3.1.6. Description and chart of the academic and administrative organizational structure of the departments and its study program/s (including relevant committees and names of senior administration).

See section 2.3:

SCHEMATIC DRAWING OF THE ORGANIZATION OF THE FACULTY OF LAW(click to follow link)

3.1.7. Location: the campus where the study program is taught (if the institution operates on a number of campuses). If the study program is offered on more than one campus, is the level of the program uniform on different campuses, and what measures are taken in order to ensure this?

All study programs are taught only on the University of Haifa campus.

3.1.8. Please provide in the format of Table 7.1 (page 14) the structure of the study program its content, and scope (years of study, semesters, hours per year and credits) and the distribution of the studies throughout the academic year. Does the study program supply courses to other units?

- See Table 7.1

All courses at LL.B. level, excluding workshops, seminars, "The sources of the Israeli legal system", and "Law and information skills", are open for free listeners.

Students from other faculties may sign up to "History of Political Thought", through an initiative offered by the University - "The Way of the Wind" - Derech Hrooach.

3.1.9. Specify what bodies are responsible for the planning and managing of the study program. What are the mechanisms responsible for introducing changes and updating the study program, and how do they operate. If fundamental changes have been introduced into the study program during the last five years, please specify what they are.

Response includes 3 sections (click to follow link):

  1. LL.B.
  2. LL.M.
  3. Ph.D.
  1. LL.B.

Study Program: Responsible Bodies

The highest academic authority regarding the study program is the Faculty Council. It discusses the study program and confirms it on an annual basis (after attending to amendments, if needed). The Council usually dedicates one full meeting each year for in-depth discussion of the curriculum offered by regular members (internals) and one full meeting to the courses offered by adjunct faculty (external). Detailed discussions in advance of the Council meetings are conducted by the Teaching Committee, which is chaired by the Dean. The Teaching Committee members' discuss, comment on, ammend and confirm the teaching program which is mainly constructed by a designated faculty coordinator, who submits a draft study program for approval.

An important part of the Faculty Council and the Teaching Committee's ongoing activities involves cooperation with student representatives of the student council. Elected representatives of the students are members – with full voting rights – in both the Faculty Council and the Teaching Committee (as in other Faculty committees). The students’ representatives are constructive in providing feedback to the various courses offered and to the program of teaching.. At times, the students’ representatives are utilized to gather specific forms of information regarding a course, lecturer or the need for discussion of a field of law. Since the academic year of 2012-2013 the Students’ Council has conducted an annual survey of students’ feedback to the teaching.

The faculty administrationis also present in the discussions, since direct access to administrative details is crucial for reaching an informed decision regarding each course and the program as a whole. The faculty administration is also assisting in gathering data for the operation of about ten faculty committees.

Mechanisms for Change and Update

Changes to the teaching program are set forth by members of the Teaching Committee in response to an interested faculty member and as part of the aforementioned discussions. These are discussed and voted upon after being introduced (in advance) to the agenda. If approved, these changes are brought to the Faculty Council for approval. In most cases, changes require a rigorous contemplation process, in which relevant empirical data and other comments are gathered and discussed.

Updates to the teaching program are carried out by the Teaching Committee (and mostly led by the faculty coordinator). Such updates are required on an annual basis given the Faculty's schedule fluidity (sabbaticals, recruits, leave of absence, etc...) and other changes. Updates are initiated after an annual review of the previous year's teaching program, and the upcoming year's needs and budgetary constraints. In addition, the process includes reviewing all the proposals submitted by adjuncts for teaching courses. The process involves reviewing various factors as e.g., quality of teaching and academic strenght, teaching experience, number of enrolled students (when enrollment is low, the committee engages in an inquiry to seek out reasons) as well as surveys conducted by students as to the degree of satisfaction. After a lengthy process, all updates are brought to the Faculty Council for in-depth deliberations and formal approval.

Fundamental Changes

The general character of the study program has not changed dramatically during the last five years, yet the following substantial changes are noteworthy (the Teaching Committee is constantly striving to improve the teaching program and engages in planning and considering changes on a personal, structural and substantial level – these were reflected in the description of the teaching program in section 3.1.3 above):

  1. The "specialized fields" updating methodology

Given the growth in the faculty and the need to update the teaching program so as to address innovative new topics and cover in greater depth core topics, as well as the desire to maintain a balanced teaching program which will assure that students will be able to specialize in their field of choice while obtaining a basic understanding of law, a specific methodology has been adopted and applied with relative success in the last two years.

