2009/2010 Faculty Survey Results
Part I Comments (edited)
Contents
University-wide Administrative ratings .......................................................................................... 1
Research Funding............................................................................................................................ 7
Support for Teaching & Research................................................................................................... 9
Tenure & Promotion ..................................................................................................................... 12
Salaries/Financial support ............................................................................................................. 13
Faculty Morale .............................................................................................................................. 15
Distance Learning ......................................................................................................................... 18
Teaching Evaluation ..................................................................................................................... 22
Faculty Senate ............................................................................................................................... 25
USA Foundation ........................................................................................................................... 26
Board of Trustees .......................................................................................................................... 26
Other ............................................................................................................................................. 27
University-wide Administrative ratings
Dr. Lea has been excellent for research, but the President continues to be an
embarrassment to the university.
The President has performed exceptionally well in protecting the University from
the adverse effects of the current fiscal crisis.
The President's decision to appoint internal candidates to certain upper-level
administrative positions, notably the senior vice president for Academic Affairs
and the Deans of Colleges of Arts and Sciences and Medicine is utterly
inexplicable. These prominent positions are vital to the University's
advancement, and it is impossible to accept the fact that better candidates, with
new views and vitality, were not available or acceptable.
Vice President Lea has performed well. He has improved research infrastructure
and organization, and has demonstrated in appreciable ways the University's
commitment to expanding its research enterprise. The University's response to
the ARRA, largely because of Dr. Lea's leadership, exceeded expectations.
Dr. Franks has had no appreciable impact on the Health Sciences Division, which
is most regrettable.
VP Johnson is doing a terrific job!!
College of medicine is unique in being heavily dependent upon the Dept of
Pediatrics and one of its Divisions for solvency. Not something to be admired.
Faculty are far removed from the Presidents and Vice-Presidents. There are very
limited opportunities for interaction. Only a few faculty are part of the "inner circle".
Truly a "we-they" exists.
Salaries are too high for the work performed. Cutting the President's salary by 5%
would leave enough money to grant each incoming freshman over $1000 in
scholarship, without drastically reducing the President's quality of life; yet tuition
and fees continue to rise and many grants and scholarships are not awarded-citing the financial crisis as the reason. It is the responsiblity of the President to
ensure that all receive and affordable, quality education, and he has failed in this.
communication about the new teaching initiatives was not handled well from the
top. it is still unclear exactly what the university wants us to do and where the
supposed savings are supposed to come from.
Feel Dr. Franks is not always completely honest
President Moulton does not seem to have the interests or well-being of the
students at heart. They are the most important part of the University, and he does
not appear to care about how well we serve them.
I think the President and administration have given too much emphasis to Football
in this difficult financial time. I have seen too much evidence of financial
resources being spent there when academic department are being denied less
expensive purchases and having to wait weeks for maintenance because things
were needed in the new Field House. I think the faculty deserves to have a full
accounting of funding sources that are used to cover the football program!
Dr. Johnson is very supportive.
Awful, just awful...
What is this mission the President and Vice Presidents have????
Management of the Mitchell Cancer Center has been a disaster from its inception
to its being "given" to Mobile infirmary
During this financial crisis they have been excellent at communicating the steps
the University is taking to handle the problem.
Now that I am not personally on the Senate, I have no idea what is going on. The
President's letter about the financial situation was as long as it was vague. Also,
we're in a financial crisis so you print it out and send it to every member of the
faculty when it has already been sent as email and is going to appear as the front
page of the Midweek memo? Also, $.44 to mail a Christmas card to every
member of the faculty (and mine arrived LAST WEEK)? Really?
I feel we are fortunate to have the leadership we currently have.
President Moulton has done an outstanding job managing the finances of the
university.
Dr Johnson's appointment as senior VP is a joke. He has absolutely zero track
record as an academic. He is, therefore, totally unqualified to evaluate faculty
whose accomplishments far far outweigh his own.
Need to include faculty who work directly with the students more often.
Communication needs to extend beyond the Deans of the Colleges.
The university's decision on football was not consulted the faculty before the
decision was made, which takes away resources to fulfill the university mission.
The President is more concerned with his legacy then maintaining a mission. A
remarkable abandoning of the College of Medicine has occurred as it slowly fails.
He has devoted resources to a cancer center that is not part of the College of
Medicine. The failure of the College of Medicine will be his legacy.
Considering the state of many universities in the current economic crisis, I think
that our leadership has done very well at keeping things running smoothly without
laying off any employees. This is extremely commendable.
The current president was appointed without input from faculty. The university
suffered from not having a discussion of its mission.
Poor job dealing with Mobile Infirmary and placement and functioning of MCI.
These decisions have damaged the medical school and put increasing financial
pressures on all.
Whether intended or not, a sense of panic (financial) permeates. Registration
exceptions, enrollment exceptions etc. are now the rule rather than the exception.
It seemed a bit in appropriate for the President to have a Christmas party when no
one got a raise and our College did not have a Christmas party due to trying to cut
back on funds. It seems as though everyone should cut back on these extra
things during a time when no one is getting extra.
I think we continue to engage in imbreeding at the upper administration level
which is to the detriment of the university because minimizes the possibility that
new ideas and procedures with be brought to the university. Searches at the
dean's level seem to be a total farce because the decision as to who will fill the
position can be predicted 100% prior to the searches that are conducted.
Has anyone said that we don't need to "baby" freshmen, but rather teach them
responsibility?
There is clearly a communication disjoint between the office of the president and
regular faculty members on campus. At my previous institution I met and
discussed issues with the president several times (and I was just a PhD student).
However, at USA, that has yet to happen. It seems to me that the president's
office rarely, if ever, seeks the opinion of the faculty when making decisions.
Feb 10, 2010 8:58 PM
It seems there is a disproportionate allocation of faculty within departments. Some
have 3 - 4 administrative assistants for 4 faculty while others have only 1 for 8 - 10
faculty
faculty not buildings
President is extremely reluctant to take advice from advisors and staff. He makes
unilateral decisions without conferring with professional staff. He is more likely to
listen to the opinion of persons outside the university
The president of this university should be required to have a PhD just like every
department chair, dean and vice-president.
Faculty are asked to increase productivity as a result of the President's continual
failure to secure a fair share of state allocations to the most economically and
socially important institution in the lower third of the state.
Efforts to improve efficiency do not address the most wasteful practices of the
school. The institution is top heavy with administrators who are neither directly
involved with instruction, nor are they active researchers.
Faculty salaries are below national and regional averages. Faculty are being told
that we must teach more with fewer resources.
VP for Health Sciences appears to mainly focus on College of Medicine; pays lip
service to Allied Health.
I like the official update he sent on the economy and his plans on how to handle it.
We know nothing is perfect right now. I appreciate getting informed that our
leaders are paying attention.
I am unsure if there is a clear understanding of whether USA is a research or
teaching university. If it is both, then a reconsideration of time and resources
should be attempted.
VP Johnson needs to take a more proactive role in making sure courses from the
COE are offered in BCF. There is a concerted effort (now stronger than ever) to
get rid of BCF courses even when faculty offer to do videoconferencing format (or
this is never suggested).
