iowa state university department chair: role, progression ... resources...iowa state university...

Iowa State University Department Chair:

Role, Progression, and Directions

A Report

Submitted to

Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost Iowa State University

Taskforce on ISU Department Leadership

ISU ADVANCE

Report prepared by

Dr. Linda Serra Hagedorn and Agustina V. Purnamasari

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS………………………………………………………………………. i

LIST OF TABLES……………………………………………………………………..………. iv

LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………..…………………………... vii

Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………… 1

Introduction …………………………………………………………………………………… 2

Limitations ……………………………………………………………………………………. 3

Significance …………………………………………………………………………………… 3

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE …………………………………………………………… 4

Methods ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 5

Data Collection ……………………………………………………………………………….. 6

Instruments …………………………………………………………………………………… 6

Data Analysis ………………………………………………………………………………… 8

Findings ……………………………………………………………………………………… 9

Department Chairs Overall Profile ………………………………………………………….. 9

Recruiting Source ……………………………………………………………………………. 12

Department Chair Pay-Base ………………………………………………………………… 13

Gender ………………………………………………………………………………………. 19

Race/Ethnicity ………………………………………………………………………………. 20

Time Management ………………………………………………………………………….. 22

Reviews/Assessments ………………………………………………………………………. 24

Performance Expectations ………………………………………………………………….. 26

Chair Duty/Task …………………………………………………………………………….. 29

Input to the Dean Regarding the Selection of Department Chair …………………………… 31

ii

Support ………………………………………………………………………………………. 33

Stress ………………………………………………………………………………………… 34

Difficulties Due to Gender, Race, and Sexual Orientation …………………………………. 35

Department Chair Profiles and Analyses by Colleges ……………………………………… 38

College of Agriculture ……………………………………………………………………… 38

Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Agriculture ……………………. 42

Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Distribution at the College of Agriculture …………… 43

College of Business ………………………………………………………………………… 44

Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Business ……………………… 47

Department Chairs’ Race/ Ethnicity Distribution at the College of Business ……………... 48

College of Design ………………………………………………………………………….. 49

Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Design ……………………….. 52

Department Chairs’ Race/ Ethnicity Distribution at the College of Design ………………. 53

College of Engineering …………………………………………………………………….. 54

Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Engineering ………………….. 56

Department Chairs’ Race/ Ethnicity Distribution at the College of Engineering …………. 58

College of Human Sciences ……………………………………………………………….. 59

Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Human Sciences …………….. 62

Department Chairs’ Race/ Ethnicity Distribution at the College of Human Sciences ……. 63

College of Liberal Arts and Sciences ……………………………………………………... 64

Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences …... 70

Department Chairs’ Race/ Ethnicity Distribution at the College of

Liberal Arts and Sciences …………………………………………………………………. 71

iii

College of Veterinary Medicine ………………………………………………………….. 72

Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Veterinary Medicine ……….. 76

Department Chairs’ Race/ Ethnicity Distribution at the College of

Veterinary Medicine ………………………………………………………………………. 77

Conclusions and Recommendations …………………………………………..………….. 78

References …………………………………………………………………………………. 85

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Number of Departments V. Number of Department Chairs 2012 ………………… 9

Table 2. Department Chairs who either Serve at the Same Department within 2 Different

Colleges or two Different Departments within 2 Different Colleges ……………. 11

Table 3. Department Chairs who serve at Two Different Departments

within One College ………………………………………………………………… 11

Table 4. Department Chairs Recruiting Source 2012 ……………………………………… 12

Table 5. Department Chairs Pay-Base 2012 ……………………………………………….. 14

Table 6. Department Chairs Salary per College 2012 ……………………………………… 16

Table 7. Department Chairs’ Salary Span 1994-2005 and 2012 ………………………….. 18

Table 8. Department Chairs’ Gender Demographics 2012 ……………………………….. 19

Table 9. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity ……………………………………………… 20

Table 10. Amount of Time Spend by Department Chairs for their activities

(ranked descending) ………………………………….………………………….. 23

Table 11. Frequency of Department Chairs’ Performance Review by Dean ……………… 24

Table 12. Frequency of Department Chairs’ Performance Review by Faculty …………… 25

Table 13. How the Deans Provided Performance Expectations Prior To Assuming the

Position as Department Chairs …………………………………………………. 27

Table 14. The Importance of Department Chair duties (‘Extremely Important’ to

‘Not at all Important’) ………………………………………………………….. 29

Table 15. Persons Provided Inputs to the Dean Regarding the Selection of

Department Chair ……………………………………………………………….. 31

Table 16. Department Chairs Perceived Support …………………………………………. 33

v

Table 17. Department Chairs Perceived Stress ……………………………………………. 34

Table 18. Department Chairs’ Perceptions on difficulties due to Gender,

Race, and Sexual Orientation …………………………………………………… 35

Table 19. Department Chairs’ Length of Service in the College of Agriculture ………..… 38

Table 20. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Agriculture ………... 42

Table 21. Race/Ethnicity Profile at the College of Agriculture …………………………… 43

Table 22. Department Chairs’ Length of Service at the College of Business …………….. 44

Table 23. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Business ………….. 47

Table 24. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity at the College of Business ……………….. 48

Table 25. Department Chairs’ Length of Service in the College of Design ……………… 49

Table 26. Gender Distribution in the College of Design …………………………………. 52

Table 27. Race/Ethnicity Profile in the College of Design ………………………………. 53

Table 28. Length of Service at College of Engineering ………………………………….. 54

Table 29. Department Chair Gender Distribution in the College of Engineering ….…….. 56

Table 30. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Background in the

College of Engineering …………………………………………………….…... 58

Table 31. Length of Service at the College of Human Sciences ………………………..… 59

Table 32. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of

Human Sciences ……………………………………………………….……..… 62

Table 33. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Background at the

College of Human Sciences ……………………………………………..…….... 63

Table 34. Department Chairs’ Length of Service at the College of

Liberal Arts and Sciences ………………………………………………….……. 64

vi

Table 35. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the

College of Liberal Arts and Sciences …………………………………………... 70

Table 25. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Distribution at the College of

Liberal Arts and Sciences ………………………………………………………. 71

Table 37. Department Chairs’ Length of Service at the College of

Veterinary Medicine ….…………………………………..…………………….. 72

Table 38. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of

Veterinary Medicine ………………………………….………………………… 76

Table 39. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity in the College of

Veterinary Medicine ……………………………………………………………. 77

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Number of Departments V. Number of Department Chairs …………………….. 10

Figure 2. Department Chair Recruiting Source in Overall 2012 ………………………..…. 13

Figure 3. Department Chairs Pay-Base 2012 ……………………………………………..... 15

Figure 4. Department Chairs’ Average Compensation 2012 ………………………………. 17

Figure 5. Department Chairs’ Average Compensation 1994-2005……………………..… . 17

Figure 6. Department Chairs’ Salary Span 1994-2005 and 2012 …………………………. 18

Figure 7. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution 1994-2005 …………………….……… 19

Figure 8. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution 2012 ………………………………….. 19

Figure 9. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity 1994-2005 …………………………………. 20

Figure 10. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity 2012...…………………………………… 21

Figure 11. Frequency of Department Chairs’ Performance Review by Dean ……………… 24

Figure 12. Frequency of Department Chairs’ Performance Review by Faculty …………… 26

Figure 13. Department chairs’ perceptions on their evaluation whether or

not it is based on clear performance expectations ……………………………... 27

Figure 14. How the Deans provided performance expectations prior to assuming

the position as department chairs …………………………………………….... 28

Figure 15. Persons Provided Inputs to the Dean Regarding the Selection of

Department Chair ……………………..…………………………………….…. 32

Figure 16. Department Chairs’ Perceptions on Difficulty Due to Gender .…….…………. 36

Figure 17. Department Chairs’ Perceptions on Difficulty Due to Race ………………….. 37

Figure 18. Department Chairs’ Perceptions on Difficulty Due to Sexual Orientation ..….. 37

Figure 19. Length of Service before Administrative Appointment at the College of

viii

Agriculture ………………………………………………………………………. 39

Figure 20. Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Agriculture ………... 40

Figure 21. Average Length of Service as department chairs at the College of

Agriculture 1994-2005 …………………………………………………..…….. 40

Figure 22. Total Length of Service at the College of Agriculture ………………………… 41

Figure 23. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Agriculture ……..… 42

Figure 24. Race/Ethnicity Profile at the College of Agriculture …………………...……… 43

Figure 25. Length of Service before Administrative Appointment at the College of

Business ………………………………………………………...………………. 45

Figure 26. Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Business ………….. 46

Figure 27. Total Length of Service at ISU (College of Business) ...............……………... 46

Figure 28. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Business …………. 47

Figure 29. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity at the College of Business ………..…..… 48

Figure 30. Length of Service before Adm. Appointment in the College of Design ……… 49

Figure 31. Average Length of Service before Adm. Appointment in the

College of Design 1994-2005 ……………………………………………..…. 50

Figure 32. Length of Service as Department Chairs in the College of Design ………….. 50

Figure 33. Average Length of Service as Department Chairs in the

College of Design 1994-2005 ………………………………………………… 51

Figure 34. Total Length of Service as Department Chairs in the College of Design ……… 51

Figure 35. Gender Distribution in the College of Design …………………………………. 52

Figure 36. Race/Ethnicity Profile in the College of Design ………………………………. 53

Figure 37. Length of Service before Administrative Appointment at the

ix

College of Engineering ……………………………………………………..… 54

Figure 38. Length of Service as Department Chairs at College of Engineering ………..… 55

Figure 39. Total Length of Service at the College of Engineering ………………………. 55

Figure 40. Department Chair Gender Distribution in the College of Engineering ……….. 56

Figure 41. Department Chair Gender Distribution in the College of Engineering

1994-2005 …………………………………………………………………….. 57

Figure 42. Department Chair Race/Ethnicity Profile in the College of

Engineering ……………………………………………………………………. 58

Figure 43. Department Chairs’ Length of Service before Administrative Appointment at the

College of Human Sciences …………………………………………..………… 60

Figure 44. Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Human Sciences ….. 61

Figure 45. Department Chairs’ Total Length of Service as at the

College of Human Sciences …………………………………………………… 61

Figure 46. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Human Sciences …… 62

Figure 47. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Background at the

College of Human Sciences ………………………………………………… 63


College of Liberal Arts and Sciences ………………………………………… 66


College of Liberal Arts and Sciences 1994-2005 …………………………….... 67

Figure 50. Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Liberal

Arts and Sciences …………………………………………………………...… 68

Figure 51. Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Liberal

x

Arts and Sciences 1994-2005 ……………………………………..…………...... 68

Figure 52. Department Chairs’ Total Length of Service at the College of Liberal

Arts and Sciences ………………………………………………………………. 69

Figure 53. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Liberal

Arts and Sciences ………………………………………………………………. 70

Figure 54. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Distribution at the College of

Liberal Arts and Sciences ……………………………………………………… 71

Figure 55. Department Chairs’ Length of Service before Administrative Appointment at

the College of Veterinary Medicine ………………………………………..…. 72


the College of Veterinary Medicine 1994-2005 ……………….……………… 73

Figure 57. Length of Service as Department Chairs’ at the College of

Veterinary Medicine ……………………………………………….………….. 74

Figure 58. Average Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of

Veterinary Medicine 1994-2005 …………………………….…………..….... 74

Figure 59. Department Chairs’ Total Length of Service at the College of

Veterinary Medicine ……………………………………………………...…… 75

Figure 60. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of

Veterinary Medicine …………………………………………………………… 76

Figure 61. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity in the College of

Veterinary Medicine ……………………………………………………………. 77

Iowa State University Department Chair 1

Executive Summary

This report provides an analysis on the topic of department chairs. The data were

gathered through an online survey questionnaire distributed to all Iowa State University

department chairs and from the ISU Office of Institutional Research. The ISU department chair

questionnaire can be found in appendix B. For the purpose of comparing changing trends of

department chairs, this report also contains information from a previous study; Trend Analysis of

ISU Department Chairs covering the years of 1994 to 2005 (Appendix A).

In general, across colleges there has been a slight shift in the proportion of participation

of chairs from people of color. However, similar to the findings from the longitudinal study

covering 1994 to 2005, there continues to be an absence of certain races, such as Hispanic and

Native American among department chairs.

In addition to the race/ethnicity distribution, gender remains unbalanced. Over the years,

females have been consistently underrepresented in this administrative position.

The full report provides detailed descriptions of the trend and progress of ISU department

chairs.


Introduction

The role of the department chair is likely the most misunderstood, non-standardized, least

studied, and most paradoxical of all academic positions. Despite the ambiguity, department

chairs perform a crucial leadership role. The job description can include a long list of tasks such

as: defining the strategic mission of the unit, curriculum planning, writing and administering

performance reviews, fiscal oversight, and advocating for and representing the department to the

university at large and to external constituents. Moreover the department chair serves as the

crucial link and bridge between the administration and faculty.

In 2005, ISU researchers provided a trend analysis of ISU department chairs covering the

years of 1994 to 2005. Using data derived from letters of intent (LOI) and the ISU

Administrative System (ADIN), the report’s stated purpose was to provide a general background

analysis. The report consisted of summary data for the colleges and within their departments.

Although comprehensive and informative, the 2005 report is now six years old and in need of

update and expansion. In addition, the October 21, 2010 meeting of the Taskforce on ISU

Department Leadership, led by Associate Provost Dawn Bratsch-Prince, defined key issues that

need to be addressed. Specifically, the task force has called for:

A definition of the role of chair

Clarification on the appointment and review process for chairs

The development of a pipeline for identifying and mentoring new chairs

In line with the research purpose, a survey distributed to department chairs designed to

answer the following research questions:

1. How are chairs appointed? What are the different patterns of appointment at ISU?


2. How are chairs evaluated?

3. What is the most stressful duty according to the chairs?

4. What is the gender disparity of ISU chairs? How can ISU close the gender gap?

5. What is the racial disparity of ISU chairs? What steps can be taken to increase the

diversity of ISU department chairs?

6. How do chairs perceive social identities (gender, race, and sexual orientation) with

respect to the difficulties in performing their role as chairs?

7. What are policy recommendations for the university?

Limitations

This is a study of Iowa State University. All department chairs were invited to

participate. Findings are limited to Iowa State University.

Significance

The findings of the current research provide a better understanding on the roles,

responsibility, and progress of department chairs at ISU. The results of this study provide ISU

higher administrators and department chairs insight to the issues surrounding the complexities of

the role of department chairs.


REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The literature review provides a foundation for this study and serves as the framework for

the analyses of the findings. Although not a popular topic, studies on department chairs have

served the needs of academic institutions in supporting their department chairs to perform

effectively.

Nearly 80% of all university administrative decisions are made by department chairs

(Seagren, Creswell, & Wheeler, 1993; Carroll & Wolverton, 2004). The three major roles-

academic, administrative, and leadership, describe only a small amount of the multiple roles of

department chairs. Their job description can include a long list of tasks such as: defining the

strategic mission of the unit, curriculum planning, writing and administering performance

reviews, fiscal oversight, and advocating for and representing the department to the university at

large, and to external constituents (Smith, 2004). Moreover, the department chair serves as the

crucial link and bridge between the administration and faculty.

Despite the very demanding department chairs’ roles and responsibilities, there is very

little available formal managerial training that prepares them to enter the position (Hecht,

Higgerson, Gmelch, & Tucker, 1999). In addition to insufficient preparation, department chairs

have to deal with multiple roles that are embedded within the teaching, research, service, and

administrative responsibilities. While department chairs might have experience in semi-

administrative roles (for example, serving as chair on a departmental committee), it is likely

insufficient to prepare them for the diverse and complex tasks of the department chair.

Individuals assuming the position of department chair must deal with role ambiguity as well as

the multiple expectations of others,( i.e. central administration, faculty, and students) (Pappas,

1989). The midlevel leadership position as department chair is indeed demanding and stressful;


consequently, the position of department chair is one of the most difficult to fill. Oftentimes,

those who are appointed would actually prefer not to take the position (Gmelch & Miskin, 1993).

