Search News


Browse Archives

News

Departments Without Chairs

May 5, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Department chairs are a fixture of campus life and academic governance. A plan being floated at Kean University of New Jersey would merge many existing departments into larger units and replace chairs with "managers" -- who would be appointed by administrators and would not hold faculty rank or tenure.

The proposal, which has yet to be released by the university in written form, has angered professors, who held a rally Monday to denounce the idea as one that would endanger academic freedom and destroy a key way for professors to be heard at the senior levels of the administration. Further, the professors charged that the administration was trying to deal with budget woes by adding administrative positions at the expense of academic jobs.

Kean administrators -- whose relations with faculty leaders, especially those in the union that organized the rally, have been contentious for years -- defended their plan (while declining to provide details). Administrators went further and accused professors of trying to protect overpaid positions. Because the idea being pushed at Kean -- eliminating the chair position -- would be a notable change for most four-year institutions, the debate is being watched by faculty groups elsewhere.

Like many public colleges and universities, Kean faces both a deficit and a lack of certainty over how large the shortfall is, although millions will need to be cut somewhere. Administrators say that they are still developing plans, and doing so in conjunction with faculty and student groups, and that it is "premature" to discuss specifics.

But deans recently briefed department chairs about a plan that would involve cutting the number of academic departments roughly in half, and creating new positions to oversee these larger academic units. Currently, faculty chairs are nominated by the professors in departments, with final approval coming from the administration, a system that is common in academe.

The plan as described to department chairs would involve administrative appointments of people without faculty rank or the protections of tenure.

The administration is "using a minor budget shortfall to force a major reorganization of academic affairs," said James Castiglione, who teaches physics at Kean and is president of the Kean Federation of Teachers. The union is part of the American Federation of Teachers, whose national president, Randi Weingarten, appeared at the Kean event Monday to pledge help with efforts "to restore financial and educational sanity here." (The union also argues that the changes the administration is pushing would violate the terms of the faculty contract.)

Because the plan would leave departments managed by people who do not come from the faculty ranks, professors will lose any advocacy that they get from department chairs, Castiglione said.

Further, he said that the savings from no longer having to release chairs from some of their regular course load would probably be offset by the salaries paid to these new managers. The union released statistics showing that another New Jersey public institution, Montclair State University, which has 25 percent more students than Kean, has only 104 administrators, compared to 163 at Kean. The union estimates that bringing the administrative ranks down to the size of those at Montclair would eliminate the need for cuts in academic programs.

For years now, faculty members have complained that President Dawood Farahi places a higher priority on non-academic matters (in particular the physical plant) than on what takes place in the classroom.

The idea of replacing faculty with administrators in leading departments suggests limited understanding of what chairs do and why they matter, said Cathleen Londino, chair of media and film. She noted that chairs at Kean are teaching throughout the time they lead departments, and said that was key. "The university is supposed to be about relationships between faculty who teach and students who learn," she said. Chairs, by virtue of teaching -- typically years of teaching -- "know and understand the program, and have built the program. We know our students. We do the advising. We see students daily."

Londino also noted that faculty chairs at Kean sometimes must go to bat on behalf of professors whom administrators want to dismiss or deny promotions. She questioned how "managers" appointed by the administration could do that without tenure. "When you take the side of a faculty member, if you feel that's appropriate, there has to be protection," she said.

She stressed that chairs and professors were under no illusions that they should make all the decisions, but that they felt they deserve "independent" voices with a shot at influencing outcomes.

Kean administrators declined to answer questions in a telephone conversation and agreed to respond only via e-mail. While asked specifically about the comparison of Montclair and Kean administrative staffs, the response from a spokesman did not address the issue. The statement said that it was "time to set aside greed and self-interest to develop a long-term solution to ensure that Kean continues to remain competitive, true to its mission and to attract students."

The statement did not specifically address the idea of eliminating chair positions, and the spokesman did not respond to a request for clarification. But the statement suggested that the course release time that chairs receive (which is common in higher education) is inappropriate.

"The majority of our faculty go above and beyond serving our students in their teaching and research," the statement said. "The small and vocal group leading the protest today wants to preserve a system that rewards part-time work with full-time pay. Most New Jerseyans lack such job security and know first-hand about the dangers of losing jobs and making payments on their homes, cars, etc. Most would not consider two or three days a week at 17 hours full-time employment. The university cannot afford to operate like that. No business can."