We relyon the taxonomy of specialized fields (detailed in section 3.1.3 above) which includes categories and sub-categories of law. Every year, the coordinator examines the courses provided in the previous year and their success (using a variety of factors) and inquires whether they should be taught again. Based on initial review, the coordinator strives to assure that the specific field is well-rounded. This is done by reaching out to relevant faculty member in a request to offer new courses or revise existing ones as well as examine courses offered by adjuncts (and even actively solicit course proposals). The coordinator shares the discussions and decisions with members of the Teaching Committee with relevant knowledge and skills in the specific specialized field, who provide recommendations regarding needed courses and their content (and at times reach out to potential adjuncts themselves). The reports of these committee members are later shared with the entire committee (and thereafter, the Faculty Council) when discussing and voting on the overall teaching program. The discussion and voting process follow through the "specialized fields" taxonomy and addresse these fields in turn. The voting on new and existing courses consists of marking such courses as priority "A", "B" or "C" (while at times noted that courses will be taught on a bi-annual basis). Thereafter, courses are included in the teaching program after accounting for budgetary restraints.

Clearly the methodology is not perfect. It might lead to stagnation, as well as confusion when courses and subject matters overlap. The teaching committee is aware, however, of these shortcomings and strives to account for them in its discussions and decisions.

  1. Summer classes

As part of a broader move initiated by the University, the faculty began offering 12 courses during the summer semester (which lasts seven full weeks). They include both electives and a mandatory course (in 2013 – Evidence; in previous years – Criminal Procedure). The shifting of mandatory courses (especially courses offered in the fourth year of study) to the summer months generated difficult questions and the faculty discussed the various pros and cons of this option. The faculty finally decided to opt for offering a limited number of mandatory classes in the summer given the benefits to students this would entail. As the recent summers indicate, the summer courses were extremely well received by the student body. Students attended these courses in great numbers and were able to benefit from a variety of unique elective courses which might not have been offered during the regular academic year (given budgetary and scheduling constraints).

  1. Cooperation and Coordination with the GLP Committee, as well as the Master's Committee

Given the growth in the faculty's GLP and Masters' programs, we have improved the coordination among these programs and the general LL.B program. To assure that faculty resources are used efficiently and that students are offered a structured path towards graduate studies, the following steps have been taken: (a) the faculty coordinator is a permanent member of the GLP committee to partake in decisions which fields will be strengthened by international visitors in any given year, and what changes should be done in the overall program accordingly; (b) the faculty coordinator is instructed to work closely with the head of the masters' program so to examine how resources could be pooled and redundancies limited (e.g., to assure that similar courses are not offered on both LL.B and LL.M levels).

  1. Commencing studies in the spring

In order to attract students of high caliber, who would not wait additional six months to be admitted, we began admitting students to commence their studies also in the spring (as opposed to the fall, when almost all law studies in all Israeli faculties commence). To enable this innovative initiative, structural changes to the teaching program were called for, and these were set forth, discussed and approved by the relevant faculty bodies. Among others, this called for changes in the mandatory core curriculum for students commencing in the spring (such as allowing them to study Public Law during their second year of studies) as well as offering the introductory course to Israeli Law (one that is taught in small groups) in the spring semester as well.

  1. LL.M.

Bodies responsible for the Planning and Managing of the L.L.M

The law faculty has been a leader in developing a broad range of pioneering master's programs (see above section 3.1.3), These elaborate programs, each with its own unique emphasis and interdisciplinary character, require coordination within the faculty and across the university. As evidenced above, the tailored and often interdisciplinary nature of the majority of our programs requires significant dedication of time and resources from ourfaculty. Specifically, the following positions and bodies are responsible for the planning and managing of all programs offered for a Master's Degree at our faculty:

(1)Head of advanced degrees – this position was instituted in 2007.Since then, this position has been reserved for a tenured faculty member who serves as the academic supervisor for all of the masters programs. In such capacity, he/she serves as the head of the committee of advanced degrees and as one the faculty representatives to the University's Authority of Advanced Degrees.The Head of Advanced degrees works in collaboration with the program heads and the secretariat for advanced degrees on a daily basis, addressing both broad structural issues (such as institution of new programs and changes in existing programs) as well as more quotidian matters such as addressing students’issues that extend beyond the authority of program heads. She/he also serves as the program head for the general studies master's program.

