Some Q & A About Provosts
The Office of the Dean of Faculties Today
The Office of the Dean of Faculties, 1940-69
The Faculty Leadership Role of the Dean of Faculties
The Provost proposal has generated a great deal of email and
telephone traffic to faculty governance leadership. Many messages have
simply requested basic information about the nature of the proposal, others
have taken positions. This column is a non-authoritative attempt to respond
to questions faculty may have, and to indicate also some of the pro and con
views that have been articulated.
What exactly is a Provost? Provost is a title applied to chief academic officers in higher education.
In some institutions, titles such as "vice-president for academic affairs"
are used, rather than Provost. All Big Ten institutions other than IU have
powerful, Provost-type positions. Typically, academic deans report to
Provosts, rather than directly to Chancellors or Presidents.
Why has Bloomington never had a Provost? In the past, Ken Gros Louis performed many of the functions
of a Provost; Vice-Chancellors for Budgetary Administration — first Ward
Schaap, then Maynard Thompson — also assumed some of those functions. In
earlier periods, the very different configuration of upper administration
allocated these functions successfully in other frameworks, as Don Gray's
account further on in this Report makes clear. Chancellor Brehm
believes the campus requires a chancellor more externally directed towards
fundraising, community relations, and legislative initiatives.
Why would adding a Provost eliminate the Dean of
Faculties? A number of functions currently under
the DoF are central to the role of chief academic officer, such as faculty
promotion and tenure. Chancellor Brehm has announced that this
restructuring must be revenue-neutral, and this would not be possible if
both Provost and Dean of Faculties offices were maintained.
Will the Provost be an academic? Chancellor Brehm has indicated that it will be a requirement
that candidates for the Provost position have records of scholarly
accomplishment appropriate for a senior academic appointment at Bloomington.
What's the problem with switching from a Dean of Faculties
to a Provost? The DoF at Bloomington has been a
faculty-oriented office that has provided critical support to many
colleagues. It has often mediated between faculty and chairs, avoiding the
conflicts involved in formal grievance; it has provided critical pre-tenure
guidance; it has maintained a consistent focus on faculty development,
providing an array of funding opportunities for faculty seeking to build or
redirect their careers. Although at times, the role of the DoF office has
placed it in tension with the role of the AAUP Committee A, which advocates
for faculty in grievance processes, the AAUP leadership has generally
recognized the DoF office as the most active administrative defender of the
values AAUP takes to be central to academic freedom and integrity in the
administration of faculty affairs. This leadership role is discussed more
fully in Myrtle Scott's item in this Report.
Because Provosts are more directly concerned with budget issues and
tend to be oriented towards the deans who report to them, rather than to
faculty directly, a Provost might be less apt to defend values of academic
freedom and integrity in personnel issues against budget pressures and unit
efficiency goals.
Could there be advantages from a faculty point of view? Recent generations of the DoF office have been
less powerful than was the case before, and this waning of power seems
directly linked to the fact that academic deans do not report to the DoF,
and the DoF possesses no budgetary authority over academic units. Some
people feel that the consequence of this has been an increasing lack of
coordination between autonomous schools, a centrifugal tendency much
increased by RCM budgeting. The Provost structure may offer to better
balance the unit perspectives of the schools with a campus perspective.
Why is there already discussion of an Associate Provost? In discussions with Chancellor Brehm, the BFC
Agenda Committee proposed and the Chancellor accepted a structure that might
help preserve some of the core features of the current DoF office. That
design would involve the appointment of an Associate Provost, whose
functions would include maintenance of faculty records, faculty development
activities, and faculty advocacy. In the last function, the Associate
Provost would report to the Chancellor, rather than to the Provost. The
position would be filled and reviewed through BFC search & screen and review
procedures for high academic administrators, and would thus be a
Chancellor's appointment. Chancellor Brehm has indicated that, like the
Provost position, this position would also be filled by an academic
appointee.
