Updated April 15, 2014
For more information, please see: An Update on Ethnic Studies Programs in Letters & Science.
Frequently Asked Questions:
2. Who in the college makes decisions about academic department and program restructuring?
3. When could a decision to restructure the Ethnic Studies units be made?
4. What is the college’s role and position in the potential Ethnic Studies restructuring?
5. Why is Ethnic Studies restructuring being discussed now?
6. Is restructuring a result of budget cuts?
7. Would restructuring reduce the resources available or lead to staff layoffs?
8. Has restructuring of Ethnic Studies programs been discussed before?
9. Have other departments or programs in L&S increased collaboration through restructuring?
10. Will there be any public meetings where I can give input?
11. Whom can I contact for more information?
What is happening with the Ethnic Studies units — the Department of Afro-American Studies (AAS), the American Indian Studies Program (AIS), the Asian American Studies Program (AAS) and the Chican@ and Latin@ Studies Program (CLS) — in the College of Letters & Science?
The Ethnic Studies chairs/directors started preliminary discussions exploring the potential advantages and disadvantages of increased collaboration among their units. There are many options, including, but not limited to: maintaining the current structure, pooling selected resources, or bringing some or all of the programs together into a shared academic department devoted to the study of race, ethnicity, and indigeneity in the United States. The college has not received a formal request from any Ethnic Studies unit* to restructure into a consolidated program or department.
Who in the college makes decisions about academic department and program restructuring?
The decision to restructure any unit in the College of Letters & Science rests with the faculty tenured in or associated with the academic departments or programs involved. The college follows the shared governance process at UW-Madison that is codified in the University Faculty Policies and Procedures 5.01 and the L&S Policy on Departmental Restructuring.
Any restructuring of departments and programs moves through a two-stage process that cannot be initiated by any group other than the faculty who will be affected by it. A restructuring must be approved by the L&S Academic Planning Council (APC), by the University APC and, ultimately, by the Faculty Senate.
In the case of Ethnic Studies, unit chairs/directors would elect to lead the restructuring discussions with full participation of the affected faculty. Staff, students and other members of the community are often also invited to share their ideas and concerns. The college is offering support and consultation to the units, but, ultimately, the decision to restructure rests with the Ethnic Studies units.
When could a decision to restructure the Ethnic Studies units be made?
If a number of Ethnic Studies units decide that increased collaboration and restructuring is worth formal exploration, the units would elect to submit a formal proposal as part of the L&S Policy on Departmental Restructuring.
The first step would be for the units to submit a request to restructure and meet with the L&S Academic Planning Council (APC). If permission is granted, the units would then prepare a complete proposal, describing a structure, governance rules, and timeline for making these changes.
The proposal must include a description of the process, and efforts to solicit the views of stakeholders (students, alumni). This proposal would be reviewed by the L&S APC, the University APC, the University Committee, and the Faculty Senate.
This shared governance process ensures that the needs of students, staff and faculty affected by the change would be addressed.
What is the college’s role and position in the potential Ethnic Studies restructuring?
The college fundamentally believes Ethnic Studies chairs/directors and faculty should lead the discussions, with full participation of other members of the campus community with an interest in the future of these units. The college is offering support and consultation to the units during these initial discussions, but, ultimately, the decision about whether to initiate a formal process to consider restructuring rests with the Ethnic Studies units.
Why is Ethnic Studies restructuring being discussed now?
In part, because it is the tradition and policy of the university to require reflection on what we do, and to evaluate whether what we’re doing is effective. Board of Regents, campus, and college policies mandate the regular review of academic programs (majors and degree programs); and new UW-Madison policy requires review of certificate programs. In 2011, the L&S Academic Planning Council endorsed an approach that allows the college to ask departments and programs engaged in review to use the process not only to evaluate the past and present quality, but also to think strategically about the future.
The Department of Afro-American Studies was scheduled for a regular review (the last review was completed in 2002-2003); and the new campus policy meant that all certificate programs offered by Ethnic Studies programs also must be reviewed. In this context, the programs were asked to reflect on how they currently collaborate and think about whether more collaboration makes sense.
