The dean of GW’s largest school got a harsh message from her faculty last week.
Professors in the Columbian College of Arts and Sciences think Dean Peg Barratt lacks a clear vision for the school and fails to understand the discipline-specific issues in its 42 departments and programs, according to results from a staff survey obtained by The Hatchet.
The survey, conducted anonymously online in December and January, drew responses from more than two-thirds of the school’s 465 full-time professors.
Discontent with her leadership was critical – and widespread.
Senior faculty were more likely to say she’s unable to articulate a clear vision for the college and a majority who took the survey said she doesn’t anticipate problems or seek input before establishing policies.
“Teamwork was not characterized as one of the dean’s stronger attributes,” the evaluation summary said, pointing to failure to work with faculty to develop plans, policies and an “atmosphere of trust.”
The dean earned high marks from faculty in her advocacy for Columbian College within the University, and a majority of professors praised how she followed through on commitments.
Barratt said while she “absolutely” values the review and is listening to faculty suggestions, she will maintain a focus on the upcoming strategic plan and her fundraising levels.
“As a dean, my job is to manage a complex web of multiple stake holders. Naturally I have to make tough decisions in pursuing short-term and long-term goals. In doing so, I try to communicate my reasons, and I understand reasonable people may have reached different decisions,” Barratt, who declined to be interviewed in person, said in an e-mail.
“I take this feedback and all feedback seriously,” she added.
But the University is not solely looking for an academic chief, Provost Steven Lerman said. In an interview about Barratt’s results, the provost said 40 percent of her job is to fundraise. Under University President Steven Knapp, GW’s deans have seen their roles transform from focusing on growing their schools’ academics to prioritizing half their workload for raising money. Barratt is under increased pressure as the Columbian College is expected to be a major supplier of fundraising dollars for the $275 million Science and Engineering Hall.
“It’s a huge challenge, because the plate’s pretty full, so there’s constantly this balancing act,” Lerman said.
Still, Lerman said he will translate "the input to a concrete list of things she can do to address those concerns” during his regular meetings with Barratt.
University spokeswoman Candace Smith did not return requests for comment on how much Barratt has raised during her tenure.
Part of the solution may be to clear off Barratt’s workload. Lerman said he and administrators have discussed with every dean how to delegate to associate deans some of each colleges’ day-to-day operations so deans can focus on vision-setting and courting donors.
Lerman brushed off the harshest criticisms against Barratt, saying the survey is difficult to put in context, because it is the first time a Columbian College dean faced faculty evaluation after the school's bylaws were revised last spring. The deans for the GW School of Business, College of Professional Studies and Graduate School of Education and Human Development also each face periodic review from faculty, according to the schools’ bylaws.
Most of the more than two-dozen Columbian College faculty interviewed by The Hatchet declined to share their opinions on Barratt because the survey by the Dean’s Council was considered private.
Some professors, who asked to remain unnamed because they did not want to publicly criticize their superior, said the survey confirmed their impressions that Barratt lacked a strong academic vision for the college and failed to effectively communicate about departments’ hiring and budget concerns.
“The problem is with vision, the lack of consultation [and] being in a reactive mode rather than a proactive [one]. She’s been a pleasant person to work with, but those stick out,” said philosophy professor Paul Churchill, who has taught at the University since 1975.
In interviews, several professors sympathized with the nuances of a dean’s job, which requires juggling competing departmental needs while following administrators’ vision.
“From my point of view, any dean is in a tough position, because they’re trying to satisfy two different groups,” said Eric Cline, chair of the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations. “She has to make faculty happy and Rice Hall happy. I cannot imagine being in that position. Whatever decision you make you’ll upset somebody.”
Barratt, an alumna, was hired away from her role as the deputy director of research policy analysis and coordination at the National Institutes of Health in 2007 – the last year of former University President Stephen Joel Trachtenberg’s tenure. This is her first deanship.
She also taught psychology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Elizabeth Fisher, a professor of classics who sits on the Dean’s Council, said Barratt compares favorably to the six other deans that have led the college since Fisher came to GW in 1978.
“In my view, she’s doing a good job in a difficult position,” Fisher said. “There are competing interests, and sometimes you just can’t win.”
In a comments section of the evaluation, faculty zoned in on three areas of discontent: Barratt’s proposal last year to move the philosophy department to the Mount Vernon Campus, the Science and Engineering Hall and the 2010 revisions of the general education requirements.
More than 100 faculty from across the college signed a petition last spring to halt the philosophy department’s potential move to the Vern. Philosophy professors had said Barratt made the call without first receiving their input. She reversed the decision a month later, citing the negative impact the move would have on the department’s interaction with students spread between two campuses.
The allocation of research lab space for the Science and Engineering Hall has also sparked debate among Columbian College professors this academic year, as science professors have vied to secure space in the $275-million building. The space assignments, which were finalized last week, left 40 percent of the college’s science faculty without research lab space in the state-of-the-art building, which will open in 2015.
