In many institutions departmental chairpersons are elected by the faculty members, while in many other institutions departmental chairs are appointed by the faculty dean.
Does a chairperson's performance depends on whether she/he were appointed or elected? which system to you think is better?
Dear Prof. Nasser, I believe that their is a third option that is somewhat in between. Deans and Chairs and probably the rectors, in my opinion, should be appointed based on their promise to deliver and lead while at the same time they shall be dis-appointed (as they disappointed the community) when they fail to deliver or lead. How can this be done?. Sort of informal election; i.e. a new chair/ dean/... etc should be interrogated, preferably in a public meeting of all staff,.etc., on his views of where the department will head to under his leadership and what he/she is willing to achieve. It is not necessary, and even not important in my view that all contribute to the voting, a smaller committee can decide, however, having his ideas and views public is important so that a reference is made upon which failure/success can be measured by the whole community (and the original or equivalent committee which appointed him). In a democratic community, having that failure was evident mounts pressure for a change. As suggested above by colleagues, elections can spoil the educational process while appointment by a higher ranking official (e.g. a chairperson by the dean) can result in accomplice management practices (I appointed him, I am thankful, I can serve you, I can replace you, He is fearful, I will please you, the rest of the community is forgotten....).Thanks. @Aldmour
It is a policy level question, basically. Well, in my opinion department chairperson should be appointed. In case of "elected" politics would emerge among faculty members and the potential department chairperson would be always busy in pleasing maximum faculty members in order to get their support. This kind of activity would definitely spoil the learning environment of the university.
It is a democratic policy that the chancellor, the dean as well as the head of departments are elected by all the staffmembers - academic and administration - and even by the representatives of the students
@Guido J. M. Verstraeten. It seems that procedure to appoint department chairperson is not the same in your and country of mine. In my country students can't contribute in this type of "election". Therefore, we may receive different answers which is itself a good democratic practice!
In India, generally seniority is the criterion for departmental chair person.
I'd love to add an answer here, but honestly I don't really know in our universities. But the only thing that I realise, we don't look at seniority anymore. Currently, the Dean of my faculty is less than 40 years old, and being a faculty member at least 12 years.
Dear Prof. Nasser, I believe that their is a third option that is somewhat in between. Deans and Chairs and probably the rectors, in my opinion, should be appointed based on their promise to deliver and lead while at the same time they shall be dis-appointed (as they disappointed the community) when they fail to deliver or lead. How can this be done?. Sort of informal election; i.e. a new chair/ dean/... etc should be interrogated, preferably in a public meeting of all staff,.etc., on his views of where the department will head to under his leadership and what he/she is willing to achieve. It is not necessary, and even not important in my view that all contribute to the voting, a smaller committee can decide, however, having his ideas and views public is important so that a reference is made upon which failure/success can be measured by the whole community (and the original or equivalent committee which appointed him). In a democratic community, having that failure was evident mounts pressure for a change. As suggested above by colleagues, elections can spoil the educational process while appointment by a higher ranking official (e.g. a chairperson by the dean) can result in accomplice management practices (I appointed him, I am thankful, I can serve you, I can replace you, He is fearful, I will please you, the rest of the community is forgotten....).Thanks. @Aldmour
Although I live a democratic country, the heads of my department and school have never been elected. On the other hand, only very people are interested in the posts.
I have worked in both systems and I must say for me there wasn't much of a difference. I believe if you do what is good and/or needed for the department and specially learning it will be recognized by everyone. If you ask me I still prefer elected.
Dear Dr. Nasser Abdellatif,
In my opinion it should comprise of both i.e. election and selection. By election a panel of 3 will be forwarded to dean by the department. The dean can forward these names with his selection views to the vice-chancellor for the final selection of the candidate for chairing the department.
Appointing or electing departmental chair depends on in which country the university is located and what the specific academic recruitment policies for the universities concerned.
In USA age is not a determining factor for such selection, experience and academic credential are important, but off course it takes time for some one to achieve those. Here chairs are usually selected. Newly selected chairs have some advantages and disadvantages to successfully run the department as it takes long time to understand individual employees and many students. But not being previously associated with the department the newly appointed chairs usually have some flexibility and unbiased nature to manage the system and the employee.
I think election is a better way to choose a chairperson or a head or sth...
Cuz it prevents the cheating in any cases that we may know or even seen these days in any kind of election...
However i think that the voters of election must be competent guys in the topic of election for chairperson...
I think that an elected chair can do a better job as he is already accepted by other members
Dear Hamid
In the case of election the faculty members in the department are the ones allowed to vote. Most universities in the USA follow this system. Chair are elected while deans are appointed.
Both systems can be manipulated. It is important that the chairperson may not have too many privileges and influence. The second important point is that the chairperson should be renewed periodically.
I agree with Kamal what we need is a person with good leadership skills and we need to provide her/him with good support.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education
- Higher Education