Merging Communications

By James Whittington, Patrick Broussoul, and Amanda Freeman 

 

Communication Studies and Mass Communication office entrance

“We have a situation here that’s pretty complex.” 

- Dr. Ruminski

This was a comment made by Dr. Elesha Ruminski, a Communication Studies professor at Frostburg State University, concerning the department merger between Communication Studies and Mass Communication.

Dr. Ruminski

Students at Frostburg may like to think that behind closed doors everything runs perfectly, but this is very often not the case. In the fall of 2014, the two departments were merged.
They now share both a budget and office space.

Mergers rarely are something that goes without a hitch, and in the case of the department merger between Communication Studies and Mass Communications, things even got a little more complicated. In the merger, there have been challenges concerning budgeting, tenure-track positions, resources, turn-over rate, office space, and rather ironically, communication. Dr. Melinda Farrington, a Communication Studies professor*, is leaving after this 2017 spring semester. “I think there were more expectations for the integration,” she said.

Why merge the two departments in the first place? What exactly is the difference between the two majors? According to Dr. Marcus Hill, a Mass Communication professor, “The feeling is (for a lot of students) is if you’re not going into production, then you are wasting your time in Mass Communication. Which is not true, but it’s what they think.”

Dr. Hill

 “I feel like students who do go into Communication Studies have a misunderstanding of Mass Communication because unfortunately most of the resources of Mass Communication are production focused (video production). So, students who aren’t in the Mass Communication program, they feel, ‘Well if I don’t want to go into production, there are no resources for me.”

-Dr. Hill

In an FSU “Fast Facts” report for the year 2016, there were 180 students in the Mass Communication program of study, while only 47 students were in Communication Studies (out of a total school-wide enrollment of 4,884 students) is clear that between the two departments, Mass Communication is the powerhouse for enrollment.

Considering that the two disciplines are very much related, even sharing some of the same courses for their majors, a department merger considering recent budget cuts seemed to some like a good idea, especially considering the circumstances.

According to professor Christine Willingham, a Communication Studies professor, “The pressure on enrollment is causing budget cuts.” Students live in an age now that pushes for STEM majors over the humanities due to job opportunities that a field presents and enrollment numbers in certain humanities majors are diminishing.

Professor Willingham

 Dr. Sheri Whalen, a Mass Communication professor and Chair of the Department of Communication, agreed by saying that, “The reason for (the merger) is budget. Most of the time it comes down to the numbers.” However, she also continued by saying that, “We spend a lot of time hiring” and “Every year we apply to tenure-track a faculty.” So, despite issues with budgeting, there are still frequent opportunities (though is this due in part to turn-over rate?)

Dr. Whalen

Between the two departments, there are fourteen professors/lecturers/instructors. Mass Communications has five tenure and tenure-track professors while Communication Studies has only one.

Amongst multiple discussion, there was a recurring topic: faculty turn-over rate. In 2017, there has been two confirmed faculty leaving, and two that are possibly departing in the near future.

Dr. Melinda Farrington, who is leaving for another position after the spring 2017 semester ends, stated, “I think there were more expectations for the integration.” She went on to explain her own situation for leaving.

Regarding her departure, Dr. Farrington stated that “There are no professional opportunities for me here, now or future” and that “There’s a lack of permanent positions.” Dr. Marcus Hill did not comment specifically about his departure.

On the subject of attaining tenure-track, there is a little ambiguity present in the department. Dr.  Farrington stated, “I’m not aware of how to go from contractual to tenure track.” Problems of clarity on this issue were expressed by professor Willingham as well. “There’s an inconsistency in the process.”

Dr. Ruminski expressed her own opinion on this issue.

“The Provost is not communicating with the tenure-track faculty.” 

 - Dr. Ruminski

According to Dr. Ruminski, “We need to do better with communication.”
Before the merger happened, Dr. Ruminski and her colleagues requested that a consulting service should be used, but that never came to fruition. “As early as 2014, my Communication Studies colleagues and I were requesting that administration support an organizational change process, including external consulting assistance… since I could foresee challenges and wanted the program merger to serve as a constructive model for change management. My hope is that as the new provost arrives we will get more support, but we are not sure how to proceed or what to expect.”  

Dr. Whalen, who is the Chair of the Department of Communication, said, “Contractual faculties don’t have the benefits” but tenure/tenure-track faculty take on a heavy workload. “A lot of work falls under a few people.” On her own experience with acquiring tenure-track, she stated that “I was non-tenure track for five years before converting (to tenure-track).”

Another issue that the merged departments face is the problem of resources. According to Dr. Marcus Hill, “With any department merger, there is always potential for tension… (in) Mass communication, we have a T.V. studio which requires way more financing in terms of equipment than say what Communication Studies may need on their end. So sometimes there is tension with that. Cameras are expensive. Monitors are expensive. Cables are expensive… all this stuff is very expensive.”.

Considering the differences in equipment used by the majors, there would be some obvious differences in the distribution of the budget, but can two former departments always be "objective" about who “deserves” what amount of resources under one budget? According to Dr. Ruminski, there is a particular situation where “Mass Communication’s need for an engineer is overstepping Communication Studies’ need of a PEN (tenure-track) staff.”

In describing “possible” tensions from the merger, Dr. Farrington stated, “I don’t think there’s any tension.” However, Dr. Farrington also stated, “I feel like there’s a lack of transparency."

Despite the difficulties, Dr. Farrington did still conclude by saying, “I have true gratitude for the school.”

All that said, are these issues only limited to internal departmental challenges from the merger? On the difference between the two disciplines, Dr. Hill commented, ““Mass communication studies and Communication studies has a long history of people saying, ‘no they should be the same thing’ or ‘no they should be separate.’ So that’s just a huge conflict in and of itself, not just in the university, but in the field, period.”

Despite their differences and similarities, another common discussion was campus-wide faculty and student “morale.”

“Campus-wide faculty morale is low.” 

- Professor Willingham

 “Morale is low in the department and campus,” Dr. Ruminski said. “There is no campus-wide unity,” Dr. Farrington said. Clearly, there is a problem here that extends beyond just the merger.

In a “Strategic Planning Process” (SPP) report released by Frostburg State University in the Fall of 2016, it detailed some of these problems that Frostburg State University faces. One portion of the report titled “Truth Trends” stated that concerning the perceived academic reputation of the university, FSU was considered a “Pretty good second choice.”
Throughout SPP report, “low morale” was a prevalent phrase in describing both students and faculty.

So maybe mergers at Frostburg State University brings about some added problems to other issues already present. Department mergers certainly can be a “pretty complex situation” … but the two former departments now under one roof might be able to better communicate to each other in order to deal with these challenges.  

*"Professor" is being used throughout the article in the colloquial sense; it can mean instructor/lecturer/associate professor.