Monday, April 8, 2013

AAUP Releases New Faculty Salary Survey

Dear Colleague,

Salaries for full-time faculty members at American colleges and universities continue to recover slowly from the ongoing recession in higher education, but the longer-term trends are not promising. That’s the finding in this year’s annual report on faculty compensation and the economics of higher education (http://www.aaup.org/reports-publications/2012-13salarysurvey) issued by the American Association of University Professors.

AAUP director of research and public policy John W. Curtis, the lead author of this year’s report, says “the news this year is not all gloomy, but the silver lining is not exactly gleaming, either.” For full-time faculty members, after three consecutive years of increases in average salary levels that lagged behind inflation, the overall increase this year (1.7 percent) is just barely on par with the increase in prices. It’s not that faculty salaries rose more rapidly during the last year, but the inflation rate was low enough to keep them from losing any further ground. Full-time faculty members who remained at the same institution as last year received average salary increases that were also somewhat better this year than in recent years (3.2 percent) but still well below the level of average increases over the last ten years. Overall salary increases for faculty members at public colleges and universities continued to lag behind those at private institutions.

The report provides current data collected by the AAUP on salary and benefits for full-time faculty members at more than 1,100 colleges and universities. It also presents in-depth analysis of three perennial concerns and provides new data on each: The continuing rise of contingent (non-tenure-track) employment for faculty members, the sharp decline in state appropriations for higher education even after the end of the Great Recession in the broader economy, and the growing salary disadvantage for faculty members teaching in the public sector.

The large majority (76 percent) of college and university instructional appointments across the nation are now contingent: full-time faculty members off the tenure track, part-time faculty members, and graduate student employees. The AAUP report provides an update on the overall employment trend and a recap of important data on part-time faculty pay released in the last year. The Coalition on the Academic Workforce (CAW), of which the AAUP is a founding member, issued a report last year that found part-time faculty members earned a median of $2,700 for teaching a three-month course.

This year’s report provides an entirely new analysis of compensation and working conditions specifically for full-time non-tenure-track faculty members, also derived from the CAW survey. The majority of new full-time faculty appointments have been off the tenure track for two decades now, but the category has previously been defined mostly by what it is not. The new analysis finds that full-time non-tenure-track faculty members earned a median academic year salary of $47,500 in fall 2010, similar to the pay of entry-level faculty members found in the AAUP data for that year. The difference, however, is that non-tenure-track faculty members have only limited-term appointments that do not constitute a career path, and they struggle with some of the same inadequate support for quality instruction faced by part-time faculty members. The report looks at four aspects of support aside from salary and benefits.
Two further public policy issues affecting higher education are included in the report: state appropriations and the pay disadvantage for public-sector faculty. The report includes a state-by-state analysis of changes in higher education appropriations during the recessionary period. The totals across all 50 states show an 18 percent decline in higher education appropriations between 2008 and 2013, but there are wide variations.
Finally, the report provides a new depiction of the continuing salary disadvantage for faculty members in the public sector. The AAUP data for 2012-13 indicate that full-time faculty members teaching at public colleges and universities earn 7 to 35 percent less than their colleagues in comparable positions at private institutions. This difference accumulates over the course of an academic career, and makes it increasingly difficult for public institutions to hire and retain the best faculty members.

The salary disadvantage experienced by faculty members at public colleges and universities, and the continued growth in exploitative contingent employment practices, are thus matters of significant public policy. The disinvestment from fully supported and compensated faculty positions in the public sector means that the majority of students will be deprived of the most engaged instructors and mentors. Elected leaders consistently proclaim that investing in higher education is a state and national imperative, yet the data on state appropriations and public-private faculty salary disparities belie these proclamations. Public officials need to hear from their constituents about the value of higher education, and, importantly, about the critical role of faculty members in providing that education.

The complete report (including the institutional listings of average salary by rank and gender and aggregate tables for comparison) is available on our website, and AAUP members will also receive a hard copy of this year’s report in the mail as part of their member subscription to Academe. Non-members may order a copy by visiting the online AAUP store (http://www.aaup2.org/store.htm) for $95.00 or calling (202) 737-5900.