I appreciate how straight forward the letters from President Moulton have been
with regard to our current economic status (and the regularity of these updates is
very helpful too).
Recent efforts at hybridizing courses reveal a bit of the "I'm the decider and I
decide what's best" mentality
Football is draining resources!
IT is time for a new president who is educated and can maintain a university
mission.
Johnson assumed office in the midst of economic crisis, and perhaps has not held
this office long enough to make a fair assessment. I do appreciate efforts of the
administration to preserve jobs, and hope admin continues to make job preservation
of faculty and staff a priority. Moreover, if cuts are to be made, I
hope that the admin will first look at reducing their own operating costs, as the
faculty and staff are already over-stretched to meet the growing needs of a largely
underprepared student body. Finally, I do have concerns about the effort to move
USA coursework online. Online courses work well in certain environments, but do
not really meet the needs of underprepared students who will either drop due to
lack of face-to-face contact or will otherwise eke through without gaining basic
skills necessary for success in their majors.
Need to articulate a much stronger vision of the academic quality of the faculty,
students and the academic as well as research taking place on and off campus
campus - at least as strongly as the athletic vision is articulated, preferably
stronger.
Best described as "scheming". Current policies simply abuse clinical medical
faculty. No raise in pay in years and increases in work-duty until now any
"protected time" is simply non-existent (meaning NONE).
The opinions in #3 are to reflect my feelings about the President. Vice President
Johnson would receive at least above average in these categories. As to Vice
President Lea, he seems very full of himself and very concerned with his image
instead of truly trying to help the faculty with regard to grant acquisitions.
Handling of "weather days" (e.g. snow, hurricane) is frustrating. Faculty, staff, and
students need advance notice of appropriate cancellations--especially those who
have young children.
There is a fundamental lack of communication from the Upper Admin with Faculty.
Very little faculty input is considered when making major changes and if it is, the
general feeling is that it is just a token measure.
Lea is the weak link at this university. Johnson is too new in the position to
accurately evaluate, but so far I feel he is doing well.
Feel there is no concern for my professional well-being from the administration
Pres. Moulton along with VP Johnson are very responsive to the faculty. They
seem to be very approachable and genuinely concerned about how events effect
each level of university to individuals.
Great job in tough times.
I have very positive impressions of them and their work.
I applaud their dedication to the University, it's faculty and students.
Dr. Johnson shows clear and consistent concern for his faculty and students,
striving to support them in their academic endeavors.
Many of us have never met him nor has the Pres. EVER come to visit the older
bldgs (ILB) on campus to evaluate their needs.
The outlook is moving towards a money making institution rather than an
academic institution. Example a grade point of 2.0 from high school is
acceptable.
President does not care at all about the hospital and the doctors. The vice
president has been ineffective in implementing positive changes at least in the
clinical departments. We need to grow and we need to focus efforts on expanding
our ability to provide care to our own employees. Primary care and continuity of
care and hospital care which can be provided by our physicians receive no
attention. It is not a priority at all. And so the clinical education we could provide
also suffers
doing a good job under difficult fiscal conditions
I am unsure why these positions are so important. Wouldn't professional
managers be more efficient and cost effective?
I would like to see the university less focused on cosmetic overhaul and more
focused on moving towards true research II status.
Moulton is an over-achieving educational entrepreneur.
Very encouraging. I am especially impressed and appreciative of Dr. Franks'
initiatives.
Dr. Lea sometimes presents other people's work/ideas as his own. The ones who
worked hard to deliver a product feel resentful. It's not a good leadership trait.
The leadership in general has very little grasp of the needs of a fully functional
College of Medicine. While I applaud the support to the basic science division,
there is little faith and support on the clinical side of the house. It is unclear to me
how an academic medical center bleeds money as this one does; furthermore, I
don’t believe that the leadership truly knows, either. It’s much like having a
leaking ship which is sinking, but no one knows where the leak is to fix the
problem; meanwhile, the leadership rearranges the deck chairs. Would someone
please dissect the numbers out to the penny from every source and figure this out
so that informed cuts can be made. The answer to the financial woes is not to
furlough the hospital staff while nothing of consequence happens to the main
campus staff. It’s frustrating as a junior faculty member who has been the part of
very successful hospital systems to watch how this mismanagement is destroying
a needed resource for the community (and I’m not referring to the service for our
indigent local population). Between the NICU and PICU, the Trauma and Burn
Service, the Pulmonary divisions work on Pulmonary HTN, and the (now defunct)
USA stroke center, there are valuable resources at the feet of population of
Mobile, AL; Problem is---nobody knows about them and the leadership doesn’t
care enough about them to have them function the way they should (IE continuing
to close beds at USAMC and not replacing key faculty members) The
responsibility for the success or failure of this system falls squarely on President
Moulton and the remainder of the leadership. I am completely unimpressed by
the lack of vision, the failure to state the mission, and the horrible execution of
either. Additionally it is unbelievable that the issues are tabled and just sat on
while the building crumbles around us. The leadership has failed to gain
community support, city support or county support for the very necessary services
that are provided; and no one has come up with a plan to right the ship. HSF is
top heavy and has a payroll that simply will never be supported by the revenues
that come in from the clinicians; other means of financing the system have to be
made. The fact that no one even tries to get support from the surrounding
hospitals and the city for all of the free work that we do is simply mind boggling.
In summary, I’m not pleased with the dedication from President Moulton to the
COM and I feel his having the COM on the back burner is a disaster waiting to
happen for the University as a whole.
The MCI situation remains a fiasco, especially in today's hard fiscal reality (that is
going to stay with us for a long time). They consume huge resources and go on a
shopping spree for instrumentation that could potentially be useful at some point
(but not now) instead of shearing resources with main campus or even clinical
laboratory. My clinical laboratory operates obsolete instruments that are now 16
years old and there are no money to replace it, even though we are serving
cancer patients. MCI has little clinical and research accomplishments that account
for a fortune sinked in this endeavor. The leaders should be responsible for this
sorry state.
unsure of role... poor communication with faculty.
President has little appreciation of our students' educational needs.
I have been disappointed in the leadership of the University during the last 3-6
months.
Dr. Lea is very pleasant and helpful to the faculty.
Research Funding
how can adjunct faculty be included or have opportunities
The research incentive plan, designed to motivate faculty to apply for ARRA
funding, was an outstanding initiative.
Office of sponsored programs sucks. They are useless and actually get in the
way. Fire them.
HSIRB refuses to answer my emails/phone calls. I have to email them 4 times,
call them twice, and have my chair email them herself before they'll bother to
answer my questions. I refuse to put anymore research projects through USA HSIRB.
Grants administration is well organized and effective.
Other than the few university grants which I have pursued, there seems to be little
support or help in identifying and applying for relevant grants. Those that I have
applied for I have found on my own.
I've gotten no help at all on the grants I've received.
The OSP should be helping to make the process of grant acquisition and
management easier for the investigators rather than increasing our workload.
Ashley Turbevill is awesome - responsive, knowledgeable, and helpful at all
aspects of grants and contracts. In my opinion our development of donors and
funding for R+D is below average. We need to do a better job of publicising our
successes and getting support for our mission.
