October 13, 2005

 

TO: Carmen Wilson, Faculty Senate, Chair

 

FROM: PTS Committee

 

RE: Short Term Pay Plan Recommendations for the University of Wisconsin – La Crosse

 

Attachments/ Enclosures:

Appendix A: Short Term Pay Plans by College

Appendix B: Current Short Term Session Appointments Policy 1980

 

The PTS committee received the following charge:

“Report to senate the final recommendations about salary compensation methods employed by colleges for faculty teaching in J-term, May-term, and summer school, and make recommendations (relative to a uniform university policy) as necessary.”

 

In Appendix A you will find the compensations plans that were in place for the summer of 2004.  Many of these plans were unchanged for the summer of 2005. 

 

During the spring of 2005 the PTS committee met with the Deans of several colleges, representatives from the office of the Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance, and the Chair of the joint budget and planning committee.  Through those discusses and a few additional meetings in the Fall we identified three areas of concern regarding the current compensation plans:

 

1.  For most faculty short term compensation is at a rate well below what they are paid during the academic year for a similar amount of work.  Short term pay has also failed to keep pace with our paltry academic year pay increases.

 

2.  There is an enormous degree of uncertainty surrounding the amount of compensation a faculty member can expect and whether or not the class will run.  Often faculty do not know what they are to be paid until AFTER they have started teaching a course.

 

3.  Faculty are concerned that the curriculum offerings are no longer within their control.

 

Immediately below you will find our proposal, followed by some brief comments of justification which address the three areas of concern outlined above.  This proposal, if adopted, will provide a single short term pay plan, consistent across colleges, and consistent with compensation policies and plans administered during the normal academic year.  The plan below has several parts, but it is a single proposal. The committee - which unanimously approved this proposal - feels the spirit of the proposal would be jeopardized if any part of it were to be amended.

 

  

Proposal:

 

Full time short term teaching load is 8 credit hours. 

 

Full time pay is 2/9 X academic year base salary of the faculty teaching the course (without regard for the number of students). 

 

Less than full time loads are prorated based upon the number of credits taught. 

(This means one 4 credit class receives 1/9th and a 3 credit class receives the 75% of 1/9th .)

 

Classes are to be cancelled no later than 2 weeks before the first day of the class.

 

Class capacity is at the same levels as in a regular academic semester.

 

 

Justification:

 

This proposal addresses the three areas of concern highlighted by the committee.

 

Addressing Concern #1

If a faculty member teaches a 6 class load over the year and 50% of their responsibility is due to teaching, then 1 course is equivalent to .75 times a month’s salary.  This should be the minimum as there are often other responsibilities that come with taking short term classes.  Generally independent studies are not compensated and are added to the faculty member’s short term teaching load, along with freshmen registration and other administrative functions that occur during these terms.

 

During the academic year most faculty are responsible for teaching, research and service.  However,  short term appointments generally cover only teaching.  Most  faculty conduct research or perform service during the short terms; those who choose to teach do so in addition to this other work. While we realize that we do so largely at our own discretion,   we still believe that we should be compensated for our short term teaching teaching at the same rate we are compensated during the regular academic year.  Students pay the same rate for the credits they earn, and they expect the same learning experience; we are not aware of any justification for paying faculty less during the short term sessions than they are paid for the teaching portion of their appointment during the academic year.  This proposal rectifies that inequity. 

 

It also divorces faculty pay from enrollment.  Academic year pay is not a function of the number of students in our classes, and we should not be responsible for our enrollment during the summer.  It is the responsibility of the administration to attract a sufficient number of students to make the classes financially viable. If they can not do this then they should cancel the class and provide the faculty and students sufficient notice.

 

This plan also pays faculty proportionate to the amount they make during the academic year. Full professors generally make more than assistants during the academic year. We should not expect them to work for proportionately less pay during the short terms?  Many of the pay models, such as the CBA and CLS plans, are a function of the number of students independent of  faculty rank and academic year pay.  It is likely that this contributes to fewer senior level faculty choosing to teach during the short terms, and one would guess that this may contribute to falling enrollment, just in terms of the kinds and levels of courses that can be offered without the participation of more experienced faculty.

 

Another justification for this plan is that it is nearly identical to the short term pay plan model currently being used at the University of Wisconsin – Eau Claire. 

