WHAT WOULD I TRY TO DO? If I were given the opportunity to lead the Faculty of Arts and Science, I would undertake various specific initiatives with three general goals: (A) Strengthen Arts and Science Academic Programs, (B) Strengthen the Research/Scholarly Environment in Arts and Science, and (C) Strengthen Collegial Decision-Making. The suggestions, although stated specifically here, would ultimately be modified and adapted through discussions with others and in response to information available as Dean. A. Strengthen Arts and Science Academic Programs Perhaps the most important task of a new Dean will be to examine specific ways to strengthen the academic and economic viability of A&S programs, including existing courses and programs, as well as new initiatives. Given our financial dependency on student tuition, enrolment is an increasing concern at UofW. Here, in no particular order of priority, are a few preliminary suggestions that address the recruitment and retention of students, the expansion of programs, and in general the effective performance of teaching functions. A1. Review with academic units ways to improve the efficiency of course offerings. There is much variation in average class size across departments, with some departments having average class sizes four times those in other departments. Although some of this variation may reflect disciplinary differences and the contribution of overload teaching by dedicated faculty, there nonetheless may be areas in which UofW could effect a more efficient and equitable use of its limited teaching resources. A2. Examine the issue of attrition in first-year courses, perhaps especially in disciplines with general problems (e.g., first-year math courses). First-year students and students in certain prerequisite courses are at high risk for withdrawal or failure. With the Department, examine such issues as identification of students at risk (e.g., GPAs, screening tests), modes of instruction (e.g., at Western, I used a repetition and peer-tutoring method for statistics), development of cost- effective remedial activities (e.g., development of Department tutoring or other resources, possible use of Collegiate and Continuing Education, central activities through Student Services, computer-assisted learning). With Student Services, Enrolment Management, and Departments, examine ways to recruit more strong students to UofW (i.e., students with high probability of success). A3. With academic units, the Center for Learning Technologies, and relevant Student Services, examine possible ways to strengthen operation of Telecourses and other Distance Education initiatives, especially outside of Winnipeg. At present, enrolment in Telecourses from outside Winnipeg is minimal. Perhaps target one or two sizable communities for experimental drives to determine whether in fact there is any demand for these or other courses in those areas. Identify kinds of students for whom such courses are effective (see also A4). A4. Examine question of high attrition rates in certain types of class (e.g., evening classes, some Telecourse offerings). Identify who is dropping out and why. Develop alternative experimental approaches to retention of these students and monitor success of those efforts. A5. Expedite introduction of viable 4-year Arts programs to capitalize on extra fourth year. Survey faculty as to whether we should reinstate Rannie 4-Year Program approved by Senate or continue along lines proposed by subsequent Curriculum Review Committee (i.e., "Ways of Knowing" and other specific core courses). Build on experiences of Departments with high quality Honours and 4-Year programs. A6. Review and strengthen support services for instruction (e.g., TA hours, classroom and lab facilities). Initiate departmental assessments of teaching and other academic needs. On the computing side, work with TSS to improve non-classroom academic support (e.g., obtaining class lists, submitting grades, calculating GPAs for advising, room scheduling, timetabling). A7. Encourage appropriate use of technologies in instruction, especially those that seem long overdue and inexpensive (e.g., improve newsgroup software on Unix to notify students of new messages in class bulletin boards, use of WWW, more on-line and print documentation). Demonstrate due concern for possible negative effects (e.g., no increase in students commensurate with increased costs, installation of expensive equipment without due consideration of depreciation and need for future replacement, loss of classroom space that limits regular course offerings, unwarranted dependency on unproven technologies or software) and for a thoughtful evaluation of such programs (e.g., build evaluation into the implementation of programs). Assertions about the effectiveness of innovative programs are sometimes offered and accepted without adequate evidence by people who lack a strong background in educational research or who have a vested interest in the promotion of the innovation. For example, at a recent conference here a speaker from Acadia commented on the greater success of students in a computer section of a course than in a regular section. The actual report, which I requested from the speaker, revealed that the computer section was much smaller, contained only volunteers, and involved a dramatically higher proportion of majors, factors that warrant some skepticism about the claimed benefits. A8. Continue UofW efforts to maintain and strengthen high quality of instruction. As Dean insist on documentation of teaching performance in annual evaluations (e.g., QUIQ ratings, classroom visits by Chair or colleagues, or other procedures as outlined in the original course evaluation report) and provide constructive feedback about areas requiring improvement. Continue and expand the work of the Teaching Development Committee. A9. Present a strong public case for