Those who assume the position of chair have to deal with an extremely busy schedule that

requires them to devote their time to the department, faculty, and students, which leaves very

little time left for themselves (Smith, 2004).

This research seeks to better understand the roles and responsibilities of department

chairs at Iowa State University. More specifically, the purpose of this study is to understand how

ISU Department Chairs view their roles as well as to find ways to improve the support they

receive in regard to their responsibilities.

The research findings serve as a means to assess the academic environment for

department chairs at ISU. Feedback and opinions obtained from the survey results may assist in

the identification of appropriate and rewarding training programs and/or workshops to better

prepare the department chairs for their complex roles.

Methods

In order to respond to the stated research questions as well as to document change since

the 2005 report, the following data sources were used:

1. Survey of all ISU department chair.

2. Document analysis of ISU institutional data

3. Interview with all ISU deans


Data collection

In order to collect the data needed to answer the research questions, the following types

of data were collected from ISU Administrative System and Letters of Intent:

a. Number of departments per college

b. Email addresses of all chairs and deans in preparation for online surveys

c. Size of each department (number of faculty and of students)

d. Chairs demographic data (gender, race/ethnicity)

e. Date of appointment

f. Length of service at ISU

g. Appointment type

h. Reappointment data

i. Pay base

Instruments

An online questionnaire was designed and administered to the department chairs at ISU.

The survey questionnaire included the following sections:

1. Chair demographics (i.e., marital status, number of children under 18 years old)

2. Appointment/Review (how they are recruited)

3. Duties (how chairs spend their time)

4. Training (experience prior to becoming department chair)

5. Support (mentors or role models; whom they turn to for questions)

6. Evaluation (self-expectations; perceived dean’s expectations)

7. Leadership (mentors and role models; authority and lack thereof)


8. Department culture and norms

a. Chair evaluation procedures

b. Role of chair in the department

The department chair questionnaire was composed from a collection of existing

questionnaires of department chairs research (California State University, n.d.; Washington State

University, 1992) as well as additions to answer specific ISU concerns. After the process of

designing the questionnaire was completed, my major professor, Associate Dean Dr. Linda

Hagedorn and I arranged a meeting with the ISU Provost’s Office and the Department Chairs

Leadership Task Force. The purpose of the meeting was to review all items in the questionnaire.

Several items were edited per the committee’s recommendations. The revised questionnaire was

ultimately approved and finalized. On March 6, 2012 Dr. Linda Serra Hagedorn and Agustina

Purnamasari were called to the ISU IRB Committee meeting to discuss the submitted IRB

package. On March 14, IRB formally approved the study and sent the approval letter. The final

Department Chair questionnaire is presented in Appendix B.

In addition to the Department Chair Survey, additional data were collected from

interviews with all ISU Deans. The purpose of the interview was to understand the role of chair

from the perspective of deans as well as to compare chair responses to those of the deans.

The interview questions for the Deans (Appendix C) included the following items:

a. Expectations of chairs

b. Relationships with chairs

c. Suggestions for better implementing chair leadership


Data Analysis

Since there were two types of data collected, quantitative and qualitative, the data

analyses were done separately. The quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive and

inferential statistics. The qualitative data were analyzed through an inductive approach using

coding into categories to find consistencies and differences. These categories were used to

capture themes across the data and the themes were used to generate the findings. As a part of

understanding the roles and responsibilities of ISU department chairs, this study assesses

whether ISU deans’ perceptions on the roles and responsibilities of department chairs match with

the department chairs’ perceptions of their roles and responsibilities. The theoretical perspective

that guides this study is basic interpretive. The goal in basic interpretive research is to understand

the meaning the participants have constructed about their experiences and their interaction with

the social world (Merriam, 2008). The methodology used is case study. In a case study the

researcher explores a case within a bounded system through detailed, in-depth data collection

involving multiple sources of information (e.g. interview, observation, audiovisual materials,

document, and report) (Creswell, 2007, p.73). In the current study, the bounded system is the

setting of the research (i.e. Iowa State University), whereas the multiple sources of information

are interview and analysis of the university document. The method of inquiry utilized was

interview.


Findings

The findings covered within this document represent the results of quantitative analyses

of the chairs’ questionnaire data. The analyses are presented through the overall description of

ISU department chairs. The next part of the findings presents the data analyses by colleges.

The qualitative data will be analyzed and presented at a later date after all interviews with

college deans are completed and transcribed.

Department Chairs Overall Profile

Similar to the 2005 study, the number of department chairs is less than the number of

departments (Table 1 and Figure 1) due to the fact that there are chairs who serve two different

departments in the same colleges, and there are others who serve in one department within two

different colleges.

Colleges Number of Departments Number of Department

Chairs

College of Agriculture and Life Sciences 14 10

College of Business 5 3

College of Design 6 5

College of Engineering 8 8

College of Human Sciences 6 5

College of Liberal Arts and Sciences 20 16

College of Veterinary Medicine 5 5

Total 64 52

Table 1. Number of Departments V. Number of Department Chairs 2012


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

College ofAgriculture

and LifeSciences

College ofBusiness

College ofDesign

College ofEngineering

College ofHuman

Sciences

College ofLiberal Arts

andSciences

College ofVeterinaryMedicine

14

5 6

8

6

20

5

10

3

5

8

5

16

5

Number of Departments V. Number of Dept. Chairs

Number of Departments Number of Department Chairs

Note:

There are more departments than the department chairs (52 persons) because there are chairs who serve at

2 different departments and/or 2 different colleges.

There are six cases of department chairs who serve in either the same department within

two different colleges or two different departments within two different colleges (Table 2). Also,

there are four cases of department chairs who serve in two different departments within one

college (Table 3).

Figure 1. Number of Departments V. Number of Department Chairs


No. Name Department Colleges

1 Steven Mickelson

Agricultural & Biosystems

Engineering Agriculture and Life Sciences

Agricultural & Biosystems

Engineering Engineering

2 Ruth S. MacDonald Food Science & Human Nutrition Agriculture and Life Sciences

Food Science & Human Nutrition Human Sciences

3 R. Paul Lasley Sociology Agriculture and Life Sciences

Anthropology (interim) Liberal Arts and Sciences

4 Aragula Rao

Biochemistry, Biophysics and

Molecular Biology Agriculture and Life Sciences

Biochemistry, Biophysics and

Molecular Biology Liberal Arts and Sciences

5 Jonathan Wendel

Ecology, Evolution & Organismal

Biology Agriculture and Life Sciences

Ecology, Evolution & Organismal

Biology Liberal Arts and Sciences

6 Jo Powell-Coffman

Genetics, Development & Cell

Biology (interim) Liberal Arts and Sciences

Genetics, Development & Cell

Biology (interim) Agriculture and Life Sciences

No. Name Departments Colleges

1 Sue Blodgett Entomology Agriculture and Life Sciences

Natural Resource Ecology and Management

2 Frederick H. Dark Accounting Business

Finance

3 Thomas I. Chacko Management Business

Marketing

4 Douglas Johnston Community & Regional Planning Design

Landscape Architecture

Table 3. Department chairs who serve at two different departments within one college

Table 2. Department chairs who either serve at the same department within 2 different

colleges or two different departments within 2 different colleges


Recruiting Source

Chairs can be recruited internally or externally. Internal recruitment occurs when a chair

is appointed from within ISU. External recruitment occurs when the department chair is

appointed from outside ISU. Although internal recruitment is more likely than external,

departments across ISU have shown various patterns of recruitment (Table 4 and Figure 2).

Former

Assignments Agriculture Business Design Engineering

Human

Sciences

Liberal

Arts and

Sciences

Veterinary

Medicine

Internal 5 2 2 5 3 12 4

External 5 1 3 3 2 4 1

Table 4. Department Chairs Recruiting Source 2012


Figure 2. Department Chair Recruiting Source in Overall 2012

Department Chair Pay-Base

According to the ISU Faculty Handbook and Procedures (ISU, Office of the Executive

Vice President and Provost, n.d.), appointments of department chairs who are faculty members

are divided into two categories; A-base and B-base. A-base appointments are reserved for

administrative positions and for persons whose responsibilities require year-round service. Those

on A-base are on duty throughout the entire fiscal year, during which they accrue twenty-four

Agriculture Business Design EngineeringHuman

SciencesLiberal Arts

and SciencesVeterinaryMedicine

External 5 1 3 3 2 4 1

Internal 5 2 2 5 3 12 4

5

2 2

5

3

12

4

5

1

3

3

2

4

1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17N

um

be

r o

f D

ep

art

me

nt

Ch

air

s Department Chairs Recruitment Sources


days of paid vacation. In addition, persons on A-base part-time appointments are required to

maintain their responsibilities to the department, college, and university throughout the entire

fiscal year. Faculty members on B-base are on duty during the academic year, and they receive

no paid vacation. Those who are on B-base part-time appointments are expected to maintain their

responsibilities to the department, college, and university throughout the entire academic year.

As presented in Table 5, ISU department chairs’ pay base varied across and within

colleges. In the College of Agriculture, for instance, 60 % of the department chairs are 12

months or A-base, and 40% of the department chairs are 9 months or B-base. Although in some

cases there is only one type of pay-base, either A-base or B-base; however, within other colleges

there appears to be no consistent pattern of pay-base.

Colleges A (12 Months) B (9 Months)

Agriculture 6 (60%) 4 (40%)

Business 3 (100%) 0 (0%)

Design 1 (20%) 4 (80%)

Engineering 0 (0%) 8 (100%)

Human Sciences 4 (80%) 1 (20%)

LAS 11 (69%) 5 (31%)

Vet Med 4 (80%) 1 (20%)

Table 5. Department Chairs Pay-Base 2012


Figure 3. Department Chairs Pay-Base 2012

6

3

1

4

11

4

4

4

8

1

5

1

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

Agriculture

Business

Design

Engineering

Human Sciences

LAS

Vet Med


SciencesLAS Vet Med

A (12 Months) 6 3 1 0 4 11 4

B (9 Months) 4 0 4 8 1 5 1

Department Chairs' Pay Base


Descriptive of department chairs’ compensation (average, maximum, and minimum

salary) is summarized in Table 6 and Figure 4. To provide an overview of salary increase over

the years, Figure 5 provides a summary of the department chairs’ average salary covering the

years of 1994-2005.

As shown in Table 6, the span between the highest and the lowest salary, (i.e. between

246,225 and 69,072) is quite wide. The amount of the highest salary is more than three times the

lowest salary.

Colleges Average Salary ($) Maximum Salary ($) Minimum Salary ($)

Agriculture 161,585 217,222 99,121

Business 200,544 221,280 187,945

Design 138,691 138,691 69,072

Engineering 178,227 199,290 150,000

Human Sciences 169,689 188,700 123,392

LAS 134,124 201,409 79,769

Vet Med 166,819 246,225 130,650

Table 6. Department Chairs’ Salary per College 2012


Agriculture Business Design Education Engineering FCS LAS Vet Med

Avg Dept Ch Sal $90,880 $99,622 $96,236 $79,054 $104,665 $85,602 $81,262 $96,872

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

Department Chair Average Compensation 1994-2005


SciencesLAS Vet Med

Average Salary ($) $161,585 $200,544 $138,691 $178,228 $169,690 $134,125 $166,820

Maximum Salary ($) $217,222 $221,280 $138,691 $199,290 $188,700 $201,409 $246,225

Minimum Salary ($) $99,121 $187,945 $69,072 $150,000 $123,392 $79,769 $130,650

$0.00

$50,000.00

$100,000.00

$150,000.00

$200,000.00

$250,000.00

$300,000.00

Sala

ry

Department Chairs Salary (in dollar)

Figure 4. Department Chairs’ Average Compensation 2012

Figure 5. Department Chairs’ Average Compensation 1994-2005



SciencesLAS Vet Med

Average Salary in 2012 ($) $161,585 $200,544 $138,691 $178,227 $169,689 $134,124 $166,819

Average Salary in 1994-2005 $90,880.00 $99,622.00 $96,236.00 $104,665.00 $82,328.00 $81,262.00 $96,872.00

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

Comparison of Department Chairs' Average Compensation between 1994-2005 and 2012

The percentage increase of department chairs’ salary across colleges from the period of 1994-

2005 as compared to 2012 is presented in Table 7. The highest percentage increase is in the

College of Agriculture and the lowest is in the College of Design.

Colleges Average Salary in

2012 ($)

Average Salary in

1994-2005

Salary

Span %

Agriculture $161,585 $90,880.00 $70,705 77.8

Business $200,544 $99,622.00 $100,922 101.3

Design $138,691 $96,236.00 $42,455 44.1

Engineering $178,227 $104,665.00 $73,562 70.28

Human Sciences* $169,689 $82,328.00 $87,361 106.11

LAS $134,124 $81,262.00 $52,862 65.05

Vet Med $166,819 $96,872.00 $69,947 72.21

Table 7. Department Chairs’ Salary Span 1994-2005 and 2012

Figure 6. Department Chairs’ Salary Span 1994-2005 and 2012

Note: *The College of Human Sciences is a merger between the College of Education and College

of Family and Consumer Sciences; therefore, the comparison of salary span for the College of

Human Sciences is derived from the average salary of College of Education and College of Family

and Consumer Sciences


21%

79%

Department Chairs' Gender Distribution

Female

Male

Male 83%

Female 17%

Gender

Gender

In terms of gender, males continue to dominate the role of department chair. In the

longitudinal data covering the years of 1994 to 2005, only 17 % of chairs were female (Figure 7).

Seven years later, the study found that the progress of female participation in this mid-level

administration has only slightly increased, as indicated by the 3% increase of women who are

department chairs as compared to the 2005 data (in 2012 21% of chairs are female) (Table 8 and

Figure 8).

Gender Number of dept. chairs

Female 11

Male 41

Table 8. Department Chairs’ Gender Demographics 2012

Figure 8. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution 2012

Figure 7. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution 1994-2005


Race/Ethnicity

The demographic data show that the ethnic diversity of department chairs has increased

significantly for certain races, but has decreased for others. As indicated in Figure 9, in 1994 to

2005, 6 % of department chairs were Asian, while in 2012 the number has more than doubled to

13 % (Figure 10). As for other races, namely African American, Hispanic, and Native American,

the percentages have decreased.

Ethnicity Number of Department Chair

Caucasian 44

African American 1

Asian 7

Native American 0

Hispanics 0

91%

2%

6%

0% 1%

Department Chairs' Race/Ethnicity 1994-2005

Caucasian

African American

Asian

Native American

Hispanic

Table 9. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity

Figure 9. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity 1994-2005


85%

2% 13%

0% 0%

Department Chairs' Race/Ethnicity

Caucasian

African American

Asian

Native American

Hispanics

Figure 10. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity


Time Management

One of the items in the questionnaire (see Appendix B, page 25) discussed how much

time the department chairs spent for a list of activities (In an average year, estimate the amount

of time you spend in each department chair activity?). A Likert type response option with a

range of 1 (none) to 5 (a great deal of time) was provided. The department chair activities are

listed in Table 10. The activities are ranked based on the respondents’ level of the agreement.

Table 10 shows that most of the chairs believed that evaluating faculty performance is the

activity that took up a large proportion of their time; while representing the department at

professional meetings took the least amount of time.


