Paradigm for the

School of Journalism and Mass Communication

FloridaInternationalUniversity

In Response to Provost’s Request

December 1, 2004

1

Paradigm for the

School of Journalism and Mass Communication

FloridaInternationalUniversity

Background and Introduction

In the spring of 2004, FloridaInternationalUniversity began intense discussions about the structure and organization of the university. These discussions were prompted by the growing scarcity of resources, particularly state support, and intensifying competition for students and research dollars.

As a result, university administration concluded that FIU could only survive and thrive if it “worked smarter,” by focusing energies on promoting greater efficiencies of operation and by fostering greater collaboration across the divisions of the university in both curriculum and research.

With that in mind, the deans of Architecture, Arts and Sciences, Computer Science, Engineering, and Journalism and Mass Communication were asked to work with their faculties to submit, by Dec. 1, a plan for meeting these objectives.

Objectives of Re-looking at the Present Structure

In a memorandum dated June 23, 2004, Mark B. Rosenberg, provost and executive vice president of FIU, stated the following objectives for re-looking at the university’s structure:

  • The development of partnerships through which larger units of the university could join with smaller units to promote efficiency of operation
  • More focused and efficient approaches to learning through:
  • Curricular consolidations
  • Course cross-listing
  • Multidisciplinary teaching
  • Resource sharing
  • Enhanced doctoral instruction
  • The measurement of results – particularly focusing on learning and institutional effectiveness
  • The development of large-scale, multidisciplinary, funded research initiatives around clusters of faculty and graduate students

Principles and Assumptions: FIU

The university, through Provost Rosenberg’s June 23 memorandum, noted a number of principles and assumptions upon which the involved colleges and schools should base deliberations:

  • The decline of state support means that FIU will have to find additional, new ways to do more with less.
  • The recent decision by the Board of Governors to mandate Academic Learning Compacts for undergraduate students heralds a long-range trend for universities to be held more accountable for their efforts.
  • The state legislature will continue to expect an expansion of undergraduate enrollment while shifting cost burdens to the universities and students themselves.
  • In order to maintain reasonable faculty course loads in the face of heightening research expectations, consolidations and efficiencies gained through course cross-listing, larger lecture sessions, greater use of graduate assistants and more efficient student-centered scheduling must be achieved.
  • Any reorganization in which larger units join with smaller units would preserve the autonomy and budget of the smaller unit.
  • Finally, faculty control over degrees, and standards and expectations for tenure and promotion, will continue to be discipline based, even in the face of reorganization.

Principles and Assumptions:

School of Journalism and Mass Communication

Through a series of school-wide and departmental discussions, the faculty of the School of Journalism and Mass Communication developed its own set of principles and assumptions upon which to base discussions for determining its best paradigm. The following is a list of those principles and assumptions:

  • Although the university has asked for a restructuring plan, SJMC must base its structure on a larger strategic plan that sets out its mission and vision for the future. With the appointment of new leadership this fall, timing is ideal to place a restructuring recommendation in the context of a broader strategic plan.
  • The curriculum content of the journalism/broadcast program and the advertising/public relations program provides extraordinary opportunities to meet the university’s goal of curricular consolidations, course cross-listing, multidisciplinary teaching, resource sharing, enhanced doctoral instruction, and the measurement of results – particularly focusing on learning and institutional effectiveness.
  • The research/scholarly output of the faculty has increased dramatically year after year, with true buy-in on the part of the professional faculty to publish significant professional/creative work.
  • The relationships forged by the faculty in SJMC over many years, and the many new faces on board this fall, provide a culture and work environment that will ease the negotiation of details necessary for a stepped-up level of achieving the opportunities suggested above.
  • The new dean and her administrative staff have brought a host of new ideas and visions to the table in the short time since their appointments. This has resulted in an exploration of outreach programs in foreign countries as well as initial discussions about certificate programs that could be efficiently offered in concert with other schools and colleges; new graduate degree programs, both at the master’s and doctoral level in concert with other units; a partnership with the Global Entrepreneurship Institute; delivery of online certificate and degree programs; and major grants to fund several centers.
  • The reputation and market niche of SJMC has been built upon a careful balance of teaching theoretical and practical skills by both PhDs and highly experienced practitioners. Feedback from employers reinforces the reality that graduates of SJMC are more effective in the workplace than most, a fact borne out by the achievements of our graduates (see Appendix A – Sample Achievements of Graduates).
  • It is critical to partner or align with schools that would most likely share the same educational philosophy and outcomes objectives.
  • Neither the College of Arts and Sciences nor the College of Business Administrationis an ideal “fit.” The former does not share our professional orientation; the latter does not understand the independent, non-business nature of the journalism profession.