the benefits of traditional A&S courses (e.g., multi-disciplinary Community Committees that include representation from business and other constituencies, presentations by Dean or representatives to public schools and relevant community groups on benefits of Liberal Arts Education, encourage and facilitate constructive interactions between academic and applied faculty, work with UofW Public Relations staff to strengthen the image of A&S in Winnipeg). A10. Initiate discussions with unit heads to determine in what areas A&S can afford to expand, and whether expansion is practical. Monitor for evidence of increased enrollment vs. simple transfers from A&S to new initiatives. A11. Develop a model for the management of Interdisciplinary programs that ensures broad representation from faculty and that makes optimal use of current A&S courses. Developments that simply shift students from one academic unit to another do little to redress financial difficulties and might even exacerbate them (e.g., by dividing same number of students among more courses). In this same vein, examine carefully alliances with affiliated institutions to determine whether their increased UofW enrolments represent new students or simply a shift of traditional A&S students to the alternative courses. Affiliated colleges account for an increased number of registrations, which could increase inefficiencies without some compensatory increase in the student population. Without due care, similar issues may arise from joint programs with Community Colleges. A12. Evaluate the effectiveness of current curriculum decision-making structures within A&S and outside (e.g., Senate, Academic Planning Committee). It is important for the academic and fiscal well-being of A&S (and UofW as a whole) that academic initiatives be undertaken with realistic expectations about success and thoughtful concern for possible negative effects on other programs. Therefore important to be sensitive to the possibility of negative impact, without letting such concerns prevent one from acting at all. B. Strengthen the Research/Scholarly Environment in Arts and Science Another priority closely related to the strength of A&S academic programs is to improve the environment and opportunities for faculty and students at UofW to undertake high quality research and scholarship. B1. Explore with UWFA, Departments, and Senior Administration the possibility of half-course teaching reductions being purchased by faculty who currently teach a full course load (e.g., 1/6th of salary). The money would cover the cost of a stipend and any extra could go into a pool for student research assistants or for internal grants. This pool of money could be for the specific use of the contributing faculty member or for general use. Any releases would be negotiated with academic units and faculty, and would permit more UofW faculty to assume a teaching load closer to the norm for universities (albeit with a voluntary cost). B2. Try to identify new funds and/or free up existing funds to provide course reductions for faculty members without external funding and/or find means for departments to allocate resources towards that end (e.g., extra-large classes could count for 1.5 of load). Develop a fair process for allocation of any rotating reductions. B3. Identify Faculty-wide, Departmental, and individual research needs (e.g., space, computers, other equipment, software). Encourage faculty and UofW fund-raising bodies to pursue outside funding and explore ways to meet research needs locally. Initiate discussions among academic units in the relative priority of different research needs. B4. Initiate discussions with UofM about easing the process by which UofW faculty become adjuncts. At present, procedure seems unduly protracted, variable across departments, and often controversial. Discuss environment for graduate students at UofW with relevant faculty and departments. Use part-time teaching funds to encourage post-doctoral researchers and other collaborations. B5. Work with academic units to identify potential areas of research growth in the institution and ensure that hiring is done with a view to developing core areas of strength, including strengths that cut across academic disciplines. There are benefits for a small institution like UofW to strive for concentrations of researchers in identified areas, rather than permitting unregulated development. Much undergraduate teaching can be performed by faculty members in a discipline even if the course content is not in their specific area of research expertise. B6. Work with the research office to explore relationships with outside institutions to ensure optimal involvement of UofW faculty in local research opportunities (e.g., Institute for Biodiagnostics, hospitals, industry, schools, public service, aerospace industry and training, military). Look especially for opportunities for Humanities and Social Science researchers to form outside liaisons. Explore possible use of adjunct appointments to facilitate such community connections. B7. Monitor and where appropriate contribute to national research activities (e.g., Centres of Excellence, changes in priorities of granting agencies) to examine possible roles for UofW and, with Deans from similar institutions, to minimize negative impact of changes on the research capacity of smaller institutions, such as UofW. Advocacy for Social Sciences and Humanities may be particularly important given the relatively modest level of SSHRC funding and the less directly applied nature of such work. C. Strengthen Collegial Decision-Making Evaluating and, where appropriate, implementing these and other ideas to strengthen teaching and scholarship at UofW will require high quality decision-making procedures. In the process of reviewing the preceding suggestions, I would examine ways to strengthen communication and decision-making within