Ashley Turbeville is very helpful. We need more people like her. The banner
system for grants is one of the worst systems I have ever encountered
Ashley Turbeville with the Division of Health Sciences is fantastic!
The university does not reward faculty members who obtain external grants. It is
pathetic.
It would help to get targeted e-mails about funding opportunities instead of
forwards about all funding opportunities.
Sending two or three e-mails per day does not facilitate writing grants. It frustrates
faculty who are busy doing the research that will facilitate grant writing. An
informed office of sponsored programs knows in intimate detail the research
expectations and expertise of the faculty. The solicitations then can be targeted at
the research.
Lea's job is to get money for the University. He should know that our job is to do
research. We only want the grant in as much as it will facilitate the research. We
don't want to fill in another form, and we sure as hell don't want to go to another
workshop.
We need institutionalized reassigned time for research projects. We need that
time to be allocated --- not on a yearly basis with negotiations among faculty,
chairs, and Deans --- but for long-term research projects that produce published
books and papers.
Research productivity is NOT measured by money generated through grants, but
by scholarly recognition of one's peers.
It seems that more work is dumped on the PI whose main job should be to insure
the completion of high quality research not whether purchase orders are paid and
other minutia. OSP seems happy to publish the amount of grants and contracts,
but not in aiding researchers!
In general there is little funding available in my area of interest
My sense is that the University contributes more resources to helping sciences
find research money than the humanities.
I am in a clinical department and research interests/potential projects are clinical
in nature. In general, there is little to no leadership/support at the college level for
those of us dedicated to clinical research. As a junior faculty trying to apply for a
very small research starter award, I encountered requirements that were unknown
to me and experienced much frustration. In talking with more senior faculty
members, frustrating experiences were not limited to the application (pre-award)
process, but also after obtaining the award. Including this type of information
during orientation would be helpful, more than completing the same online module
on patient confidentiality and risk management every year.
We could use much more grant writing assistance.
Those of us who are not in the science fields on this campus feel as if we are
second class citizens.
There is a disparity in funding available for the Humanities, Social Science, and
Sciences. Clearly those in less-funded fields have less opportunity at the start.
However, in the larger scheme of things, humanities and social sciences are
marginalized within the university as a whole. Furthermore, the "rewarding" of
those who receive grants as a way to foster more grant applications for our faculty
is fundamentally unfair for those in disciplines where there aren't many grants and
if there are, they are much more competitive.
Resources are not devoted to helping people in the humanities; if one is not in the
sciences, your research doesn't matter
In Engineering, the biggest impediment to research funding development is the
teaching load.
Overall, I try not to consult the OSP, unless absolutely necessary. To be honest,
my colleagues are of more help and assistance with proposal writing and
submission.
It seems like we are pretty much on our own when it comes to proposals. I come
from a contract research background where we had MUCH more support in
finding funding and writing grants so we could focus on doing the work, not getting
the money.
The Banner system is a nightmare. Charlene Martin is very helpful.
My teaching load is WAY TOO HIGH to even consider looking for or writing grants
from large sources. I already put in 60+ hours/week to this university at the
expense of my children an my marriage and my own well-being.
It becomes quite cyclical; if your teaching load is too high, then you have not time
to write grants and if you don't have time write grants, you'll never get them and
your teaching load remains high and leads to burn-out or a desire to look
elsewhere for employment that understands the need to support grant writing.
It was confusing and mostly a redundant waste of time.
OSP has little interest in humanities.
They have little understanding of grantsmanship. In addition they are simply lazy.
I wrote a grant for the COE but it was not sufficiently competitive due to two
things: one of the dean's pets did an AWFUL job on the assessment portion, and
the dean insisted on outlandish ideas of spending the funds for his interests
instead of the interests of the grant.
Support for Teaching & Research
Systems is a very weak link on campus.
Saving money by refusing to invest in the technology necessary for the
classrooms is causing a lot of difficulty.
A&S needs more than just Jason Smith and his barely adequate assistant
James!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Several departments merit their own technology staffs and
should be allowed to develop them/add them.
yes. I recognize the constraints of the recession and am happy to work within
them, but to continue to be a serious university we need to.
1)get back to reasonable levels of faculty travel money - enough to cover at least
one national and one regional conference /year.
2) resume a reasonable technology replacement schedule (4 years). These are
our main tools - they have to be reliable.
3)get working technology in all classrooms.
IT assistance is fragmented, & often takes a circuitous, pass-the-buck path toward
solving any of our problems.
Lack of competent office computer support and a marginally effective network
architecture makes ordinary academic computing very difficult without spending
research funds for technical support. This is a critical infrastructure issue for the
immediate and near term.
College PC Specialist is very unresponsive to requests (we can document months
of delay between report of problems and it finally being addressed - and only after
much hounding and follow-up reports to the Dean's office)
Computers have not been updated for faculty in line for such updates for over two
years.
Obviously, things could be worse. But the goal of the University shouldn't be to
make conditions just better than as bad as it can possibly get.
The tech here is way behind.
Computer needs updating. Class room arrangement is detriment to student
learning/presentations. Technological support is superb. Rusty Knapp has been
very helpful.
I find my computer needs better addressed with the use of my PERSONAL laptop.
Only when I need to use the overhead projectors do I even turn on the classroom
computer.
I have been trying to get a computer for SEVEN months. The budget for it was
approved immediately, but CIS has been extremely difficult to work with.
technology support is available...but mostly reactive rather than proactive...a
grand plan for technology improvement and updating is not in place
We need more tech support if we are going to implement additional
internet/computer based teaching. If a system is down for a week, that is one
tenth of the time for that course.
the freeze on buying computers needs to end
classroom technology is poor
Medical technology is extremely poor and falls short of what other institutions are
doing. It is disorganized, confusing, with no creativity and very little knowledge
about the needs of the health care professional.
virtually no support for mac operating sysytem, the hospital CIS especially no
knowledge of MAc operating system.
I indicated that the University did not provide adequate resources for teaching. I
would like to clarify that by inadequate resources I am referring specifically to
classroom technologies (projectors, computers, etc), and not such things as
PETAL activities. The university provides a more than adequate load of teaching
seminars, but not the resources to act upon the recommendation of these
seminars. Many of the computer-projection tools in my building are outdated,
slow, not practical for classroom use,etc., while we have only one computer
technician to service building and faculty computers. This really must change for
our current level of technology use---even more so if the university intends to
move forward with online teaching. Moreover, I do encourage the university to
spend money on more computer labs for students across campus, and free
printing for students.
Although technology is something that is provided there is no long term university
strategy for regular upgrades as well as time to train and adapt such.
I operate a computer that is now 7 years old and slow. I requested a replacement
monitor when mine failed and the new monitor was so inadequate I went out and
bought my own. There is currently no budget in my department for new programs
or even texts. We have to buy them ourselves.
Technical support is very lacking at the local level. For example, we have
difficulty simply getting access to the internet, in class or offices. Technicians
dedicated to computer services at the Department or College level are sorely
needed.
Technology is way behind. PETAL and OLL are useless. Clint (MCOB) is very nice but needs
more knowledge and time to do his job.
