Much like the Student Senate exists for governance and addressing issues and topics related to the students of RPI, the faculty also have their own governing body—the Faculty Senate. The President of the Faculty Senate this year is Jim Napolitano ’77, a professor in the Department of Physics, Applied Physics, and Astronomy, who came to RPI in 1992. “I really enjoy teaching, probably more than is good for me,” joked Napolitano. As the new president, Napolitano took some time to speak with The Polytechnic about his position and the direction the Faculty Senate is taking this year under his leadership.
He sees his role as one in which he uses the power of the faculty to come together and focus on the issues this school faces. His aim is “to do whatever [he] can to try and get faculty and the administration to be more in sync with one another on the vision and goals of the university.” “We all want to make a difference in the lives of the students here,” Napolitano said. He pointed out that in past years, the faculty and administration have largely been unable to do this. “I don’t know how President [Jackson] will achieve her vision without having faculty more committed to the goals.”
Napolitano explained that while the Faculty Senate Executive Committee is still working on “hammering out” the agenda for the year, he hopes that there won’t be any more votes of no confidence.
In addition to composing the agenda, Napolitano says he has been responding to the requests of his colleagues as well as identifying opportunities for growth, such as creating a series of debates and discussions pertaining to professors’ research and areas of expertise.
When asked if Napolitano had any specific long-term or short-term goals for the Faculty Senate, he reiterated that he would like to see the faculty and administration work together­—more so than in the past—to achieve the goals of RPI. He feels that emphasizing communication between the faculty, administration, and students would be taking a step in the right direction. “I’d like two-way discussion to be as continuous as possible, not necessarily always on a single topic,” Napolitano said. “The way the Faculty Senate can make a difference is by working with the Provost, since he sets the academic agenda.” With regards to communicating with students, Napolitano stated that he is more than willing to work with the Student Senate regarding issues important to students, commenting, “I’ve always been tremendously impressed with student initiative at RPI.”
Napolitano is enthusiastic that both the Faculty and Student Senates are looking into similar, important issues, including the issue of curricula structure, which compares having four classes at four credits each versus five classes at three credits each. Currently, RPI follows the four by four structure, although in past years, it has had the three by five structure. “A number of my colleagues would like to see the four by four curricula reviewed,” he said. “I’m happy to see the Faculty Senate Curriculum Committee taking this issue up.”
In the past, Napolitano admitted that the Faculty Senate has not always run as smoothly as it would have liked, but there are no large plans for modification or change. “I’m trying to include as many people in the Faculty Senate and Faculty Senate business as I can.” He continued, “I especially want to get newer faculty and ones in higher growth areas of the university—like biomedical engineering and nanotechnology—involved in the Faculty Senate. These are the people that are really key.” Napolitano’s plan for involving the newer faculty stems from getting them to recognize their common interest in the direction the Institute is going.
Aside from changes in the topics addressed by the Faculty Senate, Napolitano has already implemented a new structure for Faculty Senate meetings. “Discussion is very important,” he explained, a key reason for the new meeting structure. Two topics are discussed at every meeting: an “A” and a “B” topic, which are discussed for 20 and 75 minutes, respectively. The “A” topic represents a topic such as a committee report, whereas the “B” topic is much more extensive, such as the discussion of women’s issues at RPI. The new method sometimes results in topics getting pushed off until a later meeting, but Napolitano feels that the issues addressed are done so in a thorough manner.
The Faculty Senate has already met several times this semester and is in the process of addressing such topics as the role of clinical faculty and the “Library Cancellations Project,” which evaluates usage information of the library’s electronic databases in order to decide which subscriptions to maintain. Napolitano is hoping to avoid heated issues and debates this year, however, stating that “I’m a big believer in activism,” but “it’s not the time for that now,” primarily because RPI is in the midst of a Provost transition time.
