1047: 1800 words

case2.docx

Home >English homework help >1047: 1800 words

( Programs in Professional Education )

Sunbelt State University

Dean Evelyn Wilson sighed as she put down the report. “The Final Report of the Committee to Evaluate the Dean” contained an appraisal of Dean Wilsonȇs performance over the past five years. Although Dean Wilson was commended for initiating the review, her overall performance was ranked only “around a C+.” She was disappointed and frustrated. She thought:

I have worked so hard for the past five years to enhance the reputation of our programs and to service the needs of the local community, and now my faculty and department heads are telling me that my efforts were misdirected, that I should not have focused on external matters. They simply do not get it. They must not understand all that I have accomplished.

“But why is that?” she thought. “Where did I go wrong?”

The Institution

Located in a rural community in a southern state, Sunbelt State University was a public, comprehensive institution offering approximately 87 undergraduate majors and 47 masters degree programs to nearly 8,000 students (4,156 fullȬtime undergraduates, 1,668 partȬtime undergraduates, and 1,947 graduate students). It granted doctoral degrees in a few programs (music and art). The universityȇs mission statement noted “a commitment to the complementary relationship between liberal and professional education.”

The College of Education, Human Services, Behavioral Sciences, and Justice (EHBJ) offered both undergraduate and graduate courses in what are often called the “helping professions.” They included psychology, social work, criminal justice, public health, nursing, and education. Serving the needs of approximately 2,000 students, it was the second largest school at the university (Arts & Sciences being the largest). Two programs offered masters degrees; there were no doctoral programs.

This case was written by Nancy Thomas as a basis for class discussion rather than to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of an administrative situation. Names and some institutional data have been disguised.

This material has been reprinted with permission of the Harvard Education Publishing Group (HEPG) for personal use only. Any other use, print or electronic, will require written permission. For more information, please visit www.hepg.org or call 1Ȭ617Ȭ495Ȭ3432.

The Harvard Education Publishing Group is publisher of the Harvard Education Letter, the Harvard Educational Review, books under the imprint Harvard Education Press, and case studies in education. HEPG’s editorial offices are located at 8 Story Street, First Floor, Cambridge, MA 02138, tel. 617Ȭ495Ȭ3432, or email to hepg@harvard.edu.

The New Dean

Dean Wilson came to the university in 1989 as the Dean of EHBJ. She had received her Ph.D. in instructional design from Florida State Universityȇs College of Education. She joined the faculty at the Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in the Department of Surgery, and became the Director of Research in Medical Education. She published several books and articles about teaching and learning in clinical settings before shifting her focus to administration. She became the assistant dean at the School of Education at the University of North Carolina, where she earned a reputation for enhancing faculty development initiatives and designing and implementing innovative programs. From there, she moved to Sunbelt State University as the dean of EHBJ.

Her written job description for dean of EHBJ stated, among other things, that she was responsible for: teaching, research, and service standards of the faculty; longȬterm planning; budgets; development; recruiting, retention, and evaluation of faculty members; program development and elimination; cooperation with other colleges of the university; faculty development; “keeping abreast of national trends” in the behavioral sciences, public health, nursing, criminal justice, and education; the administration of the teacher education program; and “working cooperatively with external constituencies in areas associated with the school.” In addition, the institutionȇs vice president for academic affairs frequently sought her counsel or assigned her special projects. Dean Wilson said, “It can be a 24ȬhourȬaȬday job.”

Internal Strategy

Throughout her six years at EHBJ, Dean Wilson focused on managing personnel and budgets; representing and advocating for EHBJ and its programs within the institution; providing leadership in planning and staff and program development; fund raising; and maintaining professional relations with faculty members, staff, students, alumni, and professional constituents. Her level of involvement in each was varied, by intention. For example, she chose to delegate to the faculty the responsibility for the recruitment of new faculty members, preferring to serve only as an advocate of a particular choice with central administration. Similarly, she played only minor roles in faculty evaluations, promotions, and grievances.