Classes to help with new technology are poorly conducted unless you already
have a good tech background.
Why does the university or college not have an institutional license for Windows,
MS office and other standard software? It seems a tremendous waste of money
to have every department buying individual licenses for their faculty and staff.
Refusal to implement networking.
No understanding of file sharing.
Poor virus protection.
Poor packet shaping.
Inconsistent connectivity and bandwidth.
Arbitrary and inflexible firewall rules.
It took several years and many complains to get our building Wi-Fi. Even the rest
stops along many of the Interstates now have Wi-Fi. How embarrassing this is to
USA.
If we are using more technology in the lectures we need more people helping with
tech problems.
The eCollege system favored by the university is one of the least user-friendly
systems and should be abandoned for one of the much better options. The PRS
clicker system is also much less effective and user friendly than most of its
competitors and should be replaced.
There's a disconnect between what the administration expects us to accomplish
and the resources [or lack thereof] provided with which we are to accomplish
these unrealistic goals (e.g., online courses, long-distance learning, federally funded
research). The Life Sciences Bldg is an embarrassment as a "research
facility" - nearly zero fire safety, zero climate control, no wireless, zero water
quality (our filtration systems are constantly clogged with crud), no house distilled
water, the electricity is at capacity, and we're using equipment that is ca. 30 years
old in some cases and/or has been reclaimed through surplus. It's completely
unreasonable to expect faculty to continue to operate productive research and
graduate programs under such conditions. We can't even write proposals to do
"cutting edge" research b/c should we actually get funded, it would be impossible
to conduct such research in this facility.
We have a very good infrastructure for supporting research.
Tenure & Promotion
My department has tried to help me a lot with
tenure and promotion. My department has been great even if the college hasn't.
High teaching loads not only hinder the ability to do research, but hinder the ability
to be innovative and creative in teaching. Extremely high service demands also
interfere with the ability to do an exceptional job at teaching or research and
receive little or no credit in the promotion process or in evaluation and
determination of raises.
Having served on department tenure and promotion committees, I'm amazed that
teaching, which should comprise 60% of the performance evaluation in my
college, is categorically dismissed. Research and publications are the criteria that
determine advancement, but they constitute 30% of our evaluation. This is a
common practice and has been mentioned at the department chair and dean
level, but the inconsistency continues unresolved.
We should be given reasonable teaching and service loads to facilitate research--we shouldn't have to
beg for course reassignments.
Dean makes unrealistic demands for research given daily workloads caused by
frozen positions.
As for research, it isn't that the amount of emphasis is wrong, it is that we count
crappy work the same as good work.
First, we love our new building and being on main campus again!! With teaching
loads of 42 hrs over 3 semesters, it is hard to be involved in scholarship and
research. On-line classes have 30++ students in one section! This is not
consistent with other Universities. I believe the CON has more teaching hrs a
semester than colleges such as education. I wish Dr. Franks would please take a
closer look at faculty's teaching loads because we very much want to be involved
in research, publish, and present nationally which would represent the University
well. It is almost impossible to do so with the loads clinical faculty have. Nonclinical
faculty only have 33 hrs/yr. That is doable but not 42 hrs. Also please
keep the on-line number of students where it should be. Or give more teaching
credit. I am very proud of the University and love being part of the family. I just
want to continue to try to represent well.
Tenure/Promotion means nothing when administrations fires excellent faculty for
political reasons but maintains underachieving faculty simply for politics and a fear
of lawsuits.
In the COE we have heavier loads than any other college (if we teach any
undergraduate classes). I am teaching two undergraduate classes, two graduate
classes and tow field experience course this semester. Graduate-only faculty
teach a 3/2 load and get release time for "advising" graduate students and
doctoral thesis. Some actually do spend quite a bit of time with doctoral students,
while others spend almost no time. I teach undergrad, masters and doctoral level
classes and I KNOW that each level has its challenges, but none are MORE
difficult or time consuming that the other if good teaching is going on. In fact my
graduate classes take far less time than my undergraduate classes.
I mentioned earlier the inequity in promotion. Promotion depends almost entirely
on research & mostly publication. The faculty who have light teaching loads are
the ones who get promoted. They have the time to research and publish. In the
new undergraduate merged curriculum, field courses have been put into
classroom courses without any recognition of the extra hours this require from the
faculty. This makes it even less likely for faculty who teach undergraduates to
have time to publish and therefore even less of a chance to get promoted.
Adjuncts are now teaching merged courses will 40+ students in online sections
and so must eliminate any "good teaching" and revert to memorization and
regurgitation. I asked for a sabbatical to have time to write and research and was
told NO.
More emphasis is needed on rewarding good teachers versus obtaining grants,
doing research, and publishing.
Salaries/Financial support
The COM compensation is below the national average, with much higher teaching
loads, and without compensation for travel or memberships in societies important
for professional development. The financial crisis has created this nearly
unsolvable problem and I am assured our faculty leadership is working hard to fix
the problem.
College does not provide anything. I have to find my own sources to support
research and technology.
The Dean and Chairs have been the majority of the recipient of moneys to fund
professional development in the past year. The new faculty are not mentored in
ANY formal way and the students are the ones hurt by this.
Salary advances in the College of Engineering can not be correlated with
academic achievement. They are simply unfair.
Though budget a grave concern - the administration needs to find a way to give
staff AND faculty a cost of living raise before people start leaving. The
administration seems to prize facilities higher than the people that work in them. I
realize that money they use to build "vanity" projects like the clock tower are
bonded and the money can't be used otherwise, but in a show of understanding
and solidarity perhaps they could at least suspend these unessential projects until
employees can receive at least a minimal pay raise. If nothing else it would be a
way to improve morale.
Yes, money is tight, but I know of an easy place to get it and save students money
in these hard times, too- ditch the football program. My willingness to put up with
cuts is severely undercut by the extravagance of trying to start up a program
which I strongly suspect will never pay any positive dividends to faculty (or even
student) life.
Do to the economic crisis, travel funds have been cut which makes it hard to go to
national and regional conferences to increase professional development. Also
some of the areas within our college have a larger teaching load for tenure track
professors, 4/4 or 4/3. Since this average is 3/2, this makes it more difficult for
faculty to complete research. The compensation is not any greater even thought
the teaching load is increased. I do, however, approve of the relatively small
class sizes which allows the professor to have more personal interaction with the
students.
Our salaries should be based on other institutions as well as the private sector.
We have students with B.S. degrees beginning their careers making 5 to 10k
more than my salary (I've been an instructor here for 10 years). The Mobile
County Public School System, which is notoriously cheap, pays significantly more
than USA. I love my job, but it is hard to stay when there are jobs (in Mobile) that
offer much higher wages.
Faculty salaries at USA are low. Raises have been small or nonexistent. Worst of
all, raises are only faintly related to accomplishment. Administrators, on the other
hand, do well.
The only reason I get reimbursed for travel is because I have sufficient grant
money to do so.
I feel that some faculty with more clinical work get paid higher than those of with
significant administrative duty and less clinical time
Our students with bachelor's degrees are getting hired locally and are making
$10,000 to $15,0000 more than we are with Master's degrees. Salaries should be
reviewed. When was the last time this was done?
