Deb Jordan, Chair of the Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies
jordand@ecu.edu
COMMENTS MADE TO THE PPC ON WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 2012 on behalf of the Department of
Recreation and Leisure Studies
First, I’d like to thank the PPC for all its work and commend everyone on an incredibly professional
approach to the process and openness to feedback. This has not been an easy task for any one of
you. I’ve been most impressed.
I appreciate being in a College with a Dean who takes fiscal responsibility seriously. One of the many
benefits of being in this college is that we all know that resources are finite and we work that way.
We share staff between departments, the departments work together to see who is most in need of
what resources when, and we share policies and innovations across the departments.
RCLS includes four fully entwined degrees:
(1) BS in Recreational Therapy (RT)
(2) BS in Recreation and Park Management (RPM)
(3) MS in Recreational Therapy Administration (RTA)
(4) MS in Recreation and Park Administration (RPA)
The department also offers two graduate certificates: (1) Aquatic Therapy and (2) Biofeedback.
The individual degrees and certificates were not addressed in the proposed split of CHHP, and we are
uncertain as to the meaning—were the differences in needs and focus overlooked? Was it assumed
that it would be best for the undergraduate and graduate degrees in RT and the undergraduate and
graduate degrees in RPM to all go to the College of Business? Where would the Certificates fit?
The February white paper indicated that any changes…
(1) Must be sensitive to short-term disruptions and hidden costs
We’ve already missed out on this… so many hours of meetings, fear and anxiety, hallway chatter,
PPC time, etc. In addition, we need to consider the time and additional lost productivity that will
come with any physical moving of units—faculty will lose even more productivity.
Additional hidden costs are those related to equity issues with a move into a different college.
We would need to consider equalizing in terms of contracts—9 months vs 12 months—if RT
were to be moved to Allied Health we would be looking at an additional 3 months of salary for
those faculty, and for RPM in regard to salary, the differentials are incredibly significant— across
the ranks salaries are $15,000 to 38,000 higher in the proposed college than what faculty earn
now. We must consider the inherent unfairness if units were moved and full professors were
consistently making $20,000 to $30,000 less than assistant professors in another department
within the same college. Morale would be an incredible challenge, faculty members would likely
leave, and hiring new faculty would become increasingly difficult.
Yet another hidden cost is related to a need for instructional resources. Space for activity-and
clinically-based classes, and with teaching needs. Right now we make full use of three fixed-term
faculty members and several adjunct instructors. They are the lowest paid faculty members and
they each carry 4/4 loads with full classes—30 to 70 students. It doesn’t make sense to identify
2
this as an area for cost-savings. In addition, those same individuals teach in both the RT and RPM
degree areas. If the department is split into different colleges new hires will be needed to fill the
gaps left.
Further, both RT and RPM have graduate degrees. The MS in RTA is one of three in the nation;
the MS in RPA is the largest in the state and region. Thus, there will be ongoing needs for a
graduate director for each degree program as well as continuing marketing, promotional, and
recruiting efforts.
(2) Appropriately value potential for enhanced collaboration
Increased collaboration will require physically moving units so that familiarity, respect, and trust
can be established. Simply moving units will not guarantee any increase in collaboration;
particularly with inherent differences in worldview—I’ll mention shortly.
(3) Minimize harm to ECU
The degrees and certificates in RCLS are unique in a number of ways; and right now all degree
programs have positive national reputations. Changing administrative units could alter this
significantly as resource issues likely will come to bear.
In the Second PPC Report, Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies was rated a 2A program,
and fit into Group 3. The Report stated: Group Three’s high standing is most attributable to the
quality of these programs in terms of their instructional programs, research or scholarly
achievements, and service (especially in terms of regional engagement). Thus, we were quite
surprised to find a suggestion that our department be split from the rest of the College, and more
than likely, divided in two (i.e., moving to different colleges that would effectively completely
separate our currently unified degree programs). Separating the degree programs would result in a
loss of synergy (we share 12 credit hours at both the BS and MS levels, as well as graduate assistants)
and the need to add more courses to each degree program to make up for the loss of the common
core.
The BS in RPM is the only one in eastern NC. RPM is a discovery major—students typically find the
degree after trying one or more majors; RPM could easily lose its visibility if combined with HMGT
and placed in the COB. The “discovery major” distinction is not unique to ECU; recreation and leisure,
as well as RT, programs across the country face the same challenge.
RPM is a nationally accredited program and to retain accreditation, some structural elements are
required; these could be compromised if combined with HMGT. The MS in RPA is one of three such
master’s degrees in NC, and ECU typically enrolls more than twice than the other two MS programs
in the state at any one time (NCSU and UNC-G).
The RT undergraduate program is currently undergoing accreditation review, and a merger with a
different unit could result in similar challenges in terms of administration, coursework, numbers of
faculty, and so on. The MS in RTA is one of three such stand-alone programs across the country. It is
the only one of its kind in NC and the region, and retaining the stand-alone degree is necessary to
continue to recruit the types of students we serve.
The faculty in RCLS are incredibly synergistic, cohesive, and focused on quality preparation of
students and providing leadership to the state. All four degrees (the undergraduate and graduate)
3
have a “common core” of classes, taken by students in RT/RPM (undergraduate) and RTA/RPA
(graduate) that reflect the common learning outcomes from the leisure studies disciplinary core.
Underlying philosophies differ
All of RCLS is about quality of life, wellness, healthful living, and understanding how leisure
contributes to those outcomes. This is why we fit so well where we are currently housed. Business is
about entrepreneurship and business models; HMGT is about lodging, food, and conventions. RPM is
about health and wellness in the outdoors, military settings, on campuses, and in communities. In
addition, RPM is a nationally accredited program that necessitates autonomy and authority in its
administration (personnel, budget, curriculum planning, course scheduling, etc.)—this would be at
risk if that unit were to combine with HMGT, which has 45 required core credits; the COB has 12
credits of required core, and, of course, its own accreditation standards—RPM would have great
difficulty fitting in its own accredited curriculum with the other two.
The RT program (both degrees) would be a better fit within the College of Allied Health than the
COB, although even that move would very likely result in lost synergies currently in existence. It is
clear that the RT degrees and certificates would not fit in COB based on values, philosophies, goals,
or career desires of students. Values and philosophical challenges exist between RT and Allied
Health; one of the foundations of RT is recreation and leisure; thus, a clear connection between RT
and the broader disciplines within RCLS remains, regardless of where RT is housed. The RT curriculum
includes both RCLS and RCTX prefix courses.
Thus, dividing HHP into a wide range of other colleges will result in lost synergies; and add several
costs such as those related to salaries, contracts, and internal leadership. Program accreditation
could be at risk, the underlying values of the identified potential home colleges are quite a bit
different from the shared values of health, wellness, and quality of life that we currently have in
CHHP. That is where the strength of the College comes from – all the units in HHP are headed in the
same direction, with similar and complementary focuses.
Thank you.