Gary Rhoades, national general secretary of the American Association of University Professors, said that the Kean proposal would clearly violate AAUP standards on governance. The association's statement on governance says: "The chair or head of a department, who serves as the chief representative of the department within an institution, should be selected either by departmental election or by appointment following consultation with members of the department and of related departments."

Rhoades said that while he sees the proposal as violating the rights of professors, he also thinks it's foolish from the administration's perspective. Department chairs are "in between positions" in that they both represent departments to the central administration and represent the administration to the departments.

"If chairs are not of the faculty, then their ability to communicate and to be in any way an advocate on either side is compromised," Rhoades said. Unit managers such as those envisioned at Kean "would have no credibility. This would be self-defeating."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Departments Without Chairs

  • Posted by almost retired on May 5, 2009 at 6:45am EDT
  • Those professors at Kean have it just right. ANOTHER administrative level, having nothing to do with actually teaching students. Managers! Why not hire another set of Assists to the Dean? We had half a dozen who actually ran the school when the Dean was schmoozing the Prez. In my next incarnation, I am going into Administration. Safe, protected job, nice shiny wood desk, no pesky students wanting help with their work, and all I need do all day is drink coffee and tell people no. The last request I made of the Administration was for blinds that closed so the students could see my demonstration videos--class was at 2 pm and the afternoon sun was just about blinding. Oh no, this building is due for remodeling next year (now, it is the end of that "next year" and remodeling has not yet happened), so . . . Parents have no idea that the folks actually in the classroom (regardless how fancy the catalog is) are so often grad students and part time adjuncts, and these non-teaching managers are likely to hire more--they are far cheaper than TT doctoral level faculty and might even know how to do fries with that.

  • Chair's work
  • Posted by RDP , Professor Spanish at University of Virginia on May 5, 2009 at 8:15am EDT
  • The administrator who believes a chair's work is part time should be condemned for all eternity to follow chairs during a day, evening, night, weekdays and weekends, to discover his ignorance. If anything, a good chair's work (which I believe are most) is always overtime and never ending.

  • Posted by PS on May 5, 2009 at 9:15am EDT
  • Evenings? Weekends? Most of the chairs where I work can't even be reached between mid-May and mid-August because it is summer break (and they say so on their out of office email and phone message). Regardless, I agree with the faculty that the department chairs should probably remain academic. 

  • Devil is in the Details
  • Posted by Jim on May 5, 2009 at 9:15am EDT
  • In the absence of details, it is impossible to say whether this proposed administrative change is a good or bad idea. At some point, the administration must release an analysis that shows how much money is currently spent on departmental administration and how much would be saved under the new structure. It must also show how the purely academic responsibilities of department chairs (e.g., coordinating curricular changes, assessing performance of faculty, mentoring and advising junior faculty, assessing faculty requests, making teaching assignments, assembling promotion and tenure portfolios, convening search committees, hosting departmental visitors and colloquium speakers, etc.) would be handled under the new system. On the face of it, the proposed restructuring doesn't seem like a very doable idea.

    That said, what strikes me as particularly unfortunate is how the faculty union has reflexively opposed the plan before learning any of its substance. If the union's opening salvo is to hold a "rally," voice unsupported accusations about administrative intent and deception, make inflammatory statements about "restoring financial and educational sanity," and characterize what is arguably the most severe financial contraction in a half century as a "minor budget shortfall," then it is hard to see the union leaders as reasonable people with whom one can negotiate complex matters in an open and objective manner. One suspects the union would condemn any administrative plan that involves changing the status quo. Faced with unreasoning union rancor in the face of dire fiscal straits, the administration can hardly be faulted for being defensive and guarded. So much for collegiality at Kean University.

    It is hard to know why the faculty/administrator relationship at Kean has gone so sour. My instinct is that there is plenty of blame to share on both sides. But whatever the causes, the atmosphere today seems hopelessly poisoned. This is not a place where I would want to work, nor send my kids to.

  • In MY next incarnation, I'll be a tenured faculty member
  • Posted by Admin at A Canadian University on May 5, 2009 at 10:45am EDT
  • These administrators at Kean have it just right. Faculty! Why not hire extra junior faculty so that senior members can run the institution as it really should be. That way, every petty concern could be attended to immediately without concern for the overall well-being of the institution or so much as lip service paid to accountability to government, students or financial supporters. After all, who knows more about higher education administration than an astrophysicist or philosopher? By merit of having earned a PhD, I would be entitled to proclaim expertise on whichever topic crossed my path - funding, evaluation and assessment, international collaboration - nothing would be beyond my scope or gainsay.