Currently I am experiencing salary compression problems that I hope the
University will address as soon as the economy is slightly better. My hope is that
this will be rectified during the new fiscal year.
Compared to national averages in my discipline in A&S, we are very much
underpaid-- we significantly don't meet the national average. And the pay
disparity between A&S and other colleges at USA can be significant which only
echoes national trends. For example, Business School professors of all ranks
making extremely high salaries compared to those in A&S. This is a national
problem and not just here at USA. Nonetheless, it is an unjust compensation
situation. At least bring A&S averages up to national averages for disciplines.
Also, salary compression is a problem here as well. Newly hired assistant
professors make nearly as much (within a few thousand in some cases) as
tenured faculty members with years of service.
The university expects far too much uncompensated service. We are paid
(poorly) for nine months, but still expected to work for the university--coming in for
advising days and doing other administrative work--in the summer months. If they
are not going to pay adequate salaries, they cannot expect more work. We do not
get enough travel money--we are expected to attend conferences and give papers
to get small raises when available, but only have funds to travel to one, perhaps.
So although one conference is fully reimbursed, if we can't afford to pay for more
on our own, we don't go. It is rather ironic that when we get raises, they are
based on research and publications, yet we don't receive the support needed to
research and write for publication.
Funding for meetings has been eliminated. Funding for National, State, and
Regional Organizations has been severely curtailed. At a time when I am far
exceeding expectations and putting in a lot of extra time, the benefits I was
promised have been removed and in essence, my pay has been cut. I was
supposed to run a session at a national meeting but had to cancel due to lack of
funding.
The ban on travel funds has made it extremely difficult to present at professional
meetings and serve on professional committees - some of which had been
committed to prior to this ban.
Part time instructors teaching fully on-line courses should have the opportunity to
have a laptop purchased through the university.
This is the first institution that I have been employed by that does not include a
cost of living increase yearly.
I realize proration is a problem and I'm not complaining - I'm just glad I have a job!
Also poorly compensated to peers at other institutions and the travel restrictions destroy
morale and teaching development/enhancement.
Faculty salary at USA is significantly below the level with our peer institutions, and
raises are often unfairly distributed.
Steadman's buddies get hefty raises
…for travel. It is not how much you get reimbursed, it is
whether you have any funding to go to professional meetings.
Are there ever going to be raises again in my lifetime?
Pay for professors and instructors is inadequate. Does not seem to be the case
with our administrators.
Faculty Morale
"Corporations take on the personalities of their leadership."
The College of Medicine, like the University was during President Whiddon's era,
is managed like a feudal kingdom, with policy and decisions made by whispers in
the hallway.
love working at USA. I love the academic freedom I have. The only reason I
marked "move to another institution" is because the students at South have an
odd sense of entitlement, such that they should deserve an A for doing nothing
and that a poor grade is my fault, not theirs. Otherwise, I love what I do here and I
love the faculty that I work with.
I am very worried about the impact that new teaching initiatives might have on
academic freedom, as our courses become more subject to the forces of
'rationalization'.
Administration and the dean are receptive to hearing opinions on university
polices and procedures, but the interim Chairs of the English department promote
an elitist attitude, and only give credence to certain faculty's' opinion while others
are completely disregarded as having important input at all. In fact, a whole
segment of the English faculty will probably soon be disenfranchised by this elitist
group who are seeking to take away their vote on key departmental decisions.
As part time faculty, I would like to know more about university policies
procedures. I would like to receive information about and attend faculty meetings
to learn more. I would like to be hired full time in the future. Would like to continue
research because I want to share knowledge. However, as you know, part-time
faculty are not paid to do so. Therefore, I tend to spend my time volunteering or
otherwise rather than doing what I need to do to continue my research. Being
given the opportunity to be more connected to the university by attending faculty
meetings may be helpful.
There are limitations in my college and department with regard to faculty level
input for decision making.
The environment is very unprofessional. The faculty are told how to vote before
and at faculty meetings. There is no real opportunity for dialogue although it is
typed into the minutes that there is. It is "understood" how everyone will vote
before the meetings. The faculty are treated unprofessionally. Although faculty
work on week-ends and in the evenings correcting papers and preparing for
clinicals they are still expected to be in their offices, mon-friday (8-5). A secretary
comes around with a clipboard to check on faculty prescence. There is very little
support or mentorship for faculty who are not "liked" The leadershipin in many
ways is unprofessional and immature. I have worked at several other Universities
and this is the least supportive environment I have encountered both
professionally and personally. The Deans and Chairs are given the majority of
the support and finances and the junior faculty who need the mentorship are left
to struggle. Treating faculty as professionals would be a good start toward
improvement.
Under current financial difficulties and other priorities, it appears that real listening
is not taking place
I think you are punished for expression opinions that may be counter to those of
the administration so most people do not express these opinions
I love my job but we are so under staffed and overworked I am considering
leaving. That will be a shame because we lose a lot of corporate knowledge
when we lose people that have been here a long time. Our Dean doesn't have a
clue how hard we are working. He says 'it's all about the students', but if that
were true, we'd have some more staff!
Last year we had trouble with travel expenses so this year I decided not to travel
at all because I could not afford to go through that again.
I love the university and want to stay and love my job. Just mechanisms in place
to let me do it more effectively and fulfill all obligations to the college's mission.
technology in instruction vs. academic freedom, whose courses are they?
Johnson et al. would rather have another piece of paper or another clever form to
have me fill out than they would to have me present a paper a meeting. They
could give a *** if I give a talk at another school, and they do not recognize the
recognition that my peers afford me.
I am filling in this form rather than doing work on my research projects at this
moment because I am so fed up.
Any move would be based on geography rather than dissatisfaction with USA
I am content with my current work load at USA, and have been happy here,
although I am not happy with my salary. I am underpaid relative to my peers in
other areas of the country, yet I am more productive than most. Moreover, it is a
myth that cost of living is substantially lower here than elsewhere, while student
loans are quite burdensome. Recently, I have also become concerned about the
current impetus toward on-line teaching, which seems somewhat heavy-handed
and coercive. Mainly I have been relatively content despite my salary because I
enjoyed the students and the university climate. Now I fear the climate is
changing---that the university is becoming increasingly paternalistic and legalistic.
I try to stay under the radar re: complaining publicly about Univ. policies. I'm not
even sure I trust the anonymity of this survey.
As untenured, I am reluctant to speak out against anything.
In addition to moving to another institution, I would consider non-academic
employment. It is often like treading water here. It would be better if we had a
clear vision of what we are-- a research university or a teaching institution. It is
hard to do both unless you have administrators who fully understand that mission
and it is extremely hard to do unless adequate resources are devoted to it which
they are not.
We can express opinions, but as stated previously, the university administration
does not take our opinions seriously. Voicing opinions is one thing, effectively
voicing opinions is quite another.
The Mitchell College of Business is a dictatorship. The Dean cares nothing for the
opinion of faculty. This is widely known. But he's had the job for 20 years.
Teaching and research facilities are below average, particularly with regard to
introductory-level courses.
