IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/uhejxx/v87y2016i2p272-299.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Closing up Shop: Perspectives on the Departmental/Programmatic Elimination Experience

Author

Listed:
  • Susan B. Donoff
  • Vicki J. Rosser

Abstract

Departmental and programmatic eliminations represent a new paradigm in the history of American higher education. Hastened by a national economic recession and competing state funding priorities, public postsecondary institutions have turned to academic attrition as a solution to continuous budgetary shortfalls. As a means of addressing the lived experience of faculty members and department chairs, the following qualitative case study explores perceptions of implementing departmental and/or programmatic eliminations. Utilizing uncertainty reduction theory as a conceptual framework, interviewed faculty in units that were initially selected for elimination, but eventually saved, experienced considerable strategic uncertainty, failing to understand why they had been included within a budget reduction proposal. Guided by a college-wide strategic planning process, faculty in eliminated units understood the rationale for abolishing departments, though they experienced considerable structural uncertainty in terms of adjusting to a new, nonacademic reporting structure. These findings indicate that a transparent strategic planning process diminishes strategic uncertainty, while the elimination of traditional departmental structures heightens structural uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Susan B. Donoff & Vicki J. Rosser, 2016. "Closing up Shop: Perspectives on the Departmental/Programmatic Elimination Experience," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 87(2), pages 272-299, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:uhejxx:v:87:y:2016:i:2:p:272-299
    DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2016.11777402
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00221546.2016.11777402
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00221546.2016.11777402?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:uhejxx:v:87:y:2016:i:2:p:272-299. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/uhej .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.