The faculty senate adopted unanimously a resolution during its Jan. 20 meeting calling for more time for the University to respond to the Faculty Review Committee's (FRC) report before Provost Marty Krauss finalizes the curriculum proposals.Krauss said that she spoke with Prof. Dagmar Ringe, who chairs the senate, about the resolution and is "on board in being more flexible." But she said that she does not know for sure how long the response time will extend.

The resolution states that the current time allocated to respond to Dean of Arts and Sciences Adam Jaffe proposals and the FRC report is "inadequate and should be increased from two to six weeks." Although there are two weeks for the University to respond to the Feb. 15 report, the second week overlaps with the upcoming vacation, leaving less time for deliberation.

"Having heard the reports of the school council chairs, the senate feels strongly that the school councils and other existing governing bodies of the university, should become actively involved in the process and should respond formally to the reports," the resolution states.

Ringe could not be reached for comment.

Krauss said that while she had not formally responded to the senate, she is willing to work toward a more appropriate length of time for deliberation with the faculty and other members of the community.

"We will work with the senate for an appropriate length of review," Krauss said. "I think it is wise to ensure there is a real adequate time to review the FRC's report and I will make sure we have that time."

Krauss said that she did not intend for the two-week response period to overlap with the upcoming vacation. She said she was instead trying to be mindful of when different faculty and board meetings occur for more effective input into the curriculum component of the administration's integrated planning initiative.

"The senate passed the resolution because two weeks-one vacation-is insufficient for a deliberative process," Prof. Harry Mairson (COSI) said in an e-mail to the Justice. "Clearly, elected faculty committees, and the faculty, must discuss the dean's report, the FRC analysis, and decide whether to endorse the dean's suggestions."

Krauss said that she foresees a more complex process that needs to be followed after the FRC issues its report. She said that depending on the content of the report and the faculty's response, Jaffe may amend his proposals.

"The Board of Trustees will be kept informed of the deliberative process that is now underway and depending on the final set of proposals, may be presented with the results either for informational purposes or for approval," Krauss said.