 

Addressing Concern #2

Rationale (faculty perspective)

Faculty who teach in the short-term sessions have regularly experienced problems related to a difference between the salary they expect to be paid for a course and the salary they are actually paid once the course has been completed. The discrepancies are due to the practice of basing salaries on day-of-record enrollments in courses. Moreover, rate of pay per SCH enrollment varies considerably from college to college, such that the salary penalties for "failure" to meet SCH targets are greater in some colleges and less in others, contributing to inequities in short-term salaries across the university. This can be problematic for instructors for many reasons. For example, a number of faculty need to arrange and pay for day care for their children, so a smaller than expected salary can have huge financial consequences for these individuals. After one of these bad experiences, faculty are less likely to volunteer to teach during these short terms again.

 

Our investigation has led us to conclude that, for this and other reasons, faculty attitudes toward offering short-term courses (something faculty are under no obligation to do) are seriously affected by the practice of scaling salaries to SCH targets based on day-of-record enrollments. Variance in salary policy among the colleges simply exacerbates the problem. We should also note that the policies within the colleges governing short-term salary have been in an almost constant state of flux over the past several years, such that faculty do not know from year to year what the pay scales will be.

 

If the university desires to continue an expansion of its short-term programs to rely on the generation of short-term revenue and SCH production, then effective incentives to encourage faculty to offer courses during short terms must be found. Currently, these incentives are not in place. In addition, it is imperative to attract the “best” professors to teach during these terms so that students are motivated to enroll in the courses that are offered during these sessions.

 

Rationale (student perspective)

Student enrollment in summer school has been declining. If UW-L administrators are committed to increasing enrollments during short term sessions, especially summer sessions, then a good first step will be to ensure that classes are not cancelled after students have made plans that revolve around their taking a summer course. For example, students who enroll in summer term courses are making a large commitment by staying in La Crosse. These students have found a place to live, have turned down employment in other locations, and have secured work in the La Crosse area. To have a student enrolled in a class that gets cancelled shortly before its start date can have devastating consequences for a student. Typically, word will get around very quickly to future students that a certain summer class is not a good gamble, and soon, enrollment will decrease simply because students are not willing to take the chance that this will happen to them.

 

Capping classes at the same levels as during the regular semester ensures that students are getting an equally good education regardless of whether they take a class during short terms or the regular semester. Again, if we want students to enroll in short term courses, we need to be sure that the courses are of similar quality despite the term in which the courses are taken.

 

By putting these rules in place, the following student, faculty, and university needs will be met:

 

·         Students who enroll in short term courses will have advanced notice that a course is cancelled so the student can make other plans

·         Students will be more likely to take a chance and enroll in a short term course if the student knows that it will only be cancelled with advanced notice

·         Faculty will be more likely to volunteer to teach a short term course if the instructor knows that they will have advance notice that a course will be cancelled

·         Faculty will be more likely to volunteer to teach a short term course if the instructor knows s/he will getting a prescribed full-time salary

·         Faculty will not be forced to teach a course based on student enrollment, a decision that should not have to be made by an instructor because it pits “faculty needs” against “student needs”

·         Deans can cancel a class that doesn’t appear to be filling to the capacity that s/he needs it to be in order to make it a financially feasible course

·         Once a history of courses taught during short terms is established, the university will reap the benefits of this in increased revenue and SCH production

 

Addressing Concern #2

We want to reiterate the purpose of short term sessions highlighted in Appendix B.

It stated that “The primary purpose of the summer session is to provide instructional services.  Instructors given summer classroom assignments should be those best qualified to teach the courses offered.”  It also mentioned that the summer period “also provides opportunity for further study and professional development” of faculty. 

 

A contemporary understanding of this suggests the goals of short term sessions at UW-La Crosse are multifaceted and include (1) enabling current students to fulfill degree requirements within a shorter period of time, (2) providing courses for students not enrolled at UWL that can be transferred for credit to their home institutions, and (3) generating additional income for the University.

 

A review of current short term session policies at UW-La Crosse indicate that there are (1) inconsistencies across colleges in rates of remuneration for faculty and (2) uncertainties on criteria for cancellation of courses due to low enrollment and the date at which decisions on cancellations and rates of remuneration are made.  The lack of a cogent and consistent policy has resulted in dissatisfaction among faculty and discouraged innovation in developing new course offerings for short term sessions.  Moreover, without a clear enrollment and cancellation policy, students hesitate in foregoing summer employment and committing to summer residence in La Crosse and, subsequently, enrollment in summer short term sessions is below anticipated target levels.