If you have questions, comments, or suggestions about this report, please let us know (aaupfcs@aaup.org). This is always a busy time of year, but we try to respond to every message. We look forward to hearing from you.

The mission of the AAUP is to advance academic freedom and shared governance, to define fundamental professional values and standards for higher education, and to ensure higher education's contribution to the common good. By joining, faculty members, academic professionals, and graduate students help to shape the future of the profession and proclaim their dedication to the education community. Visit the AAUP website and Facebook. Follow us on Twitter.

Faculty Focus: Course Evaluations: Helping Students Reflect on Their Feedback

By: Maryellen Weimer, PhD in Teaching Professor Blog
http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-professor-blog/course-evaluations-helping-students-reflect-on-their-feedback/

I always hesitate to do posts on student ratings. Every teacher has opinions, a lot of which aren’t supported by the research. But this post is on a topic about which there is little disagreement. Students don’t take the process all that seriously, especially now that they complete rating forms online. Few take the time to provide teachers with quality feedback. They mark the rating boxes quickly and dash off a few poorly worded comments. Most of the time it’s not a process that benefits teachers or students, which is sad because it could be an experience with learning potential for both.

Yes, students can learn from activities that involve them in providing instructional feedback, especially if it’s focused on their learning experiences in class. Most students have little insight into themselves as learners. So, if the assessment activity gets them thinking about how they learn and what teaching policies, practices, and behavior expedite their efforts to learn, it can be a beneficial activity for them as well as for the teacher.

The trick is coming up with feedback activities that garner these benefits and I just found a great example. Professor La Lopa, who teaches hospitality and tourism management at Purdue University, has students in his 200-level Human Resource Management course write a reflective paper on quality teaching and its assessment. (I can hear some of you wondering about the appropriateness of the assignment. His article, referenced below, explains the context which more than justified it for me.) What’s most creative about the assignment are some of the prompts students respond to in the paper. Here’s a condensed and slightly edited version of some of them.

How would you describe your ideal professor? Include a description of the classroom setting (number of students, physical space, etc). Paint as clear a picture for me as possible so I can envision your ideal college professor and class.
Now describe the typical teacher you have actually experienced in your courses here. What is the typical classroom setting like?
If you could put one question on a course evaluation what would it be and why would you ask it?
If you were the president of your college or university, what method would you use to evaluate the [teaching] performance of college professors?

The article is worth reading for the quotes excerpted from the student papers alone. Their observations demonstrate just how well an assignment like this gets students thinking about good teaching, its assessment, and its relationship to learning.

There are lots of potential spin-offs from an activity framed around these questions. The most frequently mentioned characteristics of the “ideal” professor could be shared and discussed. Why these characteristics? Are these characteristics that support efforts to learn? How? Why? How about the teacher writing a short description of the “ideal” student followed by another short description of the “typical” student? I wonder if the one question teachers would add to the course evaluation would be anything like the question students would add. Maybe the best way to evaluate professors is by how well their students learn. Is that a good idea? Why? Why not?

There’s lots of research documenting that students don’t believe that their feedback is taken seriously by institutions or instructors, which in part explains the poor quality of the feedback they provide. And there’s lots of research documenting that if faculty talk with students about assessment feedback it improves end-of-course ratings. It’s a visible sign that teachers care and are willing to work with students, even if we don’t make all the changes they propose. Good feedback activities like the one described here have one final benefit: they can be learning experiences for students.

Please share the ways you collect, respond to, and use feedback from students. We’re especially interested in those ways that also encourage students to encounter themselves as learners.
Reference: La Lopa, J. (2011). Student reflection on quality teaching and how to assess it in higher education. Journal of Culinary Science & Technology, 9 (4), 282-292.

UCD CFD Blog Rethinking the Bottom Line for Internationalization: What Are Students Learning?

Rethinking the Bottom Line for Internationalization: What Are Students Learning?