In the course of preparing the Department of Afro-American Studies’ self-study, the department initiated preliminary discussions about increased collaboration with American Indian Studies, Asian American Studies, and Chican@ and Latin@ Studies, renewing discussions that have occurred, off and on, for several years.
Is restructuring a result of budget cuts?
In recent years, virtually all departments and programs in the College of Letters & Science were forced to absorb an 8 percent budget reduction, which was frequently achieved by not replacing people who retired or left the university. At the same time, the college has had to serve a growing number of students, while maintaining excellence in teaching and research, and responding to increasing and changing administrative and reporting demands.
As a result, all departments, programs, and units have been asked to consider new ways to do the work that must be done, so we can continue to serve our students. Some units have explored ways to innovate by restructuring courses and academic programs; others have pursued opportunities to merge with other units. Some are inventing new ways to affiliate and cooperate with each other by sharing support staff.
In all cases, these decisions are made at the unit level, in discussions led by the chairs/directors and involving affected faculty and staff.
Would restructuring reduce the resources available or lead to staff layoffs?
No.
The college has a longstanding commitment to avoiding layoffs of general fund staff. Moreover, if a number of Ethnic Studies units decide to combine, the college has promised to maintain their full budget allocations. If the units find ways to save resources by increasing collaboration, the new collaborative unit will be able to reallocate 100 percent of those savings to other activities in support of their mission.
Has restructuring of Ethnic Studies programs been discussed before?
Yes.
As recently as 2005, a draft proposal for a collaborative major in “Comparative Race, Ethnicity, and American Cultures” was circulated; that program was designed with a core set of interdisciplinary courses in theory and methods that could be combined with a concentration in each of the ethnic studies areas to form a major. The vision of greater collaboration between the programs was led by faculty in Chican@ and Latin@ Studies, and had strong support from several of the other ethnic studies programs. A final proposal was never brought forward for college review.
Have other departments or programs in L&S increased collaboration through restructuring?
Yes.
The merger of the Folklore Program and the Department of Comparative Literature was approved, effective summer 2013, when these units became the Department of Comparative Literature and Folklore. The restructure is opening up possibilities for growth: the faculty is beginning initial discussions for a new undergraduate folklore major made possible by the increased collaboration and resources of the new department.
In addition, the Department of Hebrew and Semitic Studies is currently engaged in procedures to restructure: the Biblical Hebrew faculty and graduate student scholars joined the Department of Classics, while Modern Hebrew faculty and graduate student scholars joined the Center for Jewish Studies. In this case, Classics now has a new branch of study in Biblical Hebrew, and the Jewish Studies major has articulated a formal track in Modern Hebrew language.
Will there be any public meetings where I can give input?
Yes.
The college wants to ensure there is ample opportunity for open discussion and community involvement. The Ethnic Studies chairs/directors and affiliated faculty are planning for a variety of meetings.
The first upcoming meeting is free and open to the public:
Wednesday, April 30, 7-9 p.m.
Doors open at 6:30 pm: Meet and greet, refreshments
The Pyle Center, AT&T Lounge, 702 Langdon Street
Madison, WI 53706, 608-262-1122
Registration recommended
https://www.ohrd.wisc.edu/OHRDCatalogPortal/Default.aspx?CK=46195
Whom can I contact for more information?
Afro-American Studies: Professor Craig Werner, cwerner@wisc.edu
American Indian Studies: Professor Rand Valentine, jrvalent@wisc.edu
Asian American Studies: Professor Timothy Yu, tpyu@wisc.edu
Chican@ & Latin@ Studies: Professor Ben Marquez, bmarquez@wisc.edu
L&S Administration: Associate Professor Dean Maria Cancian, mcancian@wisc.edu
*Footnote: What’s the difference between a department and a program?
Departments are defined by faculty policies and procedures; per those rules, they have dedicated faculty lines, grant tenure, oversee budgets. Programs are not established by faculty policies and procedures, and can emerge or sunset based on faculty interest and availability to participate. Teaching arrangements in programs are often ad hoc agreements.