MINUTES OF THE FACULTY HANDBOOK REVISION COMMITTEE
JANUARY 12, 2007, MASON HALL, room D5; 12:00 � 1:30 p.m.
Present:� Kevin Avruch, Lorraine Brown, Rick Coffinberger, Martin Ford, Dave
Harr, Marilyn Mobley, Suzanne Slayden.
Absent:� David Rossell
FHC Presentation
at next BOV Meeting (January 31, 2007):�
Members of the
committee have been invited to attend the next Faculty and Academic Standards
Committee meeting of the BOV next week.��
Rick will prepare a five minute presentation for review at our next meeting
(January 24th).� Any
committee members who wish to attend are most welcome.
Spring Term
Meeting Schedule begins
Wednesday, January 24th � 8:30 � 10:00 a.m. Please inform Meg if you
are unable to attend a meeting.
Discussion:� �Demonstrating Genuine Excellence in
Teaching� received from
Laurie Fathe, Director of the Center for Teaching Excellence re: Sections 2.4 Criteria for Evaluation of
Faculty and 2.4.1 Teaching:
�
A great deal
of scholarship and research about teaching exists.
�
To consider
whether it should be included as an addendum or appendix to the Faculty Handbook; too long for inclusion in FH text; also noted that scholarship may evolve over time.� Perhaps to include an abbreviated
version.�
�
Parallel to
�Excellence in Research,� not all FHC members agree with this.� Not to use parallel wording with tenure and
promotion � must be very careful not to unintentionally make these criteria;
effective is good enough.
�
Use of
�Genuine� seen as offensive and insulting; excellence should be good enough.
�
Does not include content � you may be a star performer,
but what does that mean?�
�
Distance from those in the trenches � diversity issues
in which a third of a class may be non-native English speakers; lack of
resources at Writing Center to address their needs.� Not just to let them fail or pass with C�s; comprehension
problems, poor reading skills in English although students may be working very
hard.� Caveat about generalizations re
international student diversity.� Often
students in top of class are international students.
�
Fallacy of logical types:� may be a wonderful document to assess excellence in teaching, but
is excellence in teaching a necessary requirement for tenure and
promotion?� Not excellence, but effectiveness
in teaching.� Warning if you use
�excellence� in Handbook, will become a standard.
Teaching Track to Tenure
Suppose a department wishes to increase research, would they permit a
candidate to pursue teaching track to tenure?�
Department can define what genuine excellence in teaching and high
competence in research are.� Caution to
be careful in changing words � BOV history on this.� The BOV has asked to Provost to report each year how many cases
in which candidates attain genuine excellence in teaching and in research as
well. CEHD has 80% of genuine excellence in teaching documented; training run
twice a year.�
New teachers encouraged to meet with Laurie Fathe to receive some
training in pedagogy � some may have little teaching experience; can make a
difference on a campus like this because of our diversity. Temptation to teach
as you were taught; this may not work.�
Why do we need to reinterpret standards of excellence? It may be too
simplistic on the teaching side.
How to factor in rigor?� Whether
a faculty member is a high-grader or a low grader?� Several committee members disagree with Laurie Fathe�s assertion
there is no correlation � often evidence does not surface for years after
graduation when alumni identify courses useful to them in their careers.� The Provost wants a little research � either
full sample data collection or representative selection of a larger group.� A very systematic process; most faculty
don�t want to bother with this, a lot of work.�
Six years is not a long time frame for alumni feedback.� Faculty must be good in both areas.
Direct Hires/Equity Issues:� Concern about direct hires not getting a
second-level review � beyond department level.�
Long history of problems re equity hires.�� �Direct hire� means no search conducted; how much truncation of
process can you tolerate?� At department
level usually rare cases where someone brought in with tenure with no candidate
search to dean.� Same problems whether
search or waiver of search. � someone has to decide whether tenured or
not.� Problem of going from department
directly to dean, skipping department level promotion-and-tenure
committee.� In old CAS departments, the
only ones who decide on promotion and tenure are those who have tenure.� In votes on hiring decisions, both tenured
and non-tenured faculty can decide.�
Instructional faculty must have role in deciding promotion and tenure;
expedience of time.� Not to rush through
� if a good quality hire, should be able to get an existing
promotion-and-tenure committee together for a high quality high.� Genuine search separate from tenure
decisions.� Must check box for �waiver
of search� on equity forms.� Useful to
have equity office training for interviewers to avoided off-handed statements,
etc.�
Next meeting:� consideration of 2.3.1Policies
on Recruitment and Employment of Faculty and 2.4 Criteria for Evaluation of
Faculty.
Respectfully submitted,
Meg Caniano
Clerk, Faculty Senate