U of S : Communications : OCN : Nov 14, 1997

With respect to the problems of accreditation of some programs in Medicine, several members of Council, including President Ivany, remarked that the press coverage was generally well informed, and that the stories, while they were reports of "bad news," did have the "good effect" of focusing the attention of the public on the very real problems of under-funding. The fairly intensive media coverage helped in bringing both the health board and the government to pay better attention to our problems.

But what impression is left with the public? I think Professor Barber would maintain that the public is left with a generally more negative than positive impression of the University after such front page coverage of "bad news." The public may conclude that some programs in Medicine just aren't very good; that there are unresolvable disputes involving faculty, the College administration, the health board, the government, and that things just aren't being managed very well.

Many fear the worst

Just what does the average taxpayer in Saskatchewan think of the University? Many members of the University community fear the worst, I suspect. Recall that last year in the editorial pages of the StarPhoenix the University and the Faculty Association were taken to task for not resolving their longstanding differences and getting on with business. On another issue, at the Senate meeting in October, a Senator asked President Ivany what could be done about the disputes among a few faculty members in Education that were being aired in letter after letter to the editor in the StarPhoenix. And then last week, what do you think the "average taxpayer" made of the settlement reached between the University and Professor Murphy?

Are we doing a good enough job in presenting ourselves to the public? No, not likely. The University's Office of Public Relations was, reluctantly, down-sized in the round of budget cuts last spring. However, even with the biggest and best PR staff imaginable, we must not forget the reality that the University is a public institution, and that the public has every right to know the full story about us, including our failures and our embarrassments .

And surely the University, devoted as it is to free inquiry, is not about to silence any one of its faculty members who wish to voice views in public. The University is not anything like a private corporation. We are not in the PR business of exercising as much control as possible over our public image toward the end of maximizing corporate profits.

Of course, the media stories about the University are often positive ones. Kathryn Warden, who is widely respected as the campus editor for the StarPhoenix, was quick to remind me of recent front page coverage that included stories about achievements by researchers in dentistry, geophysical engineering, and medicine; and front page stories on women's issues, the shortage of research funding in Medicine, a medical faculty member's work in Zambia, a visually handicapped student, two stories on the synchrotron, and several on 90th anniversary events.

More 'good news' than we sometimes remember

There is a great deal more coverage of "good news" from the University in the media than we sometimes remember. And, in some surveys, the public image of the University has been found to be quite positive.

Still, Ernie Barber's implicit question remains: "Good news stories and survey results aside, what do folks really know and what do they honestly think about us?"

And what do our students, our graduates, as well as those who never graduate, their families and friends think of the University? This is a complex question, to be sure, one that requires careful study, but one, unfortunately, that we have not much studied, though the Planning Committee of Council is about to embark upon a major survey of graduates.

Ken Smith, the registrar, spoke at the October Council meeting of some anecdotal reports of student satisfaction that had recently come his way. At a reception for first-year students who hold Chancellor Scholarships, he had occasion to hear of their early experiences and impressions after the first six weeks at University. He was genuinely surprised to hear these students speak of their very positive initial experiences with the faculty who are teaching their courses. These students were finding that faculty in their first-year courses, sometimes very large courses, were approachable, personable, helpful, and good teachers. This came as something of a surprise not only to Ken, but also to the students, who had been led to expect from secondary school teachers that the University professors would be quite the opposite.

The Instructional Development Committee of Council has found much the same kind of positive early University experience from students who have participated in various panel discussions at the end of their first year. Colin Sargent, in Engineering, Gary Davis in Arts and Science, John Thompson, at STM, all report that in their discussions over several years now with a variety of first year students, it's a common experience that students find professors to be approachable, helpful, good teachers.

This is a bit of good news that should not to be forgotten as you learn from the media about the Maclean's rating of the University of Saskatchewan later this month.

- John Conway is the Chair of Council

Table of Contents