|
The purpose of this model is to provide a common vocabulary to describe the varied work faculty members do and an agreed framework for discussions of that work. The model establishes some core standards, for instance that a typical semester-long, three-credit course ordinarily represents 10% of faculty effort for the academic year, and that all faculty must allocate at least 10% of their time to professional service activities essential to the life of the institution. The model also requires that each department establish, in writing, appropriate class sizes (equating to the 10% teaching effort) for the various courses taught; and that equivalencies for non-standard faculty activities (e.g., supervision of significant student research), be formally negotiated and incorporated into the faculty assessment process. Likewise, disciplines with writing-intensive courses, laboratory courses, studio and field experiences, etc., or with unusually heavy supervising and mentoring responsibilities shall establish teaching load equivalencies through the shared governance process on the basis of this model. The model does not dictate, or even favor, any particular mix of activities. That mix is for individual faculty members and their chairs to agree upon (with their dean’s approval) based on institutional needs and KSU’s shared governance process. But the application of the model’s core standards and the common vocabulary across campus should enable KSU to distribute faculty work more wisely and fairly, to assess it more accurately, and to reward it more appropriately. In order to ensure this distribution, the norms for workload effort expected in the area of teaching, scholarship/creative activity, and service for the typical tenure-track/tenured teaching faculty are 60%, 30%, and 10%, respectively. Workload adjustments are made from these norms. Faculty for whom a different model would be more appropriate will collaborate with their chair/director in the selection of that model. A faculty member’s strengths, interests, and past three years’ annual reviews will serve as the primary guide to the selection of the model.
The Workload Model and Shared Governance
Each department and college will establish flexible guidelines as to expectations of faculty members in the following three faculty performance areas:
- Teaching
- Scholarship and Creative Activity (S/CA); and
- Professional Service.
These guidelines and the individual Faculty Performance Agreements negotiated under them will be established through KSU’s shared governance process by bodies and officers detailed in the University Handbook under “Shared Governance.” Given that department review guidelines are most discipline-specific and are approved by deans and the Provost as consistent with college and University standards, department guidelines are understood to be the primary basis for P&T decisions. As with other faculty-focused KSU policy documents, amendments to the University’s Workload Model are made by administrators and Faculty Senate working consultatively through the shared governance processes outlined in the University Handbook.
The Workload Model and Faculty Performance Agreement
(See also KSU Faculty Handbook Section 3.2 - Overview of Faculty Responsibilities .)
Each individual faculty member shall divide professional efforts among the three faculty performance areas noted. That division of effort will be reflected in a Faculty Performance Agreement (FPA) between the individual faculty member and the University (see KSU Faculty Handbook Section 3.12 ). Negotiation of individual FPAs allows for diversity across colleges and departments and, within departments, among individual faculty members. Colleges and departments, in consultation with faculty stakeholders, determine which FPA combinations best suit their college and departmental objectives. FPAs may change from year to year and even from semester to semester as needs and opportunities change. Consistent with the University’s culture of shared governance, the details of an individual FPA are worked out in consultation between the chair and the faculty member and are subject to final approval by the dean. Faculty for whom a different model would be more appropriate will collaborate with their chair/director in the selection of that model. A faculty member’s strengths, interests, and past three years’ annual reviews will serve as the primary guide to the selection of the model.
If the faculty member and the chair cannot reach agreement on the FPA, the dean will make the final determination.
Instructional Responsibilities
Illustrative Example of the Workload Model
Some examples of possible FPA workload combinations appear below. The norm for workload effort expected in the area of teaching, scholarship/creative activity, and service for the typical tenure-track/tenured teaching faculty is 60%, 30%, and 10%, respectively. The examples reflect various percentages of effort in the three faculty performance areas. The examples given are merely illustrative. Individual FPAs can vary almost infinitely, as agreed by the faculty member and chair and as approved by the dean.
Some Illustrative Workload Examples*
*Actual FPA percentages for each faculty member will be negotiated with the department chair as part of annual review.
Teaching Emphasis Workload
4-4 course load Teaching…………………………………80
S/CA……………………………………………………………..10
Service…………………………………………………………..10
Total …………………………………………………………….100
Teaching - Scholarship/Creative Activity Balance*
3-3 course load Teaching…………………………………60
S/CA……………………………………………………………..30
Service………………………………………………………….10
Total ……………………………………………………………100
*Baseline Norm expectations for tenure-track/tenured teaching faculty.
Teaching - Service Balance
3-3 course load Teaching…………………………………60
S/CA……………………………………………………………..10
Service………………………………………………………….30
Total ……………………………………………………………100
Teaching - Scholarship - Service Balance
3-3 course load Teaching…………………………………60
S/CA……………………………………………………………..20
Service………………………………………………………….20
Total ……………………………………………………………100
Scholarship/Creativity Activity Emphasis
2-2 course load Teaching…………………………………40
S/CA……………………………………………………………..50
Service………………………………………………………….10
Total …………………………………………………………..100
Administration Emphasis
Service…………………………………………………………..70
S/CA……………………………………………………………..10
Teaching………………………………………………………..20
Total ……………………………………………………………100
|
Search
Menu
