Join us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Watch us on YouTube

Academic Affairs Reorganization

  • Homect_img
  • Academic Affairs Reorganization

This year, the university will examine options for the reorganization of the Academic Affairs division. As a brief history, in July 2010 the School of Liberal Arts and the School of Science, Management & Technology were combined by President Brown to form the College of Arts & Science. This was done as a cost-saving measure and with the idea of potentially forming smaller schools underneath the College umbrella. While this premise has not been completely abandoned (that of creating schools within the College of Arts & Sciences), there may be more efficient and effective options that should be considered. The School of Education continued unaffected by this change and the School of Business was later formed in July 2011 following a recommendation by an interdisciplinary task force.

The current College of Arts and Sciences houses more than 75% of the university’s FTE faculty and provides major programming to more than 65% of FTE students. As a university, we now wish to take a fresh look at the whole of Academic Affairs to see if a new configuration will better allow us to meet our university mission and priorities. In addition, Dean Terry Smith has given advance notice of his intent to retire in the summer of 2013, thereby supporting our desire to consider reorganization at the college/school level prior to searching for his replacement or replacements.


To ensure openness and support shared governance, the process for making this important decision will involve consideration of multiple organizational models, open forums and an electronic mechanism to receive faculty input, and a task force of administrators and faculty to consider all input and develop a recommendation. The final decision for reorganization will rest with the University President and Provost & Vice President for Academic Affairs. Implementation of the new organizational structure, if so recommended, is planned for fall 2013. The specific process follows.

  • Organizational models for initial consideration have been developed by the Provost/VPAA and deans. These are presented as PDF files on this web page for faculty consideration.
  • Two public forums have been scheduled for October 2012 to allow for live discussion of the proposed models and other ideas regarding the reorganization. The faculty is encouraged to attend one or both of these forums so that their input may be considered by the task force when developing its recommendation. This web page also includes an electronic comment feature to allow faculty (and others) to provide input, comments, and concerns, regarding the presented models. Ideas for additional model structures may also be recommended and described.

Open Forum Dates

Monday, October 22, 5:00 – 6:30pm, Reeder Lecture Hall
Tuesday, October 30, 12:30 – 1:50pm, Wiley Arts & Sciences Center 107

  • The Academic Affairs Task Force will be comprised of administrators and faculty and will meet beginning in early November 2012 to consider the presented models and all input provided through the faculty forums and electronic comment mechanism. A proposed model will be developed by the Task Force and presented to the University community for additional input.
  • An additional forum will be scheduled to allow for further input regarding this draft model for Academic Affairs. Those unable to attend this forum may submit comments electronically through this web page.
  • The Task Force will meet again following this open forum to consider additional input presented and develop its final recommendation for the organizational structure.

It is important to note that in this phase of the process, the focus is on the reorganization of existing departments into new school/college configurations. Reorganizations or consolidations of departments may occur in the future, but such changes are not part of the present discussion. As a matter of respect to the faculty within individual departments, changes in department structures within schools will be discussed directly with the faculty of potentially affected departments to determine appropriate actions in consultation with those impacted.


The purpose of this process is to allow the campus community and faculty in particular, to consider organizational options so that all relevant facts are brought forward in making a decision. The goal is to move toward a logical and reasonable organizational structure of the Academic Affairs division to best achieve University mission, goals and priorities. Therefore, information to consider as one reviews model options includes the following.

University Mission

All decisions at the University should be considered in terms of their support of our Mission. Our current Mission Statement reads as follows:

Edinboro University, a community where intellectual engagement and opportunity challenge and empower individuals. We are inspired to serve and lead as active citizens of our global society through collaborative learning experiences emphasizing campus activities, community outreach, and practical applications. These factors combine to ignite the excitement of discovery and create a thirst for life-long learning and a pursuit of excellence.

Edinboro University is currently in the process of recasting our Mission Statement to better reflect our priorities and provide clear direction for the University. While this process is still ongoing, President Wollman’s Listening Initiatives and ongoing forums reveal the following elements of our new Mission. These should be considered as the models are reviewed.

  • Quality academic and extracurricular programming
  • Opportunity in terms of affordability and accessibility to students who may not otherwise attend college
  • A culture of caring and support
  • Individualized attention
  • Serving regional needs

University Strategic Plan

Although Edinboro’s new Strategic Plan is currently in the development process, the University had adopted certain Performance Funding measures in the previous academic year which will be elements of the new Plan. In considering model options for Academic Affairs, some of these measures (and therefore Strategic Plan elements) may be relevant since achieving success with these measures may be better supported by some organizational structures over others.

