 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
 |
|
||||||
|
||||||||
 |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
 |
|
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
Education college structure to be considered by University Council |
| By Larry B. Dendy |
|
| A plan that reorganizes
the administrative structure of the College of Education will be on
the University Council’s agenda when the council meets Oct. 21
at 3:30 p.m. in room 101 of the Student Learning Center. The result of two years of work by the college’s faculty and administration, the plan reduces the number of departments in the college from 19 to 10, and eliminates half of the 30 administrative positions. It does not affect the curriculum or classes taught in the college, and no faculty or staff will be unemployed as a result of the reorganization. The plan calls for dissolving four schools in the college—the schools of teacher education, professional studies, leadership and lifelong learning, and health and human performance—and dissolving departments in those schools. Fewer new departments will be created by combining courses, programs and majors from the dissolved departments. The plan includes transferring the department of health promotion and behavior to the new College of Public Health, which the council approved in September. The education college will still have three associate deans under the new structure, but their responsibilities will be realigned to include faculty, administration and finance; research, technology and external affairs; and students, curriculum and accreditation. The plan is one of nine possible models for reorganization that were developed by a committee of faculty, staff and students in the college with input from faculty. Dean Louis Castenell selected, and slightly modified, this model, and it was endorsed by an external review team that included deans of three other education colleges. In a faculty vote, 73 percent of faculty approved the plan. In requesting council approval for the plan, Castenell said the reorganization meets several goals, including addressing interdisciplinary issues facing education colleges, attracting funding for interdisciplinary teams, responding more efficiently to the impact of No Child Left Behind legislation on Georgia schools, and creating a structure that will attract outstanding faculty. The council’s Executive Committee voted to put the proposal on the council agenda after a lengthy discussion that included objections from some committee members. None challenged the plan’s academic soundness, but several questioned whether the process by which the plan was developed included sufficient faculty involvement and gave fair attention to concerns of faculty who disagreed with the proposal. Some committee members also noted that the reorganization is already in place. Anyone can attend University Council meetings but only elected members can speak and vote. |
|