College of Education
Faculty Advisory Council
April 27, 2016
8:00 – 9:00 a.m.
Hill Hall 314
Dean Hough called the meeting to order at 8:03 a.m.
Attending: David Hough, Deanne Camp, Denise Cunningham, Cory Fearing, Joe Hulgus, Annice McLean, Eric Sheffield, Michele Smith, Gina Wood
1. COE Mentoring Policy Task Force
GLS: Denise Vinton
CLSE: Joe Hulgus
CEFS: Mandy Benedict-Chambers
RFT: Eric Sheffield
Chair: Michele Smith
This newly formed task force will meet with the dean Thursday, May 5th, 8:00 a.m., to discuss their charge.
The dean asked FAC their ideas/suggestions regarding what should be in the policy and what components it should have in order to help new faculty be successful. The discussion started with focus on the formal and informal mentor. FAC agreed that a formal mentor is needed to assist the new faculty member in navigating the system including tenure/promotion policies, importance of attending certain meetings/events, workshops that are available and other items. The formal mentor needs to be appointed by the department head prior to starting and would continue as long as it works favorably for both of them.
The informal mentor could be selected by the new faculty member and would not have to be assigned immediately. This could be someone in the department, the college, the university or even someone they have known through past employment or while earning their degree. The informal mentor shouldn’t be structured. The new faculty member could be encouraged to have one or more informal mentors in line by the end of the first semester.
A suggestion was made to allow for the mentor to claim one service hour for having a mentee. The mentee would know they are being recognized professionally and the mentor would be recognized for doing service in their annual review/tenure/promotion documents.
The document needs to include language to let the mentee know that they may have different mentors over time due to different circumstances which could or could not be listed. A suggestion was made to have a list of duties/responsibilities for the mentor that could be used as a guideline just to make sure certain things are covered such as T/P guidelines, the importance of attending department faculty meetings, service, the Faculty Center for Teaching and Learning, writing workshops available on Fridays and the importance of good citizenship as far as the department and university.
Everyone reviewed the sample appointment letter the Provost mails to new faculty. The letter includes that their teaching assignment may include courses taught in off-campus locations and use of instructional modalities such as ITV or on-line courses. Departments discuss this when interviewing people for positions. The letter is not to be considered a contract. Should this information also be in the mentoring document? The mentor should help the new faculty member understand expectations such as flexibility in teaching different ways: in person, on-line, off campus.
Some of the FAC did not agree that a checklist is needed for the mentor, but most thought there should be general guidelines to make sure major topics such as T/P are emphasized. The main reason for mentoring is to make sure faculty have the information they need to progress, but not to ensure they get tenure/promotion. Mentoring does not guarantee being granted tenure/promotion. It steers new faculty in the right direction, but they are responsible for themselves.
Should a mentor have a role in the new faculty member’s consideration for tenure/promotion? FAC’s position is no, because the relationship should be confidential. Concerns could be expressed in a general form especially if there is a falling out between the two. The role of the mentor is to provide factual information; not to sway either way. The mentor could recuse themselves from being on a committee regarding their mentee’s progress. The role of the mentee in all of this is to be enabled for success; not to be dependent on the mentor.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 a.m.
Submitted by Sharon Lopinot