Descriptive Statistics

Items N Rank Sum Mean

(Std. Deviation)

2. Evaluate faculty performance 45 1 179 3.98 (.892)

16. Manage department resources (finances, facilities, equipment,

and space)

44 2 174 3.95 (.776)

12. Effectively advocate for departmental interests to higher

authorities

45 3 165 3.67 (1.108)

20. Provide feedback to faculty on their major activities 45 4 159 3.53 (.869)

5. Develop and initiate long-range departmental goals 45 5 155 3.44 (.918)

8. Allocate faculty responsibilities in an effective and equitable

manner

45 6 150 3.33 (.905)

1. Facilitating successful recruitment and selection of promising

faculty

45 6 150 3.33 (.929)

18. Prepare and propose budgets 45 8 148 3.29 (.991)

7. Solicit ideas to improve the department 45 9 144 3.20 (.815)

11. Coordinate departmental activities 45 10 142 3.16 (.878)

17. Remain current within academic discipline 45 11 141 3.13 (1.198)

9. Inform faculty of department, college, and university concerns 45 12 140 3.11 (.775)

4. Assist faculty in developing their own goals and priorities 45 13 138 3.07 (.809)

6. Plan and conduct department meetings 45 14 136 3.02 (.892)

19. Look out for the personal welfare of individual faculty

members

45 15 132 2.93 (.889)

14. Participate in college and university committee work 45 16 131 2.91 (.949)

3. Reduce, resolve, and/or prevent conflict among departmental

faculty members

45 17 124 2.76 (1.048)

10. Plan and evaluate curriculum development 45 18 121 2.69 (.996)

15. Fundraising 45 19 118 2.62 (1.114)

13. Represent the department at professional meetings 45

20 110

2.44 (.967)

21. Other. Please explain* _______ 5 21 4.20 (.837)

Valid N (listwise) 5

Table 10. Amount of Time Spend by Department Chairs for Their Activities (ranked descending)


2%

98%

How often is your performance formally reviewed by your Dean?

Never

Once a year

Reviews/Assessments

All but one of the 45 department chairs who participated in the survey agreed that they

are annually reviewed by the dean (Table 11 and Figure 11).

How often is your performance formally reviewed by your Dean?

(question 27) Frequency Percent (%)

Never 1 2.2

Once a year 44 97.8

Total 45 100.0

Note:

*1Represent the department within the state of Iowa/ doing outreach on behalf of the department in the state;

2Schedule TA assignments and courses;

3Promote diversity, help recruit exceptional graduate students, find TA and RA support for graduate students, prepare

reports and provide information to the colleges, promote systems to improve the quality of faculty teaching, managing

department staff and IT support, inform faculty of external funding opportunities, maintain support for consulting

services the Department provides to other departments and research units on campus; deal with students.

Table 11. Frequency of Department Chairs’ Performance Review by Dean

Figure 11. Frequency of Department Chairs’ Performance Review by Dean


With regard to the performance review by the faculty, 15 department chairs shared that

their performance is annually reviewed by the faculty, four department chairs said they are

reviewed once every four years, two department chairs said the faculty never reviewed their

performance, and two chairs stated that the review is done at the request of the faculty (there is

no particular pattern). As presented in the note section below the Table, fifteen chairs explained

various review patterns done by faculty (Table 12 and Figure 12).

How often is your performance formally

reviewed by Faculty? (question 28) Frequency Percent

Never 2 4.4

Once a year 15 33.3

Once every 2 years 2 4.4



At your request (no particular pattern) 2 4.4

Other. Please explain*1 -15

15 33.3

Total 45 100.0

Table 12. Frequency of Department Chairs’ Performance Review by Faculty

Note:

*1year prior to end of chair term;

2I don't know if the Deans approach the faculty directly;

3at time of appointment

renewal - 5 years; 4at the request of the dean;

5during contract renewal;

65 years;

7no particular pattern:

8upon

faculty request; 9have not been chair long enough to be reviewed;

10not certain. This is my first year. I need to check

into this; 11

at time of renewal; 12

at the request of the Deans of LAS and CALS; 13

prior to end of initial appointment; 14

as part of renewal review; 15

at the end of a 5 year term and/or at the request of the Dean.


5%

33%

5% 11%

9% 4%

33%

How often is your performance formally reviewed by Faculty?

Never

Once a year

Once every 2 years

Once every 3 years

Once every 4 years

At your request (no particular pattern)

Other. Please explain

Performance Expectations

Using a Likert scale from ‘Strongly Agree’ (5), ‘Agree’ (4), ‘Neither Agree nor

Disagree’ (3), ‘Disagree’ (2) to ‘Strongly Disagree’ (1), the respondents were asked to give their

perceptions on the clarity of their performance expectations. The mean is 3.9 and the standard

deviation is 1.02. The department chairs’ perceptions is presented in Figure 13. The majority of

the chairs agreed that their evaluations are based on clear performance expectations, only 2

chairs strongly disagreed.

Figure 12. Frequency of Department Chairs’ Performance Review by Faculty


30%

42%

21%

2% 5%

My evaluation is based on clear performance expectations

(Strongly Agree to Strongly Disagree)

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Agree

Strongly Agree

The next item in the questionnaire asked how the performance expectations were

provided by the Deans prior to assuming the position as department chairs; whether verbally, in

writing, not provided, or using other ways. Over 80% of the respondents indicated that

performance expectations were provided either verbally or in writing (Table 13 and Figure 14).

How were performance expectations provided to you by your Dean

PRIOR to becoming department chair? Frequency Percent

Verbally 14 31.8

In writing 24 54.5

Not provided 4 9.1

Other. Please specify*1,2

2 4.5

Total 44 100.0

Figure 13. Department chairs’ perceptions on their evaluation whether or not it is based on clear

performance expectations

Table 13. How the Deans provided performance expectations prior to assuming the position as

department chairs

Note:

*1Verbally and in writing,

2 Chair provided expectations, not the Dean


32%

55%

9%

4%

How were performance expectations provided to you by your

Dean PRIOR to becoming department chair?

Verbally

In writing

Not provided

Other. Please specify

Figure 14. How the Deans provided performance expectations prior to assuming the position as

department chairs


Chair Duty/Task

Table 14 provides the ranking of items related to respondents’ perceptions of the

importance of specific chair duties. The majority of the chairs agreed that facilitating successful

recruitment and selection of promising faculty is the most important duty.

Rate the importance of each of the following department chair duties Rank

Mean

(Standard

Deviation)

1. Facilitating successful recruitment and selection of promising faculty 1 4.87 (.34)

12. Effectively advocate for departmental interests to higher authorities 2 4.67 (.48)

2. Evaluate faculty performance 3 4.64 (.48)

16. Manage department resources (finances, facilities, equipment, and space) 4 4.60 (.58)

5. Develop and initiate long-range departmental goals 5 4.51 (.589)

8. Allocate faculty responsibilities in an effective and equitable manner 6 4.38 (.49)

20. Provide feedback to faculty on their major activities 7 4.36 (.57)

4. Assist faculty in developing their own goals and priorities 8 4.31 (.56)

18. Prepare and propose budgets 8 4.31 (.67)

7. Solicit ideas to improve the department 9 4.28 (.46)

3. Reduce, resolve, and/or prevent conflict among departmental faculty members 10 4.20 (.69)

9. Inform faculty of department, college, and university concerns 11 4.13 (.58)

6. Plan and conduct department meetings 12 4.09 (.67)

17. Remain current within academic discipline 13 4.00 (.68)

19. Look out for the personal welfare of individual faculty members 13 3.91 (.82)

10. Plan and evaluate curriculum development 14 3.75 (.68)

11. Coordinate departmental activities 15 3.71 (.63)

15. Fundraising 16 3.69 (.95)

13. Represent the department at professional meetings 17 3.58 (.97)

14. Participate in college and university committee work 18 3.53 (.81)

21. Other. Please explain*1-9

Table 14. The Rank of Importance of Department Chair duties (‘Extremely Important’ to ‘Not at all

important’)


Related to the chair duties listed in the previous table, the chairs were also asked if they

would like more training on those specific duties. Three chairs would like to have more training

in evaluating faculty performance (statement number 2); develop and initiate long-range

departmental goals (statement number 5); fundraising (statement number 15); managing

department resources (statement number 16); and preparing and proposing budgets (statement

number 18). Two chairs stated that they need training in reducing, resolving, and/or preventing

conflict among departmental faculty members. One chair indicated the need for training for each

of the following statements, i.e. Facilitating successful recruitment and selection of promising

faculty; assist faculty in developing their own goals and priorities; plan and conduct department

meetings; plan and evaluate curriculum development; plan and evaluate curriculum

development; remain current within academic discipline; and look out for the personal welfare of

individual faculty members.

Note:*

1. Coordinate or negotiate with other departments regarding interdepartmental curricula or enterprises.

2. Ensure the department's well-being.

3. All of the above tasks are important. In a relatively large department, we have active committees working on much of

this with the chair providing oversight/critique.

4. Leading new initiatives.

5. Foster an environment of passionate faculty, staff, students.

6. Nurture positive culture.

7. Trying to manage a small college with the resources of a department. Iowa State needs to reorganize with schools that

are streamlined and maintain identity. We never should have made a college out of Human Sciences. They both should

have been schools. Now we have a School of Education, but what about the other half of Human Sciences? And Human

Sciences conflicts with Social Sciences in LAS. I also do enrollment management. We need more of that at Beardshear,

too. Scheduling classes is a nightmare at ISU.

8. Provide a place for students to express their concerns. A friendly face.

9. Promote diversity, help recruit exceptional graduate students, find TA and RA support for graduate students, prepare

reports and provide information to the colleges, promote systems to improve the quality of faculty teaching, managing

department staff and IT support, inform faculty of external funding opportunities, maintain support for consulting

services the Department provides to other departments and research units on campus.


Input to the Dean Regarding the Selection of Department Chair

One of the questions related to those who provide input to the Dean regarding the

selection of chairs. The answer to this question can be more than one option. As seen in Table

36, most department chairs 44 out of 47, stated that the tenured faculty provides input to the

Dean with regard to the selection of department chair (Table 15 and Figure 61).

Who provides input to the Dean regarding the selection of Department Chair? (choose all that apply)

Tenured

faculty

Tenure-

track

faculty

Non-tenure eligible

(e.g. Clinical faculty)

Adjunct

faculty

Part-time

faculty

Staff Emeritus

faculty

Other. Please

specify*1-8

44 42 36 26 22 35 6 10

84.6% 80.77% 69.23% 50% 42.30% 67.31% 11.54% 19.23%

Table 15. Persons Provided Inputs to the Dean Regarding the Selection of Department Chair

Note:*

1. Industry stakeholders 2.

I presume it is weighted, with more weight to the tenured and tenure track faculty 3.

Advisory Council 4.

members of profession 5.

graduate and undergraduate students and External advisory board members 6.

Member of dept. industry advisory council 7.

Advisory council 8.

Staff only informally 9.

Advisory Council, alumni


44 42

36

26 22

35

6 10

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Figure 15. Persons Provided Inputs to the Dean Regarding the Selection of Department Chair


Support

With a five-point Likert scale from ‘Strongly Agree’ (5) to ‘Strongly Disagree’ (1), the

department chairs were asked to rate several statements related to their perception on support. As

indicated by the mean in Table 16, the majority of the chairs agreed that the Dean strongly

supports them.

Statements Mean (Standard Deviation)

1. My dean supports me 4.47 (.84)

2. My faculty trusts me 4.36 (.80)

3. I have the authority to make important decisions 3.91 (1.06)

4. My dean has confidence in my leadership 4.42 (.78)

5. My faculty have confidence in my leadership 4.27 (.84)

Table 16. Department Chair Perceived Support


Stress

Using a four-point Likert scale, the chairs’ were asked to rate statements related to the

level of stress. The scale ranged from ‘Extremely Stressful’ (4), ‘Stressful’ (3), ‘Somewhat

Stressful’ (2), and ‘Not Stressful’ (1). As indicated by the mean, chairs agreed that gaining

financial support for department programs is the most stressful task (Table 17).

Rate your level of stress in each of the following areas Mean (Standard Deviation)

1. Time to stay current in my field (with research, conferences, etc.) 2.80 (.87)

2. Gaining financial support for department programs 2.98 (.81)

3. My academic career progress 2.27 (.89)

4. Fulfilling my high self-expectation 2.91 (.95)

5. Attending meetings 2.18 (.89)

6. Dealing with faculty 2.53 (.84)

7. Maintaining a healthy family life 2.33 (1.04)

8. Maintaining healthy working relationship with faculty and staff 2.16 (.98)

9. Other. Please specify

Table 17. Department Chair Perceived Stress


Difficulties based on Gender, Race, and Sexual Orientation

Using a three-point Likert scale, i.e. ‘Strongly Agree’ (3), ‘Not Sure’ (2), and ‘Strongly

Disagree’ (1), the department chairs were asked to rate their agreement to several statements

related to the difficulties that chairs may face due to gender, race, and sexual orientation. Table

18 summarized the difference between female and male chairs’ perceptions of the difficulty due

to gender, race, and social orientation.

Department

chairs

‘I feel that difficulties for

women who serve as

department chair are similar to

those for men who serve as

department chair’

‘I feel that difficulties for

race/ethnic minority group

members who serve as


those of non-minority persons

who serve as department chair’

‘I feel that difficulties for gays

and lesbians who serve as


those of heterosexual persons

who serve as department chair’

Mean (Standard Deviation) Mean (Standard Deviation) Mean (Standard Deviation)

Female 2 (.87) 2 (.50) 2 (.00)

Male 2.32 (.73) 2.29 (.68) 2.24 (.61)

Table 18. Department Chairs’ Perceptions on Difficulty due to Gender, Race, and Sexual Orientation

*Note:

1We have a long way to go with diversity concerns at ISU. But we're getting there, and that's why I

respect our institution's commitment.

2I read "similar" as "no different", and in this respect there clearly are differences. But overall the

challenges of the job are comparable for all these groups.

3These three questions are not asked in a way that speaks to the added challenge of being female,

minority, or gay/lesbian. Most challenges will indeed be the same, but there will also be new

challenges because of being in a minority

4Department Chair is an extremely difficult job for anyone. Department Chair duties require an

extreme time investment which takes time away from family. Overall, this may be more difficulty for

women to manage. There may be variation in levels of difficulty across disciplines, and some

correlation between this may have a positive association with the percentage of women who are

chairs in various disciplines.


The department chairs’ perception on difficulty due to gender, race, and sexual orientation are

presented in Figure 16, 17, and 18 respectively.

43%

36%

21%

Similar Difficulty between Women and Men

Strongly Agree

Not Sure

Strongly Disagree

Figure 16. Department Chairs’ Perceptions on Difficulty Due to Gender

5Statements may depend on the perceptions of various stakeholders within and outside of the

university. Difficulties may increase or decrease depending on the perceptions of stakeholders.

6I believe that women end up tending to the "emotional needs" of faculty, staff and students more

than men. People come to us with problems they would not present to men, because we are

perceived as motherly.

7Personally, I am gay, and in the College of Design there are absolutely no impediments to

diversity in my view.

8Since I am still on a steep learning curve to understand the position, it's hard to give a thoughtful

answer on this.

9I think it would be more difficult for these groups but I have no knowledge or data.


34%

52%

14%

Similar Difficulty between Minority and Non-Minority

Strongly Agree

Not Sure

25%

66%

9%

Similar Difficulty Between Homosexual and Heterosexual

Strongly Agree

Not Sure

Strongly Disagree

Figure 17. Department Chairs’ Perceptions on Difficulty Due to Race

Figure 18. Department Chairs’ Perceptions on Difficulty Due to Sexual Orientation


Department Chair Profiles and Analyses by Colleges

The next sections present the description and analyses of department chairs by colleges.

College of Agriculture

Within the college of Agriculture, the length of service before assuming the position of

department chair, length of service as department chair, and the total length of service at Iowa

State University varied. Although most of the department chairs have been serving for a number

of years at ISU before they were appointed as chairs (Table 19), four began their service at ISU

as department chairs.

2Department chair of Agricultural Economics is the same as the department chair of Economics in the

College of LAS

Departments

Length of

Service before

Adm appt.

(years)

Length of Service

as Dept. Chair

(years)

Total Length

of Service

Agricultural Education and Studies 29 3 32

Agronomy 18.5 6.5 25

Animal Science 0 9 9

Biochemistry/Biophysics/Molecular Biology 2 4 6

Entomology1 0 1 1

Food Science and Human Nutrition 0 8 8

Genetics, Development, and Cell Biology 13 1 14

Plant Pathology and Microbiology 9.5 6.5 16

Sociology 21 10 31

Agricultural Economics2 27 1 28

Agricultural and Biosystem Engineering 29 1 30

Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology 17 9 26

Horticulture*

Natural Resource Ecology and Management1 0 1 1

Note:

*Department of Horticulture did not participate in the survey. 1Department chair of Natural Resource Ecology & Management and Entomology is the same person.

