CHSS Restructuring: Your Questions Answered

Planning has been underway for several months regarding a restructuring of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences (CHSS). Here are the facts.

Is CHSS closing?

No.

The University is not dismantling, closing, or shrinking CHSS. No degree programs or majors will be cut.

No faculty or staff positions are being cut.

The plan is being developed collaboratively with participation of faculty, staff and students. The only set element at this stage is the grouping of programs and their faculty by themes (such as languages and literature or social and political systems) rather than relying exclusively on discipline-based departments. This does not mean departments are being eliminated but it is intended to reduce barriers to creating interdisciplinary opportunities for students and provide the flexibility to improve processes and share resources.

CHSS will remain the academic home for all of its current majors and programs.

If CHSS is not closing, then what is being considered?

The College is developing a plan to re-align its structure to address the complex challenges of contemporary life, organize its administration and functions around students’ needs and expectations, and promote innovation and impact by cultivating cross-disciplinary collaboration.

Where does the restructuring process currently stand?

The basics of the new organizational structure has been set.

The College will consist of four yet-to-be-named Schools that will house degree programs and faculty. The naming process for the Schools will be collaborative. The College’s faculty and staff are continuing the work of refining the internal organizations and functioning of the schools, including the role of departments.

The College may also add additional Centers, which will reflect areas of research excellence and community engagement, and participate in the development of Institutes which emphasize research collaboration across colleges.

Has the University decided to eliminate academic departments?

No. Faculty, chairs and staff are working to design the schools. That work is ongoing and is focusing on potential models that retain departmental structure.

Why is the College doing this, and how will it benefit students?

CHSS remains the heart of the university’s core curriculum, but the number of students choosing specific humanities majors has declined. Some majors are down in total enrollment by more than 20% over a five-year period (2021-2025).

The vision is to develop a college oriented around purpose. We want students to understand why we study the humanities and social sciences. At a time when study in these fields is being disparaged in popular press and discourse, these disciplines offer useful lenses to understand fundamental issues affecting humanity today.

The restructuring also seeks to reinvigorate these programs by reducing administrative work, increasing opportunities for faculty-student mentoring, and growing students’ access to interdisciplinary opportunities by removing obstacles to the creation of innovative courses, experiences and programs.

Are you really replacing names like “Department of English” with broad titles like “School of Human Narratives”? Won’t this confuse students and employers?

First, no academic programs are receiving new names. Students will still choose their major based on the name of the program and graduate with a “BA in English” or a “BA in History.” The degree names — the credential that is listed on the diploma and matters to employers — will remain unchanged.

Second, no decision has been made with respect to the future of departments. Models being developed by faculty include departments.

The School structure simply allows students to explore the connections between related fields (like political science and sociology, history and literature) more clearly, facilitating double majors and richer elective choices.

Third, the names of the Schools have not yet been determined

Are you eventually going to cut all Humanities majors and become a business college like Marymount University?

Absolutely not. This initiative is not the first phase of a plan to ultimately eliminate majors or programs. To insinuate otherwise, by likening this effort to an institution that eliminated humanities majors, is patently false.

The goal is to increase interest in critically important disciplines through a new organizational structure that provides greater space for interdisciplinary opportunities for students and enhances efficiency.

Is the University prioritizing international students and thereby taking away opportunities from prospective students in America and current Montclair students?

Absolutely not. The University is committed to expanding access to high-quality educational opportunities for all students.

Enrolling more international students is part of the University’s overall strategy, to both enliven the intellectual community and create a sound financial condition. This is beneficial to all Montclair students – from New Jersey, other US states and the rest of the world – because it allows the expansion of opportunities at Montclair State University.

Any insinuation that current or future students will be deprived anything based on growth in international enrollment is false.

Recent media coverage suggests this restructuring will erase traditional disciplines like History or English. Is the University devaluing these fields?

No. We value the humanities highly and want them to thrive in a modern context and attract more interest.

The traditional silo model has seen declining enrollments and reduced visibility nationwide. By critically examining structure as a barrier to innovation and interdisciplinarity, we are not erasing disciplines but trying to create an environment for them to thrive. The degrees, the faculty, and the rigor remain in place as do the many institutions that support disciplines beyond the University (such as academic journals, professional associations, conferences and peer review).

Critics also argue that the new structure uses “corporate” or “vacuous” language — such as “synergy” and “schools” — to mask a reduction in faculty autonomy and an increase in administrative control. Is this true?

No. Many institutions – from liberal arts colleges to major research institutions – have embraced multidisciplinary “Schools” to foster collaboration. Faculty will remain the stewards of the curriculum and retain their role in their hiring process. Restructuring would change bureaucracy, not dictate course content.

Is this restructuring really just a way to cut costs or eliminate tenured faculty positions?

No. We want to be crystal clear: There are no layoffs of tenured or tenure-track faculty associated with this restructuring. There are also no layoffs of staff.

We are always working to direct more resources toward student advising, faculty research support and program development.

Will students get new advisors?

No. Advisors will remain the same. For example, Philosophy majors will continue to be advised by Philosophy professors.

Who will be in charge of the curriculum?

Faculty. The creation and approval of curricula will remain the faculty’s responsibilities. This will not change regardless of structure.

Would faculty hiring change under a new structure?

No. Hiring processes and decisions will still be guided by the same University-wide policies set forth by the provost office.

What are the next steps in the process?

Faculty and staff are now working to design the rest of the structure – including the names for the four interdisciplinary Schools – in consultation with administration. The target launch date for the new structure has not yet been determined.

Where can I go if I have questions?

Email the College of Humanities and Social Sciences at chss@montclair.edu.