hwawavmmw. -‘ ‘ *5. ' l a” ‘ '3 ‘ 5 . .‘é " a 1416;! .1" . u - . - I- u i.— - 4‘ " A A - I . - . . F.’ - ‘ “ — ' .J} - a $5 ( p 7;" L ”.1395 - N ,-'A ‘4‘; 4.. ":l' I" ."x ' I 'I‘Afiflg“$ I u Iris-«ta '» a '3'!\;l§l" tiny \".I N'I'jl‘ In} . . 4 in .' I. 13:3 I 1‘”. ‘IIES‘I I ,".‘\‘ I. flunk-{HQ 2:" "i ‘2; . I.‘ I T I 2"?" t"" ‘ ' ('I)::' “Lugs. '- 1 “1.7.5.”: ""5 T- If! “f. v. .2 LklI 1“”.- JHE; ,1II"I I I: . IL $3 \3 g {fa WIV‘IJ‘I‘I‘.~"\ ._ . . 3.. V" 'I'Vu . , E'I‘I‘ ‘H 'I "i .‘ ' ' I. . I I I “I": ‘ J J". it]: I , . - . W.“ lerb'fifi II : , ... . “H"."m .. {I} “I III JHII'; ' I:"l’" I‘V5 2-"? .‘ufis by: . 3‘ (E :A‘I‘l. Im'C‘W ‘5’ 351.1“ “I“; A" . 3r -fi'\" ‘9 51"“ :5" 1 \ i“ M I’m“ ((5.1%? If pp“? “5. I? -+ $1.?” lc'zo‘?!‘ .':.Yn&‘t‘h '§\ II? “it? ‘ 9’51 ”iii "cI I.- 3" xii; “*1“? :3": non I'l‘IIIIIVI ‘. \‘I‘I‘vb I " 0' IH‘ .' Iféfil {‘vfik‘u :}t%§'.$r}:1:§ 3|. I {nfi ‘+'\g '5')? it“ ER "/7 '5"\:l. 3' I tiff-13w. “ ‘Tuh‘t" ‘i“" I .I I I "-' I II.IH ‘1‘“; . I f' “I. . 7 .5 "1. ‘.\‘ .‘ \'II I L'II‘ [:3'... {:02} 1‘ ”‘1'- I If! 'I'k‘III‘I". H . l is“: "H. In it. : HI . . . .(.!i.IIII |--“f .: I 7V; .« «In-"h 1“ 5.5" Al ‘ I? 6'31} 1] \{ni'o} {7+ was. saw . 5“...- '.‘5 :r"- \I‘. 4? .1‘." .Q‘ .5; . “EN 53"”? 55% .‘,‘- "‘0? v I ‘ , v , ”a . @fig‘bz'r‘ ' / I-NI 0 MN” 'Jklm'u' ‘o'f’HFE Illlllllllllllllllll\lllllllllllllllllllll ‘ L THFsz 3 129310431 2768 This is to certify that the thesis entitled A STUDY OF ART DEPARTMENT CHAIRPERSONS OF THE BIG TEN UNIVERSITIES: THEIR VIEW OF THEIR ROLE presented by Eldon Lavern Clark has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Doctor of Philosophy degree in Administration and Higher Education Wm Major professor Date 3'29‘78 AU‘ 1194 1991* I tau-3}»? - '53 -- J 3M“! ‘l l 5 5 © 1978 E LDON LAVE RN CLARK ALL RI GHTS RESERVED A STUDY OF ART DEPARTMENT CHAIRPERSONS OF THE BIG TEN UNIVERSITIES: THEIR VIEW OF THEIR ROLE BY Eldon Lavern Clark A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1978 H9057 7 ) ABSTRACT A STUDY OF ART DEPARTMENT CHAIRPERSONS OF THE BIG TEN UNIVERSITIES: THEIR VIEW OF THEIR ROLE BY Eldon Lavern Clark The subject of this descriptive study was the artist as an administrator and specifically the art department Chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities. This study focused on their view of that role. The review of literature gave special attention to (1) the academic department and its chairperson, (2) the arts in academe and (3) the professional in the organization. Kornhauser's theory was used as a framework for analysis of the collected information. Kornhauser theorized that tensions existed between the professional and the organization in which he/she worked because pro— fessional and organizational goals, incentives, controls and influences were at variance. The study population consisted of the ten art department Chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities (N=10). A direct-mail questionnaire and a personal interview were Eldon Lavern Clark employed to collect the information for this descriptive study. outside Art department Chairpersons of three universities the study population participated in a pilot study. Conclusions Art department Chairpersons do not view their role to be substantially different from Chairpersons of other departments. However, they are in unique situations or have problems which other department Chairpersons do not have, namely physical facili- ties and communications. The Chairpersons viewed the role of the discipline of art in higher education as providing professional training for the artist and a liberal arts exper- ience for the students of the general university community. The affect of that View on the adminis- tration of their department was directed toward service to the university, personal goals for the department and toward departmental goals and needs. In general, most of the Chairpersons viewed them- selves as teachers. Tensions between the organization (university) and the professional (artist) because the goals, con— trols, incentives and influences of the profession were at variance with those of the organization existed in the view of the art department l. 2. 3. 4. Eldon Lavern Clark Chairpersons, but with one exception. Organiza- tional and professional goals were more often in unison than in conflict. Art department Chairpersons generally accepted tensions between the profession and the organiza- tion as a "matter of course." The art department Chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities were dedicated, hard working and sensitive members of the academic community. Recommendations A study is needed to determine assessment criteria for art departments and art programs in higher education. A study is needed of the feasibility for organizing the various arts (music, performing arts and the visual arts) under one academic dean or adminis- trative head for the purpose of having a central spokesperson for the arts in the university. A study is needed to determine the influence on departmental administration when a chairperson holds a rank below professor. A study is needed to identify expected experiences and qualifications of prospective art department Chairpersons. 6. Eldon Lavern Clark There is a need to study under what conditions and situations would a department be best served by a rotating chairperson/permanent chairperson. A study of former department Chairpersons would be desirable which would deal with the utilization of talents and experiences of those former chair- persons. Parallel studies of other universities and other art departments would be desirable in an effort to determine whether art department Chairpersons of different population groups held similar views to those involved in this study. A study is needed to identify the impact which the university art department has on the acquisition of the visual arts in the university and the pro- motion of the visual arts for the enhancement of human capability in society. Included in such a study should be the influence the art department exercised in the leadership in the visual art world for creating new art forms and innovative methods. DEDICATION Ginger Dave Trixie ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS With sincere appreciation to: Dr. Richard L. Featherstone, committee chairman, for his encouragement and guidance during my graduate studies and for his patience and counsel in making this study possible. Dr. George R. Myers, committee member, who always took time to listen, reflect and encourage. Dr. Louis C. Stamatakos, committee member, for his critiques, his friendship and his openness. Dr. Charles S. Steele, committee member, for pro- viding aesthetic insights. Dr. Paul L. Dressel for having faith in me. The Art Department Chairpersons, who participated in this study, for their time, kindness, cooperation and interest. My fellow students who shared in the tribulation and excitement of scholarship. Sally Jean Taylor. She was special and her spirit lives. Mom and Dad for instilling the fundamental values from which all else evolved. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS I. THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . The Problem . . . . . . Background of the Arts in Higher Education. . . . . . Focus of the Problem. . . Purposes of the Study . . . Definition of Terms. . . . Rationale for the Study . . Need . . . . . . Theoretical Justification . Assumptions . . . . Limitations and Delimitations Limitations. . . . . . Delimitations . . . . . DeSign O O O O O O 0 Collection of Information. . Overview of the Study . . . II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . Introduction . . . . The Academic Department and Its Chair- person . . . . . . . The Academic Department. . Definition . . . . . Functions/Missions. . . Organizational Structure. Influences . . . . . The Department Chairperson. iv Page 10 ll 13 13 14 15 l6 17 18 21 23 23 24 26 28 28 30 35 40 The Arts in Academe . . . . . . . The Rise of the Arts in Higher Education . . . . . . . . Present Status of the Arts . . . . The Artist and the University . . . The Profession and the Organization. . METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . Study Population . . . . . . . Construction of the Survey Instruments. Questionnaire . . . . . . . . Personal Interview. . . . . . . Interview Guides . . . . . . Pilot Study. . . . . . . Procedures for Collecting the Data . Method of Data Analysis. . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . Overview of the Art Department Chair- persons . O O O I O O O O 0 Personal Information . . . . . . Sex . . . . Faculty Rank . . Position Title . Education . . . Experience. . . Selection and Reporting . . . . Functional Role and Motivation. . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . Views Held by the Art Department Chair- persons . O I C O O O O O O The Chairpersons' View of the Art Department. . . . . . . . . Page 52 53 56 75 85 92 92 95 96 96 97 98 100 102 104 106 108 108 109 109 109 110 110 111 113 115 117 123 124 124 Page Departmental Emphasis . . . . . . 124 Strengths . . . . . . . . . . 125 Challenges. . . . . . . . . . 129 Unique Situations . . . . . . . 132 smary. O O O O O O O O O O 138 Chairpersons' View of the Role of the Visual Arts in Higher Education. . . 139 Role of the Discipline of Art . . . 140 Effects of Chairpersons' views of Art on Administration . . . . . I46 Acceptance of the Visual Arts in Higher Education . . . . . . . 148 sumary. O O O O O O O C O O 150 Chairpersons' Views of the Profession and the Organization . . . . . . 150 Strains . . . . . . . . . . 151 Goals 0 O O O O O O O O O O 153 Controls . . . . . . . . . . 155 Incentives. . . . . . . . . . 156 Influences. . . . . . . . . . 158 Summary. . . . . . . . . . . 159 Chairpersons' Views of Their Role Encapsulated . . . . . . . . . 160 smary O C C O O O O C O O O O 162 V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . 165 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . 165 Overview of the Study . . . . . . . 166 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . 171 Implications . . . . . . . . . . 179 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . 185 APPENDICES APPENDIX A. STUDY PARTICIPANTS/INSTITUTIONS. . . . . 190 B. QUESTIONNAIRE. . . . . . . . . . . 191 C. PERSONAL INTERVIEW GUIDE-RESPONSE FORM . . 195 vi APPENDIX D. INTERVIEW GUIDE E. PILOT STUDY PARTICIPANTS/INSTITUTIONS. F. COVER LETTER . G. SCHEDULE OF PERSONAL INTERVIEWS. H. DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION WITHIN BIG TEN UNIVERSITIES SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY vii Page 201 202 203 204 205 206 Table 1. LIST OF TABLES Page OPERATIONAL PATTERNS OF SIXTY-NINE DEPART- MENTS C O O I O O I O O O O O I 31 POSITION TITLES O O O O C O O I O O 110 HIGHEST DEGREE HELD . . . . . . . . . 111 HIGHEST DEGREE BY CATEGORY OF UNIVERSITY/ SCHOOL. 0 O I O O O O O O O O O 112 MAJOR IN HIGHEST DEGREE. . . . . . . . 113 YEARS AS CHAIRPERSON. . . . . . . . . 114 CHAIRPERSONS' VIEW OF FUNCTIONAL ROLE . . . 118 PERCENTAGE OF TIME IN FOUR RESPONSIBILITY AREAS O l O O O O O O O O O O O 120 CHAIRPERSONS' REASONS FOR ACCEPTING THE POSITION O O O O O O O O I O O O 122 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Activity Flow . . . . . . . . . . . 94 ix CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM Introduction Since the establishment of academic departments at Harvard in 1825, the role of the department chair- person " . . . in American higher education has increased 1 Heimler held that this increased sig- significantly." nificance was the result of two factors: (1) the influence of faculty members in the formulation of institutional policy and (2) the decentralization of decision—making authority in American higher education.2 According to McHenry the department housed a community of scholars " . . . responsible for instruction and research within a specialized field of knowledge."3 Institutional growth 1Charles H. Heimler, "The College Department Chairman," in The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role, eds. James Brann and Thomas A. Emmet (Detroit: Balamp, 1972), p. 198. 21bid. 3Dean E. McHenry and Associates, Academic Depart- ments (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977), p. 2. in size and in numbers of faculty and students has resulted in a concomitant increase in the size of academic departments. As departments became larger in size, admin- istration of the activities and personnel became more complex. "All organizations must be managed. . . ."4 This task falls to the chairperson (or head) who has been described as the all-important link, key figure, ill pre- pared, representative, manager, chore boy, colleague and other things often unflattering. It still befalls the chairperson to coordinate the activities of the department. Inherent to that task are the duties to be performed in a role with functions, expectations and obligations which are often in conflict. Henry reported that the chairperson's functions were: (1) representing the college to the department, (2) representing the department to the administration, and (3) maintaining and shifting the department agenda.5 Other reports had lists which are even longer and more comprehensive, but suffice it to say that the chairperson's duties are extensive. 4D. S. Pugh, Organizational Theory (Middlesex, England: Penguin, 1971), p. 99. 5David D. Henry, "The Academic Department and Educational Change," Management Forum 2 (February 1974): 1-4. Expectations of department Chairpersons were extensive as well. Delahanty6 reported that the chair- person was to maintain a distance between faculty and the public and pacify the public inquiries as well as those of administration. The chairperson was to monitor decisions in the department to prevent any evil which might befall the department and keep the correspondence flowing smoothly. Faculty expectations of the department chairperson were the promotion of harmony and esprit-de- corps among the faculty as well as leading the faculty " . . . into green pastures and still waters."7 Regardless of anyone's expectation of the chair- person, departments need chairpersons who could " . . . gain satisfaction from helping their colleagues grow, who enjoy enriching their department and their discipline, who like ideas and translating good ideas into realities."8 In many universities the department chairperson position was considered to be an obligation to be held for a period of time, not a position of honor. On the other hand, the chairperson who successfully held the position 6James Delahanty, "What Do Faculty Want in a Departmental Chairman?" in The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role, eds. James Brann and Thomas A. EmmetITDetroit: Balamp, 1972), pp. 221-26. 7Ibid., p. 227. 8Wilbert T. McKeachie, "Memo to New Department Chairman," Educational Record 49 (Spring 1968): 227. ' for an extended period might be considered to be seeking the deanship and abandoning his discipline altogether. Where faculty groups held prestige the department chair- person often held little. A scholar serving as a depart- ment chairperson could seriously jeopardize his/her own professional career. To be sure, " . . . the position of the department chairman is vague, often misunderstood, and not clearly perceived."9 Despite the ambivalence and the vagueness of the role, the department chairman is the person who makes the institution run. He really is the foreman. As one chairman put it . . ., "He's the guy who gets hell from everyone." Another said, "I view my job as a service to the people who really do the work of the department--teach- ing and research--and the students who come to learn. My job is to facilitate this. They're not here to work for me. I'm here to work for them."10 And so it goes. No list of duties seemed complete or agreed upon to identify a chairperson's responsibili- ties. The chairperson served in a role which presented conflicts in functions, expectations and obligations. The Problem The role or the posture of the departmental chairman is an exceedingly difficult one. In his own eyes he is still primarily a teacher who has assumed certain 9Paul L. Dressel, F. Craig Johnson, and Philip M. Marcus, The Confidence Crisis (San Francisco: Jossey- Bass, 1969), p. 84. 10James Brann, "The Chairman: An Impossible Job About to Become Tougher," in The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role, eds. James Brann and Thomas A. Emmet (Detroit: Balamp, 1972), p. 6. administrative tasks and responsibilities. He has not, as it were, "sold out" completely to the other side by becoming a dean. He is, therefore, quite often in conflict as to whether his role is one of spokesman for his colleagues in the department, or whether it is one of an administrator who must make the decisions not only for the welfare of his depart- ment but for the welfare of the college and uni- versity as a whole. What is difficult of course is that he must balance both roles. He is both a pro- fessor and an administrator.11 The subject of this investigation was the artist as an administrator, specifically the chairperson of the art department. Not only has the art department chair- person been faced with the problems listed above, but also he/she has been confronted with the dichotomous role of the artist and that of the administrator. The artist deals with the particular, the subjective and the unique object while the administrator deals with generalizations, categorizations and the "bottom line."12 Also, the art department chairperson represents a discipline (Art) which has entered academia under suspect circumstances and which has been required to defend itself as has no other disci- pline.l3 11Calvin B. T. Lee, "Relationship of the Depart- ment Chairman to the Academic Dean," in The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role, eds. James Brann and Thomas Emmet (Detroit: Balamp, 1972), pp. 54-55. 12Morris Risenhoover and Robert Blackburn, Artists as Professors (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1976I7 p. 11. 13Albert Bush-Brown, "Art and the Liberal Arts: A Trivial, Artificial, Irrelevant Antagonism," in Art in Background of the Arts in Higher Education The rise of the arts in American higher education was primarily the result of prophetic insight of early national leaders, the Land Grant Act, universal public education and the popularization of higher education. John Quincy Adams was prophetic indeed when he said that we must learn the arts of war and independence, so that our children can learn architecture and engineering, so that our grandchildren may learn Fine Arts and painting.14 The land grant college gave impetus to the evalu- ation of the practice of the arts in American higher edu- cation institutions. From the state and land grant uni- versities emerged a commitment to art as those institutions sought to expand their professional programs and meet their re3ponsibility of service to the public at large.15 As universal secondary education became a reality, the need for elementary and secondary art teachers intensi- fied. That situation caused increased enrollments at American Higher Institutions (Washington: National Art Association, 1970), p. 6. 14J. A. Perkins, "University and the Arts," Teachers College Record 66 (May 1965): 671. 15Albert Christ-Janer and Ralph L. Wickiser, "Higher Education and the Arts," in The Arts in Higher Education, eds. Lawrence E. Dennis and Renate M. Jacob (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1968), pp. 42-43. college level with corresponding demands for more courses in art practice, and to a greater extent, demands for courses in music.16 The spread of popular higher education further contributed to the rise of the visual arts. Higher edu- cation was a means of social and economic mobility, the degree being viewed as legitimate and a credential that met socially acceptable criteria. In contrast, the Bohemian life style associated with art communities and artist groups had little relation to the work ethic nor was it degree granting. While parents will not send their children for four years of living at North Beach, they will finance them to a baccalaureate in art at San Francisco State.17 The rise of the arts was not without conflict and problems. Christ-Janer and Wickiser made the follow- ing observations: (1) throughout American history, most educators neglected the arts; (2) few institutions re- garded the arts in high esteem; and (3) most universities equated knowledge with the written word, implying that 18 human experience was recorded in books. The authors 16Risenhoover and Blackburn, Artists, p. 6. 17Ibid., p. 7. 18 pp. 42-430 Christ-Janer, et al., "Education and the Arts," also observed, even though the arts received increased attention since World War II, " . . . the nonverbal arts are still not appreciated sufficiently in higher edu- cation."19 Mahoney reported that there was an absolute separation of the arts from the rest of academia. There was little interdepartmental cooperation or recognition of common interests. Art was presented in a segmented way preventing the integration of the arts with other aspects of society.20 21 confirmed those notions and added that Winkler there was a sense of isolation on the part of the art faculty (most evident with visiting professors and artists in residence) from the mainstream of the art world. Con- cerning curriculum in the arts she stated, "The demands of education . . . are for the facts, for objectivity, for impartiality and generalization, and the demands of the arts tend toward their opposites."22 Good art teaching was personal and idiosyncratic.23 19Ibid., p. 43. 20Margaret Mahoney, "Overview of the Present," in The Arts on Campus: The Necessity for Change, ed. Margaret Mahoney (Greenwiéh: New York Graphic Society Ltd., 1970), pp. 19-280 21Karen J. Winkler, "Is It Possible to Teach and Be an Artist Too?" The Chronicle of Higher Education 28 (January 28, 1974): 10-11. 22Ibid., p. 10. 23Ibid. Support for the arts in higher education has, in the main, been attributed to the chief executive officers of the institution. Colleges of Education, professional schools and government agencies have been most negative to the development of the arts in higher education. The general faculty fell somewhere between those two extremes.24 The art department chairperson occupies a unique position encompassing all of the problems and conflicts representative of an academic department chairperson in general. Additionally the art department chairperson represents a discipline which has had a slow and peri- pheral growth in higher education. This growth resulted primarily through the prophetic insights of early national leaders and public demands from outside the university. The art department chairperson is also faced with a con- stricting economic situation (as are all academic depart- ment Chairpersons) while increasing enrollments in art abound. Conversely student enrollments in higher edu- cation generally are on the decline. Focus of the Problem Those persons most deeply and intimately involved with the role of artist-administrator were the art department chairpersons. This study focused on the role 24Jack Morrison, The Rise of the Arts on the American Campus (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973). p. 159. 10 of the art department chairperson. It included an explor- ation of the View of the discipline of art in higher edu- cation affect ment. study: 1. held by the art department chairperson and the of this view on the administration of the depart- Therefore, three questions were central to this How does the art department chairperson view his/ her role as artist-administrator? Does the art department chairperson view his/her role of artist-administrator to be in conflict in terms of professional goals, controls of profes- sional work, incentives for professional activity and influences of professional work? How does the art department chairperson, as artist-administrator, deal with the conflict of professional goals, controls of professional work, incentives for professional activity and influences of professional work? Purposes of the Study The purposes of this study were: To provide a research base for understanding the artist-administrator role for those who aspire to be art department Chairpersons and for those cur- rently serving as chairperson of an art department. 11 2. To provide deans, other university administrators and faculty members insight into the view held by the art department chairperson of the discipline of Art. 3. To provide students of administration an under- standing of the conflicts between the unique demands of the profession of art and the demands of the organization, i.e., the university. 4. To contribute to the present knowledge of the role of the academic department chairperson. Definition of Terms Art Department.--The academic unit of the Big Ten Universities which administers to the visual arts program. The visual arts include some or all of the following art forms: painting, sculpture, drawing, graphics, industrial design and crafts, i.e., ceramics, metalsmithing, jewelry and weaving and others, as well as Art History and Art Education. Depending on the university, the academic unit (meeting the criteria of the above definition) may be identified as a division, a department, a school or an institute. Big Ten Universities.--University of Illinois (Urbana-Champaign), Indiana University (Bloomington), University of Iowa (Iowa City), Michigan State University (East Lansing), University of Michigan (Ann Arbor), 12 University of Minnesota (Minneapolis), Northwestern Uni- versity (Evanston, Illinois), Purdue University (west Lafayette, Indiana), The Ohio State University (Columbus), University of Wisconsin-Madison (Madison). Art Department Chairperson.--The administrative head or chairperson of an art department (art department is defined above). Academic Department.--A sub-administrative element of a university usually associated with a field of study or academic discipline; for example, The Department of Anthropology. Artist—Administrator.~~An individual formally educated in the visual arts, Art Education or Art History and who has exhibited or published his/her work. Also the individual must currently hold the position of art department chairperson either permanently or temporarily. Respondents.--The art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities who participate in the study. Goals.--The aims or broad objectives of a pro- fession (professional goals) or of an organization (organizational goals). 13 Controls.--The regulation and exercise of power through hierarchical structures or through members of a collegial group. Incentives.--Rewards or status provided by an organization or colleague group. Influences.--The legitimacy of authority. Organi- zational authority is executive authority. Professional authority is the authority of the expert based on special competence. Rationale for the Study Need There was a need to investigate the department chairpersons of large universities. Dressel, et al., reported that the most extensive systematic investigation of department chairpersons has been done with small pri- vate colleges. Of the thirty-three colleges investigated, six of the department chairpersons had no administrative duties. "The department chairmen of large universities, both private and state, have yet to be investigated empirically."25 There was an identified need for study of college departmental chairpersons in terms of how they perceive their role. Heimler reported that extensive research has 25Dressel et al., Crisis, p. 243. 14 been done on management of industrial enterprises with resultant improved management procedures. He found that similar studies in higher education could contribute to up-grading of teaching and other college services. How- ever, little research has been done on the chairperson's place in management and administration. Among a number of research needs which he listed included, “How do col- lege department chairmen perceive their role?"26 The artist and the administrator have dichotomous roles. Therefore, it is important to study the artist who is an administrator in an effort to identify conflicts which may exist between the role of artist and the role of administrator in terms of professional goals, controls, incentives and influences. Theoretical Justification Kornhauser theorized that among scientists in industry an inherent strain existed between professionals and the organizations in which they worked. This tension was generated because the goals, incentives, controls and influences of the profession were at variance with those of the organization. This incompatibility was attributed to the fact that, "Professionalism has as its primary function the protection of standards for creative 26Heimler, "Department Chairperson," p. 205. 15 activities; organization has as its primary function the efficient coordination of diverse activities.“27 According to Kornhauser professionalism was a response to the need for functional autonomy with a premium on intellectual judgment. On the other hand, bureaucracy (the organization) was a response to the need for rational coordination with a complex interdepen- dence of specialized activities.28 This study of art department chairpersons will provide insights relative to Kornhauser's theory as it applies to the artist-administrator. The inclusion of this theoretical concept should not be construed as an attempt to prove or disprove the theory. Rather, the inclusion is to provide a framework for analysis of the art department chairperson who has professional demands of art and organizational demands of the university. Assumptions In this study, it was assumed that: l. Chairpersons of art departments and chairpersons of other academic departments were similar in terms of their academic position in the university 27William Kornhauser with Warren 0. Hagstrom, Scientists in Industry Conflict and Accommodation (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1962), pp. 195-96. 281bid., p. 196. 16 hierarchal organizational structure, faculty rank and tenure policy. However, as an artist, the art department chairperson may view his/her role and the role of other academic department chair- persons to be different. It was feasible to gather viewpoint information to identify role, expectations and conflicts which may arise therein. To explore and describe the role and expectations of art department chairpersons, and an appropriate method for data collection was a structured per- sonal interview. The responding art department chairpersons would provide honest and open answers. That the art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities would be sufficiently dedicated to research in higher education to support, with their time and expertise, research relative to the role of the artist-administrator. Limitations and Delimitations Limitations The study limitations were as follows: Representativeness was limited to those chair- Ipersons willing to participate in the study. 17 In the process of completing the study, the identification of concepts and factors which were not anticipated were reported and analyzed. However, the analysis was made only to the extent deemed appropriate to this study. In an effort to insure objectivity, a structured interview instrument was used to gather infor- mation. However, some inevitable bias and data interpretation was subject to the limitations associated with the use of such data-gathering techniques and methods. Delimitations The study delimitations were as follows: The study was delimited to art department chair- persons of the Big Ten Universities. Library research included ERIC and DISSERTATION ABSTRACTS information searches, books and periodicals on file at Michigan State University Library and State of Michigan Library, published and unpublished material obtained through inter- library loan with Michigan State University Library, and books and materials owned or borrowed by this investigator. 18 Design The centrality of this study was the art depart- ment chairperson's view of his/her role as artist- administrator. The descriptive method of research was used. "Descriptive research studies are designed to obtain information concerning the current status of phenomena."29 The descriptive study was concerned with: . . . conditions or relationships that exist, opinions that are held, processes that are going on, effects that are evident, or trends that are developing. It is primarily concerned with the present, although it often considers past events and influences as they relate to current con- ditions. The objective of descriptive research was to determine " . . . the nature of prevailing conditions, practices, and attitudes--seeking accurate descriptions of activities, objects, processes, and persons. . . ."31 It appeared that the design of descriptive research was most appropriate to investigate the role of the art department chairperson as viewed by that chairperson. 29Donald Ary, Lucy Chester Jacobs, and Asghar Razavieh, Introduction to Research in Education (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc., 1972), p. 286. 30John W. Best, Research in Education (3d ed.; Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1977), p. 116. 31Deobold B. Van Dalen and William J. Meyer, Under- standing Educational Research An Introduction (New York: McGraw—Hill, 1962), p. 203. 19 According to Webster's Dictionary, a view was, "An opinion or judgment colored by the feeling or bias of its holder."32 Collection of Information Each art department chairperson of the Big Ten Universities were asked to participate in the investi- gation. The chairpersons were contacted initially by telephone. A follow-up letter explained the problem of the study, sought the c00peration of the chairperson in the investigation and requested that he/she complete a written questionnaire. The questionnaire was used to collect demographic information such as sex, degrees held and other basic information pertinent to this study. A follow-up personal interview was employed to collect information concerning the art department chairperson's view of his/her role. The personal interview allowed for in-depth probing of the personal attitudes and feelings which art department chairpersons may have about his/her role. The advantages generally attributed to the personal interview as compared with a written questionnaire included the following: (1) people were usually more willing to talk than they were to write; (2) confidential information could be obtained which might not be obtained through a 32Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, Mass.: G. and C. Merriam Company, 1974). 20 written questionnaire; (3) the investigator had the oppor- tunity to explain more clearly, if necessary, what infor- mation was needed; (4) clarifying questions could be asked if the respondent did not understand a question; and (5) the interviewer could stimulate the respondent to greater insights into the re3pondent's own experiences and allow for further exploration of significant areas not anticipated in an original plan of investigation.33 The primary disadvantages of the personal inter- view involved travel and interview time, cost and inter- viewer bias. In comparative studies on the cost of mailed questionnaires and interviews, it was found that the personal interview cost was sixty times greater than the mailed questionnaire cost.34 35 "The danger of interviewer bias is constant." Errors introduced by him [interviewer] may be of several types: omitting a question, rewording questions, giving insufficient time for a respon- dent to express his ideas, failing to probe when necessary or to probe adequately, not listening carefully, giving his own interpretation of what 33Best, Research, pp. 182-83. 34Olive A. Hall, Research Handbook for Home Economics Education (Torrance, Calif.: Burgess Publish- ing Company, 1967), p. 98. 35Best, Research, p. 183. 