F(17)

Approved by RCB vote 4-00
Pop.f17 11/12/97

ROBINSON COLLEGE OF BUSINESS
FACULTY WORKLOAD POLICY

This policy applies to faculty of the Robinson College of Business with both full-time and part-time appointments on both fiscal year (FY) and academic year (AY) contracts. Some provisions of this policy are also relevant to the determination of teaching assignments for graduate teaching assistants (GTAs) and part-time instructors (PTIs).

WORKLOAD

Definition: Consistent with the workload policy approved by the University Senate in February 1997, the workload of a faculty member is comprised of the mix of teaching, research and service activities that are assigned as that faculty member's contribution of effort toward achieving the goals of the academic unit and the RCB. Depending on the needs of the academic unit and the distribution of faculty talents, individual faculty may be engaged in different mixes of teaching, research and service activities at any one point in time; individual faculty may be engaged in different mixes of teaching, research and service activities across their careers; and faculty from one unit to the next may be engaged, on average, in different mixes of teaching, research and service activities. The intention of the workload policy is that faculty members contribute comparable levels of total effort toward achieving organizational goals.

Annual Faculty Performance Evaluation: Faculty Profiles are defined and discussed under RCB policy document entitled "Faculty Performance: Planning Development and Evaluation." The role of faculty profiles in the annual faculty performance evaluation is rescinded. Faculty members will no longer be required to select a profile. A faculty member's performance evaluation will be made on the basis of accomplishments as measured against the workload assigned to that faculty member. The profiles will remain in the faculty Performance: Planning, Development and Evaluation document as an aid to career management and development.

THE TEACHING COMPONENT OF WORKLOAD

Teaching-related workload: The teaching-related workload of a faculty member may include many activities besides the teaching of for-credit courses with formal classroom hours; such activities may include, for example, curriculum development, supervision of readings courses, student counseling, and dissertation supervision or committee membership. All of these activities are part of teaching (and total) workload to be considered by the head of the academic unit in assigning the type, number and size of for-credit courses to be taught by a faculty member

(Recommended by the Faculty Affairs Committee 10/97 and Executive Committee 11/97; approved by the RCB faculty11/12/97)

Teaching load credit and benchmark class sizes: Teaching load credit is defined in this document as the number of three-semester-hour courses taught with enrollments equal to the college-wide average class size (ACS) for the 1996-97 academic year for non-core courses and the class size limits shown below for core courses. These are hereafter referred to as benchmark class sizes.

Courses of a given type with an enrollment that is smaller or larger than these benchmark class sizes count for teaching load credit in proportion to the enrollment relative to the benchmark class size. For example, if the enrollment of a graduate non-core course taught is 30 and the graduate non-core course benchmark size is 20, this course section counts for 1.5 teaching load credit (30/20 = 1.5)

Courses counting for teaching load credit: Courses which count for teaching load credit normally include only those for-credit courses which have formal classroom hours. Normally, no teaching load credit is received for directed readings, independent study, dissertation supervision, residencies, internships or similar courses that have no formal class hours but are listed in the College's schedule of classes. (In the future, however, courses utilizing modern information technology--e.g., taught exclusively on the Internet-- may substitute for classes that have formal classroom hours and count for teaching load credit.) However, all of these activities comprise part of the total workload to be considered by the head of the academic unit in establishing the number and type of courses to be taught by a faculty member.

Course staffing objectives and constraints: The assignment of courses to full-time faculty should achieve balance among the following objectives:

Provide a reasonable schedule of classes for students in terms of times and frequencies of course offerings staffed by full-time faculty

Assure that the proportion of students that are taught by full-time faculty is at least 60% in each academic unit at both the undergraduate and graduate levels each semester in order to meet AACSB accreditation criteria.

Provide teaching loads that are competitive for recruiting and retaining faculty in terms of number and type of sections taught, number of students taught and number of preparations taught and that also meets the College's budget constraint.

Assure that sections that are above regular size and most graduate sections (except in cases of specialized courses taught by part-time faculty with unique qualifications) are taught by full-time faculty.

Minimum and maximum number of courses taught per academic year: The number of three-semester-hour course sections taught per academic year by a full-time faculty member is normally in the range of two to eight. As indicated above, the teaching load credit associated with these courses may be more than, equal to, or less than the number of courses taught depending on the size and type of the courses. In assigning specific courses to be taught, the head of the academic unit will take in to consideration the level, size and type of courses to be taught and the number of preparations involved--in addition to the research, service and other teaching workload of that faculty member. Faculty not engaged in any significant service or other teaching-related efforts or demonstrating significant research productivity in recent years would normally be assigned eight courses in accordance with AACSB accreditation standards which state that teaching loads should not normally exceed 12 hours per term, which is eight course sections for an academic year. Faculty with significant research productivity and/or service activities would normally be assigned 4-6 courses; faculty with an outstanding level of research productivity and/or service activity would normally be assigned fewer than four courses.

Number of courses assigned to new, untenured, tenure track faculty: For the first three years of employment (until the formal third-year contract renewal review), the number of courses assigned to a new, untenured, tenure track faculty should generate teaching load credit in the range of 3 to 5 per academic year but average approximately 4 over the three years in order to enhance the opportunity for meeting research expectations for promotion and tenure, to assure equity among candidates across all academic units, and to be competitive in recruiting new faculty.

