|
Weakness
without Leadership
The
weaknesses of schools without program leadership positions
are:
1
Without
leadership positions by discipline, isolation of faculty members
within disciplines is encouraged. There is no formal structure
to promote unity among faculty members serving each program.
This discourages curriculum development, planning, and faculty
interaction. It therefore diminishes the educational experience
for students within those programs. A unified faculty compared
to a divided one reflects the Gestalt principle of the whole
being greater than the sum of its parts. The most successful
educational programs have always been those with a unified
faculty sharing common values and goals. All in all, programs
without appointed leadership are bound to have a negative
impact on educational quality, and they are destructive to
faculty commitment and sense of well-being.
2
There is over-reliance on graduate teaching assistants
and part-time faculty. Once a School moves into this trap,
it is nearly impossible to escape because of the cost of replacing
teaching assistants and part-time instructors with full-time
faculty.
3
There is absolutely no way that the Director can provide
educational leadership for two or more programs. At best,
the Director can function only as an operational manager.
4
The establishment of a School and Director with the
latter serving as advisor to the Dean removes the Dean from
any direct, structured contact with educational programs.
This is compared to the Department Head system where all program
Heads as members of the College Council had regular contact
with the Dean.
5
Within Schools without appointed leadership by program,
the professional identities of individual programs begin to
blur as the operation of the school takes on the qualities
of a single entity rather than as a combination of distinctly
different programs of study.
6
Programs without appointed leadership have no representation
Ð no spokesperson for the program, faculty or students. The
Director's role is unmistakably an administrative one, and
it is representative only in terms of what the Director chooses
to represent. Faculty from each major discipline do not have
an unencumbered communication channel to the Dean.
7
Schools without appointed leadership and program budgets
are overly paternalistic. (Administrators are parents and
faculty members are children.) At many Schools, there are
no annual operating budgets for each program. If funds are
required, they are disbursed at the discretion of the Director.
Individual or program funding is available only by personal
request.
8
Too much decision-making is removed from program or
faculty level and invested in the Director.
9
The Director is responsible to the Dean but not accountable
to faculty under his supervision.
Needed
Changes
The organization of educational programs into a School is
beneficial but with a few modifications it could function
with greater effectiveness. At the same time, the educational
environment would be improved and faculty productivity increased.
The
most important changes would involve
1
Making
schools into Divisions within the College and retaining Department
Heads for each program in the School.
2
Educational leadership positions should be filled with
a Department Head appointed by the Dean or elected by the
faculty. The Department Head would be listed in the table
of organization, there would be financial compensation, the
Head would serve at the will of the Director and a majority
of faculty in the program.
3
The Director is an administrative position, and serves
at the will of the Dean, but should be accountable to Department
Heads. At such a time as a majority of Department Heads vote
no confidence in the Director, the Director should be replaced.
If the Director does not have strong incentive to represent
faculty and programs, they invariably end up representing
only their best interests and serving the Dean.
4
Each program should have an operational budget to be
spent at the discretion of the Program Head and faculty.
5
Department Heads serve as an advisory council to the
Director.
6
Department Heads should have structured access to the
Dean that would not be interpreted as circumventing the Director.
There should be a direct link between the Dean and the educational
programs.
|