 

The development of a consistent and published policy on short term sessions will achieve equity in remuneration for teaching staff and faculty across campus, provide incentive for teaching during short terms, and give students better information on cancellation policies and dates that will facilitate their decision on attending short term sessions school at UW-La Crosse.

 

We would also like a statement from the previous policy on summer appointments from appendix B: “Determination of course offerings and appointments for summer session instruction shall be made by the various academic departments following allotments of positions by the appropriate dean or other administrative officer.”  This indicates to us that it is still the faculty’s prerogative as to what is offered and who teaches.

 

Respectfully submitted,

PTS
 

 

 

Appendix A: Summer Session Pay Plan Models Summer 2004

 

CBA

 

Summer Session Revenue Model

College of Business Administration

Draft – November 4, 1998

 

Summer session revenue will be distributed to departments from the Dean’s office using the following procedures.  Summer session is defined as all course offerings in the May term as well as the traditional summer session from June through August.  Summer session salaries in year t are determined by course enrollments in year t.

 

1.                    All funds will be distributed to departments.  Departments will develop bylaws to distribute the funds to their faculty.

2.                    Each course with an enrollment of at least ten students will be guaranteed a minimum salary of $3000.

3.                    Maximum faculty salaries for summer session courses are set at 1/9th of individual faculty member salaries.  This maximum is mandated by UWS.

4.                    Departments will retain revenues generated by their summer courses after they have reached a total departmental summer enrollment exceeding Q* students.  Q* is equal to 17 x the number of courses offered by the department during the summer session.

5.                    The revenues retained by departments after they reach Q* enrollment are equal to $96.25 x the number of students x the number of credit hours x .6. 

6.                    Departments may use these funds to increase summer salaries (subject to the UWS mandated maximum) and/or disburse these funds as faculty development or research grants.

 

The pay model for the MBA courses is $5000 to teach a 3 credit course and $4500 to co-teach a team taught course (3-4 credits). I am informed there was some compensation to develop new courses but that was for the development of the new MBA program and that policy is no longer in effect.

 

CLS

College of Liberal Studies

Intersession Pay Plan

 

Undergraduate Courses

 

Student Credit Hours Generated/3rd Day of Session                    Salary

 

30-45 SCH (10-15 students/3crs)                                                       $3,500 (or 1/9 limit if lower)

                (46-47 SCH paid at the same rate)

 

48-60 SCH (16-20 students/3 crs)                                                      $3,800 (or 1/9 limit if lower)

                (61-62 SCH paid at the same rate)

 

63-75 SCH (21-25 students/3crs)                                                       $4,100 (or 1/9 limit if lower)

                (76-77 SCH paid at the same rate)

 

78-90 SCH (26-30 students/3 crs)                                                      $4,400 (or 1/9 limit if lower)

                (91-92 SCH paid at the same rate)

 

93 plus SCH (31 plus students/3 crs)                                               $4,700 (or 1/9 limit if lower)

 

--Less than 30 SCH – Paid straight Tier II

--Tier II formula = SCH (# of students x # of course credits) x tuition rate ($109 in 2003/04) x 60%

--Independent Study sections are calculated into an instructor’s total SCH on a 1:1 basis

--Internship sections are calculated into an instructor’s total SCH on a 2:1 basis

--SCH is calculated for salaries on 3rd day enrollment

 

·         Every effort will be made to keep enrollment in these courses small (not to exceed 35).  If student numbers are sufficient a second section of the course will be offered.  In cases where the number will exceed 35 by only one or two students, an overload of $125 per student, up to a maximum of $250, will be paid (up to the 1/9 salary limit).

 

Graduate Courses

 

Student Credit Hours Generated/3rd Day of Session                    Salary

24-30 SCH (8-10 students/3 crs)                                                        $4,000 (or 1/9 limit if lower)

                (31-32 SCH paid at the same rate)

 

33-39 SCH (11-13 students/3 crs)                                                      $4,500 (or 1/9 limit if lower)

                (40-41 SCH paid at the same rate)

 

42-48 SCH (14-16 students/3 crs)                                                      $5,000 (or 1/9 limit if lower)

                (49-50 SCH paid at the same rate)

 

Graduate Courses, con.

