Dear University of Vermont Faculty, Staff and Students: This spring, the expanded Academic Reorganization Working Group will seek feedback on UVM’s academic organization. The Working Group will consider realignments that capitalize on our strengths, collective resources and academic and research synergies while ensuring a sustainable future for the university. The Working Group and Subgroups will be looking at both current successful structures and practices at other universities and ways to improve UVM that are aligned with our strategic vision and academic success goals.

In collaboration with the Faculty Senate and in response to the motion regarding academic organization passed at the November 2020 Senate meeting, the Academic Reorganization Working Group will expand its membership.  Following the successful models of the General Education and UVM Strong Working Groups, we have reconstituted the Working Group and added three subgroups to examine the various facets of academic reorganization:

Academic Reorganization Working Group:
David Jenemann (Chair—Dean, HCOL/CAS)
Linda Schadler (Dean, CEMS)
Jim Vigoreaux (Vice Provost/CAS)
Mary Cushman (Faculty Senate Executive Committee/LCOM)
Adrian Ivakhiv (Faculty, RSENR)
Alan Maynard (Faculty, CNHS) 
Ernesto Mendez (Faculty, CALS)
Pramodita Sharma (Faculty, GSB)
KC Williams (Staff/Student Services Collaborative)
Avery Rasmussen (Student, GSS)
Chris Burns (Faculty Senate President/Libraries)—ex officio
 
External Benchmarking Subgroup:
Pramodita Sharma (Chair—Faculty, GSB)
Jim Vigoreaux (Vice Provost/CAS)
Jinny Huh (Faculty, CAS)
Adrian Ivakhiv (Faculty, RSENR)
Jay Lashombe (Staff Council/Admissions)
Katherine Merrill (Faculty, CEMS)

Alex Yin (Executive Director, OIR)—ex officio
Kathy Howrigan (Foundation/Alumni Relations)—expert resource

Internal Alignment Subgroup:
J Dickinson (Co-chair - Vice Provost/CAS)
Susan Comerford (Faculty, CESS)
Alan Maynard (Faculty, CNHS)
KC Williams (Staff/SSC)
Lana Al Namee (Student, SGA)
Avery Rasmussen (Student, GSS)
 
Kirk Dombrowski (Vice President for Research)—ex officio
 
University Resources Subgroup:
Linda Schadler (Chair – Dean, CEMS)
Mary Cushman (Faculty Senate/LCOM)
Cathy Paris (Faculty, CALS)
Mary Lou Kete (Faculty, CAS)
Randall Headrick (Faculty, CAS)
 
Shari Bergquist (Budget Director)—ex officio
 
The responsibilities of each group are as follows:
 
Working Group:

  • Solicits stakeholder feedback in public meetings, focus groups, one-on-one conversations, and other avenues designed to maximize community input.
  • Oversees the work of the subgroups.
  • Compiles subgroup findings, community input, and other information.
  • Prepares the working group’s reports.

External Benchmarking Subgroup:

  • Researches other institutions of higher education who have undertaken university-wide reorganizations.
  • Interviews external and internal senior administration, faculty, staff, and other stakeholders about reorganization experience at other institutions.
  • Examines how reorganization might position the university in the market place.
  • Assesses potential impact on alumni and donors.
  • Compiles any measurable outcomes resulting from reorganization that can be tracked.

Internal Alignment Subgroup:

  • Examines barriers to student success created by our current academic alignment.
  • Identifies policies and practices in place at the unit or university-wide level that promote student success.
  • Examines current and potential research alignments to determine opportunities for research growth.
  • Considers ways to improve the graduate experience and any opportunities to invest in our graduate offerings that would result from reorganization.
  • Identifies potential opportunities and synergies for innovation/relevance/academic excellence at the undergraduate level.
  • Assesses impact on students, faculty and staff.

University Resources Subgroup:

  • Analyzes and evaluates university infrastructure relative to our academic organization.
  • Catalogues administrative tasks and services likely to be impacted by reorganization.
  • Identifies opportunities for more effective support for academic programs that would result from reorganization.
  • Evaluates the financial impact of selected organizational models.

In the spirit of the motion passed at the Faculty Senate meeting, we see the work ahead as having two distinct phases: 1) a study phase to explore the opportunities and challenges for reorganization and possible contours for reorganization; and, 2) a proposal-planning phase that would include more detailed organizational design and implementation discussions. Both phases will provide opportunities for university stakeholders to provide input on how to proceed with our reorganization efforts.

During both of these phases, the Academic Reorganization Working Group will consult with the Faculty Senate. By the April Faculty Senate meeting, the Working Group will present the initial findings of the subgroups so that the Senate can provide feedback by the time of the Senate’s May meeting. Through the remainder of the calendar year, the Working Group will develop an academic reorganization proposal to be presented to the Faculty Senate for its feedback no later than the Senate’s December meeting.

cc: David Jenemann, Chair, Academic Reorganization Working Group
     Chris Burns, President, Faculty Senate

Patricia A. Prelock, Provost and Senior Vice President