Faculty Senate delays vote on Judicial draft

Yesterday marked the second time the Faculty Senate Executive Committee gathered to discuss the student judicial charter. And like its last meeting, the group did not pass any resolutions or come to any firm conclusions. Provost Stanley Chodorow attended most of the meeting to hear feedback on the charter from the senate members. Senate Past Chairperson David Hildebrand, a statistics professor, said the idea of passing a resolution was not even considered. He added that the meeting was "as thoughtful and hard-working as one could hope for." At its October meeting, SEC formed a three-person subcommittee to evaluate the issues and come to the body with recommendations. Now that same subcommittee -- made up of Political Science Professor Will Harris, Radiology Professor David Hackney and Microbiology Professor Helen Davies -- will work with Provost Stanley Chodorow to iron out "the few remaining unresolved areas," Hildebrand said. With Chodorow's help, the committee will write up a report on its findings. That report will be considered in the drafting of the next version of the charter, Senate Chairperson William Kissick said. "There are some issues that still aren't resolved but we're getting there," Hildebrand added. SEC member Larry Gross said he did not think yesterday's meeting resolved any issues. But he added that the subcommittee made "significant progress" since SEC's last meeting. "What is emerging seemed to me to be a big improvement over the earlier drafts we had seen," said Gross, a communications professor. "Certainly the provost seemed to be really responsive." Issues on the table range from the role of the advisor -- and who that advisor should be -- to whether the provost should have the power to increase the severity of a sanction imposed by the hearing board. Despite the lack of a conclusion at the meeting, SEC "behaved responsibly," according to Kissick, a Medical School professor. "SEC addressed the issue and did their homework," Kissick said. "The discussion was open and frank, there was no animosity and there was a respect for everybody's position." Many SEC members lauded the subcommittee, saying its members analyzed the issues thoroughly and fulfilled its mission properly. Although Chodorow was unavailable for comment, Hildebrand said the provost probably would not predict a date of completion for the charter. "I think on this one he's got a fairly severe allergy to timetables," Hildebrand said. Since the ultimate decisions reside with the provost, Chodorow must make final revisions to the charter. It will then be sent to the four undergraduate schools for approval. The Faculty Senate, as a body, is not planning on discussing the issue any further, Hildebrand said.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.