21 the respondent says, using inadequate or inappro- priate motivation, and actually cheating in 36 recording answers to questions he did not ask. To insure that accurate recording of the interview was accomplished, each respondent was encouraged to grant his/her permission for a tape-recorded interview. Overview of the Study The study of art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities: their view of their role will be presented in five chapters. Chapter I: Included in this chapter was the intro- duction, the problem statement, the rationale for the study, the purpose, the assumptions, the limitations and delimitations, the study design and the overview of the study. Chapter II: A review of the pertinent literature related to the study will be presented in this chapter. Special attention will be given to the academic depart- ment and the department chairperson. A comprehensive summary of Kornhauser's theory will be included, i.e., that an inherent strain exists between professionals and the organizations in which they work. Chapter III: The research design, methodology, population, and method of data collection will be dis- cussed in Chapter III. 36Hall, Research. 22 Chapter IV: The results of the study will be reported and analyzed in this chapter. Demographic information will be reported quantitatively. Statements of art department Chairpersons' views of their role will be presented qualitatively. Chapter V: A summary of the study findings, conclusions and recommendations for further research will be presented in the final chapter. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE Introduction This study focused on the role of the art department chairperson as an artist-administrator. In support of this focus, research and writings relative to the academic department and the department chairperson were reviewed. To provide insights into the view held by educators con- cerning art, a literature review of arts in higher education was conducted. Additionally, a theoretical framework was reviewed to analyze the art department chairperson's role as an artist-administrator. The literature search included four major sources: (1) Dissertation Abstracts International, (2) E.R.I.C. (Edu- cational Resources Information Center), (3) Educational Index and (4) The Arts Index. The review of literature is presented in three major sections. In the first section are summaries of the selected research and writings of the academic department I and its chairperson. In the second section, information relating to the arts in academe is summarized. The 23 24 second section is divided into three subsections: (1) The Rise of the Arts in Higher Education, (2) The Present Status of the Arts, and (3) The Artist and the University. A theoretical framework to analyze the art department chairperson's role is included in the last section. The Academic Department and Its Chairperson Dressel, Johnson and Marcus reported that "The role of the department chairman (or head) has received some systematic investigation."1 However, most research on academic departments had been conducted by observation and reflection.2 In 1975, Anderson noted that "More support and criticism of departments have occurred than solid research about them."3 Writing in defense of departments, Trow concluded that departments have been subjected to more abuse than analysis with strong roots in the functions they effectively perform. Trow stated: " . . . the academic department remains the central organizational unit of American uni- versities and of many colleges, and it must be given much 1Paul L. Dressel, F. Craig Johnson, and Philip M. Marcus, The Confidence Crisis (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1969): P. 242. 21bid., p. 241. 3Kay J. Anderson, "In Defense of Departments," in Academic Departments, eds. Dean E. McHenry and Associates (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977), p. 1. 25 of the credit for the extraordinary success of American higher education over the past century in extending both educational opportunities and the frontiers of knowledge."4 The chief criticism of departments was that they had too much power. Dressel et a1.5 claimed that depart- mental self-interest must be brought under control to serve educational needs within allocated resources accord- ing to priorities. Other criticisms of power included: "During the 19505 and 19605, much authority for decisions as to academic personnel was shifted to the faculties, particularly the department faculties and their department chairperson."6 Appointments, promotions, degree require- ments, new courses and research were under full control of the department.7 The department was " . . . the major avenue through which faculty members in large universities 4Martin Trow, "Departments as Contexts for Teaching and Learning," in Academic Departments, eds. Dean E. McHenry and Associates (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977), p. 33. 5Dressel et al., Crisis, p. 232. 6John J. Corson, The Governance of Colleges and Universities: Modernizing Structure and Process (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975), p. 189. 7E. Shils, "The Hole in the Centre: University Government in the United States," Minerva 8 (January 1970): 1-7 0 26 influence decisions."8 The department was practically a self-governing sovereign power.9 Two "great shocks" of the 19605 (student shock and control shock) demonstrated the stability of the academic department. The shock of student assertion of power brought students into academic governing bodies. The concentration of control at levels above the campus by state coordinating councils and superboards further bur- dened administrators with additional layers of bureaucracy. However, there were " . . . few changes at the operating levels of the departments and schools."10 The Academic Department The roots of academic departmentalization have been deep. Even the medieval universities were separated into faculties of Law, Theology, Medicine and Arts.11 The American contribution to the departmental organization was 8Doris W. Ryan, "The International Organization of Academic Departments," Higher Education 43 (June 1972): 464. . 9E. D. Duryea, "Evolution of University Organi- zations," in The University as an Organization, ed. James A. Perkins (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973), P. 25. 10Carnegie Commission on Higher Education, Priori- ties for Action: Final Report of the Carnegie Comm1551on Report on Higher Education (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973), p. 53. 11Dressel et al., Crisis, p. 2. 27 graduate schools of arts and sciences.12 Undergraduate departmentalization stemmed from disciplinary specializa— tion in graduate education " . . . as seen in the founding of Johns Hopkins and the model presented by the German 13 The universities in contrast to the English system.” English model emphasized interdisciplinary residential colleges. In Germany, " . . . the discipline was repre- sented by the chair-holding professor and his Institute."14 In the early American college, there were chairs and professorships specifically identified with subject material such as Latin, Greek, Mathematics and others. Tutors worked with classes for a period of study (three to four years) in the various subject areas. In 1825, Harvard was organized into five departments and, in 1880, Cornell and Johns Hopkins established autonomous depart- ments. As colleges became complex in organization and as specialization grew, the academic department became part of the organizational structure of higher education.15 12Talcott Parsons and Gerald M. Platt, The American University (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973), p. 5. 13Anderson, "Defense," p. 4. 14Trow, "Departments as Contexts," p. 14. 15Dressel et al., Crisis, pp. 2-4. 28 Definition By definition a department is a distinct sphere. In the academic setting, a department is a division of a college or school giving instruction in a particular sub- 16 ject. Shoben described academic departments as: . . . disciplinary Establishments, sub institutions within our 17 larger institutions of higher education." The authors of Confidence Crisis held that the department related to faculty organization, to a field of study, and that it has many missions.18 The idea that academic departments were formal organizations for decision-making was cited by Ryan.19 Functions/Missions The notion has been commonly held by some that teaching, research and service are the primary functions of the academic department. However, priorities placed on each of these functions vary. Dressel et a1. listed, 16Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield, Mass.: G. and C. Merriam Company, 1974). 17Edward J. Shoben, Jr., "Departments vs. Edu- cation," in The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role, eds. James Brann and Thomas A. Emmet (Detroit: Balamp, 1972), p. 84. 18Dressel et al., Crisis, pp. 2-6. 19Ryan, "Academic Departments," pp. 464-82. 29 in order of priority, ten department missions as deter- mined by faculty members, department chairpersons and deans of fifteen universities. They included: 1. Instruction of graduate students 2. Basic research 3. Undergraduate instruction 4. Advancing the discipline and profession nationally 5. Advising undergraduate majors 6. Instruction of undergraduate non-majors 7. Expressing departmental views in the university 8. Career development of the junior staff 9. Applied research 10. Service to business and industry20 Departments which ranked undergraduate instruction high tended to rank research relatively low. "When faculty members were asked to indicate which three of the ten goals the department should emphasize, the initial three missions again were chosen most frequently."21 Trow described graduate education, recruitment and promotion of academic staff members, research and undergraduate education as functions to be performed by departments.22 20Dressel et al., Crisis, p. 71. 211bid., p. 72. 22Trow, "Departments as Context," pp. 15-27. 30 Parsons believed that the university and the department had a primary goal of promoting learning and creating new learning; its organization should be loose and decentralized.23 Organizational Structure In their study of sixty-nine departments, Dressel et al. found that department organization ranged from the very simple, usually without formal committees, to complex with elaborate committee structures and formal staff meet- ings. The complexity of the organization, however, had little relationship to decision-making.24 "One chairman operating with few committees would seek advice of many members of his faculty, while another with elaborate com- mittee structures would not even ask for recommendations from committees on important issues."25 They studied the Operational patterns of the departments to determine if departments were autocratic, paternalistic, oligarchic, bureaucratic, democratic or laissez-faire. They found most departments to be organized 23Talcott Parsons, "The Strange Case of Academic Organization," Higher Education 42 (June 1971): 486-95. 24Dressel et al., Crisis, p. 40. 251bid., p. 41. 31 as a democratic bureaucracy.26 The distribution of governing patterns by discipline may be found in Table 1. TABLE 1 OPERATIONAL PATTERNS OF SIXTY-NINE DEPARTMENTS Discipline 2::::::§::;.. °:i::r‘ 3332;32:22, :ziize' Chemistry 2 0 7 1 History 1 2 6 1 Psychology 1 2 6 1 English 0 5 5 0 Mathematics 2 5 5 0 Business 5 l 4 0 Electrical Engineering 5 1 3 0 Total Depart- ments 16 16 34 3 SOURCE: Paul L. Dressel, F. Craig Johnson, and Philip M. Marcus, The Confidence Crisis (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1969), p. 42. Perceptions of responsibilities and authority varied between faculty and administrators. Featherstone described the conflicting views of faculty and adminis- trators relating to who established goals and at what echelon of the university structure the work would be carried out. Basically, the two views of the hierarchical roles were as follows: (1) management of the board con- trol (Board of Trustees) established goals, intermediate 26Ibid. 32 management levels (provost, dean, chairman) were responsible for control and the faculty carried out the tasks to accomplish the established goals: (2) On the other hand, the faculty perceived their role as setting goals and objectives, intermediate management (chairman, dean, provost) acted as service elements to assist in the accomplishment of tasks and the board of control then established broad goals which had been originated from the faculty.2.7 Murray,28 after studying twenty-two universities, concluded that individual departments evolved through a series of five stages of governance. The size and pres- tige of the department, the mix of tenured/untenured, junior/senior faculty members and faculty rank were factors in identifying the stages of development. Stage one was autocratic. The situation was exemplified by the small department (less than fifteen), often new, limited in prestige, with the department head exercising the bulk of decision-making. Individuals who attempted to change the structure were eliminated by transfer, non- appointment or by other means. Stage two was described 27Richard L. Featherstone, The Development of Management Systems for the Academic Department (Boulder: Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, 1972), Pp. 46-47. 28Robert K. Murray, "On Departmental Development: A Theory," The Journal of General Education 16 (October 1964): 227-36. 33 as the department in turmoil. Characteristics of the second stage were growing departmental size, increased prestige, attempts by faculty members to erode the power of the chairman, and cliques choosing sides to exert power. The chairman was generally viewed by faculty to be sympathetic toward administration. Murray described the third stage as rampant democracy (found in departments with fifteen to twenty-five faculty members). In the third stage, he observed the rise of the committee system, the rotation of the department chairman, increased morale of the faculty while, at the same time, seeing the infil- tration of caution and conservatism relative to department practices and policies. The fourth stage was oligarchial in nature and found on the larger and better known campuses (twenty-five to forty-five faculty members in the depart- ment). The older or senior tenured faculty members exerted the greatest amount of power deciding such things as tenure policy, election of department chairman, pro- motions, academic and personnel policy. Considerable prestige was enjoyed by departments in the fourth stage with research and publication as the activities receiving the greatest emphasis. In major departments of large universities, the oligarchial model was most prevalent. Although existing in few universities, the fifth stage seemed apparent. A special environment was required, that is, a small department or an exceedingly large 34 department with certain common characteristics. In the small department made up almost exclusively of distin- guished professors, the administration was handled by a body of competent secretaries. Activities directly associated with a professor's status or work were handled between the professor and the central administration. In the large department (up to one hundred faculty members) with a high percentage of distinguished professors, administration was carried on by assistant professors specifically assigned to administrative tasks. In those larger departments, a bureaucratic organization developed which then became self-perpetuating and expanding. The department chairperson's position became one of adminis- trative prowess as opposed to academic leadership. Murray concluded that the fifth stage was the peak of organi- zational and administrative sophistication and offered this challenge to academic governance: . . . it becomes questionable whether governance at the lowest prestige levels of departmental life (stage one) is much worse than at the emerging highest prestige level (stage five). Under the circumstances the most logical next step may well be a sixth stage representing the elimination of the department altogether. Universities and facul- ties which aspire to future loftiest prestige levels perhaps should take heed.29 For McKeefrey, the probability of eliminating academic departments seemed to be remote because the 291bid., p. 236. 35 efforts of a few experimental colleges which have dropped departmental designations were yet to be evaluated.30 Influences Factors which influenced the behavior of depart- ments, their organization, personnel, activities and goals included the discipline, the university, students and faculty. Often the influential factors and the degree of influence varied. Discipline: McKeefrey reported that the depart- ment's first responsibility was to remain accredited. It must maintain close relationships with national associ- ations representing the specific discipline through pub- lications in professional journals, membership in those associations (individually or collectively), convention activities and by conducting research recognized as appropriate for the field.31 Shoben stated that the founding of learned journals and societies contributed to the intellectual life of academe. Further he stated, " . . . it also tended to underscore the primacy of the faculty member's affiliation with his discipline and to 30William J. McKeefrey, "The Participation of the Faculty in Department Decision Making and in Campus Governance," in The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role, eds. James Brann and Thomas A. Emmet (Detroit: Balamp, 1972), p. 217. 311bid., p. 219. 36 provide the mechanism by which he could find professional stimulation and colleagueship regardless of his geographi- cal or institutional location."32 The authors of The Confidence Crisis reported that departments with national reputations were oriented toward research in their field. Undergraduate education was de- emphasized except as a means of employing graduate assis- tants. The faculty members felt less obligation to a particular department than to the discipline.33 University: In their study, Dressel et al. reported that authority operations, organization, student concern and university relations were primarily influenced by the university. Department behavior relating to stu- dent concerns showed definite university influence. For example, when university policy encouraged strong faculty- student interaction, the departments responded and inter- action occurred. Advising activities following a similar pattern were originated from university policy. Concern- ing university relations, influence was based on depart- ment members' perception as much as fact. For instance, when the university was viewed to be highly influential in department affairs, departments were considered by the 32Shoben, "Departments,“ p. 85. 33Dressel et al., Crisis, p. 218. 37 faculty to have maintained little influence, and faculty considered themselves as members of the university rather than of the department.34 In future operations, university influence will be toward those departments of moderate size with a strong orientation to undergraduate studies. The department will look to the university for funds. On the other hand, the university will be the prime mover to increase the prestige and quality of the department which will provide greater options for the department; thus, the department orientation will be more toward the influence of the 35 discipline. Students: The Carnegie Commission Report on Higher Education reported that students tried to assert their power " . . . over the inner sanctum of academic and administrative affairs."36 Before the 19605, students confined their efforts to extracurricular activities.37 The range of faculty attitudes toward student influence was expressed in reports by Brann and McCann. Brann's findings indicated that universities were oriented 34Ibid., pp. 34-90. 351bid., pp. 216-18. 36Carnegie Commission, Priorities, p. 53. 37Ibid. 38 more toward the furtherance of the discipline than toward 38 meeting students' needs. McCann claimed that student control of funds through student organizations presented a "monstrous clout."39 During the 19605, the target of a great deal of student unrest in the university was the administration. McKeefrey suggested that, in the future, the faculty will become the target of student attacks. Those attacks will be directed first toward poor teachers, then ultimately toward the curriculum.40 Powell stated that the grading system created barriers to student-faculty relationships. According to Powell, faculty dominance must be restrained and decision- making must be restricted to the discipline. His thesis was that students should be co-equal partners with faculty in the educational process.41 38Brann, "The Chairman," p. 25. 39Charles J. McCann, "Vital Undergraduate Studies: What's the Right Climate?" in The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role, eds. James Brann and Thomas A. Emmet (Detroit: Balamp, 1972), p. 123. 40McKeefrey, "Faculty in Department," p. 216. 41Robert S. Powell, Jr., "Evaluation: Student Viewpoints," in The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role, eds. James Brann and Thomas A. Emmet (Detroit: Balamp, 1972), p. 137. 39 Faculty: The findings of Dressel et a1. indicated that faculty influence on departments took two forms. First, the faculty exerted its power as a whole, and second, it exerted its power through committees. Com- munication systems with graduate students, department chairperson and committees were also shown to be a means of faculty influence on departmental behavior. In depart- ments where the entire faculty had influence, a high priority was attached to research and a high level of administrative support was received from the university. In departments where faculty members perceived themselves as having influence, they also perceived themselves to have control over their own fates as well as control over students.42 Faculty influence was exercised in the kinds of decisions which it made. Because the faculty had little control over financial matters, its decisions were in other areas. They were: (1) the furtherance of the professional field, (2) development of the department faculty, (3) curriculum matters and (4) matters relating to students.43 In summary, thus far, the literature indicated that the academic department had a long tradition, and it 42Dressel et al., Crisis, pp. 84-85. 43McKeefrey, "Faculty in Department," p. 219. 40 was usually associated with a specific academic discipline. Teaching, research and service were its primary functions. Departments varied in organizational structure, but most departments were democratic bureaucracies. The influences exerted upon the department originated from the discipline, the university, the faculty and the students. Those influences were exerted with varying degrees depending upon institutional size and emphasis, i.e., graduate or undergraduate education. As stated in Chapter I of this dissertation, the coordination of department activities rests with the department chairperson. The chairperson's role is becom- ing increasingly complex, and it will be addressed in the next subsection. The Department Chairperson Studies about the academic department chairperson covered a range of concerns. Significant among those concerns included the difficulty and the importance of the job as well as the debilitating effects on his/her professional and personal life. Most studies dealt with the role of the academic department chairperson in terms of duties, responsibilities and tasks. Other studies addressed the chairperson's leadership style and power sanctions. The terms "chairperson," ”chairman" and "head" were used in the literature. The term "chairperson" will 41 be used in this dissertation unless the term is within a quotation or when it detracted from the meaning of the cited study. Some distinctions were made between the term "chairman" and "head." Featherstone clarified those two terms when he stated: "The difference between depart- ment head and department chairman is often a philosophical distinction in which the 'head' title is treated as the 'authority,‘ being appointed by the dean, while the 'chair- man' title reflects a more democratic role, since the faCUItY tends to elect the chairman.”44 The situation which the department chairperson was usually in may be summarized by the title of Brann's article, "The Chairman: An Impossible Job About to Become Tougher.n45 Brann stated: Thus, the seat of the chairman is an uneasy one in an era of societal change. He must make the exist- ing system function while keeping an open ear and mind toward the cries of academic reform. Rushing toward him from one direction is the puzzling and somewhat alarming specter of unionism and from another, the often-ill-informed political repre- sentatives of a dissatisfied public. Central administrations aided by computers and long-overdue applications of management principles are becoming increasingly powerful and efficient, leaving the chairman little room to maneuver or juggle budgetary categories. His faculty is insecure and resistant to change. And his students scream, "Relevance!" and want to abolish traditional standards.46 44Featherstone, Management Systems, p. 24. 45Brann, "The Chairman," pp. 5-27. 461bid., p. 27. 42 In the study, The Development of Management Sys- tems for the Academic Department, Featherstone noted that the department chairperson was a key figure in the increas- ing complexity and decentralization of university adminis- tration. The importance of the chairperson's role was in the fact that he was the administrator closest to the instructional program. He was the chief executive of the department and the channel of authority between the faculty and the administration. The chairperson was also a key figure in determining the educational success of the institution.47 In a study of forty-seven academic departments at Miami University (Ohio), Waltzer reported the debilitating effects on the professional and personal life of the department chairperson. The individual who serves as a chairperson pays a high price in terms of teaching quality and research endeavors.48 The study found that many chairpersons felt that, as a chairperson with teaching responsibilities, they were unable to adequately prepare for their instruction. Many chairpersons felt that " . . . they are distracted by some administrative task or problem, and that they are 47Featherstone, Management Systems, pp. 24-30. 48Herbert Waltzer, The Job of the Academic Depart- ment Chairman: Experiences and Recommendations from Miami University (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Edu- cation, 1975), pp. 32-35. 43 not always as 'present' in the classroom as they should be."49 As a result, personal guilt feelings were exper- ienced by the chairpersons.50 Waltzer found that the chairpersons were unable to pursue their research endeavors. There was both insuf- ficient time and lack of privacy to read or write. He said: "As scholars . . . the chairmen often are marking time."51 The study found that the chairperson's personal life was affected as well. Chairpersons reported that they could not leave their job at the office. Therefore, their home life was involved. Waltzer said: "The job may exact its heaviest personal toll on those with young families, with spouses and children bearing the brunt of the costs."52 A comprehensive study of the role and responsi- bilities of the department head was conducted at The Pennsylvania State University in 1964.53 The study con- cluded that there was a need for a definite concept of the role and responsibilities of the department head. Key 491bid., p. 33. SOIbid. 511bid., p. 34. 52Ibid. 53 Booz-Allen and Hamilton, Inc., "Report on Survey of Role and Responsibilities of Department Heads College of Liberal Arts," University Park, Pennsylvania, 1964. 44 aspects of the concept should include: (1) the basic role is one of administrator, (2) leadership is essential in relations with colleagues, in planning and in creation of an environment for academic proficiency and scholarship, (3) give executive direction to the department, (4) assure adequate high quality human resources, (5) attract financial and material resources, (6) participate in University governance and (7) engage in instruction and scholarship.54 Factors affecting the performance of department heads were also addressed in The Pennsylvania State Uni- versity study. The scope of responsibilities was extensive and little understood by department faculty. Administra- tive responsibilities continually increased without ade- quate preparation provided to the department head. Such inadequate preparation often led to an exaggeration of the burden of routine administrative tasks. Echelons of administrative leadership above the department head had been limited with respect to direction and supervision of departmental administration and general university admin- istration. The study concluded that because the department head was first an administrator, scholarly involvement diminished. That fact the department head must accept.55 pg Darkenwald, in 1970, surveyed fifty-four colleges and 284 chairpersons to examine the chairperson's role in 54Ibid., pp. 12-25. 551bid., pp. 26-43. 45 terms of institutional size.56 The chairperson's alle- giance to the department and sense of autonomy from the university were greatest at large, high quality, research- oriented institutions, i.e., Harvard or Stanford. The size of the institution had little effect on the degree of conflict which the chairperson experienced with admin- istration in decision-making; however, the role was more difficult at medium size institutions such as Boston Uni- versity or San Francisco State. Most chairpersons viewed themselves as leaders. The size of an institution did impact upon selection procedures. Darkenwald found that the faculty had a major voice in the selection of the department chairperson at large institutions, some voice at medium size and little or no voice at small size institutions (small schools included small liberal arts colleges and former teachers' colleges).57 56Gordon Gerald Darkenwald, “The Department Chairman Role in Relation to the Social Organization of Colleges and Universities" (Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia University, Teachers College, 1970), Disser- tation Abstracts International, 1970, Vol. 31, 2700A- 2701A (University Microfilms No. 70-23430). 57Ibid. 46 g” In two separate studies of the chairperson's role, Ramer,58 in 1963, and Bullen,59 in 1969, found that budget restrictions and administrative duties were ever present problems which hindered the chairperson in goal accomplish- ment. Additionally, the chairperson's position was not actively sought after by faculty. Also, to maintain control of department functions, the chairperson was not to delegate final responsibility for decisions. Moreover, Ramer found that chairpersons of larger departments functioned as administrative coordinators, whereas chair- persons of smaller departments performed as executives.60 In 1953, Doyle surveyed thirty-three private, church-related colleges to ascertain the status and functions of the department chairperson. Doyle found that chairpersons functioned primarily as teachers and secondarily as administrators with responsibilities for 58Hal Reed Ramer, "Perceptions of University Departments and the Role of Their Chairman: A Study of Some Attitudes and Opinions of Selected Professors, Department Chairmen, Deans and Central Administrators of The Ohio State University" (Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1963), Dissertation Abstracts, 1964, Vol. 24, 5144 (University Microfilms No. 64-06951). 59Robert Abbott Bullen, Jr., "A Study of the Per- ceptions of Selected Deans, Department Chairmen and Faculty on the Role of the Department Chairman at The University of Alabama" (Ed.D. dissertation, University of Alabama, 1969), Dissertation Abstracts International, 1970, Vol. 30, 3213A-3214A (University Microfilms No. 70-01369). 60Ramer, "University Departments." 47 budgeting, personnel records, supervision of teaching, and development of the departmental objectives and cur- riculum. The major portion of the small college chair- person's time was devoted to teaching, counseling, and sponsoring student activities.61 When selecting a depart- ment chairperson, Doyle reported that the criteria included: previous teaching experience, outstanding teaching ability and administrative talent.62 ¢_Aldmon, in 1959, studied task areas and behavioral requirements for department chairpersons at the University of Tennessee, University of The South (Sewanee, Tenn.) and Western Carolina College (Cullowhee, N.C.). Aldmon determined ten critical task areas as follows: curriculum, instruction, evaluation, institutional operations, public relations, staff personnel, student personnel, physical facilities, finance and business management, and depart- ment operation. Critigal behavioral requirements included: integrity and self-control, consideration of others, coop- erative planning, scientific problem-solving, adaptation to change, communication skill and management ability.63 61Edward A. Doyle, The Status and Functions of the Departmental Chairman (Washington, D.C.: Catholic Uni- versity Press, 1953), PP. 33-46. 621bido I pp. 3-320 63Howard F. Aldmon, "Critical Behavior Requirements of Heads of Departments" (Ed.D. dissertation, The University (of Tennessee, 1959), Dissertation Abstracts, 1960, Vol. 20, 3138 (University Microfilms No. 59-06979). 48 y Leadership behavior style of department chair- persons and job satisfaction of faculty were investigated by Washington, in 1975. Thirty-one departments of speech and communication were surveyed. His findings included: (1) faculty job satisfaction was high when a chairperson established clear-cut lines of responsibility and organi- zational structure, (2) faculty job satisfaction was high when the department chairperson fostered friendship, mutual trust, respect and warmth, (3) faculty were more satisfied when they had a voice in the selection of the chairperson and (4) faculty job satisfaction increased with higher faculty rank, greater years of service and higher salary.64 R“ In their study of departments, Dressel et al., in 1969, reported that a department chairperson's style was associated with three levels of activity: (1) what the chairperson did, (2) what the chairperson delegated and (3) what the chairperson left undone. Chairpersons were either "doers," "delegators" or "dalliers."65 The "Doers" were the chairpersons who did all the chores themselves or were very careful as to what decisions they would permit others to make.66 64Earl M. Washington, "The Relationship between College Department Chairpersons Leadership Style as Per- ceived by Teaching Faculty and that Faculty's Feeling of Job Satisfaction" (Ed.D. dissertation, Western Michigan University, 1975), p. 82. 65Dressel et al., Crisis, pp. 22-28. 66Ibid., pp. 23-24. 49 Y’The "Delegators" involved the faculty in decision- making procedures. Committee structures, although cumber- some, contributed to high morale among the faculty. Dressel and associates noted: “Through the committee structure and the opportunity to interact with each other on administrative or policy matters, faculty members developed mutual trust which yielded a cohesiveness in the group."67 .(The "Dalliers" exemplified the laissez-faire style of the chairperson. Often organization was so loose that important matters were left undone. The chairperson failed to exercise leadership, thus causing the department to suffer.68 2’ Brann described the chairperson who was successful at keeping faculty, students and deans happy in addition to keeping their departments afloat, prosperous and visible.69 He said: --An effective chairman sees that faculty committees are established to shoulder much of his work, particularly in curriculum design and revision, and departmental housekeeping. --An effective chairman learns how to circumvent70 the regulations of his central administration. 