    As much fun as it might seem to lob bricks at the admin building, it may be worth considering that a great many of the folks therein are equally committed to the aims of the institution, and of higher education in general. Despite the above, the proposals made at Kean ARE clearly a step further into the abyss of the institution as business endeavour. However, when the atmosphere is as badly polluted as it appears to be there, it is easy to understand how admin aren't convinced by the efficacy of academic management.

  • Kerfuffle at Kean
  • Posted by can'taffordretirement , Asst. Director, Campus Life at New Jersey City University on May 5, 2009 at 10:45am EDT
  • This is more than faculty vs. administration. Farahi is a bully who does not honor the negotiated contract (even though he signed it). This is not the first time he has tried to make academic changes by fiat. He'll never explain his rationale because he doesn't think he has to. This is just another way to rattle the faculty and distract them from teaching. It's no coincidence his pronouncement comes at the end of the semester.

  • Department Disarray
  • Posted by George Patsourakos , Retired Administrator at Harvard University on May 5, 2009 at 12:00pm EDT
  • The plan at Kean University to merge many departments into larger units and replace chairs with managers who have no faculty rank or tenure is self-defeating. The managers would know very little -- if anything at all -- about the subjects being taught in their management areas. Moreover, faculty members would lack a leader in the subject being taught, and this would result in much chaos and disarray in each subject area.

  • Kean Follis
  • Posted by Cheap Seats on May 5, 2009 at 12:30pm EDT
  • The plan to replace chairs with managers might be an interesting thought experiment, but whatever its merits (and I confess I see none), the story makes clear that Kean's administration is not just hostile to its faculty but self-confessedly incompetent.

    For evidence of the latter, consider the following statement from the administration as found in IHE: "The majority of our faculty go above and beyond serving our students in their teaching and research," the statement said. "The small and vocal group leading the protest today wants to preserve a system that rewards part-time work with full-time pay. Most New Jerseyans lack such job security and know first-hand about the dangers of losing jobs and making payments on their homes, cars, etc. Most would not consider two or three days a week at 17 hours full-time employment. The university cannot afford to operate like that. No business can."

    Forget for a moment the cheap appeal to the worst views of academia. Indeed, even forget for a moment the extraordinary sight of a university administration trashing the people it's hired and presumably rewarded up to this point to run the academic side. Think rather only how the administrators say they've been doing their job. According to the administration's statement, these business types have been running an institution in which they've routinely approved full-time salaries for less than half-time work. Nice work if you can get it, no doubt, for those lucky stiffs putting in their 17 hours. Did the administration just discover this clever scam? Did they always know about it but just didn't bother to do anything? Whether it's the former or the latter, maybe the good taxpayers of New Jersey ought to demand their heads.

    If it's true (and it isn't of course), the odds that the administration can be trusted to run matters efficiently (forgetting for the moment the necessity to balance academic priorities with student needs, institutional priorities, etc.) are mighty long indeed.

    I can only offer a prayer of thanksgiving that I'm not employed at any capacity at Kean. Mean and incompetent are a nasty duo.

    from the cheap seats

  • Chairs / Heads
  • Posted by Greg Johnson , Chair, Anthropology at Hunter College CUNY on May 5, 2009 at 1:00pm EDT
  • Chairs typically represent faculties to management - at CUNY they are members of the Professional Staff Congress - a union bargining unit - very definitely not admin.

    If I were a high ranking administrator, I would much prefer to appoint chairs and control their conditions of service: salary - teaching load - research support and so on. This would enable a more fully shared vision of institutional needs and goals and foster long delayed transformation of teaching and learning in the 21st century to advance workforce initiatives, vastly improve student retention and graduation rates, provide accountability and outcomes assessment to the larger community and generate justification for much needed and earned merit raises to political associates on the Executive Compensation Plan.

    If this sounds like your institution, you know why you want to keep elected chairs [if faculty] or not [if management].

    cheers,

    gj

     

    It would also be the end of shared governance

  • mean and incompetent
  • Posted by nancy Brilliant , English at Kean on May 5, 2009 at 6:00pm EDT
  • "Mean and incompetent" about sums it up. We at Kean have an institution whose practices and policies come from someone who really doesn't know much about our work. If Farahi knew what Department chairs do, he might (I'm being charitable) not be so quick to think we could do without them. Then again, it might not make any difference to him. Control seems increasingly to be all he cares about.