Posted by judithcoe ⋅ April 5, 2013⋅ Leave a Comment

Filed Under assessment, Association of International Educators, global citizens, global learning, global-learning outcomes, Honors and Leaders Program at CU Denver, intercultural skills, international requirement as part of the general education program, internationalization, Madeleine F. Green, Mark Salisbury, rapidly changing global environment, student learning, study abroad, Teagle Foundation

Rethinking the Bottom Line for Internationalization: What Are Students Learning?
From The Chronicle, March 21, 2013
The following is a guest post by Madeleine F. Green, a senior fellow at Nafsa: the Association of International Educators and a senior program consultant at the Teagle Foundation.
I am working with student and faculty leaders in the Honors and Leaders Program at CU Denver in planning a possible Maymester to Ireland in 2014. As a US Fulbright Scholar Alum and Fulbright Ambassador Emerita, I so believe in international initiatives and cultural ambassadorship. There’s much to consider, here.
___________________________________________________________________________________
For many, if not most, institutions, “success” in internationalization is a bit of a numbers game. It is defined by the number of students going abroad, the number of international students and the amount of revenue they generate, and the number of campuses abroad or courses offered with an international focus.
But what do these numbers mean for student learning? Although many colleges and universities cite producing “global citizens” as a goal, few have a clear set of learning outcomes associated with this label, a map of the learning experiences that will produce this learning, or an assessment plan in place to determine what students are actually learning and what that means for curricular improvement. Clearly, institutional performance and the student-learning perspectives can be related to each other, but one cannot assume causality in either direction. As anyone who has tried to assess student learning knows, a given set of institutional activities or the participation rates in various courses or programs does not tell you anything about what knowledge students are obtaining.
Consider the example of study abroad. It is no longer deemed acceptable to cite the “it changed my life” argument as the self-evident truth of its impact. Education-abroad professionals, researchers, and faculty members are looking seriously at outcomes, especially in light of the rapid growth of short-term overseas programs. What are realistic learning goals for these short experiences, and how do they compare to longer-term experiences? In a word, there is wide agreement that “being there” does not automatically result in learning, let alone “transformation.”
To further complicate matters, education abroad is only one approach to learning about the world. And as Mark Salisbury points out in his recent opinion article, U.S. higher education can’t put all its eggs in the study-abroad basket, no matter how wonderful it is. Although it is difficult to estimate the proportion of students who study abroad for credit sometime during their undergraduate careers, data from the International Institute of Education tell us that only 274,000 students out of more than 20 million enrolled in postsecondary education studied abroad in 2010-11.
Thus, the key question for higher-education institutions is how the overwhelming majority of students who do not go abroad will learn about the world and develop the intercultural skills they will need as citizens and workers. To address this question, institutions will need to be very clear about what knowledge, attitude, and skills students must learn, where and how they will acquire them, and what constitutes evidence of such learning.
The crucial first step is to articulate a series of agreed-upon global-learning outcomes. As is often the case in academe, the process is as important as the product. Having an inclusive process will enable a wide variety of people to relate the exercise to their own work. Global learning should belong to everyone. Here, there is help available. For Nafsa: the Association of International Educators, I wrote “Measuring and Assessing Internationalization,” which includes sample learning outcomes developed by a variety of institutions and guidance on how to develop a process that focuses on global-student learning.
The next step is identifying which courses and programs deal with these learning outcomes. Having a global or international requirement as part of the general education program is one common way to ensure that every student gets at least a small dose of global learning. Such a requirement is a good foundation, but does not go far enough. Institutions also need to look at majors, programs, and individual courses, as well as campus life and education abroad. In a word, global learning is not a one-time event.
The third step involves assessment. Assessment enables institutions to find out whether they are really producing “globally competent” graduates. This is indeed tricky business, for some institutions are much more serious about assessment than others, and capacity varies tremendously. Many faculty members find the language and trappings of assessment annoying and trivializing, and consider it a creation of the bureaucrats that distracts them from their real work. Yet, if you ask faculty members “how do you know what your students are learning?,” that can lead to some interesting and serious conversations. Successful assessment requires ownership by faculty, an investment in faculty development, and a process that is both manageable and continually focused on improving student learning.
And finally, institutions must apply what they learned from assessment to improving curriculum and teaching. This loops the conversation back to whether the goals are the appropriate ones (they need not be cast in stone), and what modifications could be made in content or pedagogy to improve student learning.
As internationalization becomes more central to U.S. higher education, it will be important to shine the spotlight on students. Although internationalization, alas, is increasingly a matter of numbers, profile, and branding, the real measure of success should be how well students are equipped to live and work in a rapidly changing global environment.