67 68 Ibid.' p. 26. Ibid.' pp. 22-28. 69Brann, "The Chairman," p. 11. 7°Ibia. 50 The power of department chairpersons was investi- gatedflbyaMggennauinfl1962. McKenna surveyed forty-five department chairpersons and 115 departmental professors in four higher education institutions. He analyzed power sanctions and perceptions of power held by chairpersons and professors. The amount of power which was mutually sanctioned by chairpersons and professors included: high power for reporting and budgeting; medium power for organizing, coordinating and directing, and low power for planning. Professors, who perceived chairpersons to have more power than was sanctioned by professors for a function, preferred that the chairperson have less power. The inter- personal relationships between chairpersons and professors corresponded to the perceptions and sanctions of power held by the professors.71 + The study by Hilland_French involved a survey of 405 professors in five, state-supported four-year colleges. The investigation was designed to measure the power imputed to department chairpersons by the professors in terms of job satisfaction and professional output. Their findings indicated that professors' job satisfaction was increased when they perceived their chairperson to have considerable personal influence. The chairperson's power and professors' 71David L. McKenna, "A Study of Power and Inter- personal Relationships in the Administration of Higher Education" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1958), Dissertation Abstracts, 1958, Vol. 19, 1275 (Uni- versity Microfilms No. 58-03704). 51 professional output showed no relationship. The professor with strong personal contact in his discipline tended to impute less power to his chairperson than the professor who saw himself primarily as a member of a particular college.72 To encapsulate the role and the many-faceted aspects of the academic department chairperson, a lengthy passage from Confidence Crisis is quoted below: Tradition and faculty demand require the chairman ;. A, to be a scholar, but the demand placed upon the 3’24 chairman include many functions: Chairman initiate action on budget formulation; selection, promotion and retention of academic staff; faculty salaries, sabbatical leaves; interdepartmental relationships; research grants; educational development and inno- vation; university committee membership; discipline representation; professional growth; advice to dean on department matters; administration of faculty relationship; new faculty orientation; departmental meetings; adequate nonacademic help; student admin- istration; student advising; class scheduling; student personnel records; faculty load; graduate student application approval; grading standards and practices; and curriculum changes. Also, they have knowledge of the administrative routine of the college; institutional legislative organization; government grants procedures; policies relating to graduate students; and scholarly productivity of departmental faculty. Most new chairmen lack familiarity with many of these activities, and there is usually no ready way to acquire familiarity. They attain the familiarity at the expense of their scholarly effort. If, in the understandable wish to meet departmental desires in the face of seemingly unreasonable university rules and policies, the chairman develops ways of circumventing these, he may find his irritations and possible pangs of conscience promoting a state 72Winston W. Hill and Wendall L. French, "Per- ceptions of the Power of Department Chairmen by Pro- fessors," Administrative Science Quarterly 2 (March 1967):} 573. 52 of tension which is by no means conducive to instruction or research. Thus, if he lingers as chairman for more than a few years, he may be beyond the point of no return.73 The Arts in Academe The review of literature relating to the arts in higher education focused on three areas of interest: history, current status and the artist. The historical aspects of the arts were reviewed in general terms. Recent publications were reviewed to provide insights into the present status of the arts. Concerns and issues which related to the artist in higher education were reviewed. Because certain words and terms may cause some confusion for the reader, a short explanation is presented. For example, some authors use the words "art" and "arts" interchangeably. Other words and terms such as "art forms," "creative arts," "art practice," "studio art," "fine art," ”fine arts" and still others add to the con- fusion. Many times such words have a multiplicity of meanings. Efforts to make unquestioned delineations among the terms proved to be fruitless. Only a general guide can be offered. The arts in higher education fall into three general categories: (1) music, (2) performing arts and (3) visual arts. 73Dressel et al., Crisis, p. 13. 53 The Rise of the Arts in Higher Education As stated in Chapter I of this dissertation, the rise of the arts in American higher education was pri- marily the result of prOphetic insights of early national leaders, the Land Grant Act, universal public education and the popularization of higher education. However, the rise was slow and peripheral. Risenhoover and Blackburn compared the entry of the arts into higher education with the establishment of scientific practice. Separate scientific schools were formed at Harvard and Yale in the early nineteenth century so that experimenters could bring laboratories to the campus to practice scientific manipulation and to conduct research.74 They stated: A somewhat similar pattern occurred with the arts a hundred years later. Musicology, art history, and the study of drama and poetry as literature (as well as literary criticism, of course) long had been honored as eminently reSpectable academic disciplines.75 When it was asserted that the actual creation of art and performance of music and drama should have an equal position with the "re5pectable" (a term used by Risenhoover and Blackburn) academic disciplines, critics 74Morris Risenhoover and Robert T. Blackburn, Artists as Professors (Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1976): PP. 3:6. 751bia., p. 5. 54 claimed that the university was opting to teach mere technique and craftsmanship " . . . just as the criticism raged concerning the practice of science a century before."76 The various art forms entered American institutions of higher education at different times and under different circumstances. A comprehensive examination of the develop- ment of the arts was reported by Morrison in the Carnegie Commission Report on Higher Education.77 Utilizing a questionnaire, Morrison surveyed seventeen institutions of higher education. He found that theater and drama appeared on the academic scene at Harvard in the late 16005. Musical training was introduced as music education in the normal schools during the mid 18005. The University of Southern California offered an academic major in film making in 1935. Exercise, light calisthenics and physical education were the forms of dance in the early American university. Higher education has had some kind of "concert series" since the Civil War, but it was not until after World War II that the concept expanded. By the mid 19605, about 8 percent of the four-year United States colleges and universities had museums of good 76Ibid. 77Jack Morrison, The Rise of the Arts on the American Campus (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973), pp. 7-37. 55 quality relative to professionally designed exhibits, professional staff and educational cultural activities. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology established a professional architectural course in 1865. Since World War II, fine arts centers have grown in number and have become an integral part of campus life.78 Morrison also reported that visual arts training in the United States had its start in the private art academies such as the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts (1806), Maryland Institute (1862), the School of the Art Institute of Chicago (1866) and others of equal importance. Believing that the practice of the arts had humanistic values, John Fergerson Weir at Yale (1876) and George Comfort at Syracuse (1873) began art practice programs and, by 1900, visual arts programs proliferated. By 1930, the requirement for teacher certification of elementary and secondary art teachers increased the need for art practice courses in public higher education. By 1970, over 62,000 students were enrolled as art majors in American higher education. According to Morrison, increased enrollments in the visual arts continued at a phenomenal rate.79 78Ibid. 79Comprehensive histories of the various art forms in American higher education may be found in Jack Morrison, The Rise of the Arts on the American Campus (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973), pp. 7-38 and in James Ackerman, "The Arts in Higher Education," in Content and 56 Present Status of the Arts The present status of the arts in higher education was reflected in recent reports. The reports indicated that the current trend is a definite upsurge in the interest and participation in the arts. However, those reports revealed that support for the arts remains at a low level. The literature identified the conflicts in educational emphasis as well as the direction of the arts in higher education for the future. To ensure that the information appropriately identified the status of the arts on the contemporary scene, only those documents published subsequent to 1969 were selected. The preponderance of information related to the current status of the arts in higher education was found in journal articles, publications of professional organi- zations and conference reports. Additionally, reports of the Carnegie Commission of Higher Education, specifi- cally Jack Morrison's book, The Rise of the Arts on the Context, ed. Carl Kaysen (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973), pp. 219-67. Historical concepts in art may be found in Jeanne M. File, A Critical Analysis of the Concepts of Art in American Higher Education (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University Press, 1958). A description of colleges as early pioneers in the arts, the close associ- ation between archaeology and the develOpment of art instruction, the growth of graduate studies and a profile of institutions offering programs in art and archaeology may be found in Priscella Hiss and Roberta Fansler, Research in the Fine Arts in the Colleges and Universities of the United States (New York: Carnegie Corporation, 1934). 57 American Campus, and James Ackerman's essay, "The Arts in Higher Education,” were used as major sources. In a speech delivered to the International Council of Fine Arts Deans in Atlanta, Georgia, in 1973, Kerr explained the emphasis which the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education placed on the arts in higher education. Kerr stated that the Carnegie Commission on Higher Edu- cation included the arts in the report: . . . because it was our sense that this was one of the areas for really new developments in higher education; the acceptance of the creative arts and the performing arts as an integral part of our campuses. So we placed the arts along with medicine and law as one of the three areas for special attention.80 According to Kerr, the three standard purposes of higher education, i.e., teaching, research and services, 81 were expanded by the Commission to five. Those five purposes were: Advancing the intellectual and professional capacity of individual students with a construc- tive campus environment Enhancing human capability in society at large through training, research and service Increasing social justice through greater equality of opportunity to obtain an advanced education 80Clark Kerr, "The Carnegie Commission Looks at the Visual Arts," in The Status of the Visual Arts in Higher Education 1976, eds. Fred V. Mills, Clyde McCulley, and Donna Maddox (Peoria: National Council of Art Admin- istration, 1976). P. 1. 811bid., p. 2. 58 Advancing learning for its own sake through science, scholarship and the creative arts; and for the sake of public interest and consumption Evaluating society, for the benefit of its self-renewal, through individual scholarship and persuasion Further, according to Kerr, the Commission held that through the arts, education could make contact with the American people and enhance their cultural life. Through the arts would come broad learning experiences and, in Kerr's words, "Ways of Knowing." Also, the Com- mission agreed, the fine arts would be one of the growing points left in higher education.83 Referring to the status of the arts, Kerr ques- tioned why the creative arts are different from the rest of higher education, and how can the fine arts become more accepted, a more integrated part of higher edu- cation.84 He contributed a partial answer by saying: . . . the other fields (other than art) operate more in a vertical way, they build more upon prior scholarship; and that this makes it easier to evaluate performance. Has the person read the literature and do his footnotes show that he has? Does he know the accepted methodology and can he use it? But you get to . . . --the creative arts-- which move more laterally, more horizontally; an area where people are trying to move away from the beaten paths, where they are seeking to have some kind of an individual inspiration which draws away from the past, where they even seek to repudiate the past.85 82Carnegie Commission, Priorities, p. 26. 83Kerr, "Visual Arts," p. 6. 84Ibid. BSIbid. 59 He said that the contrasts of approaches between the standard fields of knowledge and the creative and per- forming arts are substantial. The standard fields of knowledge (including history and criticism in the area of the arts) were concerned more with "incremental originality," drawing substantially from established authority. On the other hand, the arts were more con- cerned with originality. Originality in the arts opposed past authority. He said that to be "academic" in approach was a compliment to standard fields of knowledge, but it was a criticism to the arts.86 Kerr noted: "Judgment in the standard fields can be exercised with some pre- cision and with considerable agreement on the quality of the facts and the methods of analysis in a work of scholar- ship; but, in the creative and performing arts, less reliance can be placed on objective external evidence and more demands on the internal reaction of the individual judge. . . ."87 Kerr presented to the fine arts deans the challenge as to how the fine arts can become a more accepted, a more integrated part of higher education.88 That acceptance and integration appeared to be happening on many campuses. Professional education of 86 87 Ibid. Ibid. 881bid. 60 the artist, new art centers and the legitimization of the arts as an academic subject were examples. Risenhoover reported, the emergence and intensi- fied professional level activity in the creative and per- forming arts as well as institutional involvement in sponsored arts programs were indications of higher edu- cation's commitment to the arts. Evidence to that commit- ment were the large numbers of art centers recently created on campuses across the nation.89 Ackerman con- firmed the great post-war construction boom of studios, theaters, concert halls, galleries and art centers, monu- mental in nature, which often dwarf the campus library.90 In their comprehensive study, "The Status of Art in Higher Education: A Study," Mills and McCulley reported that the visual arts have become a legitimate subject area. They said: With an increase in stature, enrollments, class offerings, and faculty, art programs have moved onto the "academic stage" with no intention of leaving it. In recent years, departments of art have expanded even more rapidly not only in numbers of students and teachers but also in the size and complexity of their facilities.91 89Morris Risenhoover, "Artist-Teachers in Universi- ties: Studies in Role Integration" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1972), p. 1. 90James S. Ackerman, "The Arts in Higher Edu- cation," in Content and Context, ed. Carl Kaysen (New York: McGraw-Hill,(l973)) 9.4235. 91Fred V. Mills and Clyde McCulley, "The Status of Art in Higher Education," in Report 1975: National 61 The study by Mills and McCulley provided the most definitive information relative to the current status of the visual arts in higher education. Their study involved a questionnaire survey of art departments in 165 colleges, universities and art institutes from forty-four states. Among the findings of their study, three major trends were indicated. First, although enrollments in higher education showed declines, enrollments in the arts (both arts majors and nonart majors) were increasing. Second, the "elite climate" of training professional artists was changing. Art faculties who have been edu- cated and conditioned at work in that environment will need to re-evaluate their attitudes and commitments. Third, community relations and public awareness and involvement will be the direction of the visual arts in the future.92 Although the arts have been experiencing an increase in enrollments, there has been a concomitant decrease in funding for arts programs. Kinne, in 1975, and Morrison, in 1976, reported that enrollment of both majors and nonmajors in art continued to climb.93 Council of Art Administrators, eds. Fred V. Mills and Clyde McCulley (Peoria: Natibnal Council of Art Admin- istrators, 1975), p. 19. 921bid., pp. 19-48. 93Frances Bartlett Kinne, "Come My Friends, 'Tis Not too Late to Seek a Newer World,'" Arts in Society 12 (Fall/Winter 1975): 324; Jack Morrison, "The Rise of the 62 Jules Heller wrote of the ever-increasing enroll- ment and the ever-diminishing financial support for the fine arts in higher education. He believed that those mounting pressures could reduce the quality of the pro- grams.94 Morrison reported faculty apathy and anguish as results of increased enrollment and decreased funding.95 Concerns of decreased funding were expressed by Christ-Janer and Mahoney. Christ-Janer expressed the concern that although funds were made available for research in the arts colleges, funds for further develop- ment as a result of that research and for art education may not be forthcoming. Funding of the arts through state and federal agency grants were insufficient. He was also concerned that funding through private foundation contri- butions, in the form of grants, amounted to only about 10 percent of the total financial grants to the arts.96 Arts and the American Campus and Its Potential to Remain There," in The Status of the Visual Arts in Higher Edu- cation, eds. Fred V. Mills, Ciyde McCulley, and Donna Maddox (Peoria: National Council of Art Administrators, 1976), p. 35. ' 94Jules Heller, "Crisis in the Fine Arts: Malaise or Blunderland," Arts in Society 12 (Fall/Winter 1975): 318. 95Jack Morrison, "Challenge to the Artist-Teacher in Academe or Let's See the Color of Your Money Buster," Arts in Society 12 (Fall/Winter 1975): 338. 96Albert Christ-Janer, "Art in Higher Education: Inquiry and Prescription/Institutional Forms and Functions," in Art in American Higher Institutions, ed. Burke E. Feld- man (Washington, D.C.: NatiOnal Art Association, 1970), p. 86. 63 Donors and foundations were interested in building build- ings but not in providing funds for new programs or for curriculum reform.97 Ackerman reported that federal and state govern- ments, through arts councils, foundations and educational channels, were increasing financial support for the arts. However, he argued that " . . . figures on the increase for funding do not show how meager it was at the start and how inadequate it remains."98 The Mills and McCulley study found that the art departments of 165 institutions surveyed reported support for the visual arts as follows: 16 percent strong support, 22 percent good support, 36 percent average support, 26 percent little support.99 The reports cited above indicated the fact that enrollments and interest in the arts in higher education were increasing. At the same time, support for the arts was declining notwithstanding the post-war construction boom of theaters and.art centers. As interest in the arts increased, the university assumed the role of professional education for the artist. 97Margaret Mahoney, "Overview of the Present," in The Arts on Campus: The Necessity for Change, ed. Margaret Mahoney (Greenwich, Conn.: New York—Graphic Society, 1970), p. 23. 98Ackerman, "Arts," p. 220. 99Mills and McCulley, "Art in Higher Education," p. 44. 64 Opinions varied as to the effectiveness of this role. Confusion and disagreement arose over professional art programs and liberal arts programs. To many educators, the arts were valuable only in the context of a liberal arts education. For others, professional arts education should be restricted for purely economic reasons. Writing for the Art Journal in 1972, Kelly claimed that the university had largely taken over the functions of professional training in the arts but in the process had sacrificed professional standards. He argued that pride, skill, craft and performance with accompanying concentration and production were required to achieve professional standards. Kelly maintained that the "aca- demic mind" [sic], suspicious of the validity of the studio as an educational experience, was unwilling to 100 equate the studio with the classroom. Such a notion was similar to the criticism aimed at the scientific laboratory. Art curricula were disallowed to be flexible. Rather, art curricula must follow the standard practice of enrollment in required courses and the awarding of credit for satisfactory completion.101 100Rob Roy Kelly, "Art in the American University: Fact or Facade?" Art Journal 22 (Fall 1972): 26-30. 1011bid., p. 28. 65 Of concern to Kelly was that too often art pro- grams were actually an extension of a liberal arts edu- cation with little concern for pride, skill, craft and performance needed for professional development in the arts. His charge to the colleges and universities was that there was a need to separate the liberal arts exposure program from the professional program in art.102 According to Kelly, universities became victims of their own problems. "The liberal arts educated, semi- professional artist graduating from colleges and universi- ties has been hired by other universities creating a peculiar kind of inbred philosophy toward art and art education.“103 Unfortunately, Kelly did not elaborate on what he meant by "peculiar kind of inbred philosophy toward art." However, some clarification may be found in a report by Hausman and Ryan. They found from the use of a question- naire survey of 216 institutions that some institutions place an inordinate amount of confidence in acquired degrees for faculty appointment, tenure and promotion over 104 art faculty quality of work and exhibition records. Additionally, Ackerman reported that, if educational 103 lozIbid., p. 30. Ibid., p. 29. 104Jerome J. Hausman and Joanne Ryan, "Degree Requirements for Art Faculty: Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure," Art Journal 22 (Winter 72/73): 179-81. 66 institutions could be persuaded to hire faculty with professional credentials rather than graduate degrees, then much of the artist's education could be included in a singular program of varied duration and degree of specialization (maybe a three-year or five-year program). He asserted that a graduate degree was required only for teacher qualification and was not synonymous with profes- sional qualifications.105 Kelly opposed the encroachment of the liberal arts into the education of the art professional and urged uni- versities to place a higher regard on progressional pro- grams in art. “By so doing, they (higher education institutions) would begin to think smaller in terms of numbers, but larger in terms of support and excellence at all times."106 Heller was also concerned with the absence of professionalism in art courses. At the same time, he opposed ”watered down" fine arts courses for humanists, engineers, social scientists and others. He said, "I do not wish to be a party to their being made esthetic cripples."107 105Ackerman, "Arts," p. 237. 106Ke11y, "Art," p. 30. 107Heller, "Crisis in the Fine Arts," p. 320. 67 Albert Bush-Brown charged that the antagonism between the liberal arts and the arts was trivial, arti- ficial and irrelevant. Too often the arts were isolated from the intellectual and social process. He asserted that the demands for specialization separated fields of study.108 Addressing this demand for specialization, Holden held that specialists in the arts were becoming extremely narrow. Degree programs were too rigid and too narrow. She stated, " . . . fewer and fewer artists talk to each other, let alone to anyone outside their special field."109 Bush-Brown also felt that demands for purification brought to dominance academic or scholarly standards. Those two demands of specialization and purifi- cation, Bush-Brown believed, excluded all educational activity except literary and measurable indices of edu- cational performance and were inimical to art and to artists. The problem is not history or physics or sociology, but strategies for understanding. The problem is not architecture, for example, but how to erect shelters that are commodious, durable, and enjoyable 108Albert Bush-Brown, "Art and the Liberal Arts: A Trivial, Artificial, Irrelevant Antagonism," in Art in American Higher Institutions, ed. Edmund B. Feldman (Wash- ifigton, D.C.: National Art Association, 1970), pp. 4-13. 109Carol D. Holden, "A New Mission for Colleges of Fine Arts: The Aesthetic Education of the General Student and the Training of Arts Educators" (Normal, 111.: Illinois University, Research and Information Bulletin of the National Council of Art Administrators, March 1977), p. l. 68 and how to shape urban communities; that problem requires engineers, economists, laborers, manu- facturers, sociologists, and others besides archi- tects. The problem is not agriculture, for example, but how to provide food and to conserve natural resources far into the future, and that problem invites the c00peration of experts in population and hunger, conservation, food processing and syn- thesization, education, birth control, storage, transportation, and water, as well as agricultural technicians. The problem is not medicine but com- prehensive health services. The problem, again, is net music in a symphony hall, sculpture and painting in a museum, or dance in a ballet studio; the problem, rather, is how to have the arts at their best, experienced by people as inevitable, natural conditions of their daily environment, and that problem, far from requiring the Victorian institutions we have invented, the museums and symphony halls that isolate and protect the arts from a hostile, industrial environment, requires the work of nearly a whole society, including film makers, record makers, guardians of budgets, artists, police, courts, and highway and park commissioners, not symphony conductors and museum directors alone. Bush-Brown believed " . . . man's need for developing his verbal, visual, and mensurate capacities for organization, and the collaborations required to address human problems" was the object of education.111 In his essay, "The Arts in Higher Education," Ackerman addressed the conflict between professionalism and the liberal arts tradition. Conflict between professional specialization and the liberal arts tradition affects the arts as well as scholarly and scientific disciplines, and does so more profoundly, since colleges and universities are able to offer professional training in separate 110Bush-Brown, "Art and the Liberal Arts," p. 6. 111Ibid., pp. 7-8. 69 schools of the arts at the undergraduate level. But even departments in liberal arts colleges are professionally oriented in the sense that the faculty prefers to teach committed apprentice artists rather than students of other subjects or even arts majors who plan not to continue pro- fessionally. 12 Ackerman argued that the bulk of incoming freshmen were not prepared to begin professional programs in art because of inadequate pre-college art experience. In Ackerman's view, it was a rarity for secondary schools to provide sufficient art courses of quality to prepare individuals to begin their professional art instruction upon entry into higher education. Too often students who demonstrated competency in art were often excluded from professional programs in higher education because they failed to meet academic qualifications.113 To clarify the conflict between professionalism and the liberal arts tradition, Ackerman presented the following solution. For those students not interested in becoming practicing artists but who wanted to study art in the liberal arts context should be provided strong and challenging courses. Such programs should be closely integrated with professional art programs.114 Only one in five of those students enrolled in art programs would become professional artists. Ackerman concluded, 112Ackerman, "Arts," p. 220. 114 113Ibid., pp. 236-37. Ibid., p. 238. 70 therefore, that it was not in the public interest to increase professional art programs. Rather, he felt that resources could be better utilized by concentrating a small number of programs into those institutions which were currently most effective. Ackerman did not, however, explain how the effectiveness would be determined.115 Before the confusion and disagreement over pro- fessional education of the artist and the value of the arts in higher education can be corrected, certain myths about the arts must be clarified. Ackerman summarized a number of unconscious attitudes which have developed and have sustained the view that the arts were lacking in social function. He said: Confusion of creative work with undisciplined self-expression and, by extension, with recreation (the attitude of many academics) or with escape from the pressures of the system (the attitude of many students) The loss of confidence in our ability to determine a craftsman valid for our time as evi- denced by basic arts training that is either obsolete or weakly permissive The academic tradition that the arts are somehow produced by, and appeal to, physical and emotional functions of the personality quite dis- tinct from intellectual-cognitive functions and therefore that the practice of the arts does not help the student to understand them better and does not significantly contribute to a liberal education The public attitude that the fine arts are for a privileged elite, that this is inevitable since the best art is too subtle and complex to llsIbid.. pp. 234-38. 71 be accessible to ordinary people, and that the elite is sadly but inevitably composed of the wealthy, the educated, and the otherwise excep- tionally fortunate The attitude of artists and students of art that the purity of art is tarnished if it responds to existing public needs and/or is financially successful The conviction that therefore the fine arts cannot be made popular nor can the popular arts be made fine and that there is a clear distinction between the two The failure of teachers (and particularly of historians of the arts) to draw issues involving value judgments into the classroom on the grounds that they are subjective and that an educator's responsibility is to maintain an impartial objec- tive, and supposedly scientific posture. é Ackerman held that the universities will provide the probable source of leadership for changing those attitudes and influencing the direction of the arts in American society. This leadership may be demonstrated through curricular and administrative reforms in higher education.117 His suggested curricular reforms included: (1) design art courses which are no less rigorous and disciplined than academic subjects; (2) distinguish pro- fessional courses from liberal arts courses in the arts keeping the liberal arts equally demanding but less technical (i.e., less emphasis on technique); (3) inte- grate art practice into art history curriculum; (4) devise purposeful teacher education for those professional arts students who seek to become art educators; (5) open the 116 117 Ibid., p. 262. Ibid., p. 236. 72 curriculum to the non-Western (primative, Eastern) and popular arts (film, television, popular music and new visual art forms of kinetic art, conceptual art, elec- tronics and computer graphics).118 Ackerman's suggested reform in administration included: (1) make professional education in the arts available after the liberal education (usually two years) and ignore advanced degrees as a criterion for appointment and promotion of faculty; (2) allow for flexible schedules for art students, permitting them the time required for serious involvement in their art; (3) encourage the development of programs which would aid secondary school art instruction; (4) restrict professional schools to those which have superior teachers, adequate funds and which can provide employment to the graduate; and (5) invest in better education before better buildings.119 The Mills and McCulley study identified the future 120 direction of the arts in higher education. The list below reflects the major concerns: 1. Emphasis on the improvement of the value of society. De-emphasis on the entertainment and therapeutic aspects of art. llBIbid. 119Ibid., pp. 263-64. 120M111s and McCulley. "Art in Higher Education," p. 46. 73 2. Increase efforts for public awareness of the arts as an intrinsic part of their lives and for increasing the depth of that awareness. 3. The public's disenchantment with science and technology will tend to create a growing awareness of the vital role of the arts. 4. Increased exposure of the arts to the public. Isolation of art by dealers, critics and artists themselves have too often made art seem unimpor- tant and alien to the "work ethic." Holden reported that the financial crises, super- specialization in the arts and rigidity of degree pro- grams should be alarming to arts administrators in higher education as an unhealthy sign. It excluded the general student and nonart major from the aesthetic experience. She charged that arts administrators should become the leaders to reverse that trend. Her recommendations included: (1) retrain university art faculty to teach less sophisticated students in the arts; (2) art depart- ments should emphasize that which the department can do best; (3) re-evaluate art degree programs, reduce the proliferation of duplication and direct energies to com- munity arts programs, aesthetic education and interdisci- plinary arts (i.e., visual arts, performing arts and music); (4) focus on the general public to enhance 74 aesthetic literacy, and audience develOpment; and (5) pro- vide in-service education for public school art teachers to broaden their sc0pe of how art may be integrated into the educational process.121 Increased interest and enrollment in the arts were supported by published reports. Also substantiated was the concern for minimal to inadequate support for the arts in higher education. Numerous recommendations and suggestions were made as to the direction higher education will take relative to the arts, but opinions were mixed. The dominant attitude appeared to be that education in the arts should be directed toward a broader audience with the concentration of professional art programs in fewer schools. Whatever the trend for the future, Kerr, and Mills and McCulley agreed that the arts are in higher education to stay. In addition to the sources cited above, Morrison spoke of the "cultural revolution" and the reordering of societal values, thus Speeding up the demand for effective arts programs on the American campus. Some higher edu- cational institutions must yet decide whether to encompass the arts fully. According to Morrison, the problems 122 Many of the problems were identi- ahead remain great. fied by Christ-Janer and Wickiser, Mahoney, Winkler and Morrison. Those problems were addressed in Chapter I of 121Holden, "Arts Education," pp. 1-4. 