Since United States President Trump’s inauguration just a few weeks ago, there has been a volley of Executive Orders (EOs) and reinterpretations of policy at the federal level that have and will continue to impact Bucknell faculty, staff and students in the future. Various sites affiliated with the relevant government or educational institutions maintain live updates as to what the federal administration has changed and the effect those changes might have on universities. As a follow-up to a faculty meeting held earlier this month where members of the Bucknell staff expressed concerns about these ongoing federal statements, another faculty meeting was held on Tuesday, Feb. 18 to continue discussing lingering questions. University President John C. Bravman opened the meeting with a few remarks about his own perspective and goals surrounding the news coming out of Washington, D.C.
In recent weeks, Bravman, along with other members of senior administration and the population at large, have focused almost singularly on the issuance and potential outcomes of Trump’s many EOs. Such “monopolization” of attention has generated “anxiety […] and fear” surrounding a variety of topics, many of which are both pressing and personal. Bravman harbors concerns around the potential abandonment of equity and belonging on campus, as dictated by federal law; he also worries about threats to faculty research funding, limits to and consequences for the expression of free speech and legal limitations being placed on international members of campus whose visas or citizenship should not be in question.
Bravman, throughout his brief address, emphasized how deeply he shares the faculty’s concerns, and how he and the senior administrative team are “working deliberately” to identify the best course of action to “stay with [Bucknell’s] mission within the limits of the law.” He also stressed how daily (and, at times, hourly) updates out of Washington, D.C. make it much more difficult for he and his team to respond externally to every EO or announcement. But his “greater concern” is that the “constellation of [issues being addressed] are now a threat to higher education at large” as we have “come to know it over the past 70 years.”
“Little has been written about the ripple effect of [the] federal layoffs” or how they will affect the private sector, so Bravman and his administrative team are working to stay aware of financial aid concerns for all students because “all our students deserve to be here,” a statement met with applause from the assembled faculty.
After Bravman left the podium, Provost Wendy Sternberg gave a speech designed to address the dozens of questions submitted to her by faculty. She established that, at the time of her presentation, she would not be able to answer some of them due to the still-evolving nature of several situations and introduced a supplemental live-updates-website (Bucknell login required) and corresponding email address (response-info@bucknell.edu) for members of campus to interact with. She also offered several Bucknell offices with expertise in specific areas of concern, such as the Public Safety and general legal council staff.
Sternberg’s concerns lay primarily with threats to faculty research and university curriculum, but she echoed Bravman’s sentiment that the overall institutional approach to EOs will remain steadfast in Bucknell’s mission and values of academic freedom. “No recent changes have been implemented on campus based on Executive Orders,” and regardless of what comes out of Washington, D.C., Bucknell must also comply with Pennsylvania laws and regulations, which include personal identity protections.
“I know this is going to be a long haul,” Sternberg said, “we’re less than a month into this [federal] administration, [but] we need to be prepared to face challenges together.” Sternberg reiterated the administrative team’s ongoing efforts to “do [their] best to respond” to federal news while “still operating day-to-day.” Ultimately, Sternberg expressed a need to “better understand the broad implications and impacts” of these rapid federal changes before working towards a solution within shared governance structures.
Sternberg reassured faculty that “where shared governance,” or the process of holding committees that combine faculty and administration to problem-solve a given issue relevant to Bucknell and its campus, “can be present, it will be.” Bucknell is committed to meaningful engagement with faculty and staff, but legal obligations fall outside that shared governance. An updated shared governance structure proposal was recently created by a Shared Governance Implementation Committee and will be voted on in a future forum.
Accommodations, like those applied during the pandemic when many faculty members’ research was halted, “will not be implemented until the full impact [of Trump’s EOs] can be assessed,” but faculty members should report changes to their federal funding immediately to the relevant administrative offices. Faculty will not be asked to change their research based on EOs. Administration will accept requests from faculty members should they wish to change the publicly available information about them on Bucknell’s sites, but they will not proactively make any changes. Immediate concerns for physical safety should be directed to Public Safety.
During the final few minutes of the discussion portion of the meeting, faculty were encouraged to ask questions as part of a Q&A. Professor Meenakshi Ponnuswami, Associate Professor of English, Affiliated Faculty in Critical Black Studies and Theatre & Dance, asked that the Bucknell administration recognize that Trump’s policies, especially the most recent “Dear Colleagues” letter released this past Friday, Feb. 14, express specific anti-black, latino, LGBTQ+ and transgender sentiments and offer faculty something other than general statements. Another professor inquired as to Bucknell administration’s planned response to an EO directive requiring international students (termed “alien students and staff” in the EO in question, released Jan. 29) be “examined for antisemitism.” The question could not be answered at the time of the meeting.
Several faculty members expressed a desire for the Bucknell administration to recognize the role they’ve played in keeping faculty out of preparation and accommodation discussions. Rafe Dalleo, English Department Chair, Literary Studies Director, Affiliated Faculty in Critical Black Studies and Latin American Studies, expressed concern at the faculty’s lack of involvement in curriculum and academia-related discussions, regardless of the legal constraints entailed in any proposed implementation; Sternberg then reiterated the limitations of existing shared governance structures.
Elizabeth Capaldi, Professor of Biology, Animal Behavior, Director of Neuroscience, inquired as to what the University is doing to stand with its peer institutions and unite faculty across the board. Sternberg reported attending several virtual meetings with administrative team members from universities around the nation to “engage with colleagues [and] make sense of [these] issues.” As next steps are discussed, collective action has not been decided.
Three sessions of a Provost’s Forum have been scheduled in the coming weeks, during which time any additional or developing challenges will be discussed. In the meantime, Provost Sternberg is committed to staying in contact and invites faculty to take advantage of her regular open office hours.
The key takeaway of the meeting is the sheer number of faculty members who attended—the ELC Forum space was almost completely full, indicating a high turnout of upset and frightened faculty who are hoping to have their concerns heard and remain updated about the University’s approach(es) to these complex and constantly-changing issues. Every professor harbors personal concerns, but the ultimate goal of continuing meetings and discussions such as these is to maintain a course that is best not just for the University as an institution, but for each of its staff members and students.