With respect to budgets, she played a more active role. This was because in five of her six years as dean, Sunbelt State University reduced its base budget in response enrollment drops in every college, except EHBJ. In the first two years of these difficult times, Dean Wilson chose to handle the budget cuts centrally. Departments were not asked to reduce their budgets, but if they lost personnel, the positions most likely remained unfilled. In the third year of reductions, she changed her strategy and assessed prorated shares of the reductions to all departments. She worked with department heads to address special problems resulting from the reductions. Enrollments remained strong throughout this period, and funding needs for faculty development were met.

To compensate for the budget cuts, Dean Wilson took an active role in writing grant and contract proposals. In six years, she wrote or coȬauthored seven proposals. Five were funded. Frustrated, however, by the lack of support she received from the universityȇs development office, she sought funds to hire a fullȬtime development officer for EHBJ. The central administration accepted that proposal during her fifth year; a search was conducted for the candidate during her sixth year, and the selected candidate started in Dean Wilsonȇs sixth year.

( Sunbelt State University )

( 2 )

( 3 )

Dean Wilson emphasized longȬrange planning, although she did not start the process until her fourth year. In that year, she formed a Planning Committee consisting of department heads and several senior faculty members. Her goals included planning for EHBJ through a series of selfȬevaluations and planning initiatives in each department. Although some departments responded more positively to the process and its goals than others, the overall process was wellȬreceived. An overall EHBJ plan was drafted but had not been finalized by the time of her review.

With a personal goal of being as accessible to faculty members as the job allowed, Dean Wilson maintained what she called an “openȬdoor” policy. Faculty members were invited to meet with her for casual conversations during office hours set aside weekly. She established “coffee with the dean” hours monthly, but they were not wellȬattended, so she abandoned the idea. Instead, she began inviting each faculty member to lunch at least once a year, a tradition she found very effective. She explained:

Primarily, I serve as a source of information for my faculty members and department heads who ask. I keep in touch with them regularly in meetings or even through informal notes and correspondence. And I am not a cold or aloof person. I send each faculty and staff member personal birthday cards. I take each faculty member to lunch at least once a year. I try to maintain a reasonably high level of visibility.

Overall, under Dean Wilsonȇs leadership, EHBJ remained a strong school at a university experiencing financial problems and enrollment declines. Enrollment at EHBJ remained high, and the students were considered among the strongest in the schoolȇs recent history. Despite losses in the faculty due to attrition, the school had managed to hire fourteen new faculty members in six years, and faculty morale appeared to be high. Both the chief academic affairs officer and the president of the university held Dean Wilson in high regard, and the other deans at the institution respected her.

Outreach Strategy

Dean Wilson believed strongly that one of the dean’s primary responsibilities was to serve as liaison to the professions her school served. “The dean should be outreachȬoriented,” she opined. She continued:

Professional deans must pursue extensive program representation responsibilities. The employers of our students, the public officials who regulate and license our programs and the programs where our students will eventually work, the professionals and legislators who frame the rules governing the professions, and the graduates themselves all expect and require a major presence by the dean. This seemed obvious to me from the beginning of my time here. It is the reason I became acquainted with as many key members of our professional constituency as possible.

Consistent with this thinking, only months after starting, Dean Wilson formed a Deanȇs Advisory Council. The Council consisted of more than thirty leaders of the regionȇs professional organizations, agencies, and service units that employed the schoolȇs graduates. It included representatives of the public schools, the courts, leaders from city, county, and state law enforcement agencies, social services agency leaders, and representatives of agencies concerned with public health, nutrition/dietetics, recreation, and philanthropy. The Council met each semester and communicated regularly through correspondence, electronic mail, and randomly scheduled individual or small

group meetings. At each meeting, two or three EHBJ faculty members presented their research or service initiatives to the Council. Dean Wilson added:

The Council provides an excellent sounding board for ideas for our school, outstanding feedback for the improvement of our programs, and, I believe, a very good vehicle for the wider exposure of our academic efforts to the professional community that consumes our “products,” the graduates.

Not surprisingly, community members of the Council expected Dean Wilson to serve them as well. “It is a twoȬway street,” she noted. By the end ofher second year as dean, she found that she was involved in a whirlwind of community activity. “I invested a great deal of time and energy in participating in the arenas where professional contacts exist,” she said. Although originally her involvement was limited to educational organizations, in the last three years, it had grown to include work in health and human services areas and interdisciplinary, collaborative organizations.

