Dr. Black’s Talking Points Memo

on implementation of the new faculty review process and standards.

Circulated to “Faculty” on Dec. 4; discussed at Faculty Senate Dec. 11, 2006

 

Talking points to the Faculty regarding the implementation of our new faculty review procedures:

·              We should emphasize that this first year is a pilot year for the new guidelines and processes.  We need careful and clear communication among the faculty, chairs, deans, and the Provost as we move through this process for the first time together.  As we see what works and what doesn't work, we'll make appropriate changes.

·              We are reconsidering our original deadline for having new department and college guidelines completed by the end of this semester.  It is important that appropriate dialogue and consensus be reached among the faculty, chairs, and deans regarding the new guidelines prior to submitting them to the Provost for approval.

·              Based on input from the Faculty Senate Executive Committee and the Council of Academic Deans, it seems clear that some departments and colleges need additional time to have adequate discussions and to achieve consensus on new department and college guidelines.

·              Some departments and colleges will likely meet the original deadline of the end of this semester, but others clearly need more time.  For those areas that have their documents approved, they should move forward with implementation.

·              For those who need additional time, February 28, 2007 will be the new deadline for all departments and colleges to have their new guidelines complete and approved by the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.  In addition, for those departments and colleges that need additional time faculty and chairs will have until April 6, 2007 to compete the Faculty Performance Agreements (FPAs). 

·              For all departments and colleges regardless of the approval dates, we should ensure that a majority of the full-time faculty members in each department approve of the department guidelines and that a majority of the full-time members in each college approve of the college guidelines.

·              We will continue to discuss faculty workload throughout campus and it will be a topic of discussion at the December 11 Faculty Senate meeting.  A new workload statement will be completed in January to coincide with the approval of the new KSU Strategic Plan.  However, we should realize that faculty workload will not change significantly throughout campus until KSU acquires more resources, particularly additional, faculty, staff, facilities and equipment.

·              The faculty performance area of Service needs further clarification and discussion on at least two points. 

§         Point number one is that all faculty members are expected to contribute to the service activities of the university and those expectations should be articulated in the department and college guidelines.

§         Point number two is that accomplishments in Service should be thought of as Scholarship/Outstanding Achievement.  One may have scholarship in service, but there are outstanding achievements in the service performance area that are not scholarship and we are struggling to give them a scholarship label.  Outstanding service achievements should be given due credit in faculty performance, as articulated in department and college guidelines.