From the Dean: Key takeaways from PC/CC/GC conversations

In February, I held four listening sessions with program coordinators (PC), certificate coordinators (CC), and graduate coordinators (GC) to listen to concerns and suggestions. Fifteen people attended. Below is a summary of the key points that were discussed. I encourage departments and programs to have follow-up discussions about this topic.

Role definition

• Some coordinators feel that their faculty colleagues need to be more engaged in programs, demonstrating shared ownership and investment in programs. Program coordinators should be coordinators, not the sole doers of tasks. Post-COVID there seems to be less faculty engagement in some programs, and the decrease in service time from 20% to 10% has led to some faculty opting out of program work and demonstrating less commitment to the collective. Big items and thorny issues need collective brainpower, and faculty need to feel shared ownership and investment in programs, thinking of themselves as part of a team. If faculty do not contribute to running the program, the PC will burn out.
  • Possible solution: Each program needs to discuss the distinction between coordinator duties and full faculty responsibilities. Faculty need to agree what part of their 10% service time is program work.
• There are a lot of tasks that fall between program coordinators and graduate coordinators, so there needs to be more clarity about who is doing what. Coordination involves a lot of things that are not articulated, and other faculty are not aware of them. It would be helpful for all to understand the full scope of the task.
  • Possible solution: Each department needs to clearly articulate what falls under each person’s role (PC, GC, DH, staff, all faculty), especially in complex units with a lot of programs.
• It is unclear what the role of staff members is in supporting coordinators as coordinators do not supervise any departmental staff, so they do not know what else they have on their plates.
  • Possible solution: Departments need to clarify what tasks can be handled by staff. It would be helpful to share models of staff assistance for GCs and PCs across departments.

Workload

• In some programs, being the graduate coordinator makes you the advisor of all non-doctoral graduate students, but it doesn’t have to be this way. Advising is a shared responsibility of all program faculty.
• Separating field and program coordination is a good idea and should continue.
• Be clear what the base level of the job is and what is “extra” (e.g., organizing socials for graduate students).
• MAT admissions are challenging because each case is unique, and classes from past transcripts have to be mapped onto the program of study. This is an infrequent task in most programs, so it is more time consuming as it doesn’t become routinized. What options are there for streamlining this process?
• There was generally strong praise for the Office of Academic Programs for clear communication, timely provision of data, help with problem solving (particularly for student issues).

Who can be a coordinator?

• Coordination roles are not restricted to clinical faculty; tenure-track faculty can and should take a turn in this role.
• Some programs rotate PC roles across faculty for equity. However, not everyone has the skill set to be effective in these roles, and there are people who genuinely enjoy the roles, so rotating might not work for every program.
• There is a power differential between clinical and tenure-track faculty, which can be challenging when clinical faculty serve as program coordinators and are making recommendations about instructional assignments.
  • Possible solution: There needs to be full faculty buy-in to a process for assigning instruction that the PC can implement.

Challenges in coordination

• Student issues are unpredictable and time-consuming but often require immediate attention.
  • Possible solution: Consider using a faculty committee to address non-urgent student concerns to relieve the burden from the program coordinator.
• The work feels more reactionary than strategic.
• Institutional deadlines and administrative changes create additional burdens and can hinder innovation. PCs/GCs feel like they are always chasing deadlines and lack time to think creatively and delve deeper into issues. Chasing deadlines can lead to doing things without appropriate consultation with others.
• PCs/GCs keep getting asked to do more reports. While there are good reasons for these reports, new reports often are not announced far enough in advance for coordinators to have them on their radar at the beginning of the semester, which requires devoting less time to something else to get an unexpected report done.
  • Possible solution: Calendar of deadlines from the College, OVPI, Graduate School would be helpful for planning purposes.
• Coordinators do not feel equipped or supported for the leadership aspects of the role.
  • Possible solution: Need structured training for these leadership roles, including delegation strategies.
  • Possible solution: Meetings for program coordinators and graduate coordinators should have leadership components in addition to management components as these are leadership roles. Faculty need to learn how to facilitate a program, how and when to delegate, etc., and they need time to talk with one another about strategies and tools they use for particular challenges. Part of these meetings should be set aside for collaborative problem solving and learning from one another. Coordinators need time for sharing resources across departments. What are your biggest pain points? Who has a solution? Share your work hacks with others.
  • Possible solution: Create a leadership mentoring program that is invigorating so people are excited about continued leadership. This should not be a place for discussing procedural matters but should be a space for exchanging ideas, building efficient systems, and helping one another. There needs to be a similar space for staff who work with PCs and GCs.

Compensation

• Coordination roles take time away from other important work, regardless of the track or rank of the PC/GC. The quality of curriculum, placements, relationships with schools/internships sites, responsiveness to student needs, are essential, so other responsibilities suffer. Mistakes are costly, so the work requires careful attention. Compensation is helpful but does not replace lost time for research and curriculum development/revision.
  • Possible solution: Consider letting faculty choose a course release or extra compensation if their compensation is sufficient to replace instruction. Consider letting those who are serving as both PC and GC buy out of one course.
  • Possible solution: Some would prefer counting coordination as service.
• The first year in the role is particularly demanding, but it becomes more manageable over time.
  • Possible solution: Consider allowing a course release the first year if the program meets a certain threshold.
• Is the number of students in the program the most salient metric for deciding compensation? Some people create a lot of work with few students while others have very streamlined processes and many more students.
• How does class size impact the decision about a course release vs. compensation? Teaching a class of 60 might be very different than a class of eight in terms of workload from which a person would be released.
• Program coordination is an essential function, not an “extra” responsibility.

Other

• Consider workload distribution within programs and departments based on factors like advising load, student numbers, and dissertation supervision.
• Encourage a collaborative rather than isolated approach to PC/GC responsibilities.
• Educator preparation programs need to rethink their models or they won’t have students. We cannot keep tinkering in our silos. Whose responsibility is it to connect people across programs to discuss shared solutions? This seems like a responsibility beyond PC/GC. Perhaps this is a College responsibility?