122Morrison, Rise of the Arts, p. 5. 75 this dissertation. Morrison claimed that if man were to make informed choices about the cultural growth, he must have an understanding of the arts.123 The Artist and the University Risenhoover reported that professional education in the creative and performing arts was a relatively new phenomenon in universities and artist-teachers were correspondingly new to faculty positions. He held that faculty members of the sciences and humanities had a long academic lineage and generally prepared themselves for a career in academia. In contrast, according to Risen- hoover, the artist prepared for a career unrelated to academic life.124 . . . the creative arts do not readily fit into the standard academic molds; the administrative and curricular problems which they entail are endlessly difficult, most of them springing from the central anomaly that the intensities of the artist are quite different from--and at times seemingly at odds with--the intensities of the scholar. In outlook, temperament, and even language, the artist is inherently alienated from the traditional concerns and values of higher education, and at times his passions, unorthodoxies and irreverences make him seem even a dangerous intruder.125 123Ibid., p. 6. 124Risenhoover, "Role Integration," p. 18. 125 (1963): 4. Introductory Statement, Arts in Society 2 76 Artists were viewed as ignorant and unlearned people. Sloan reported that this view was significantly held by members of the academic community. Sloan con- cluded that such an attitude made artists suspect in the intellectual community.126 In the essay by Wald, "The Artist and The Uni- versity," which was first published in the Report of the Committee on Visual Arts at Harvard University in 1956, Wald stated that scholars everywhere granted without question the work of art in the culture.127 Indeed it is readily conceded to be one of the highest fruits of the culture, perhaps the exemplary expression of its outlook and orien- tation. Much of the teaching of the university is concerned with the attempt to transmit an understanding of our own and past cultures 128 through their literature, music, and visual art. Wald held that it was a curious paradox that the university held in high esteem the work of art but took a dim view of the artist. The contemporary artist was assumed as a flighty, undependable, unpredictable person, " . . . something of a blemish upon his own productions."129 With the often held myth of the artist as an inspired idiot, Wald took exception. Such a notion, 126Joseph C. Sloane, "The Scholar and the Artist," Art Journal 23 (Fall 1963): 17. 127George Wald, "The Artist and the University," Arts in Society_2 (1963): 58-65. 129 1281bid., p. 60. Ibid. 77 according to Wald, denied any serious intellectual compo- nent in artistic creation and implied slow-wittedness. Wald reported: One need only think responsibly to realize the absurdity of such a view. When one considers what manual skills, what grasp of composition, restraint in execution, what capacity for subsuming detail to the integrated whole are needed to produce an authenic work of art, one realizes that these are the very highest affirmations of the intellect, and altogether incompatible with any failure of the mind or of the personality. Art is the epitome of order, the very negation of disorder.13 The truth is that the artist knows very well what he is doing, and could not be an artist were this not so. So much labor, suffering, discipline, skill, and talent go into a work of artistic creation that we may take it as a truism that the artist is in every sense the master of his product-- that if the art is great, the artist necessarily is greater.131 Wald compared the artist with the scientist, as did Risenhoover and Blackburn cited above. Both the artist and scientist were relatively newcomers to the university. Both the artist and the scientist had special places for their creative work, the studio and the laboratory. Both the artist and the scientist were craftsmen among university scholars. Both the artist and the scientist were regarded with suspicion and awe. The scientist and the laboratory found their place among the scholars. Given time and opportunity, the artist and the studio should find their places as well. Wald 130 131 Ibid., pp. 60-61. Ibid., p. 62 78 held that once the artist and his studio found their places in the university, their history will be no dif- 132 ferent than the scientist's. Wald'noted: With all the similarities between the artistic and scientific enterprise there are also important differences. Science is organized knowledge. Art, whatever its intrinsic ends, expresses the beliefs, aspirations and emotions of the whole culture. The one is a severely limited, the other an unlimited enterprise. From this point of view, the artist in the university takes on something of the position of the philosopher. His is the voice through which all of us must speak.133 Shahn.was skeptical about the formal organization of the college and university and its possible debili- tation of the arts. His concern stemmed from the poten- tially destructive impact of criticism and scholarship the arts. He was not sure whether art was a good solid intellectual subject.134 Among the first to support the artist as intel- lectually deserving of academic status was Dewey. He perceived that artistic production required a special kind of intelligence which was based upon thinking in a special kind of material (paint, stone, claY), not just verbal signs and words. Dewey held that the artist must perceive the relationships and connections between what he has already done and what he will do next. Control 132 133 Ibidop pp. 63-64. Ibid.’ p. 64. 134Ben Shahn, The Shape of Content (New York: Random House, 1957), p. 4. 79 in that process required thought as intent and penetrating as the scientific inquirer. He concluded that the pro- duction of a genuine work of art probably demanded more intelligence than most of the so-called thinking that goes on among those who pride themselves as being intel- lectuals.135 Perkins observed that differences in style compli- cated the communication between artist and scholar, thus making it difficult to apply similar standards of judgment to their work. Perkins stated: Without familiar standards of evaluation, the scholar cannot measure artistic performance and frequently concludes that a performance that cannot be evaluated does not belong in a uni- versity. The artist, on the other hand, is puzzled by the seeming depersonalization of the scholarly enterprise. 35 Larrabee reported that to put the artist in an academic context was to place him in a structured relation- ship in which he had little affection. The scholar and the artist were the implicit critics of each other. The artist stood as a rebuke to the nonartist in matters of art. The artist's presence among the scholars was to 135John Dewey, Art as Experience (New York: Capricorn Books, 1934), pp. 45-46. . 136James A. Perkins, "The University and the Arts," Teachers College Record 66 (May 1965): 675-76. 80 convey virtue to the "magical properties of art." His role was that of a shaman.137 To Risenhoover, such a view meant that the artist was unaware of a rational or cognitive basis for his work. The artist's imagination, discipline and craftsmanship may be subconscious or unconscious and not admissible " . . . to the exhalted realm of ideas which are the scholar's habitat."138 Also, Larrabee reported: " . . . it is a wonder he (the artist) survives at all the encounter with a smoothering embrace from those explicators and evalu- ators who must always be, as in moments of sanity he knows, his natural enemies."139 In a two-year study of thirty colleges and uni- versities, Richie found that some artists thrive in the academic setting while others do not. The separation of the campus from New York tended to cause in the artist a sense of isolation from the center of artistic enterprise. To some, however, the campus became the cultural center of interest for the artist's activities. In situations where the campus could not sustain the artist's interest 137Eric Larrabee, "Artist and University," in The Arts on Campus: The Necessity for Change, ed. Margaret Mahoney (Greenwich, Conn.: New York Graphic Society, 1970), p. 44. 138Risenhoover, "Role Integration," p. 12. 139Larrabee, "Artist," p. 42. 81 in productivity and search for expression, artists stayed at the university for purely academic interests rather than artistic.140 Richie also found that the artist in higher edu- cation who sustained national exhibition records were educated in either private or public professional schools of art. ”In sum, professional education can claim clear responsibility for most of the vitality of our current artistic life."141 In academia, the artist with a degree less than a doctorate is considered by some scholars to be inappro- priate for equal academic standing with disciplines which hold the doctorate as essential. However, Ackerman142 and Richie143 reported that degrees had no value in the assessment of artistic competence. The College Art Association resolved that the Master of Fine Arts degree, or equivalent degree, be considered the terminal degree for studio teaching.144 140Andrew C. Richie, The Visual Arts in Higher Education (New York: College Art Assodiation of America, 1966), pp. 80—83. 1411bid., p. 82. 142Ackerman, "Arts," p. 235. 143Richie, Visual Arts, p. 84. 144Midwest College Art Association Conference, Allen S. Weller, Chairman, "The Ph.D. for the Creative Artist," College Art Journal 19 (Summer 1960): 343; 82 The artist's view of himself, according to Kelly, was one of second-class university citizen. Art faculty salaries are generally lower than other areas in the uni- versity. University art faculty worked with student/ teacher ratios (such was not the case in Art Institutes), fragmented programs and often substandard facilities. Kelly found that many art teachers were intimidated by the intellectual climate of the university usually as a consequence of the perceived second-class status.145 A somewhat opposite view was expressed by Gosnell. Writing in the "Point of View" column of the Chronicle of Higher Education, Gosnell claimed that the university could not do without the artist. He wrote: . . . we are seminal to intellectual advancement in any other area of inquiry. We are the champions of the intuitive, the bulwark of the aberrent, the last-ditch stand of rugged solipso—individualism, 146 and without us all other scholarship will atrophy. Smith argued for the admission of the artist into the community of scholars. Smith presented what he con- sidered the standard stereotype comparison between scholar and artist. The scholar proceeds from the known to the unknown. The artist delves directly into the unknown. H. Harvard Arnason, Chairman, "The Present Status of the M.F.A. Degree," Art Journal 29 (Spring 1970): 244. 145Kelly, "Arts," pp. 29-30. 146Stephen Gosnell, "Dissecting the Academic Artist," Chronicle of Higher Education, May 14, 1976, p. 32. 83 The scholar defines a problem and devises methodology. The artist needs a form which implies methodology. The scholar gives credit. The artist is unaware of his debt to others. The scholar concludes. The artist expresses.147 But, according to Smith, scholars often behave like artists. The scholar often "leaps" into the unknown and "plays hunches." Smith asked, " . . . how often was the 'conclusion' . . . the first element . . . to lurk in 148 the mind of the investigator?" About the artist, Smith asked: " . . . doesn't the artist sometimes behave like a scholar? . . . does he not proceed from the known structure to a new result?"149 When the artist enters the community of scholars, Smith raised the question: . . . if we grant that a work of art is in any comparable to a work of scholarship--then how will we know its value? Who will audge it? How can we say that it is valid?15 - Smith's conclusion was that " . . . we cannot . . . " however, he continued: We can observe that the work of art is a result of a discipline . . . not a beginner's experiment We can vouch that the artist has some acquaintance with . . . works of other artists 147Warren S. Smith, "The Artist and the Community of Scholars," AAUP Bulletin 45 (June 1959): 239. 1481bid., p. 240. 1491bid. 15°Ibid., p. 241. 84 past and present. . . . We can give evidence of his devotion, his single-mindedness, his need for expression. And hOpefully we can assume that he has communicated through his work with at least some reputable members of his own faculty.15 The community of scholars could guarantee nothing more of a scholarly thesis, argued Smith.152 Risenhoover and Blackburn supported the idea of similarities and common interests between scholars and artists.153 The authors observed that the scholar and the artist placed high value on quality teaching, creative and productive work; both had need for a good work environ— ment. The authors reported a number of areas in which scholars and artists could learn from each other. "Main- line academics practice sponsorship . . . " i.e., place- 154 For the arts, ment of students and joint publication. individuality prevented cooperative adventures. Artists could better realize their purposes by devising ways to maintain collegial relationships with their professional offspring. Conversely, scholars could profit by visiting the artist's studio. "There the professor at work is on public display and some secrets of the creative process 155 are revealed." Students can observe the ongoing 151 152 Ibid. Ibid. 153Risenhoover and Blackburn, Artists, pp. 200-13. 154 155 Ibid., p. 202. Ibid., p. 203. 85 work, see both mistakes and solutions and have a glimpse of the struggle with ideas.156 The Profession and the Organization The focus of this study was on the role of the art department chairperson as an artist—administrator. Kornhauser's theory was used as a framework for analysis. Kornhauser theorized that among scientists in industry there were "built-in” strains between professionals and the organization in which they worked. The value of this theory as a framework to analyze the role of the art department chairperson existed because of the simi- larity between the role of the artist and the role of the scientist. That similarity was professionalism. Kornhauser's criteria for professionalism were: " . . . (a) specialized competence that has considerable intellectual content; (b) extensive autonomy in exercising the special competence: (c) strong commitment to a career based on the special competence; and (d) influence and 157 responsibility in the use of the special competence." According to those criteria, the artist was a professional. 156Ibid., pp. 203-04. 157William Kornhauser with Warren 0. Hagstrom, Scientist in Industry: Conflict and Accommodation (Berkley: University of California Press, 1962), p. 11. 86 Parsons reported that: . . . the artist is engaged in creating expressive symbols. But it is precisely the difference in one respect between sophisticated art and purely "spontaneous" expressive activity that there is a "technical" aSpect of the artist's work which is directly comparable with other techniques. This aspect of his activity is instrumental. It depends on knowledge and skill in exactly the same fundamental sense as does industrial tech- nology: or the technology of scientific research. The artist must accept severe discipline, must 158 spend much time in study and practicing his skills. : According to Risenhoover, the artist was a pro- fessional. He explained: Even according to the somewhat obsolete definition of a professional as a "free agent" as an indepen- dent practitioner (such as a physician or lawyer, working alone and ultimately responsible only to his professional ethic) the artist qualifies for inclusion as a professional. The folklore sur- rounding artists' lives as well as statements by the more articulate point toward a fierce profes- sional commitment, almost an obsession, with their work. The primary function of professionalism, according to Kornhauser was " . . . the protection of standards of excellence in the face of pressures for quick and easy 160 n solutions." 0n the other hand, . . . organizations strive to mobilize professional people to serve their 158Talcott Parsons, The Social System (Glencoe, I11.: The Free Press, 1951), p. 409. 159Risenhoover, "Role Integration," pp. 35-36. 160Kornhauser, Scientists, p. l. 87 (organization's) own ends, and to organize professional people along their (organization's) own lines."161 Those inherent strains between the professional and the organization were generated because the goals, incentives, controls and influences of the profession were not the same as those of the organization. The specific differences between the professional and the organization in terms of goals, incentives, controls and influences were described by Kornhauser and summarized below. Goals: The broad aims of the profession were to seek understanding, technical excellence and creativity. The broad aims of the organization were for utility, operating ease and routine.162 Controls: "Organizations tend to be structured hierarchically . . . " whereas the professions " . . . tend to place ultimate control over their members in the colleague group."163 Kornhauser reported that colleague control ran counter to bureaucratic authority. It obstructed promptness of decisions, consistency of policy and clear responsibility of the individual. Conversely, bureaucratic control weakened professional initiative and incentives.164 162 161Ibid., p. 9. Ibid., p. 16. 163 164 Ibid., P0 130 Ibido ' Pp. 43-440 88 Incentives: Loyalty of an individual to an organization or to a profession was rewarded by status in the respective group. The requirements for a success- ful career in an organization often clashed with require- ments for success in a profession. Kornhauser found that: . . . taking on administrative duties may be the major (or only) way of advancing in an organization, but the assumption of such duties implies the cur- tailment of professional activities and therefore of a professional career. In sum, there is a potential conflict between organizations and pro- fessions in respect to motivation and incentives, and the corresponding kinds of contributions which are sought from professional workers.165 Influence: Professional influence represented the conflict between professionals and organizations relative to authority and responsibility for implementing professional ideas.166 For example, " . . . the pro- fessional, unlike the manager, is responsible only for the results of his own work."167 Kornhauser held that the power to implement or utilize professional ideas was a matter of authority. Authority was viewed in terms of legitimacy, i.e., organizational authority was executive authority; professional authority was based on special competence. For the professional to put his ideas to use with authority, he had to become part of the bureaucratic hierarchy. By doing so, the professional abdicated his 165 166 Ibid., p. 13. Ibid., PP. 158-94. 167Ibid., p. 159. 89 privilege for deep-probing explorations within his pro- fessional discipline. Professionals who sought to enhance their autonomy (freedom to pursue discipline by self- direction), rather than their authority, limited their responsibility to ensure that the fruits of their work be fully and legitimately utilized and appreciated.168 Although there were differences between the organization and the profession, Kornhauser held that organizations and professions were inter-dependent. There were strong pressures from both the organization and from the profession for " . . . accommodation of 169 Those accommodations were identified their interests." by Kornhauser as new professional goals, new professional controls, new professional careers and new professional responsibilities. They are summarized below. New professional goals: Organizational needs and demands to set limits on basic research were accommo- dated by establishing research units apart from production units. At the same time, directors of research units were placed on the same level of authority as the directors of production units. That differentiation did not ameliorate new tensions which built up among units performing dif- ferent research functions and between research units and other units of the organization. However, it was less 1681bid., pp. 158-94. 169Ibid., p. 198. 90 disruptive than the conflicts between the profession and the organization.170 New professional controls: "The management of professional work requires the adaptation of professional norms to organizational contexts, which has occurred through the creation of the role scientist-adminis~ trator."171 The role of scientist-administrator sought to accommodate the professional demand for judging pro— fessional work and the organizational need for adminis- trative control. Tensions still existed, however, because professionals who were administrators at a high level tended to adhere to the norms of the organization. Those at the lower level of administration tended to adhere to the norms of the profession.172 New professional careers: To accommodate for the organization's need for professionals as administrators, career patterns were established for the professional within the organization. There was also the establishment of ”multiple career lines." Kornhauser explained: The separation of a professional career from an administrative one helps to meet the needs of the organization for both professional and mana- gerial contributions. It also helps to ensure that the professional commitment will not be overwhelmed by organizational pressures. Insofar as the traditional system of incentives in organi- zations prevails, motivation for career in sc1ence 170 171 Ibid., pp. 197-99. Ibid., p. 200. 1721bid., pp. 199-203. 91 or engineering will be dampened. Industry is becoming aware of this, and recently has been experimenting with "professional ladders" whereby scientists and engineers can secure advances in salary and status without taking on administrative duties. Instead of greater authority, they are rewarded with greater freedom to engage in their specialties.l7 New professional responsibilities: Kornhauser reported that professionals were becoming increasingly aware of pressures to assume responsibility for the use of new professional ideas. Discovery alone was not enough. The professional became involved with decisions to put new discoveries to practical use. That situation put the professional in a partnership role with economic, social and political affairs. Thus, according to Korn- hauser, the integrity of science was being eroded.174 It may be concluded that efforts to ease the strain between professionals and organizations had been accommodated. It may also be concluded that with each accommodation new tensions arose, but with less debili- tating effects. 173 174 Ibid., p. 205. Ibid., pp. 206-08. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY Introduction The subject of this study was the artist as an administrator and specifically the art department chair- persons of the Big Ten Universities. In academic insti- tutions of higher education the individuals most intimately involved with the role of artist-administrator are chair- persons of art departments. This study focused on their view of that role. To investigate the role of the art department chairperson as an artist-administrator, the descriptive method of research was used. The study was designed to provide information about the art department chairperson's View of his/her role as artist-administrator. Additionally the study explored the art department chairperson's view of the role of the discipline of art in higher education. From a search of the literature, it was determined that this investigation did not duplicate the efforts of others. The collection of information for this descriptive 92 93 study was obtained through written responses to a direct- mail questionnaire and through audio responses in a personal interview. Kornhauser's theory was used as a framework for analysis of the collected information. He theorized that tension existed between the professionals and the organi— zations in which they worked concerning professional goals, influences, controls and incentives.1 Figure l is a visual presentation of the activi- ties conducted during this investigation. Topic selection was determined as a result of personal background and interest of this investigator. Also there was an identi- fied need to study department chairpersons (described in Chapter I). A proposal was submitted and approved. The literature review was wide in scope and was reported in Chapter II. The survey instruments were constructed, critiqued and revised. Rehearsals and a pilot study were accomplished and further modifications made of the survey instruments. The information was collected through the direct-mail questionnaire and the personal interview. The information was analyzed and the findings reported in Chapter IV. 1William Kornhauser with Warren 0. Hagstrom, Scientists in Industry: Conflict and Accommodation (Berkely: UniverSity of California Press, 1962), pp. 195-96. $34 vofiu .A nfiomnoozvz codeoauvucoo .A-_-_'r «cosauaccn cauoa>o¢ mm SE36 scam sua>auoa souvusuoucu mo : o a v o o a a o o 0H 03%.“ ounh~n=< mcuauonoz codauoaom canoe 95 Study Population The population for the study of art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities was small. Therefore, the entire population was selected for study. A study of art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities met the identified need to investigate department chairpersons of large universities.2 Also a study of this group of chairpersons met the identified need to investigate departmental Chairpersons' perceptions of their role.3 The search of the literature revealed that in almost no instance did research deal with: (1) department chairpersons of a specific discipline or (2) art department chairpersons as the exclusive source of information in research about art departments. All ten of the art department chairpersons par- ticipated in the investigation (a 100 percent response). The department Chairpersons' names and institutions are listed in Appendix A (N=10). 2Paul L. Dressel, F. Craig Johnson, and Philip M. Marcus, The Confidence Crisis (San Francisco: Jossey- Bass, 1969), P. 234. Also see "Rationale for the Study," Chapter I, this dissertation. 3Charles H. Heimler, "The College Department Chairman," in The Academic Department or Division Chair- man: A Complex Role, eds. James Brann and Thomas A. Emmett (Detroit: Balamp,—1972), p. 198. Also see "Rationale for the Study," Chapter I, this dissertation. 96 Construction of the Survey Instruments The collection of information was accomplished through the use of a direct-mail questionnaire and a personal interview. The questionnaire was designed to collect demographic information about the art department chairpersons. For the personal interview, interview guides were designed to obtain the art department chair- persons' view of their role. The questionnaire and interview guides were critiqued by the guidance committee. Corrections and changes were made and then approved. Questionnaire The direct-mail questionnaire was designed to collect demographic information about the art department chairperson and information about departmental emphasis. It was designed so that the respondents could answer all of the questions from recall. The questionnaire was developed for two reasons: (1) to reduce the amount of time needed for the personal interview and (2) to provide ease in collection and tabulation of the information. The questionnaire content was based, in part, on work by Dressel et a1.4 and by Risenhoover.5 A question- naire example may be found in Appendix B. 4Dressel et al., Crisis, pp. 259-62. 5Morris Risenhoover, "Artist-Teachers in Universi- ties: Studies in Role Integration" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1972), pp. 122-31. 97 Personal Interview The personal interview was used because, "Many people are more willing to communicate information ver- bally than in writing and, therefore, will provide data more readily and fully in an interview than in a question- naire."6 Kerlinger described the interview as follows: The interview is a face-to-face interpersonal role situation in which one person, the interviewer, asks a person being interviewed, the respondent, questions designed to obtain answers pertinent to the pur- poses of the research problem. Although the advantages and disadvantages of the personal interview (reported in Chapter I) were considered, it was believed that because of the background of this investigator (practicing artist, faculty member and administrator) the personal interactions with the respon- dents would achieve best results. Bingham, et al., re- ported that the interpersonal situation was precisely the element which made the interview such a valuable tool. They stated: Sources of unreliability inhere in the interviewer, in the person interviewed, and in the relationship between the two. Paradoxically, it is precisely 6Deobold V. Van Dalen, Understanding Educational Research (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., TT—‘1 62 , p. 258. 7Fred N. Kerlinger, Foundations of Behavioral Research (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., W 5 , p. 469. 98 these same elements which make the interview a valuable instrument. The difference lies in the conduct of the interview and the quality of the relationship.8 According to Fenlason, quality relationships may be established by applying the essentials of good inter- viewing. Interviewer knowledge of personality and behavior, role performance and proper attitude were among the essentials which she described. However, she singled out the skilled artistry of listening as, "The most fundamental prerequisite for any interview. . . ."9 She noted that the components of the discipline required of an artful listener were concentration, active partici- pation, comprehension and objectivity.10 Interview Guides To support the personal interview and to insure uniformity and structure of the interview, an interview guide-response form (for use by the interviewer) and an interview guide (for use by the interviewee) were dev- eloped. The formats for the interview guides were based 8Walter Bingham, Moore Van Dyke, Bruce Victor, and John Gustad, How To Interview (New York: Harper and Brothers, Inc., 1959), p. 9. 9Anne F. Fenlason, Essentials of Interviewing, (New York: Harper and Row, Inc., 1962), p. 143. loIbid., p. 144. 99 on the work of Borland.ll The question content was designed to acquire the art department Chairpersons' views of their role in accordance with the problem state- ment (see Problem Statement, Chapter I). The purpose of the interview guide-response form was to insure that the investigator followed standardized procedures and that important information about the research project, confidentiality and time involved were explained to the respondent. Space was provided to record administrative activities as well as space to record appropriate notes during the course of the inter- view. The focus notations following some of the ques- tions on the interview guide-response form were for the interviewer's use only. They were not intended to guide the respondent through the questions or to obtain specific answers. Rather, the focus notes were highlights of information obtained from the search of the literature relative to the question. The primary method of recording the participants' responses was to tape-record the interview. Borg sighted three advantages of the tape-recorded interview: (1) it reduced the tendency of the interviewers to select 11Kenneth E. Borland, "Career Perceptions, Position Sequences, and Career Strategies of Michigan Public Community-Junior College Presidents" (Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1976), pp. 343-48. 100 information favoring their own bias: (2) a thorough analysis of the responses could be made during playbacks; and (3) the interview process is speeded up because note taking was not essential.12 One chairperson would not permit the use of a tape recorder, therefore, extensive notes were taken. This particular interview took two hours to complete. An example of the interview guide- reSponse form may be found in Appendix C. The interview guide for the respondent listed only the questions to be asked. It was used so that the respondent would receive the questions both written and audibly. This reduced misunderstanding of the question by the respondent. The guide also allowed the respondent an opportunity to have a general idea of the total inter- view and to organize his thoughts. An example of the interview guide may be found in Appendix D. Pilot Study On December 2, 1977, a rehearsal of the interview was conducted before a television camera and videotaped. The rehearsal was held at the Instructional Resource Center, Michigan State University. The subject for the interview was the Assistant Dean of Fine Arts, University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point, on leave for doctoral studies in Higher Education at Michigan State University. Prior 12Walter R. Borg, Educational Research: An Intro- duction (New York: David McDay Inc., 1965), p. 225. 