Lilly Conference on College & University Teaching - Submit a Proposal

Submit a Proposal

The call for proposals is now open and will close June 1. Click here to submit your proposal.

The review process will be completed as swiftly as possible with the intention of notifying presenters of programming decisions by July.
We encourage you to submit a proposal but no more than 2 proposals per presenter will be considered. To be accepted, presentations must

demonstrate scholarly teaching
build upon a foundation of published literature or include original data
be applicable across disciplines
have stated learning objectives
include active learning exercises/guided participation of the audience, if requesting greater than a 20-minute session
be non-commercial

References cited do not have to be published works of the presenter but rather include the references that serve as the foundation of the work to be presented.
As you develop your proposal, we suggest that you create your draft submission in a word file and be prepared to provide the following:

name, institution, department, academic rank, business address, work telephone for yourself or co-presenter(s):
identify which track your proposal best fits: Academic Success; Assessment, Student Learning; Creating Communities of Learners; Course/Curriculum Design/Redesign; Engaging and Motivating Studetns: Innovative Pedagogical Approaches; Multiculturalism/Diversity/Inclusion; Online Learning and Teaching; Sustainability; Service/Experiential Learning; Teaching Well with Classroom Technologies; or Other
Title (Maximum of 15 words)
3-5 Presentation Objectives
100 word abstract of the presentation (to appear in the conference program
Session Description (Maximum of 500 words) elaborate on the content of your presentation.
List presentation Activities(i.e., how will you engages session participants during the session?)
References from which your presentation is supported

Please note that once you have written your proposal abstract and description it takes about 15 minutes to complete the online submission by entering your contact information, co-presenter information, and cut/paste your proposal into the dialogue boxes.

Education Admin Web Advisor: Issue 23, Spril 8, 2013

Issue 23 · April 8, 2013

Headlines

"National School Shield" Task Force Recommendations Backed by NRA

A task force organized and funded by the National Rifle Association made eight recommendations to improve school safety, including placement of armed protectors in every school building in America.

School Performance Test Score Cheating Scandal Boils Over in Atlanta

The superintendent and other educators in the Atlanta, Georgia, public school system turned themselves in to face charges that they orchestrated or participated in a widespread conspiracy to change the scores on standardized student performance tests.

Teachers Channel Ideas on Professional Renewal and Transformation

A "national conversation" has gotten under way in which teachers are contributing their perspectives to public policy efforts aimed at transforming the teaching profession for the 21st century.

Why Students Join Gangs and What Schools Can Do

Preventing school-based gang activity begins with understanding students' motivations for joining gangs. With that understanding, educators have many tools for dealing with the destructive influence of gangs on their students.

Supreme Court Takes Another Race-Based University Admissions Case

A U.S. appeals court struck down a voter-approved ballot initiative in Michigan that forbids preferential treatment of applicants to state-funded colleges and universities based on their race, ethnicity, or gender. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, even though it is still considering the constitutionality of a race-conscious admissions policy at the University of Texas.

Student Recruitment Incentive Compensation No Longer Allowed

The Department of Education removed a safe harbor in its regulations that allowed pay incentives for school recruiters based on students successfully completing their academic program (or one year of the program).

Online Briefings for Education Leaders

Click for more details and to register ...

Staff Diversity in Schools and Universities: How to Embrace the Concept to Improve the Quality of Education

Thursday, April 11, 2013 @ 1 PM Eastern

An inclusive workplace sparks innovation, creativity, and intellectual reach. Find out how to establish a faculty and staff diversity management program that takes your institution to a whole new level.

School Volunteers and Interns: Are They Really Employees Under the FLSA?

