“…Institutions of higher education within the United States may at first glance seem to be built structurally the same; however, ‘in fact no two have been found to be exactly alike’ (Powers & Schloss, 2017, p. 27). Despite this fact, the administrative roles within U.S. higher education remain consistent across all institutions though they may vary depending on institutional size, scope and history (Johnson Bowles, 2022).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…U.S. higher education institutions all have similar academic and non‐academic structures in terms of leadership and decision making related to governance (Powers & Schloss, 2017). The American system of higher education, at all types of institutions, is largely characterized by this participatory governance model in both the public and private sectors, through which operations are facilitated by a central administration in concert with input from faculty, staff, and students.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A myriad of committees, advisory groups, task forces, and panels form the threads that are woven into the tapestry of internal governance, from community colleges to liberal arts colleges to research universities to online institutions. (Powers & Schloss, 2017, p. 51)…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The campus senior administrative and administrative level roles hold the largest amount of power related to decision making and creating policies and procedures within their institutions (Powers & Schloss, 2017). Their power lies in the ability to make executive decisions that create change.…”
This study used critical discourse analysis to explore how higher education administrators in the United States talk about how they assess and support online programs. Specifically, we hoped to analyse administrators' perceptions of their responsibilities over online programs, faculty and students, to attain where they may need more training. Therefore, we explored the perspectives of 11 administrators at both the mid‐level administrative and campus senior administrative levels who oversee online programs in U.S. higher education. Our findings suggest that mid‐level administrators hold pivotal roles in communicating needs, administrators are not viewing their online faculty holistically, current online program assessment is insufficient and concern for student engagement is often neglected. Implications for research and practice include additional investigation of the online faculty experience and the development of administrative training specifically focused on the needs of online programming and online faculty support.
“…Institutions of higher education within the United States may at first glance seem to be built structurally the same; however, ‘in fact no two have been found to be exactly alike’ (Powers & Schloss, 2017, p. 27). Despite this fact, the administrative roles within U.S. higher education remain consistent across all institutions though they may vary depending on institutional size, scope and history (Johnson Bowles, 2022).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…U.S. higher education institutions all have similar academic and non‐academic structures in terms of leadership and decision making related to governance (Powers & Schloss, 2017). The American system of higher education, at all types of institutions, is largely characterized by this participatory governance model in both the public and private sectors, through which operations are facilitated by a central administration in concert with input from faculty, staff, and students.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A myriad of committees, advisory groups, task forces, and panels form the threads that are woven into the tapestry of internal governance, from community colleges to liberal arts colleges to research universities to online institutions. (Powers & Schloss, 2017, p. 51)…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The campus senior administrative and administrative level roles hold the largest amount of power related to decision making and creating policies and procedures within their institutions (Powers & Schloss, 2017). Their power lies in the ability to make executive decisions that create change.…”
This study used critical discourse analysis to explore how higher education administrators in the United States talk about how they assess and support online programs. Specifically, we hoped to analyse administrators' perceptions of their responsibilities over online programs, faculty and students, to attain where they may need more training. Therefore, we explored the perspectives of 11 administrators at both the mid‐level administrative and campus senior administrative levels who oversee online programs in U.S. higher education. Our findings suggest that mid‐level administrators hold pivotal roles in communicating needs, administrators are not viewing their online faculty holistically, current online program assessment is insufficient and concern for student engagement is often neglected. Implications for research and practice include additional investigation of the online faculty experience and the development of administrative training specifically focused on the needs of online programming and online faculty support.
“…As major decision makers, department chairs have influenced policies and practices of university, college, and their units (Schloss and Cragg, 2013), including shared governance or shared decision-making at the institution. Specifically, department chairs are key to academic human resource decision-making in faculty hiring; re-employment, promotion and tenure; other types of evaluation; and discipline and discharge (Chu and Veregge, 2002).…”
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to explore unionization’s impact on university department chairs for academic human resource decision-making in terms of faculty hiring; re-employment, promotion and tenure; other faculty evaluation decisions; and discipline and discharge.
Design/methodology/approach
The subjects were department chairs with more than one year of experience in institutions with faculty bargaining units in the USA. Half of the department chairs were members of the bargaining unit and half were not members of the bargaining unit. T-test and Chi square statistics were used to examine and compare 136 chair responses.
Findings
While there were significant differences between the groups when making all academic human resource decisions based on role affiliation, there was a weak identification as a bargaining unit member. There was no difference between groups when determining how the participants perceived the process rules, and the majority of the responses indicated membership in the union does not complicate making academic human resource decisions.
Originality/value
Based on these findings, this study provides the first empirical evidence against a long-held administrative belief department chairs should not be unionized as they will side with union colleagues in difficult academic human resource cases. The findings of this study also produce three key recommendations for practice and faculty development.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
