Document Sample
					REALLOCATION PROPOSALS: 1. Faculty Achievement Program. This proposal aligns with the first strategy and tactic under “Vitality” in the University’s draft strategic plan: Establishing an exemplary University community by providing nationally competitive faculty salaries. The College proposes a faculty retention initiative aimed at the University and College’s top priority: retaining the excellent faculty we have hired and helped to develop. We see this program as a method of pre-empting our best faculty from seeking offers from other institutions, which result either in our losing a valuable faculty member or our making a successful counteroffer that distorts the department’s salary structure. In addition, over a four-year period, this initiative should make the College’s salary structure more reflective of salary structures at peer CIC institutions. In most departments, at present, average faculty salaries are in the bottom third of the CIC peer group. The goal of increasing the size of our faculty is very important, if we are to offer students a full range of curricular options and interaction with faculty. However, the goal of retaining excellent faculty is even more important. The College and our departments invest energy and financial resources in recruiting approximately 40 new faculty each year at competitive salaries. As these faculty progress to tenure and through the tenured ranks, their salaries begin to fall below competitive levels, as a result of the small salary increment pools we have to allocate. For this initiative, DEOs would nominate up to 10% of faculty who have primary appointments in their departments (rounded to the next higher integer). The nomination (no more than one page) must show that the faculty member has demonstrated excellence in his/her teaching, research, and service over the previous 12-18 months. The College would consider only candidates who have also been recommended for above-average salary increments from the department’s merit increment pool. For jointly appointed faculty, the nomination would be made by the department of primary appointment, based on consultation with the DEO of the secondary unit; the second DEO would sign the nomination. This program would be most successful as a multi-year program. However, even if funding were available for only one year, the reallocation would be permanent as it would be added to the faculty member’s base salary. 2. Equipment Budget. This initiative aligns with one of the strategies under “Undergraduate Education” in the University’s draft strategic plan: to “assure access to resources that are critical to teaching and learning.” The College proposes establishing an equipment budget ($1 million per year to be allocated only for purchase and renewal of instructional and administrative equipment and for necessary staff support to maintain the equipment). In the past, equipment purchases have been treated as capital costs; because of the need to renew equipment every three to four years, these must now be treated as operating costs. The College has never had a designated equipment budget. In some years, the Provost’s Office has made non-recurring allocations for equipment. (These amounted to $1 million per year in FY 98 and 99; $350,000 were allocated in FY01.) In the past four years, all equipment purchases have been made on an ad hoc basis from residual and unreliable funds at the end of the year. The College formerly also received an annual allocation from FREC for computer renewal in faculty and administrative offices, amounting to $200,000 to $250,000 per year. This allocation was lost to budget reversions.

Instructional technology is increasingly essential to our teaching mission in all disciplines, and must be renewed instructional equipment regularly and treated as an operating cost in our fiscal planning. Given the timelag between budgeting and purchase, even our newest buildings are underequiped. Biology Building II and the renovated Biology Building, both already on-line, were underfunded for equipment, and some classrooms and labs are not yet fitted out. With the Art Buildings coming on-line, we have insufficient funding for equipping the technology-dependent classrooms and studios in these buildings. In the new Adler Journalism Building, the only way to ensure renewal was to fundraise for an endowment, which is achievable because of the professional nature of journalism education. This is not a model that can be repeated in other buildings. We must avoid repeating the history of the Becker Communication Studies Building, which was opened in 1984 with costly, state-of-the-art equipment, but no plan for renewal. Equipment in the BCSB Audio Lab has never been renewed and the Lab can no longer be used for teaching, yet sound production is an area of faculty expertise and student interest in Communication Studies and in Cinema and Comparative Literature. In the broadcast studio and video editing lab in BCSB, we have updated equipment but only when it has become so broken-down and outdated that it could no longer function. Moreover, the renewal has been piecemeal (a few editing stations at a time, e.g.) and has therefore created problems of consistency and coherence for instructors and students using the equipment. Due to FREC budget reductions, renewal of equipment has been impeded in many generalassignment classrooms used entirely or predominately by CLAS faculty and TAs. In many cases these are rooms assigned to TAs who are technology-savvy and eager to use instructional technology for the benefit of our students, but have no access to the technology. Some general-assignment classrooms used predominantly by CLAS faculty (e.g., in MacLean Hall) have never had such equipment, a situation which further complicates the classroom assignment process. 3. Administrative Fellow Program. This initiative aligns with one of the strategies under “Intellectual and Community Vitality” in the University’s draft strategic plan: to “nurture enlightened, creative leadership throughout the University.” The College will establish an Administrative Fellows Program in the Dean’s Office, open to faculty on the College’s budget at the rank of professor. Administrative fellows will be appointed on a one-year basis, renewable for one additional year. Candidates will ordinarily have departmental administrative experience and/or experience on College-wide or University-wide faculty governance bodies. The purpose of this program is to bring the expertise of individual faculty members to bear on Collegiate processes, to develop in faculty members a broader perspective on the College, and to promote the leadership and managerial skills of faculty who have demonstrated administrative promise. Administrative Fellows in the College will work directly with one or more of the College’s associate deans on special projects as determined in collaboration with the College. The administrative fellow will assist with focused administrative processes, planning, and reallocation of resources. The administrative fellow’s PTEA portfolio will be adjusted to reflect the additional service commitment, and the College will supply funding for teaching replacement as needed.