101 to the interview the subject completed the questionnaire. Following the rehearsal the subject furnished this inves- tigator with critical comments about the interview tech- nique and suggested ways to improve it. The personal critique plus visual and audio feedback from television proved invaluable for later successful interviews. During early December 1977, meetings were arranged with the art department chairpersons of Western Michigan University, Central Michigan University and Eastern Michigan University. The three art department chair- persons completed the questionnaire and participated in a personal interview. With the concurrence of this investigator's guidance committee chairman, the art department chair- persons of the three Michigan institutions were selected for the following reasons: (1) they were in close proximity to East Lansing, Michigan; (2) they met the definition of an artist-administrator defined in Chapter I of this dissertation; (3) they were knowledgeable of uni- versity organizational structures; (4) they were informed about the visual arts in higher education; and (5) they could provide insights into the role of the art depart- ment chairperson which department chairpersons of other disciplines may not be able to do. The names of the three art department chairpersons and their institutions may be found in Appendix E. 102 The pilot study was successful. It demonstrated that about ten minutes were needed to complete the questionnaire and the personal interview could be com- pleted in about one hour. The only change needed was a minor format change on one page of the questionnaire. Procedures for Collecting the Data The initial contact with the art department chair- persons of the Big Ten Universities was made by telephone on November 29 and 30, 1977. Telephone contact was made because the holiday break of the subject institutions varied and it was felt that the holiday season could delay mail delivery. In addition, this investigator wanted to conduct the interviews before, during and after the holiday season. During the initial telephone conversation, intro- ductions were made, the chairpersons were given a brief description of the research project and informed that the data would be collected through a short written question- naire and a personal interview. The chairpersons were informed that they would receive a letter to further explain the research project plus the written question- naire. They were then asked if they would be willing to participate. All of the chairpersons expressed enthusiasm for the project except one. He requested written documen- tation for the research. He agreed to participate after he received the letter. One chairperson made an 103 appointment for the interview during the initial telephone conversation. Dates and times when the chairpersons would be available for an interview were determined so that this investigator could schedule travel. The mail packet was prepared and sent to each art department chairperson in mid December 1977. The packet consisted of a cover letter describing the research, the questionnaire and a return self-addressed stamped envelope. The completed questionnaires were returned within the requested time. All of the questionnaires were usable. However, one chairperson said he could not respond to the question which asked the reasons for accepting the art department chairpersonship. An example of the cover letter may be found in Appendix F. Arrangements for travel were tedious. Travel times had to be coordinated with a local travel agency to correspond with the availability of the chairpersons. Additionally, travel routes had to be such that costly overlaps would be avoided. Interview appointments were made by telephone while concurrently arranging for travel schedules. Travel to six universities was by air, three by private automobile and one by bus. The interviews were held between December 14, 1977, and January 18, 1978. The dates and times of the inter- views may be found in Appendix G. 104 In all cases the interviews were held in the chairperson's office. The interviews took about one hour each. All of the interviews were tape-recorded except one. As indicated above, that interview took two hours. At each interview this investigator was well received with excellent rapport being established between the chairperson and the investigator. The chairpersons were genuinely interested in the research project, felt that it was valuable and many asked for a copy of the results. Post-interview activities included lengthy conversations about the study, art and higher education, guided tours of the department by the chairperson or by an assistant and in one case lunch with the chairperson and a group of art faculty members. Method of Data Analysis The data analyzed consisted of the written responses of the direct-mail questionnaire and the responses to the personal interview. All of the ten art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities participated. The analysis of the data was undertaken to present the view held by the art department chairpersons of: (1) their role, (2) the role of art in higher education and (3) the strains which exist (or do not exist) between the profession and the organization. 105 The information collected was analyzed and pre- sented in two general categories. First, the information obtained from the questionnaire was reported quantita- tively. The first category dealt primarily with factual data and included: (1) personal information about the art department chairperson, (2) chairperson selection and reporting channels, (3) a self-view of role and moti- vation and (4) departmental emphasis. Second, the infor- mation obtained from the interview has been reported qualitatively. This second category was organized to present the art department chairperson's view of: (1) the department, (2) the role of art in higher education and (3) strains which exist (or do not exist) between the profession and the organization. Response frequency tabulation and frequency per- centages were calculated for items of the direct-mail questionnaire. Other material was presented descriptively. Because of the descriptive nature of the study, other statistical methods were not used. To analyze whether strains exist between the pro- fessional (artist) and the organization (university) in which they worked, Kornhauser's theory was used as a framework. He theorized that the incompatibility between the profession and the organization existed because the 106 goals, incentives, controls and influences of the pro- fession were at variance with those of the organization.13 Although Kornhauser studied scientists in industry, the value of this framework to analyze the role of the art department chairperson as an artist-administrator existed because of the similarity between the role of the artist in the university and the scientist in industry. The similarity was professionalism.14 Summary To investigate the role of the art department chairperson as an artist-administrator, the descriptive method of research was used. The population for the study consisted of the art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities. Art department chairpersons of three universities outside the study population were selected for a pilot study. Demographic information about the chairpersons was collected using a direct-mail question- naire. The personal interview was employed to obtain the art department Chairpersons' view of their role. A 100 percent response rate was achieved. The analysis of the data was undertaken to present the view held by 13Kornhauser, Scientists, pp. 195-96. 14For a discussion of professionalism, see the section, "The Profession and the Organization,” Chapter II of this dissertation. 107 art department chairpersons of their role as artist- administrators, of the role of art in higher education and of the strains between the profession and the organization. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS Introduction This study focused on the role of the art depart- ment chairperson of the Big Ten Universities as an artist- administrator. It was designed to elicit the views which art department chairpersons held about their artist- administrator role. Additionally, the study explored the art department Chairpersons' views of the role of the discipline of art in higher education. Whether the chairperson viewed his role as a professional artist to be in conflict with his role as an administrator in an organization (the university) was investigated. For this investigation, the descriptive method of research was used. A direct-mail questionnaire and a personal interview were employed to collect information from the ten department chairpersons (Nelo). Information about the department chairpersons such as experience, education, selection methods and motivation for becoming a chairperson was obtained through the direct-mail questionnaire. The Chairpersons' views of (l) the 108 109 department, (2) the role of art in higher education and (3) the tensions which exist between the profession and the organization were obtained through the personal interview. The research findings are reported in this chapter of two major sections. In the first section is an over- view of the art department chairperson. The second section of the chapter represents the views held by the chairpersons studied. Each section contains a number of sub sections. Overview of the Art Department Chairpersons In this section, an overview of the art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities is presented. Personal information is included to give a limited profile of the chairpersons. The general method of chairperson selection as well as the line of communication from the chairperson to higher echelons within the university organizational structure are included. The Chairpersons' personal views of their functional role and their moti- vation for accepting the chairperson position are sum- marized. Personal Information Sex The ten art department chairpersons in this study were male. 110 Faculty Rank All of the art department chairpersons held the rank of professor except one. That chairperson was an associate professor. All of the chairpersons were tenured faculty members. Position Title Depending on the university organizational structure, the position title of the administrative head of the academic unit encompassing the visual arts varied. Of the ten individuals studied, seven held the title of chairperson, one was a dean, one was a director and one individual held the title of head. The distribution of the position titles of the administrative heads of the art departments of the Big Ten Universities may be found in Table 2. TABLE 2 POSITION TITLES Title Number Chairperson 7 Dean 1 Director 1 Head 1 Total 10 The position of the art department within the uni- versity organizational structure may be found in Appendix H. 111 Education The highest degree held by the chairpersons ranged from Master of Arts (MA) degree to the Doctorate. The Master of Fine Arts (MFA) degree predominated with 60 percent of the chairpersons having the MFA degree. The Ph.D. degree was held by 20 percent of the chairpersons while one (10 percent) held a Master of Industrial Design (MID) and one (10 percent) chairperson held a Master of Arts (MA) degree. The distribution of the highest degree held by the chairpersons may be found in Table 3. TABLE 3 HIGHEST DEGREE HELD Degree Number Ph.D. 2 MFA 6 MID 1 MA 1 Total 10 All of the chairpersons had received art training during their undergraduate education. However, only one chairperson had obtained an undergraduate degree from an art school. All other chairpersons had completed their undergraduate education at a public or private university. Graduate education of the chairpersons was pri- marily within universities. Although four of the 112 chairpersons had attended an art school during their graduate studies, only one chairperson had received the terminal degree from an art school. Four Big Ten Uni- versities were the source of the highest graduate degree for four of the chairpersons. The highest graduate degree of five of the chairpersons was received from other than the Big Ten Universities, representing four universities in three states and one university in Europe. The distribution of the highest degree held by category of university or school may be found in Table 4. TABLE 4 HIGHEST DEGREE BY CATEGORY OF UNIVERSITY/SCHOOL Highest Degree Level University/School No. PhD MFA Masters Big Ten University 1 2 l 4 University Other than Big Ten 1 3 l 5 Art School 1 1 Total 10 The Chairpersons' academic major in their graduate education represented a wide range of media within the visual arts. Among the ten art department chairpersons, eight visual arts disciplines were represented. The major in which the chairpersons received their highest degree is shown in Table 5. In the left column of the table is 113 a list of the majors in which the highest degree was achieved. The number in the right column of the table indicates the number of chairpersons who received their highest degree in a particular major. TABLE 5 MAJOR IN HIGHEST DEGREE Major Number Art History Ceramics Graphics Industrial Design Painting Print Making Sculpture Studio Art Total rd hard F'td w +4 N [.1 O Experience The length of time that the chairpersons had served as faculty members of art departments ranged from 6 l/2 years to 25 years. Only two chairpersons had served as faculty members less than 10 years. The other chairpersons had been faculty members for 14 years or more. The average length of service of art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities as faculty members was 16.3 years. As indicated earlier, all of the chairpersons were tenured faculty members. 114 The number of years that the chairpersons had been in their present position of art department chairperson ranged from three months to five years for an average of about two years and four months. The ten Chairpersons' length of service as chairperson may be found in Table 6. In the left column is listed the number of years the respondents have been in the chairperson position. The number of chairpersons is indicated in the column at the right. TABLE 6 YEARS AS CHAIRPERSON Years Number 5 2 3 3 2 l l l/2 l l 1 Less than one year 2 Total 10 Among the ten art department chairpersons, seven had previous academic administrative experience; three had none. The academic administrative experience which the chairpersons had before becoming an art department chairperson was confined, in all but one case, to admin- istrative experience within the art department. The types of administrative experience within the department 115 included: (1) associate or assistant chairperson, (2) director of graduate studies, (3) area chairman, i.e., painting, sculpture, ceramics, (4) acting head and (5) gallery director. An assistant dean position had been held by one of the respondents. One chairperson reported that he had been con- sidered for the chairperson position because of his admin- istrative experience in academic areas other than art. Another chairperson reported that his years in art- related activities in industry and government were influential in his selection as art department chair- person. Selection and Reporting The art department chairpersons were asked to report the method by which they were selected, i.e., by the dean, by the faculty, by a combination of the dean and faculty, or by other. The method of chairperson selection was reported by seven chairpersons as a combi- nation of the dean of the college and the art department faculty. Appointment of the chairperson by a dean was reported by only one chairperson. Selection by the art department faculty was the method used in the selection of two of the art department chairpersons. Reporting channels to the next higher echelon in the university organizational structure were found to be as follows: (1) eight chairpersons reported to a dean, 116 (2) one chairperson reported to a department head and (3) one chairperson reported directly to a vice presi- dent. The academic disciplines represented by the indi- viduals to whom art department chairpersons reported included administration, art education, chemistry, economics, history, music, philosophy, physics and political science. Only one art department chairperson indicated that problems existed because he reported to an administrator at a higher echelon who was of another discipline. It was the view of that chairperson that the administrator had little concern for the needs and aspirations of the art department. This will be dis- cussed in greater detail in the second part of this chapter. Although it was not a part of this study, the concept of a rotating chairperson was discussed to a limited degree by four chairpersons. A rotating chair- personship, as understood by the four respondents, was the rotation of willing faculty members through the chairperson position for a fixed period of time. Two of the chairpersons served under this arrangement and believed that it was a good method of chairperson service. The other two chairpersons served on a permanent basis and they felt that the nonrotating method to be the most effective for their situation. 117 Those who served as rotating chairpersons cited two advantages. First, it allowed a number of faculty members to serve and experience the opportunities, chal- lenges and problems found in the position. Second, it permitted the chairperson to return to teaching and creative activity without long periods of time devoted primarily to administrative matters. The chairpersons who served as a permanent chair- person believed that such an arrangement was the only way that a chairperson could conduct long-range planning for the department and to provide leadership to the department faculty. Functional Role and Motivation The chairpersons studied were asked if they thought of themselves as teachers, artists or adminis- trators; how much time they spent at their work; and why they took the job. In response to the question, "Do you usually think of yourself primarily as: a teacher, an artist, an administrator or other?" they did not respond, in all cases, with one primary role. Although it was the pur- pose of the question to elicit a single answer, most chairpersons either would not or could not answer singu- larly. When asked why they included multiple responses, their reply was usually that they functioned in all of 118 the roles which they listed. The frequency to which they responded to the functional role of teacher, artist or administrator may be found in Table 7. TABLE 7 CHAIRPERSONS' VIEW OF FUNCTIONAL ROLE No. of R016 Chairpersons Other Teacher Artist Administrator X X Scholar l X X Problem Solver 1 X Writer 2 x 1 x 1 x Total 10 Total Frequency 8 5 5 3 Of the four chairpersons who responded to one item only, two viewed themselves primarily as teachers, one as artist and one as administrator. The other six chairpersons felt their primary role included two or more of the listed responsibilities. Of those six chair- persons, three thought of themselves as a teacher and an administrator; one saw himself to be a teacher, an administrator and a scholar; one viewed himself as a 119 teacher, an artist and a problem-solver; and one thought of himself as a teacher and a writer. It should be noted that whether the chairperson responded to a singular or multiple role, eight chair- persons identified themselves in the role of teacher. The time that chairpersons spent at their work varied widely. They reported the percentage of time they actually spent and the percentage of time they would ideally like to spend in teaching, research, creative work and administrative duties. They also reported, on the average, the total number of hours they actually spent per week on the combined tasks listed above. The percentage of time that chairpersons actually spent in teaching, research and creative work was generally less than they would ideally like to spend. The converse was true for administrative duties. There were exceptions, however. There were two chairpersons who could ideally like to teach less time than they actually do. Only one chairperson would ideally increase his time for adminis- tration over the actual time spent on administrative duties. The average percentage of time which chairpersons actually spend and the percentage of time they would ideally spend may be found in Table 8. The table shows the responsibility areas in the left column and the average percentage of time actually and ideally spent in those areas in the central and right columns 120 respectively. The actual time in which the respondents spent, on the average, for teaching was 19 percent as compared to 22 percent of the time they would ideally like to spend. They actually spent 6 percent of their time, on the average, with research and creative work respectively. Ideally, the average percentage of time was 10 percent for research and 19 percent for creative work. On the average, the respondents spent 69 percent of their time with administrative duties, but they would ideally like to spend only 49 percent of their time with those duties. TABLE 8 PERCENTAGE OF TIME IN FOUR RESPONSIBILITY AREAS Percentage of Time Responsibility Area Actually Spend Ideally Spend Teaching 19. % 22. % Research 6. 10. Creative Work 6. 19. Administrative duties as department chairperson 69. 49. Totals 100. % 100. % A comparison was made between the role (teacher, artist, administrator and other) and the time they spent in their responsibility areas (teaching, research, creative work and administration). It was confirmed 121 that regardless of how they viewed themselves, whether it be teacher, artist, administrator or other, the chair- persons, in general, would like to spend more time teach— ing and less time with administration than the actual time they spend with those responsibilities. The average number of hours which each chairperson spent every week for the combined responsibilities of teaching, research, creative work and administrative duties ranged from a high of 80+ hours per week to a low of 54 hours per week. The Big Ten University art depart- ment chairpersons worked an average of 63.9 hours per week. The chairpersons were asked to rank the three reasons, from a list of nine reasons, for accepting the position of art department chairperson. The reasons given for their acceptance may be found in Table 9. The reasons for accepting the position are listed in the left column. The frequency of ranking lst, 2d and 3d by the chair- persons is shown in the three center columns. In the right column is shown the frequency with which the chair- persons did not rank a reason either 1, 2 or 3. No one selected "release time from teaching" as a reason for taking the chairpersonship. That relates to their desire to spend more time teaching. To increase personal income or to have influence over the budget or faculty had very low priority. No apparent one reason emerged as a reason 122 TABLE 9 CHAIRPERSONS' REASONS FOR ACCEPTING THE POSITION Frequency and Reason for Ranking Not Ranked Accepting l, 2 or 3 1st 2d 3d Improve quality of teach- ing in the department 2 2 6 Exert greater influence on the university administration 1 l 2 6 Professional advancement 2 8 Improve departmental administration 2 l 4 3 Increase personal income 1 9 Release time from teaching 10 Exert greater influence in the control of the budget 1 9 Exert greater influence on the department faculty 1 9 Other 2“1 3b 1c 4 No Response 1 l 2 6 Totals 10 10 10 a"Other qualified people declined"; "Improve overall department." b"I feel I can do a better job"; "Improve facili- ties"; "Lack of more qualified candidates." c"Produce if possible a more professional atmos- phere." 123 for becoming the chairperson. However, there was an indication that the individual chairperson wanted to improve something such as teaching, administration, overall department or facilities. To improve some part of the art activity was listed as a first priority for taking the job by five of the chairpersons. Summary The findings presented above represent the responses by the chairpersons to the items of the direct- mail questionnaire. The questionnaire item concerning departmental strengths will be discussed in the following section. It was found that all of the chairpersons have tenure, all have been educated in the arts representing eight different visual arts media. They were all exper- ienced teachers and generally view themselves as teachers. Their administrative experience was limited prior to their appointment as chairperson. Appointment or selec- tion procedures varied, but most chairpersons were selected by mutual agreement of the faculty and the dean. The reasons for accepting the chairperson position also varied. In that case, most chairpersons took the position to improve some aspect of the art department. 124 Views Held by the Art Department Chairpersons The views held by the art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities are presented as they relate to (1) the art department, (2) the role of the discipline of art in higher education and (3) the profession of art and the organization (the university) in which the artist works. The Chairpersons' View of the Art Department Departmental Emphasis To determine the department emphasis within the art departments of the Big Ten Universities, the chair- persons were asked to indicate, on a five-point scale, the emphasis they felt the department placed on eight different areas. Rank ordering provided the following results. (1) Undergraduate instruction (2) Professional education of art students (3) Creative work and exhibitions of faculty members (4) Instruction of graduate students (5) Providing an art experience for a liberal arts education 125 (6) Instruction of nonart majors (7) Faculty community service (i.e., Art councils, workshops, etc.) (8) Advancing the art profession nationally When the chairpersons were asked which three areas they personally felt should have the greatest emphasis in their departments, the initial three areas listed above were most frequently listed and in that order. Strengths The strengths of the departments were identified by the chairpersons to be the faculty, programs, the reputation of both the faculty and the department, and the students. Chairpersons cited the faculty as being either the greatest strength of the department or that the faculty contributed to the reputation and prestige of the department. The faculty brought professionalism to the visual arts. The faculty provided the department with diversity because individual faculty members had reputations in their specific fields. Also, students were attracted to a particular university because of the reputation of a faculty member. Typical comments follow: One the 126 The greatest strength is in the faculty. The teachers turn out the students. They are the professional people who do their own work to bring recognition to themselves as well as to the university. Actually they are the depart- ment. If you don't have good strong faculty any money you put into the venture is wasted. Our strength is in the faculty who are practicing and showing artists. From the beginning we required that faculty teaching studio courses were people who had begun to make a name for themselves as professional exhibiting artists. I think it is the professional maturity of the faculty. Many were artists for many years before they became teachers. The size of the department, the diversity of the faculty and the attraction of outstanding graduate students plus an outstanding office staff are the outstanding features of the department. Its strength has been in painting because that is where the bulk of the faculty members are. People who select graduate study here do so because of the faculty. More and more people are choosing to study in ceramics because of the faculty person specifically. chairperson considered the part-time faculty to be strength of his faculty. Some of our part-time people (part-time faculty) who are very young and enthusiastic, good teachers and ambitious are our greatest strengths in terms of personnel. Programs were reported by the chairpersons as contributing to the strength of the art department. Chairpersons viewed those programs from broad concepts to specific majors. 127 In the broad sense, programs were thought of as ways which " . . . suggested that the fine arts could be within the university situation.” We were one of the first programs that found a way of marrying studio artists, creative artists and professional artists into an academic situation. Another part of the strength was the including, combining in the program, almost as much history (art history) as studio work. . . . Some chairpersons saw program strength of their departments in terms of professionalism and specific majors. This university, unlike many universities, did not grow as a liberal arts arm nor did it evolve as a major in art or an art minor. It has always had a professional art program, similar to an art school. The degree offered has always been the Bachelor of Fine Arts Degree (BFA). It is essentially a professional program. That is the strength of the department, the professional training. The uniqueness of the program was that it was designed to prepare people, on the one hand to be professional artists, and on the other to be professional art historians or to be administrators of art. We have strength in the graduate program, specifi- cally the Master of Fine Arts program. We have strong printmaking, graphic design, ceramics and painting programs. For many years we have had a strong and active Art Education program. Its strengths are in teacher preparation and public service. Reputation of faculty members in the field of art as well as the department reputation were considered important to the strength of the department. One chair- person reported that the department strength was based 128 on . . . its national reputation and to some degree on its international reputation." Another chairperson reported that the strength of his department was because of the " . . . good reputation in several areas instead of just one or two areas." He felt fortunate that at least one faculty member of major importance was repre- sented in every visual art media taught at his university. When asked what a good reputation was, he replied, Simply it is the professional resumé, the number of exhibits, the quality of those exhibits, how often they exhibit, in what periodicals are they reviewed, who is included in books, workshops they have done, was he a visiting artist. That's what we look at in terms of reputation. How he is viewed in the eyes of his colleagues in the depart- ment and the university in general. Here it seems that more emphasis is on professional reputation than on teaching or department and university service. These are all the factors considered in promotion. The number one consideration is the reputation of the professional artist. Quality students were mentioned by a few chair- persons as a strength in the department. The graduate was also considered to have an impact on the strength of the department. In the view of the art department chairpersons, the faculty was the greatest strength of the department. The faculty provided the prestige to the department and attracted the students. Additionally, the wide range of media expertise among faculty members contributed to departmental strength, thus their contribution to the department's reputation. The importance of programs 129 was viewed in terms of the legitimacy of the fine arts in the university and as specific majors. Challenges The challenges which art department chairpersons face were many, but no single or even dominate challenge emerged during this investigation. Each chairperson had his own goal to meet or "ax to grind." At the outset of this study it was thought that because of constricted funding and reduced budgets in higher education that the department chairpersons would have budgets foremost on their minds. Although chair- persons felt restricted because of budgetary restraints, they did not universally report financial problems as more significant than other concerns. Among budgeting matters, the chairpersons reported low salaries of art department faculty and the acquisition of funds for growth and needed projects as the major monetary concerns. Financial support for projects such as graduate assistantships, studio space, capital invest- ment and visiting artists was the greatest need. The following selected quotations from the per- sonal interviews are representative of the Chairpersons' feelings about monetary restrictions. Art department salaries are about $3000 less than the university average. Because of budget restraints we have not been able to hire younger people and get new ideas. Budget restraints prevent hiring new faculty or to provide new space and equipment. 130 Right now it's a matter of funding for the particu- lar projects that we have in mind. We have lost two permanent visiting artist positions which we would like to reinstate. We would like funding for equipment. A major problem area is getting enough information concerning the budget and knowing how the art department stands relative to other departments in the college. We have faced for a number of years, and still do, the concern for salary equity. The maintenance of the status of the department appeared to be of greater concern to the chairpersons than monetary concerns. However, the two may be linked even though the chairpersons did not specifically relate the two. A response by one chairperson was that his major problem was competing with other art departments and maintaining the status of the art program. Whether the younger faculty members could provide the prestige needed to take over when older faculty retired was his constant concern. Staff develOpment, he felt, was his responsi- bility to alleviate the situation. The major responsibility of mine is staff develoP- ment, particularly to be careful as to who receives tenure and who does not. Also, how instructors and assistant professors are retained. It is easier to remove someone after one or two years than it is after four or five. Other chairpersons felt that to maintain their departmental status they had to stay "up-to-date," attract students and attract faculty. For example: 131 I suppose our challenge is to maintain a contemporary- ness to the program. We have not had a big turn-over in our faculty. We are not having as many retire- ments or resignations as we would like. We can't get new positions. We are highly tenured. As people resign we try to shift positions. Now we have people coming in for two-year appointments so we don't feed into the tenure track. A challenge we face now and will continue to face for some time is sustaining a program to attract high quality students. Enrollment at the university is down, our enrollment within the department in terms of majors has increased by about four percent. Our service role has declined reflecting the overall enrollment decline. We must address ourselves more to the service function. We are heavily committed to the service function if we are to maintain support for GTA's (Graduate Teaching Assistants) which we now have. Our service courses provide the student a "hands on" approach and often the students' only exposure to art during college. Probably the acquisition of faculty; luring, hiring, choosing and deliberating with faculty, that is the toughest part. Keeping faculty motivated and per- mitting people to work with one another. A number of the respondents were challenged to set the tone of the office or to provide an atmosphere in which pe0ple could work Openly and freely. Addi- tionally, they felt a need to involve the faculty in the on-going operations of the department. The greatest challenge I feel is to create an atmosphere in which people feel free to express their feelings, where all participants, students, faculty, staff respect each other's rights. Also to create an environment in which there is free and Open communication and positive criticism. To provide an environment for the students and faculty to achieve their fullest potential. The difficult thing about being chairman is involving everybody in the department so they feel some personal responsibility for the health of the department, its welfare and its on-going efficiency. 132 To have a solid, smooth-running operation where everyone is doing his own thing and cranking out the work, getting into shows, being recognized and our students going out. To one chairperson, the greatest challenge was to see the development of a College of Fine Arts within his university. His department had initiated the proposal and he wanted to see its approval. Another chairperson had recommended a similar proposal to his dean which would combine the visual arts, performing arts, music and other related activities under one academic head. Important challenges to one chairperson included philosophical unity and community education. He said, Another one, and one which I came to the job with, was to develop some unity of philosophy within the department. A third challenge is to educate the university community about art. The greatest day- to-day challenge is holding people with diverse philosophies and disciplines together. It is an effort that one must make. It's like weeds in the garden. "Staying sane" was the greatest challenge to one chairperson. Unique Situations In Chapter I of this dissertation it was stated that the art department chairperson occupied a unique position with all of the inherent concerns of any other academic department chairperson. Additionally, the art department chairperson represented a discipline which had slow and peripheral growth in higher education. 