Faculty senators voted overwhelmingly yesterday to support saving the School of Planning, which has been slated for possible elimination, by moving it into the department of geography and regional development.
Though the 18-0 vote was nonbinding because the senate lacked a quorum, Provost George Davis said it nonetheless sent administrators a resounding signal that the faculty opposes eliminating the school.
According to a report presented yesterday to the senate, by joining with geography, the school could help serve undergraduates in that department who have said they are interested in learning about issues like city history and structure, economic development and transportation.
"If you approve this, you are making the right decision," said John Paul Jones, head of the geography and regional development department. "My faculty is open to the possibility ... of devising an appropriate agenda for the future."
That comment drew a wink from Faculty Chairman Jory Hancock, who sat on the committee that recommended moving the school rather than closing it.
The senate will vote again over e-mail in hopes of attracting enough votes to make the recommendation official and will forward it to a variety of committees, made up largely of students and faculty. Ultimately, though, President Peter Likins will decide whether to ask the Arizona Board of Regents to support the senate's recommendation or to eliminate the school completely.
Planning and geography share an intellectual foundation, Jones said, and combining the two departments could lead to a more well-rounded education for students in the geography department while still allowing planning students to focus on service and community outreach.
Planning faculty would welcome the chance to teach more undergraduate courses and perhaps eventually develop a formal undergraduate curriculum for planning, which now offers only a master's degree, said Barbara Becker, the school's director.
Finding departments so willing to merge with each other is unusual, said Sen. Jennifer Jenkins, an associate professor in the Humanities Program. That program is being dissolved and its faculty sent to other departments.
"It strikes me that the committee has brokered a really happy marriage here," she said. "A happy marriage is not an easily won thing."
The senate appeared supportive of charging course and program fees for planning students, a move that could help improve the school's financial stability. Planning students have also welcomed that idea, said Jani Radebaugh, president of the Graduate and Professional Student Council.
"Most of them were amenable to the idea of course fees as long as the money came straight back into the classroom," she said.
Senators also said the university would save little money by eliminating the school because its tenured faculty would still be employed in other departments. Moving planning faculty into the geography department, however, could increase its efficiency because it could add another dimension to the department's intellectual atmosphere, senators said.
"One way to save is for the same amount of money to have more productivity," Hancock said.
The School of Planning has been sitting in academic limbo for about 15 months since Likins and Davis recommended eliminating it as part of Focused Excellence. They said the school was vulnerable because it lacked an undergraduate degree and outside funding sources. Since then, the school has fought for its survival, with students, faculty and outside professionals lobbying administrators and regents alike, saying the school performs too vital a public service to eliminate.
And yesterday, the scope of planning supporters widened, much to the joy of Becker. Over the past 15 months, she said, she's often felt alone in her fight.
"To have the Faculty Senate support us in this way, we don't feel so alone anymore," she said.