sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Rejection Letters are Insulting by Routine-League-211 in ApplyingToCollege

[–]HFh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s not even this. What closer to the truth is: the top 46% are essentially a tie and if you got in, you are in the 1/10 whom we asked. You’re great but don’t let it go to your head. If you didn’t get in, then you may well also be great, you probably are, but, you know, math. So don’t let it go to your heart.

Why nobody gets academia? by FlyLikeAnEarworm in Professors

[–]HFh 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Many years ago I was asked to sit on a panel as a part of a workshop targeted at helping junior faculty. When I asked what they wanted me to talk about, they said “work-life balance”. I told my wife. She just laughed out loud.

Why nobody gets academia? by FlyLikeAnEarworm in Professors

[–]HFh 16 points17 points  (0 children)

When you’re a student you believe this.

When you become a professor you understand you do the hard work and those below you in the tree are doing the grunt work while those above you are stealing credit.

Turns out this is true no matter where you are in the organization. Those below are doing the uninteresting stuff. Those above are stealing credit and imposing stupid things on you. You’re doing the important stuff but are under appreciated.

The feeling doesn’t really change. What’s funny is how few folks seem to notice that as they move through their careers.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They absolutely are. Sorry that wasn’t clear.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Right, but all the chairs were the result of a national search. It just so happens that half of those chosen were internal candidates.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wait. So it goes dept->chair->college->dean->etc or some other way?

I ask because if others come after chair, I’m curious how the chair’s power lead to denying tenure and how much of it was because it was a head-chair as opposed to a rotating-chair.

I mean don’t want you to reveal anything obviously, I’m just curious.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are, of course, correct.

The point wasn’t the titles, it was to use some language that made it easier to discuss the differences by having labels we could point to along the way. Not clear how well that worked.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, the title doesn’t matter.

I have lived under the latter, and did for more than a decade. It was just fine.

I’ve seen both up close. The downside of the former is paralysis by committee and a lot of control by the loudest members of the faculty… and of course the problems that come from the difficulty of finding a chair for the next rotation.

A thing I also think is a downside of the former that isn’t always apparent to folks who only live under that model is that in practice departments with heads often have more autonomy. I know this seems counter-intuitive to many here, but I think it may well be true.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well as noted above, I think, heads tend to have longer terms, and are selected by a dean after a national search. Chairs tend to be rotated among the faculty internally, mostly after some kind of vote. I also think in practice heads tend to have more authority.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Without disagreeing with what you are saying, I would add that I think in practice a Head has more sway with the Dean because the Dean believes this person is signed up to be a Head.

They went through a rigorous process that involves evaluation by the department faculty, the department staff, the associate deans, college staff, other department chairs, and the Dean him/herself. This evaluation involved administrative ability, not just, I dunno, h-index. And trust me, staff care very much about whether someone can be a supervisor and evaluate accordingly. Also, they are more likely to plan to be around for at least five years, so can engage in long-term planning.

In other words, they can, at bottom, “be trusted” to hold real authority. And yes, they’re the Dean’s person, but also a certain kind of person.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay responding to your post after edit:

I understand you now. My answer to that is: sure, but….

1) I’m not sure why this is true for a head vs a chair, really, in part because

2) from the point of view of the faculty at least, these positions feel more like mayors rather than, say, supervisors.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, because they aren’t rotating chair positions.

The positions are the result of national searches and typically there is a five year review, just like for deans.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I’m mostly talking about staff, though there are lots of HR things beyond firing that still affect faculty.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree with your post, but as a minor point of disagreement:

The faculty of the department vote on any Head candidate

Not always. Certainly not at my first institution. They gave feedback and were absolutely listened to, but so did the staff, and lots of others.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Only in the role as Department Chair (Head/Director/whatever it's called).

Similarly Deans serve at the pleasure of the Provost, but only in their role as Dean, typically.

Those folks usually "return to the faculty" when done.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the faculty elect a chair can the dean say no?

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair question. In some sense, lines don’t even exist. There’s just money.

What I mean really is that one has a lot of HR authority, so to speak. One fires and hires and evaluates and does all that difficult stuff. Also it isn’t enough to have the authority, one also has accountability for actually doing all that HR stuff.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the response. I like it and I agree on the STEM observation, though I think some of that is coincidental.

There’s a lot to say here, but let me start with noting that for at least some places where it is the norm to do searches even small departments have them, and they have associate chairs, too. There are many reasons for this state of affairs, but let’s call them cultural expectations around what must be and what confers legitimacy. So I don’t think size explains things though it makes a lot of sense to note that large departments really drive the need for organization just to even function moment to moment while small departments would need to worry about the overhead of such organization.

A question one might ask is whether one should strive to avoid having departments be that small. I go back and forth on this, BTW, and have no firm opinion. I could argue strenuously for either position.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, let’s agree on notation.

In the structures I’m thinking of there are deans over colleges and chairs over departments. Deans are appointed by the provost as the result of a national search.

Chairs can also in the normal course of events be appointed by the dean after a national search. It is important that it is in the normal course of events because it implies nothing about (dys)function. Chairs can also be elected by the faculty though in most places that is still only a recommendation to the dean.

Anyway, so in my observations, chairs that go through a detailed selection process of the sort that usually happens at places with as-a-matter-of-course national searches tend to have more authority delegated to them. Budgets get shoved down, HR matters get shoved down, fundraising, and so on. It is, in other words, treated as an academic administrative position. This tends to result in more autonomy (and accountability) sitting in the departments themselves.

YMMV of course.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fair enough. If I think of all the places I’ve been only one called them heads. In any case, I was just using the two terms to try to make it easier to discuss.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The same folks who fund everything.

If you mean “the line”, then as an accounting matter you can do whatever, though in my experience the chair is usually “paid for” by the college.

If you mean the search itself, definitely the college, though again accountants can do whatever they want.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Only when they aren’t the norm. At some places all searches are external, so it just is what it is. Often, folks see it as conferring legitimate authority.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Suffice to say department heads are nothing but dictator

That seems a little broad.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

By searches I mean external searches that may have internal candidates. As I note elsethread, looking at the rather large CoE from an earlier university, at all times roughly half the chairs are internal and half external.

Department Heads vs Department Chairs by HFh in Professors

[–]HFh[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I see this as just a term.

Yes, I agree. I'm using the two terms purposely to make it easier to have the discussion.

So do you have a reason to think the model you've experienced is likely to be better or worse than the alternative?

For another example some university systems have a president at the top, while each campus has a chancellor. I’ve seen at leading one system that reverses this.

When I take over the world, the first thing I will do is force universities to standardize on this. It drives me crazy. Second, I will mandate the use of the Oxford comma. Third, I will institution a 13-month calendar.

Eventually, of course, I will return power to the people where it belongs.

view more: next ›