133 Because of that fact, the art department chairpersons were asked what unique situations or problems they had that other department chairpersons did not have. Their responses were varied and difficult to put into specific categories. Often their initial response was "no“ and then they would elaborate on a number of their problems. However, for ease in reporting, two major categories have been selected, i.e., facilities and communications. Other unique situations were reported by the chairpersons which they individually felt strongly about but did not appear with more than 10 percent fre- quency. Facilities Physical facilities such as studio space, general space and equipment were identified by five of the chair- persons as problems unique to the art department. That fact was tempered by their realization that science activities or theater departments may havefisimilar problems. Nevertheless, the art department chairpersons felt that good and adequate physical plants were abso- lutely essential to a viable visual arts program. Vast differences in kinds of physical facilities were needed. The needs of painters were not the same as needs of sculptors in terms of space, equipment and use of resources. Acid vats for printmakers, kilns for ceramicists or slide libraries for Art Historians 134 required totally different kinds of considerations for space and equipment. Multi-use of facilities was not possible in their view. Problems of pollution, health hazards and safety measures were by-products of art activities according to one respondent. To him, this was a physical science problem and said, " . . . we are not physical scientists." Another respondent said that costs involved to contend with these situations were high and administrators " . . . see art department facilities as high overhead." Changing technology led to the obsolence of equipment and space requirements without capital budgets to keep up were the concerns of one chairperson. New buildings did not always meet the changing needs. One department was housed in a new building but the ventilation system was such that fumes from ceramic kilns and sawdust from the woodshop circulated throughout the building into voice studios and lecture halls. One chairperson praised his old buildings because they were "well submitted." When someone messes it up no one really cares. We have much more space here and square footage is the important thing. We don't need marble walls. The responsibility of an entire building was unique for one chairperson. For others it was the coordination of parts of buildings scattered around the campus which were being used for studios, workshops and classrooms. 135 Communications Among the respondents, four chairpersons related shortcomings in transmitting knowledge or information about art needs to university administration and faculty and to the community. One chairperson attributed that communication shortcoming to the personality of the artist. He depicted artists as individuals but who tended to be " . . . with- drawn, to meet people less easily, to have a dialogue with people less easily." A real problem is that art faculty have tended to be very insolare [sic] and not their own spokes- person for contacts—in the community and other segments of the university. That is a serious consideration and one which I'm working very hard on to get us on a positive direction and inter- change with other departments and university administration. Another respondent viewed the communication short- coming in terms of evaluation. We have difficulty proving things to the academic community since we don't give tests with numbers and ratings. We had problems with evaluations of graduate applicants. People were rejected and we say their work is bad. Our judgment is challenged because it's argued that it's all subjective Opinion. We say it's not all subjective in that sense. The trained eye, and ear in music, knows from years of experience instantly that something is lousy and something is good. That is a problem to communicate the method to administration at times. Yet another chairperson felt that the conservative attitude toward art by his university hindered a free and open interchange of ideas. That led, he thought, to 136 a lack of respect for the artist. The following lengthy quotation from his interview reflects his adamant concern. Our campus tends to be conservative as reflected by the art works. They don't have a great deal of understanding as an administration or a social group of what's happening in contemporary art. It is harder to justify some programs and some needs, say than other departments. Contemporary art doesn't reach their consciousness. . . . It will be a "cold-day-in-hell" when they get a performance artist or video artist as a faculty member at this university. The rigidity of the administration and walls built up against people who are non-PhD's is so entrenched that a person without a PhD, regard- less of his stature in the outside world, is just a nonentity. . . . Being a conservative academic setting there really isn't too much respect for artists here. It must be stated here that there was disagreement about the attitude toward studio artists because their terminal degree was not a doctorate. All of the chair- persons, except two, believed that the studio artists on the faculty were respected for their contribution and not for their credentials. Contributions related to exhi- bition records. One chairperson stated that his uni- versity did not even require an Art Historian to hold a PhD while another chairperson said that he would not hire an Art Historian without a PhD because that person would have no promotion potential. A fourth chairperson viewed a lack of understand- ing by the university about art and the artist which hindered the interchange of ideas. 137 There is a basic and fundamental ignorance on the part of the people in the university, as well as the rest of the world, as to just exactly what an artist is and what he is doing. Their (non- artist) whole thinking is product oriented. They will go to an exhibit because it's the thing to do. . . . University-wide committees work to a disadvantage of the art faculty because often people in other departments and disciplines do not know what the artist is doing. Other unique situations mentioned by the chair- persons involved multiple disciplines within one depart- ment and with individuals with varied backgrounds. One chairperson compared his department with the sciences. I'm involved with Art History, Art Education and studio art. I'm involved with people of a series of different disciplines. If you have physicists you have all physicists. They may have specialties but they have all come through a similar kind of program. We have what? Our sculptors may be in a totally different world than our ceramics people, or where metal smithing is. Those (ceramics and metal smithing) may have come out of a craft tra- dition which has nothing whatever to do with where our sculptor thinks he is in the fine arts. . . . So you are dealing with a whole series of tradi- tional and historical prejudices from one art to another. Conversely, one chairperson believed that because his department focused on studio art, not Art Education, Art History and "peripheral" things, ”It makes it easier to handle." Most of the chairpersons viewed their position as art department chairpersons to be in a situation unique from other department chairpersons. Typically, the Chairpersons' initial response to the question was that their problems were not different, for example: 138 I never used to think so. But I am given to believe by other executive officers on campus, and certainly by administrators, that anyone who heads the art group, the "animal quarter," is really dealing with problems. However, without probing by this investigator, the chairpersons did go on to identify problems which they felt were unique. Only two respondents cited no special problem areas. Rather, they thought that the visual arts were well accepted at their respective uni- versities. Summary The role of the art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities as it applies to the department was studied in terms of departmental emphasis, department strengths, Chairpersons' challenges and unique situations which they felt to be personally important. The departmental emphasis which actually existed and the emphasis which the department chairpersons believed to be important were generalized to be the same. The chairpersons unanimously responded that the faculty was the strength of the art department. Profes- sionalism, diversity of expertise and individual repu- tation were the factors which the chairpersons attributed to the faculty as creating the departmental strength. Programs which brought legitimacy to the arts in higher education also contributed to department strength. 139 Programs, in terms of specific majors, such as painting, sculpture and others, were likewise viewed as strengths of their respective departments. The maintenance of departmental status appeared to be the greatest challenge to the art department chair- persons. To maintain status and to be competitive they had to (1) develop their current faculty members by encouraging faculty exhibitions and provide the means to permit individual work, (2) attract new, innovative faculty and good students and (3) create a working environment where faculty and students could grow to their fullest potential. The art department chairpersons believed that they were faced with unique situations which other department chairpersons did not have or did not have in the same degree of complexity. Two unique problems were found to be most important; physical facilities and communications. Physical facility requirements were different for each visual art media with little compatibility for cooperative use. Chairpersons found it difficult to communicate the needs of the visual arts to the university for a number of different reasons. Chairpersons' View of the Role of the Visual Arts in Higher Education This study included an exploration of the view of the discipline of art in higher education held by the 140 art department chairpersons and the affect of their view on the administration of the department. To obtain their views, two specific questions were asked: (1) In your view, what is the role of the discipline of Art in higher education? and (2) Does your View of the discipline of Art in higher education affect your administration of the art department? Because the review of literature revealed that the arts were not totally accepted in higher education, the chairpersons were also asked how the visual arts could be more accepted into the mainstream of academe. Responses to those questions are addressed below. Role of the Discipline of Art The chairpersons appeared to have difficulty with the question, "In your view, what is the role of the disci- pline of Art in higher education?" One chairperson's initial response was, "Oh boy." Another said, "That's not easy to answer except in general terms." A third said, "I don't know." A fourth chairperson responded with, "I never asked myself that question." Following a pause of silence by the investigator they answered the question. The view generally held by the art department chairpersons of the role of art in higher education tended to correspond to the conventional role which the 141 arts have traditionally held in colleges and universities, namely, professional training and a liberal arts exper- ience. In the respondents' views, professional preparation involved the development of individuals to be teachers or practicing artists. According to the respondents, that professional education was provided at both the under- graduate and graduate level. At the graduate level, the greatest support for the graduate student was through "teaching" assistantships. That kind of support tempted students into a teaching role, specifically teaching at college level. Other support systems were needed such as fellowships so that graduate students could devote their time to "making art." Such fellowships would permit art careers as an alternative to teaching and it would provide knowledge to the student about the opportunities available to artists. The liberal arts experience was best summarized by one chairperson who saw the role of art as providing " . . . an art experience to the students of the general university community." He continued: It may be a general course or a very specific kind of course. That will go a long way in changing societal attitudes about art. They will understand the effort, time and energy required that go into the making of art. 142 A number of chairpersons viewed the role of art, again in the liberal arts context, as expanding the arts into the community. For example: There is a change in emphasis from the ivory tower to outreach. The college student will change. He will be older. Evening classes, specialty courses, worksh0ps and new technical information will come forth. . . . We have done a number of experiments along these lines and it's been quite satisfactory. A minority of chairpersons expressed strong feel- ings about the role of art in higher education. Their views were considered to be important to this study and they are reported below. One respondent who headed a department with a history of professional education of artists in a uni- versity which aggressively supported the arts, said: The development of young artists has every bit as much legitimacy in higher education as the study of religion, philosophy, music or anything else. It is a human activity that has to be fostered by long periods of development and creative growth. Col- leges and universities are places where this kind of growth should be nurtured. . . . I think the university here and most enlightened universities witness that by the fact that they have constructed these amazing building, factories and schools that permit this kind of study to go on. The investment in training young artists is staggering. It's greater than the Medicis ever spent before. The university is the patron of the arts. It is an undeniable fact in our culture that 2000 years from now we will look back and discover that in the 19th and 20th centuries the visual arts were carried by the university. That is where the artists are working. Most artists who teach in universities could not make a living as artists. They would probably have to give up their practice of their art to make a living. The fact that this exists is a vote of confidence from higher education 143 in the practice of teaching young artists. It strikes me that too many colleges do this with great reluctance. I think they offer art programs kicking and yelling. They might resist offering courses in other areas. It has been demonstrated among the enlightened institutions that art is something that goes on at the higher levels of education. That same chairperson argued that art in higher education was a human aspiration for reliance on intuition. He said, " . . . if an institution intends to be compre- hensive, there is no way that it can avoid offering studies in the visual arts--that is the doing and the apprehension thereof." He questioned the granting of a Bachelor of Arts Degree "without art." However, the defense of art must be grounded in human values and the acceptance of a basic sympathy and openness for those values. He con- tinued: Certainly some of the human values are embodied in the visual aspect. There is a visual literacy which we take for granted in our culture. Other cultures don't take it for granted. We don't strive for visual acuity in this country. If we did, I don't think it should be necessary to make this argument. If we could answer that question there would be a renaissance in higher education in this country that would be unparalleled. One other chairperson supported the argument for visual literacy but reported that only "feeble" efforts were made to accommodate the nonart major. Another chairperson, who reported that his uni- versity did not have a strong tradition in the visual arts, believed the arts to be the ”fulcrums" of the psyche. 144 Fundamentally I think universities are institutions which are out of balance with their conception of education. There is an enormous intellectual emphasis in universities and it's almost a compen- sating mechanism, compensating for the fact that they don't have many answers. There is a super abundance of copying, methodology as used in the higher sciences, using statistical methods, using analytical empirical techniques etc. . . . In areas where theory is so vague as in studio art, it's not applicable. Everything is gut level and intuitive. They (university) have grave suspicions of what is going on. My feeling is that all of the arts are really fulcrums or balances of the psyche. . . . As we look at art in the long view, I think we are making people more healthy, saner, more balanced. In his view administrators could not handle such abstract concepts emotionally or intellectually. As a result he took a conservative stance to justify the arts at his institution. It is tacitly justified on the basis that it give students an entry into understanding western culture and understanding the visual arts. For yet another chairperson at a university with a strong visual arts background reported that there were still " . . . latent concerns that maybe all that (art) should be chucked away." For him art in higher education was to " . . . demonstrate to people in other academic disciplines that we provide another way of understanding reality." No matter what their own expertise is, if they were to become involved in the arts it may sooner or later have an effect on their understanding or on their managing of their own disciplines. Describing an interdisciplinary massive art project, the chairperson continued: 145 The Engineering Department did work with us. Our students have been able to work the hydraulics engineers into a whole series of water problems. Now one of our faculty and a large group of stu- dents are involved with an ice problem which the state, city government, river control people and hydraulic engineers as well as a physicist in light are all involved. To me, regardless of the results, . . . there are a whole series of people willing to work in it. . . . Everyone's involved. This is what art can do. That view of involvement was supported by another chairperson who felt that an important task for him was to create an environment " . . . where students became effective creative problem solvers." To him that meant not only solving visual problems but also solving inter- personal problems with a team spirit. He said, Artists solve problems. Frequently an artist will be comfortable in solving a problem in.a painting but feels that he or she could not assist in solv- ing problems in the community in which they live. Artists tend to be nonpolitical beings on and off campus. They tend not to be community leaders or campus leaders. That chairperson wanted to reverse that trend and believed that he was succeeding. To him, art should not limit individuals. I don't think the nature of the discipline of art has to have a limitation on the person trained as an artist to cause that person to feel confident only in one isolated area. The reverse should be the result. Art training should be problem solving. He encouraged his students and faculty to be involved with university and community activities in the solution of common problems. 146 In summary, the chairpersons viewed the role of Part in higher education as providing professional training and a liberal arts education. The quantity of indepth responses about the role of art in higher education was limited. However, the focus of this part of the study was exploratory in nature. Strong opinions of a minority of chairpersons may provide a ground work for future study. Effects of Chairpersons' Views of Art on Administration When asked if their view of art in higher edu- cation had an effect on the administration of their department, eight chairpersons responded that it did and two chairpersons stated that it did not. Those chairpersons who thought that their view of art affected their administration of the department, two said results should be service to the needs of the university and the department. Service needs included getting art objects around the campus and seeking support for student and faculty projects. The major aspect that a chairman should be involved in is considering how his department can function as a service. . . . If you are here, what are you giving to the rest of the university? We must be more carefully attuned to the needs of our constituencies. . . . Four of the respondents saw their administrative direction to be toward their personal or departmental goals. 147 I look for peOple who can do the job as I see it should be done. The primary thing we are doing here is creating an environment in which faculty, students and staff participate in creative problem solving. I'm planning a time table and a curriculum, pro- viding a staff and shOp facilities and putting all my money into programs that specifically train individual artists as professionals. I've been here a long time and my views are well known by the faculty. They know how I feel about the direction this department should take. I believe firmly in a professional education for the artist. One respondent thought that his view of art was reflected in day-to-day decisions about small issues, but "I can't tell you how it does." Another chairperson felt that he made allowances for peOple's needs. You realize that an artist is not the same kind of beast as an academician. . . . God knows artists are much more quirky. Very few artists fit themselves into an administrative role. Two respondents did not think that their view of art contributed to the administrative function in any way. One thought that other departments should follow their example " . . . with a kind of democratically organized department." The other chairperson said that, "Artists are no different than anyone else in management procedures." Although eight chairpersons said that their view of art had an influence on the administration of their department, their elaborations seem to reflect that 148 personal goals, departmental goals and needs have greater influences than any philosophical view about art. Acceptance of the Visual Arts in Higher Educatibn In an effort to find out what measures could be taken to enhance the position of the visual arts in higher education, the chairpersons were asked the follow- ing question. It is generally thought that the arts are not totally accepted into the academic community. In your view, how can the visual arts become more accepted and integrated into the mainstream of academe? For two chairpersons, the acceptance of art at their campus was not a problem. Art was accepted equally with other academic disciplines. One chairperson did not think that the visual arts could be integrated into academia. However, the response by one chairperson was the synthesis of the general view held by most of the art department chairpersons. He said, "By participating and contributing." Participation and contribution included such activities as serving on university committees, becoming politically involved with the administration of the university, going to teas and coffees, being visible on the campus, giving workshops and conducting "outreach" programs. With a couple of exceptions, as stated above, the chairpersons tended to confirm the lack of acceptance of 149 art in higher education. Among the Chairpersons' reasons for the arts not being integrated into academia were: (1) misunderstanding on the part of administrators and deans of the differences between the MFA (Master of Fine Arts) and the MA (Master of Arts) degrees, (2) the stereo- type view of the artist, (3) lack of art in our cultural life styles and (4) bogus doctorate programs simply to give the artist a "protective carapace." Too often administrators and deans made little distinction between the MFA and MA degrees. Thus they failed to view the MFA as a terminal degree. Standards of the MFA are needed and there must be " . . . compliance across the country . . . " of those standards. The artist has been stereotyped as one without scholarship; "strange folks." "we have to feed our chil- dren," said one chairperson. Another said, “ . . . the person who wears a neck tie and suit . . . is just as much an artist and as valuable.” One chairperson was proud that a number of his faculty members on university committees commanded "tremendous respect." Art was " . . . something we participate in after everything else happens . . ., it is . . . not really needed," lamented one chairperson. Another said, "The arts are a psychic barometer," but in this country the academic structure " . . . resists the psychic pull." 150 We should learn from other societies where " . . . the arts are infused into the life style." The chairpersons valued their right to establish their own criteria and to be judged on those criteria. Doctoral degrees were an incorrect measure of artistic quality. "I find it an untenable situation," said one chairperson. The chairpersons generally agreed that higher education had not totally accepted the arts. They con- firmed that the situation should be changed and offered suggestions for doing it. In some cases their primary efforts were channeled to enhance the prestige of the art department. Summary The art department chairpersons generally viewed professional training and the liberal arts experience as the role of art in higher education. However, strong views existed among a minority of chairpersons. Concerns for visual literacy, reliance on intuition, creative problem solving and interdisciplinary involvement were included in their arguments as the role of art in higher education. Chairpersons' Views of the Profession and the Organization To analyze the role of the art department chair- person as an artist-administrator within the organization 151 (the university), Kornhauser's theory (as described in Chapter II) was used as a framework. He theorized that strains existed between professionals and the organization in which they worked. According to Kornhauser, the primary function of the profession was the protection of the standards of excellence of the discipline while the organization sought to mobilize professional people to serve the ends of the organization. Conflict existed because the goals, controls, incentives and influences of the profession and the organization were at variance. This section deals with the views held by the art department chairperson of (l) the strains which existed as a consequence of reporting to an administrator of a discipline other than art and (2) the conflicts which existed because the goals, controls, incentives and influences of the profession and the organization were not essentially the same. Strains In general, the chairpersons did not identify a conflict between themselves and the individual(s) of the university to whom they reported. Rather, they reported that relationships with deans and administrators were good. When asked if reporting to an administrator of another discipline caused any particular stress, the responses were that little or no stress existed. 152 I have not found that so yet. I did not find that problem in all my years here, even as a faculty member. No, I don't think so. The present dean has been in the job two or three years and has become familiar with the problems of the art program as well as the other arts. He is on the university committee for the arts with another chairperson and myself. I think our relationship is as good as it has ever been in the history of our depart- ment. He is doing as much as he can. He is very candid and open on how much money he has and how he spends it. He is unique as a dean because he is supportive. He just got us another gallery space which is very good. Through this, we get support from the president, the provost and other deans. As a matter of fact, we have an advantage. We have had great stability in the college and the department in terms of administrative leadership. No. I report to three deans in the college. I have good relations with all three of them. If the dean were of the studio arts, the relation- ship would be no better. The dean is very fair. No. We have a lot of mutual respect. I have reported to three different peOple and they have all been first-rate people and exceedingly sym- pathetic. I have no complaints on that score at all. No. I have a good working relationship with the dean. If I had my druthers, I would rather report to a dean of a college of art. But, under the present situation, I have no difficulty. One chairperson cited "education" of the dean as essential. The dean must be kept informed of the needs and activities of the department. He also said, I maintain a close relationship with higher admin- istrators, including the president, as well as with potential benefactors. 153 Only one chairperson had negative feelings toward the dean. However, that chairperson had been in the position for only a short period of time and close relationships were yet to be established. Goals According to the theoretical framework, broad professional goals enhanced professional understanding and creativity while broad goals of the organization were for utility and Operational ease. Most of the chairpersons would not concede that university (organization) goals were for operational ease and utility. One chairperson felt it was a ” . . . miss- reading of any good administrative operation." Another said, "Administrators . . . did not set out as a goal to create this mind-boggling bureaucracy." He continued, Operational ease and utility doesn't have its origin, I don't think, with administrators. Outside restraints have been the main problem. A third chairperson saw no conflict between "excellence and creativity and administrative Operational ease and utility." Other responses included: If education can take place, the university will bend over backward to allow it to take place. No. I don't agree with that as far as the uni- versity's goal is concerned. I think the uni- versity might give that appearance but it's because they are beleaguered by everyone's problem. 154 I think the dean shares the artist's goals for excellence and understands difficulty of admin- istration. Some chairpersons saw conflicts in goals but their feelings were not strong. Their concerns centered around evaluating quality by quantity. Administrators are looking at the statistics in terms of dollars. We are looking at students and educational experiences. It (university) tries to quantify things that are not quantifiable. You are asked to make quality judgments in terms of quantity. Only one chairperson had strong feelings that the goals of the artist and those of the university were in conflict. There are grave conflicts between the artist's goals and the university's goals. Excellence and creativity come about through enthusiasm, self-direction, self-actualization and self- generation of a very strong ego structure and through strong direction. That strong direction is constantly at loggerheads with needs of administration. One chairperson claimed that there was a " . . . discrepancy between what the university says and what it does." The university says that the goals are excellence and creativity. The reality is that we live in a pragmatic world where dollars are appropriated in relation to the number of students. The uni- versity has difficulty when looking at art classes with fewer students than in large lecture classes. Although dissenting voices were apparent, the chairpersons, as a group, did not view professional goals and university goals as sufficiently varied to cause undue stress. 155 Controls Regulatory control was theorized to be hierarchical for organizations and within the collegial group for pro- fessions. Organizational control, therefore, weakened the professional initiatives and incentives. The chairperson's reaction to university or col- legial control was mixed. No generalization was drawn from their responses. Some chairpersons felt that the university exerted too much control; others felt that it was mutually supporting; while still others felt that the art department was relatively free of university control. Requirements by federal and state governments worked to hinder the professional activities of the faculty. Those requirements were of concern to a number of chairpersons. They absorbed financial resources for bureaucratic administration, thus reducing those resources for art faculty enterprises. In that regard, one chair- person said, ”We have a growing staff of people who fill out forms and send in reports. This takes away from the teaching staff." According to one respondent, the university suf- fered from a “superstar mania." Administrators reviewed credentials with "medieval scholastic thoroughness" for excellent people. Bureaucratically, administrators exert more control to keep them (university) rigorously good. Yet, I don't think they get any better people. I think they produce more anxieties in faculty members. 156 Conversely, other chairpersons reported that art depart- ments at other campuses established their own professional criteria for selection and promotion of faculty and that the university supported those criteria. Other controls by the university were cited by the chairpersons. Those controls involved funding inflexibility for students and faculty study away from the campus thus creating personal hardships because of after-the-fact reimbursement. Control as a means of modifying behavior was cited as negatively influencing the professional incen- tives and initiatives. Avant-garde art work was not supported and controversial community activity was dis- couraged. Therefore, creative individuals tended to become conservative and cautious. As one chairperson said, "One would engage in something less controversial." Incentives Incentives are related to an individual's loyalty to the profession and to the organization and the result- ing conflicts. Status was attributed in terms of success. Professional success often clashed with a successful career in an organization. The assumption of adminis- trative duties may be a major way of advancing in the organization but, at the same time, a curtailment of professional activities. 