Arts and Science to ensure the widest-possible and critical evaluation of various courses of action. I know that some faculty and administration see no problems with the current decision-making processes in the Faculty, but I suspect that other faculty would appreciate a concerted effort to ensure a broader consultation and more critical discussion of inititatives undertaken by the University. Presumably such efforts would do no harm, as long as decisions did not get bogged down in some unworkable process. C1. Make effective use of electronic forms of communication. Evaluate and improve electronic message distribution. There are still questions about whether electronic messages reach everyone and, if so, in a timely fashion. Advocate broader use of e-mail for work of the Dean's Office, and work with TSS, CLT, and Andre Oberle to evaluate and strengthen computer competencies among staff and faculty. Create a homepage for the Faculty, including administrators, staff, and committees. Post meeting times, agendas, and minutes from committee meetings to electronic bulletin boards. Ensure that new ideas are circulated electronically and comments invited at the earliest possible moment. C2. Until electronic messaging is universally adopted, use a weekly newsletter or special section of In Edition for distributing information about A&S business. Try to reduce the distribution of individual memos to faculty and staff. C3. Assess whether it is desirable and possible to formally strengthen the role of Chairs of Academic Units (e.g., as an advisory body on specified issues, for ad hoc committees to develop recommendations). Avoid possible duplication with A&S committee structure. C4. Review the FCAS and relevant Senate and Board committee structure (e.g., effective terms of reference, lines of reporting). Examine relevant areas of decision-making outside A&S to ensure adequate input from faculty. C5. Hold regular meetings of FCAS and obtain formal approval for recommendations. Where warranted, use ballot vote to ensure broad approval for actions. C6. Require that all reports and recommendations coming to the Dean's Office and leaving A&S (e.g., to Senate and its subcommittees) include information about the degree of consultation followed and evidence on agreement or disagreement by relevant constituencies. C7. Ask faculty and staff whether they feel adequately informed about ongoing changes and sufficiently involved in decision-making. At start of mandate, hold meetings with departments, invite suggestions, and perhaps even conduct a survey. Circulate a revised version of this document for comment. C8. In consultation with Faculty, Staff, and Senior Administration develop a rating form and other procedures for evaluating the Dean's functioning (e.g., The Dean is an effective spokesperson for the value of a Liberal Arts education. The Dean consults effectively with Faculty and Staff. The Dean works well with other administrators. The Dean is open to alternative points of view.). Examine ways to formalize this detailed kind of review of the Dean, inasmuch as simply inviting comments is probably not adequate to elicit useful feedback. C9. Early in the term of office, discuss with academic units the general organization of Arts and Science and how structures and processes might be improved (e.g., the degree to which decision-making should and could be decentralized to departments, whether A&S should be organized as several faculties rather than as one, relationship of A&S to the larger University community). This review should be completed prior to the final year of office, so that, if necessary, appointment of a subsequent Dean (or Deans) could be undertaken in the context of a modified organization for the Faculty. WHAT CHANCES FOR SUCCESS? There are reasons to expect that I could be successful at achieving some or all of the preceding objectives, including considerable relevant experience and an academic orientation well-suited to the realization of the specified goals. However, there are also a few reasons to have reservations. Below I document some of these pros and cons. Relevant Experience Briefly, I have been a university faculty member since the mid 1970s, serving extended periods at three different universities (6 years full-time at the University College of Cape Breton, 8 years as a research associate and primarily part-time instructor at the University of Western Ontario, and 7 years at the University of Winnipeg). UCCB was formed by amalgamating a community college and a teaching college affiliated with St. Francis Xavier, whereas Western is a large research-oriented institution. This range of experience at different institutions and different types of institutions provides a useful background for administration at UofW, which is an intermediate size institution that strives to balance teaching and research functions. I was extremely active in the academic affairs of UCCB, serving several terms as President of the Faculty Association, leading negotiations with UCCB and implementing regression solutions to salary equity problems, participating in the provincial association's lobbying efforts, representing faculty at national meetings of CAUT, serving as Secretary of the Faculty Senate, chairing for several years a committee that oversaw the operation of a BA in Community Studies program (the program included work-placement and interdisciplinary problem-centered courses), undertaking institutional analysis of the predictors of student success at university and reporting the results at a conference on higher education in Canada, strengthening student services for students at risk (e.g., preparatory writing and math programs), contributing to the development of campus computing facilities (including a long-distance link to Halifax back in the 1970s prior to the internet), writing public comments on higher education for the