Volume IV: What works, what matters, what lasts
Considering institutional issues: Interdisciplinary programs
From the 2000 PKAL F21 National Assembly
The assignment
As a consulting team, you have been asked by the dean of a public comprehensive university in the Midwest to give advice and counsel on a three-year process that will lead to the establishment of a formal environmental studies program. Her goal is to put in place a program agreed-to by the vote of the whole faculty, having been discussed and recommended by the major faculty planning committee. In your recommendations, give due attention to the stages of maturation of this program, provide a template for the development of additional interdisciplinary programs, addressing current campus policies and politics, as well as present and future institutional needs.
The dean's primary concerns are: i) lack of ownership within the cadre of senior faculty for interdisciplinary efforts (even given the perfunctory nod to such programs in the institutional goals statement recently developed by the Board of Overseers); and ii) lack of formal policies that facilitate the establishment, funding, and governance of cross-departmental programs. She has put a hold on new hires in all departments until greater clarity has been arrived at in regard to the role of interdisciplinary programs in the future of academic program planning on her campus.
The problem
Only junior faculty have been involved with the nascent environmental studies program; senior faculty have taken the stand that such programs are being mandated from above and will dilute the institution's historic disciplinary strengths. There are also infrastructure concerns (where is the program housed, who pays for what, how majors are tallied and counted for departmental allocations for budgets, and hires that are causing difficulties).
The background
A small, public comprehensive university in the Midwest, with 'non-connected' environmental studies courses taught in several departments for the past five years, is trying to establish a formal environmental studies program. The impetus for the new program is student demand, which has generated significant administrative interest- primarily as a means to maintain/increase enrollments. The president has gone on record that an environmental studies program is one of his highest priorities for academic program development-and thus for fund-raising.
However, many barriers stand in the way. Some of these surfaced at the time of a recent tenure decision; the candidate was denied tenure by her department, with the concurrence of the dean and president. Upon appeal, the decision was overturned. (She was one of the four, non-tenured faculty in different departments teaching courses related to environ-mental issues.)
When earlier consultants visited the campus, they found a strong departmental culture- with decisions about budgets, hires, and made at the departmental level. Yet, within and between departments, power resides in an informal structure dominated by non-institutionalized patterns of authority and prestige. To further complicate the situation, the formal campus Planning/Curriculum Committee is made up of departmental representatives, not by members elected by the faculty as a whole.
Possible issues
How to advance and inform campus wide conversations about the philosophy and value of interdisciplinary programs.
How to ensure that decisions about the governance and location of emerging interdisciplinary programs are less ad hoc.
How to ensure that faculty involved in such interdisciplinary programs are appropriately reviewed and rewarded.
Project Kaleidoscope is supported by: