The most interesting results of our recent survey on the process and prospect of breaking CAS into smaller schools came from the narrative comments. We have scheduled a meeting with President Schill to share both the concerns and hopes of our members regarding this potential, major re-organization of the university.
We report on the major themes that arose in the narrative comments and the aggregated unit data of the responders.
Concerns
| Less support for/value of Humanities and undervalued departments | 35 |
| Less collaboration/integration | 28 |
| More centralized admin/resources, less faculty voice | 27 |
| Moves away from traditional university/Liberal Arts structure and mission | 16 |
| Potential negative impact on students | 13 |
| The process is opaque/there is too little information | 12 |
| Favoring the Sciences over the Humanities | 11 |
| Is this change for the sake of change/why? | 9 |
| This kind of thing went poorly in CoD/other institutions | 4 |
| Restructuring = job losses | 3 |
| Overall weakening of CAS | 2 |
Hopes
| None/I hope it doesn’t happen | 21 |
| Better resource allocation for and across Divisions | 13 |
| Increased representation for the Divisions | 9 |
| Humanities don’t suffer/potentially come out stronger | 9 |
| This proves to be a thoughtful and fair process that centers faculty voice | 7 |
| Retain a focus on value of interdisciplinarity/Liberal Arts education | 7 |
| More flexibility and autonomy for Divisions/less bureaucracy | 6 |
| It’s actually good for faculty and students, not just what admin wants | 5 |
| Maybe an alternative configuration than that proposed is better? | 5 |
Demographics
