Friday, March 30, 2007
US News
I write regarding the US News & World Report magazine. In its latest survey of law schools, Wayne State University Law School is listed in the “fourth tier,” which is lower than it has always been regarded by academics, lawyers, judges, and the general public. This development demands action: we are a far better law school than this survey suggests and we can prove it. As an institution, Wayne State University Law School is committed to its students and alumni, along with the community it has long served with distinction. As Dean, I am equally dedicated to the work that must be done. I ask that all of our supporters join us in this effort.
Although many educators as well as observers have been highly critical of US News for its methodology and influence, I recognize its importance in the marketplace. Our students no less than our alumni – indeed, everyone associated with our Law School– expect us to do our best to improve the institution in a manner that will be reflected by this indicator. As Dean since 2004, I have sought to do just that, working with the faculty to develop a strategic plan that has emphasized changes that are intrinsically worthwhile while also likely to have a positive effect on our US News ranking. These changes include: an increase in scholarships to make us more competitive for the most highly-credentialed students and those with financial need; hiring new professors and instructors; and starting the design phase for construction of the Damon J. Keith Classroom Building and Center for Civil Rights.
In every respect with one exception, we have been highly successful. According to objective data on reputation, LSAT, UGPA, and so on, we are better in almost all other institutions in the “fourth tier” and better than most other institutions in the “third tier.” We are comparable to schools within the top 100; moreover, we have improved meaningfully on factors such as student-faculty ratio.
It is virtually certain that the recent outcome is the result of our employment statistics and nothing else. Under the US News formula, the percentage of graduates employed is a factor in determining ranking and the percentage of graduates who fail to respond to the survey about employment also is a factor. Thus, it is crucial both to ensure a high proportion of graduates are employed and a high proportion of graduates respond to the survey. (It is important to note all the issues relevant here, including the survey about employment, arose prior to the exemplary service of our current Assistant Dean for Career Services.)
Before release of the US News survey, I had realized there are challenges facing our graduates in the regional marketplace. We had already committed additional financial resources to the Career Services Office, which is in the process of hiring another full-time counselor. I am personally involved in student placement, including outreach within the state to potential employers and expanding our geographic domain. I also have begun working with the Assistant Dean for Career Services to ensure we bring about significant improvements in our reporting of employment statistics. In this regard, the active cooperation of our most recent graduates and current students is crucial and in their own self-interest. Every single person counts. I believe that our employment rates have improved significantly and that the reporting in the past has been adversely affected by practices that are being corrected through aggressive administrative action. The Career Services Office has developed an action plan. I expect its implementation to continue our success.
On Monday, April 2 (venue to be determined), we will hold a Town Hall to discuss these matters. Please join us in this conversation and all that lies ahead. Together, we can and will do better.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Commencement Speaker
I am very pleased to announce that our Law School’s Commencement Speaker for this year is the Honorable Arthur J. Tarnow of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. A native of Detroit and a graduate of Wayne State University and Wayne State University Law School, with Honors, Judge Tarnow was appointed to the bench in 1997 by President William Jefferson Clinton. Prior to taking the bench, he was a noted criminal defense attorney in Detroit. Commencement will occur on May 14, 2007, at the Detroit Opera House.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Public Commendations
I write to offer public commendations for two members of our community: Professor Michael McIntyre and University Distinguished Professor Robert Sedler. On April 12, Wayne State University will honor both of them for 30 years of service. This is a wonderful accomplishment in its own right for each of them. They have had and continue to have wonderful careers as scholars and teachers, as well as through their many contributions to our institution and society at large. Yet their commitment to our Law School also shows the sense of stakeholding we all should aspire to. Their work continues to bring renown to us all. As Dean, I know I have benefited from the advice of Professor McIntyre and Professor Sedler, on many issues that have arisen.
When the NCA accreditation team visited recently, its members remarked on the enormous numbers of individuals who are associated with Wayne State University who display a genuine commitment to its mission -- these are people who have given much of their lives to help others through the educational process. The NCA team, all of whose members are themselves experienced academics, were impressed by the loyalty of so many to our campus. I know that deans come and go, students graduate, and even alumni develop other professional commitments. Our faculty, however, are here for the duration. Those who have been here for such long periods of time represent the best we have to offer. None exemplify the qualities of which we boast better than Professors McIntyre and Sedler.
Please join me in thanking Professor McIntyre and Professor Sedler for everything that they do.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Campus Safety
From time to time, it is important that I remind everyone of campus safety. No matter how much we do to ensure campus safety, we are a public institution located in a major urban area. As elsewhere, there is always a risk of crime. In the past few weeks, there have been isolated incidents within the Law School that it is important for us to acknowledge: a laptop computer was stolen from a third floor faculty office and a peeping tom was discovered in the first floor women's restroom.