Tuesday, April 16, 2013 @ 1 PM Eastern

Schools rely on volunteers to help in the main office or in classrooms and to fund-raise and manage school functions, and interns working as student teachers or aides are common. These may seem like simple "unpaid" volunteer or intern situations, but the Fair Labor Standards Act might see it differently. Find out how to tell whether your volunteers and interns are actually employees entitled to compensation.

Managing Disabilities in the College and University Setting: How ADAAA Requirements Affect Section 504

Wednesday, April 17, 2013 @ 1 PM Eastern

You have expansive responsibilities to identify, accommodate, and protect students with disabilities, including those with medical and psychiatric disabilities. Learn from an education law expert what the laws and regulations require of higher education institutions.

Legal and Practical Issues with Student Rights: Maintaining an Effective School Environment

Tuesday, April 23, 2013 @ 1 PM Eastern

As a Supreme Court Justice once famously said, students and parents don't leave their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate. Administrators must be able to deal with controversies involving freedom of speech, religious liberty, right to a public education, due process, and others. This briefing will survey student rights issues and help you devise a Student Code of Conduct that respects these rights while maintaining effective control of the school environment.

Affirmative Action Plan Preparation: Guidance for Writing Your Plan and Interpreting the Results

Wednesday, April 24, 2013 @ 1 PM

If your institution has government research or service contracts, you are subject to OFCCP regulations and are required to maintain a written affirmative action plan that is updated annually. An AAP is also a useful tool for achieving faculty and staff diversity. But it's not an easy hurdle. An attorney will walk you through the process and how to use the results for your own purposes.

View Our Entire Webinar Line-Up

No Worries! -- Webinars on CD Option!

What if you have a time conflict and can't participate in a webinar of interest on its scheduled date and time? Don't worry. You can still take advantage of our CD option. Soon after completion of each webinar, the program will be available on CD. Click here for the complete listing and future ordering information.

Education in the Courts

Teacher Calling Out School District's Educational Bias Against Student Had Limited Protection

An obviously conscientious kindergarten teacher recommended one of her students, an African American child referred to as "JK," for an extended-day program available in the school district to children who are performing poorly in literacy-related learning. School district officials declined to admit JK to the program, citing his "resistant behaviors" and the fact that he already knew the alphabet. The teacher believed that the real reason was bias against an African American child in a predominantly white school district, and she reiterated her concern at a district meeting several months later. The day after speaking out, she was denied tenure and was forced to resign at the end of the school year. Is she protected under the employment discrimination provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and was her First Amendment right of free speech trampled on?

After the alleged retaliation, the teacher filed a lawsuit in federal district court for the Western District of New York against the Penfield Central School District and its superintendent. She first asserted two claims: (1) that she suffered unlawful retaliation because of her opposition to discrimination in violation of Title VII; and (2) that the school district violated her First Amendment rights when she spoke out about an issue of public concern. She later added a third cause of action: that the school district was receiving federal financial assistance at the time it committed the alleged discriminatory acts, in violation of Title VI.

Under Title VII, an employer may not retaliate against an employee for opposing any practice made unlawful by Title VII. To prove unlawful retaliation, the employee must show that she was engaged in protected activity, the employer was aware of the activity, the employee suffered a materially adverse action, and a causal connection existed between the protected activity and the adverse action. However, the district court pointed out, the courts have repeatedly held that a teacher's complaints about alleged discrimination directed against a student do not constitute opposition to an unlawful employment practice. Because the teacher did not allege unlawful discrimination directed at herself, the district court dismissed the Title VII claim.

As for the First Amendment retaliation claim, to prevail the teacher must prove that she engaged in constitutionally protected free speech because she spoke as a citizen on a matter of public concern, that she suffered an adverse employment action as a result, and that her speech was the motivating factor in the employer's decision to retaliate. Back in 2006, the Supreme Court narrowed the type of speech protected by the First Amendment. Specifically, when public employees make statements as part of their official duties, they are not speaking as citizens for First Amendment purposes, and the Constitution does not insulate their communications from employer discipline.

