Senate Reference No. 05-15

 

 

Question Time

 

 

During the last two Senate meetings the issue of the teaching loads for Academic Administrators has arisen.  Attached is a verbatim transcript of the discussion of this issue from the February 13th Faculty Senate meeting.  It is the administration’s response, not the substance of the issue, on which I would like to focus.

 

Q1 – How does the administration view the role of shared governance at IPFW, especially those “Senate Documents” passed in Faculty Senate where the administration was a part of the debate and the vote for passage?

 

Q2 – Are there stated, or unstated, criteria as to which Senate Documents the administration chooses to follow and enforce and which documents they choose to ignore?  If so, what are these criteria?

 

Q3 – Wouldn’t the administration wholeheartedly agree that it is not shared governance in a true sense if the administrators, who are an integral voting part of the Faculty Senate process, can select/ignore the outputs of the Senate process?  For example, in the case of administrator’s teaching, wouldn’t the proper process be for the issue to be brought back to the Faculty Senate for action rather than arbitrarily ignored by the administration?

 

Respectfully Submitted,

 

George D. Schmelzle

Department of Accounting and Finance

Senate Reference No. 05-15

 

 

TRANSCRIPT OF DISCUSSION ON

ADMINISTRATIVE TEACHING LOAD

 

 

C. Champion presented SR No. 05-12 (Administrative Personnel with Academic Rank) for information only.

 

P. Iadicola:  I am curious as to why three of the deans are currently not participating directly in the teaching mission of this university since it is a recommendation of the Senate that administrative staff with faculty rank make a contribution directly to the workload of the execution of the curriculum.  I am just curious if there are any particularly reasons why the three deans, and including yourself, Vice Chancellor Hannah, would be excused.

 

S. Hannah:  This is just for the past two years.  If you had gone back a year, you would have picked up all three of those deans.  Marc taught advanced algebra, and John taught an operations course.  Ben taught history of jazz.  I don’t expect the deans to teach on an annual basis.  I know that is what the Senate documents say.  I myself have taught twice in the years I’ve been here.  We could have a long discussion about how often folks need to teach.  I think all of us teach often enough to remember what it’s like to be in the classroom.  That is, after all, our main responsibility – to support the people who are.  I don’t believe that it’s necessary that we do it every year or even every other year, but that we do it occasionally when our schedules permit and when it seems to be appropriate.  I think it’s a good idea, but it’s not an annual requirement.

 

N. Younis:  The collective wisdom of the faculty, as well as administrators, back in 1996 is that administrator’s teaching is expected for the following four reasons:

 

1.         Teaching is an important function of all IPFW faculty members

2.         Maintain scholarly currency

3.         Familiarity with IPFW students

4.         Familiarity with the issues and problems faced by faculty

 

In addition, we advertise that IPFW is a teaching-focused institution.  Therefore, in my opinion, everyone who wants to be in the academic arena must teach in order to make practical and educated academic decisions.

 

Finally, it helps the morale when administrators show the respect to a document passed with the faculty.