Table 19. Length of Service in the College of Agriculture


Four of the department chairs at the departments of Animal Science, Entomology, Food

Science & Human Nutrition, and Natural Resource Ecology & Management were externally

recruited as chairs, therefore, their length of service at ISU before administrative appointment is

zero (Figure 19).

29

18.5

0 2

0 0

13 9.5

21

27 29

17

0 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Length of Service before Adm appt. (years)


Figure 19. Length of Service before administrative appointment at the College of Agriculture


As mentioned earlier, the length of service as department chairs in the College of

Agriculture is varied across different departments (Figure 20). Nearly half of the department

chairs in this college have been serving as chairs for more than six years. A similar trend was

also found in the 2005 analysis on department chairs (Figure 21).

3

6.5

9

4

1

8

1

6.5

10

1 1

9

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Length of Service as Dept. Chair (years)


5 6 6 5

3

5 5 4

3

10

4

9

5 4

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Average Length of Service as Department Chair

Avg Length of Svc

as Dept Chair

Figure 20. Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Agriculture

Figure 21. Average Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Agriculture 1994-2005

(Adapted from: Trend Analysis on Department Chairs 1994-2005)


Most of the department chairs have served ISU as faculty members before they were

appointed as chairs. Figure 22 summarized the total length of service of each chair in the College

of Agriculture. Total length of service includes the service before assuming the position as chairs

to the present.

32

25

9 6

1

8

14 16

31 28

30 26

1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Total Length of Service


Figure 22. Total Length of Service at the College of Agriculture


Gender

Out of fourteen department chairs, only four are females (Table 20 and Figure 23).

Gender Number of dept. chair

Male 10

Female 4

Male

71%

Female

29%

College of Agriculture_Gender Distribution

Male

Female

Table 20. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Agriculture

Figure 23. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Agriculture


Ethnicity

The race/ethnicity profile of the department chairs is dominated by Caucasian (Table 21

and Figure 24).

Ethnicity Number of dept. chair

Caucasian* 13

African American 0

Native American 0

Hispanic 0

Asian 1

93%

0% 0% 0%

7%

College of Agriculture_Ethnicity

Caucasian

African American

Native American

Hispanic

Asian

Note: *Several of the department chairs serve at two different departments within the College of Agriculture and other

colleges

Table 21. Race/Ethnicity Profile at the College of Agriculture

Figure 24. Race/Ethnicity Profile at the College of Agriculture


College of Business

In the College of Business, most department chairs served as faculty at ISU for more than

20 years before assuming the position of chairs. As presented in Table 22 and Figure 25, in the

Accounting, Finance, Marketing, and Management departments, all chairs have been serving for

more than twenty years prior to their service as department chairs. In contrast, the chair of the

department of Supply Chain and Information System was externally recruited.

Departments

Length of Service

before Adm appt.

(years)

Length of

Service as Dept.

Chair (years)

Total Length of

Service

Accounting/Finance1 23.5 2.5 26

Supply Chain and Information Systems 0 3 3

Marketing/Management2 23 9 32

Table 22. Department Chairs’ Length of Service at the College of Business

Notes: 1Dept chair of Accounting and Finance departments is the same person

2Dept chair of Marketing and Management departments is the same person


As seen in Figure 26, department chairs’ length of service at the College of Business is

quite varied ranging from 2.5 years to 9 years. Another distinctive characteristic of this college is

that two of the department chairs have double positions in different departments within the

college.

23.5

0

23

0

5

10

15

20

25


Length of Service beforeAdm appt. (years)

Figure 25. Length of Service before administrative appointment at the College of Business


26

3

32

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Accounting/Finance Supply Chain and

Information Systems

Marketing/Management



2.5 3

9

0

2

4

6

8

10


Length of Service as Dept.

Chair (years)

Figure 26. Length of Service as department chairs at the College of Business

Figure 27. Total Length of Service at ISU (College of Business)


Gender

As shown in Table 23 and Figure 28, none of the department chairs in the College of

Business is female. The absence of females as chairs in this college is parallel to the 1994-2005

longitudinal data. In the previous study, there were five departments that continually, from 1994

up to 2005, were chaired by males. In 2012 with the same number of departments, there is a

similar pattern of chairs that have two positions at two different departments, i.e. Accounting and

Finance departments are chaired by one person; likewise, Marketing and Management

departments are chaired by one person. Yet, none of the department chairs is female.


Male 5

Female 0

100%

0%

College of Business_Gender Disparity

Male

Female

Figure 28. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Business

Table 23. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Business


Ethnicity

Unlike most colleges at ISU, the majority of chairs are not Caucasian. Two of the chairs

are Asian (Table 24 and Figure 29).

Race/Ethnicity Number of dept. chair

Caucasian 1

African American 0

Native American 0

Hispanic 0

Asian 2

33%

0%

0% 0%

67%

College of Business_Ethnicity

Caucasian

African American

Native American

Hispanic

Asian

Table 24. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity at the College of Business

Figure 29. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity at the College of Business


College of Design

In the College of Design, half of the department chairs have been serving at ISU for more

than 10 years prior to their administrative appointment (Table 25 and Figure 30). This pattern is

similar to the finding in the previous 2005 study in which most of the chairs had served at ISU

for more than 10 years before assuming the department chair position (Figure 31).

Departments

Length of

Service

before

Adm appt.

(years)

Length of

Service as

Dept.

Chair

(years)

Total

Length of

Service

(years)

Architecture 17.5 2 19.5

Graphic Design 10 2 12

Interior Design 0 3 3

Landscape Architecture/Community and Regional Planning 0 5 5

Integrated Studio Art*

Note: Department chair of Landscape Architecture and Community and Regional Planning is the same person.

Department chair of Integrated Studio Art did not take the survey.

17.5

10

0 0 02468

101214161820



Figure 30. Length of Service before Adm. Appointment in the College of Design

Table 25. Department Chairs’ Length of Service in the College of Design


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Architecture Art & Design Comm &RegionalPlanning

Landscape Arc

14 15

11

0

Average Length of Service before Administrative Appointment

ArchitectureGraphic

Design

Interior

Design

Landscape

Architecture/

Community

and Regional

Planning

Length of Service as Dept. Chair

(years)2 2 3 5

2 2

3

5

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

ye

ars


Figure 31. Average Length of Service before Adm. Appointment in the College of Design 1994-2005

Figure 32. Length of Service as Department Chairs in the College of Design


19.5

12

3 5

0

5

10

15

20

25

Total Length of Service (years) in 2012

Total Length of Service (years)

Another interesting finding is that the length of service as department chair is almost

similar to the 2005 data. As can be seen in Figure 32, the length of service of department chairs

in 2012 varied from 2 to 5 years, whereas in 1994-2005, the average length of service of the

department chairs ranged from 2 to 11 years (Figure 33).

2

5 5

11

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Architecture Art & Design Comm & RegionalPlanning

Landscape Arc

Average Term & Average Length of Service as Department Chair 1994-2005

Avg Term

Avg Length ofSvcas Dept Chair

Figure 33. Average Length of Service as Department Chairs in the College of Design 1994-2005

Figure 34. Total Length of Service in 2012 as Department Chairs in the College of Design


Gender

There is almost an equal number of male and female department chairs in the College of

Design. As presented in Table 26 and Figure 35, there are 3 males (60%) and 2 (40%) females

assuming the position of department chairs (Table 15 and Figure 35).

Gender Number of department chair

Male 3

Female 2

60%

40%

College of Design_Gender Distribution

Male

Female

Table 26. Gender Distribution in the College of Design

Figure 35. Gender Distribution in the College of Design


Ethnicity

All five department chairs at the College of Design are Caucasians, as presented in Table

27 and Figure 36.

Ethnicity Number of Dept. Chair

Caucasian 5

African American 0

Native American 0

Hispanic 0

Asian 0

100%

0% 0%

College of Design_Ethnicity

Caucasian

African American

Native American

Hispanic

Asian

Table 27. Race/Ethnicity Profile in the College of Design

Figure 36. Race/Ethnicity Profile in the College of Design


0

29

12

26

0 0

9

05

101520253035



College of Engineering

There is great variability (0- 29 years) with respect to the length of service at ISU prior to

administrative appointment in the College of Engineering (Table 28 and Figure 37).

Departments

Length of

Service before

Adm appt.

(years)

Length of

Service as

Dept. Chair

(years)

Total

length of

Service

(years)

Aerospace Engineering 0 2 2

Agricultural & Biosystems Engineering 29 1 30

Chemical & Biological Engineering 12 3 15

Civil, Construction and Environmental

Engineering 26 1 27

Industrial and Manufacturing Systems

Engineering 0 0.75 0.75

Materials Science and Engineering 0 6 6

Mechanical Engineering 9 3 12

Electrical and Computer Engineering*

Table 28. Length of Service at College of Engineering

Figure 37. Length of Service before Administrative Appointment at College of Engineering

Note:

*Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering did not participate in the survey.


2

30

15

27

0.75

6

12

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Aerospace

Engineering

Agricultural &

Biosystems

Engineering

Chemical &

Biological

Engineering

Civil,

Construction

and

Environmental

Engineering

Industrial and

Manufacturing

Systems

Engineering

Materials

Science and

Engineering

Mechanical

Engineering

Total Length of Service (years)

Total length of Service (years)

2

1

3

1 0.75

6

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Aerospace

Engineering

Agricultural &

Biosystems

Engineering

Chemical &

Biological

Engineering

Civil,

Construction

and

Environmental

Engineering

Industrial and

Manufacturing

Systems

Engineering

Materials

Science and

Engineering

Mechanical

Engineering



Figure 38. Length of Service as Department Chairs at College of Engineering

Figure 39. Total Length of Service at the College of Engineering


Gender

In the College of Engineering the gender distribution among female and male department

chairs remains unequal, with two females (25%) and six males (75%) (Table 29 and Figure 40)

but represents an improvement over the previous 8% of women chairs during the years of 1994-

2005 (Figure 41).

Gender Number of Department Chairs

Male 6

Female 2

75%

25%

College of Engineering_Gender Distribution

Male

Female

Table 29. Department Chair Gender Distribution in the College of Engineering

Figure 40. Department Chair Gender Distribution in the College of Engineering


92%

8%

College of Engineering_Gender Distribution 1994-2005

Male

Female

Figure 41. Department Chair Gender Distribution in the College of Engineering 1994-2005


Ethnicity

Seven departments in the College of Engineering are chaired by those of Caucasian

background and one department is chaired by an Asian (Table 30 and Figure 42). This

distribution is consistent with the 1994 to 2005 trend analysis. According to the previous report,

in 2000, however, the distribution of the different races was a bit more diverse with one person

of African-American who assumed the position as a chair.


Caucasian 7

African American 0

Native American 0

Hispanic 0

Asian 1

87%

0% 0%

0%

13%

College of Engineering_Ethnicity

Caucasian

African American

Native American

Hispanic

Asian

Table 30. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Background in the College of Engineering

Figure 42. Department Chair Race/Ethnicity Profile in the College of Engineering


College of Human Sciences

College of Human Sciences is relatively new to Iowa State University. Founded in 2005,

the college is the result of a merger of the former College of Education and the College of

Family and Consumer Sciences. The department chairs’ length of service at ISU before their

administrative appointment in the College of Human Sciences varied; from zero up to twenty

years of service (Table 31 and Figure 35).

Departments

Length of Service

before Adm appt.

(years)

Length of

Service as

Dept. Chair

(years)

Total

length of

service

(years)

Curriculum and Instruction 3 5 8

Educational Leadership and Policy Studies 20 5 25

Human Development and Family Studies 0 2 2

Kinesiology 0 4 4

Food Science and Human Nutrition1 0 8 8

Apparel, Educational Studies, and

Hospitality Management*

Note:

1Food Science and Human Nutrition belongs to 2 colleges, i.e. Agriculture and Human Sciences.

*Department chair of Apparel, Educational Studies, and Hospitality Management did not participate in the

survey.

Table 31. Length of Service at the College of Human Sciences


The length of service of department chairs ranged from two to 8 years (Figure 44). Three

out of six chairs at this college were externally recruited and therefore, the total length of their

service started when they assumed the department chair position (Figure 45).

Curriculum

and

Instruction

Educational

Leadership

and Policy

Studies

Human

Development

and Family

Studies

Kinesiology

Food Science

and Human

Nutrition

Length of Service before Adm appt.

(years)3 20 0 0 0

3

20

0 0 0 0

5

10

15

20

25y

ears





Curriculum

and

Instruction

Educational

Leadership

and Policy

Studies

Human

Developme

nt and

Family

Studies

Kinesiology

Food

Science and

Human

Nutrition

Total length of service (years) 8 25 2 4 8

8

25

2

4

8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

yea

rs

Total length of service (years)

Curriculum

and

Instruction

Educational

Leadership

and Policy

Studies

Human

Developme

nt and

Family

Studies

Kinesiology

Food

Science and

Human

Nutrition

Length of Service as Dept. Chair

(years)5 5 2 4 8

5 5

2

4

8

0

5

10y

ears


Figure 44. Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Human Sciences

Figure 45. Department Chairs’ Total Length of Service as at the College of Human Sciences


Gender

Out of six departments, two of the department chairs are females (Table 32 and Figure

46).

Gender Number of Department Chair

Male 4

Female 2

67%

33%

College of Human Sciences_Gender

Male

Female

Table 32. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Human Sciences

Figure 46. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Human Sciences


Race/Ethnicity

Four of the chairs in the College of Human Science are Caucasians, one is African-

American, and one is Asian (Table 33 and Figure 47).

Race/Ethnicity Number of Dept. Chair

Caucasian 4

African American 1

Native American 0

Hispanic 0

Asian 1

67%

16%

0%

0% 17%

College of Human Sciences_Ethnicity

Caucasian

African American

Native American

Hispanic

Asian

Table 33. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Background at the College of Human Sciences

Figure 47. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Background at the College of Human Sciences


College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

At the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences 14 out of 18 department chairs who filled out

the survey stated that they have served at ISU for more than 10 years. One has served for 6 years,

another Chair served for 2 years. Further, there are two of the chairs who were externally

recruited, thus, their length of service before the administrative appointment is zero (Table 34

and Figure 40).

Departments

Length of

Service before

Adm appt.

(years)

Length of

Service as

Dept. Chair

(years)

Total

length

of

service

(years)

1. Chemistry 18 1 19

2. Ecology, Evolution & Organismal Biology 17 9 26

3. Economics 27 1 28

4. English 0 2 2

5. Geological and Atmospheric Sciences 14 1 15

6. Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication 0 9 9

7. History 10 2 12

8. Mathematics 25 4 29

9. Music and Theatre 6 7 13

10. Philosophy and Religious Studies 10 3 13

11. Political Science 24 13 37

12. Psychology 16 3 19

13. Statistics 24 10 34

14. World Languages and Culture 21 4 25

15. Anthropology1 21 10 31

16. Biochemistry, Biophysics, and Molecular Biology2 2 4 6

17. Computer Science*

18. Genetics, Development, and Cell Biology3 13 1 14

19. Physics and Astronomy*

20. Sociology1, 4

21 10 31

Table 34. Department Chairs’ Length of Service at the College of Human Sciences


Notes:

*Two departments, i.e. Computer Science and Physics &Astronomy did not participate in the survey.

1The department chair of Anthropology is the same as Sociology, and the respondent categorized himself into

College of Agriculture.

2The department of Biochemistry, Biophysics, and Molecular biology is within two different colleges, i.e. Agriculture

and LAS.

3The department of Genetics, Development, and Cell Biology is categorized under 2 different colleges: Agriculture

and LAS.

4The department of Sociology belongs under 2 different colleges: Agriculture and LAS.

