College of Education Faculty Advisory Council Meeting
May 6, 2015
9:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.
Hill Hall 314
Dean Hough called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
Attending: Paul Ajuwon, Denise Cunningham, Cory Fearing, Kim Finch, Fred Groves, David Hough, Joe Hulgus, Annice McLean, Jim Meyer, Becky Swearingen
- Faculty Research Request
A request for Faculty Research Funding in the amount of $2,714 was discussed.
– Conduct survey through email
– Send surveys home with students
– Have surveys available at Open Houses, Parent-Teacher Conferences
– Fund request to some degree, but with suggestions to explore other avenues, such as funding through Graduate College
Decided: Pay for printing, explore other options for postage, and apply to Graduate College for extra funding. The dean will convey these FAC recommendations to appropriate persons.
- Hiring Plan
A major goal for COE as identified and supported by the Budget Committee, Faculty Advisory Committee, and Leadership Council is to focus on filling more tenure track faculty positions. The Faculty Senate leadership has emailed Dean Hough and others stating their support for the following: When appropriate, consider creating a position that is .50 FTE faculty and .50 FTE staff, in lieu of hiring a 1.0 FTE staff person. Based on this recommendation, CLSE has formed a search committee charged with making a recommendation to the Dean for a position that would fill the data analysis need in the Office of Accreditation, Assessment and Data Management & hold a tenure-track academic rank in an area of need within the department. As other opportunities of this nature are made available, the FAC, Budget Committee, and Leadership Council will consider them. The order of preference remains as follows:
1) 1.0 FTE Faculty
2) .50 FTE Faculty/.50 FTE Staff combined positions
3) 1.0 FTE Staff
The Dean asked the group their opinion on instructor v. tenure track faculty positions.
– Sometimes instructors are hired because of their skills, but do not qualify for a tenure track position.
– On occasion, the department/program only needs an instructor for one or two years because someone is coming back or changes are being made.
-There could be tenured faculty that no longer want to go for promotion or can’t go any further and may be interested in changing to a faculty/staff position, enabling a search for full time tenured faculty.
- Promotion & Tenure Guidelines
The Definition of Research Active Faculty document was finalized and approved at the last meeting.
The annual review process for probationary faculty includes a review/recommendation from the department committee, department head and dean. They would then have five years of reviews prior to tenure decisions. How do you fairly and honestly keep probationary faculty apprised of their status and progress? The FAC discussed ways to keep committees consistent and truthful and to be specific with clear recommendations.
– Have department heads meet with their entire faculty prior to starting the annual review process, which would allow for all faculty members to hear what is expected. Clarity should be given on the guidelines and probationary faculty need to understand the department’s promotion and tenure guidelines. They also need to be responsible and know what is expected of them. The discussion should include examples of “satisfactory” and “unsatisfactory” reviews. Probationary faculty need to know that they may be given “unsatisfactory” in research or service on their first annual review, because they will have had only one semester (and possibly the preceding summer, if approved for a research stipend) to work on research and participate in service. This can and should be acknowledged, and future reviews can then document progress.
-Department Heads should have special training for the committee chairs, which could also include the dean.
– Probationary faculty need to be assigned a good mentor that will help them understand departmental guidelines and expectations for successful teaching, service and research.
- Support for Faculty Involvement in Local, State, Regional, National and International Organizations
The first recommendation was to remove “local” organizations. There are times when new faculty are unable to get on committees, especially in their first year. Some do have opportunities to be on state, regional, etc., committees, but do not have funds available to attend. It would be helpful to get them involved in state, regional, etc., organizations. This would support the goals of the university and is a requirement for working toward tenure and promotion. Dean Hough will draft a proposal and bring it to the next meeting.
- Probationary Faculty Supports
Starting in August, the dean will meet monthly with all probationary faculty. Besides financial support, what types of supports can we provide for probationary faculty?
Discussion: Have someone review their dossier before submitting it. (This should be done by their mentor.) This would include making sure they are specific regarding their involvement on committees or in organizations. They should include documentation when they can.
Per the prior discussion (see #4 above) make support for state, regional, national and international leadership roles available for probationary faculty FIRST, and then tenured faculty as funds might remain. Dean Hough will discuss this with the Budget Committee and ask for a recommendation.
- Summer School Revenue Share
Greg Rainwater will meet with the Budget Committee on Friday to review a new revenue sharing formula for summer school. Colleges will now be able to keep a portion of the funds if there is a profit after university expenses are covered. The Budget Committee will decide what to do with any money received. It could be put in the summer school fund for the following year or used for something else. The key is how much faculty are paid to teach a section and how many students they have.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:05 a.m.
Submitted by Sharon Lopinot