How will the Provost fit in the upper administration? On the campus level, the Chancellor has indicated that the Provost will
work as a team with the Vice-Chancellor for Budgetary Administration, Neil
Theobald, with the Provost shaping the academic side of the budget. The
precise division of responsibility will probably be determined only once a
Provost takes office. In the IU system, the Bloomington Chancellor
serves as Vice-President for Academic Affairs, and in that sense, there is a
Provost on the system level. However, the VPAA position has never been
strongly developed, and given the unusually powerful role of the system
President at IU, the lack of a strong vice-president with a purely academic
portfolio may be a significant weakness. It is unclear how the shift of
local academic functions from the Chancellor to the Provost will affect
this.
Doesn't this really mean adding more administrators? It may. The Chancellor states flatly that the
change will be revenue-neutral, but it is difficult to see how this will be
accomplished – the proposed plan involves shifting academic administration
formerly accomplished by the Chancellor, not simply renaming the DoF. The
DoF has become an office with many portfolios, as Ted Miller's item in this Report describes. No analysis of how these will be reorganized has
yet been undertaken, and it may be that cost-savings can be realized in that
process. The goal of minimizing administrative costs, however, should not
dictate a reduction of essential academic support.
What process has been used to consult with faculty on
this? Chancellor Brehm initially discussed this
idea with the BFC Agenda Committee. Over the summer, she met jointly with
that group and the BFC Long-Range Planning Committee. Her plan was placed
on the BFC agenda for September 17, but discussion was deferred to October
1, and minutes of that discussion are posted on the BFC website, as noted
above.
Who has approved creating this position? The position was authorized by President Brand. Appointment
must be approved by the Chancellor, President, and Trustees.
What is the timetable for hiring a Provost? The search committee has been formed in accordance with BFC
procedures for existing high academic administrative positions, and its work
is already underway.
- Bob Eno, EALC
back to top
To understand the nature of the proposal to create a provost,
it is important to know what the Dean of Faculties currently does. The
Office of the Dean of the Faculties has several functions important to the
life of the faculty. Primary amongst these is the academic human resource
responsibility for the Bloomington campus, exercised by the Dean and
supported by the Office of Academic Personnel Policies and Procedures (the
faculty records office). Implementation of the faculties’ policies in the
areas of tenure, promotion, sabbatical leave and leave without pay are
centered here, as is implementation of the newly revised policy on
academic appointments.
Currently there is a very significant focus on the HRMS project (PeopleSoft), since
that is the environment within which these policy implementations will occur
over the foreseeable future. Once this system is operational, there will be
a continuing focus on development of additional functionality in which
faculty members have a very large stake. Faculty interests must be
adequately represented so as to ensure that the system will meet our needs
rather than dictate how we must do things. This is but one example of the
advocacy role of the Office of the Dean of the Faculties, which allows for
the views of the faculty to enter into what many might view as essentially
administrative deliberations.
The DoF also has a significant focus on resolving a
wide array of grievances typically brought by faculty, staff, or students
against academic administrators or members of the faculty. This has the
objective of resolving issues that could ultimately lead to a formal
grievance involving the Faculty Mediation Committee, the Faculty Board of
Review, or a legal suit, and has over many years contributed enormously to
the well being of the campus community.
Other components of the office are more logically
associated with the domain of the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs (a
title which Deans of Faculties simultaneously hold, and which, presumably, a
Provost would also hold). These include the University Division,
Instructional Support Services, Summer Sessions, and the Bloomington
Division of Continuing Studies. The reporting line for these functions
could easily be restructured in a number of different ways within a
Provost’s office. On the other hand, significant restructuring the Dean of
the Faculties’ functions could affect faculty life in very basic ways.
- Ted Miller, SPEA
back to top
I don't know how the responsibilities of a Provost of the Bloomington campus
will be defined. But if a future Provost will be the chief academic officer
of the campus, with significant authority for, among other matters, faculty
appointments and deciding and spending the budget, then such an officer has
already existed in Bloomington. He (it was always he) was called the Dean
of Faculties.
My
first-hand knowledge of this office precedes even my appointment to the
faculty in 1956. Like many colleagues of my generation, I was taken before
the Dean of Faculties as part of my interview on campus. Such interviews
were not simply courtesies. I remember a Dean of Faculties telling my
department that we could not appoint someone we were recruiting because he
did not think that our candidate would be an effective teacher of Indiana
undergraduates.
