Faculty senators argued last night about how to regulate and reward advising activities after a senate committee proposed revising the policy.
Senators criticized several elements of the proposal, primarily focusing on its inclusion of the provost in the process and the lack of specificity about compensation.
You're giving the burden
and you're not spelling out what the compensation is going to be said Fine Arts Senator Charles Smith. The only way I can support this ' something that creates more work for the faculty . . . is if you spell out how it's going to be rewarded. If you don't spell it out administrators are not going to dip into the non-existent pot to pay for it
but you're (still) going to require the work.
David Ingram, a College of Arts and Sciences senator, presented the resolution and defended the Educational Policy and Student Affairs committee against charges of micromanaging.
The faculty in your school should develop the policies. The faculty in your school should decide how they're going to be evaluated
he said. I don't want to tell you how to do it and I don't want to tell you how to be compensated for it.
Smith replied, The way this is set up
you are telling me how to do it.
If you're going to lay out how I'm going to do it
I want you to lay out how I'm going to be compensated
he continued. It is vague. 'You'll be recognized ' 'Oh
I see you!'
Communication Senator Joe Bernt echoed Smith's concerns.
I don't understand why you're standing in front of a group of faculty pushing a proposal that is going to require more faculty time
Bernt said. The idea that we as faculty are going to support more work before we get compensated is ludicrous!
The part of the resolution that drew the most criticism called for a university-wide policy initiated by the provost that puts forth expectations for faculty and students. Smith took issue with language, saying faculty would ensure that certain responsibilities are carried out, but that students would endeavor to complete responsibilities. Senators said that wording shifted the burden from students to faculty.
The resolution was tabled with two dissenters, including Ingram. After the meeting, Ingram said he took from the discussion that the faculty don't want to recognize and reward advising.
I was disappointed by the negative reaction from the senate
he said.
Ingram and his committee worked with several students, including representatives of Student Senate, on the resolution. Chris Diehl, Academic Affairs commissioner, said he was also dissatisfied with Faculty Senate's actions, but said Student Senate would probably take up the issue.
We were planning to write a resolution in support of (Faculty Senate's) should it have passed
