5

explained that the elimination of the dean structure occurred in October 2014 when senate worked with President Burse as the university considered declaring financial exigency. She went on to point out that KSU’s current FTE is only about 1,250. In 2014, senate had compared KSU to aspirational colleges and found they did not have elaborate dean structures. Time was up but conversation continued. A senator pointed out that at present chairs do not have enough authority; to bring back deans would exacerbate the problem. Chair Rye responded that the intent in 2014 was indeed to strengthen the role of the chair. Dr. Jackson explained that she is a proponent of bringing back deans since it would improve efficiency in her office. She recognized concerns about the financial impact of deans, but at present the Provost / VPAA has 37 direct reports, which is too many to be efficient. She noted that the aspirational universities cited by Chair Rye might have been similar in size, but not necessarily in culture. A senator suggested the creation of a chairs’ council by which a subset of chairs could fulfil the roles that would be played by deans. Dr. Jackson responded that there are twelve chairs presently and the areas they cover are all very different; deans would help with reporting on similarly grouped disciplines. Chair Andries explained that he supported the return of the dean structure, although with the caveat that chairs and deans must have the autonomy and authority to do what they need to do to get their jobs done. Deans could be advocates for divisions in a way not possible now. A guest pointed out that some of the aspirational universities do not have the wide range of programs that KSU offers, such as land grant or nursing, despite a similarity of size. President Sipes asked Dr. Jackson that aside from cutting down the direct reports of 12 chairs to 3 or 4 deans, would other direct reports be eliminated? Dr. Jackson said they would not. Dr. Jackson went on to say that part of the resistance to deans returning seems rooted in focusing too much on people or the way these offices were run in the past rather than thinking about structure and organizational issues. Chair Rye pointed out that not all chairs do all reporting currently; in some situations that work is completed by area coordinators. If chairs don’t do this work, what would deans do? Dr. Jackson reiterated that faculty need to divorce the idea of the position from the way they were conducted in the past. She added that deans would carry a reduced teaching load. A quorum was lost at 5:05pm. Respectfully submitted, Joe Moffett, Faculty Senate Secretary

Joe Moffett, Faculty Senate Secretary

[Approved, as distributed, by the Senate Executive Committee at its 5/10/17 meeting]