As a community, I ask that we work together to ensure campus safety. If you become aware of any individual engaged in inappropriate behavior or any activity that is suspicious, please contact Public Safety at 313-577-2222 and please also feel free to contact the Dean's Suite at 313-577-3933.
Thank you.
Monday, March 12, 2007
Pragmatism
As Dean, I must be a pragmatist. There are many programs I’d like us as an institution to develop and there are various changes I’d support. To be an effective leader, I must respect principles of shared governance (discussed in the below post) and work within established processes. It may be helpful to our stakeholders, then, to explain what must be done to implement ideas.
Consider a potential clinical course. Students and other stakeholders often come to me to propose we start a skills program in this area or that specialty. For purposes of our discussion, assume that I am fully supportive – because of the importance of clinical training. My enthusiasm is necessary, but not sufficient. Typically, what is equally important is a faculty member who will take up the cause. S/he would need to be both dedicated to the substance of the concept and sensitive to the practical requirements to implement it.
To implement this hypothetical clinical course, we would need to have the class itself, along with the faculty members, approved. This requires faculty participation. The Academic Affairs and Curriculum Committee would consider the potential class; the Appointments Committee the associated faculty members. Each Committee would deliberate; they would then refer the matter to the full faculty at one of our regular meetings, which occur roughly on a every month. The full faculty would need to approve the class by a majority and the faculty members by a 2/3 supermajority. Additional consultation with the Budget Advisory Committee as to funding priorities is required, and with the Salary Committee as to compensation; these are committees established under the collective bargaining agreement, and they consist of faculty members who belong to the union.
We may need additional approvals from the Provost, who is the chief academic officer of Wayne State University. Many decisions are delegated to deans, but even in those cases they may still need to be vetted with the central administration. In some instances, we also may need the agreement of the union, the AAUP-AFT, which represents the faculty and is an integral aspect of the university operations. For example, the collective bargaining agreement limits the total number of clinic faculty that may be hired by the Law School, and we currently have all the clinicians we are allowed.
Of course, all of this decision-making is meaningful only if funding is available. Our budget, especially with declining levels of state support, generally does not permit us to begin new programs without external funding (or a tuition increase). It is best to have the funding source identified prior to undertaking the other work associated with implementing a new program, to avoid disappointment; the exception are those efforts that command such strong support that they warrant inclusion in our ongoing capital campaign. Assuming everyone is amenable, a new clinical program would likely cost at least $150,000 per year, with a commitment of at least 3 years to be worthwhile. That modest budget would allow us to hire a full-time faculty member (covering salary and fringe benefits) and allocate part of a secretary; it does not account for other overhead.
Accordingly, a successful effort is likely to take two full academic years, or, if expedited, one full academic year. Nonetheless, we have been able to bring about numerous advances, and I look forward to many more.
Shared Governance
I write regarding shared governance. The concept is as important in academe as it is unknown in other contexts. Perhaps the best parallel to shared governance is the separation of powers as envisioned by the United States Constitution and explained in the Federalist Papers. In essence, shared governance is notion that the faculty and the administration work together, with policy decisions made either through a direct democracy in which professors vote (and, in general, administrators do not) or at least extensive consultation with professors (in regular faculty meetings or in various committees). At every level, the administrators who are successful are those who respect shared governance, learning how to lead by example and through a deliberative process that is inclusive. Administrators risk not only their authority but also their careers if they fail to engage with the faculty. Thus, the dean works for the faculty rather than vice versa.
Concrete examples of the paramount role of the faculty include the recent decision to adopt a new admissions policy. The primary author of the policy was the long-time chair of the Admissions Committee, Professor Jonathan Weinberg, not a member of the administration. The pair of unanimous votes that were cast to adopt the admissions policy were taken of professors. As Dean, I cast only a tie-breaking vote on an amendment -- and that was the first and likely the last vote I will cast at a faculty meeting. (The Associate Dean also does not receive a ballot). Another example is faculty hiring. All of the decisions about whom to interview or extend an offer are made by either the Appointments Committee or different groups of faculty (depending on the nature of the appointment).
As an institution, we have undertaken numerous important efforts over the past two and a half years and have additional efforts underway. Faculty participation is the primary means of advancing these efforts. We have changed, for instance, the status of clinical faculty and LRW faculty, as well as the evaluation standards for the former. At this time, we are engaged in the initial design process for the new Keith Building and Center for Civil Rights, led by the Building Committee. We also are starting strategic planning, to be led by a Steering Committee; review of the part-time program and the LLM program are already started, also led by Committees dedicated to those tasks.
In all of our activities, I also have sought to increase student participation. Students have long been able to interview faculty candidates, but the process has been made more formal. The Student Board of Governors has an opportunity to designate representatives to meet directly with the faculty to offer student opinions about each applicant. Students sit on virtually every committee, taking part in deliberations on policy matters (though, for confidentiality reasons, not on matters such as individual admissions decisions).
Whatever we are able to do, it is only by working together.
