Every so often, certain situations seem to throw me back to the days of my youth. I had decisions to make, and I didn't want to make them. So to whom did I turn? Mom and Dad, of course. In some cases, only my mother could counsel me on subjects like the cliquey girls in my class and the blatant stupidity of prepubescent boys. Other times, I sought advice from my father on issues such as learning to drive and the most effective ways to exercise. Naturally, I would never ask my father about how to deal with cliquey girls (he could never understand). Nor would I ask my mother to teach me to drive (it would only raise her heart rate too much for her own good). But all in all, I was set. I had my father to consult for some things, my mother for others. Mixing up their notably distinct roles would only hinder the progress of my development. (And asking my father about how to deal with things like PMS? I was smarter than that.)

Admittedly, the heart-wrenching decisions of the good old awkward age don't exactly parallel any decision a college student needs to make today-let alone any decision an institution needs to make, especially under dire circumstances. But with the formation of the Brandeis 2020 Committee, which aims to develop strategies for cost-efficient restructuring within the College of Arts and Sciences, I suspect that the line between "mom" and "dad"-in this case, trustees and faculty-may start to blur.

According to the results of a survey released Friday by the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges, the trustee-professor relationship appears fairly healthy but not as easily definable as the mom-dad distinction. A Jan. 25 news article from Inside Higher Ed explains that both faculty and trustees could likely benefit from more education about the other's role in university governance: "One board chair said: 'Faculty and trustees approach the institution with differing perspectives: the faculty tend to look at the present-the students, current programs, their effectiveness. The trustees' responsibility is to approach the institution with a view toward the long term-the resources, facilities, programs, personnel, students, and alumni-to ensure that the institution moving forward has the ability to deliver its education in increasingly effective ways and with the resources to ensure long-term well being. That difference in perspective can lead to conflict.'"

This message should bear strong implications for the University as our Board of Trustees and perpetually growing number of faculty committees proceed to handle this budget crisis. Tension is already brewing. According to the Jan. 26 issue of the Justice, American Studies Chair Prof. Joyce Antler called it "unprecedented" for a trustee to address faculty directly. Perhaps Antler has a point: If the Board of Trustees' primary job concerns the University's long-term security in terms of practical resources necessary to maintain a prestigious academic institution, maybe the establishment of the Brandeis 2020 Committee is nothing but a dangerous imposition upon our faculty. Professors, whose chief concern is simply educating students, should not be burdened with the process of combining resources and restructuring academic departments. This responsibility lies in the hands of the Board.

But like the CARS committee, the Brandeis 2020 Committee will only make recommendations to the Board of Trustees and not actual decisions. The article from Inside Higher Ed states, "The report discourages the placement of faculty members on boards but encourages their inclusion on board committees, especially those dealing with academic issues." And to be fair, who should know better about academic issues than professors? Examining individual departments and programs (or some of them, anyway) at the source could in theory provide helpful information about which programs work and which tend to straggle.

However, since last year's debacle with CARS and its ineffective recommendations for restructuring academic programs, targeted departments like American Studies remain wary of the Board of Trustees' goals of resource-sharing collaboration. Now, with every academic program under scrutiny, professors have every right to be overprotective of their departments, considering the University has just placed their life passions in jeopardy. Is it fair or necessary to force the faculty into such a tense situation? On the surface, it wouldn't seem unreasonable to seek advice from experts on the inner workings of academia. But at the same time, it seems all too similar to making my father discuss his feelings on the churlish interactions among 12-year-old girls.

I realize it may be a bit much to expect the trustees and the faculty to nurture our University like a prepubescent adolescent; I'm not asking for that. Everyone involved, without a doubt, has the University's best interests at heart. But as both bodies continue to seek a solution to our depleting budget, they should take care to recognize and respect the inherent differences in their approaches.