Skip to main content
Skip to main content

2010 State Of The College Address

September 15, 2010 College of Arts and Humanities

Thumbnail

The dean's report on the state of the college at the Annual Faculty & Staff Convocation held Sept.14, 2010.

The dean's report on the state of the college at the Annual Faculty & Staff Convocation held Sept.14, 2010.


The College of Arts and Humanities
Office of Communications
September 14, 2010


REMARKS BY DEAN HARRIS TO ARHU FACULTY AND STAFF
Gildenhorn Recital Hall, Clarice Smith Performing Arts Center


State of the college Address

Faculty Searches| Research, Grants, Awards, Development| Academic Programs| Graduate Programs| Reallocation| General Education| BE WORLDWISE| the Future| Conclusion

THE DEAN: My report on the state of the College of Arts and Humanities for 2010 shares a good deal of common ground with those of the recent past as it combines reasonably equal measures of pride in accomplishments, especially the appointment and promotion of excellent faculty colleagues, success in planning for changes that face us as well as in securing resources to ensure that they occur, and concern for the future, largely the financial future.

It is impossible to note all of the impressive accomplishments that occurred this past year or that will occur in the coming year, but I must say here that the Liz Lerman dance performance over the past weekend, The Matter of Origins, in which dance collaborated with physics was spectacular. My congratulations to all involved and kudos to Susie Farr who has made the Clarice Smith Performing Arts Center a major contributor to the creation of new works of art. Last spring we enjoyed the performance of Shadow Boxer, an opera based on the life of Joe Louis.

This year we welcome a new Dean’s Lecture Series. Among other appearances, the college and campus will be invited to hear Tony Kushner in Conversation, featuring a Pulitzer, Emmy, Obie and Tony award winning playwright and screen writer. And in The Future of Disciplinarily: the Case of Literature Louis Menand, professor of English at Harvard University, Pulitzer Prize winner and New Yorker writer will discuss a much debated issue facing many of us. In the same context Professor Martha Nell Smith from our own English department will deliver a Distinguished Scholar-Teacher lecture entitled The Humanities are NOT a Luxury: A Manifesto for the Twenty-First Century on September 30, 2010. And Chris Vadala, who we just heard on sax, is also a Distinguished Scholar Teacher- he will give his lecture and performance on December 19, 2010.

As you have seen in my welcome to new colleagues, the departments have worked very hard at the time-consuming business of searching for colleagues who best ‘fit’ our strengths. I want to draw special attention to three aspects of that process that I observed in the course of the past year. All departments who were able to search set as their goal finding the best and, again as you have seen, did so. That may appear easy in this economic climate, but it is not. Indeed, the best proof may be three departments that closed their search because they did not find, or succeed in appointing, the best. The moral here is quite clear – it is often no simple task to induce the best to move. But I was pleased that these departments had the courage to avoid the temptation of appointing someone who was merely ‘good’ and all three departments are repeating those searches this year. If we always appoint the best, we will soon be the best.

Finally, I was thrilled with the results of the two competitive ‘cluster’ searches that we ran in the areas of the Digital Humanities, Media and Culture, and in Latin American Studies. In the digital area the searches were competitive and four departments worked through a common committee to secure appointments for two lines; in Latin American two departments competed for one line. In the final analysis we appointed three in the digital field (in Art, American Studies and Women’s Studies), and one in Latin American (in Art History). Especially in the digital field – because three were appointed at one fell swoop – the addition of talent to an already strong field has already been extraordinary. These ‘cluster’ searches stimulated interest in the two fields out of proportion to the results we might have expected from three separate searches. We have learned from it and will repeat the process in modified form in the field of Film Studies this coming year.

In prior years I have spent time lauding your efforts in many departments and centers at pursuing sponsored research, prestigious grants and awards, and in assisting with fundraising with our excellent college development office. I will not lose time by going into detail on specific numbers. But we have increased the total number of research dollars that flow through the college substantially and that in a difficult time period – my thanks to all and especially to Catherine Ingold in NFLC, Norbert Hornstein in Linguistics, Carol Mossman in the School of Languages, Literatures and Cultures, and to Neil Fraistat in MITH – the Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities.