Additional Facts to Consider

In addition to the above-stated principles and assumptions, there are some additional facts to consider. A recent study of schools of journalism and mass communications nationwide revealed that free-standing schools are the norm among accredited schools of journalism and mass communication. Specifically, the study showed that:

  • Nearly half of all accredited programs are free-standing schools of journalism or broader schools of communication and that number is increasing
  • 40% are housed in liberal arts schools
  • 10% are housed in other, disparate areas of a university

Further, an examination of the top 15 schools of journalism and/or mass communications by U.S. News and World Report and the top 10 schools per the Gourman Report, 10th Ed., shows that all are free-standing schools (see Appendix B).

Also, an examination of accredited Florida schools of journalism and mass communication shows that all but one are free-standing (see AppendixC). Notably, our major competition across town, the University of Miami, is a free-standing college with its own building, which is fewer than three years old;they are already planning a major expansion. Since we are currently at a disadvantage vis-à-vis the University of Miami regarding pricing for their Spanish Language Journalism Master’s Program, which is less expensive than ours, we must ensure that we can remain competitive and build upon our existing reputation as a “topnotch” national program.

The trend in organization of schools of journalism and mass communication within universities is clearly in the direction of free-standing schools. As noted earlier, today nearly one-half of all such schools are free-standing (see Appendix D).

The Process

In order to develop the strategic/reorganization plan by the deadline date of Dec. 1, SJMC entered into the following process:

  • On Aug. 17, newly appointed Dean Lillian Lodge Kopenhaver called an all-day faculty retreat to provide new and existing faculty the chance to meet; to set out an initial agenda for the fall and to lay the groundwork for the work to be done to meet the Provost’s request.
  • On Aug. 25, Dean Kopenhaver followed up with the Fall 2004 Faculty Meeting to provide, in detail, the charge to the faculty to develop a reorganization plan by Dec. 1
  • Following that meeting, in August and September Interim Department Chairs Catherine B. Ahles (Advertising and Public Relations) and Allan Richards (Journalism and Broadcast) convened a series of department meetings to foster discussions about the mission, vision, long-range goals and objectives of the two departments. Particular attention was paid in these meetings to identifying barriers to success and discussing resolution of those barriers.
  • SJMC’s faculty as a whole came back together in a school-wide meeting on Oct. 7 to share findings and insights.
  • The outcome of that meeting was the identification of a set of options to examine (see below). Faculty agreed to establish a set of adhoc committees to examine each of the options and report back to the faculty of the whole by the end of October.

The Options

Options identified for study included the following:

  • Absorb Programs or Create Partnership Programs: The charge was to identify the full range of colleges, schools and/or specific programs within FIU that SJMC could absorb or partner with in order to create economies of scale. Faculty were encouraged to look for courses that could be cross-listed between schools.
  • Create a “College of Professional Studies”: The charge was to identify whether a grouping of professional programs made sense and which professional programs would be appropriate.
  • Realignment withanother College or School and/or Expand to Offer Doctoral Programs: Under this option, SJMC would identify the single, larger college or school it is best suited to realign with. Imbedded in this option would be exploration of the possibility of establishing a doctoral program(s).
  • Examination of Structure at Top: This task force would examine the organizational structure of FIU as it is currently established and propose alternative “reports” to Provost Rosenberg that would achieve his stated goal of having fewer reports while improving efficiency and effectiveness.The faculty looked at the concept of two executive vice provosts: one with a broad portfolio to encompass academic support functions, including budget, institutional effectiveness, governmental affairs, and research; the other with responsibilities for undergraduate studies, international studies, the libraries, the honors college, and the Biscayne Bay Campus. The directors of the museums and the chair of the arts council would report to the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. This would permit all academic deans, those responsible for the current schools and colleges, to continue to report to the provost.
  • Biscayne Bay College/Environmental Theme: Faculty would examine the option of structuring the Biscayne Bay Campus around “environmental education.” Under the direction of a single Biscayne Bay executive dean overseeing day-to-day operations (again, to reduce direct reports to Provost Rosenberg), all programs housed at Biscayne Bay would be encouraged to explore programs of study that took advantage of its unique waterfront location and would foster curricular consolidations, course cross-listing of courses, multidisciplinary teaching, resource sharing, enhanced doctoral instruction, and the measurement of results – particularly focusing on learning and institutional effectiveness. Examples for SJMC include specialty degrees or certificates in health or science reporting, environmental reporting and public relations/public affairs, or public relations and advertising for the tourism/cruise line industry.

Faculty Recommendations

In late October, SJMC faculty reconvened to share their preliminary findings and discuss next steps. Following is a summary of the recommendations coming out of that meeting:

Although we may ultimately realign with another part of the university, making that decision now is premature for several reasons.