157 That situation was precisely the position of the art department chairperson and most agreed that their art work suffered because of the administrative demands placed on them. In most cases, they viewed their achievement of status or credibility as a result of their being chair- person of the department but with qualifications. Uni- versity recognition was usually in terms of the position. Recognition by the art faculty came from both their role as chairperson and also as an accomplished artist. Typical responses were: It is really half and half. I've had exhibitions and I received telegrams from faculty members. My status in the university is a result of the office I hold. Among my colleagues, it's half and half. For me personally, it's because I'm the chair- person of a department which has a national reputation. In that position I receive a certain amount of prestige. My salary is slightly higher than music and theater. Status from my faculty is in both areas. Traditionally, I'm known as a good teacher. My reputation in the university comes through the work that I do in my professional activities. So, in real terms, people think of me as an artist. The dean looks at me as chairperson. He knows I'm not contributing to art. In this job, you have to administrate, there is no time for your professional work. I would say the latter (artist) because I've known these people for many years just as an artist in the department. Contacts now are as an administrator. Only one respondent considered his position as chairperson to have limited status. Varied comments from a couple of chairpersons included: 158 I was made chairperson because I was the only one who could make out the reports and type a letter. I presume there is an aura of status for any department chairman. I haven't noticed people genuflecting. Influences Influences are related to the ability to implement professional ideas. The power to implement or utilize professional ideas was a matter of authority. For the organization, authority was executive authority, hier- archically structured; for the profession, authority was based on special competence. The professional had to become part of the bureaucratic hierarchy to put his ideas to work. The chairpersons agreed that involvement by the art faculty in university administrative affairs would enhance their position. Many chairpersons encouraged their faculty members to serve on university committees. In most cases, the chairpersons felt that their depart- ments were well represented in the university committee system. For example: I would say that is highly unlikely that anyone in art would ever become chancellor, but it's not unlikely for artists to serve on some of the most influential and important committees on the campus. On the other hand, as identified in Kornhauser's model, the professional abdicated deep-probing explorations with the profession when they became involved with 159 organizational activities. That was the case with the artist. The chairpersons described the artist as "intro- verted," "not political creatures," "one who wants pri- vacy," and "not being confident outside their own area." The chairpersons reported that artists do serve on uni- versity committees but, as one chairperson put it, "Artists are reluctant to give up a lot of time being political creatures." According to him and to other chairpersons, art was a physical activity and extremely time consuming. Summary The chairpersons generally reported that they had positive relationships with the individuals in the university hierarchy to whom they reported. Deans, vice presidents and chief executive officers in most cases were supportive of the arts and assisted the art depart- ment chairpersons in every way possible. Most of the chairpersons agreed that the goals of excellence and creativity were shared by the artist. They also felt that those goals were held by the uni- versity as well. Organizational goals of operational ease and utility were not designed to detract from the professional goals but rather a way to support the pro- fessional goals. A number of chairpersons appreciated the university support. As one chairperson indicated, the university was the patron of the arts. 160 Controls which the university placed on the art professionals drew a mixed reaction from the chairpersons. The reactions ranged from a feeling of relative autonomy from bureaucratic control to suppression of professional initiatives, particularly in controversial art forms. Most of the chairpersons felt that their status in the university was achieved as a result of their position. However, their credibility from their col- leagues was because of both their position and their contribution to art. There was little question in the minds of the chairpersons that their own and art faculty involvement in university committees enhanced the position of art. The artist, however, was often reluctant to participate. Chairpersons' Views of Their Role Encapsulated At the conclusion of the personal interview, each art department chairperson of the Big Ten Universities was asked to provide, in a general summary statement, the role of the art department chairperson. Their encapsulated responses follow: 1. To insure that the education program is maintained, constantly conscious of professional development. From that comes all else; faculty, money, students. 161 To keep the ship afloat, the "nitty-gritty" of holding the department together. To coordinate the long-term goals of the depart- ment, achieve growth, redefine programs and to be an advocate for his colleagues. To get things done, to mediate disputes, to work with people, to be someone with one good ear and one bad ear. To provide leadership in funding, initiating programs, public relations and to accomplish long-term goals. To stay cool and create an environment where things are done right and "out on the top of the table." To assess his peers as artists and to be honest about it. To provide an environment for achieving maximum potential and to shield faculty from problems. To be a facilitator, shield the faculty from bureaucratic business. To meet responsibility that the public understands the artist's role which is the advancement of the highest and noblest aspiration of humanity. 162 10. To be a teacher, to make the faculty members' lives as uncomplicated as possible and to be sensitive to all individuals. Summary The art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities were studied, utilizing a direct-mail ques- tionnaire and a personal interview, in terms of how they viewed their role as an artist-administrator (N=10). It was found that the art department chairpersons were all tenured faculty members and formally educated in the visual arts representing eight visual art media. Terminal or professional degrees were held by nine chairpersons. Only one respondent received the highest degree from an art school. The others received their highest degree from universities. They were all exper- ienced teachers representing an average of 16.3 years of teaching service. Although most of their time was spent with administrative activities, they generally viewed themselves as teachers. Their term of service as chairperson averaged only two years and four months which included a range of service from five years to as little as three months. Administrative experience before they became chairpersons was generally limited to duties within the art department. Most of the chairpersons were selected by mutual agreement of the art faculty and the 163 dean. The motivation for taking the position varied, but the reason most frequently identified was to improve some aspect of the art department. The chairpersons viewed the faculty as providing the department strength. They also cited specific disci- pline areas as department strengths such as painting, sculpture and others. The challenges which the department chairpersons faced were numerous. However, each chairperson had his own goals to meet or "ax to grind." To maintain depart- ment status and reputation was a pressing issue. Fiscal concerns centered around faculty salary equity and support for on-going projects, but fiscal concerns appeared to be of lesser importance than reputation. Relative to other academic department chairpersons, the art department chairpersons viewed physical facilities and communications as unique situations. Physical facility demands for art programs were heavy. The requirements for each visual art medium allowed little compatibility for cooperative use. Shortcomings in communicating the needs and aspirations of the arts to the administration, uni- versity generally, and the community were many. Per- sonality of the artist, methods of evaluation, conserva- tive attitudes toward art and misunderstandings of degree requirements contributed to communication problems. Multiple disciplines was also cited as unique to art departments. 164 The findings showed that, in general, the art department chairpersons viewed the role of art in higher education in the traditional sense, namely, professional training of the artist and as a liberal arts experience. A minority of the chairpersons held strong views as to the role of art in higher education. They included: (1) art was a human aspiration for reliance on intuition, (2) art was the fulcrum of the psyche and (3) art provided new ways of understanding and problem solving. The views which the chairpersons held of the role of art influenced their administration of the art depart- ments only in terms of personal and departmental goals and departmental needs. Those needs and goals were of a practical nature and reflected little, if any, vital- istic view of art or life. It was generally agreed among the department chairpersons that the visual arts were not totally accepted into the mainstream of academe. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction The subject of this study was the artist as an administrator and, specifically, the art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities. In academic institutions of higher education, the individuals most intimately involved with the role of artist-administrator are the chairpersons of art departments. This study focused on their view of that role. Literature indicated that the role of the academic departmental chairperson has become exceedingly complex. Those complexities included the multitudinous functions that person must perform, the expectations of faculty and administrators of the role and the obligations incurred as the leader of the department. Not only has the art department chairperson been faced with the aforementioned complexities of the academic department chairperson in general, but the art department chairperson has been confronted with the dichotomous role of the artist and that of the administrator. The artist deals with the particular, the subjective and the unique object while 165 166 the administrator deals in generalizations and categori- zations. Additionally, the art department chairperson represents a discipline which has had slow and peripheral growth in higher education. That growth resulted pri- marily through the prophetic insights of early national leaders and public demands from outside the university. The Land Grant Act, universal public education and the popularization of higher education were representative of those public demands. The impetus for this study was a personal interest, by this investigator, in the visual arts in higher edu- cation, the role of the academic administrator responsible for the visual arts, and a general interest in the academic department and its chairperson. This personal interest plus the need for study of departmental chairpersons of large universities and the need to study how departmental chairpersons perceived their role, as identified in the literature, led to this study of the art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities. Overview of the Study The focus of this study was on the views held by the art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities concerning their role as artist-administrator. The study included an exploration of the art department Chairpersons' views of the role of the discipline of art in higher 167 education and the effect that view had on the adminis- tration of their department. Three questions were central to the study. 1. How does the art department chairperson view the role of artist-administrator? Does the art department chairperson view the role of artist administrator to be in conflict in terms of professional goals, controls of professional work, incentives for professional activity and influences of professional work? How does the art department chairperson, as artist-administrator, deal with the conflict of professional goals, controls of professional work, incentives for professional activity and influ- ences of professional work? To obtain the views of the ten art department chairpersons (N=10), a direct-mail questionnaire and a personal interview were utilized. The questions on the direct-mail questionnaire (see Appendix B) and those of the personal interview (see Appendix C) were designed to provide answers to the three central questions. The purposes of this investigation were described in terms of the benefits which may be provided by a study of this kind. The purposes of the study are listed below. above, 168 To provide a research base for understanding the artist-administrator role for those who aspire to be art department chairpersons and for those cur- rently serving as chairperson of an art department. To provide deans, other university administrators and faculty members insight into the view held by the art department chairperson of the disci- pline of art. To provide students of administration an under- standing of the conflicts between the unique demands of the profession of art and the demands of the organization, i.e., the university. To contribute to the present knowledge of the role of the academic department chairperson. The focus and purposes of the study, described as well as an underlying assumption (that the artist, as a department chairperson, may view that role to be different than other academic department chair- persons) were addressed in the first chapter. The review of literature was reported in Chapter II. Special attention was given to (l) the academic department and its chairperson, (2) the arts in academe and (3) the professional in the organization. The academic department has had a long tradition usually associated with a specific academic discipline. 169 Although organizational structure of departments varied, most departments were democratic bureaucracies with teach- ing, research and service as their primary functions. The department chairperson was described as the individual who made the institution run. Demands on the chairperson were to be both a scholar and manager, but usually that person comes to the chairperson position with little experience in administrative matters. There was agreement among some authorities that the arts were a permanent part of academe, however, there were still problems of acceptance of the nonverbal arts (visual arts) in many institutions. Some higher edu- cational institutions must yet decide whether to encompass the arts fully. The cultural value of art, i.e., the fruits of the culture and the expressions of cultural orientation, appeared to be an accepted notion among scholars. On the other hand, the traditional scholars took a "dim view" of the artist. Similarities between the artist and scholar existed too. Both the scholar and the artist placed high value on quality teaching, creative and productive work and both had a need for a good working environment. Additionally, the artist must perceive relationships and connections of the artist's investigations requiring control and thought in the investigative process as intent and penetrating as the scientific inquirer. The scholar, the scientist and 170 the artist shared in a common professional function, i.e., to protect the standards of creative activity. The protection of standards by the professional ran counter to the organizational (bureaucratic) response to the need for rational coordination of complex activi- ties. It was theorized that tensions between the profes- sional and the organization were generated because the goals, controls, incentives and influences of the pro- fession were not the same as those of the organization. The research methodology was described in Chapter III. The study population consisted of the ten art depart- ment chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities (N=10). A direct-mail questionnaire and a personal interview were employed to collect the information for this descriptive study. Art department chairpersons of three universities outside the study population participated in a pilot study. In Chapter IV, the information obtained from the direct-mail questionnaire and the personal interview was presented qualitatively and quantitatively. A final summary of the findings was compiled at the end of that chapter. In this final chapter are a summary of the study, conclusions, implications and recommendations. 171 Conclusions The conclusions are organized and presented according to (l) the underlying assumption of the study, (2) an exploration of the art department Chairpersons' views of art in higher education and (3) the three questions central to the study. These conclusions rep- resent generalizations drawn from this study population only. The conclusions are based on the findings of the direct-mail questionnaire and the personal interview. The underlying assumption of the study was that, as an artist, the art department chairperson may view his/her role and the role of other academic department chairpersons to be different. The conclusion drawn from the findings indicate that art department chairpersons do not view their role to be substantially different from chairpersons of other departments. However, they are in unique situations or have problems which other department chairpersons do not have, namely physical facilities and communications. The underlying assumption has its foundation in the fact that the artist deals with the subjective and the unique object while administrators deal in generali- zations and categorizations. Additionally, the art department chairperson represents a discipline which has had slow and peripheral growth and acceptance in higher education. 172 The art department chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities viewed their position as similar to other academic department chairpersons with the inherent con- cerns of maintaining their department and programs, offering leadership and of being facilitators of depart- ment goals and aspirations. On the other hand, they identified unique situ- ations which were different than other academic depart- ment chairpersons. These two unique situations included physical facilities and communications. Physical facilities of art departments required considerable diversity in design and equipment with little compatibility for cooPerative use among the disciplines within the visual arts. Developing technology in the visual arts increased the need for spacious and pollution- free physical plants. Artists, generally, were unable to deal with health and safety hazards. Art department chairpersons also considered the magnitude of their physical plants to be unique when compared with other academic departments. Also, when compared with other departments, the art department chairperson identified communication problems as unique. Those problems existed because the personality of the artist was such that the artist was unable or reluctant to have dialogue with the rest of the academic community. Evaluation on an intuitive and 173 subjective basis ran counter to grades, ranking and numerical objectivity. The conservative attitude by the academic community toward art, particularly the Avant Garde and experimental forms of contemporary art, led to misunderstanding of the artist. The artist had difficulty communicating in objective terms his art work. In that regard, the verbal and visual conflicts existed. Administrators did not fully understand the difference between the Master of Fine Arts (MFA) degree and the Master of Arts (MA) degree resulting in a particl status differential between art department faculty and other faculty members. The study included an exploration of the art department Chairpersons' views of the role of the disci- pline of art in higher education and the effect of that view on the administration of their department. It was concluded from the findings that the chairpersons viewed the role of the discipline of art in higher education as providing professional training_for the artist and a liberal arts experience for the students of the general university community. The effect of that view on the administration of their department was directed toward service to the university, personal goals for the depart- ment and toward departmental goals and needs. The chairpersons viewed the role of art in higher education and the effect of that view on the administration 174 in pragmatic terms. To provide professional training and a liberal arts experience, quality faculty, facilities and environmental conditions were essential. The admin- istration of the department was planned to acquire, develop and allocate those resources to maintain a viable department. Administrative style was generally democratic. Seldom would an art department chairperson make decisions (other than daily routine decisions) without input from department members. Although the art department chairpersons saw the role of art in higher education as providing professional training and a liberal arts experience, the chairpersons, generally, were in agreement that the arts were not totally accepted in higher education. Among the chair- persons' reasons for the arts not being accepted into academia included (1) misunderstanding on the part of administrators and deans of the differences between the Master of Fine Arts (MFA) degree and the Master of Arts (MA) degree, (2) the stereotype view of the artist as "lacking scholarship” held by a large segment of the uni- versity faculty, (3) the lack of art as intrinsic to our cultural life style and (4) "bogus" doctorate programs simply to give artists academic credentials. Involvement in university affairs would tend to enhance the artists' acceptance but, at the same time, the artists reluctantly 175 became involved. In cases where the art faculty became involved in university committees and decision-making bodies, respect for the artist was enhanced. The conclusions drawn from the findings of this investigation relating to the three central questions of the study are addressed below. For ease in reading the questions have been restated. 1. How does the art department chairperson view the role of artist-administrator? In general, most of the chairpersons viewed them- selves as teachers. When comparing the functional roles of teacher, artist or administrator, the chairpersons held greatest emphasis on teacher. They reported that they spent most of their time with administrative chores. They would, like to spend less time with administration but indi- cated that under ideal conditions most of their time would be spent administering the department. Their role as artist, or the involvement with creative work, ideally was less important, in terms of time, than teaching or administration. Additionally, teaching could be scheduled: creative work had to be accomplished when time allowed. Administrative duties took priority. Generally, the chairpersons had strong interests in teaching and took the teaching role seriously. The teaching emphasis was also reflected in the fact that 176 undergraduate instruction was the departmental activity with the greatest emphasis. The challenges which they faced were many, but administrative in nature. Maintaining departmental status through the acquisition and development of quality faculty was particularly pressing. Fiscal concerns were less pressing, however, the two may be directly related. In view of the findings, serious doubts exist as to whether they actually viewed themselves as artist- administrators. 2. Does the art department chairperson view the role of artist-administrator to be in conflict in terms of professional goals, controls of professional work, incentives for professional activity and influences of professional work? Tensions between the organization (university) and the professional (artist) because the goals, controls, incentives and influences of the profession were at variance with those of the organization existed in the view of the art department chairpersons, but with one exception. Organizational and professional goals were more often in unison than in conflict. Art department chairpersons had good relationships with the administration of the university. The individual administrator to whom they reported were supportive and understanding relative to the needs of the arts. Chair- persons were generally lauditory of the deans. Strains 177 which may exist between deans of one discipline and chairpersons of another did not appear. Goals of the artist and those of the university were more often in unison than in conflict. Excellence and creativity were mutually held by the artist and by the university in the view of the art department chair- person. Bureaucratic goals for Operational ease and utility were often viewed as helpful to professional develOpment. Regulatory control by the state and federal government was viewed as debilitating to the profes- sional activity of the department in that resources were siphoned away from teaching endeavors. Often the insistence by the university of highly academically credentialled faculty did not necessarily bring better artists to the campus. Conservative attitudes concerning art often caused artists to "make art" of a less contro- versial nature. The art department chairpersons encountered con- flict between their artistic profession and their admin- istrative responsibilities. It was not that they lost credibility as an artist among their colleagues, but that they were not engaged in "making art" to their personal satisfaction. They did not seem to suffer a loss of pro- fessional status either from their colleagues or from the university because they were less involved with their 178 art profession. They generally accepted "their lot," so to speak, because of their loyalty to the discipline and to their colleagues as well as their responsibility to the university hierarchy. The chairpersons felt that the art faculty could have an impact and could enhance their position by being involved with influential university committees. On the other hand, when the university administration sought guidance on matters pertaining to art, it was the art department chairperson who was consulted and not neces- sarily the most prominent artist on the campus. In that regard, the influence of the organization dominated over the profession in the implementation of professional ideas. 3. How does the art department chairperson, as artist-administrator, deal with the conflict of professional goals, controls of professional work, incentives for professional activity and influences of professional work? Art department chairpersons generally accepted tensions between the profession and the organization as a "matter of course." The theoretical framework (as described by Korn- hauser) used to analyze the role of the artist-administra- tor drew into focus the variances between professional and organizational goals, controls, incentives and influ- ences experienced by the artist professional in the bureaucratic structure of the university. In general, 179 the art department chairpersons accepted those variances and the concomitant tensions as part of the administrative problems of the chairperson's position. Their efforts to ease those tensions included keeping the administration of the university informed of problem areas relating to the visual arts while, at the same time, shielding the art faculty from bureaucratic matters. The chairpersons viewed themselves as mediators to those tensions. General conclusion: The art department chair- persons of the Big Ten Universities were dedicated, hard- working and sensitive members of the academic community. They sought to enhance their profession and develop "new ways of knowing" through their discipline. They also had a loyalty to their university and put forth a great deal of effort to maintain the art department status for the benefit of both the institution and the visual arts. To the art department chairperson, the discipline of art had as much legitimacy in higher education as any other aca- demic discipline. Implications As a corollary among the review of literature, the findings of the study and through observations and experiences of this investigator a number of implications are set forth for consideration. It is the opinion of 180 this investigator that the art department chairperson's role is central to each implication. Collegiality: The isolation felt by the art faculty may be a result of their own compartmentalization and parochialism. Few would argue about the idiosyncratic nature of the artist, but the art faculty must learn to know and understand their colleagues within and without their departments and the importance of the role of col- legiality. The results of this investigation indicated that art faculty involvement in university committees enhanced the position of the arts. Additionally, "out-reach pro- grams" (directed to the community) and interdisciplinary involvement of the visual arts, performing arts and music have brought public and university attention to the arts in positive ways. These kinds of programs should be a challenge to art department chairpersons and art faculty members to involve themselves individually and as a group in the university community for the arts to have greater acceptance into the mainstream of academe. Grantsmanship: Often students in science fields learn proposal writing and "grantsmanship" early in their academic endeavors. Art students and art faculty tend not to follow this pattern. Art departments should con- sider the development of programs whereby skills are developed in proposal writing and "grantsmanship." It 181 is important that art students be informed of the oppor- tunities for the acquisition of funds for artistic activi- ties through state and federal art agencies, for example, The National Endowment for the Arts. Without such financial assistance many art students will be unable to pursue art careers. In this regard, it is necessary that the art student be knowledgeable of procedures and administrative matters to apply for available financial assistance. A work study experience would be an excellent method to achieve these skills. Many communities have arts organizations which are substantially staffed by volunteers. Cooperation between university art depart- ments and these local art groups could lead to internship programs for art students. Universities have vast resources from which to draw expertise concerning grant writing. Some schools offer courses in community resource development. Almost all schools have development offices. Art departments should draw extensively from these resources. Workshops and seminars would be ways to bring these resources to the art student. Arts administration: Since 1970 arts adminis- tration programs in academic institutions have prolif- erated as a result of the growing interest in the arts and the need for professional management of arts organi- zations in the ever-increasing complexities of our 182 environment. This rapid growing field needs cohesion. Currently most arts administration programs are oriented toward business or specific art fields (performing arts, music and to a limited degree to the visual arts).1 Art departments may provide the artistic base for a breadth of artistic knowledge and sensitivity to the nature of art in collaboration with the arts administration program. The art department chairperson is the key in this effort to initiate or coordinate an integration of the visual arts and the arts administration programs. Again, col- laboration with community art organizations (as described in Grantsmanship above) would be one means of providing enhancement of the understanding between the arts admin- istrator and the artist. Physical facilities: This investigator had an opportunity to visit the physical plants of each art department of the Big Ten Universities. In many cases, there was a need for expansion of the physical facility. It should be noted, however, that much greater use could be made of the present physical plants through a systema- tic approach to space utilization and "self help" main- tenance. At too many institutions there was an obvious lack of user care of equipment. The argument that the artist must spend time creating original art work is lGael O'Brien, "Managing Arts Programs," The Chronicle of Higher Education 11 (November 3, 1975): 6. 183 valid only if that time can be spent in a creative environment and free of health hazards and unsafe con- ditions. Requirements for "diet kitchen" cleanliness may be distracting, but studio orderliness, with tools and equipment properly placed and stowed would enhance the environment and allow for creative thought. The above comments are not intended to delimit the excellent efforts of those departments which obviously insisted on proper environmental conditions. In this regard, exchange visits by art department chairpersons and faculty members between and among institutions would be beneficial. Consortia and professional organizations: There is an obvious need on the part of university art depart- ments to communicate the differences between the Master of Fine Arts degree and the Master of Arts degree to the university hierarchy. Enlisting the aid of professional art organizations such as the College Art Association may enhance this communication endeavor. Inter-university cooperation in the form of consortia may be helpful too. Such consortia may be a cooperative venture among art department chairpersons of universities within a state or region or among universities such as the Big Ten Universities. A new frontier: The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education agreed that the arts would be one of 184 the growing points in higher education.2 Among the pur- poses for higher education the Commission cited (1) advanc- ing learning through the creative arts for the sake of public interest and consumption and (2) evaluation of society for the benefit of self-renewal.3 Art department chairpersons and art faculty should sieze upon those purposes to further art department goals in professional training and a liberal arts experience. Consideration must be given to ways to advance learning through the arts for self-renewal. Art Education professionals could play a key role in this effort in the preparation of secondary school teachers with a sound artistic base. Secondary school art teachers, working closely with university art depart- ment members and fellow teachers could develop new ways for having the arts " . . . at their best, experienced by people as inevitable, natural conditions of their daily environment. . . ."4 New avenues for diverse exploration and "ways of knowing" can become an integral part of edu- cation through the immediate, sensuous and noncognitive of the aesthetic. 2Kerr, "Visual Arts," pp. 2-3. 3Carnegie Commission, Priorities, p. 26. 4Bush-Brown, "Art and the Liberal Arts," p. 6. 185 It should be noted that a number of art department chairpersons of this study were working on interdisci- plinary programs. It should be expanded. Support of deans and university administrators as well as art faculty will be necessary for such expansion. Curriculum modifi- cation, flexibility of class schedules with less rigidity may be needed. Obviously university curriculum policy governing bodies will be involved, physical facilities must be considered and central administrative offices such as the registrar (or scheduling office) must be con- sulted. As Bush-Brown indicated " . . . to have the arts at their best . . . requires the work of nearly the whole society, including film makers, record makers, guardians of budgets, artists, police courts, and highway and park commissioners. . . ."5 He continued, " . . . man's need for developing his verbal, visual, and mensurate capaci- ties for organization, and the collaborations required to address human problems" was the object of education.6 Recommendations For many investigations in finding answers to questions, the results identify more questions and problem areas than they produce answers and solutions. This investigation was no exception. Further study or expansion of a subject is often desirable and appropriateness of 51bid. 6Ibid., pp. 7-8. 186 methodology can be brought into question. Therefore, the following recommendations are presented as possible sub- jects for further research. 