Much the same is true in the development world – and that in a VERY difficult economic world. As you may know we actually reached and exceeded our original goal in the Great Expectations capital campaign (of $40 million), have reset the goal to $50 Million, and will very likely reach that goal this year. My thanks to Laura Brown and her staff.

The college is always in the process of considering academic programs and this past year was no different. I am pleased to report that the new program in the Honors College, Digital Cultures and Creativity, is up and running under the very able leadership of Professor Matt Kirschenbaum from English and MITH together with the vital assistance of Tanya Clement. Meanwhile a revamped Honors Humanities is continuing its exciting progress under the leadership of Professor Valerie Orlando of French who is being aided in her work by the addition of Dr. Dana Carluccio (Ph.D. from Illinois).   And I want to thank Professor Peter Mallios who so brilliantly led this program for three years.

It is, I think, important to highlight the important role that faculty play in both our living-learning programs and in center activity – both tenure track faculty as well as non-tenure track.

As many of you know, the past year (or two) has seen nearly all of the departments in the college invest a great deal of time in examining graduate programs with a weather eye on the economy, the job market, and on the numbers of our faculty. The precipitous decline in available academic openings nationally is one reason why the ACLS and Mellon pioneered a new program last year to place humanities doctoral graduates lacking permanent positions in two-year postdocs at a limited number of universities. They are repeating the exercise this year with an expansion in the amount of money devoted to it. As we applaud their efforts, we need to realize that it is not solving the basic problem and is addressing a very small percentage of those seeking employment.

This college’s approach to the problem of graduate education is complex. Individual departments are examining their graduate programs and not a few are engaged in basic curricular reforms. All are questioning the issue of size, a problem posed for us by declining placements as well as by declining state financial support. I cannot here go into detail on all that has been done, but I can tell you how this discussion informed the college approach to budgeting and planning.

The world of planning is driven increasingly by resources. The campus strategic plan, easily accessible online to anyone who wishes to read it, contains a provision for reallocation of 2% of state-provided base budget annually. One percent goes to the dean, one to the provost. The provost, informed by APAC (Academic Planning and Advisory Committee) and a blue-ribbon committee of faculty, distributes these resources with the goals of the strategic plan in mind. Last year we gave up 1% and received back about 1.1% -- this year we gave up 1% and received about 1.47%, or to put it in simple dollar terms: we gave the Provost $468,000 and he gave us $692,000. In addition, he has provided $167,000 in one-time funds. Of course, we must use the 1% (again, $468,000) delivered to me as dean for our proposed strategic actions. Please recall, as you ‘feel good’ about this largesse, that some other colleges must have received less than 1% back – this is a zero-sum exercise. 

I believe that ARHU was so successful because much of our proposal was for support of our graduate programs. We asked for funds to reduce the teaching load for our teaching assistants in several programs, to raise stipends for teaching assistants in several programs, to support professional development of graduate students, and to begin altering, in a small way, the delivery of instruction for undergraduates (away from exclusive dependence on teaching assistants). We are in the process of implementing this proposal by distributing the $692,000 received to units in the college for support of graduate programs.

Additionally, funds from the 1% delivered to me will be used this coming year for a variety of uses, among them searches (but only about seven new searches); for appointing a new advisor in the college student affairs office, something desperately needed and that will enable more attention to Study Abroad and our burgeoning international programs. 

Let me emphasize, lest it be overlooked, that the funds devoted to assisting graduate studies are one-third (roughly) of the total we agreed was probably necessary. Had we asked for all of it in one year we would not have had a chance of receiving it – so we asked for one-third and said we would be back this year and the following year as well. The grant to us, as you can understand, does not guarantee future years – we will need to justify it and the reallocation plan will need to continue in operation.

