Rationale:
The actual faculty title and expectations are established at the
department level, and in concert with the Dean of the college.
Annual evaluation and general merit evaluation of LTF should accordingly
be conducted with clear reference to the terms of the appointment.
[This is under consideration by the Salary Task Force committee].
2.
Amend
the Faculty Handbook to specify that LTF should have the logistical support
necessary to carry out the expectations defined in letters of appointment (e.g.
office space, phone, access to a computer in the office, mailbox).
Rationale:
There is language in the section on Probationary and Permanent faculty
guaranteeing office space, but not for the LTF. For LTF to provide high quality teaching, as they most
frequently are asked to do, they need to have a place to meet students, contact
students, and access key technology (like Blackboard).
3.
Ensure that all colleges have explicit language that defines the
procedures for the evaluation of LTF, and their rights to participate in general
merit.
Rationale:
While the Handbook language for evaluation stipulates that all LTF be evaluated annually, this may be abridged at the college
level.
4.
Consider proposing that all LTF, regardless of FTE, be eligible for general
merit.
Rationale:
As indicated in the text, a widening salary gap can/does develop between LTF who
begin at the same time but at different FTE levels.
5.
Consider establishing ranks internal to the position of Lecturer. An
advanced rank of Lecturer could entail a longer period of appointment, augmented
voting rights and eligibility for general and special merit.
Rationale:
The addition of a rank of “Senior Lecturer,” and/or “Principal
Lecturer,” would increase job security and morale for faculty who have taught
routinely, as well as provide stability within departments.
While LTF faculty are evaluated annually, they presently have no way to
increase their status, which has led to low morale among those who have been
teaching at Western the longest. Increased
morale will encourage greater productivity and higher quality teaching. A model - and justification - for such change is provided by
the recent “Report and Statement of Principles Subcommittee on Lecturer
Status” at the University of Washington and in the “Lecturer Legislation”
recently approved by that university’s Faculty Senate (see the links below):
http://www.washington.edu/faculty/facsenate/senate/legislation/classa/lecturer.htm
http://www.washington.edu/faculty/facsenate/councils/fcfa/lecturereport.htm
http://www.washington.edu/faculty/facsenate/councils/fciq/FCIQ-minutes/00-01/112900mins.htm).