District assignments are based on three factors: title, academic discipline (as defined by the UDDS code) and location. The current scheme was implemented in 1989-90 after being approved by the representatives of the Academic Staff Assembly (ASA).
These three factors are each considered, although not necessarily with equal weight or significance across all districts. The primary factor is title. In some areas (such as the Kegonsa Research Campus and clinical faculty located at Physicians Plus clinics) location is the next factor. For most academic staff in locations considered “on-campus,” academic discipline (UDDS) is second to title in deciding where a staff member will be districted.
Based on extensive discussion and contact with representatives and many other academic staff, a conscious effort was made to provide opportunities for access to governance to all academic staff, to as wide an audience as possible, within the context of the incredibly diverse group of titles administered under the heading “academic staff.” These districting principles were approved by members of the ASA.
Districts grouped by title provide the advantage of grouping people appointed in positions with similar educational requirements and potentially similar concerns (such as job security for research-funded staff in Category B researcher districts).
The unclassified title guidelines were used to make the first pass of separation of districts into four groupings:
Within each of these four groupings, discipline and location are used to determine the district placement. The grouping of Category A academic staff clearly contains the widest variety of titles.
However, Category A academic staff who are appointed in “higher level administrative” or “supervisory” titles are typically districted separately (for example, see Public District Profiles, 48x districts [excluding 481]). Generally, staff in this group have campus-wide influence as part of the responsibilities of their job, and/or have many alternatives to effect change on campus. By grouping these supervisory people in separate districts, they benefit from sharing common concerns. In addition, academic staff with non-supervisory titles are more likely to gain a greater voice and access to governance through representation in the ASA. This enables the perspectives of both supervisor and supervisee to be heard and voted, and limits the potential for conflict of interest.
This logic is intended to provide diverse perspectives within the broad range of academic staff titles on the Madison campus.