Cape Breton Post, contributing to graduate professional development for teachers through the Atlantic Institute of Education in Halifax, and serving as course advisor for interdisciplinary Problem-Centered Courses in the Community Studies BA program (e.g., groups of students examined real-world problems, such as learning disabilities, from different academic and applied perspectives). Although my position at Western was part-time and primarily involved research and teaching duties, including mentoring of graduate students in the lab with which I was associated, I did participate somewhat in the operations of the Psychology Department and the university, contributing to a review of computing services in the Department and the implementation of a local network, and serving on a committee that oversaw institutional-wide computing. I also taught a variety of courses relevant to university affairs, including quantitative courses in statistics, educational psychology, and a graduate course in Educational Assessment. During this time I wrote not only standard empirical and review papers in cognitive psychology, but also an applied paper on cognitive psychology and education and a hybrid philosophy/empirical research paper on some fundamental questions about the nature of science. During my 7 years at UofW I have been very active in departmental, institutional, and external affairs. At the department level, I have: (1) initiated and guided several important changes to the Psychology curriculum that have served our students well (e.g., strengthening the research methods components of our program), (2) chaired our Honours Committee for several years, (3) initiated the first comprehensive handbook for our honours students (Psychology accounts for approximately 20% of all Honours graduates at UofW), (4) developed one of the earliest homepages on campus (http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/~psych), (5) introduced numerous aspects of computing into the methods and statistics course that I teach to approximately 40 Honours students each year (e.g., statistical analysis, the internet, e- mail, basic programming, file transfers, word-processing), (6) written a statistics text for that same course, (7) started a complementary text including computer-related and other material (e.g., scientific writing, effective spoken presentations, preparing graphs and figures, measurement, philosophy of science, doing literature reviews), (8) helped to develop and coordinate the computing lab for psychology, (9) organized for the past few years an undergraduate research conference that includes presentations by 40-70 undergraduate students from various Prairie universities (e.g., UofW, UofM, Regina, Saskatchewan, UND, NDSU), (10) mentored undergraduate students in a variety of ways beyond regular courses (e.g., as thesis advisor or second reader, as their employer on my NSERC grant, as supervisor for NSERC summer scholarships), (11) commented extensively on the direction of the Department and how it operates, and (12) maintained an active research program that has been renewed twice for NSERC funding since my arrival at UofW. At the institutional level, I have: (1) developed and continue to help perform university-wide course evaluations, (2) participated in the development of the Rannie 4-year degree proposal, (3) served as Chair of the University Honours Committee, (4) served on Senate and numerous other committees concerned with academic and related matters (e.g., Academic Standards, the Advisory Committee on Computing and its various predecessors), (5) served on the UWFA negotiating team that resolved our disagreement last year, (6) served last year and this (as VP) on the UWFA Executive and various other related committees (e.g., the JCC on faculty workload), (7) prepared guides for computing at UofW (e.g., the old Vax, Unix, Pine), (8) served as Treasurer for the Faculty and Staff Club, (9) informally wrote various "documents" commenting on developments at UofW (e.g., Administrative Studies, Continuing Education, the Centre for Learning Technologies, the University Budget ... admittedly these would be perceived more or less positively by different people in the UofW community), (10) participated two years ago in the highly successful lecture series on postmodernism (I essentially argued for the legitimacy of the traditional academic emphasis on rational and empirical approaches to knowledge), (11) given several guest lectures to the experimental Ways of Knowing course (advocating for a scientific approach to understanding human behaviour), (12) participated in various institutional research efforts (e.g., survey of UofW graduands undertaken with former Dean of Student Services, discussions with student advisors, analyses of course evaluations), and (13) served as an original member of the Arts and Science Teaching Development Committee (based in part on a recommendation made in my original course evaluation report). With respect to external affairs, I have: (1) served on the Joint Advisory Committee that previously oversaw joint graduate programs with UofM, (2) been an adjunct for several years at UofM and have taught a graduate course there and currently supervise several MA students (one holding an NSERC PGS who will continue to be funded by NSERC for his PhD under my supervision), (3) written numerous comments on higher education in the province (e.g., letters to the editor published in the Winnipeg Free Press, a presentation on Bill 32), (4) represented UWFA at the recent CAUT national meeting, (5) served for 3 years on NSERC's Life Sciences/Psychology Scholarship Committee as member and last year as national Chair, (6) participated in and continue to work on changes to the NSERC Scholarship process (including advocating for basic science in addressing NSERC's current practice of steering funds toward applied engineering