Now before you all can relax, let me tell you where we stand on another major part of the strategic plan – implementation of General Education reform. For many years all undergraduate students were required to fulfill a series of requirements outside of their major. They still are, but the requirements themselves are changing and a number of new categories are being introduced.

We are, I think, becoming familiar with the ‘I’ series courses that emerged a year ago, courses designed to present non-majors with exciting insights into ways of thinking about established disciplines. The campus also agreed to require, in some form, courses in Oral Communication, Analytic Reasoning, Diversity, and Scholarship in Practice. Several of these are offered in whole or in part by ARHU and we are consequently very concerned with how they emerge from the campus implementation process.

This issue is of moment because a set of deadlines for submission either of a department (or college’s) intent to participate or of proposals for courses that might be used to satisfy a requirement will occur this fall in October and November. A few departments have already been considering the issue, most have not. All units will examine their undergraduate offerings within the context of these campus changes. The primary consideration must be the quality of the offerings and that will, of necessity, take some time to do properly. Because this exercise has serious resource implications, we need to move quickly but prudently. All decisions, whether to declare your interest in a course or to submit a proposal must come to the college for consideration by the PCC (Programs, Courses and Curricula) committee. I want to thank in advance all who will play a role in this important work.

For anyone wishing to get a ‘sense’ of what the Arts and Humanities is all about, particularly at the undergraduate level, please read the new publication BE WORLDWISE (copies are available today). My favorite quotation (anonymous) is: “ If you’re not living on the edge, you’re probably taking up too much space.”

A word about the future is in order even if that is itself problematic. There is no way to say at this point in time whether there will be another cut in this year’s budget (2011) or in that for 2012. Higher education in Maryland is no different than our counterparts elsewhere – we hope for the best, but expect little. In terms of immediate dollars and cents, it is clear that there is no merit pay and furloughs continue (and please note that the calculation this year differs from that we used last year). As we continue to appoint new faculty, we build into our salary structure a growing imbalance creating what is commonly called ‘salary compression’-- we must address this issue this year.

Of course diminished resources affect much of what we do, as witness the changes in graduate programs where we combine smaller numbers with higher stipends and, where possible, a reduced teaching load. We are spending more and more time on the question of the related and vexing questions of cost versus quality. Quality, in my opinion, is the most important value. And quality is also a goal as we develop online courses, a delivery mode that is highly attractive to students, to teaching assistants, and even to some faculty. The biggest ‘earners’ in summer programs were courses offered online. Later this fall the college will open a process for developing high-quality online courses to be used both in summer and winter terms as well as in the academic year.

Change surrounds us on campus. We have a new president, Wallace Loh, formerly the provost at Iowa, who was trained in Psychology, earned a degree in Law and was dean at the UW Law School for nine years. I have met him and am excited at the prospects for UM under his leadership. In addition, the campus must replace two vice presidents in the important areas of research and information technology. The campus will also renew a search for a Director of International Programs, an area that is especially important to the strategic plan we are implementing. We have a new Associate Provost for Faculty Affairs, our own Juan Uriaguereka from Linguistics. In a few days we will discuss in the Senate the formation of a new college, one combining the life sciences and computer, mathematics and physical sciences. Speaking from the experience we faced in forming a new School last spring – of Theatre, Dance, and Performance Studies (TDPS) – this is not easy. 

If this were not enough, change will also occur within the College of Arts and Humanities. Yesterday I gave Provost Farvardin a letter stating my decision to resign my office as dean effective June 30th, 2011. At that point I will have served fourteen and a half years and that is enough. I have enjoyed my job as dean in many ways, though now is not the time to enumerate them. From beginning to end I have enjoyed the support of faculty, staff and students as well as that of three excellent provosts. I am announcing my decision now in order to provide as much time as possible for the search for my successor. Provost Farvardin will, of course, organize that search and will notify you of the process. I urge you to act just as you do when you search for faculty--select the best possible candidate!