 

51 plus SCH (17 plus students/3 crs)                                                $5,500 (or 1/9 limit if lower)

 

--Less than 24 SCH – Paid straight Tier II

--Tier II formula = SCH (# of students x # of course credits) x ($195 in 2003/04) x 60%

--SCH is calculated for salaries on 3rd day enrollment

 

  • Every effort will be made to keep enrollment in these courses small (not to exceed 20).  If student numbers are sufficient a second section of the course will be offered.  In cases where the number will exceed 20 by only one or two students, an overload of $250 per student, up to a maximum of $500, will be paid (up to the 1/9 salary limit).

 

 

EESHR

 

Concerning summer pay.  We have a two step process.  Max pay per course is assigned by a percent of salary per credit.  The scale is 3.5% for one credit, 7% for two credits,11% for 3 credits, and 14% for four credits.  Actual pay is based on revenue.  The Dean allows us to use 55-60% of tuition revenue for that course, up to the assigned max, for salary.  The Dean lets us know each year, what percent we will use.  Clinical supervision pays $150 per student and internships pays $250 per student.  No pay is given for independent studies and theses.  There are sometimes variations based upon circumstances, but that is the basic model we follow.

 

No class is automatically dropped based upon low enrollment.  If the actual salary is not something a faculty member is willing to teach for, then we will drop the class.  That decision must be made during the intercession, so students can make other plans and are not informed the day before a class is taught that it is being dropped.  Thus, if a faculty wants to wait in hopes of a higher enrollment, then they are obligated to teach regardless of salary.

 

 

SAH

 

January 29, 2004

 

MEMORANDUM

 

TO:                         SAH Chairs

 

FROM:                   Michael E. Nelson, Dean

 

RE:                          Summer 04

 

The ad hoc committee on Summer School, chaired by Dave Riley, presented information and suggestions about funding for 2004.  A call was made to Department chairs requesting information on proposed courses and instructors.  After receiving this material, the CSAH office established guidelines as suggested by the ad hoc report, and constructed a course and salary schedule.  Minor modifications were made to some requests. 

 

Guidelines for summer scheduling include the following:

 

  • SCH expectations generally are based upon “normal” enrollment during the fall and/or spring semesters – the maximum section size as established by the chair during the academic year.

 

  • Chairs will be given a departmental salary allocation and an SCH target – both based upon the requests submitted by Chairs during Fall 2003.

 

  • The initial individual salaries were based on 1/9 salary for teaching a 4 credit hour course

 

  • Chairs will have the authorization to internally (within the Department) adjust individual class SCH targets and salaries.

 

  • Chairs will have the opportunity to negotiate a lower departmental summer salary allocation if they anticipate departmental SCH targets will not be met.

 

  • Departments will be expected to achieve, or exceed, the SCH target.  Departments failing to meet SCH targets will not be penalized for Summer 04.  However, future funding (2005 summer and beyond) will be based on 2004 SCH production.

 

  • May-term courses may not extend into Summer session.  A proposed four credit hour course taught during May term must be completed prior to the beginning of Summer session.  An exception will be the graduate course taught by Dr. Periyasamy.

 

  • Chemistry and Health Professions have rather complicated systems of teaching assignments with some instructors teaching lecture sections only, others teaching laboratory sections only, and still others teaching both lecture and laboratory sections. Compensation for their will be awarded as requested by Chair Osterby and Chair Tyser.

 

BIOLOGY

                1 section BIO 103

                                SCH target:  112 (28 per section)

                                Salary approved:  $7,000

                Cost per SCH:  $62.50

                Cost per contact hour:  $100.00

 

CHEMISTRY (all CHM prefix courses submitted - (does not include cost of instruction for PAS 624 – Weaver)

                                SCH target:  466

Salary approved:  $45,700

                Cost per SCH:  $98.06

                Cost per contact hour:  $78.79

 

COMPUTER SCIENCE

                2 sections of C-S 101 during May term; 4-credit course

                                SCH target:  256 (37 per section)

                1 section of C-S 446/546 during May term or Summer session; 3-credit course

                                SCH target:  60 (20 per section; 3 hr. course)

                Salary approved:  $24,236

                Total SCH target:  356

                Cost per SCH:  $68.07

                Cost per contact hour:  $157.37

 

GEOGRAPHY/EARTH SCIENCE

                1 section of:  ESC 101 during May term (4-credit course)

SCH target:  120 (30 per section)

                1 section of : GEO 200 during May term (3-credit course)

                                SCH target:  96 (32 per section)

                Salary approved:  $14,467

                Total SCH target:  224        

Cost per SCH:  $64.58

                Cost per contact hour: $131.52

 

HEALTH PROFESSIONS

                                SCH target:  2278 (includes PAS 624 course taught by Weaver)

Salary approved $79,938 (includes payment for Weaver, all student help and lab assistants required for anatomy course, etc.