The Dean’s Council – a group of 15 faculty members that advises the dean – and Associate Provost for Academic Planning and Assessment Cheryl Beil developed the evaluation and submitted a detailed report of its results to Barratt and Lerman.
More than two-thirds of the school’s 465 full-time faculty responded to the survey. Revisions to the Columbian College bylaws made last spring call for a faculty evaluation of the dean every three years.
Aliya Karim and Andrea Vittorio contributed to this report.
Sounds like the dean of SPHHS!
She and the Provost will both “brush it off,” believe me. Faculty discontent matters little to them if money is being raised. They hear faculty voices are just so much noise. The academic issues are of secondary importance. Everything the university does these days comes from the top down to us as a “done deal.” We have been reduced to soldiers with marching orders. That review sent a clear message to senior-level administration that after five years of on the job training, we think this Dean is unsuitable. Why are we still waiting to hear the upper level administration’s response to the results of the review? Why have they said nothing to us at all?
It’s not any different or better on the staff side, either. GW’s decidedly corporate mentality is incompatible with many of the hallmarks of an institution of higher learning.
You are right about that.
By the time anything reaches us, decisions have been made. It’s a joke. Our grand strategic plan is a laughable mess of thing, so poorly conceived, so out of touch, having little to do with what the faculty and students prioritize.
I had a chat with Dean Barratt during my sophomore year at a “meet and greet” event for CCAS students. I told her I was majoring in Early Modern European Studies, a small but established program within the Columbian College. She replied “I’ve never heard of it.” Now I’m an alum. All I can say is: Dean Barratt, good luck getting more of my money.
GW in general has so many administrative problems it’s not funny. I have had so much paperwork lost by office staff and so much red tape to cut through across the entire university (especially mine, the School of Engineering and Applied Science). Faculty and staff generally don’t listen and don’t really care either until you go above them and make them care. Some of my classes have been farcical in their disorganization, so frankly the fact that a Dean at the University is being criticized for “lacks a clear vision for the school and fails to understand the discipline-specific issues in its 42 departments and programs” doesn’t surprise me at all.
Higher admins can only benefit from proactive, open dialogue with stakeholders in the departments, schools, and programs they serve. Collaborative problem solving at the institutional level can improve university functions for staff, faculty, and students.
Dean Barrett is a wonderful person for this alum to work with. Her “vision” for the CCAS is well developed at least in her communications with the alums who are close to her. I have know many deans at GW in CCAS most closely, over the past 40 plus years (ye gads), and she is the very best I have known. Her role – like all the deans’ – is a very tough one requiring decisions that by their very nature allocate resources. Such things always create some “issues”. I for one will consult with her and see if there is any way our National Council can help her to overcome these perceptions. We would be impoverished by her loss, I assure you.
“GW in general has so many administrative problems it’s not funny. I have had so much paperwork lost by office staff and so much red tape to cut through across the entire university (especially mine, the School of Engineering and Applied Science).”
The same is true at CSAS. These problems are far worse than what they should be even give the size of the institution. Nobody lest students evaluate the school until you are done with your degree (the exit evaluation).
While working summer session CI Dean Barratt would often times be unable to answer even the simplest of questions posed by incoming students or worse, she would even give a completely wrong answer! Her lack of knowledge about the programs in her college did not go unnoticed by students nor parents and left us having to correct her mistakes. If the University expects the Deans to be representatives of their schools it might want to reevaluate their duty to fundraise- otherwise find someone else to head academics.
The University spends so much time and energy on fundraising because it has one of the lowest rates for alumni giving. This is not a coincidence- the overall experience that students have at GW motivates them to get to graduation and never look back. Let’s have Dean’s that engage in academics, not fundraising; and an administration that puts the focus on improving student life in all aspects. Change the way students feel about the university while they’re here, and you may see alumni giving increase.
“The University spends so much time and energy on fundraising because it has one of the lowest rates for alumni giving. This is not a coincidence- the overall experience that students have at GW motivates them to get to graduation and never look back.”
Very well said! I don’t want to donate another dime to this place.
I have had the good fortune to work with Dean Barratt from the volunteer and alumni perspective. She has always been very receptive to ideas about “improving” the GW experience, and facilitating the discussion with the various constituent groups. I regret that the job of Dean has had to evolve into what it is today, with so much energy devoted to Fund Raising, instead of the traditional academic world. But, it is a new world out there, and there is increased competition. She has no peer over the last ten years that I have been involved.
The role of Dean, like senior management positions in other large organizations,is incredibly complex. There are many priorities and constituencies that often compete and that must constantly be balanced to keep the organization moving forward. From my perspective as an active alumni, donor, and volunteer, Peg Barratt understands these challenges and strives for what is best for Columbian College and GWU. At our National Council meetings, she works to highlight the breadth and depth of the academic programs of Columbian College,the expertise of its faculty, and the promise of its students.
40 percent is fundraising?
Why is it that the Hatchet always does a “hatchet job” on women leaders at GWU, but is afraid to take on the men? Sexist much?
How about the new GSPM head…he’s a real prize.