Our Performance Funding measures are as follows:

  1. Number of Degrees Conferred (all levels)
  2. Baccalaureate Degrees per FTE Undergraduate Enrollment
  3. Closing the Achievement Gap for Pell Recipients (comparing 6-year graduation rates for Pell recipients relative to non-Pell recipients)
  4. Closing the Achievement Gap for Underrepresented Minority (URM) Students (comparing 6-year graduation rates for URM students to majority students)
  5. Closing the Access Gap for Pell Recipients (comparing percentage of entering Pell recipients to the percentage of all high school graduates whose family incomes were below 200% of the poverty level)
  6. Closing the Access Gap for URM Students (comparing the percentage of entering students who were URMs to the percentage of high school graduates who were URMs in the state)
  7. Faculty Diversity – Percentage of Faculty who are Non-majority Persons
  8. Faculty Diversity – Percentage of Faculty who are Female
  9. Private Support (3-year average of annual private funds raised by the University and Foundations)
  10. Student Persistence from Fall of Freshman Year to Fall of Third Year
  11. Student Persistence from Fall of Freshman year to Fall of Fourth Year
  12. STEM and Health Profession Degree Recipients
  13. Student Diversity – Percentage of Students who are Pell Recipients
  14. Student Diversity – Percentage of Students who are Non-majority
  15. Facilities Investment (a composite measure based on University performance on the Sitelines LLC review)
  16. Student Participation in High Impact Practices
  17. Percentage of Freshmen who Participate in First Year Experience
  18. Percentage of Seniors who Participate in One or More High Impact Practices

Additional information on these performance indicators may be obtained from the Institutional Research Office.

Departmental Program Offerings

While the models presented below include department names, it is also important to understand what specific academic programs are offered within each department. A PDF file showing program enrollments by department is available here. This table shows undergraduate and graduate enrollments by student headcount (left table) and FTE (right table).

New Student Enrollments by Program

As a supplement to the above data, it is also instructive to examine new student enrollments by program and department for fall 2012. These data will provide some indication of growth or decline in different areas of the University. Since overall new student enrollments were down this fall, most departments will show declines, but the degree of decline will vary by program. This information is available in a PDF file here showing new student enrollments in late August 2012. Note that these data do not reflect final numbers for the University, but very closely approximate these values. It is important to note that two data points do not constitute a trend and that the fall enrollment numbers should be considered as a measure of relative demand for certain program offerings in the fall.


Model A    This model represents the current structure of Academic Affairs with three major schools: College of Arts & Sciences, School of Business, and School of Education. The current reorganization process is occurring in response to recognition that the College of Arts & Sciences (CAS) is very large and may not optimally allow for the university to meet its mission or adequately support its priorities. While this appears to be a “No-Change” model, the College of Arts & Sciences may be modified to include one or more schools within the College umbrella. These may include a School of Fine Arts (Art and Music) and a School of Health Professions (Nursing, Social Work, and Speech, Language and Hearing) as examples. Other School configurations may be possible and each would be led by a Vice Dean reporting to the Dean of the College of Arts & Sciences. Financially, if Schools were developed within the CAS, there would be additional cost associated with the Vice Deans and any additional support staff as necessary.


Model B    This model modifies the current organizational structure by preserving the current colleges/schools, but with a reduced College of Arts & Sciences (CAS). The School of Education is modified to become the School of Education & Professions and the departments of Nursing, Social Work, and Speech, Language & Hearing are added to the existing education departments. The School of Business is expanded to include the department of Communication and Media Studies to take advantage of synergies between business and at least some elements of communications programming. The CAS is reduced to 14 departments. This model would maintain a relatively heavy representation in CAS in terms of faculty FTE relative to the other schools. As with Model A, the development of schools within the CAS may be considered, e.g., School of Fine Arts and School of Science & Technology, each led by a Vice Dean reporting to the Dean of CAS. Financially, if Schools were developed within the CAS, there would be additional cost associated with the Vice Deans and any additional support staff as necessary.


Model C    This model emphasizes the development of a STEM-H (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Health Professions) structure. Current departments within the College of Arts & Sciences (CAS) would be distributed between the new College of Arts & Humanities and the new College of Science, Mathematics & Health. This latter College would provide separate emphasis to the STEM fields, consistent with priorities specified through our performance indicators. The School of Business would be augmented by the addition of the department of Communication & Media Studies. The School of Education would remain unchanged in terms of disciplines, although reorganization within the School is likely. Financially, this model would require the hiring of an additional dean and support staff; an additional dean suite location would also need to be developed.


