The Informer Page 7

November 24, 1988

FACULTY DEVELOPMENT

B y

Here is part of the text of my memo to President
Jardine and the Deans in which I responded to the
Morin Report and Perra implementation plan for a new
Development Centre. In this response I tried to
represent fairly the various opinions I received from
faculty throughout the institution. As I mention, your
views were very uniform and quite strong. I hope this
memo accurately expresses your opinion. The memo
was addressed to Doug Jardine.

REID

“At your request, I read the Report, Lloyd Morin,
Developing the Human Dimension: A System
Perspective. (June, 1988). I also initiated a discussion
of the Report and its subsequent implementation plan
with the representatives of each Division to the
Faculty Development Committee. I also circulated 48
copies of the Summary and Recommendations chapter,
along with a response by John Waters on behalf of
CIEA, to coordinators of all areas of the College,
requesting area discussion and response by 31 October,
1988. A copy of the full Report had been circulated
among the Deans and Associate Deans, who were also
invited at Instructional Board to make any
recommendation they wished. I also spoke at a CCFA
meeting regarding this Report and indicated that
response would be sought through discussion in each
area.

In my opinion, this Report has, therefore, had as
complete a circulation among the professional
members of our community as it is possible to arrange.

I should add that I have had informal comment
from a number of staff members, whose views are
reflected below. I hope that the opinions of support
staff regarding the impact of the Morin Report has also
been sought. Faculty at Capilano College feel that the
needs of faculty are specific; this response addresses
only those needs.

The responses have been congruent to a surprising
degree; rarely in my experience at the College has
opinion been as unanimous. Indeed, it is likely that
the reason fewer written responses were received than
I had hoped (apart from the usual pressures of work
load and time) is the unanimity of opinion: since
everyone tends to agree, everyone assumes the answer
is given.

In my experience, it is dangerous to allow a
political process to proceed without comment, while
assuming that everyone is like-minded. In this regard,
I point out that, in the face of the negative CIEA
response to Morin, the Council of Principals has
already established a “Human Resources Development
Task Force” (Leo Perra, Chairperson), whose “action
plan” assumes the recommendation of the Morin
Report and moves beyond them. CIEA has made a

GILBERT

motion which supports the Perra plan given certain
restraints. I feel that the Perra plan flows so directly
from Morin that opposition to one vitiates the other.
Therefore, I believe this college should record its
views regarding the Morin Report and call upon our
President to express these to the Council of Principals.
Response to the Perra plan is requested before 14
November, 1988.

Our response follows:

1. THE Facuuty or CAPILANO COLLEGE support the
basic call for additional funds for professional
development and for a system-wide encouragement of
personal, and locally developed collective professional
development. One million dollars distributed
throughout the system would greatly enhance
professional development.

1.1 THE TERM “HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT” seems
to us to convey the wrong attitude to the issue.
Faculty members at Capilano College do not see
themselves as “resources” to be managed, but as
professional academics for whom intellectual and
career development is a continuing priority. We are
aware that this term is current jargon, but—as action
flows from language—we point out that the
assumption that the system has “human resources” to
be managed leads quite naturally to the assumption
that an agency is needed to manage these “resources”.
On the other hand, if faculty are seen as individuals
with very different needs and common goals, then a
decentralized system with local initiatives seems more
naturally to follow. Perra notes that he concurs with
faculty distaste for this term, but argues that he uses
it “for accuracy and consistency” with the Morin
Report. This is an important aside by Perra as it
makes clear what underlies the Perra plan: the
assumption that Morin’s recommendations are
already accepted and that a Centre must come into
being.

2. THe Facu.ty or CaPILaNo COLLEGE appears
unanimous in its opposition to the creation of a
separate, “resource centre”. We acknowledge that
some minimal staff may be needed to coordinate some
system-wide activities, but the level of staffing and
the ambitions suggested in the Perra plan seem to us
to be too expensive and too expansive.

2.1 THE PERRA PLAN SUGGESTS THAT “the Development
Centre Board... will annually assign a major portion
of the HRD budget to an HRD Grants Program”. We
support this grant programme, but call for a very
major portion—some 90%—of funds to be distributed
directly to colleges and institutes for local initiatives.
If a central staff can do effective work coordinating
with a budget of some 10% (currently about