In the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, the length of service of department chairs

prior to assuming the position as chairs varied widely. As shown in Figure 48, two of the chairs

were externally recruited, and thus, have zero years of service at ISU before becoming a

department chair. Nine have been serving ISU from 2 to 18 years before becoming a chair;

while, seven of the department chairs have been serving for more than 20 years before

undertaking the administrative role.


A similar variation of the length of service at ISU prior to the administrative appointment

was also found in 1994-2005 trend analysis (Figure 49).

18 17

27

0

14

0

10

25

6

10

24

16

24

21 21

2

13

21

0

5

10

15

20

25

30



Figure 48. Department Chairs’ Length of Service before Administrative Appointment

at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences


The department chairs’ length of service in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, as

described in Figure 50, is varied from 1 to 13 years. Parallel to the 2012 data, in 1994-2005, the

average length of service of the chairs was also widespread from 3 to 14 years (Figure 51).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

22

15 15 11

19

6

20 15

9

21

5

27

15 11

17 22

12 8

28

20

Average Length of Service before Administrative Appointment 1994-2005

Figure 49. Department Chairs’ Length of Service before Administrative Appointment at the College

of Liberal Arts and Sciences 1994-2005


1

9

1 2

1

9

2

4

7

3

13

3

10

4

10

4

1

10

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14



7 5 4 5 5 5 4 5

10

5 4

7

4

14

5 3 5 4 4

10

02468

10121416

Average Term & Average Length of Service as Department Chair

Avg Term


Figure 50. Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

Figure 51. Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences 1994-2005


Similarly, the total length of service before assuming the administrative position and

during the appointment as department chairs, ranged from 2 to 37 years. One of the chairs has

served for a total of 2 years, while nine of the chairs have been serving from 6 to 19 years. Seven

department chairs have been serving at ISU for more than 25 years (Figure 52).

19

26 28

2

15

9 12

29

13 13

37

19

34

25

31

6

14

31

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40



Figure 52. Department Chairs’ Total Length of Service at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences


Gender

In the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences 4 out of the 20 departments are chaired by

women (Table 35 and Figure 53).

Gender Number of Dept. Chair

Male 16

Female 4

80%

20%


Male

Female

Table 35. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

Figure 53. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences


Race/Ethnicity

Like most of the departments in other colleges, the department chairs are dominated by

Caucasians (Table 36 and Figure 54).

Race/Ethnicity Number of Dept. Chair

Caucasian 18

African American 0

Native American 0

Hispanic 0

Asian 2

90%

0%

0% 0%

10%


Caucasian

African American

Native American

Hispanic

Asian

Table 36. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Distribution at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

Figure 54. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity Distribution at the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences


College of Veterinary Medicine

In the College of Veterinary Medicine, nearly all of the department chairs have been

serving at ISU for more than eight years prior to their administrative appointment (Table 37 and

Figure 47). Among five chairs only one of them was externally recruited.

An interesting finding is that in the 1994-2005 trend analysis, the average length of

service of the department chair of Veterinary and Clinical Science was one year (Figure 56). The

situation in 2012 is presented in Figure 55.

Departments

Length of

Service before

Adm Appt.

(years)

Length of

Service as

Dept. Chair

(years)

Total

Length of

Service

Biomedical Science 9 4 13

Veterinary Microbiology & Preventive Medicine 25 3 28

Veterinary Clinical Sciences 0 3 3

Veterinary Diagnostic & Production Animal

Medicine 11 6 17

Veterinary Pathology 25 1 26

9

25

0

11

25

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Biomedical

Science

Veterinary

Microbiology

& Preventive

Medicine

Veterinary

Clinical

Sciences

Veterinary

Diagnostic &

Production

Animal

Medicine

Veterinary

Pathology



Table 37. Department Chairs’ Length of Service at the College of Veterinary Medicine


the College of Veterinary Medicine


In terms of their length of service as department chairs, the College of Veterinary

Medicine has a relatively short length of service compared to department chairs in other colleges.

Most of the chairs have been serving for one to three years; one of the chairs has been serving for

four years, and one for six years. A similar pattern was also found in the previous study covering

the years of 1994-2005 in which the highest average length of service was six years.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Biomedical Sc Vet Mic & PrevMed

Vet ClinicalSvc

Vet Diag &Prod An Med

Vet Pathology

12

8

1

9

12

Average Length of Service before Administrative Appointment 1994-2005


College of Veterinary Medicine 1994-2005


4

3 3

6

1

0

5

10

Biomedical

Science

Veterinary

Microbiology

& Preventive

Medicine

Veterinary

Clinical

Sciences

Veterinary

Diagnostic &

Production

Animal

Medicine

Veterinary

Pathology



6

3 3

2

3

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

BiomedicalSc

Vet Mic &Prev Med

Vet ClinicalSvc

Vet Diag &Prod An Med

Vet Pathology


Avg Term


Figure 57. Length of Service as Department Chairs’ at the College of Veterinary Medicine

Figure 58. Length of Service as Department Chairs at the College of Veterinary Medicine 1994-2005


As for the total length of service of the department chairs, all chairs except the chair of

Veterinary Clinical Science department, have been serving for more than ten years, the range

slightly varied from 13 to 28 years (Figure 59).

13

28

3

17

26

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Biomedical

Science

Veterinary

Microbiology

& Preventive

Medicine

Veterinary

Clinical

Sciences

Veterinary

Diagnostic &

Production

Animal

Medicine

Veterinary

Pathology



Figure 59. Department Chairs’ Total Length of Service at the College of Veterinary Medicine


Gender

In contrast to the majority of the student population in the College of Veterinary

Medicine who are mostly females, none of the department chairs is female (Table 38 and Figure

60).


Male 5

Female 0

100%

0%


Male

Female

Table 38. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Veterinary Medicine

Figure 60. Department Chairs’ Gender Distribution at the College of Veterinary Medicine


Ethnicity

One chair is of Asian ethnicity and four are Caucasian (Table 39 and Figure 61).

Compared to the period of 1994-2005, where there were four African American and 15

Caucasians.


Caucasian 4

African American 0

Native American 0

Hispanic 0

Asian 1

80%

0%

0% 0% 20%


Caucasian

African American

Native American

Hispanic

Asian

Table 39. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity in the College of Veterinary Medicine

Figure 61. Department Chairs’ Race/Ethnicity in the College of Veterinary Medicine


Conclusions and Recommendations

This section presents findings that may lead to further discussion and policy

determinations on the topic of the ISU department chair.

Research question 1: How are chairs appointed? What are the different patterns of appointment

at ISU?

The appointment of chairs at ISU varies from college to college; sometimes the

appointment is internal and other times it is the result of a national search. There is no university

pattern.

In terms of the pay base, appointments of department chair who are faculty members are

divided into two categories; A-base and B-base (Office of the Executive President and Provost,

Iowa State University, n.d.). A-base appointments are reserved for administrative positions and

for persons whose responsibilities require year-round service. Faculty members on B-base are on

duty during the academic year, and they receive no paid vacation. Again, there is no university

policy on whether chairs should be A- or B-based. We found that ISU department chairs’ pay

base varied across and within colleges. For example, within one college 60% of the chairs are 12

months or A-base and 40% are 9 months or B-base, while in others there is only either A-base or

B-base. Sometimes a chair’s salary may be supplemented with an administrative stipend. The

amount of the stipend is also not uniform.

The selection of department chair often is influenced by input to the Dean from the

faculty. The majority of the chairs (84.6%) stated that tenured faculty provided input to the

Dean with respect to the selection of the department chair.

Another finding to note is that the term of appointment of the department chairs varied

across the colleges, ranging from 1 year up to 5 years.


Typically, most of the chairs have been serving at ISU for a number of years prior to

assuming their administrative positions. However, there are cases in which the chairs are

externally recruited (recruited from outside ISU), and thus, their length of service before

becoming chair was zero.

Research question 2: How are chairs evaluated?

In answering the second research question on chairs evaluation, this study found the

majority of the chairs agreed that their evaluation is based on clear performance expectations;

however, there were two chairs who strongly disagreed. It is important to note that there are no

university level expectations; all expectations are college level. Over 80% of the department

chairs stated that performance expectations were provided to them either verbally or in writing

prior to assuming the administrative position. In addition, some colleges have rubrics for

evaluating department chairs, but some did not.

The chairs responded positively regarding their perceived support from their Dean. The

majority of the respondents agreed that their Dean is supportive and also has confidence in their

leadership skill. The chairs also agreed that the faculty trust and have confidence in them.

Based on our interview with Deans across colleges, we found that there is no definitive

mentor assigned to new department chairs. They typically get guidance from the Dean. Some

new chairs will take it upon themselves find another more experienced chair to be their mentor.

While ISU does provide some training for chairs, there is no formal mentoring program.

Research question 3: What is the most stressful duty according to the chairs?

One of the key findings worth noting is the identification of duties perceived by the

chairs as the most stressful. Gaining financial support for department programs was recognized

by the chairs to be the most stressful task. The second most stressful task was fulfilling their high


self-expectations, and the third most stressful task is time to stay current in their field (with

research, conferences, and other scholarly-related activities). The combination of the three most

stressful tasks speaks loudly for the intermingled role that department chairs must face. They are

both faculty and administration and hence will working to support the department from the

administrative side; they must also continue their scholarly pursuits.

Research question 4: What is the gender disparity of ISU chairs? How can ISU close the gender

gap?

Participation by women in this midlevel administrative position has slightly increased

compared to the period of 1994-2005. In 2012, 21% of chairs were female, compare to 17% in

the 2005 study. Nonetheless, the female chairs are typically concentrated in certain colleges.

There are 4 female out of 10 chairs in the College of Agriculture; 4 out of 16 in the College of

Liberal Arts and Sciences; 2 out of 5 chairs in the College of Design; 2 out of 8 in the College of

Engineering; and 2 out of 6 in the College of Human Sciences. While, in the College of

Business, none of the five chairs is a female. Such is also the case in the College of Veterinary

Medicine. Even though the student population in this college is largely female, all department

chairs in the Veterinary Medicine College are chaired by men.

Research question 5: What is the racial disparity of ISU chairs? What steps can be taken to

increase the diversity of ISU department chairs?

In terms of race, for a large university like ISU, only one African-American assuming the

position of department chair can be considered a very low number. Moreover, there are no

Hispanics currently serving as chair. Thus, efforts to diversify the department chair position with


respect to race are highly warranted. The university may want to consider identifying faculty of

color who may be future chairs and provide leadership or other training.

Research question 6: How do chairs perceive social identities (gender, race, and sexual

orientation) with respect to the difficulties in performing their role as chairs?

Another finding to be highlighted is the question on difficulties that the chairs face due to

gender, race, and sexual orientation. Most chairs are unsure whether or not their biological or

social identities affect the difficulties chairs may face. However, it is worth noting that the

respondents’ answers were somewhat related to their own social identities. Our findings provide

evidence that male chairs are less likely to perceive female chairs having difficulty based on

gender. Likewise, for an item that asked the respondents to rate whether they feel that difficulties

for gays and lesbians who serve as department chair are similar to those for heterosexual persons

who serve as chair, the respondents were more likely to not sure. Indeed, it was reflected by the

66% of the chairs who chose the ‘Not Sure’ option. This item provides room for the respondents

to give comments on how social identities, i.e. gender, race, and sexual orientation might cause

different difficulties in their role as chair.

As discussed in literature on department chairs, time management can be challenging due

to the many roles and responsibilities that a chair must balance. The majority of the chairs agreed

that evaluating faculty performance is their most time-consuming single activity. The second

most time-consuming activity is managing department resources (finances, facilities, equipment,

and space). The third most time-consuming activity is advocating for departmental interests to

higher authorities. Conversely, the activity that demands the least of the chairs’ time is

representing the department at professional meetings. Perhaps it may be noted that there will be

periods within the academic year that may be especially taxing with respect to time.


Research question 7: What are policy recommendations for the university?

Findings of the current study have prompted reflective questions as the foundation for

policy recommendations for Iowa State University. In regard to understand the role of ISU

department chair and to improve support for the chairs, we propose the following questions as

well as recommendations:

1. Pay base of ISU department chairs is not uniformed across colleges; should the pay-base

be standardized, either using A-base (12 months) or B-base (9 months)?

2. The average compensation of the chairs is varied widely; there is a wide span between

the average of the lowest and the highest compensations between different colleges. What

criteria to determine the salary and what is the appropriate level of compensation? How

can market disciplinary differences be understood within a profession that is

administrative and similar regardless of discipline. How should the size of the

department factor into chair compensation?

3. How can ISU better accommodate diversity with respect to the department chair? Issues

of length of service at ISU, length of tenure at ISU, level of seniority, age, gender, and

race/ethnicity all have an effect on securing a diverse chair pool.

4. What are the criteria to select chair, should there be standardized criteria or qualification

to recruit a department chair?

5. Some of the colleges do not have specific criteria or rubrics used to evaluate chair. Apart

from fulfilling duties according to the PRS (Position Responsibilities Statement) that

determines the percentage of teaching, research, and service; the department chair has a

number of administrative duties on which the chair should be evaluated. Should there be

a uniform rubric of expectations?


6. The findings of this study indicated that nearly half of the chairs stated that the evaluation

on chairs is not based on clear expectations. If the university expects chairs to improve

their departments and to effectively manage the departments, then, chairs need to know

what the expectations are. By doing so, chair would be able to measure how much he/she

has achieved and what he/she still needs to improve.

7. ISU may consider more intentional training of new chairs. This may be accomplished

through more national leadership workshops or other training.

8. As a midlevel administrator, chairs have to deal with arduous paperwork taking a great

portion of their time. ISU may consider ways to alleviate the book-keeping and similar

types of activities. In some departments, perhaps the consideration of an assistant- or

associate-chair

9. The complexities of chairs’ duties should be balanced with a higher level of authority.

Oftentimes, chairs are required to fulfill high level responsibilities, but the authority or

administrative “power” they have may not be sufficiently matched.

10. At times those who have proven their ability in leading the department may not be

interested in continuing their service as chair. The University can encourage productive

chairs by providing larger tangible and intangible rewards when inviting those chairs to

continue serving. Moreover, chairs are likely to be in the best position to identify the

next generation of department chairs.

11. Department chairs who are internally recruited have to undergo the transition from being

a part of faculty, into overseeing the faculty. In other words, transforming from their role

as colleague to supervisor. The university may consider how it can help to smooth the


change of the nature of interaction with faculty during their term as chair and after the

term ends?

12. “A good researcher is not always a good chair, and vice versa” (Dean, anonymous). That

statement was quoted from one of our interviews with ISU Deans. The PRS requires

chairs who are faculty members, to fulfill their teaching and research duties.

Consequently, oftentimes chairs are still evaluated on teaching and research

responsibilities; while in fact, they have little time left to do research and teaching.

Therefore, university might need to revisit the policy related to the teaching and research

expectations of department chairs.

13. In order to improve the department’s performance, chairs need to have a chance to create

innovative ideas. With the already hectic chairs’ schedule the university may consider

ways to support chairs to develop their creativity, both scholarly and managerially.

14. Undoubtedly, the job of a chair is highly complex. The university may consider clearly

stating the priority for chairs, whether it is their scholarship, teaching, or leading the

department. By doing so, department chairs may benefit from the increased direction on

how to prioritize their works.

We conclude with a quotation that sums up the job of department chair. “Where else in

institutions of higher education do we hire an individual without appropriate previous experience

and expect him or her to tackle admittedly difficult and complex responsibilities without benefit

of relevant training (Hecht, et al 1999, pg. 7). Considering the complexities and the high stakes

involved in the position, ISU is indeed fortunate to have a dedicated and productive team of


department chairs. It is hoped that this report provides some university guidance to continue the

fine service of its chairs as well as direction to make the university more chair-friendly.


References

Carroll, J. B. & Wolverton, M. (2004). Who becomes a chair? New Directions for Higher

Education, 126, 3-10.

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.

Denzin, N.K. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods.

Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall.

