The controversial restructuring of International and Area Studies has continued to make headlines since its announcement in March. A recently formed student coalition submitted its petition against the change to campus administration, expressing concerns about lack of consultation and the projected absence of academic advocacy. Executive Vice Chancellor George Breslauer responded in e-mail, asserting that there were indeed many consultations and that “this change in reporting lines was neither intended to, nor going to, damage or eliminate the teaching programs.” However, in his latest e-mail, Breslauer did not mention a change that many students are passionate about; the impending departure of Professor Ananya Roy. As an extremely popular professor on campus, Roy’s intention to leave Berkeley after next semester is an issue that does qualify as an undeniable shift for the teaching program.
It would be hard for anyone to believe that this issue would have developed in the same way without Roy’s input. Her aversion to the restructuring process was immediately shared with students on the night that the plan was shared with the campus, thus setting much of the student resistance in motion. Although Breslauer says otherwise, Roy has repeated that she, as associate dean of academic affairs for international and area Studies, did not feel that she was consulted about the restructuring. Roy intends to leave the campus within a year, partially due to this process.
In reporting on this issue, the vast majority of students I talked to said that the elimination of the IAS dean position (one of the main changes in restructuring), would not affect them. Indeed, who does personally interact with the dean of the department? Students were instead most passionate and disapproving of the change when asked about Roy’s intention to leave.
When Breslauer states that the teaching program will not be affected, he very well might be right. Only time will tell once the proposed restructuring is actually implemented, and even then most students said they would not miss the dean. However, the resistance vocalized by Roy has turned out to be pivotal as students become much more likely to protest when their favorite professor says something is unequivocally wrong. At the very least, transparency becomes an issue. If the campus had shared information and address the concerns Roy said she and other staff members shared in a memo, individuals within the division may have had a greater understanding of the change and would have felt less blindsighted. Many have wondered why, if Breslauer says there is nothing to worry about, that not made clear to faculty and staff like Roy who are clearly upset about it?
Although consultations took place, clearly there was a breakdown in communication somewhere. And that, for many, is enough reason to be concerned.
- Leslie Toy