But rather
than consult my memories of the office, I will summarize what I have learned
about it from Thomas D. Clark's multi-volume history of the University
(1970-77) and from descriptions available through the home page of the
University Archives.
In 1940
President Herman B Wells created the office of the Dean of Faculties because
"the work of the President's office had become too great" and he needed
"someone to be in charge of academic affairs in his absences from campus"
(Clark III, 20). "Budget control," according to a synopsis of the
responsibilities of the office on the Archives web site, "was a primary
responsibility. In this capacity the Dean controlled all academic budgets
and played a key role in the development of annual budgets."
The first
Dean of Faculties was Herman T. Briscoe, a faculty member in chemistry and a
powerful presence in the campus culture of his time. In addition to his
budgetary responsibilities, he oversaw the creation of new schools
(including the Graduate School and the realization of Wilfred Bain's
ambitious plans for the School of Music), approved faculty appointments and
recommendations for tenure and promotion, acted on "academic problems and
proposals," and, curiously, served "as a member of all university
faculties."
After his retirement in 1959 Dean Briscoe was succeeded by
Ralph Collins (1959-63), Ray Heffner (1964-66), Joseph Sutton (1966-68), and
Joseph Hartley (1968-69). When the office of Chancellor of the Bloomington
campus was created in 1969, some of the Dean of Faculties' responsibilities
migrated to the new office. The duties of the new Chancellor listed on the
Archives web site include "Campus academic program development; Campus
budget development; Recruitment, promotion, tenure, retention, and
termination of faculty and staff members," and "Library development and
coordination." Byrum Carter was appointed as the first Chancellor of the
Bloomington campus.
- Don Gray, English
back to top
PROTECTING THE FACULTY LEADERSHIP ROLE
OF THE DEAN OF FACULTIES OFFICE
It has become fashionable to say that a
Dean of Faculties in a university is an outmoded concept, one with little
power, whose tasks could be better done by others. I beg to differ. To say
that a DoF has no power implies an immature view of organization theory or
management of a complex organization. He or she has some of the greatest and
most important powers in the institution and ones that must be protected for
the long term health of the university.
The most basic purpose, aim, or mission of
a university is the production of knowledge. The people who produce that
knowledge are faculty. The DoF is the keeper of that flame. Knowledge
production or creative activity in a university is different than in other
organizations in that it is free, open, and unfettered, versus "targeted," or
"focused," as might be the case in a drug company or an automobile plant.
Academic knowledge production also requires a different environment in order
to thrive. The person in a university who is specifically charged with
understanding, protecting, preserving, and defending this process is a Dean of
Faculties. This gives the DoF enormous power, enormous responsibilities, and
enormous challenges. To reduce or disperse this role, for example into some
sort of "faculty advocacy" role, risks substantially weakening the university.
In recent times it has also become
fashionable to attempt to tie everything to budgetary criteria. An older and
more enduring criterion is an equally (often stronger) force driving the
nature of the institution, at least of a research university: curiosity, a
drive to understand, knowledge creation. Yes, yes, I know that without
dollars... Well, actually I don't know that. And neither did Barbara
McClintock or Gregor Mendel or Carl Sandburg or Maya Angelou. And the
argument that "the times have changed" doesn't cut much ice either. No matter
how big "big science" gets, what could possibly come of it without a curious,
seeking, human brain behind it?
A far more important power is the
keeping, the protection and preservation of the very bedrock values of the
institution, i.e. the production of knowledge and the people who do this as
their basic job definition. That important power is lodged in the Dean of the
Faculties. To simply put those functions "somewhere" or tuck them into some
office because it is not clear what immediate purpose they serve is
shortsighted indeed and can weaken the institution in both the short and long
runs. Susan Walton Gray once distinguished between the immediately urgent and
the ultimately important. The preservation of the long term values, indeed
the raison d'être, of the institution is surely one of the most ultimately
important tasks of a university. The leadership role of the Dean of Faculties
must be protected if the institution is not to be substantially weakened.
Herman Wells spoke repeatedly of need to understand these important
distinctions and preserve them while also addressing increasingly complex
needs. Let us not weaken our university because we cannot keep straight our
basic mission versus an increasing number and variety of demands made on us.
-- Myrtle Scott, Education
back to top
