commitment did far worse damage to the morale of professors and their relationship with administration.

“The fallout from that was just enormous,” Hockett emphasizes. “You lose trust right away. And so, from that point on, it was really difficult to feel that there was any kind of good faith in our dealings with the administration.”

And with the plan to combine humanities disciplines into general education courses, replacing disciplines with four “divisions” organized around fashionable topics, Arnold felt especially hurt. “​​I was told that [my] discipline doesn’t matter. Not just that they’re going to eliminate some of the degrees that [my department] offered, but that [my] discipline doesn’t matter as a discipline, and that instead, [history] was going to be part of some catch-all thing that all freshmen will take.”

This consolidation of the humanities disciplines was especially harmful to the university as a whole.

“‘I was told that [my] discipline doesn’t matter.’” have been regarded as a good idea,” echoes Dr. Jeffrey Hockett, professor of political science who has taught at TU for over 35 years. “This was an existential threat. You’re talking about the destruction of any kind of meaningful notion of higher education.”

The release of True Commitment was especially shocking for Dr. Donald Prudlo, Warren Professor of Catholic Studies and chair of the now combined Philosophy, Religion and Sociology Department. Prudlo came to this university just after the restructuring plan eliminated his major.

“A couple years before I came here, there were six professors in Philosophy and Religion. This was widely known as one of the finest small Philosophy and Religion programs in the country. There’s been wellpublished authors that have come through this department,” Prudlo remembers.

“We’ve gone down from six to three professors.”

Following True Commitment, the Philosophy and Religion and Political Science departments lost faculty, either from early retirement or simply from leaving TU. Notably, faculty at TU have lost their traditional retirement packages. For those that left, the administration offered retirement packages that were perceived as tactical buy-outs.

“Our department lost, in part because of True Commitment, a junior faculty member who’s not been replaced,” Hockett says.

And as professors left or retired and the department shrank, and those professors were not replaced. “If you lose a professor in ethics, the usual practice is that you get to

“We’ve suffered tremendously because of the damage done to other programs, in particular, the humanities,” Hockett says. “The whole institution suffers when the humanities have been targeted and severely damaged.”

Dropping degrees in philosophy and religion threatens the very idea of a university. “Philosophy and Religion looks at the big questions that attempt to unify all of the other sciences and all the other disciplines together,” Prudlo explains. “While other disciplines are asking the “what’ and the ‘how,’ Philosophy and Religion focuses on the ‘why.’”

“And if you’re not asking those questions, then the real danger is [that] you give people a radically incomplete picture of the world and of themselves.”

“And in so doing, you are left with people that are able to earn a living but ill prepared to make a life.”

“To be at a university that no longer offers even a major in Philosophy or Religion, to be at a university that grants degrees and doesn’t offer Greek or Latin, and only teaches a language to fulfill a language requirement which doesn’t allow people to actually study it,” Arnold emphasizes. “What is this? That is not a university.”

In Prudlo’s view, True Commitment attacked the very disciplines that are the heart of a liberal arts education, and, beyond that the very heart of the university.

“These are some of the core disciplines that are needed in order to form people,” Prudlo asserts. “And what we need most in

photo by Julianne Tran Chapman Hall is home to the Kendall College of Arts and Sciences.

society, we need citizens who can act freely and responsibly in response to very complex situations. Technical training is not going to be able to produce those things. We’re supposed to be producing free and responsible leaders for society.”

As professors look towards the future of TU, the phrase “cautiously optimistic” comes up often in conversation. Some believe that the turnover of administration since True Commitment holds promise.

Others, conscious of periodic reviews of programs and majors, know that this is not the end.

“The creativity of the students in pushing back, their independence that they exhibited, the fairness, how informed they were in pushing back, and insisting that they were going to be listened to,” Hockett reflects. “[Students] ultimately did the most democratic thing they could do [in calling a no confidence vote.]”

“I don’t think that the faculty alone would have been listened to. So I’m enormously grateful.”

Since True Commitment, passionate professors serve on faculty senate and push for greater transparency in administrative pro-

“‘These are ... disciplines that are needed in order to form people ...’”

Looking back at True Commitment, some silver linings emerged.

“When we mobilized to push back against True Commitment, I really started to meet faculty from other disciplines, which was really healthy,” Hockett reflects. “[We gained a] strong sense of ownership of our university, our colleges, our departments, and extended the interconnections between faculty among different departments.”

“We’re much more collegial,” Arnold echoes. “We used to just be in our little worlds, and now we actually talk to each other.”

“We have a faculty unity and activism that is present in a way that it wasn’t present before True Commitment, and we continue to be wholly dedicated to our students and to our disciplines,” Prudlo adds.

