DeanWuBlog

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.