Gmelch, W. H. & Miskin, D. (1993). Understanding the challenges of department chairs:

Leadership Skills for Department Chairs, Bolton, MA: Anker.

Hecht, I. W. D., Higgerson, M. L., Gmelch, W. H., & Tucker, A. (1999). The department chair

as academic leader. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.

Iowa State University. (2005). Trend Analysis on Department Chairs 1994-2005 Iowa State

University. Ames, IA.

Jones, S., Torres, V., & Arminio, J. (2006). Negotiating the complexities of qualitative research

in higher education: Fundamental elements and issues. New York, NY: Routledge.

Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Merriam, S. B. (2008). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis.

San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.


Munger, M. C. (2010, February 8). 10 Suggestions for a new department chair. The Chronicle of

Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/10-Suggestions-for-a-

New/64963/

Office of the Executive Vice President and Provost, Iowa State University. (n.d). Faculty

Handbook and Procedures. Retrieved from

http://www.provost.iastate.edu/faculty/handbook/current/section3.html#section-3.3.1

Papas, E. (1989). The department chair in the 1990s: Confessions, concerns, and convictions.

ACA Bulletin, 68: 34-39.

Seagren, A. T., Creswell, J. W., & Wheeler, D. W. (1993). The department chair: new roles

responsibilities and challenges. ERIC Higher Education Report, 1. Washington, D.C.:

George Washington University.

Smith, E. (2004). The end of the reign: Department chair no more. New Directions for Higher

Education, 126, 85-92.

http://chronicle.com/article/10-Suggestions-for-a-New/64963/

http://chronicle.com/article/10-Suggestions-for-a-New/64963/

http://www.provost.iastate.edu/faculty/handbook/current/section3.html#section-3.3.1

Appendix A

Trend Analysis onDepartment Chairs

1994 - 2005

Iowa State University

Draft - 5/5/2005

Executive Summary

The purpose of this study is to provide a general background analysis on Department Chairs. The

data were gathered partly from the letter of intent (LOI) and partly from the ISU Administrative System

(ADIN). Information were gathered on each Department Chair for the past ten years within each

college. It is important to remember that some Department Chairs started their position earlier than

1994. There are circumstances where the Department Chairs have left the university for more than

five years and documentation is limited or non-existent. In these cases, certain criteria like term length,

reappointment and salary were assessed base on information that was found from the ISU

Administrative System (ADIN).

In the case where two or more departments are merged into one, only the current/new department is

used for labelling but the total number/data of Department Chairs of combined departments are used.

So the total number of Department Chairs may be slightly higher than usual. If this is the case, it will

be indicated/noted on the corresponding table/chart.

Certain data may be duplicated for the purpose of this report. In the case where a person is the

Department Chair for more than one department, he/she is considered as separate individuals. In

the case where a department belongs to two colleges, the department is listed twice (once in each

college). In either case, the duplicated data were treated as separate data for the purpose of this

study.

The report is organized into two sections: summary data for the colleges (with the exception of College

of Library) and departmental data within each college (with the exception of Departments of Air Force

Aerospace Studies, Military Science & Tactics and Naval Science for College of Liberal Arts & Sciences).

College of Library has been intentionally, not inadvertently, excluded from this report. Although the

University Library functions as a college, with a Dean of Library Services and tenure-track faculty

librarians, it is excluded from this study due to the unique nature of department chair positions

in the library system. The Library's three Associate Deans (for Collections & Technical Services,

Reference & Instruction, and Research & Access) hold renewable appointments as senior

administrators, but also serve as department chairs in promotion, tenure, and post-tenure reviews

within their respective divisions.

The report was first done departmentally within each college (pages 10 - 42), then summarized for the

colleges with the same criteria (pages 5-9) with added information such as compensation and

demographic. Detail descriptions of the study are listed below:

1. Table 1

Avg Length of Svc bef Adm Appt - This is an average time a Department Chair serves as a

faculty member before he/she was appointed to an Administrative position.Avg Term - This is an average term that a Department Chair is hired for as specified in his/her

Letter of Intent (LOI).Avg Length of Service as Dept Chair - This is an average time that a person serves

as a Department Chair (this includes Interim and Regular appointment).

2. Chart 1 - Average Length of Service before Administrative Appointment

A column chart showing the average time a faculty serves as a faculty member before being

appointed to an Administrative position.

Page 1 - Summary

Draft - 5/5/2005

3. Chart 2 - Average Term & Average Length of Service as Department Chair

A column-line chart showing a relationship between the average term a Department Chair is

hired for and the average time he/she actually served as a Department Chair.

4. Table 2

Number of Department Chairs - This is the total number of Department Chairs that serve in

each category (department/college) for the past ten years. In such cases where two or

more departments are combined into one, the total number of Department Chairs are

used. If this is the case, it will be indicated/noted on the corresponding table/chart.

*Number of Departments - This is the total number of Departments that each College

currently has. For the College of Liberal Arts & Sciences, Departments of Air Force

Aerospace Studies, Military Science & Tactics and Naval Science are excluded from this

study.

*This information is furnished for the colleges only.

Recruiting Source - This the total number of Department Chairs that were hired internally vs.

externally. The conclusion was made by considering the length of time a Department Chair

serves as a faculty member before being appointed to a Department Chair. If the length of

time is zero, the Department Chair is considered as an external candidate. On the other

hand, if the length of time is not zero, the Department Chair is considered as having served

at the university as a faculty member and therefore is considered as internal candidate.

5. Chart 3

*Number of Dept Chairs Vs. Number of Depts (1994-2004)

A column-bar chart showing the total number of Department Chairs Vs. total number of

Departments.

*This information is provided for the colleges only.

Number of Department Chairs (1994-2004)

A bar chart showing the total number of Department Chairs for the past ten years.

6. Chart 4 - Recruiting Source

A stacked-column chart showing a comparison between how many Department Chairs were

hired internally vs externally by each category (department/college).

7. Table 3 - Appointment Type

Interim - This is the total number of Department Chairs served on Interim basis.

Co-Interim - This is the total number of Department Chairs served as Co-Interim.

Interim/Term - This is the total number of Department Chairs served first as Interim and later

served as regular (Term) appointment.Term - This is the total number of Department Chairs served as regular (term) appointment.

9. Table 4 - Reappointed

This is the total number of Department Chairs reappointed or not reappointed as chairs.

First Term - This is the total number of Department Chairs currently serving on their first term

(data of whether they are reappointed or not are not yet available).

10. Chart 5 - Reappointed

A column chart showing side-by-side comparison of how many Department Chairs were

reappointed or not and how many Department Chairs are serving on their first term.

Page 2 - Summary

Draft - 5/5/2005

11. Table 5 - Faculty Pay Base

This is the pay base should a Department Chair return to a faculty position. It is important to

remember that certain Department Chair is an A-base (12 months) faculty member and certain

Department Chair is hired as Department Chair on B-base (9 months) appoinment only.

12. Chart 6 - Faculty Pay Base

A bar chart showing the percentage of each faculty pay base, A (12 Months) vs B (9 Months)

should a Department Chair return to a faculty position.

13. Table 6 - Benefits/Inducement Included

These are the different types of benefits/inducement included in appointment conditions (addition

to compensation) and may vary by department/college.

14. Table 7 - Special Conditions stated in Letter of Intent

These are additional conditions that may or may not be stated in the Letter of Intent and may

vary by department/college.

*The following information are provided on a college/university level only.

15. Table 8 - Compensation

Avg Dept Chair Salary - This is an average salary (includes administrative increment) for

Department Chairs within a college. This includes initial salary when a person is hired as a

Department Chair and the salary each time the Department Chair is reappointed. It does

not include regular annual salary increase. All twelve-month salaries have been converted

to nine-month equivalents for comparison purposes.Avg Faculty Salary - This is the average nine-month salaries for full professor (1993-2004).

Avg Adm Inc - This is an average administrative increment for Department Chairs within a

college. In the case where a Department Chair is hired on different administrative

increment (in such case where a Department Chair first served as Interim and later

appointed to regular appointment or Department Chair reappointed at higher increment),

an average amount is used for the purpose of this study.

16. Chart 7 - Average Compensation

This chart attemps to explain the relationship of how much salary a Department Chair earns as

compared to a faculty member (full professor) vs. the administrative increment that he/she

receives.

17. Table 9 - Demographic

This is the general Department Chairs' demographic.

18. Chart 8 - Demographic

A pie chart showing the percentage of each demographic category.

19. Table 10 - Gender

This is the total number of male and female Department Chairs.

20. Chart 9 - Gender

A pie chart showing the percentage of male vs female Department Chairs.

21. Table 11 - Ethnicity

This is the total number of Department Chairs by ethnicity.

Page 3 - Summary

Draft - 5/5/2005

22. Chart 10 - Ethnicity

A pie chart showing the percentage of each ethnicity.

Page 4 - Summary

Draft - 5/5/2005

Table 1

Avg Length of Svc

bef Adm ApptAvg Term

Avg Length of Svc

as Dept Chair

Agriculture 13 4 5

Business 10 3 3

Design 11 4 5

Education 15 2 3

Engineering 14 4 5

FCS 9 3 5

LAS 16 4 5

Vet Med 9 3 3

Chart 1

Chart 2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16


13

10 11

15 14

9

16

9


0

1

2

3

4

5

6



Avg Term

Avg Length of Svcas Dept Chair

Page 5 - Colleges

Draft - 5/5/2005

Number of Number of

Table 2 Department Chairs Departments Internal External

Agriculture 42 14 27 15

Business 21 5 16 5

Design 10 4 5 5

Education 17 4 14 3

Engineering 25 8 18 7

FCS 13 3 8 5

LAS 57 20 48 9

Vet Med 22 5 16 6

Chart 3

Chart 4

Recruiting Source

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Number of Dept Chairs Vs. Number of Depts (1994-2004)

Department Chairs

Departments

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


27

16

5

14 18

8

48

16

15

5

5

3

7

5

9

6

Recruiting Source

External

Internal

Page 6 - Colleges

Draft - 5/5/2005

Table 3 Interim Co-Interim Interim/Term Term

Agriculture 7 0 6 31

Business 2 0 3 16

Design 1 0 3 6

Education 5 2 3 6

Engineering 6 0 3 16

FCS 1 2 1 9

LAS 3 0 10 44

Vet Med 9 0 2 11

Table 4 Yes No First Term

Agriculture 21 11 11

Business 7 12 2

Design 7 2 1

Education 10 5 2

Engineering 14 6 5

FCS 9 3 1

LAS 34 10 13

Vet Med 13 5 4

Chart 5

Appointment Type

Reappointed

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35


21

7 7

10

14

9

34

13

11 12

2

5 6

3

10

5

11

2 1

2

5

1

13

4

Reappointed

Yes

No

First Term

Page 7 - Colleges

Draft - 5/5/2005

Table 5 A (12 Months) B (9 Months)

Agriculture 30 11

Business 0 21

Design 1 9

Education 1 15

Engineering 1 24

FCS 3 10

LAS 11 46

Vet Med 20 2

Chart 6

Table 6 Benefits/inducement Included:

a) Travel/Research

b) Administrative/Research Assistant/Associate

c) Profesional Development

d) Summer Salary/Supplement

e) UP Professorship Supplement

f) Reimbursed Moving Costs

g) Funding towards course buyout

h) Semester leave with pay

i) Start-up package

Table 7 Special Conditions stated in Letter of Intent:

a) Serves at the pleasure of the Dean

b) Unused vacation will be forfeited upon returning to B-base

Faculty Pay Base

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Agriculture

Business

Design

Education

Engineering

FCS

LAS

Vet Med

Faculty Pay Base

A (12 Months)

B (9 Months)

Page 8 - Colleges

Draft - 5/5/2005

Table 8 Avg Dept Ch Sal Avg Faculty Sal Avg Adm Inc

Agriculture $90,880 $76,432 $6,568

Business $99,622 $97,910 $7,711

Design $96,236 $67,565 $10,032

Education $79,054 $71,034 $5,469

Engineering $104,665 $94,673 $3,531

FCS $85,602 $72,924 $3,962

LAS $81,262 $77,459 $5,221

Vet Med $96,872 $87,730 $5,061

Chart 7

Table 9 Male Female

Caucasian 147 35

African American 4 0

Asian 13 0

Native American 0 0

Hispanic 1 0

Chart 8

Compensation

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Caucasian

African American

Asian

Native American

Hispanic

Male

Female

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000


Average Compensation

Avg Dept Ch Sal

Avg Faculty Sal

Avg Adm Inc

Page 9 - Colleges

Draft - 5/5/2005

Table 10

Male 171

Female 36

Chart 9

Table 11

Caucasian 189

African American 4

Asian 13

Native American 0

Hispanic 1

Chart 10

91%

2%

6%

0% 1%

Ethnicity

Caucasian

African American

Asian

Native American

Hispanic

Male 83%

Female 17%

Gender

Page 10 - Colleges

Third Draft - 3/1/2005

Table 1

Avg Length of

Svc bef Adm

Appt

Avg Term

Avg Length of

Svc

as Dept Chair

Ag Economics 6 5 5

Ag & Biosys Engr 22 5 6

Ag Educ & Stud 18 5 6

Agronomy 7 4 5


BBMB 15 4 5

EEOB 19 4 5

Entomology 17 5 4

FSHN 5 4 3

GDCB 9 3 10

Horticulture 5 3 4

NREM 13 4 9

Plant Pathology 13 4 5

Sociology 28 4 4

Chart 1

Chart 2

College of Agriculture

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

AgEconomics

Ag & BiosysEngr

Ag Educ &Stud

Agronomy AnimalScience

BBMB EEOB Entomology FSHN GDCB Horticulture NREM PlantPathology

Sociology

6

22

18

7

11

15

19 17

5

9

5

13 13

28


0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Avg Term


Page 11 - Agriculture


Number of

Table 2 Department Chairs Internal External

Ag Economics 2 1 1



Agronomy 3 1 2


BBMB 3 3 0

EEOB 3 2 1

Entomology 3 2 1

FSHN 4 1 3

GDCB 2 1 1

Horticulture 3 2 1

NREM 4 3 1


Sociology 3 3 0

Chart 3

Chart 4

Recruiting Source

0

1

2

3

4

5

Ag EconomicsAg & Biosys EngrAg Educ & StudAgronomyAnimal Science BBMB EEOB Entomology FSHN GDCB Horticulture NREM Plant PathologySociology

2 2 2

3

4

3 3 3

4

2

3

4

3 3


0

1

2

3

4

AgEconomics

Ag & BiosysEngr

Ag Educ &Stud



Sociology

1

2 2

1

2

3

2 2

1 1

2

3

2

3 1

0 0 2

2 0

1 1 3

1

1

1

1

0

Recruiting Source

External

Internal



Table 3 Interim Interim/Term Term

Ag Economics 0 1 1



Agronomy 1 0 2


BBMB 0 1 2

EEOB 0 1 2

Entomology 0 0 3

FSHN 1 0 3

GDCB 0 0 2

Horticulture 1 0 2

NREM 1 0 3


Sociology 0 0 3


Ag Economics 2 0 0



Agronomy 1 1 1


BBMB 2 0 1

EEOB 2 0 1

Entomology 1 1 1

FSHN 2 1 1

GDCB 2 0 0

Horticulture 2 1 0

NREM 3 0 1


Sociology 1 2 0

Chart 5

Appointment Type

Reappointed

Reappointed



Table 5 A B

Ag Economics 0 2

Ag & Biosys Engr 1 1

Ag Educ & Stud 2 0

Agronomy 3 0

Animal Science 4 0

BBMB 3 0

EEOB 1 2

Entomology 3 0

FSHN 3 1

GDCB 0 2

Horticulture 3 0

NREM 4 0

Plant Pathology 2 1

Sociology 1 2

Faculty Pay Base

0

1

2

3

AgEconomics

Ag & BiosysEngr

Ag Educ &Stud



Sociology

2

1 1 1

0

2 2

1

2 2 2

3

1 1

0 0

1 1

3

0 0

1 1

0

1

0

1

2

0

1

0

1 1 1 1 1 1

0 0

1 1

0

Reappointed

Yes

No

First Term



Chart 6


a) Travel/Research

b) Research Assistant/Associate


d) Summer Salary

e) Reimbursed Moving Costs

f) Funding towards course buyout




0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Faculty Pay Base

A

B



Table 1

Avg Length of

Svc bef Adm ApptAvg Term

Avg Length of

Svc

as Dept Chair

Accounting 9 3 4

Finance 9 3 4

LOMIS 9 3 2

Management 11 4 3

Marketing 11 4 3

Chart 1

Chart 1

College of Business

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Accounting Finance LOMIS Management Marketing