1. From this investigation it was found that the art department chairpersons generally viewed the role of the discipline of art in higher education as providing professional training and a liberal arts experience. It was also found that art department chairpersons viewed, as a major challenge, the maintenance of department status. In this regard, what assessment methods are used or needed to determine quality of programs? Who should estab- lish assessment criteria and how can it be imple- mented for appropriate accountability for the sake of public interest and consumption. A study is needed to determine assessment criteria for art departments and art programs in higher education. During the course of this study, organization of the performing arts, music, visual arts and other art related activities under one academic head was suggested. Research to determine the value of such organizational structures could be bene- ficial. Therefore, it is suggested that research be undertaken to study the feasibility of organiz- ing the various arts (music, performing arts and the visual arts) under one academic dean or 187 administrative head for the purpose of having a central spokesperson for the arts in the university. Study is needed to determine the influences on departmental administration when a chairperson holds a rank belowyprofessor. This investigation found one chairperson with a rank below professor. Does this situation call into question a department chairperson's ability or appropriateness to eval- uate faculty members of higher rank for salary increases, fellowship grants and teaching ability? Will the chairperson tend to make decisions favor- ing senior faculty members for the benefit of the chairperson's own promotion potential? The results of this study indicated that the art department chairperson came to the chairperson position with relatively little academic adminis- trative experience. The question may be asked, what experience and qualifications are required or expected of individuals for selection to the position of art department chairperson? A study is needed to identify expected experiences and qualifications of_prospective art department chairpersons. Such a study may be undertaken from the point of view of expectations of faculty and/or deans and administrators. 188 The advantages and disadvantages of rotating chairpersons versus permanent chairpersons were partially addressed in this study. A study is needed to suggest under what conditions and situ- ations would a department be best served by a rotating chairperson[permanent chairperson. In view of the above recommendations, a logical follow-up question may be, what happens to an individual after the service as a department chairperson is completed? How can former chair- persons' experiences be best utilized in the department or elsewhere in the university organi- zational structure? A study of former department chairpersons would be desirable which would deal with the utilization of talents and experiences of those former chairpersons. Parallel studies of other universities and other art departments would be desirable in an effort to determine whether art department chairpersons of different populationgroups held similar views to those involved in this study. Of special interest to such an investigation would be smaller institutions which have no graduate pro- grams or limited graduate programs in the visual arts. 189 The following recommendation goes beyond the scope of this investigation and is offered for consider- ation. 8. A study is needed to identify the impact which the university art department has on the acqui- sition of the visual arts in the university and theypromotion of the visual arts for the enhance- ment of human capabiligy in society. Included in such a study should be the influence the art department exercised in the leadership in the visual art world for creating new art forms and innovative methods. APPENDICES APPENDIX A STUDY PARTICIPANTS/INSTITUTIONS APPENDIX A STUDY PARTICIPANTS/INSTITUTIONS Eugene Wicks, Acting Head Department of Art and Design University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Illinois 61302 Thomas F. Coleman, Chairman Department of Fine Arts Indiana University Bloomington, Indiana 47401 Wallace J. Tomasini, Director School of Art and Art History University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa 5224 Roger Funk, Chairperson Department of Art Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 48824 George V. Bayliss, Dean School of Art University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 10. 190 Herman Rowan, Chairperson Department of Studio Art University of Minnesota Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455 Jack Burnham, Chairperson Department of Art Northwestern University Evanston, Illinois 60201 William McGill, Chairperson Division of Art and Design Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana 47906 Robert J. Stull, Chairperson Department of Art The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio 43210 Philip Hamilton, Chairperson Department of Art University of Wisconsin- Madison Madison, Wisconsin 53706 APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE A Study of Art Department Chairpersons of The Big Ten Universities: Their View Of Their Role December 1977 Please complete the questionnaire and return in the envelope provided. The questionnaire infOrmation is strictly confidential. Neither the participants nor the institutions will be identified with the responses. Name: Institution: 1. What is your faculty rank? 2. What is your position title? Chairperson. Head Other ically beginning with the most recent. Master's. Diploma's, Bachelor's and/or others if applicable): (Specify) 3. Educational history since high school graduation (List chronolog- Include earned Doctorate, Year Institution Major Minor Degree Awarded 4. HOw long have you been the department chairperson? years 5. How long have you been a faculty member of an art department? years 6. Did you have academic administrative experience before you became a department chairperson? yes no If yes, how long? In what capacity? years 191. 7. 10. 11. .192 How is the art department chairperson selected at your institution? Selected by the Dean Selected by combination of Dean and Faculty Selected by the Faculty Other (Specifi) Do you usually think of yourself primarily as: a teacher an artist an administrator other (Specify) what is the academic discipline and title of the dean (or administrator) to whom you report? Discipline Title To better understand the time demands placed on you as a department chairperson. please estimate the percentage of time you spend in teaching. research. creative work, and administrative duties re- lated to the position of department chairperson. In the left column show the percentage of time you actually spend and in the right column show the percentage of time you would ideally like to spend. Percentages in each column should equal 100%. PERCENTAGE OF TIME You actually Ideally, you would spend like to spend Teaching Research % Creative work ‘ Z % Administrative duties as department chairperson % 75 100‘% 100‘% On the average. how many total hours do you actually spend each week in the combined activities listed in question 10 above? hours 12. 13. L193 Within your department, how much emphasis is placed on each of the following? Check one on each line b. Undergraduate instruction Instruction of graduate students Instruction of non-art majors Professional education of art students Creative work and exhibitions of faculty members Faculty community service (i.e., Art councils. work- shops, etc.) Providing an art experience fer a liberal arts education Advancing the art profession nationally Very Great Amount Great Amount Some Slight Amount From the list in question 12 which three items do you think should have the greatest amount of emphasis? Circle only one letter in each row. Greatest amount of emphasis Second lost emphasis Third.most emphasis Least Amount 11+. 15. 194 What were the three major reasons for your accepting the position of chairperson of the art department? (Indicate reasons in order of importance using the numbers 1, 2. 3 in the appropriate spaces with 1 indicating the most important, 2 the second most important. and 3 the third most important reason) b. C. d. iu_____ e-_____ h._____ 1.______ J-_____. Improve quality of teaching in the department Exert greater influence on the university administration Professional advancement Improve departmental administration Increase personal income Release time from teaching Exert greater influence in the control of the budget Exert greater influence on the department faculty Other (Specify) Other (Specify) What other comments do you have about your role as an art department chairperson? APPENDIX C PERSONAL INTERVIEW GUIDE-RESPONSE FORM APPENDIX C PERSONAL INTERVIEW GUIDE-RESPONSE FORM A Study of Art Department Chairpersons of The Big Ten Universities: Their View of Their Role December 1977 Introduction Personal introductions: Establish rapport with interviewee and resolve the following details: 1. 2. C'U Request permission to tape-record interview and set-up recorder. Clarify that the information will be kept confidential. Identify length of interview: about one hour. Discuss interview purpose: to gather information. in addition to the written questionnaire. relative to the art department chairperson’s view of his role. Review and relate interviewee's written questionnaire for any clarification needed. Provide interviewee with copy of interview questions. Background Information Name of Interviewee Name Of Institution Interview Date/time Information concerning the interview: 1. 2. 3. Interview: Location Permission to tape-record the interview: Yes No Special notations or comments: A. The research project B. The written questionnaire C. The personal interview 195 Interview Responses 196 1. In your view, what are the greatest strengths of your department? 2. As an art department chairperson. what is your greatest challenge? Focus: a. b. c. d. Meeting teaching. research and creative commitments Family relationships Responsibilities: budgeting, reporting. planning staff development, etc. Behavior requirements: self control. consideration. cooperation, problem solving, change, communication. management ability 3. As an art department chairperson. what unique situations (problems) do you have Focus: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. that other department chairpersons do not have? Enrollment Research Methodology: Past scholarship vs. creativity Evaluation Emphasis Public Awareness and Involvement Myths about art ' Credentials of faculty Fragmented programs 197' 4. Art department chairpersons often report to a dean, or other admin- istrator, who may be of another discipline. In your role. does this cause any particular stress? Focus: Strains between the organization and the profession 5. In your view. what is the role of the discipline of Art in higher education? Focus: a. Advancing creative art in the public interest b. Professional vs. liberal arts c. Myths about the arts d. Attitudes about art e. Improve value of society f. Public awareness g. Disenchantment with science h. Exposure of art to the public 6. Does your view of the discipline of Art in higher education affect your administration of the Art Department? How? Focus: Open 198 7. It is generally thought that the arts are not totally accepted into the academic community. In your view, how can the visual arts become more accepted and integrated into the mainstream of academe? Focus: a. Emphasis by Carnegie Commission -Enhance cultural life -Fine arts last growth point in higher education b. Challenge to art administrators to integrate art in academe (Kerr) 8. Literature indicates that the artist's goals are for excellence and creativity while the university's goals are for administrative operational ease and utility. How do you deal with this? Focus: a. Profession: Understanding, technical excellence and creativity b. Organization: Utility, Operating ease. routine .199 9. Do you see the bureaucratic control of the university strengthing, maintaining or weakening the professional initiatives and incentives of the artist faculty member? Focus: a. Profession: Control by the colleague group b. Organization: Structured hierachically 10. As a member of the university community. do you achieve status and credibility among university administrators and university faculty members generally because you are a department chairperson or be- cause they know of your contributions to the field of art? Focus: a. Profession: Status from colleague group b. Organization: Status from organization within the hierachy 1200 11. The artist might achieve higher prestige and be better understood by academe if the art faculty would be less isolated and more involved with university committees and administrative activities. What is your reaction to this statement? Focus: The professional must become part of the bureaucratic hierachy in order to put his ideas to work. Perceptions or concerns of the chairperson Concluding the Interview Extend appreciation for chairperson's participation in the project. Inform participants that they will be provided with a summary of the results of the survey. APPENDIX D INTERVIEW GUIDE APPENDIX D INTERVIEW GUIDE A Study of Art Department Chairpersons of The Big Ten Universities: Their View of Their Role December 1977 10. 11. In your view. what are the greatest strengths of your department? As an art department chairperson. what is your greatest challenge? As an art department chairperson. what unique situations (problems) do you have that other department chairpersons do not have? Art department chairpersons often report to a dean, or other admin- istrator, who may be of another discipline. In your role. does this cause any particular stress? In your view, what is the role of the discipline of Art in higher education? Does your view of the discipline of Art in higher education affect your administration of the Art Department? It is generally thought that the arts are not totally accepted into the academic community. In your view. how can the visual arts become more accepted and integrated into the mainstream of academe? Literature indicates that the artist's goals are for excellence and creativity while the university's goals are for administrative operational ease and utility. HOw do you deal with this? Do you see the bureaucratic control of the university strengthening. maintaining or weakening the professional initiatives and incentives of the artist faculty member? As a member of the university community. do you achieve status and credibility among university administrators and university faculty members generally because you are a department chairperson or be- cause they know of your contributions to the field of art? The artist might achieve higher prestige and be better understood by academe if the art faculty would be less isolated and more involved with university committees and administrative activities. What is your reaction to this statement? 201. APPENDIX E PILOT STUDY PARTICIPANTS/INSTITUTIONS APPENDIX E PILOT STUDY PARTICIPANTS/INSTITUTIONS Richard Kline, Acting Chairperson Department of Art Central Michigan University Mount Pleasant, MI 48859 Kingsley Calkins, Chairperson Department of Art Eastern Michigan University Ypsilanti, MI 48197 John Link, Chairperson Department of Art Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, MI 49003 202 APPENDIX F COVER LETTER APPENDIX F COVER LETTER MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION EAST LANSING ' MICHIGAN ' 48824 DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION AND HIGHER EDUCATION ERICKSON HALL 1735 Linden Street East Lansing. MI #8823 Date Chairperson's Name Name of Department Name of University City, State Zip Code Dear Chairperson: Your cooperation with research I am doing is greatly appreciated. The study focuses on the Art Department Chairperson and his experiences in the dual role of a professional in art and an administrator in the university. Your assistance in exploring the artist—administrator role is invaluable. The re- sults of the study are intended to provide insight for university administrators and faculty members about the unique concerns faced by the Art Department Chairperson. As I indicated to you. I am a doctoral candidate in Higher Education at Michigan State University. My experiences as a practicing artist. faculty member and as an administrator have led me to this subject. I selected the Art Department Chairperson. specifically the Art Department Chairpersons of the Big Ten Universities. because he is the person most intimately involved with representing the artist to the university and the university to the artist. The research includes a questionnaire and a personal interview. My specific requests of you are: 1. to complete the questionnaire and return it in the enclosed self addressed envelope by flpgth ggig. Iggy. 2. a personal interview to further explore your role as Art Department Chairperson. I will contact you by telephone for an appointment. Completing the questionnaire will take about ten minutes. The interview will take about one hour. All questionnaire and interview information will be kept strictly confidential. Neither the participants nor their universities will be identified with the responses. Results of the study will be provided to you. Questions concerning the development of this stud may be referred to Professor Richard L. Featherstone (telephone: 517-353-17U6 . The population for this study is ten. therefore your participation is vital. Again, thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely. Eldon L. Clark Telephone: 517-351-8537 encl: Questionnaire Self addressed envelope 2()3 APPENDIX G SCHEDULE OF PERSONAL INTERVIEWS APPENDIX G SCHEDULE OF PERSONAL INTERVIEWS Date December, 1977 14 15 16 21 22 January, 1978 9 12 13 17 18 204 Time 1:00 10:00 10:00 10:00 1:30 10:30 10:00 1:30 10:00 9:00 P.M. A.M. A.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. A.M. P.M. A.M. A.M. APPENDIX H DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION WITHIN BIG TEN UNIVERSITIES uud mo uswsuummwo uud mo usefiuummma daemon paw yum mo soamfl>flo uu< mo usefiuummma and oepsum mo ucmfiuummmo use so Hoonom un< mo ucmsuummma muoumam un< new and mo Hoonom muu< been no usmeunmmmo :mflmmn cam was «0 usefiuummma BZHSBMdeQ soflumospm mo Hoonom muse may mo oemaaoo coaumospm psm mosmflom Hafioom mmflufismfism mo Hoosom mmocmwom psm mums muse ammoneq one no Hoonom mumuumq tam wand mane ammoneq mmugmflom UCM mqufl mums pmwamm< can mcflm mwmAAOU COmemz acmflpmzlswmsoomflz mo >uamum>flsa msnfisaou muwmum>flsD mumum Geno one msMflpsH .muumhmmmq umma muflmnm>wso mspHsm mHostHH .soumsm>m muwmum>wsa sumumwsnunoz mflaommwscwz mnemmssfiz mo auflmnw>wsb uonu< sad smmflnowz mo auflmum>flsa msfimsmq ummm auflmum>wss wumum smmfl20Hz huwo m30H m3oH m0 muflmum>flsb soumsflfiooam muflmum>wso sunflpsH smflmmemnolmsmnus mwosfiHHH mo muflmum>flsa MBHmmm>HZD mmHBHmmm>HZD ZMB UHm ZHmBHS ZOHB¢NHZ<0¢O BZflSEMdmma m NHQZMQAfl 205 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Cited References Ackerman, James. "The Arts in Higher Education." In Con- tent and Context. Edited by Carl Kaysen. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973. Aldmon, Howard F. "Critical Behavior Requirements of Heads of Departments" (Ed.D. dissertation, The University of Tennessee, 1959). Dissertation Abstracts, 1960, a0, 3138. (University MiCro- films No. 59-06979.) Anderson, Kay J. "In Defense of Departments." In Academic Departments. Edited by Dean E. McHenry and Associates. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977. Ary, Donald; Jacobs, Lucy Chester; and Razavich, Asghar. Introduction to Research in Education. New York: Rinehart and Winston Inc., I972. Best, John W. Research in Education. 3d ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1977. Bingham, Walter; Van Dyke, Moore; Victor, Bruce; and Gustad, John. How TotInterview. New York: Harper and Brothers, Inc., 1959. Booz-Allen and Hamilton Inc. Report on Survey of Role and Responsibilities of Department Heads College of Liberal Arts. university Park, PennsyIvania, 1964. Borg, Walter R. Educational Research: An Introduction. New York: David McDay Inc., 1965. Borland, Kenneth E. "Career Perceptions, Position Sequences, and Career Strategies of Michigan Public Community-Junior College Presidents." Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1976. 206 Brann, Bullen, 207 James. "The Chairman: An Impossible Job About to Become Tougher.“ In The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role. Edited by James Brann and Thomas A. Emmett. Detroit: Balamp, 1972. Robert A. "A Study of the Perceptions of Selected Deans, Department Chairmen and Faculty on the Role of the Department Chairman at the University of Alabama" (Ed.D. dissertation, University of Alabama, 1969). Dissertation Abstracts Inter- national, 1970, 32, 3213A-321A. IUniversity Microfiims No. 70-01369.) Bush-Brown, Albert. "Art and the Liberal Arts: A Trivial, Artificial, Irrelevant Antagonism." In Art in American Higher Institutions. Washington: National Art AssociaEion,‘i970. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. Priorities for Action: Final Report of the Carnegie Commission Report on Higher Education. New York: McGraw- Hill, 1973. Christ-Janer, Albert. "Art in Higher Education: Inquiry and Prescription/Institutional Forms and Functions." In Art in American Higher Institutions. Edited by Burke E. Feldman. Washington, D.C.: National Art Association, 1970. Christ-Janer, Albert, and Wirkeser, Ralph L. "Higher Edu- Corson, cation and the Arts." In The Arts in Higher Edu- cation. Edited by Lawrence E. Dennis and Lenate M. Jacob. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1968. John J. The Governance of Colleges and Universi- ties: Moderniiing Structure and Process. New York: McGraw-Hill, l975.~ Darkenwald, Gordon Gerald. "The Department Chairman Role in Relation to the Social Organization of Colleges and Universities" (Doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1970). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1970, 31, 2700A-2701A. (University Microfilms No. 70-23430.) Delahanty, James. "What Do Faculty Want in a Departmental Chairman?" In The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role. Edited by James Brann and Thomas A. Emmett. Detroit: Balamp, 1972. 208 Dewey, John. Art as Experience. New York: Capricorn Books, 1934. Doyle, Edward A. The Status and Functions of the Depart- ment Chairman. Washington, D.C.: Catholic Uni: versity Press, 1973. Dressel, Paul L.; Johnson, Craig; and Marcus, Philip M. The Confidence Crisis. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass, 1969. Duryea, E. D. "Evolution of University Organizations." In The University as an Organization. Edited by James A. Perkins. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973. Featherstone, Richard L. The Development of Management Systems for the Academic Department. Boulder: Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, 1972. Fenlason, Anne F. Essentials of Interviewing. New York: Harper and Row Inc., I962. File, Jeanne M. A Critical Analysis of the Concepts of Art in Higher Education. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University Press, 1958. Gosnell, Stephen. "Dissecting the Academic Artist." Chronicle of Higher Education (May 14, 1976): 32. Hall, Olive A. Research Handbook for Home Economics Edu- cation. Torrence, Ca1if.: Burgess Publishing Company, 1967. Hausman, Jerome, and Ryan, Joanne. "Degree Requirements for Art Faculty: Appointments, Promotion, and Tenure." Art Journal 22 (Winter 72/73): 179-81. Heimler, Charles H. "The College Department Chairman." In The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role. Edited by James Brann and Thomas A. Emmett. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1972. Heller, Jules. "Crisis in the Fine Arts: Malaise or Blunderland." Arts in Society 12 (Fall/Winter 1975): 318. Henry, David D. ”The Academic Department and Educational Change." Management Forum 2 (February 1974): 1-4. 209 Hill, Winston W., and French, Wendall L. "Perceptions of the Power of Department Chairmen by Professors." Administrative Science Quarterly 2 (March 1967): Hiss, Priscella, and Fansler, Roberta. Research in the Fine Arts in the Colleges and Universities of the United States. New York: Carnegie Corporation, 1934. Holden, Carol D. "A New Mission for Colleges of Fine Arts: The Aesthetic Education of the General Student and the Training of Art Educators." Normal, 111.: Illinois University. Research and Information Bulletin of the National Council of Art Administrators, March 1977. Kelly, Rob Roy. "Art in the American University: Fact or Facade?" Art Journal 22 (Fall 1972): 26-30. Kerlinger, Fred N. Foundations of Behavioral Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965. Kerr, Clark. "The Carnegie Commission Looks at the Visual Arts." In The Status of the Visual Arts in Higher Education. Editediby Fred V. Miils, Clyde McCulley, and Donna Maddox. Peoria: National Council of Art Administration, 1976. Kinne, Frances Bartlett. "Come My Friends, 'Tis Not Too Late to Seek a Newer World." Arts in Society_12 (Fall/Winter 1975): 324. Kornhauser, William, and Hagstrom, Warren D. Scientists in Industry Conflict and Accommodation. Berkeiey: University of California Press, 1962. Larrabee, Eric. "Artist and University." In The Arts on Campus: The Necessity for Change, Edited by Margaret Mahoney. Greenwich, Conn.: New York Graphic Society, 1970. Lee, Calvin B. T. "Relationship of the Department Chair- man to the Academic Dean." In The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role. Edited by James Brann and Thomas Emmett. Detroit: Balamp, 1972. 210 McCann, Charles J. "Vital Undergraduate Studies: What's the Right Climate?" In The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role. Edited by James Brann and Thomas A. Emmett. Detroit: Balamp, 1972. McHenry, Dean E., and Associates. Academic Departments. San Francisco: Jossey—Bass, 1977. McKeachie, Wilbert T. "Memo to New Department Chairman." Educational Record 49 (Spring 1968): 221-27. McKeefrey, William J. "The Participation of the Faculty in Department Decision Making and in Campus Governance." In The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role. Edited by James Brann and Thomas A. Emmett. Detroit: Balamp, 1972. McKenna, David L. "A Study of Power Interpersonal Relationships in the Administration of Higher Education" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1958). Dissertation Abstracts, 1958, 12, 1275. (University Microfiims No. 58-03704.) Mahoney, Margaret. "Overview of the Present." In The Arts on Campus: The Necessity for Change. _Edited by Margaret Mahoney. Greenwich: New York Graphic Society Ltd., 1970. Midwest College Art Association Conference. Allen S. Weller, Chairman. "The Ph.D. for the Creative Artist." College Art Journal 19 (Summer 1960): 343-52. . H. Harvard Arnason, Chairman. ”The Present Status of the M.F.A. Degree." Art Journal 24 (Spring 1965): 244-49. . H. W. Janson, Chairman. "Standards for Studio Faculty: A Resolution." Art Journal 29 (Spring 1970): 294. Mills, Fred V., and McCulley, Clyde. "The Status of Art in Higher Education." In Report 1975: National Council of Art Administrators. Edited by Fred V. Mills and Clyde McCulley. Peoria: National Council of Art Administrators, 1975. Morrison, Jack. "Challenge to the Artist-Teacher in Academe or Let's See the Color of Your Money Buster." Arts in Society 12 (Fall/Winter 1975): 338. 211 Morrison, Jack. The Rise of the Arts on the American Campus. New York: McGraw-Hiil, 1973. . "The Rise of the Arts on the American Campus and Its Potential to Remain There." In The Status of the Visual Arts in Higher Education. Edited by Fred V. Mills, Clyde McCulley, and Donna Maddox. Peoria: National Council of Art Administrators, 1976. Murry, Robert K. ”On Departmental Development: A Theory.” The Journal of General Education 16 (October 1964): 227-36. O'Brien, Gael. ”Managing Arts PrOgrams." The Chronicle of Higher Education 11 (November 1975): 6. Parsons, Talcott. The Social System. Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, 1951. . ”The Strange Case of Academic Organization." Higher Education 42 (June 1971): 486-95. Parsons, Talcott, and Platt, Gerald M. The American Uni- versity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973. Perkins, James A. "The University and the Arts." Teachers College Record 66 (May 1965): 671-78. Powell, Robert 5., Jr. ”Evaluation: Student Viewpoints." In The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role. Edited—by James Brann and Thomas A. Emmett. Detroit: Balamp, 1972. Pugh, D. S. Organizational Theory. Middlesex, England: Penguin, 1971. Ramer, Hal Lee. "Perceptions of University Departments and the Role of Their Chairman: A Study of Some Attitudes and Opinions of Selected Professors, Department Chairpersons, Deans and Central Admin- istrators of The Ohio State University" (Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1963). Dissertation Abstracts, 1963, a5, 5144. (Uni- versity MiCrofilms No. 64-06951.) Richie, Andrew C. The Visual Arts in Higher Education. New York: College Art Association of Amefica, 1966. 212 Risenhoover, Morris. "Artist-Teachers in Universities: Studies in Role Integration." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 1972. Risenhoover, Morris, and Blackburn, Robert. Artists as Professors. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1976. Ryan, Doris W. "The International Organization of Academic Departments." Higher Education 43 (June 1972): Shahn, Ben. The Shape of Content. New York: Random House, 1957. Shils, E. "The Hole in the Center: University Government in the United States." Minerva 8 (January 1970): 1-7. Shoben, Edward J., Jr. "Departments vs. Education." In The Academic Department or Division Chairman: A Complex Role. Edited by James Brann and Thomas A. Emmett. Detroit: Balamp, 1972. Sloane, Joseph C. "The Scholar and the Artist." Art Journal 23 (Fall 1963): 16-19. Smith, Warren S. "The Artist and the Community of Scholars." AAUP Bulletin 45 (June 1959): 237-42. Trow, Martin. "Departments as Contexts for Teaching and Learning." In Academic DepartmenEe. Edited by Dean E. McHenry and Associates. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977. Van Dalen, Deobold B., and Meyer, William J. Understanding Educational Research An Introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill, i962. Wald, George. "The Artist and The University." Arts in Society 2 (1963): 59-65. Waltzer, Herbert. The Job of the Academic Department Chairman: Experiences and RecommendatiOns from Miami University. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1975. Washington, Earl M. "The Relationship between College Department Chairpersons Leadership Style as Per- ceived by Teaching Faculty and the Faculty's Feel- ing of Job Satisfaction." Ed.D. dissertation, Western Michigan University, 1975. 213 Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary. Springfield, Mass.: G. and C. Merriam Company, 1974. Winkler, Karen J. "Is It Possible To Teach and Be an Artist Too?" The Chronicle of Higher Education 28 (January 28, 1974): 10-11. General References Adams, Clinton. "Back to the Drawing Board." Arts in Society 12 (Fall/Winter 1975): 334-36. Arnheim, R. Art and Visual Perception. Berkeley: Uni- versity of California Press, 1974. Bell, Roger Jackson. "New Art in Higher Education: Towards a New College Model." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington, 1972. Bersson, Robert. ”A Ranking of the T0p Ten Graduate Schools in Art Education: A Rejoiner." Art Education 24 (April 1976): 23-24. Brewer, Joseph. "Creative Artist in the College Community." Association of American Colleges Bulletin 24 (May 1941): 255-60. Burns, Vincent Clemens. ”Professional Requirements in the Studio Art as Viewed by the Art Faculty in Selected Institutions of Higher Education in the State of Indiana." Ed.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1973. Cone, Edward T. "Creative Artist in the University." American Scholar 16 (April 1947): 192-200. Dennis, Lawrence E., and Jacob, Renate M., eds. The Arts in Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass, 1968. Elsner, Elliot W. "Toward a More Adequate Conception of Evaluation in the Arts.“ Peabodnyournal of Edu- cation 52 (April 1975): 173-79. Freundlick, August L. "A Study of College Art Departments in a Time of Expansion." Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1960. Glaser, Barney G. Organizational Scientists: Their Pro- fessional Careers. Indianapolis: The Bobbs- Merrill Co. Inc., 1964. 214 Goldman, Freda A. The Arts in Higher Educatien: A Second Review of Programs. Boston: Boston Uni- versity, Center for the:Study of Liberal Education for Adults, 1966. Gorder, Raymond L. Interviewing Strategy. Techniques and Tactics. Homewood, 111.: Dorsey Press, 1969. Griffiths, Daniel E. Administrative Theory. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1959. Griswold, A. Whitney. The Fine Arts and the University. New York: St. Martin‘s Press, 1965. Gross, Edward, and Grambach, Paul V. Universitnyoals and Academic Power. Washington, D.C.: Amerisan Council of—Education, 1968. Halpin, Andrew W. Administrative Theory in Education. New York: MacMillan Co., 1958. Hardiman, George W., and Zernich, Theodore. "Research in Art Education 1970-74 Portrayal and Interpre- tation." Art Education 29 (February 1976): 23-26. Lanier, Vincent. "Objectives of Art Education." Peabod Journal of Education 52 (April 1975): 180-86. Lowry, W. McNeil. "University and the Creative Arts." Arts in Society 2 (1963): 7-21. McIntosh, Donald J. "The Ordering of the Studio Art Experience in Contemporary American Higher Edu- cation: A Proposal for a Fine Art Studio Pro- gram." Ed.D. dissertation, Columbia University, 1972. McMullen, Roy. Art, Affluence and Alienation. New York: Frederich A. Prager Publishers, 1968. Maxwell, David W. "Numbers Numbness." Liberal Education 59 (December 1973): 405-16. Merton, Robert; Fiske, Marjorie; and Kendall, Patricia L. The Focused Interview. Glencoe, 111.: The Free Press, i956. Meyer, Ursula. Conceptual Art. New York: Dutton, 1972. Munro, Thomas. Art Education: Its Philosophy and Psy- cholo . Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merrill Co., Inc., I 956. 215 Munro, Thomas. Evolution in the Arts, and Other Theories of Cultural Histogy. CleveIand: Cleveiand Museum, N. D. Abrams, 1963. Opper, John. "The Role of Art Departments in State Uni- versities." Ph.D. dissertation, Columbia Uni- versity, 1952. Pelz, Donald C., and Andrews, Frank M. Scientists in Organizations: Productive Climate for Research and Development. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966. Rice, Norman. "A Profession of Choices." Arts in Society 12 (Fall/Winter 1975): 329-33. Robbins, Wayne Lindsey. "Perceived Job Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers among Professors of Educational Administration." Ed.D. dissertation, University of Arkansas, 1975. Schwartz, Fred R. "Graduate Education in the Fine Arts for the Artist-Teacher." Peabogy Journal of Education 52 (April 1975): 205-12. Scott, W. Richard. "Professional in Bureaucracies--Areas of Conflict." In Professionalism. Edited by Howard W. Volmer and Donald L. Mills. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1966. Shuart, James M. "Some Value Orientations of Academic Department Chairmen: A Study of Comparative Values and Administrative Effectiveness." Doctoral dissertation, New York University, 1966. Skinner, Robert G. "Perceptions of Some Artists in Resi— dence in Ohio Colleges and Universities." Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio University, 1971. Sorgl, Walter Felix. "The Artist in the University: Problems and Personal Development.“ Ed.D. dis- sertation, Columbia University, 1964. Stake, Robert E. Evaluating the Arts in Education: A Responsive Approach. CSiumBus, Ohio: Merrill, 1975. Straus, R. "Departments and Discipline: Stasis and Change." Science (November 1973): 895-97. 216 Suppan, Adolph A. ”Forward." Arts in Society_12 (Fall/ Winter 1975): 312-13. Taylor, Harold. "A Note on the Professional Training of the Artist Athletes." gets in Society 12 (Fall/ Winter 1975): 343-46. Toffler, Alvin. "The Art of Measuring the Arts." The Annals (American Academy of Political and Soc1a1 Solence) 373 (September 1967): 141-55. Victoria, James, and Steele, Charles. "Accountability and Assessment of Art Education in Public Schools." Journal of NAEA (National Art Education Associ- ation) 28 TSeptember 1975): 14-19. Walters, Walter H. "Late Thoughts." Arts in Society 12 (Fall/Winter 1975): 314-17. Wilson, Brent. "National Assessment and the Future of Art Education." Peabody Journal of Education 52 (April 1975): 213-16. Young, Pauline V. Scientific Social Surveys and Research. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1966. ”ICH "fliifiilfiflmflmfliflfijfiflfiiflfiiES