On the local and state levels, some of Dean Wilsonȇs activities included:

1. The Regional Human Service Coordinating Coalition (RHSCC): Described as a “multipurpose collaborative body,” the RHSCCȇs mission was to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of services provided by the stateȇs Departments of Education, Public Health, Mental Health, and Social Service, and the Jobs Commission. RHSCC met monthly, and service on ad hoc subcommittees and attendance at special meetings was required.

2. The Family Coordinating Council (FCC): Similar to RHSCC, the FCC was a countyȬlevel collaborative body that reviewed and coordinated the efforts of countyȬlevel services (e.g., mental health, jobs commissions, aid to families and children). It met quarterly, with special meetings several times a year.

3. Community Needs Assessment Group (CNAG): Funded by a Kellogg Foundation grant, the CNAG worked with the United Way and local youth and family groups to decide how to allocate resources in the community. Dean Wilson served on the steering committee and served as chair of the data collection committee. She also worked on the first report on needs assessment and a telemarketing campaign for publishing the results. Dean Wilson remained enthusiastic about the project, but admitted that it “absorbed an inordinate amount of time.”

4. Buttonball Closure Project: This project involved fund raising and followȬthrough for the local public school system to assess the impact of the closing of the Buttonball School. Dean Wilson handled most of the correspondence to the stateȇs Department of Education concerning the grant and the school closing.

5. Kellogg Foundation Youth Initiative Program Advisory Council (KYIP): The dean was invited to serve on this advisory council formed to evaluate the foundation’s work in the region and to plan the next round of activities. KYIP met monthly, in addition to organizing several smaller, specialȬpurpose events.

6. Village for Families and Children Project (VFCP): The Village was one of the region’s public housing projects for lowȬincome families. Faculty, staff, and students were recruited to provide a variety of services at the Village. The relationship provided research and teaching

opportunities for faculty members and field experiences for students in criminal justice, education, social work, family studies, and psychology.

7. Regional Interagency Special Education Council: Dean Wilson served as a member of this group that coordinated efforts between local hospitals, mental health entities, government entities, physicians, churches, and family support groups that collaborated to serve the families of special needs children under age three.

8. Regional Youth Home Evaluation Group: The administrative judge of the Probate Court asked the dean to join this temporary group to evaluate the courtȇs juvenile detention facility.

9. Feasibility Study Committee for Alternative Schools: A project evolving out of the County Superintendent’s Round Table (of which the dean was an advisory member), this group was formed to study the needs of area youth for alternative educational environments. It met monthly, with special assignments.

10. Area Childrenȇs Coalition: Dean Wilson was a member of the steering committee for this group that looked at domestic violence. The committee was extensively involved in planning a conference for next year.

11. Professional Development School Partnership: The department of education was in partnership with a local elementary school. Dean Wilson became involved in the formation of the partnership, interactions with state representatives, and in obtaining funding. Several faculty members were also involved.

12. Center for Educational Development, Governing Board: Dean Wilson served on the governing body of this operation, a joint effort between the state Department of Education and seven local school districts.

13. State Dean’s Council: Deans responsible for education departments or programs at both public and private institutions in the state met monthly to discuss common problems and strategies, to collaborate on projects, and to address special issues (e.g., program review, or enrollment issues).

14. State Teacher Examination Advisory Committee (TEAC): TEAC was one of five legislativelyȬmandated advisory bodies to the state’s Department of Education and the State Board of Education. Appointed by the state universities’ Presidents’ Council for a twoȬyear term, Dean Wilson worked with others to review issues surrounding teacher testing.

Dean Wilson added:

Representing the College at the state and local levels, particularly the involvement with the Dean’s Council and the TEAC group, requires a great deal of time. There is a good deal of inȬstate travel, and it is not a small state. The distances mean air travel is the only reasonable approach most of the time, and flight schedules from this rural area do not make it as efficient as it would be from a major hub. I use the flight time to prepare for meetings or work, and it also offers a rare opportunity to catch up on

desk work in solitude. In the last four years, I suspect I have typed more memos, letters, and report drafts on my laptop in the airport than at my desk on campus.

