Even after four failed simulations in New Brunswick, months of bargaining, and a hastily called Friday afternoon SAS-NB meeting that drew 200 people in October 2019, of whom 100 voting faculty unanimously rejected robo-scheduling, the Barchi administration appears set to impose Infosilem/CourseAtlas in fall 2020.
Hundreds of faculty responded to our action survey. Virtually all of them wanted a collective petition to voice our central demand: delay implementation of CourseAtlas (formerly Infosilem) until faculty secure guaranteed, enforceable protections for service, research, and family commitments, as well as faculty authority to resolve scheduling conflicts.
Myth
Robo-scheduling will improve the student experience at Rutgers.
Reality
False. Simulations have not included students’ preferences and no study has been released on how this could improve travel. Simulations so far assume our students, who often work as well as take classes and lead busy lives, are available for class at times when our departments have long established they are not.
Myth
The Rutgers Administration has already accommodated faculty demands to block off times for child care, research, and other commitments.
Reality
False. Rutgers’ Administration refuses to put in writing any of these necessary accommodations in an enforceable agreement. Further, any of their current stated or implied accommodations for one semester can be jettisoned the next. We need an enforceable agreement in writing.
Myth
Chairs, Undergraduate and Graduate Program Directors and other faculty administrators will be able to correct schedules.
Reality
False. Rutgers’ Administration refuses to allow a faculty member to override the decisions of the algorithm to make necessary revisions. Chairs may be able to correct some problems, such as canceling the course of a professor taking leave in Fall 2020, but even that accommodation may evaporate in the future. Again, we need an enforceable agreement.
Myth
Robo-scheduling will have little to no impact on the research, service and mentoring schedules of faculty.
Reality
False. After four simulations at our New Brunswick campuses—no simulations have been done at Camden or Newark—faculty continue to receive schedules that would drastically alter and interfere with their ability to conduct research and service. The algorithm continues to churn out impossible conflicts and times that would threaten enrollments or impede scholarly work.
Myth
Robo-scheduling will be an advantage for Part-Time Lecturers and Non-Tenure Track faculty.
Reality
False. In fact, most of our chairs have expressed alarm about the impact on our most vulnerable faculty. Infosilem prevents instructors who teach part time at Rutgers from reconciling their complex multi-institutional teaching schedules. Indeed, the robot may make it nearly impossible for any faculty member to teach at two Rutgers’ campuses that both use this system.