I am one of the sinister anonymous individuals referred to in your article about Academic Senate reforms. I did not realize that I was anonymous until I read the article. After all, I and a number of other faculty openly signed the petition that brought the issue forward.

This issue was first considered in a meeting of the SDSU Chapter of the American Association of University Professors. I was out of town and did not know the chapter’s decision on the issue. However, the issue did originate among SDSU AAUP members.

One of the reasons that I joined the AAUP was because I was concerned about the movement among universities, including SDSU, to what I perceived as the business model of university management. In this model, administrators (business managers) concerned with attracting and retaining students (customers) become less than concerned about the quality of education provided.

AAUP nationally supports faculty governance because this is one way to assure quality education. It is only faculty members in the respective discipline communities who know what students need to be properly educated.

This is a serious issue and should not be made light of by the Academic Senate executive committee. The proposed reforms are intended to return the voice in curricular decisions to the faculty in order to assure continued quality education at SDSU.

Delmer LonowskiProfessorDepartment of History and Political Science