Attachment C       Issues of IAS Workload Policy

 

The IAS Committee continues to study the issue of implementing a standard workload policy that will encompass IAS across campus.  Any such policy should not benefit one sector of IAS, while disadvantaging another.  The Committee has agreed upon a set of values that it feels should be incorporated into such a workload policy and requests Faculty Senate feedback.  The statements in the Possible Wording column came from the workload policy developed in conjunction with the Provost’s Office and Human Resources and presented at the Open Forum on February 23rd.

 

Issues

Possible Wording as of 2/17/06

Questions/Concerns/Problems

Any workload policy should be consistent across colleges, but the policy should give flexibility to allow individual colleges and/or departments/programs to maintain current standards; such as, accreditation policies, class size standards, etc.

Defining workload as a range of teaching hours would allow for flexibility, while still defining the minimum for a full-time appointment and the limit after which an overload would be paid.

Determination of full-time equivalency will be based on a minimum of 12 contact hours and a maximum of 15 contact hours per semester.  Generally, a full-time load will include no more than 4 different course preparations in a single semester and generally no more than 6 different course preparations in an academic year.  If the contact hour load exceeds the 12 to 15 hour equivalency, an overload will be paid.

1.        If half-time is set at 8 contact hours, how many IAS will be working 9 hours?

2.        How will adopting a range, which makes it possible for one IAS to teach 15 contact hours, affect the overall quality of education offered at UWL?

3.        The IAS Committee used contact hours since it is how Faculty workload is defined in Senate Bylaws.  Does this in any way put one set of IAS at a disadvantage/advantage?

4.        Implementation of contracts reflecting increased job security (i.e., multi-year and renewable) should be tied to the adoption of a new workload policy.

A set of criteria should be outlined by which individual workload equivalency will be set.

1.        This set of criteria prevents IAS from being assigned a 15 contact hour load and then being asked to serve on committees, oversee student teachers, advise students, etc. (without compensation) to fulfill departmental needs or to fulfill career progression requirements.

2.        The IAS committee does not have the knowledge of individual departments to set a number for class size, etc. – therefore, this must be determined by individual departments and addressed in their bylaws.

3.        This list of criteria is not meant to be all encompassing; therefore, department bylaws must include such specifics.

1.        Criteria that should be considered in setting the 15 contact hour workload equivalency are the following:  service commitments, advising, professional development, graduate instruction, laboratory preparation, distance learning, thesis supervision, class size, writing content, supervision of individual student work (e.g., student teachers, teaching assistants, undergraduate research, independent study, etc.).

2.        Department bylaws should be changed to reflect this workload policy and reduction criteria.

1.         Can we be certain that the criteria will be used to set workload – that all IAS will NOT be teaching 15 hours?

2.        Should IAS who are paid by the credit be governed by this policy – or should they be held to 12 contact hours?  Should a standard amount per credit be set for all IAS who are paid by the credit?  The committee is still not entirely clear how the amount paid per credit will be calculated under a 15 credit load – will it remain $1100 per credit? Or will the base be divided by 15 to arrive at a new $ per credit amount (in the same way that the $1100 was arrived at for a 12 credit load)?

 

 

The department or program to which an IAS is assigned determines individual IAS workloads. 

The operative unit in determining workload equivalencies shall be departments and programs.  OR Bylaws Faculty WL statement

Who is accountable in the end – department, dean, provost?

What happens if department chair sets equivalency and dean says No OR if chair & dean agree and provost says No?

An appeals process is necessary to maintain a fair and unbiased application of the workload policy with regards to all IAS.