9 9 9

11 11


0

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4



Avg Term


Page 16 - Business


Number of


Accounting 4 3 1

Finance 4 3 1

LOMIS 5 4 1

Management 4 3 1

Marketing 4 3 1

Chart 3

Chart 4

Recruiting Source

0

1

2

3

4

5


4 4

5

4 4


0

1

2

3

4

5


3 3

4

3 3

1 1

1

1 1

Recruiting Source

External

Internal

Page 17 - Business



Accounting 1 1 2

Finance 1 1 2

LOMIS 0 1 4

Management 0 0 4

Marketing 0 0 4


Accounting 3 1 0

Finance 3 1 0

LOMIS 1 4 0

Management 0 3 1

Marketing 0 3 1

Chart 5

Table 5 A B

Accounting 0 4

Finance 0 4

LOMIS 0 5

Management 0 4

Marketing 0 4

Chart 6

Faculty Pay Base

Reappointed

Appointment Type

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4


3 3

1

0 0

1 1

4

3 3

0 0 0

1 1

Reappointed

Yes

No

First Term

Faculty Pay Base

Page 18 - Business



a) Research Assistant/Associate

b) Profesional Development

c) Summer Salary/Supplement

d) UP Professorship Supplement


f) Semester leave with pay




0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Accounting

Finance

LOMIS

Management

Marketing

Faculty Pay Base

A

B

Page 19 - Business


Table 1

Avg Length of

Svc bef Adm

Appt

Avg Term

Avg Length of

Svc

as Dept Chair

Architecture 14 3 2

Art & Design 15 4 5

Comm & Regional Planning 11 5 5

Landscape Arc 0 5 11

Chart 1

Chart 2

College of Design

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16


Landscape Arc

14 15

11

0


0

2

4

6

8

10

12


Landscape Arc


Avg Term


Page 20 - Design


Number of


3 1 2

3 2 1

3 2 1

1 0 1

Chart 3

Chart 4

Architecture

Comm & Regional Planning

Landscape Arc

Recruiting Source

Art & Design

0

1

2

3


Landscape Arc

3 3 3

1


0

1

2

3


Landscape Arc

1

2 2

0

2

1 1

1

Recruiting Source

External

Internal

Page 21 - Design



Architecture 1 0 2

Art & Design 0 2 1

Comm & Regional Planning 0 1 2

Landscape Arc 0 0 1


1 1 1

2 1 0

3 0 0

1 0 0

Chart 5

Table 5 A B

Architecture 0 3

Art & Design 0 3

Comm & Regional Planning 1 2

Landscape Arc 0 1

Chart 6

Landscape Arc

Faculty Pay Base

Appointment Type

Reappointed

Architecture

Art & Design

Comm & Regional Planning

0

1

2

3


Landscape Arc

1

2

3

1 1 1

0 0

1

0 0 0

Reappointed

Yes

No

First Term

Page 22 - Design





c) Reimbursed Moving Costs

d) Semester leave with pay




0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Architecture

Art & Design

Comm & RegionalPlanning

Landscape Arc

Faculty Pay Base

A

B

Page 23 - Design


Table 1

Avg Length of

Svc bef Adm

Appt

Avg Term

Avg Length of

Svc

as Dept Chair

Curr & Instruction 21 2 3

Educ Lead & Pol St 15 2 2

Health & Human Perf 14 2 4

Industrial Educ & Tech 11 2 4

Chart 1

Chart 2

College of Education

0

5

10

15

20

25

Curr & Instruction Educ Lead & Pol St Health & HumanPerf

Industrial Educ &Tech

21

15 14

11


0

1

2

3

4

Curr & Instruction Educ Lead & Pol St Health & Human Perf Industrial Educ & Tech


Avg Term


Page 24 - Education


Number of


4 4 0

5 4 1

4 3 1

4 3 1

Chart 3

Chart 4

Health & Human Perf

Industrial Educ & Tech

Recruiting Source

Curr & Instruction

Educ Lead & Pol St

0

1

2

3

4

5

Curr & Instruction Educ Lead & Pol St Health & Human Perf Industrial Educ & Tech

4

5

4 4


0

1

2

3

4

5

Curr & Instruction Educ Lead & PolSt

Health & HumanPerf


4 4

3 3

0

1

1 1

Recruiting Source

External

Internal

Page 25 - Education



Curr & Instruction 2 0 0 2

Educ Lead & Pol St 1 2 0 1

Health & Human Perf 1 0 1 2

Industrial Educ & Tech 1 0 2 1


Curr & Instruction 3 1 0

Educ Lead & Pol St 3 1 1

Health & Human Perf 2 1 1

Industrial Educ & Tech 2 2 0

Chart 5

Table 5 A B

Curr & Instruction 0 4

Educ Lead & Pol St 1 3

Health & Human Perf 0 4

Industrial Educ & Tech 0 4

Appointment Type

Reappointed

Faculty Pay Base

0

1

2

3

Curr & Instruction Educ Lead & Pol St Health & HumanPerf


3 3

2 2

1 1 1

2

0

1 1

0

Reappointed

Yes

No

First Term

Page 26 - Education


Chart 6


1. Serves at the pleasure of the Dean

2. Unused vacation will be forfeited upon returning to B-base

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Curr & Instruction

Educ Lead & Pol St

Health & Human Perf

Industrial Educ & Tech

Faculty Pay Base

A

B

Page 27 - Education


Table 1

Avg Length of

Svc bef Adm

Appt

Avg Term

Avg Length of

Svc

as Dept Chair

Aerospace Engr 14 4 4


Chem Engr 16 3 5

Civil, Const & Env Engr 17 4 15

Elec & Comp Engr 10 3 3

Ind & Man Systems Engr 15 3 3

Mat Sc & Engr 8 5 7

Mech Engr 17 3 3

Chart 1

Arun somani

Aziz Fouad

Randall Geiger

Pat Patterson

Pius J. Egbelu

Geraldine Montag

Mufit Akinc

Krishna Vedula

Judy Vance

Jon Van Gerpen

Warren R. DeVries

Shyam Bahadur

Theodore Okiishi

Chart 2


0

5

10

15

20

25

AerospaceEngr

Ag &BiosysEngr

Chem EngrCivil, Const& Env Engr

Elec &Comp Engr

Ind & ManSystems

Engr

Mat Sc &Engr

Mech Engr

14

22

16 17

10 15

8

17


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

AerospaceEngr

Ag &BiosysEngr

Chem Engr Civil, Const& Env Engr

Elec &Comp Engr

Ind & ManSystems

Engr

Mat Sc &Engr

Mech Engr


Avg Term


Page 28 - Engineering


Number of




Chem Engr 3 3 0




Mat Sc & Engr 2 1 1

Mech Engr 5 4 1

Chart 3

Chart 4

Recruiting Source

0

1

2

3

4

5

AerospaceEngr

Ag & BiosysEngr


Elec &Comp Engr

Ind & ManSystems

Engr

Mat Sc &Engr

Mech Engr

3

2

3

1

2 2

1

4

1

0

0

0

2

1

1

1

Recruiting Source

External

Internal

0

1

2

3

4

5

AerospaceEngr

Ag & BiosysEngr


Elec & CompEngr

Ind & ManSystems

Engr

Mat Sc &Engr

Mech Engr

4

2

3

1

4

3

2

5







Chem Engr 1 0 2




Mat Sc & Engr 0 1 1

Mech Engr 2 0 3




Chem Engr 2 1 0




Mat Sc & Engr 2 0 0

Mech Engr 3 1 1

Chart 5

Table 5 A B

Aerospace Engr 0 4

Ag & Biosys Engr 1 1

Chem Engr 0 3

Civil, Const & Env Engr 0 1

Elec & Comp Engr 0 4

Ind & Man Systems Engr 0 3

Mat Sc & Engr 0 2

Mech Engr 0 5

Appointment Type

Reappointed

Faculty Pay Base

0

1

2

3

Aerospace Engr Ag & BiosysEngr

Chem Engr Civil, Const &Env Engr

Elec & CompEngr

Ind & ManSystems Engr

Mat Sc & Engr Mech Engr

2

1

2

1 1

2 2

3

1

0

1

0

2

1

0

1 1 1

0 0

1

0 0

1

Reappointed

Yes

No

First Term



Chart 6


a) Travel/Research


c) Reimburse Moving Costs

d) Summer salary




0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Aerospace Engr

Ag & Biosys Engr

Chem Engr

Civil, Const & Env Engr

Elec & Comp Engr

Ind & Man Systems Engr

Mat Sc & Engr

Mech Engr

Faculty Pay Base

A

B



Table 1

Avg Length of

Svc bef Adm

Appt

Avg Term

Avg Length of

Svc

as Dept Chair

*App, Educ St & Hosp Mgmt 10 4 6

Food Sc & Human Nutrition 5 4 3

Human Dev & Fam St 14 2 4

*Departments of Hotel, Rest & Inst Mgmt, Textiles & Clothing merged into the Department of App, Educ St & Hosp Mgmt

Chart 1

Mary Winter

Chart 2

College of Family & Consumer Sciences

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

*App, Educ St & HospMgmt

Food Sc & Human Nutrition Human Dev & Fam St

10

5

14


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

*App, Educ St & Hosp Mgmt Food Sc & Human Nutrition Human Dev & Fam St

Average Term & Average Length of Service as Department Chairs

Avg Term


Page 32 - FCS


Number of


App, Educ St & Hosp Mgmt 6 5 1



Chart 3

Chart 4

Recruiting Source

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

App, Educ St & Hosp Mgmt Food Sc & Human Nutrition Human Dev & Fam St

6

4

3


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

App, Educ St & Hosp Mgmt Food Sc & Human Nutrition Human Dev & Fam St

5

1

2

1

3 1

Recruiting Source

External

Internal

Page 33 - FCS



App, Educ St & Hosp Mgmt 0 0 1 5

Food Sc & Human Nutrition 1 0 0 3

Human Dev & Fam St 0 2 0 1


App, Educ St & Hosp Mgmt 4 2 0



Chart 5

Table 5 A B

App, Educ St & Hosp Mgmt 0 6

Food Sc & Human Nutrition 3 1

Human Dev & Fam St 0 3

Chart 6

Faculty Pay Base

Appointment Type

Reappointed

0

1

2

3

4

App, Educ St & HospMgmt

Food Sc & HumanNutrition

Human Dev & Fam St

4

2

3

2

1

0 0

1

0

Reappointed

Yes

No

First Term

Page 34 - FCS



a) Travel/Research


c) Reimbursed Moving Costs




0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

App, Educ St & Hosp Mgmt

Food Sc & Human Nutrition

Human Dev & Fam St

Faculty Pay Base

A

B

Page 35 - FCS


Table 1

Avg Length of Svc

bef Adm ApptAvg Term

Avg Length of Svc

as Dept Chair

Anthropology 22 5 7

BBMB 15 4 5

Chemistry 15 3 4

Computer Science 11 3 5

EEOB 19 4 5

Economics 6 5 5

English 20 5 4

For Lang & Lit 15 3 5

GDCB 9 3 10

Geol & Atmos Sci 21 3 5

GSJC 5 4 4

History 27 4 7

Math 15 3 4

Music 11 4 14

Phil & Rel Studies 17 3 5

Phys & Astron 22 3 3

Political Science 12 6 5

Psychology 8 3 4

Sociology 28 4 4

Statistics 20 4 10

Chart 1

Chart 2

College of Liberal Art & Siences

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


02468

10121416


Avg Term


Page 36 - LAS


Number ofTable 2 Department Chairs Internal External

Anthropology 2 2 0

BBMB 3 3 0

Chemistry 4 4 0


EEOB 3 2 1

Economics 2 1 1

English 3 3 0


GDCB 2 1 1


GSJC 4 2 2

History 2 2 0

Math 3 2 1

Music 2 2 0


Phys & Astron 3 3 0


Psychology 3 2 1

Sociology 3 3 0

Statistics 2 2 0

Chart 3

Chart 4

Recruiting Source

0

1

2

3

4

2

3

4 4

3

2

3 3

2

3

4

2

3

2

3 3

2

3 3

2


0

1

2

3

4

2

3

4

3

2

1

3 3

1

3

2 2 2 2

3 3

1

2

3

2

0

0

0

1

1

1

0 0

1

0 2

0

1

0

0 0

1

1

0

0

Recruiting Source

External

Internal

Page 37 - LAS



Anthropology 0 0 2

BBMB 0 1 2

Chemistry 0 0 4


EEOB 0 1 2

Economics 0 1 1

English 0 0 3


GDCB 0 0 2


GSJC 0 1 3

History 0 0 2

Math 0 1 2

Music 0 1 1


Phys & Astron 0 0 3


Psychology 1 0 2

Sociology 0 0 3

Statistics 0 2 0


Anthropology 1 0 1

BBMB 2 0 1

Chemistry 1 1 2


EEOB 2 0 1

Economics 2 0 0

English 0 2 1


GDCB 2 0 0


GSJC 2 1 1

History 2 0 0

Math 3 0 0

Music 1 0 1


Phys & Astron 1 1 1


Psychology 3 0 0

Sociology 1 2 0

Statistics 2 0 0

Chart 5

Appointment Type

Reappointed

3

3 3 3

Reappointed

Page 38 - LAS


Table 5 A B

Anthropology 0 2

BBMB 3 0

Chemistry 2 2

Computer Science 1 3

EEOB 1 2

Economics 0 2

English 1 2

For Lang & Lit 0 3

GDCB 0 2

Geol & Atmos Sci 0 3

GSJC 0 4

History 0 2

Math 0 3

Music 0 1

Phil & Rel Studies 0 3

Phys & Astron 1 2

Political Science 1 3

Psychology 1 2

Sociology 1 2

Statistics 0 2

Chart 8

Faculty Pay Base

0

1

2

1

2

1 1

2 2

0

2 2 2 2

1

2

1 1 1

2

0 0

1

2

0 0

2

0 0 0

1

0 0 0 0

1 1

0

2

0

1 1

2

1 1

0

1 1

0 0

1

0 0

1 1 1

0 0 0 0

Yes

No

First Term

Page 39 - LAS



a) Travel/Research



d) Summer Salary


f) Funding towards course buyout




0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Anthropology

BBMB

Chemistry

Computer Science

EEOB

Economics

English

For Lang & Lit

GDCB

Geol & Atmos Sci

GSJC

History

Math

Music

Phil & Rel Studies

Phys & Astron

Political Science

Psychology

Sociology

Statistics

Faculty Pay Base

A

B

Page 40 - LAS


Page 41 - LAS


Table 1

Avg Length of

Svc bef Adm

Appt

Avg Term

Avg Length of

Svc

as Dept Chair

Biomedical Sc 12 3 6

Vet Mic & Prev Med 8 3 3

Vet Clinical Svc 1 4 3

Vet Diag & Prod An Med 9 3 2

Vet Pathology 12 2 3

Chart 1

Patrick Halbur

Lisa Nolan

Robert Holland

Nolan Hartwig

Gary Osweiler

John Andrews

Claire Andreasen

Joseph Haynes

Norman Cheville

John Greve

Chart 2


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14


Vet Clinical Svc Vet Diag & ProdAn Med

Vet Pathology

12

8

1

9

12


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Biomedical Sc Vet Mic & Prev Med Vet Clinical Svc Vet Diag & Prod AnMed

Vet Pathology


Avg Term


Page 42 - Vet Med


Number of


Biomedical Sc 4 3 1




Vet Pathology 4 3 1

Chart 3

Chart 4

Recruiting Source

0

1

2

3

4

5

6



Vet Pathology

4

5

3

6

4


0

1

2

3

4

5

6



Vet Pathology

3 3

1

6

3

1

2

2

0

1

Recruiting Source

External

Internal

Page 43 - Vet Med



Biomedical Sc 1 1 2




Vet Pathology 3 0 1


Biomedical Sc 4 0 0




Vet Pathology 4 0 0

Chart 5

Table 5 A B

Biomedical Sc 4 0

Vet Mic & Prev Med 4 1

Vet Clinical Svc 3 0

Vet Diag & Prod An Med 5 1

Vet Pathology 4 0

Chart 6

Reappointed

Faculty Pay Base

Appointment Type

0

1

2

3

4



Vet Pathology

4

3

1 1

4

0

1 1

3

0 0

1 1

2

0

Reappointed

Yes

No

First Term

Page 44 - Vet Med




b) Start-up package




0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Biomedical Sc

Vet Mic & Prev Med

Vet Clinical Svc

Vet Diag & Prod An Med

Vet Pathology

Faculty Pay Base

A

B

Page 45 - Vet Med

1

ISU Department Chair Survey

Q1 Consent Form for: Analysis of the Role, Progression, and Directions of the ISU Department Chair

This form describes a research project and contains information to help you decide whether or not you wish to participate.