I may have a large amount of freedom to express my opinion, but that doesn't
matter if no one listens.
Don't discuss academic freedom in MCOB. Carl doesn't like that.
I feel my untenured colleagues are responding to pressure to inflate grades in the
name of student "retention".
I would like to move in to more of a research role and/or administrative position
but don't see any option for that here unless there is significant change in load
expectations and support for research and service. I have contact on a regular
basis with colleagues in my same discipline in this region of the country and see
the support that get for their endeavors which is far greater than here. They keep
trying to recruit me... if I did not have personal responsibilities here right now that
will not allow me to move, I would definitely take them up on their offer.
South Alabama is a great place to teach medicine. Clinical peers are outstanding.
Some of the people I work with here are heads and shoulders above other folks I
have worked with at other institutions. It just seems the current administration
does not realize how good they are and are letting things deteriorate.No vision, no
help, no allocation of resources. We need newfound commitment, growth, and
development.
This is not a place for people who rock the boats.
The constant sham searches and internal promotions just leave me sad and
unmotivated.
I am a part-time instructor so these results may not help in the validity of your
survey. However, I would like to say that the midterm notices for 100 and 200
level courses seems a bit like high school. I do not think that at this level of
education the students need to have their hand held or be spoon fed anymore.
Since I joined USA many years ago, there has been no protected research time
whatsoever. This is very unfair compared to my peers in my department. How can
this university expect academic productivity without providing time for research
and development?
President repeatedly manipulates supposed expressions of faculty (and student)
opinion.
Any discord with the administration is not taken very while. Both myself and most
of my fellow faculty feel the administration consider the faculty nothing more than
a necessary evil, not be trusted and placed at the bottom of the pecking order.
If you disagree with key administrators, you are accused of being "insubordinate"
or told to focus activities that will lead to tenure/promotion.
Many of the faculty feel that USA is in danger of becoming an online degree mill,
and that in the process, we are being pressured to lower academic standards.
This is the only time we have to express our opinions and I know it is just a way to
vent. Nothing will come of it. If anything the dean will figure out who said what
against him and make life even more unbearable.
I love what I do here, but what I do is changing significantly. Although thought of
as a good teacher, my teaching interactions are being limited for uncertain
reasons. I am relied upon primarily as an income source and I resent it. I would
like more interaction with young physicians...yes more!
I am happy and enjoy my colleagues.
I have always been a strong proponent of USA-COM and our mission. The recent
lack of support in terms of financial support for academic endeavors, protected
time for scholarly work, and understaffing of the faculty have led to increasing job
dissatisfaction by myself (and I believe, many of my fellow faculty.) It is unlikely I
will remain at USA if the environment remains as is
Distance Learning
Without release time or additional incentives there is little benefit to conducting
online courses.
The time involved in creating a distance ed course is considerable, no release
time is given. To teach a distance course effectively requires more time than a
traditional course. Course load should be lower not higher.
Distance learning is crap. Show up.
Teaching online is another "tool" for a true educator. Content is content. A good
teacher can deliver content in a multitude of venues - including via a distance
platform . Online education allows the University to truly support a learning
environment that does not discriminate or marginalize certain members of our
society. Who are we to say that unless a student can sit in the classroom and
hear me speak, they should not be given the opportunity to learn the content that I
deliver in that manner? With the technological advances available in a University
community, we should think of numerous delivery models for content. A welleducated
society benefits us all.
OLL makes a transition to online teaching wonderful!
I have zero interest in distance learning and hope that I will not have to choose
between staying here and having to participate in it and leaving.
Distance learning is a moot point until the technology for local teaching is
adequate. I cannont recommend diverting scant resources for a new venture
unless it can replace or strengthen the base function of the University. There may
be select markets (adult education) that could be profitably entered, but this does
not seem like a good use of resources until the current residential programs are
competent.
Though online courses require a great deal of extra work, no time is allotted to
develop them. Arts and Sciences does provide an incentive to develop and teach
these courses, but again, the English department leadership has been anything
but supportive and may even consider voting to keep our courses from being
completely online.
Give us a ******* incentive to do online courses. It's a lucrative business and the
University of compensate us accordingly.
The distance learning program has not be researched and we don't currently have
the resources. PETAL is useless and Litchfield et al is also useless.
Course capacity (# of students enrolled) is too high to do a good job and there
appears to be no university standard for this. It varies from college to college and
even within colleges.
I have taught elsewhere using WEbCT. Ecollege is similar. I learned about using
ECollege in two OLL recent workshops. WebCT was a helpful tool as a
supplement to the class. We met at all regularly sheduled classes at the
university. However, I felt I could share info, save paper, and communicate with
students better using the tool as a supplement. I may decide to use eCollege next
fall if appropriate for classes I am assigned.
The best technical support I have received is from the eCollege technical staff.
Unfortunately, the technical support at USA is not at all adequate and, in my
opinion, nonexistent.
This whole business of training faculty for distance learning needs to be
completely overhauled. I have found any interaction with these people over in the
commons to be a total waste of time.
Lack of support technically and personally
eCollege is not a very good distance education program.
The administration is crying for "efficiency." A few years ago, the call was for
"retention." When will there be adequate concern for quality of students and
instruction?
Quickie training courses are insufficient....technology professionals should be
assigned to each Department so that real training and assistance can take place.
Faculty have many other duties and do not have time to learn all tech training on
their own...
It takes a lot of time and planning to develop a course for online delivery. Other
school provide additional pay for developing online courses. I have absolutely no
time to take on any more projects, but I do believe that developing online content
is very important to our progress as a University.
Technical support is very inadequate. Currently, we cannot even get basic office
computer problems resolved in a timely manner. Need to hire many more
instructional design staff before embarking on big shifts to online course
development.
Teaching takes time and too few seem to recognize this. Teaching well online
means a great deal of initial time and great time in responding to students and
grading assignments.
I have addressed problems here in an earlier comment connected to University
support for teaching.
I am not in favor of distance learning.
eCollege is expensive and very rudimentary. The university pays a Mercedes
price for a Pinto. The university should look at others such as Blackboard, Angel,
Desire2Learn, Moodle, and Sakai.
If this is the road we are going to go down (which it seems increasingly like we
will), there needs to be greater support for developing such courses which take
time. Incentives perhaps-- other than just a Mac computer. A course release to
develop and/or cash incentive. Moreover, I can't get the technology to work in my
own classroom-- the computers are not maintained well and the equipment old in
some cases. I can't even download certain things from the internet to access
during class because the computer can't handle it. How can we expand when we
have trouble with the basics?
I have serious doubts about the effectiveness of online learning. I think it is
usually undertaken for budgetary and convenience rather than educational
reasons. Perhaps I will be proven wrong, but I don't think the studies are
conclusive and I hope that objective analysis will be undertaken about the
educational value of online courses.
The public school system seemingly has more technical capability than the
university does. I have found it difficult to deliver effective multimedia components
for online learning due to bandwidth issues, restrictions placed by the Computer
Center, etc.
The seminars held to instruct faculty on how to do technical things in the
classroom are usually held in the middle of the day for about 4 hours at a time.
