Editorial : Chancellor’s seat in senate audience aids debate-reform efforts

Chancellor Nancy Cantor has sat in the audience for two consecutive University Senate meetings. Except for those she could not attend, the chancellor previously presided on stage, at the center of every meeting.

Removing Cantor from the focal point of every meeting complements reforms to the USen debate process enacted by the new USen moderator, Ian MacInnes. This semester and last, reforms have focused on facilitating tamer and more productive discussion after a few heated debates arose in spring 2010 on a number of topics, including changes to employee benefits and distancing the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs from the College of Arts and Sciences, among others.

The first change removed the chancellor as the moderator for discussion. In the past, her role as moderator became problematic when she had to both guide discussion and answer questions, sometimes hostile, from the audience. Last month, MacInnes enacted more reforms: enforcing a three-minute time limit for each comment in a debate and assuring all voices would be heard before any one person speaks for the second time.

It is hoped that Cantor’s move — whether by personal choice or by recommendation — will likewise facilitate fairer and freer conversation. The move, at face value at least, equalizes the discussion: Administrators don’t have the privilege of the last word, and they also don’t become the easy target of anger or hostility.  

This is not to say it is good to take the chancellor out of the limelight to reduce criticism of her and the administration. USen serves as an important venue for such grievances that cut across campus, as well as a place to voice criticism or concerns about any other department or issue facing the campus at large.

With short and peaceful meetings so far this semester, senate debate has not yet put these changes to the test. It is hoped they will facilitate honest and respectful discussion from various perspectives rather than the typical spats between a bloc of administrators and a bloc critical senate members.