and computer science), (7) given several public lectures and media interviews on topics related to psychology or science in general (e.g., phonics vs. whole-language approaches to the teaching of reading in elementary schools, psychic phenomena, cognitive effects of aging), (8) served on the planning committee of a national organization of experimental psychologists (Canadian Society for Brain, Behaviour, and Cognitive Science) for an upcoming Winnipeg conference (included preparation of conference homepage), and (9) been Chair of the Perception, Memory, and Cognition section of the Canadian Psychological Association. Finally, I have a number of technical competencies that would serve well in the Dean's position. My research, teaching, and governance activities have necessitated the development of many computer skills, including familiarity with programming (Basic, Pascal), data base (DBase, SQL), and statistical (SPSS, SAS, BMDP) languages, as well as with the usual computer packages (e.g., word-processing, spreadsheets, e-mail, ftp, browsers). I teach these skills to students, have consulted widely with interested faculty, have worked on committees here and elsewhere to promote use of computers, and have written documentation for students and faculty. In addition, I communicate well both in writing and speaking, which would be important within the faculty and perhaps especially in interaction with the wider community (e.g., business leaders, educators, politicians). Finally, I have demonstrated in my research, teaching, and governance activities an intellectual capacity for effective problem-solving and for integrating broad areas (e.g., applying a cognitive model to diverse educational topics, using the notion of inhibition to explain phenomena across a very broad range of areas in psychology and neuroscience). I believe that a UofW would benefit from a similarly broad and problem-solving approach to the issues facing the Faculty of Arts and Science. My Academic Orientation The preceding list of my academic activities and competencies demonstrates a high degree of commitment to all areas of faculty responsibility: teaching, research, and service. Many faculty at UofW, however, could probably claim as much or more academic experience. What perhaps sets me apart is my strong academic background in these areas (i.e., teaching, research, and service are areas in which I have demonstrated an academic interest as well as being an active participant). My academic perspective has developed because cognitive psychology, my primary area of professional expertise, includes learning, memory, knowledge, problem-solving, decision-making, language, and other competencies central to university teaching, research, and governance, in addition to more fundamental processes studied in my basic research. I also have a long-standing professional interest in education, starting out as a high-school English teacher, conducting research on student success at university, teaching educational psychology, and writing scholarly papers and popular articles on educational topics. My own conviction, consistent with my belief in the practical value of academic research and study, is that such scholarly activities provide a strong foundation for educational practice, whether as teacher, researcher, or administrator. With respect to university teaching and curriculum, I am familiar with the relevant scholarly literature on the measurement and development of the qualities of effective instruction and on the numerous benefits of liberal arts education (e.g., appreciation of alternative perspectives, development of critical thinking abilities, communication skills), have undertaken studies of student success, am involved in the analysis of course evaluation information, have published a paper on Cognitive Psychology and Education, have an electronic paper on improving university teaching on my homepage (http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/~clark), and have read widely on the challenges of integrating academic and applied programs (this is a major issue in psychology because of somewhat conflicting foundations for academic and clinical psychology and I also faced this issue overseeing work-placement courses at UCCB). With respect to research and scholarship, not only am I an active scholar with a realistic conception of the challenges facing researchers at institutions such as UofW, but also I have taught statistics and research methods to both undergraduates and graduates, have read widely in philosophy and history of science (including original writings of Galileo, Darwin, and other early scientists), have talked on postmodernism and related critiques of science at UofW and other institutions, have published a paper on the language of psychological researchers, have read widely and reflected extensively on the relative value of basic and applied research, and participate in research that cuts across a broad range (e.g., from molecular brain mechanisms involved in fMRI studies of cognitive processes to impulsivity in delinquent teenagers). This breadth puts me in a good position to appreciate the diverse forms of scholarship characteristic of the Faculty of Arts and Science. With respect to service (particularly collegial decision making), I have read and taught about the research and theoretical literature on impediments and aids to effective decision-making (e.g., group think), have identified parallels between effective institutional decision-making and evolutionary models of science related to my studies of science (i.e., the importance for effective decision-making of broad involvement in the generation and critique of alternative courses of action parallels the view that science proceeds by the generation of diverse ideas and empirical filtering out of deficient ideas), have developed a general model of human cognition in