From: University of CentralMissouriFaculty Senate

Prepared by: Dr. Jack E. Rogers, President

Subject: Report to Missouri Association of Faculty Senates

Disposition: Information

Date:September 11, 2007

The first Faculty Senate meeting of the 2007-2008 academicterm convened on August 29th, 2007. During that meeting, the Faculty Senate passed the following motions:

FS 2007-2008-2 made by Senator Jack Rogers, seconded by Senator Steven Popejoy regarding the Merit Pay Deadline:

Whereas, the faculty compensation plan approved by the University of Central Missouri’s Board of Governors mandates a merit pay component, and;

Whereas, In action taken by the 2006-2007 Faculty Senate, funding was set aside for the implementation of a merit pay system, and;

Whereas, the current merit pay plan affords each academic department the opportunity to develop its own criteria for the awarding of merit pay,

Be it therefore resolved: that the Faculty Senate recommends that all academic departments must submit their merit pay plan to their respective Deans on or before December 1st, 2007 or revert to a College approved plan.

-PASSED-For: 14Against: 6Abstain: 0(2007-2008-2)

FS 2007-2008-3 made by Senator Jack Rogers, seconded by Senator Steven Popejoy regarding the Merit Pay Fund Reallocation:

Whereas: Action taken by the 2006-2007 Faculty Senate recommended that 15% of the funds available for faculty raises for the 2007-2008 academic year be dedicated to funding a merit pay system, and;

Whereas: Further action taken by the 2006-2007 Faculty Senate recommended that those funds be set aside until each department on campus could develop merit pay criteria and a plan to distribute same, and;

Whereas: the current plan would be to distribute those funds in the following manner: Once departmental criteria have been developed and merit pay recommendations made for deserving faculty, the merit pay amounts would be awarded retroactively to the faculty member’s base salary for the 2007-2008 academic year (e.g. if professor X is awarded $600 for merit pay at some point in the Spring 2008 semester, the entire $600 would be paid out in the remaining salary periods of the 2007-2008 contract), and;

Whereas: some have argued that this system is neither timely nor equitable;

Be it therefore resolved that: the Faculty Senate recommends to President Podolefsky that all funds set aside for merit pay in the 2007-2008 budget be added to and distributed as across-the-board raises to that group of faculty who received 2.45% or less.

-PASSED-For:18Against: 2Abstain: 0(2007-2008-3)

FS 2007-2008-4 made by Senator Steven Popejoy, seconded by Senator Somnath Sarkar regarding the Proposal to Amend the UCM Faculty Guide:

Background: This motion amends the UCM Faculty Guide, Section II (F) (9), Academic Policies and Procedures/Instructional Procedures/Evaluation of Instruction. Changes include minor alterations of grammar and punctuation, as well as an additional paragraph emphasizing the confidential nature of faculty performance management records.

Motion: The Faculty Senate proposes that the following changes be made to Section II (F) (9) of the UCM Faculty Guide:

9. Evaluation of Instruction. Faculty members are evaluated annually by their department chairs, using multiple means to evaluate instruction, [for example,]such as student evaluations and peer review. The evaluations are reviewed with the faculty member and forwarded to the college dean.

Faculty members who teach are evaluated annually by their students under the supervision of the department chair. Faculty members offering courses through Extended Campus also are evaluated. The department or college to which the faculty member belongs selects the forms used.

An online version of the print form that is selected by the department or college of the faculty member may be adapted at the department or college level to include online, rather than face-to-face, instructional factors. Online versions can be used for the same assessment purposes as print versions (e.g., promotion and tenure, course improvement).

The University of Central Missouri Faculty Senate endorses a requirement that departments utilize procedures which ensure evaluator confidentiality during the distribution, completion, and analysis of faculty course evaluations and that faculty will not receive course evaluation results until after final grades have been submitted.

Students evaluate first- and second-year faculty members [who teach] each semester. Department chairs review these evaluations with the[se] faculty members in an effort to enhance their professional strengths and effectiveness.

During the first five years of service, all faculty will have [a yearly,] an annual written evaluation and consultation with the department chair. The evaluation form will include a performance statement for the year. Categories will be (1) excellent, (2) satisfactory, and (3) unsatisfactory. If "satisfactory" or "unsatisfactory ["],” written recommendations for the area(s) of improvement will be noted and kept in the faculty member's permanent file. A written rebuttal from the faculty member may also be kept in the file. These may be used for reference when an application for tenure is considered.

Faculty evaluations are utilized as performance measurement and developmental tools, primarily in making promotion and tenure decisions. As such, these records are considered confidential in nature and not a matter of public record.

[ ] denotes deletion

-PASSED- Unanimous(2007-2008-4)

In other business and discussions before the Faculty Senate Executive Committee:

  • The Faculty Senate Executive Committee is considering asking the Strategic Planning & Resource Council to investigate the possibility of developing a university-wide plan that would allow President Podolefsky to recoup a percentage of unspent carry-over funds to be used to finance projects that would benefit the entire campus community;
  • The Faculty Senate has asked Provost Wilson to assemble a task force to suggest a procedure for evaluating the general education requirements. That task force is meeting and not yet ready to report its findings to the Senate.
  • A Compensation Task Force is being assembled with representation from the three university governance bodies (Faculty Senate, Professional Staff, and Support Staff Councils). The intent is to collaborate on a campus-wide compensation plan for the foreseeable future.
  • The Faculty Senate Executive Committee is considering assembling an ad hoc group of students and faculty to work under the direction of the Provost’s Office to investigate the possibility of devising a student-based teacher assessment instrument that could be linked to the UCM website for public access.

Respectfully submitted,

Dr. Jack E. Rogers, President

UCM Faculty Senate