Officials will implement about six out of more than 40 recommendations from faculty working groups tasked with developing proposals on addressing “community challenges” since June, Provost Chris Bracey said last week.
Bracey said officials will accept some recommendations from the volunteer-based working groups — organized by the Office of the Provost over the summer to reinforce the University’s plan to strengthen productive community dialogue amid tensions after Oct. 7 — and work with the Division for Student Affairs and the Office for Diversity, Equity and Community Engagement to promote free speech, productive dialogue and work with humanitarian nongovernment organizations. Faculty in the groups said the experience marks a step in the right direction for expanded faculty input in GW’s decisions, but they hope officials provide more transparency on the status of recommendations that officials do not currently plan to implement.
The groups, each composed of eight to 12 members, submitted a recommendation report Aug. 15 to the Provost’s office after meeting several times over the summer, faculty in the groups said. The groups produced recommendations on topics decided by University President Ellen Granberg and Bracey, like community conversations, free speech, humanitarian efforts through partnerships, organizing lectures about the war in Gaza, ensuring diverse community members feel included by the University and sustainable investing.
The recommendation reports range from the Community Conversations Group’s two-paragraph-long recommendations calling for community dialogue workshops, to the Humanitarian Efforts Group’s 10-page document recommending partnerships with humanitarian organizations providing aid to Gaza.
Dwayne Kwaysee Wright, the co-chair of the Free Speech and Community Group, said the Provost’s office told groups in July to brainstorm at least two to three recommendations that the University could “reasonably” implement during the current academic year.
“We sort of crafted, sort of reframing the ask, which was how we reconcile free speech and community as opposing concepts and the committee came up with, ‘Well, let’s just merge them and talk about free speech within a shared community,’” Wright said.
The free speech group ultimately produced six recommendations, like developing a “comprehensive free speech framework” into GW policies and practices, which would define “encouraged,” “permitted,” and “prohibited” forms of speech and develop educational resources on responsibly engaging in free speech in a shared community.
The group also recommended that officials review GW’s responses to last spring’s pro-Palestinian protests within the context of existing free speech policies, preserve community members’ ability to participate in the “full life” of GW, reform the Student Code of Conduct and model “respectful” dialogue in official GW statements.
Bracey said officials will embrace the “free speech within a shared community” vision and “begin to consider” the development of a free speech framework. GW will also work with department chairs and deans to fund undergraduate course development around topics like free speech, he said.
Wright said he wishes there was a more concrete plan for how officials will follow through with faculty recommendations. He said the group was not provided with any information on why the Provost’s Office did not accept some of his group’s recommendations, like reforming the Student Code of Conduct or if there would be further use of the faculty groups.
“We do too many things here at GW that are one-time, one-off type of events without a more strategic, comprehensive plan,” Wright said. “I think it would have been better if the Provost, when he sent out the report said, ‘I’m going to meet with the groups two or three more times before the end of the next year to have a conversation and keep them informed on the implementation.’ Unfortunately, even if that is the plan, it was not announced as the plan.”
Melani McAlister, a member of the Free Speech and Community Group, said the group’s recommendation for GW to review responses to protests from the spring “within the context” of existing free speech policies was excluded from the recommendations advanced by the provost’s office this fall.
She referenced officials closing Kogan Plaza and University Yard and installing metal fencing after local police cleared the pro-Palestinian encampment in U-Yard last spring, as well as alleged student and student group disciplinary charges due to protest involvement and stay-away agreements with federal prosecutors pertaining to arrested students.
“We thought that the University should really examine some involvement with the closure of the University spaces, including the University Yard, Kogan Plaza, its involvement with court cases that have followed the arrests, the STET agreements with students, the sanctions that the students received,” McAlister said. “We would really like to know exactly what the University’s role was in all of that and how they might do this differently in the future.”
Bracey said unmentioned recommendations — like those from the Pathways to Greater Inclusion Group, which suggested more than 20 recommendations on collaboration between student groups and faculty and officials to advance inclusivity initiatives — are being taken “under advisement.”
The Lecture Series Group suggested that officials hold three lectures in the fall starting with a discussion with Mark Tessler, a professor of political science at the University of Michigan. The group invited Tessler and gave him a $1,500 “honorarium” before the group realized they were only told to recommend a speaker, not invite one, according to the group’s recommendation document. The group also suggested speakers for the second and third events, but Bracey did not provide any insight into whether those speakers were approved in his email to the community.
Bracey said GW will promote a lecture series by Tessler and other international law experts about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but did not specify when the lectures would start.
The Humanitarian Efforts through Partnerships Group split their recommendations into an Educational Opportunities report and an NGO Partnerships report. The group recommends that GW partners with humanitarian organizations that offer “life saving” support in Gaza, starting a series of panels with NGOs as a learning opportunity for students and recommends creating a webpage with a course list of humanitarian courses at the University, “enhanced for interested students.” Bracey said in his email that the University will “publicize” current course offerings surrounding humanitarianism and work with department chairs and deans to fund undergraduate courses on the topic.
The Sustainable Investing Group said they “renew” calls for transparency by November 2024 in how the University endowment is invested. The group recommended that GW establish a permanent standing committee by January 2025 to review investments and provide continued guidance on “socially and environmentally-responsible” investment opportunities to the GW chief investment officer. They recommended the “viability” of integrating impact investments, like Calvert Impact Capital’s community investment note, as part of GW’s investment portfolio by March 2025.
Bracey’s email accepted the group’s recommendation to start a committee that provides guidance on investment strategies but did not specify when the committee would be created by.
Nizar Farsakh, a member of the Community Conversations Group, said officials accepted the group’s recommendation of conducting community conversation workshops, with the first dialogue occurring a couple of weeks ago. He said the workshops are a space for community members to share their opinions and concerns on a topic, to which faculty could suggest ideas and resources for the issue.
The group’s report states that the space would include neutral facilitators who would provide a report to GW on the outcome of the conversation. Bracey said officials will conduct “listening circles” with rules for respectful conversations about “difficult topics” that will feature neutral facilitators and report to University leadership on the discussions.
Farsakh said his group wanted the University to do “better” and offer a space for students to discuss issues on Israel’s war in Gaza because he said officials did not do a sufficient job of creating “safe spaces” for students to be heard after Oct 7.
Farsakh said after GW took measures like suspending Students for Justice in Palestine from on-campus activities in November 2023 after the group projected anti-Israel slogans onto Gelman Library the month prior, he approached officials independently about having conversations on identifying antisemitism and free speech but did not hear back on his proposal.
“It is incumbent on us as faculty to make sure that our students feel safe and feel that there are spaces where they can voice their opinion or share their concerns without fear of repercussions,” Farsakh said. “Precisely because we are faculty, and we’re not administration, it allows us to be a listening board that they can trust.”
Tyler Iglesias contributed reporting.
