RethinkingDepartmental STRUCTURES

Who has done it?Why do it?

How? Who can help?

By Maury Cotter January 26, 2013

Rethinking structures is one strategy forEducational Innovation

Curriculum Design• Departments across campus transforming their curriculum for learning

excellence, market need, and best use of capacity Delivery

• Technology to support collaborative, self-paced learning• Spaces for new learning

Serve and graduate more students• Professional degrees and certificates • Increasing capacity in high demand areas

Agile infrastructure• Restructuring units for optimal size and disciplinary connections• Expanding summer offerings• Streamlining and updating policies for efficient changes

Structures – Examples School of Medicine and Public Health.

• Reconfigured from 3 depts to 2 depts: Anatomy, Physiology and Pharmacology – TO - Cellular and Regenerative Biology, and Neuroscience

• Reconfigured to create: Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine

L&S• Merged: Comparative Literature and Folklore Program

Engineering.• Merged into another dept: Engineering Mechanics to Nuclear to create Eng.

Physics• Created: Biomedical Engineering

CALS• Merged: Forest and Wildlife Ecology;

Poultry Sciences and Meat and Animal Sciences merged to become Animal Sciences • Dissolved: School of Natural Resources, Dept. of Continuing and Vocational Education • Absorbed: Food Microbiology and Toxicology into Bacteriology

SOHE: created as a spin off from CALS

Variations

Absorb

Reconfigure

Merge

Why Do It?SMPH:

Anatomy, Physiology and PharmacologyTo

Cellular and Regenerative Biology, Neuroscience

“The new structure features research priorities as opposed to traditional teaching disciplines. The new departments formed reflect the strengths of the departments dissolved. It made the focuses stronger.”

Rick Moss, Associate DeanInterview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGyri6DfxRE&feature=youtu.be

SMPH: “Size and strength go hand and hand;

we’re seeking optimal size.”

Optimal Size Allows:

Goal of collaborative, programmatic research Need critical mass to develop focused research areas Recruit and retain – people want to be part of a program

of research by its mass, achievements, synergy, collaboration

Administrative functions strengthened; Better positions and career ladder for staff

Why Do It?

Letters and ScienceDepartment of Comparative Literature and Folklore Program

ToDepartment of Comparative Literature and Folklore Studies

“Intellectual reasons have to be primary -improving the ability to achieve the academic mission of the unit:

improving a department’s ability to successfully engage in teachingand research, serve its students, and make significant contributionto the field. ”

Mary LayounDepartment Chair, Comparative Literature

Comparative Literature and Folklore Program

Challenges of being too small

It’s difficult to:

• Provide the breadth of intellectual needs• Compete on a national scale; reputation; grants• Recruit, hire and retain the best faculty and graduate students• Fill leadership roles and functions:

• Chair, Graduate Studies, Undergraduate Studies, Budget, Curriculum, Communications, Events, Planning, Merit/Promotion/Personnel, Planning, Fundraising…

• Take sabbaticals• Provide breadth of services to students

Why do it?College of Engineering

Two examples

Merge one into another: Engineering Mechanics into Nuclear to form Engineering Mechanics

• Strengthened research programs

A Program to a Department: BioMedical Engineering • High interest in BME Masters Program• Funding and collaboration opportunities

Why Do It?SMPH

Too Big and Too Small to…

Surgery

Orthopedic Surgery

Rehabilitative Medicine

Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitative Medicine

…Just Right…

How to Do It: The Approval Process

.

Department(s) develop

proposal(s)

Discussions at dept., S/C,

campus levels

S/C APC Votes

Faculty vote in their executive

committees

Faculty Senate Reviews/Approves

UAPC Votes

Faculty discuss in their

departmentsA

cces

s A

dvic

e

SMPH 3 to 2: How Did They Decide?

School level committee. Facilitated. Group recommended the merger. 2 months

Faculty in each department discussed Each faculty member declared which department they would be in. Each department voted to dissolve and to form SMPH APC voted UAPC voted Faculty Senate TOTAL – 15 months Status – recruiting department chairs – desirable jobs

Comp Lit & Folk: How Did They Do It? Chair and Director began discussions with Faculty and some

graduate students). 5 mos. Exec Comm authorized Chair to pursue. Gained support of

Dean. 2 mos. Held joint Retreat. Developed high-level document. Facilitated

process - 6 mos. Received Permission to Plan from L&S APC. 5 mos. Developed formal Proposal. 5 mos. L&S APC approved. Oct. 2012 UAPC approved. Dec. 2012 For information to Faculty Senate. Spring 2013 Effective 2013-2014 Academic Year Total – 2+ years

There are challenges: Allegiances – to colleagues, disciplines, staff,

intellectual community Change is hard! It takes time away from “real

work.” Each faculty member’s career is their identity and

is deeply rooted. Resources to sort out: patents, royalties, IP, etc. Fear of unknown. Are we sure it’s better than what

we have? Because we don’t make structural changes often,

“how to do it” might seem a mystery.

Some Questions to Consider

Has our discipline evolved so that new boundaries or combinations or names could enhance potential?

Do you have critical mass for achieving strength? Recruiting and retaining, attracting research funding, taking on complex research issues, teaching, interdisciplinary collaborations, administrative functions, etc.

What other benefits or opportunities are possible?What do we want to know about ourselves? Potential partners? Where can we get that data? (APIR, Query Library)

Who will provide the leadership needed?

Components for Proposals for Departmental Restructuring

Approvals and endorsements

History/Background/Rationale Scope Strategy Action Plan for Establishing the New Structure Anticipated Curriculum/Academic Program Changes

Exemplary Proposals

Exemplary Proposals:http://apir.wisc.edu/uapc/2012-13UAPCdocuments/UAPC2012122017CompLitFolklStu.pdfhttp://apir.wisc.edu/uapc/2010-11/UAPC_2010.12.16.03_Neuroscience_.pdfhttp://apir.wisc.edu/uapc/2010-11/UAPC_2010.12.16.04Cell_and_Regen_Bio.pdf

Want help? Exemplary proposals Peer-to-peer conversations Facilitated discussions Expertise on academic planning and approvals Check list, guide

Contact: OQI - Maury Cotter, mcotter@wisc.eduAPIR - Jocelyn Milner, jlmilner@wisc.edu