Faculty Beat Addresses Graffiti Ban
By Bella Lee and Yulin Meng
The October 10 faculty meeting highlights consist of an acknowledgment of the concerns raised about the recent ban of campus graffiti, questions about Reed’s stance on student protests, an update regarding changes to staff and faculty benefits, the approval of five new study abroad programs, and an introduction to a long-overdue revision of the Reed Honor Principle.
Opening Comments and President’s Report
As is custom, the meeting began with Reed President Audrey Bilger proffering two sets of meeting minutes for approval: those from the September 8 meeting and the concurrent executive session, the latter of which would not be approved until the end of the meeting. Both motions were approved without comment. President Bilger reminded the attendees that fall break is just around the corner; in accordance with her pledge to focus on promoting enrollment this year, she will be spending the break in the Bay Area working with the admissions team. Bilger noted that the October board meeting and dinner recently took place. The ten students recruited from the President’s Showcase to show off their achievements “dazzled” board members, providing an important reminder of what the college is accomplishing. The board reportedly approved of all of the goals Bilger highlighted in the previous meeting, particularly improving enrollment, “imagining dialogue,” and moving forward with the new public campaign. The public campaign, she noted, will be launched within the next few months before the year’s end.
President Bilger gave an announcement about the ongoing budget realignment to manage the decrease in enrollment. She reminded attendees that the board gave Reed two years to assess the downward trend of enrollment before making adjustments, so a reevaluation is necessary. Additionally, as “retention eases the pressure on the admissions pipeline,” she thanked the faculty for their care and attention paid to student retention. She acknowledged that 20th-century Reed was more indifferent to graduation rates, with many faculty adopting the belief that even “a little bit of Reed is good,” but she is grateful that the mindset has shifted. She opened the floor for questions after a brief comment on how lobbyists for education are facing a situation in Washington, D.C. “different than anything we’ve seen.”
President Defends Graffiti Ban
After thanking Bilger for the report, linguistics professor Sameer ud Dowla Khan asked for comments on the Presidential Council on Campus Climate (PCCC)’s recent ban of campus graffiti, a measure put in place to attempt to stop the increasing amounts of graffitied “hate speech and derogatory language,” which was a controversial subject among students and faculty alike. Khan voiced concern over the lack of consultation with faculty and students about the ban, and its status not as a community “agreement” but an “expectation.” He resonated with the generally negative sentiment about the ban, recalling that the college’s appreciation for expressive graffiti helped to inspire his love for the school in his early days at Reed. From witty remarks scribbled in the Vollum restroom to the Chinese poetry in Eliot Hall, graffiti is what sets us apart from other institutions in his opinion. Khan expressed additional concerns about the “draconian” alternative solutions implied in the ban’s announcement, namely patrolling and surveillance. Why had these options been on the table in the first place? Were they still a possibility? Finally, he pointed out that the PCCC is made up almost entirely of senior staff, yet the enforcement of this ban falls upon others who are not represented, creating more work for all involved.
In her response to Khan’s concerns, Bilger stated that the PCCC is open to all recommendations and suggestions for alternative methods for preventing hateful messaging. She reminded those in attendance that while there is no easy way to address the situation, people “don’t feel safe, and they are distressed,” so something must be done. Bilger asserted that the council discussed this decision for over a year and there was never any possibility of cameras being added inside restrooms. Cameras would have potentially been placed in other hard-to-monitor locations, but it was not something the PCCC was ever going to go forward with. She expressed that this outcome was due in part to the PCCC’s frustration with being asked to “do more” to solve a problem without a solution. President Bilger informed the audience that the statements put out were not working; studies show that banning graffiti has been found to decrease hateful vandalism, and thus this solution was decided upon. She concluded her response by reiterating that she welcomes alternative ideas before handing it off to the dean’s report.
Dean’s Report and Budget Details
Dean of the Faculty Kathy Oleson began her report with the reminder that the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU) accreditation team is in the process of doing its seven-year visit, and encouraged faculty to come to its open forum. Although accreditation is necessary for Reed to qualify for credit transfers, she encouraged faculty to keep in mind that the goal of the review is to make Reed a more inclusive place, increase admissions, and inspire self-reflection. She informed the audience that the seven-year report is now accessible on the Reed website.
Oleson went on to detail the realignment of the budget: each dean has been given a budget to work towards and all pieces of the academic program (for example, the library, IT department, and the reactor) will be included. A council will be formed in the spring composed of the deans, faculty, Committee for Academic Policy and Planning (CAPP), and Committee for Advancement and Tenure (CATT) committee members, to assist with the two-year implementation process of the new budget and provide recommendations from the CAPP Budget Advisory Subcommittee (CBAS). Meetings will be held in the near future to ensure transparency. Kelly Chacón from the chemistry department took a moment to speak during the dean’s report, partially to “remind people that [they] can” and to announce that the recent open house meeting on diversity had good attendance and conversation, and that deeper discussion ideas are in development and could include a space to voice thoughts on the new graffiti policy. The meeting was then opened for comments on the dean’s report.
Questions About Reed’s Stance on Student Protesting
During the section for questions and comments regarding the dean’s report, Kate Bredeson from the theatre department proposed changes to Reed College's policy involving student protest. Bredeson was inspired to bring this up regarding a recent email addressing the increase in federal troops in Portland, and reminded faculty that she had made a similar proposition in 2020. Bredeson argued that the college’s policy strongly suggests that students should avoid protests, while she believes that it should instead inform students about how to protest safely and provide advice about what to do if one is arrested while protesting. Bredeson mentioned that the president of Macalester College offered to cover fines and bail of students arrested while protesting in 2020 and though she understands that this likely would not be possible, it should at least be considered at Reed. She finished her comment by stating that ultimately, anything (even a more robust promotion of American Civil Liberties Union guidelines) would be a better approach to student protest than “just say[ing] no.”