which inhibition (i.e., a kind of "natural selection") plays a central role, and have a strong social science background that encourages an experimental and evaluative attitude to institutional change (e.g., an impersonal and objective perspective on institutional actions that one has promoted and undertaken, a realistic appraisal of our capacity to know with certainty the costs and benefits of alternative actions, a general orientation that actions should be taken in provisional ways that permit evaluation and reconsideration). Possible Reservations I do think my qualities and experience are well-suited to Dean of Arts and Science at UofW, but I am realistic enough to have several reservations about my own suitability and acceptability for the position. An appreciation of these reservations will help me to approach the job with appropriate care and humility. One serious reservation is that I have not demonstrated my capacities in an extended administrator position (e.g., as department Chair or Associate Dean), which leaves much of the preceding as partly an act of faith. The lack of administrator experience arises in part from my holding an interim position for so many years at Western (I was raising my son as a single parent and deemed it undesirable to leave his other relatives in London after an unsuccessful effort with him in Cape Breton) and in part from philosophical differences within the Department of Psychology at UofW. I stood for the position of Chair when it became available 5 years ago, along with one other candidate. An initial ballot resulted in a close vote and on the second ballot I voted for the other candidate, largely because the interests of the Department seemed best-served by a speedy resolution of the issue. I have few concerns about my ability to handle certain duties of administrators (e.g., the technical aspects of budgeting seem manageable given my computer and quantitative strengths, my general familiarity with the university budget as it is reflected in public documents, and access to other individuals with expertise in that area), but other areas seem more uncertain (e.g., the human aspects of administering a collection of academic units with different and sometimes conflicting interests). It is somewhat reassuring that I have demonstrated my capacity to deal with controversial and complex issues on a smaller scale (e.g., the development and operation of course evaluations, which were resisted at the outset and continue to be challenged; the handling of salary inequities at UCCB; participation in negotiations at UCCB and UofW). Notwithstanding the lack of more extensive administrator experience, I believe that my commitment to a deeply collegial and problem-solving style of administering Arts and Science would be effective and would also benefit from the many strengths of chairs, other administrators, and faculty. A second concern is that I have had sometimes impassioned differences of opinion with certain faculty and administrators at UofW. It is possible that these differences might contaminate future interactions, something that could, if it occurred, diminish the effectiveness of a Dean and weaken the Faculty. My experience has generally been, however, that I can continue to work effectively with most people despite differences of opinion, in part I think because I do treat these debates as academic and generally try to appreciate the perspectives of others (even though I might ultimately disagree with their position). As examples, I have been invited to give guest lectures in the Ways of Knowing course despite my outspoken opposition to the course, I work closely with several people in the Dean's Office on course evaluations and other matters despite quite public differences on a number of other issues, my colleagues and I in psychology work well together despite some very fundamental differences about Departmental matters, and I have had differences with other members of UWFA about policies. Moreover, many of these differences concern more how decisions were taken rather than the specific decisions, something that reflects my strong views about the importance of broad consultation and open discussion. It is also worth noting, perhaps, that too much emphasis on "agreeableness" in a future Dean would limit choices to outside people (about whom evidence on this factor would simply be lacking) or to people who have failed to take a stand on any of the many controversial and fundamental issues facing Arts and Science over the past few years, something that hardly seems desirable in a Dean. Nonetheless, it remains possible that others with whom I have had differences of opinion would find it difficult to work with me, and the selection committee should consider carefully this possibility. CONCLUSION In conclusion, I think that my experience and my academic and personal qualities would be well-suited to the challenges currently faced by the Faculty of Arts and Science and by universities in general. My strengths include: (1) experience at three institutions with diverse programs and in diverse roles (researcher, teacher, participant in numerous committees and in faculty association affairs, advocate for higher education to the public and politicians), (2) a sound academic foundation with respect to all aspects of higher education (pedagogy and use of computers in education, epistemology and views of knowledge, effective decision-making, the development of strong academic- applied links), and (3) competencies and personal qualities relevant to development of a strong Faculty (background in research methods and statistics relevant to program evaluation, effective communicator, computer knowledgeable with longstanding experience using computers in teaching and research, strive to understand position of others, generally able to maintain cordial relationships with people despite disagreements).