Hockett, proud of the changes accomplished by the faculty push-back, is especially appreciative to the efforts by students to resist True Commitment.

cesses. This is not the end, but the future holds some promise for these liberal arts disciplines.

Prudlo says that they have a plan and verbal backing to reinstate the Philosophy and Religion major in the near future.

The trust between administration and professors has not yet healed. But still, the professors move forward, with renewed dedication to their disciplines and their students.

They remain wary and cautiously optimistic about the future.

“So long as we continue to get the kinds of students that we’ve had that are as willing to take matters of education as seriously as they have,” Hockett asserts. “Yes, I think that TU has a bright future.”

11 April 2022

The Collegian

Page 7

The administrative aspect of True Commitment Dr. Gerard Clancy and Janet Levit were the foremost faces behind refashioning TU, but the story extends before and after April 11th.

Adam Walsh Managing Editor In 2017, the University of Tulsa selected Gerard Clancy as its next president. Clancy’s initial role in Tulsa was as the president of OU-Tulsa, working specifically with increasing the campus’s community engagement programs. His background featured multiple administration positions, though he began as a medical doctor and professor. With the aid of a $50 million donation from the Kaiser Family Foundation, he was

could have been suspended or revoked. Issues with shared governance, an inability to phase out programs except through attrition and the lack of a mechanism for program review drew the eyes of the HLC and featured heavily in the report.

The report was sent to TU in April 2018, and after receiving the Higher Learning Commission’s report, it would rarely leave Levit’s office. Faculty members that were interested in reading the report would have to visit Levit’s office in person — no electronic copies were allowed — and were required to remain in the same room as Levit while perusing the document. To this day, the only public information available from this report comes from the original True Commitment planning statements, which quote the HLC’s report as justification for the program eliminations.

“... [these changes] led to confusion, outrage and eventual despair ...” instrumental in constructing medical programs at OU-Tulsa, and was also the foremost proponent of creating the College of Health Sciences at TU. Janet Levit followed a different track to power, beginning as a professor in the college of law, then making her way through the ranks at TU until being selected as provost.

During 2018, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) sent a team of investigators to perform a mandatory evaluation of TU’s status in relation to HLC guidelines. The Higher Learning Commission is an institution that lends credence and accreditation to institutions they have verified as in compliance with various regulations, with the aim of producing a successful educational environment with balanced shared governance between faculty and administration.

The report of that evaluation indicated TU was failing to comply in several key areas, which necessitated the continued monitoring of TU’s progress or lack thereof in remedying these breaches. If TU failed to change their conduct, the university’s accreditation

TU, like many other collegial institutions, ran at a large deficit, with a multitude of lowenrollment programs demanding portions of the budgetary pie. The Provost’s Program Review Committee (PPRC) recruited select individuals to their ranks. This committee set out to apply the requests submitted by the HLC and develop a new organizational plan for the future. Notably, this committee’s place is itself an oddity in the realm of university administration. Other universities utilize a program review process already entrenched in their academic structure. Instead of lying as an administrative branch, this group would operate under the provost’s jurisdiction and power. In short, it was an ad hoc committee that required no faculty oversight. Members of this committee were also required to sign non-disclosure agreements surrounding the information gathered, proposed plans and other facets of their work.

The final plan composed by this committee, True Commitment, was approved by the Board of Trustees before April 11th.

The sidewalk chalk pictured above related the results of the faculty vote of no confidence in Clancy and Levit.

photo by Ethan Veenker Dr. Clancy, Levit and Dr. Manly present at a student forum shortly after the announcement of True Commitment.

Faculty and staff were notified of a general meeting that week, with those whose programs would be cut receiving calls the day of to meet before the general staff meeting to discuss the changes. If a faculty member was teaching a class at the time, they weren’t involved in the announcement of the program. Some students posited that the April release was tactically placed near exams to prevent students from focusing on these budget cuts.

In the document itself, the critical information that guided the PPRC’s decisionmaking process was covered up by boxes that claimed the data was too sensitive to reveal. However, not showing the data due to propriety did not satisfy a portion of faculty, who wished to be more involved in the process and understand the reasoning behind these massive restructurings. The opaqueness of these changes led to confusion, outrage and eventual despair from both the faculty and student body. One email from Dr. Jacob Howland preserved on tuplan.org illustrates this. Howland had reached out to the HLC for information regarding the report, and Howland’s interactions seemed to

photo by Elise Ramsey

have incited a feeling of confusion, because the HLC appeared to believe that the university would have shared the information with the faculty. The HLC believed Howland’s request for TU to publicize the document was reasonable. The email states that there is no reason for the provost to hide that information, but the provost’s office continued to insist on their protection of the document.