Research studies include only people who choose to take part—your participation is completely voluntary. Please discuss any

questions you have about the study or about this form with the project staff before deciding to participate.

Who is conducting this study?

This study is being conducted by: Dr. Linda Serra Hagedorn, Associate Dean and Professor from the College of Human Sciences

at Iowa State University in conjunction with the ISU Provost Office, and the ISU ADVANCE Project.

Why am I invited to participate in this study?

You are being asked to take part in this study because you are a department chair or equivalent at Iowa State University.

What is the purpose of this study?

The purpose of this study is to better understand the roles and responsibility of department chairs at Iowa State University.

What will I be asked to do?

If you agree to participate, you will be asked to respond to a series of survey questions asking about your roles and

responsibilities as a department chair, as well as the support and challenges you face in your roles. Your participation will last

for the duration of your time spent on the survey, approximately 15-20 minutes to answer all of the questions. At any time

you may choose to not answer a question or to end the survey.

What are the possible risks and benefits of my participation? Risks – The researchers anticipate no risks related to your

participation in this research. The questions are non-invasive and you may choose to not respond to any question at any

time.

Appendix B

2

Benefits – You may not receive any direct benefit from taking part in this study. We hope that this research will benefit Iowa

State University department chairs by informing administrators of the challenges and support needed by department chairs

with regard to their roles and responsibilities.

How will the information I provide be used?

The information you provide will be used by Iowa State University administrators and faculty members to understand the

roles and responsibility of department chairs at Iowa State University. The data you provide will be summarized with other

department chairs’ data. Statistics may be released in aggregate form to inform administrators. No aggregated data will be

released with less than three department chairs’ data summarized in order to assure the confidentiality of all participating

chairs. There will be no identifying information attached to any analyses or presentation. However, due to the small number of

Department Chairs, complete anonymity cannot be guaranteed.

What measures will be taken to ensure the confidentiality of the data or to protect my privacy?

Records identifying participants will be kept confidential to the extent allowed by applicable laws and regulations. Records

will not be made publicly available. However auditing departments of Iowa State University, and the ISU Institutional Review

Board (a committee that reviews and approves research studies with human subjects) may inspect and/or copy your records

for quality assurance and analysis. These records may contain private information. To ensure confidentiality to the extent

allowed by law, your responses will be disassociated with identifiable information at the end of the survey period.

The confidential data will be stored on a computer behind a locked office door and password protected, and access only

granted to approved persons to analyze the data. Individual responses will not be released. Deans will not be provided with

data from their departments.

Will I incur any costs from participating or will I be compensated?

You will not have any costs from participating in this study and you will not be compensated.

What are my rights as a human research participant?

3

Participating in this study is completely voluntary. You may choose not to take part in the study or to stop participating at any

time, for any reason, without penalty or negative consequences. You may skip any questions that you do not wish to answer.

Your choice of whether or not to participate will have no impact on you as a department chair in any way.

Whom can I call if I have questions or problems?

You are encouraged to ask questions at any time during this study.

For further information about the study contact Dr. Linda Serra Hagedorn, Associate Dean and Professor, at 515-294-5746,

[email protected].

If you have any questions about the rights of research subjects or research-related injury, please contact the IRB

Administrator, (515) 294-4566, [email protected], or Director, (515) 294-3115, Office for Responsible Research, 1138 Pearson

Hall, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011.

Consent and Authorization Provisions

By clicking the “continue” button, you indicate that you voluntarily agree to participate in this study, that the study has been

explained to you, that you have been given the time to read the document and that your questions have been satisfactorily

answered. You may print a copy of the informed consent for your own files or contact the principal investigators to obtain a

copy.

I wish to continue

I do not wish to continue

4

Q2 Please indicate your College:

College of Agriculture and Life Sciences

College of Business

College of Design





5

Q3 Please indicate your department:

Agricultural Economics

Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering

Agricultural Education and Studies

Agronomy

Animal Science

Biochemistry, Biophysics and Molecular Biology

Ecology, Evolution and Organismal Biology

Entomology

Food Science and Human Nutrition

Genetics, Development and Cell Biology

Horticulture

Natural Resource Ecology and Management

Plant Pathology and Microbiology

Sociology

6

Q4 Please indicate your departments:

Accounting

Finance

Supply Chain and Information Systems

Management

Marketing

7


Architecture

Community & Regional Planning

Graphic Design

Integrated Studio Art

Interior Design

Landscape Architecture

8


Aerospace Engineering

Agricultural & Biosystems Engineering

Chemical & Biological Engineering

Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering

Electrical and Computer Engineering

Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering

Materials Science and Engineering

Mechanical Engineering

9


Curriculum & Instruction

Apparel, Educational Studies & Hospitality Management

Human Development and Family Studies

Food Science & Human Nutrition

Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

Kinesiology

10


Anthropology

Biochemistry, Biophysics and Molecular Biology

Chemistry

Computer Science

Ecology, Evolution & Organismal Biology

Economics

English

Genetics, Development & Cell Biology

Geological and Atmospheric Sciences

Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication

History

Mathematics

Music & Theatre

Philosophy and Religious Studies

Physics & Astronomy

Political Science

Psychology

Sociology

Statistics

World Languages and Cultures

11


Biomedical Sciences

Veterinary Microbiology & Preventive Medicine

Veterinary Clinical Sciences

Veterinary Diagnostic & Production Animal Medicine

Veterinary Pathology

12

Q10 Appointment Process Please select the response that best fits the search/selection process when you were

appointed Department Chair.

Internal search within the department

Internal search within ISU but external to the department

External search to ISU

Other. Please specify ____________________

13

Q11 Who provides inputs to the Dean regarding the selection of Department Chair? (choose all that apply)

Tenured faculty

Tenure-track faculty

Non-tenure eligible (e.g. Clinical faculty)

Adjunct faculty

Part-time faculty

Staff

Emeritus faculty


14

Q12 What is the term of your appointment?

Please indicate how many years: ____________________

No specific term length


Q13 If offered another term as Department Chair, how likely would it be for you to accept?

Yes, I would enthusiastically accept

Possibly would consider another term

I would not consider another term

Q14 Why would you accept or not accept the offer?

15

Q15 If offered a higher position in administration, how likely would it be for you to accept?

Yes, I would enthusiastically accept

Possibly would consider another term

I would not consider another term

Q16 Why would you accept or not accept the offer?

________________________________________________________

16

Q17 How long is your academic year contract as the Department Chair?

9 months

10 months

11 months

12 months

Not certain


Q18 What is the typical term for Department Chairs in your department?

Please indicate how many years: ____________________

No typical term


17

Q19 At the end of the Spring 2012 term, how long will you have been Department Chair at ISU?

______ years

Q20 What was your academic rank and status when you became Department Chair? (mark all that apply)

Associate Professor

Full Professor

Tenured


Q21 According to your PRS, what percentage of your profile is dedicated to Department Chair duties?

______ %

Q22 Approximately what percentage of your work time is ACTUALLY spent on Department Chair related duties (as opposed to

teaching, research, and service)?

______ %

18

Q23 Listed below are possible reasons for becoming a Department Chair. Indicate how relevant each reason was in your

case.

Not Relevant Somewhat Relevant

Very Relevant

I wanted to help lead my department

Faculty rotate through the position and it was my turn

I wanted the extra pay

I wanted to increase my retirement pay

No one else willing to do it

I aspire to higher positions of leadership

I desired to advance a particular department program

I prefer a leadership role

For personal development (interesting challenge, new opportunities)

Other. Please specify

Additional comments

19

Q24 How many total years have you been a full-time faculty member at ANY institution?

______ years

Q25 How many years have you been a full-time faculty member at ISU?

______ years

Q26 Prior to your assignment as Department Chair, were you (check all that apply)

An ISU faculty member

A faculty member at a different institution

An ISU administrator

An administrator at a different institution

Other. Please explain ____________________

20

Q27 Reviews/Assessments How often is your performance formally reviewed by your Dean?

Never

Once a Semester

Once a year

Not certain


Q28 How often is your performance formally reviewed by Faculty?

Never

Once a Semester

Once a year

Once every 2 years

Once every 3 years

Once every 4 years

At your request (no particular pattern)


21

Q29

Strongly agree

Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree

Disagree Strongly Disagree

My evaluation is based on clear Department Chair performance expectations

Q30 How were performance expectations provided to you by your dean PRIOR to becoming Department Chair?

Verbally

In writing

Not provided


22

Q31 Chair Duty/Task

Rate the importanceof each of the following Department Chair duties

Extremely Important

Very Important

Neither Important

nor Unimportan

t

Very Unimportant

Not at all Importan

t

Check if you

would like more training

1. Facilitating successful recruitment and selection of promising faculty

2. Evaluate faculty performance

3. Reduce, resolve, and/or prevent conflict among departmental faculty members

4. Assist faculty in developing their own goals and priorities

5. Develop and initiate long-range departmental goals

6. Plan and conduct department meetings

7. Solicit ideas to improve the department

8. Allocate faculty

23

responsibilities in an effective and equitable manner

9. Inform faculty of department, college, and university concerns

10. Plan and evaluate curriculum development

11. Coordinate departmental activities

12. Effectively advocate for departmental interests to higher authorities

13. Represent the department at professional meetings

14. Participate in college and university committee work

15. Fundraising

16. Manage department resources (finances, facilities, equipment, and space)

17. Remain current within academic discipline

24

18. Prepare and propose budgets

19. Look out for the personal welfare of individual faculty members

20. Provide feedback to faculty on their major activities

21. Other. Please explain

25

Q32 Time

In an average year, estimate the amount of time you spend in each Department Chair activity

1 None

2 3 4 5 A great deal

1. Facilitating successful recruitment and selection of promising faculty

2. Evaluate faculty performance

3. Reduce, resolve, and/or prevent conflict among departmental faculty members

4. Assist faculty in developing their own goals and priorities

5. Develop and initiate long-range departmental goals

6. Plan and conduct department meetings

7. Solicit ideas to improve the department

8. Allocate faculty responsibilities in an effective and equitable manner

9. Inform faculty of department, college, and university concerns

10. Plan and evaluate curriculum development

11. Coordinate departmental activities

12. Effectively advocate for departmental interests to higher

26

authorities

13. Represent the department at professional meetings

14. Participate in college and university committee work

15. Fundraising

16. Manage department resources (finances, facilities, equipment, and space)

17. Remain current within academic discipline

18. Prepare and propose budgets

19. Look out for the personal welfare of individual faculty members

20. Provide feedback to faculty on their major activities

21. Other. Please explain

27

Q33 Indicate any Department Chair preparation workshops that you attended.

Please specify ____________________

I have not attended any Department Chair preparation workshops

Q34 Indicate any leadership workshops that you attended.

Please specify ____________________

I have not attended any leadership workshops

28

Q35 Support

Rate your agreement with each of the following items:

Strongly Agree

Agree Neither Agree nor Disagree

Disagree Strongly Disagree

1. My dean supports me

2. My faculty trusts me

3. I have the authority to make important decisions

4. My dean has confidence in my leadership

5. My faculty have confidence in my leadership

Q36 What additional supports should be provided to Department Chairs to assure success?

__________________________________________________

29

Q37 Please rate your agreement with the following statements.

Strongly Agree Not Sure Strongly Disagree

1. I feel that difficulties for women who serve as department chair are similar to those for men who serve as department chair.

2. I feel that difficulties for race/ethnic minority group members who serve as department chairs are similar to those of non-minority persons who serve as department chairs

3. I feel that difficulties for gays and lesbians who serve as department chair are similar to those of heterosexual persons who serve as department chair. I

Please provide additional comments:

30

Q38 Stress

Rate your level of stress in each of the following areas:

Extremely Stressful

Stressful Somewhat Stressful

Not Stressful

1. Time to stay current in my field (with research, conferences, etc.)

2. Gaining financial support for department programs

3. My academic career progress

4. Fulfilling my high self-expectation

5. Attending meetings

6. Dealing with faculty

7. Maintaining a healthy family life

8. Maintaining healthy working relationship with faculty and staff

9. Other. Please specify

31

Q39 Demographics

What is your gender?

Female

Male

Q40 What is your marital status?

Single/ widowed /divorced

Married or living with a partner

Q41 Number of children under age 18 living at home.

________________________________________________

Q42 Any other comments you wish to add regarding your role as Department Chair?

____________________________________________________________

Interview Protocol

Procedure

1. Greetings

2. Describe the project, telling the interviewee about (a) the purpose of the study, (b) what will

be done with the data to protect confidentiality of the interviewee, and (c) how long the

interview will commence.

3. Turn on the digital recorder and test it.

4. Explain the participant’s consent

5. Give the consent form to sign

6. Start the interview

Interview questions

1. How long have you been a Dean?

2. Have you ever been a department chair?

3. Please tell me about the process of appointing a new department chair.

4. What kinds of formal or informal orientation do you provide to new department chairs?

5. Is there a typical term of department chair in your college? In your opinion, what should that

term be?

6. How often do you evaluate department chairs in your college?

7. Describe the evaluation process of department chairs in your college:

Probing questions:

Are there specific criteria in the evaluation?

What are the most important tasks on which you evaluate department chairs?

Are you satisfied with the outcome of your evaluation?

8. Do you have a rubric for evaluating department chair? May I have a copy of the rubrics?

Appendix C

9. What are the specific qualities or personalities or talents that you seek in department chairs?

10. What are your performance expectations for department chairs?

11. What scholarly expectations do you have for department chairs?

12. How do you provide performance expectations to department chairs prior to the time they

assume the position as chairs? (Verbally, in writing, or did not provide any)

13. Under what circumstances do you send chairs to department chair or leadership workshops?

14. What do you perceive as the biggest challenges that department chair face?

15. How do you support department chairs in their research and teaching agenda?

16. How have your expectations of department chairs changed over time?

17. Can you describe the reward or salary structure for department chairs?

18. What demands do you perceive are placed on the department chairs from other internal

sources?

19. What are the limits of department chairs’ authority?

20. In what ways do you think your department chairs encourage the faculty and staff to

improve their departments? (or, do you think they have not done it?)

21. What is the gender and racial composition of the college? Are there ‘tensions’ due to gender

or racial composition? How can ISU close the gender gap?

22. What are policy recommendations for the university?

23. What are the academic paths of ISU department chairs? In other words, what academic

patterns predict service as a chair?

24. Who do new department chairs turn to when seeking mentoring, advice, or just answers to

administrative questions?

25. Is there anything more you would like to share? Is there anything that you think I should ask

you?

Thank you for your participation

iowa state university department chair: role, progression ... resources...iowa state university...

Documents