or until clear guidelines were provided. [fh motion was passed
in May. The November rescinding of the Sell: rs/Mansfield pro-
posal is, I must assume, our answer. As a proposer of the above
motion, as a supporter of the Sellers/Mansfield proposal, and as
a faculty member who still believes that the Faculty Development
Committee should have a clearly stated budget for the activities
they plan, and control over that budget, I felt it necessary to
resign from the Committee.

Nothing that has happened since has changed my mind. The
Faculty Development Committee passed a motion (late November, 1974)
stating that they did not have time to plan any college-wide
activity for January, yet such activity took place. Recently,

I received a memo (January 27, 1975) which said that the Dean

of Curriculum (Bill Day) intended to ask the Principal's Council
to approve an activity for the May college-wide development
period. This memo went on to say that Bill Day was "uncertain
about the current status of the Faculty Dvelopment Committee."

I'm pretty uncertain about the current status of the Faculty
Development Committee myself. It would appear to have been turned
into a eunuch committee. And the entire convoluted process can
hardly inspire any faith in me, as a faculty member, in the
internal administrative process at Douglas.

Jack Finnbogason