(2)Program heads – tenured faculty members who serve as the academic heads of the specialized masters programs. Typically, the program heads' academic expertise is related to the program's main emphasis and often they are those who initiated the establishment of the program in order to provide academic expertise and generate further research in such a domain. Program heads' responsibility includes: preparing the curriculum each year, following up with students and lecturers on the program, addressing individual requests that arise over the course of the studies, overseeing the outreach to potential students, organizing at least one annual academic conference, conducting a formal feedback session with the students each semester, identifying weaknesses and strengths of the program, and putting forth suggestions for change and development of the program.

(3)Advanced degrees secretariat – oversees all administrative matters relating to the management of existing masters programs, the opening of new programs and the faculty's doctoral program. A staff of three handles the admission of new students, the registration of all students to courses, the scheduling of course dates, coordination with lecturers, updating course materials, the administration of assignments, grades and appeals, the handling of thesis and doctoral proposals and final works, and more.

(4)Coordinator of special events and marketing – a full time administrative position in charge of all special events (conferences, guest lectures, colloquia, and the like) that take place in the faculty, and the marketing of existing and new study programs to potential students. As such, the coordinator is in charge of all events relating to the master's program, including the annual event that each specialized program holds, a special event for the opening of school year and other conferences.Additionally, the specialized programs require a focused and intensive effort to outreach the appropriate audience.

(5)Committee of Advanced Degrees – a faculty committee whose members include the Head of Advanced Degrees, the Head of the Doctoral Committee, the head of the advanced degrees secretariat and three additional faculty members (who may change on an annual basis). The committee oversees the academic aspects relating to the masters programs, providing as an additional layer of quality control on top of the Head of Advanced Degrees and Program Heads and typically initiates or approves major changes in existing programs, and development of new ones. The committee approves the program curriculum in each specialized program and selects the courses that will be offered to the students of the general master's program as part of their "mandatory choice" courses. Members of the committee receive a list of three or more courses offered exclusively to master's degree students of which they must choose two, on top of the requirement to study advanced jurisprudence.

(6)Authority of Advanced Degrees – a university organ that supervises all advanced degree programs at the University of Haifa. Therefore, all new programs are submitted to the Authority for approval and substantial changes to existing programs are reported when necessary. The Authority is also involved when its approval is required in special cases for admission or extension of studies and allocates funds for scholarships and awards to advanced degree students from time to time.

(7)Faculty Council – approves new programs for master's degree, following the approval of the Committee for Advanced Degrees and prior to their submission to the Authority of Advanced Degrees and University Senate. The faculty council's approval is also required for policy changes that require amendment of the faculty charter.

(8)Faculty members –teach many of the courses and provide guidance and supervision to those students for advanced degrees who wish to write a thesis. They do so either as formal supervisors or through informal advice and input rendered in their comments to these proposals.

(9)The University of Haifa Senate – approves new master's programs or is notified of changes after the involvement of the Authority of Advanced Degrees.

(10)Dean of the faculty of law – involved in major decisions such as the opening of new programs or the decision not to open a particular program in a given year. Furthermore, the Dean may be involved on smaller scale issues as s/he has an "open door" policy for students. Under this policy, the Dean meets with students, including advanced degree students, at least once a week.

(11)Head of Faculty Administration – supervises all budgetary aspects relating to the programs, in charge of administrative staff, and funding of scholarships and awards.

New master's programs are approved by the Committee for Advanced Degrees and the faculty council, and are later brought before the Authority of Advanced Degrees and the University Senate for final approval.

Once a program is approved, the program head, appointed by the Dean, together with the head of advanced degrees and the secretariat for advanced degrees, are responsible for executing the program.

Mechanisms responsible for introducing changes and updating the study programs

The faculty has instituted formal and informal, bottom-up and top-down, mechanisms for the ongoing evaluation, development and improvement of its advanced degrees programs, as follows:

(1)Program heads meet with the students in their programs on an ongoing basis and students have direct access to them. Aside from informal exchanges, programs heads hold meetings with the program’s students at the beginning of each semester during which difficulties, as well as sources of satisfaction and success stories, are surfaced.