Dr. Hans D. Kellner

Candidate for Chair Elect of the Faculty

Brief Biography

Dr. Hans D. Kellner, professor of English

Pittsburgh-born, I attended Harvard, then to the University of Rochester for a Ph.D. in European Intellectual History. My career has been fairly typical: I have taught, a lot, and at all levels. I have published in leading journals in historical, literary, and philosophical discourse. My work has appeared in English, French, Italian, Polish, and Dutch. I've spoken on historical and rhetorical theory at many universities in the United State and abroad. I've been a Woodrow Wilson Fellow, and Andrew W. Mellon Fellow, and an NEH Fellow. I have served my universities at the department, college, and university level.

Three things, however, make my academic career a bit different. First, I spent five years after my Ph. D. as an itinerant, non-tenure track teacher, teaching whatever a local college needed, often on very short notice. I understand the pressures on the non-tenure track faculty (as least some of them). I am interested in the different models that universities create for their faculty and concerned that all are served as well as possible. I know who does the lower-level teaching to non-majors – I continue to do a lot of it myself. I also know that only tenure-track faculty can do many of the tasks that departments and colleges require, and that supporting their numbers is vital to the life of American universities. The tenure system and an assertive faculty make American universities the success that they are.

Second, after I got a tenure-track position, my wife and I spent 14 years commuting 450 miles between our respective universities. I am keenly aware of the frustrations of academic households (of all sorts) and the value of helping faculty to lead rewarding lives, however they choose to define that. We are more than our jobs, and our students must be more than theirs.

Third, I have taught at three large universities: first, at Michigan State University, where I began as an assistant professor of humanities and rose to the rank of professor of history; then, University of Texas-Arlington, where I moved to head a Ph. D. program in rhetoric (and unite my family); and, finally, to North Carolina State, where I am now professor of English. My years at these have given me a broad view of public higher education and its challenges. My journey from one discipline to another has made me sensitive to the valuable role of disciplinarity in creating faculty. Without these experiences, I would have a narrower sense of possibilities and, perhaps, less inclination to question things as a senator.

Most relevant to this brief biography, I have served in the faculty senate here at NC State for almost four years, and at UT-Arlington for five years. Faculty governance has been a large part of my professional life for a long time; I have seen it at its best and less than best. I have been secretary of both senates. Faculty governance is important to me, because I value the university as an institution, and I believe that the faculty are the university. It is the best way we have to move beyond our corner of things and see the university whole.

You can learn more about me, if you like, at a Web site: http://www4.ncsu.edu/~hdkellne/

Or...

If you want to examine a selection of my writings, go to the library e-reserves; under my name (Kellner), in "ENG 599", are some essays and chapters – all of them are mine.

Statement

The chair of the faculty has many roles: a cheerleader and a scold, a manager and shop steward, speaker and listener. But, above all, the chair is always an advocate for faculty from every discipline and every rank, in almost any imaginable situation. It is the chair who must insist that the faculty is the academic substance of the university, and that this has many implications. It does not imply that we have a role in every aspect of the university. We haven't the time for everything, and aren't paid for such a role. In the academic area, however, we must be assertive and vigilant.

The first principle of a faculty senate must be - do no harm. Do not, as the elected voice of the NCSU faculty, take positions that do not reflect the will of the faculty, nor approve measures that weaken faculty interests or curricular quality. The second principle should be – seek a balance among interests. Our university, even more than most, is historically divided into unique arrangements. Most of us are hardly aware of the existence of many groups and disciplines at NC State, each with its own traditions and historic role. Without a sense of balance, no senate can claim a legitimate role in such a diverse organization.

We usually speak of NC State as either a research university with a mission of basic inquiry and practical applications, or as a land grant university devoted to engaged service to the state and the nation. These are vital missions for us; they define NCSU. However, we should not forget that we are, first and foremost, a university without a qualifier. This implies that our major product isn't patents or prizes, but also the NC State graduate. Economists refer to refrigerators and automobiles as "durable goods," but the most important durable good is an education for effective living. Our students should be well trained for their first years after graduation, but we know that most will change careers several times in life. The education they receive must stay and grow with them, enriching them on a long-term basis. It must remain part of them even in retirement.

The land grant mission of 150 years ago was premised upon balancing the existing reality of a classics-based academic world. Agricultural and mechanical arts needed a home. The success of this venture has been enormous. The land grant university stands today beside innovative agricultural, industrial, and technological centers, public and private. We live in a land grant-created world, in which change is the only constant. We know that the university will grow very quickly by about one-third. This raises many questions about the nature of that growth. It is important that the senate be a forum for discussion of the possibilities offered by growth, and of the trade-offs that must be made. The challenges facing research and graduate studies are clear: they are largely financed by grants, and grant competition is increasing. This situation impacts the careers of young scholars and researchers, in particular, as they face a more difficult environment. It is the responsibility of the faculty senate to do nothing that would limit the opportunities for faculty to seek support where they can. The senate can further work to call attention to the practical situation of faculty who face ever-higher demands.

There are a number of issues that I feel strongly about; to be responsible, I should mention a few of them. First, there is a relentlessly growing "hidden workload" for faculty of all descriptions. The world of e-mail, texting, cell-phones, the Internet, computers, and all the other conveniences has created endless demands. We now have administrative roles, and even clerical roles, that absorb our time without visible reward. These are tasks that have no place in the six realms. Every short survey, multiplied by the number of the faculty, costs a lot. The problem is that faculty time is hard to calculate as a cost. The "hidden workload" does not mean we teach less, nor do less service (on the contrary). It always comes out of our career time, professional-research-scholarly time. I would like to see a policy in place whereby any call on faculty time – a committee, a survey, a workshop – is given a price, based on the value of faculty hours. Next, I fear that the pursuit of niche programs and degrees for NC State may lead to a sense of being a latecomer, an institution that must seek specialties, while our rivals occupy the center. NC State is better than this. Finally, I believe in the disciplines. While we certainly need to create smoother paths to the creation of interdisciplinary collaborative ventures, they must not rival the disciplines. Only strong disciplinary units offer structures that protect faculty interests and the tenure system.

The faculty senate is only effective when it enjoys positive relations with the central administration; fortunately, our administration has proven consistently supportive of faculty governance. It is important that we all understand what faculty governance can and cannot do. Although it is a fact that a large part of the NC State faculty have little interest in or knowledge about faculty governance, this isn't a disaster. I believe it shows a generally felt satisfaction with things. I am certain, however, that many colleagues would value participation in the process if they knew more about the senate and what it might offer them. They would feel, as I do, that it represents an extraordinary opportunity to meet remarkable people, and to begin (as I am only beginning, after decades) to understand the size and variety of a modern university like State. As chair of the faculty, I would hope to visit the units to talk about the senate and, above all, to listen and learn how we can better represent the faculty of our university. And, I would try every day to show good humor, common sense, and a little self-irony.