With my heavy faculty load, I am completely unable to attend any of those
sessions, even though I would like to do so.
The distance learning software used (eCollege) is a highly inadequate platform,
with too many shortcomings to list them all here. In reality, lectures become
reduced to PDF files because they are easier to handle, and MUCH easier for the
students to view.
The library has to support distance learning students but we are not involved in
the development of the courses at all -- I cannot even access USA Online to see
what kind of problems students might encounter.
OLL is mostly useless. PETAL is a complete waste. Our guy, Clint, needs to catch up and be properly
trained if he's going to help us with online learning.
We have really fallen behind other institutions regarding distance learning. I've
tried for years to get some of our courses offered online but have hit brick walls. It
takes a lot of time to build a quality online course but the university provides no
incentive for taking on a project of this magnitude. There should be a financial
incentive offered for online course development. Faulkner offers the faculty a
$1000 development fee.
Students like online learning because they can pay someone else to take and
pass a class for them. There are web sites and info available to have someone
do this for you at any college.
Many of my colleagues at other universities in several different disciplines were
paid to develop fully-online courses. This was not even mentioned to us. Setting
up web-enhance or fully-online courses, without technical support, is very difficult
and EXTREMELY TIME CONSUMING, especially with our current online system
which leave much to be desired
If you want to teach for University of Phoenix, that's fine by me, but I wish you
would not be here.
OLL Workshops are a joke.
I have not become involved with distance learning because the incentives and support are not there.
This question begs the larger issue regarding the effects of online education on
student learning. I and many of my colleagues feel the trend at USA toward online
courses is diminishing the quality of our program.
Online courses tend to be far less rigorous than classroom based courses (even
when they are lecture format). South needs to do what Auburn does: require
faculty to prove distance sections are a rigorous as on-campus courses. I know
for a fact that some faculty have dumbed down their online courses when
students complained "too much work" in order to ensure enrollments and good
evaluations.
Distance learning is not just "online." I asked that USA get the technolofy to do
courses as Auburn does: via technology that allows students to attend inreal time
by webcam in their homes (a form of videoconferencing where the students do not
need to be attending from one other location with expensive videoconferencing
equipment-something like SKYPE but more reliable and with more interactive
tools). Iwas told NO: we already have spent so much on Second Life....
My office computer never works correctly. I go home to do most of my computer
and Internet based work.
We are expected to use technology in our classrooms (in fact we have been
threatened with sanctions if we do not) yet the tech doesn't work many times or if
there is new tech it is incompatable with other tech that we have previously
prepared to teach our classes. We are told simply: redo everything to fit the new equipment.
There has been an increased interest from the dean to teach hybred courses. I
believe that if the univerisity is going to follow this course of action, then the
technology needs to be upgraded to meet this demand. If the professor is to
provide those who come to class and those who choose to do thier work only
online with the same information, then the school will need to consider
broadcasting the in-class sessions live. Otherwise the in-class meetings become
glorified office hours.
There is a strong push for distance learning and hybrid classes, while overall
enrollment has grown. In surveying our students most are strongly against this
method of teaching, and chose our university because of its location and
convenience for attendance. I highly suggest surveying our students more
formally about whether we should continue to push and invest so much in these
alternate classrooms.
Teaching Evaluation
Instructors with near perfect teaching evaluations receive very high performance
ratings, but are likely not challenging students to work beyond their comfort level.
Instructors who force students to work harder than they would like will likely be
punished with somewhat lower teaching evaluations.
The principle evaluation for teaching is based on student reviews which do not
express the extent to which students have learned a subject, only their subjective
feelings on the teacher/experience. Moreover these evaluations should be public so that students have a
more reliable measure of a course than ratemyprofessors.com
As an adjunct, I wish I would have been observed at least once by my chair - or
someone similar, in addition to student evaluations.
As important as it is, teaching is extremely difficult, probably impossible, to
accurately evaluate. But I suspect we could do a better job than we're doing now.
There should be specific requirements, and clearly stated expectations regarding
teaching effectiveness.
Evaluation of teaching varies from one dept. to another and in many cases is
inadequate. Student surveys are given too much weight. They should be used
for feedback to instructors, not for evaluation.
I am new part-time faculty. I do not know yet how teachers are evaluated at
USA. I think new faculty should receive the evaluations students will be using at
faculty orientation. I will search for evaluation after this survey. I think teacher
evaluations are important. However, of course, there are all kinds of reasons
students give positive or negative evaluations. I think most emphasis should be
put on teachers evaluating students rather then them evaluating teachers. Most
teachers I know, seem to be trying to teach well. Different students respond to
differently to different methods and different people.
The use of student evaluations of teaching heavily or solely is problematic.
In the College of Engineering, faculty in favored departments have an easy
teaching load; faculty in departments not favored, are overloaded. Look at the
numbers!
The evaluations should be done on-line so that class time is not wasted. Also, it is
inappropriate for faculty members to administer the surveys. However, with no
raises in the past, present or near future, why should it matter?
Many pseudo-experts believe that there is a real and effective method of
evaluating "best practice"...it is multi-factorial and difficult ... student evals
(electronic) have become a joke .... personal evals are artificially high ... Real
leadership at the College and Department levels is lacking ... just developing self
supporting rubrics is not the answer
Faculty need to be observed teaching in the classroom as part of their evaluation.
How you look on paper is not a good indication of your value as a teacher. The
student evaluations at the end of the course are worthless. Most are too afraid to
give negative comments and the rest are just too lazy to give thoughtful
responses.
Our department desperately needs a new evaluation tool.
consumer satisfaction is all that is used. of course this is related to grades and
workloads in the course.
The student surveys are likely to be mishandled and abused. The University
should provide on-line surveys for all students in all courses. Students should
complete surveys before they see their grades, and they should be afforded the
opportunity to revise their opinion after they see their gradees.
We are encouraged to have rigor in our classes but then discouraged from having
students be "unsuccessful." It is difficult to balance this.
Teaching evaluation needs a complete overhaul and more effort needs to placed
on other measures of teaching effectiveness than simple student evals.
Guidelines from academic affairs as to what consitutes adequate teaching
evaluation would go far in solving some of these issues.
Student evals are of questionable worth
everyone talks about the importance of teaching but when it comes down to it the
only thing really counted is publications., This is not fair.
During annual review student evaluations are used to assess teaching abilities.
For the most part these evaluations are subjective and often opinions and
destructive criticism from dissatisfied students rather than constructive feedback.
Peer-level evaluations would be more helpful.
I think students do not understand the evaluations.
The current evaluation system is outmoded and does not allow for students to
accurately evaluate. Qualitative evaluations are really the way to accurately
assess. Certainly students who have an "axe to grind" with certain professors
because the student isn't doing the work and failing should not be a basis for
which to evaluate a professor's classroom performance. Make the student
accountable by asking them qualitative questions. Besides, that way the
professor knows what, exactly, to improve upon. I have always received high
evaluations, but I can see how it is a poor system with a poor set of questions
where junior faculty members could be the big losers (ie: salary/merit increases,
tenure evaluations) with such a method of evaluation. Many faculty think that the
current evaluation with SSOTs are a joke and don't pay any attention to it.