Reductions in actual number of courses taught from courses assigned: The actual number of courses taught by a faculty member during the academic year will be less than the assigned number of courses to the extent that course releases are granted to that faculty member from one or both of the two following sources:

Courses releases financed at full cost of 10% of AY contract plus fringe benefits by externally-funded projects

Administrative course releases granted by the Dean

AVERAGE TEACHING LOAD CREDIT FOR FULL-TIME FACULTY EMPLOYED ON ACADEMIC YEAR CONTRACTS

Full-time academic year (AY) contract faculty include tenure track faculty appointed to Regents' Professorships and to endowed chairs and professorships, as well as non-tenure track faculty at any rank appointed at an EFT of .60 or greater.

Average teaching load credit for the RCB: The average teaching load credit for the RCB to be met by full-time AY contract faculty is periodically reviewed because the RCB environment changes over time in terms of inventory of available classroom sizes, proportion of graduate credit hours and core versus non-core credit hours, budgetary ability to hire full-time versus part-time faculty relative to AACSB accreditation criteria, etc. As indicated in other sections of this document, teaching load credit is defined both in terms of number of sections taught and number of students taught; either one or both of these variables may need to be adjusted over time. The current average teaching load credit to be met in the RCB is comprised of a combination of sections taught that is equal to the average number of sections taught by full-time AY contract faculty for the three most recent academic year quarters for which data were available prior to the implementation of this policy for conversion to the semester calendar for the fall term of 1998 and benchmark class sizes previously stated in this document (see previous definition of teaching load credit).

Average teaching load credit target to be met by an academic unit: In order to achieve equitable workloads across academic units that have different goals with resultingly different levels of productivity in research and service functions, the average teaching load credit to be met in each academic unit may not be identical. (Note: While specific courses are assigned to individual faculty, the average teaching load credit target is a constraint to be met by the academic unit, not individual faculty.)

Each year, the Dean establishes an average teaching load credit target for each academic unit to be met by the full-time AY contract faculty of that academic unit. This target may be equal to, greater than, or less than the college-average teaching load credit but the weighted average of the targets for all academic units will equal the college average. The target is determined by assessing the research and service contributions of the faculty of the academic unit relative to the faculty of the College's other academic units using faculty activity reports, performance evaluations and goals statements for the coming year that are annually submitted to the Dean by the heads of academic units; in addition, the relative contribution of the academic unit to the delivery of College-wide programs, such as the Executive MBA program, is taken into consideration in establishing the target.

TEACHING LOAD CREDIT FOR FULL-TIME FACULTY EMPLOYED ON FISCAL YEAR CONTRACTS

Full-time faculty appointed on fiscal year (FY) contracts include heads of academic units and other faculty in college administrative positions.

Heads of academic units: The head of each academic unit submits a proposed teaching load credit for the coming fiscal year to the Dean. As in the case of all full-time faculty, teaching load credit is determined in light of the projected total teaching, research, service, and managerial workload of the faculty member for the coming year.

Other FY contract faculty: For full-time faculty appointed on FY contracts other than heads of academic units, the teaching load credit of that faculty member will be determined by the Dean, based on an assessment of total teaching, research, service and managerial workload of the faculty member for the coming year.

COURSE STAFFING PLAN

Preliminary plan for full-time faculty: At the same time (approximately mid-March) that faculty activity reports, evaluations and goal statements are completed and submitted to the Dean, the head of each academic unit submits a preliminary course staffing plan for full-time faculty for the coming academic year under procedures to be provided. This plan indicates the number and type of courses to be taught in each semester for each full-time faculty member. In proposing the number and type of courses to be taught, the head of the academic unit will take in to consideration the total teaching, research and service workload of the faculty member as reflected in faculty activity reports, goal statements and performance evaluations.

Overall plan: The information contained in the preliminary plan provides sufficient information for the Dean's Office to generate an overall staffing plan for the academic unit indicating how the number and type of courses offered for the current academic year (i.e., before any changes to the annual class schedule) will be staffed for the following year by full-time and part-time faculty. This overall staffing plan will compute the percentage of projected graduate and undergraduate credit hours to be staffed by full-time faculty in each semester of the academic year relative to the 60% full-time coverage AACSB accreditation criterion. Also, the average teaching load credit for full-time faculty will be computed from the information contained in the preliminary plan.

Revised plan for full-time faculty: After the Dean's conference with the heads of all academic units are completed, revisions to the preliminary plan for full-time faculty will be requested for review and approval via procedures to be provided. The purpose of these revisions will be to (1) resolve any disparities noted in the conference between the overall workload and proposed assignment of courses to individual faculty, (2) meet the average teaching load credit target for the academic unit that is established as a result of the conferences , and (3) achieve 60% or greater staffing by full-time faculty of both undergraduate and graduate credit hours in each semester of the academic year.

AMENDMENT OF COURSE STAFFING PLAN

Recognizing that circumstances may change subsequent to the submission of the revised staffing plan for full-time faculty for review and approval, amendments may be proposed each semester of the academic year for approval via procedures to be provided. The amendments to the course staffing plan will be reviewed with respect to continuing to meet the established teaching load credit target and 60% full-time coverage of graduate and undergraduate credit hours.

APPROVAL OF THIS DOCUMENT AND SUBSEQUENT REVISIONS

This document originates with the Executive Committee and must be reviewed and approved by the Executive Committee and Faculty Affairs Committee; the Faculty Affairs Committee will decide if it is to be submitted to the RCBfaculty for approval. Subsequent revisions must be approved by the Executive Committee and Faculty Affairs Committee. However, if the Faculty Affairs Committee is of the opinion that the proposed revisions constitute major changes, then the proposed revisions will be submitted to the RCB faculty for approval.