The dean acknowledged Oleson’s comment and reminded faculty that the email in question stated that students have a right to protest and only discouraged “risky” behavior. She stated that the message was intended to be as direct as possible.
The comments portion of the dean’s report concluded with clarification regarding the decision to schedule faculty training in October.
Unanimous Approval of New Study Abroad Programs
Miriam Bowring from CAPP introduced five new study abroad programs, and the faculty approved these programs unanimously. Kristin Scheible, professor of religion, noted that a student of hers reported having no viable study abroad options in Asia. One of Scheible’s students wondered why Reed has so many programs in Spain and virtually none in Asia. Kristen Anderson, professor of psychology, responded that there are currently programs in Vietnam and China, and more with the addition of these five new programs. Anderson further emphasized CAPP’s desire to expand Reed’s study abroad portfolio with possible future programs in Africa.
Faculty Healthcare Benefits Taking A Hit
The Committee on Advancement and Tenure (CAT) report, given by Anderson, consisted mainly of information regarding upcoming changes to healthcare benefits. Anderson stated that Reed is fortunate to be able to sustain stable benefits, even as national health spending is projected to continue to rise. However, the college faces a significant cost increase with its provider, Kaiser, due to its high member utilization rate. Other options were explored and found to be far more expensive, so budget adjustments have been made to provide the most essential coverage for the most people. Anderson informed faculty that they considered a survey posed to faculty and staff with around 300 responses when making this decision. Main changes to the program involve the introduction of a Health Reimbursement Arrangement (HRA) of $250 per account to reimburse medical expenses, minor cost increases for emergency room services and outpatient services, an increase in cost for Added Choice members, and a new $15 out-of-paycheck cost for individual members to balance out increases. Anderson stated that more information would be going out to faculty by email.
During the comment period, various concerns were raised about the out-of-paycheck cost, the potential lack of conversation with the community around decision-making, and questions regarding whether the school’s overall budget had been adjusted to reflect the increased costs for benefits. Anderson informed faculty members that CAT will begin this process as early as possible and if attendees have questions or concerns, she and others from the committee are willing to meet with them to discuss the situation. Bilger informed the audience that the benefits budget is separate from the college’s overall budget, and concluded by reminding faculty members that a benefit is, in fact, a benefit of working for the college.
Faculty Reviews Honor Principle Resolution
Kristin Scheible, professor of religion and Honor Council Faculty Chair, presented the current Honor Principle resolution to the assembled faculty along with Student Chairs Piper Brandy ‘27, Skyden Canfield ‘26, and Leila Menezes ‘26. The Honor Principle, scheduled to be revised every 20 years, was not revised in 2020 due to COVID-19. The current resolution has been revised by the Judicial Board and Honor Council. Senate passed the resolution and it was then presented to the faculty for discussion.
Scheible emphasized the fact that, despite consensus, there is no article of any bylaw to instruct the 20-year revision period. She also pointed to a lack of clear guidance as to how the resolution should be presented to staff. Since the Honor Principle is a communal resolution and not a governing document, it is uncertain whether the resolution should be brought forth by the Honor Council or the legislative committee.
14 members of faculty submitted individual comments to Scheible, reporting a wide variety of concerns ranging from “[the Honor Principle is] too vague” to “[the principle is] too specific.” Other general topics for comments included questions about the resolution’s use of language, the potential inclusion of clauses addressing AI usage, the applicability of the principle to different sectors of the Reed community, as well as the relationship between the policy and honor violations.
Darrell Frank Schroeter, professor of physics, asked if past resolutions were accessible online. Scheible responded that the only past instance available is the 2000 resolution, which is the current resolution displayed on Reed’s Honor Principle webpage.
Members of the faculty also had questions regarding the resolution’s language. Sameer ud Dowla Khan asked for clarification on the Honor Principle’s applicability to staff. Bilger explained that, though staff follow the Honor Principle, adjudication processes for staff look different than that of faculty and students. Kristen Anderson expressed dissatisfaction with the current equation of policy violation to honor violation. Scheible responded that the Honor Council’s responsibility is to assist the community in defining honor. Not all members of the community agree on a definition of honor, and some suggest that we are in a “post-honor” world. Ultimately, the adjudication of potential policy or honor violations are not the domain of the Honor Council.
Jake Fraser, professor of German and humanities, noted a dualism between community honor and academic honor, indicating that academic honesty is an aspect of honor that the current resolution seems to deemphasize. While a passage in the 2000 resolution extensively discusses academic honesty, the subject is brought up only once in the current resolution, and he asked if this was an intentional shift of emphasis. A representative of the Student Chairs acknowledged the change and emphasis, citing reports from students that the Honor Principle is absent in their lives outside of discussions of academic integrity when professors outline the syllabus. The Honor Council believes that deemphasizing the academic aspect of the Honor Council will give students agency to determine the meaning of honor for themselves, and hope that this agency will encourage a revival of honor discussions among the student body. Nicole James, professor of chemistry, expressed her alignment with the Council’s insight and argued for an integration of the academic into the communal understanding of honor. Lastly, Bilger asked Scheible to outline the next steps for the resolution. Scheible explained that, after the resolution passes by faculty vote, it will be circulated among staff with the help of Vice President of Student Life Karnell McConnell-Black. However, as the resolution has not yet been passed by faculty, she encourages all faculty members to continue raising comments and giving feedback.
With that, Bilger motioned the meeting into an executive session, and all non-faculty members were asked to leave as the session continued behind closed doors.