On a national level, Dean Wilson was also involved in organizations such as the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, the Council for the Advancement and Support of Education, and the Teacher Education Council of State Colleges and Universities. She attended annual meetings, some special sessions, and served on ad hoc committees from time to time. During one meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, Dean Wilson attended several sessions on “professional development schools.” Since then, the department of education at EHBJ, with Dean Wilson’s guidance, had formed its own PDS initiative consisting of a partnership with a local school. The initiative included school formation, professional training programs, and collaboration with other EHBJ professional programs including justice, nursing, social work, health education, behavior technology, and teacher education. She observed, “The massing of such educational and delivery opportunities in community sites has tremendous intuitive appeal, at least to me.”

A Performance Review for the Dean

In her sixth year, Dean Wilson voluntarily initiated a review of her performance as dean. She explained:

This was my own initiative. No one, including the Vice President for Academic Affairs, asked me to do this, although the VP thought it was a great idea. The other deans thought I was crazy, a glutton for punishment. Some were worried that they would be next. I invited department heads, faculty members, students, and others both internal and external to the institution to form a committee. I charged the group with the task of assessing my activities and accomplishments. To help the committee, I provided a review and selfȬevaluation of my activities, about thirty pages, singleȬspaced.

Although invited to serve on the review committee, the EHBJ department heads unanimously decided that they would like to submit their own, separate evaluation of the dean. They sent out surveys to all EHBJ faculty members to get a broad range of opinions. They did not send the surveys to students or members of the outside community. None of the survey recipients knew about or reviewed the dean’s thirtyȬpage selfȬevaluation. About half of those surveyed responded.

After several months of meetings and debate, the department heads submitted a sevenȬpage evaluation that they claimed “represents the best collective wisdom that could be provided.” They divided the report into two sections that reviewed (1) the deanȇs strengths and (2) goals for the future. Under “Strengths,” the department heads commended the dean for being approachable, concerned, proactive, supportive of them, supportive of faculty development, conscious of the reputation of the school, conscientious, creative, and trusting. Under “Goals,” the faculty advised the dean to focus more on longȬrange planning, with specific attention to goals and strategies for their achievement. The report stated:

In working toward this goal, the dean should concentrate a greater proportion of her efforts on internal matters. When the need arises to spend time offȬcampus, the dean needs to integrate her efforts with college strengths and programs and provide feedback to the departments…While it is essential that the dean be visible both on

and off campus, members of the committee felt that membership on too many committees, boards, and commissions can elicit a perception of shallowness.

At the same time, the original committee established by the dean issued its report. Similarly, that report praised Dean Wilson’s “very positive flow of energy and ideas, particularly between the university and the external community.” However, the committee said, “It is clear that the dean should place her highest priorities on the internal affairs of the college, and her lowest priorities on external affairs.” The report continued:

A major discrepancy exists between the way Dean Wilson chooses to spend a great deal of her time, and the way a majority of her internal constituents think/feel she should spend her time. Most members of the faculty perceive the role of dean as substantially less expansive, requiring more internal focus than certain activist members of the local and state community see it. These perceptions might be a function of the extent to which prioritization by the dean has either fostered or circumscribed perception, priority, and both.

The Dean’s Reaction

At first, Dean Wilson was very disappointed in the evaluation process. She felt that limiting the survey recipients to faculty members and excluding members of the outside community skewed the results. She was critical of the fact that the department heads did not provide the survey recipients with a copy of her selfȬevaluation. “How can they assess my performance if they do not know how I spend my time?” she lamented. Only half of those who received the survey returned it. She suspected, if not hoped, that those who did not return the survey were more supportive of her. She also noted, without surprise, that the education department faculty members appreciated her external efforts more than those in other departments. She thought, “Faculty members simply do not understand what a dean is supposed to do. They do not know what I have been doing and how it might help their professional lives.”

After reflecting on the report, however, she began to wonder if she had adequately communicated to the EHBJ faculty her dayȬtoȬday activities and particularly her external strategy. She began to see that her frustration with the committee members for not sharing her selfȬevaluation widely was probably misplaced. “If I felt such a need to justify how I spend my time through the selfȬ evaluation, perhaps I knew all along that my faculty members and department heads did not know or understand… But how could I have helped them to understand?” she wondered.