The perceived lack of transparency coincided with a notion that the plan would not actually save the university all that much money. One internal estimate claimed that the plan would reduce the overall budget by four million dollars over five years. The primary cost of an institution lies in its salaried employees, and while True Commitment promised to cut programs, it did not outright fire or remove faculty. The apparent inconsistencies fueled staff speculation. From the faculty’s point of view, this program utilized a limited number of committee members to facilitate the creation of a plan locked behind legal contracts that fundamentally reshaped the face of TU. During the fall semester following True Commitment’s announcement, TU’s faculty passed a vote of no confidence in both Clancy and Levit. At the end of January 2020, President Clancy resigned effective immediately, citing health concerns, with then-Provost Levit stepping in as Interim-President.

Brad Carson was announced as the next full president of TU in the spring of 2021.

Clancy accepted another job teaching at a university in Iowa. Levit, on the other hand, merely shifted out of the Interim-President’s seat, taking a year-long paid sabbatical and will return to TU as a law professor in the fall of 2022. With Brad Carson taking the presidential seat and George Justice set on beginning his provost duties this summer, the two primary administrative positions are filled and the primary restructuring of True Commitment remains unfulfilled.

TU adopts new strategic plan The new plan, while not as radically reconstructive as True Commitment, still emphasizes professionally applicable fields.

Shelby Hiens, Adam Walsh News Editor, Managing Editor In January 2021, the University of Tulsa announced a new five-year strategic plan that will set TU on a “clear path to an exciting future.” The plan was unveiled after TU’s former strategic plan, True Commitment, faced considerable criticism from faculty and the student body.

The new strategic plan emphasizes five priorities for the university. The first area of improvement is being the “Best University in the Region for Life & Career Success” through combining liberal arts and professional studies, culminating in well-rounded career support. On Sept. 27, 2021, TU announced a new initiative deemed the “‘CaneCareers Job Placement Guarantee,” which will be put into effect starting fall 2022. This pledge guarantees that students will acquire a job or be enrolled in a graduate program within six months of graduation as long as they complete their bachelor’s degrees and the ‘CaneCareers agreement.

The second area focuses on being the “Most Student-Centered University in the Region” through two initiatives: “Wraparound Support” and “Diversity & Inclusion.” TU aims to support students through new engaging programs and strong relationships between students and faculty.

The third priority is being a “World Leader in Energy & Cyber” by expanding TU’s future in the oil and gas industry as well as TU’s reputation in cybersecurity in both the public and private sectors.

The fourth priority TU aims to achieve is being a “Resilient, Innovative Institution” through eight initiatives: “Enrollment & Revenue Management, Athletics, Resourcing, Strategic Reviews, Talent, Collaborative Incentives, Marketing, and Fundraising.” Another key difference in this strategic plan is the implementation of regular performance reviews. TU was at risk of losing accreditation in April 2018 due to the Higher Learning Commission’s (HLC) concerns over TU’s lack of program review.

The fifth area is called “Truly The University of Tulsa,” which outlines TU’s goal to contribute to Tulsa’s overall growth and success.

TU’s new mission statement reads as follows, “We are a student-centered research university that cultivates interconnected learning experiences to explore complex ideas and create new knowledge in a spirit of free inquiry. Guided by our commitment to diversity, equity, and service, we prepare individuals to make meaningful contributions to our campus, our community, and our world.”

TU Scholars Although abandoned, the bones of True Commitment can be seen in recent programs developed by the administration of TU. The TU Scholars initiative focuses on promulgating the benefits of cross-discipline double majors, offering a pathway for those seeking out a degree from both the liberal arts and those termed as professional studies. Hard sciences lie on the side of professional studies, while the natural sciences remain with the college of arts and sciences.

The impetus for this idea lies in the attempted restructuring of the university during True Commitment to force arts and sciences into a “professional super college” whose primary responsibility was to teach

Two years after the release of True Commitment, TU adopted a new strategic plan.

introductory courses, as well as remove departmental barriers. TU Scholars, however, offers the full major experience to those interested, with the program’s creator, Interim-Provost Jennifer Airey, hoping that these cross-discipline outreach efforts will help to tie together the rift between STEM and the liberal arts while countering the belief that

courtesy Wikimedia Commons

one has to sit on a single side of the spectrum. Instead of attempting to convert the entirety of a department into one administrative structure, TU Scholars’s purpose is to open the door to more educational exploration.

Writers meetings held every Monday at 5:00 p.m. in Oliphant 110