Under this more restrictive interpretation, the teacher would have had to show that she spoke on a matter of public concern and that she was speaking as a citizen and not in regard to her duties as a school employee. The district court concluded that her speech was uttered because of her job as a teacher and in furtherance of her teaching duties. The court also opined that she spoke out, not in a public forum but at a private meeting attended only by district employees. Furthermore, she did not complain about systemic discrimination but only about the treatment of one particular student. Taken altogether, these facts convinced the district court to dismiss the teacher's First Amendment claim.

Finally, on the teacher's charge under Title VI that the school discriminated in a program that received federal funds, the court was more hospitable. The teacher had already amended her claim to allege that she had continuously complained of disparate treatment of African American children by the school district and that she was denied tenure and compelled to resign in retaliation for her advocacy. According to the district court, the fact that the teacher "was not the target of the discrimination does not defeat her claim. The question is simply whether she opposed a practice that she reasonably believed violated Title VI." Citing case law precedent that advocating for the educational rights of students under Title VI is conduct governed by Title VI's anti-retaliation provisions, the district court offered the teacher the opportunity to amend her complaint to assert only a claim under Title VI against the school district.

In all of this, kindergartener JK still did not gain access to the extended-day kindergarten program for low-performing students in which the teacher thought he belonged.

Read the decision and order in Karen Palmer v. Penfield Central School District, District Superintendent John Carlevatti, January 22, 2013

About EducationAdminWebAdvisor

EducationAdminWebAdvisor offers school administrators a source of ready information needed to run a modern teaching and learning enterprise, from pre-K to university, from small school to multi-level systems. Our online webinars, management tools, and free Web site content allow you to benefit firsthand from the experiences of experts in education administration, financial management, technology, research, law, and regulatory compliance. We will keep you in stride with the best practices of your fellow school administrators around the country and help you manage your institution's human resources, improve teacher and student performance, stretch budgetary resources, monitor trends in education management and delivery, deal with everyday challenges, and control legal and compliance risks.

Thank you for reading this EducationAdminWebAdvisor newsletter advertisement.

In This Issue

Headlines
· Education administration, innovation, and compliance news & issues

Webinars for Education Leaders

· Staff diversity management program

· FLSA compensation rules for school volunteers and interns

· Disability management in higher education

· Student rights: legal & practical issues

· Affirmative action plans for colleges & universities

Education in the Courts
· Teacher alleging bias against student loses job

Here's a Thought

"I believe we must view teacher performance evaluation primarily as a professional growth tool, rather than purely as an accountability mechanism. Don't get me wrong, there will be teachers who will fail to secure tenure or who will be terminated because of issues surfaced through their performance evaluation. But for the overwhelming majority of our teachers, those who are solid performers to truly extraordinary educators, our evaluation system will be about continually improving and enhancing their instruction."

-- Dr. James P. McIntyre, Jr., superintendent, Knox County Schools, Tennessee, testimony before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce's Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education at hearing on measuring teacher performance, February 28, 2013

Follow Us.

Inside Higher Ed: Digital Research, Not Teaching and MORE!

On Pace With Inflation

AAUP's annual survey shows modest pay gains, but low rate of inflation means that many full-time faculty members have a bit more spending power. Salaries and raises are larger at private than at public institutions.

Digital Research, Not Teaching

Survey of professors finds that they identify and use online materials for their own studies, but are less likely to do so for their classrooms.

Negligible International Growth

Report finds only marginal increase in applications from outside the U.S. to graduate schools. China -- source of large increases in recent years -- shows decline.

Welcome to the Dillard University Center for Teaching, Learning and Academic Technology Blog!

The Dillard University Center for Teaching, Learning and Academic Technology (DUCTLAT) http://www.ductlat.blogspot.com/ is essential in helping faculty effectively manage technology on and off campus. An important aspect of this initiative is achieved by bringing groups of faculty members together to learn the technology necessary to develop electronic resources for their courses and themselves, while planning and beginning the development of shared curricular materials. Cultivating faculty success at all levels reinforces the University's commitment to build premier faculty learning communities. All faculty, deans and academic administrators play a critical role in creating competitive and productive academic units in which expectations for faculty performance are clearly articulated and professional achievements are recognized and rewarded.

Dillard University CTLAT Blog

Search DU CTLAT Blog