Final Report of the Committee to Review the College and Divisional Structure

In response to a recommendation from the deans of the College and the Social Sciences Division, Humanities Division, and Physical Sciences Division, the Norman Committee was charged in April of 2016 to evaluate the University’s academic administrative structures relating to their divisions and the College. This report contains the results of the committee’s exploration of possible alternatives for maintaining the benefits of the current structure and recommended changes to resolve existing obstacles and capitalize on emerging opportunities.

Report of the Provost’s Oversight Committee on Online Learning

In 2013, Provost Thomas Rosenbaum appointed the Provost’s Oversight Committee on Online Learning (POCOL) and charged them with: (1) overseeing the University’s first forays into online learning over a two year period; and (2) based on knowledge gained during this period, making recommendations for the University’s future utilization of, and participation in, online learning. To fulfill its charge, the committee oversaw the production of five Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) by faculty members in Booth, PSD, BSD, SSD, and Law.

A Report of the University of Chicago Committee on the Criteria of Academic Appointment (Shils Report)

On 15 July 1970, The Committee on the Criteria of Academic Appointment was appointed by President Edward H. Levi. This Committee was charged with writing a report that would become the basis for evaluating faculty up for promotion. Understanding this report allows for a clearer understanding of the University itself. 

Report of the Provost's Committee on Academic Fraud

In September, 1996, Provost Geoffrey Stone appointed a second Committee on Academic Fraud (the first one was appointed in 1984 by Provost Norman Bradburn). Its charge was (a) to review the existing policies and procedures in light of the University’s experience, the development of discussions and policies elsewhere, and the expectations of external institutions that do or may fund research at the University; and, if necessary, (b) to recommend revisions in the University’s Procedures for Investigating Academic Fraud.