Model D    This model divides departments originally located in the College of Arts & Sciences (CAS) into multiple areas. A new College of Arts & Humanities is created to house relevant programs; a new College of Science, Technology & Mathematics is created to house STEM-related departments; and professional program departments are moved into an expanded School of Education & Professions. The department of Communication & Media Studies may optionally be moved to the School of Business. This model supports the University’s performance funding-related priority of emphasizing STEM disciplines through the creation of a new college in this area. Financially, this model would require the hiring of a new dean and support staff; an additional dean suite location would also need to be developed.


Faculty should note that these models are presented to serve as a starting point and basis for discussion. Variations of these models should be considered, or entirely different models proposed.


Following the faculty Open Forums, the reorganization task force has met multiple times to review the initial models (presented above), additional models submitted by members of the university community, and input provided through the forums and comments posted to this page. The task force decided early in the process to recommend a model that reflected who we are and wish to be as an academic institution – a draft of that model is presented below as Model E. Additional Open Forums to discuss this model will occur at the following dates and times. Following these forums, the task force will meet to discuss a final recommendation.

Monday, December 3, 4:30-5:30pm, Reeder Lecture Hall
Tuesday, December 4, 12:30-1:30, 107 Wiley Arts & Sciences Center
Model E    This model is an expansion of initially proposed Model C and creates a new College of Fine and Performing Arts. The model attempts to reflect the primary areas of importance to the University and allows for deans to focus attention on more defined academic areas. Compared to Model C, the names of some of the colleges have been refined and the department of Social Work was relocated from the “sciences” college to the College of Humanities and Social Sciences. All units have been renamed “Colleges” to allow for the possibility of creating “Schools” within the colleges in the future.


The Final MODEL

Following the Open Forums in December, the Task Force met to discuss the input provided and to make a recommendation to the President and Provost. Two versions of Model E were presented by the Task Force for consideration. One version included a free-standing School of Visual and Performing Arts with its own dean, while the second version included this School within a broader College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences.

Input provided by the Task Force was considered by the President and Provost who agreed on the model shown in the link below; this structure was approved by the University’s Council of Trustees on January 7 for a fall 2013 implementation. 


Some features of the new structure follow:

  • The departments formerly comprising the College of Arts & Science are divided into two colleges: the College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (CAHSS) and the College of Science and Health Professions (CSHP).
  • The new CAHSS will include a School of Visual and Performing Arts, which will be comprised of the current Art and Music departments. The School will provide recognition of the importance of the arts at Edinboro University and create a separate identity for this area. The Dean of the CAHSS will lead and manage the College with a focus on program and enrollment development. The Dean will be assisted by an Associate/Assistant Dean who will provide some specialized focus on the Visual and Performing Arts school.
  • The new CSHP provides a focus on the University’s commitment to growth of programs in STEM (sciences), health and allied health professions. This structure will allow the University to administratively focus on and provide a visible commitment to these critical growth areas. The Dean will focus on program and enrollment development in the disciplines included in this school.
  • The School of Business will remain unchanged and focus efforts toward achievement of AACSB accreditation, program and enrollment growth. At a future time, the University will consider augmenting this School with the department of Communication & Media Studies, where synergistic relationships can be further developed.
  • The School of Education will remain unchanged and will continue to focus on NCATE accreditation reaffirmation and enrollment and program development. The School will develop and implement a plan to reorganize its faculty into a different departmental structure during the spring 2013 semester, as appropriate.
  • The School of Graduate Studies & Research will remain unchanged in this reorganization and will focus on the development of new programs to diversify graduate offerings.
  • With the creation of new colleges/schools, administrative support personnel will also be increased with a plan to house the dean offices for CAHSS, CSHP, and Business in the Wiley Arts & Sciences Center. A plan has also been developed to ensure a reasonable administrative support structure and transition. 

In general, the new structure provides focus on critical areas of University programming with a minimal increase in administrative personnel.


Members of the Academic Affairs Reorganization Task Force includes the following representatives of the administration
and faculty:

Alan Biel (Dean, Graduate Studies and Research)
Donald Dilmore (Associate Vice President, University Libraries)
Charles Edwards (Psychology Department)
Nomsa Geleta (Dean, School of Education)
Elisabeth Joyce (English and Theatre Arts Department)
Judy Kubeja (Senior Executive Associate to the Provost)
Danielle Lawson (Communication and Media Studies Department)
Richard Lloyd (Physics and Technology Department)
Scott Miller (Acting Dean, School of Business)
Penelope Orr (Art Department)
Roy Shinn (Speech, Language and Hearing Department)
Terry Smith (Dean, College of Arts and Sciences)
Marc Sylvester (Mathematics and Computer Science Department)
Kerri Watson (School of Business and College of Arts and Sciences)
Stacie Wolbert (Elementary, Middle and Secondary Education Department)

comments powered by Disqus

Comments may be removed at the discretion of the Provost.