                                Salary approved plus salaries paid to 12-month faculty:  $185,669.82

                  Cost per SCH:  $81.50

                  Cost per Contact Hour could not be calculated due to large number of students doing fieldwork.

 

 

MATHEMATICS

                4 sections of MTH 145

                                SCH target:  512 (32 per section)

                1 section of MTH 150

                                SCH target:  128 (32 per section)

                1 section of MTH 151

                                SCH target:  128 (32 per section)

                1 section of MTH 175

                                SCH target:  128 (32 per section)

                1 section of MTH 207

                                SCH target:  125 (25 per section)

                1 section of MTH 208

                                SCH target:  60 (15 per section)

                                Total SCH target:  1081

                                Salary approved:  $52,680

                Cost per SCH:  $48.73

                Cost per contact hour:  $101.70

 

MICROBIOLOGY

                1 section of MIC 230

                                SCH target:  72 (18 per section)

                                Salary approved:  $6,757

                Cost per SCH:  $93.85

                Cost per contact hour:  $80.44

 

CLINICAL LABORAOTRY SCIENCE Course

                1 section of CLI 440 (1-credit course; 20 hour lecture/lab course)

                                SCH target: 14

Salary approved: $2,151

 

In summary, the CSAH could produce 4595 SCH at a total salary cost of $232,930.  In Summer 03 the salaries were $233,546.  What remains critical in this entire issue is that departments must meet their SCH targets.

 

I want to discuss this course and salary proposal at our initial meeting of SAH Chairs scheduled for February 5, 2004.

 

MEN/cat


 

Appendix B: Current Summer Session Appointments Policy

 

Summer Session Appointments

Staffing for summer session is on a year-to-year basis. Guarantees of summer employment are not made in advance to academic year appointees. Those whose services are required for the summer session (normally eight weeks of both undergraduate and graduate instruction) are paid additional salary for that period.

Student enrollment is from 30 to 40 percent of that during the regular year and its composition differs markedly from that of the regular semesters. Summer assignments and plans for the ensuing summer session are usually distributed in April each year.

Summer Session Policy

1. The Purposes of Summer Session.

a. Instructional Services. The primary purpose of the summer session is to provide instructional services. Instructors given summer classroom assignments should be those best qualified to teach the courses offered.

b. Professional Development. The summer period also provides opportunity for further study and professional development at a time when many instructors are not on regular assignments. The Senate, therefore, urges the various departments, schools, and colleges to establish policies which will encourage faculty and academic staff to pursue higher degrees or other scholarly activities during the summer.

2. The Determination of Course Offerings and Teaching Assignments.

Determination of course offerings and appointments for summer session instruction shall be made by the various academic departments following allotment of positions by the appropriate dean or other administrative officer. Each department in consultation with the appropriate dean or other administrative officer shall also determine:

a. the extent to which rank, degrees, and longevity of service to the department and to the University are used in establishing priorities for appointments;

b. the nature of any rotational system deemed desirable; and

c. the suitability of appointing both faculty and academic staff to summer sessions.

3. Appointments for Potential Retirees.

Academic departments, in consultation with the appropriate dean or other administrative officer and the Chancellor's offices, are encouraged to develop plans which will provide the maximum summer appointment opportunities possible for persons in their last three years prior to retirement.

4. Chairpersons' Summer Appointments.

Upon approval of academic departments after consultation with the appropriate administrative officers, chairpersons may be given load reductions for administrative responsibilities during periods other than the thirty-nine week academic year. Such reductions should be derived from positions assigned to the department. When deemed necessary, departments should annually review with the appropriate administrative officers, the arrangements made for departmental administration during non-academic year periods.

5. Previous Policies.

Upon approval of this statement, all other summer session policies in which the Senate previously concurred become null and void.

6. Effective Date of this Policy Statement.

This policy shall be in effect beginning with the planning for the summer term of 1980.