The Future of CHASS: Response from the Department of Psychology

Doug Gillan, Department Head

Question 1Should we use resources to restore lost capacity vs. build new capacity?

Don’t frame this as “lost” versus “new” capacityBetter framed as -- will a new hire enhance a high-quality program that has been chosen for emphasis by the department and college without the department losing essential core teaching capabilities?

Strong, existing PhD programs should not be diluted to support newer, unproven PhD programs

Psych Department could be a model for other departments because of our demonstrated success in doing a smaller number of things well

Question 2To what degree should we allocate funds to undergraduate vs. research and graduate programs?

Hire to enhance the scholarly reputation of high-quality programs, usually at the graduate level

This is another false dichotomyGreat grad training can enhance undergrad educational opportunities for research and scholarshipInsist that the undergraduate core continue to be taught by excellent teachers

Psych faculty hires have generally been targeted more narrowly toward specialty grad areas rather more general undergrad areas

Question 3Should we allocate funds to traditional disciplinary structures (i.e., departments and programs) vs. targeting inter-disciplinary themes?

Interdisciplinary programs nearly always grow out of disciplines that find a common thematic interest: Bottom-up, not top-down

Moving in a particular interdisciplinary direction can only happen if a disciplines are enthusiastic about it

However, interdisciplinary issues like water, climate, energy (named by Chancellor Woodson as central themes to pursue in the future) all need the help of applied research psychologists

People and communities are misusing resources and can learn, can be motivated, can be provided with information to use them more appropriatelyFunding agencies are focusing resources on multidisciplinary research

Question 4Can we build support for initiatives that may have weak advocacy within our current configuration?

Especially when initiatives would help us reach strategic goals of excellence and comprehensiveness

“Tragedy of the commons” -- Departments will always be self-focused

Decisions about the greater good need to be made at a level higher than the individual departmentCost/benefit analysisExternal financial support for such initiatives will be critical

Better questions: What is the vision of a comprehensive university? How do we get there, given current constraints?

How do new initiatives dovetail with existing strengths?Can we leverage existing resources at local colleges and universities?