First, with the appointment of a new management team in SJMC and several new faculty on board, we are presently in the middle of developing a strategic plan that will assist us in focusing our mission and future direction. The SJMC wants to enhance its reputation and scope and is in the midst of building bridges to other units (note our recent collaboration with the GlobalEntrepreneurshipCenter). We need time to agree upon our focus and determine how we might best move forward.

Second, we need to allow the new development officer the opportunity to forge relationships and a chance to secure substantial donations in order to enhance our capabilities and build our endowment and reputation. Discussions are already underway about whom SJMC can approach to sit on a newly expanded advisory board to assist with this task. Further, a list of potential donors is already being compiled so that he can begin to approach potential donors, especially for funding for a new SJMC technology complex and other naming opportunities, including endowed professorships.

Third, we have clearly established through the program review process that we are a strong and growing school, producing high quality, in-demand professionals. We have an international reputation in journalism, broadcast, advertising and public relations education. Of utmost importance is taking the time to determine how best to build on this strength and bring new capability to FIU. We will do this in two ways: first, we will re-assess our curriculum and required electives to determine how we can creatively look at alliances with other departments and units to develop specialty areas and certificate programs (see further discussion below); second, we will work with Fraser Seitel, an internationally known public relations strategist, to determine how to best position ourselves on the national level to continue and increase our national ranking.

Fourth, we need to proceed slowly and with deliberation to assess the repercussions of losing our free-standing school status, both from an accreditation and a reputation perspective. The Accrediting Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communications (ACEJMC) scrutinizes all organizational changes to ensure that top administrative support continues for the units. Additionally, as mentioned previously, all of the “top” national journalism schools are freestanding. Closer to home, our prime competition, the University of Miami, is freestanding. We must assess how any change will lessen our standing as a top school, our ability to attract and retain top faculty, including minorities, and our ability to raisesubstantial funding.

Equally important, we must assess the impact on our students. Our students have just gone through a period of uncertainty associated with a transition of deans and department chairs. They are educated consumers who have chosen our institution over some other strong accredited journalism schools. They are the group that will eventually be most affected by any decision regarding the future of our school. Faculty feel strongly that, if we are to remain truly competitive, it is essential that we stay on an equal footing with other top-ranked schools of journalism and mass communication.

Fifth, we must assure that any agreed change will make us, and the university, function more efficiently. When the SJMC originally became a part of the College of Arts and Sciences in 1983, it was, in then Dean James Mau’s words, “nesting there until it was strong enough to fly by itself.” As we grew as a professional school, we did not have an affinity for the culture of the College of Arts and Sciences, and as soon as we were first accredited in 1991, it was agreed that the SJMC would function more efficiently and be able to better flourish and reach our potential as a free-standing school. We need to now carefully scrutinize “why” taking a backward step would now be seen as more efficient. Since minimal cost savings have been realized with the consolidation of the School of Hospitality Management with the COBA, we cannot readily see cost savings with any SJMC realignment other than the occasional cross-listing of a course, which can be done outside of a reporting change. Moreover, needing to report to an executive dean at another campus is, by definition, less efficient and more time consuming to evolutionary plans for future growth and development. We also need to very carefully assess the ramifications on our national standings and reputation of being put back into the place we “outgrew” 13 years ago. We have already had reactions from deans of schools around the country with whom we work that this is a very negative step for the future of the program at FIU, from all points of view: accreditation, recruitment by national employers, possible fund-raising and national stature.

Finally, before looking at any potential home in another school, we need to understand the make-up and parameters of the potential home. First, while the College of Business Administrationappears relatively stable, we have yet to perceive the benefits to either party of the School of Hospitality Management being housed within it. While the potential for several partnerships on the level of certificate and joint degree programs will be explored with COBA, the college’s overall philosophical approach, especially for journalism, is far less than an ideal fit. Although today’s media business is huge, the editorial side, i.e., journalism, asserts its independence from the business side. Second, we know that the College of Arts & Sciences, the largest unit in the university, is in the midst of discussing various reorganization options for itself; they contemplate that it could take as much as 24 months to complete their reorganization process. Until their paradigm is finalized, it is impossible to even contemplate whether or not we could or should fit into their new structure. Being thrust into a partnership with a college whose faculty and administration are themselves discussing their future only increases uncertainty for the faculty of both units and sets up a less than welcoming situation for all concerned. Since our goals and those of Arts and Sciences are not necessarily complementary, the steady and progressive growth we have evidenced will be impacted if we are thrust into a larger and established entity whose philosophical and operational objectives are divergent from ours as a professional school.