Maybe we could have an evaluation system that measures more accurately by
qualitative methods, or at least better questions than those on the current SSOTs.
Relying solely on student evaluations of teaching is not adequate. Students'
perceptions frequently can be correlated with grades; until we begin to take
grades and the grades students expect to receive into the equation, these surveys
will remain inadequate.
Evaluation in lower-level courses is skewed because students are increasingly
more unprepared to be there (and are thus less satisfied with their experience),
and because the university does not handle the placement process correctly.
Placing a student in a remedial course while concurrently enrolled in the course
they need it for is unproductive; students that don't have the skills to introductory level
work should either not be admitted, or admitted provisionally while being
placed in remedial-only course. Excuses for not doing this, especially those
leaning toward 'preserving self-esteem', are simply setting students up to fail (an
un-ethical taking of their time and money).
Too many problems to specify.
The students that respond to computer evaluations sometimes are the very ones
who never attended class and therefore did poorly. The good students tell me
they usually don't bother to reply to evaluations.
I find the teaching evaluation forms filled out by my students to be worthless. The
questions are terrible and there is no room on the form for independent feedback.
WHy else be here if the teaching is not paramount to the teacher!?
Class evaluations in our unit are completed by students using eCollege. They do
not show comparisons with others in the unit or for the University as a whole.
Teaching evaluations of the senior faculty members are not considered at all. as a
result, majority of the senior faculty members do not care much about the quality
of their teaching.
There is an culture at USA of excellence in teaching, however, the other side of
the equation is ignored or at times discouraged, i.e., excellence of learning. We
need to start treating our students as adults, with adult consequences, good or
bad, for their actions
the teaching evaluations used in A&S are not reliable. It also not clear what
exactly they are measuring.
If we continue to move in the direction of bigger classes and heavier teaching
loads I'm not sure how anyone can expect good teaching. But then, folks seem to
think lecture and exams IS good teaching (sigh)
Faculty Senate
faculty senate needs more teeth. I think they try to represent our interest to the
faculty, but have a limited ability to do so. In part because the different units
represented have such different interests and challenges. they may need to do
more work at the caucus level.
I don't even know why we have a faculty senate. The University simply ignores
recommendations it doesn't agree with. We don't appear to have anyone in the
senate with the cajones to stand up to the administration.
It is good that faculty senate members are increasingly represented on university
committees - that is a real source of leadership and power. Also, expanded terms
for faculty senators could lead to improved continuity. I agree with that bylaws
change.
The administration has told you that faculty work loads will increase. That is what
they mean by improved efficiency. Why does the senate not call for a faculty
strike? Or does the senate think that its role is to say, "Yahsah, please don't beat
me masser."
The Faculty Senate is extremely poor in relating information to faculty. Case in
point, as of today, February 22nd, the minutes from this month or the previous
month are not posted. Moreover, why aren't meeting agendas published by a
blast e-mail to all faculty BEFORE meetings. That way if a faculty member
wanted to attend to join in on a discussion of a certain issue, they could. I don't
see any tangible evidence for achieving David Turnipseed's first two goals. In
fact, the most faculty have heard from Turnipseed is advertising getting together
to have us meet football coaches and players, get their autographs. While useful
in promoting this program, it is a bit of a slap in the face to the faculty who were
opposed to football at this time. Moreover, our communications from the Senate
President should include a wider variety of issues other than meet the football
players and one town hall meeting. At least it is an improvement from the past
where there were Zero communiques. Is it so hard to post, or better yet, e-mail a
summary of what the Executive Committee discusses with President Moulton?
These are just basic things-- why hasn't this been done?
The faculty senate needs to realize that it can promote
the interests of the faculty, which are different in some respects from the interests
of the administration, in a way that facilitates communication and understanding
between the groups. It does not have to be an adversarial relationship, which the
administration frequently views it as, nor does the senate have to simply accept
the decisions of the administration without comment, which it too frequently does.
Reasonable people can disagree on issues and can come to compromises that
work well for both sides.
Faculty Senate at this institution is a joke, for whatever reason; virtually no power
or influence on significant issues.
The Senate does the best it can given the fact that administration gives it no real
power and does not listen, as they will routinely tune out the results of this survey.
I'm not sure why I bother.
Great job from the Senate in terms of promoting football among the faculty this
year!!! I LOVED the meet the coach at the Terrace, the Faculty tent at
Homecoming (I hope this becomes an annual Homecoming activity!!), and the
Faculty Appreciation luncheon at the Waterman Globe. Bravo!! (I say all of this
even though I did not win any "swag" from any of the drawings!!!)
The Faculty Senate needs real power. The administrators I have talked to
consider it a joke and gesture at best.
USA Foundation
The USA Foundation has been a great supporter of the teaching and research
mission of the university.
The USA Foundation is worthless to the mission of the University
foundation supports university mission by clearcutting
I'm very upset about management of the USA endowment. The endowment
irreversibly lost a huge chunk of the assets in the 2007-2009 market crush and did
not see the crisis coming. I'm not an economist but I did see it coming and various
financial blogs (where the very news are created) were swarming 2006-2007 with
clear articulations why there will be a depression or near-depression in USA. The
truth is, the financial 'managers" were incompetent and took money for doing
nothing.
With respect to the Foundation: the dollar management seems to be very well
done - particularly in the current financial climate. However, the areas to which
the spending is allocated is too restrictive.
Board of Trustees
The Board of Trustees is composed of well-intentioned but rather clueless people
when it comes to what a university is.
The university administration and board of trustees need to understand what an
academic institution should be and facilitate that. A university is not a business
and it is not a political toy.
Other
National Searches should be conducted when there are vacancies.
The university administration is also undermining our ability to teach effectively by forcing the use of
online technologies. Many faculty members have serious doubts about the effectiveness
of online courses--students may like them, but that does not mean that they best
facilitate learning. Yet the pressure is on to use this technology--and since the
technology purchased by the university is not top-of-the-line, it is hard to trust that
it will be appropriate to the needs of the students. Many students have also said
they do not want online courses--they like the contact with professors. I hope the
university will analyze all aspects of these changes before it forces more changes.
If the university truly wants to be a research university, it needs to devote more
resources to that end, and to realize that research in the arts and humanities is
just as important as that in the sciences and medicine.
It would be very nice if the university administration worked with the faculty and recognized that we are
not the enemy--we want the best for the university too, we are professionals who care about our
students, and that we can be trusted to do our jobs. All too frequently we are
treated as children who need to be controlled and disciplined rather than as
professionals who could contribute quite productively to university governance if
the administration did not see us as adversaries.
I am concerned about the recent emphasis on retention and efficiency, with little
concern for standards and quality. Also, increasing amounts of time are being taken up with
administrative red tape. This cuts into teaching and research time.
Extremely poor and ineffective recruiting. Absolutely abysmal.
This university is a bureaucracy, the faculty, as a whole likes the status quo. While
other universities are moving forward with innovative ideas and concepts and "for
profit" non accredited institutions are skimming off prespective students, everyone
seems to be fat dumb and happy (or at least they were until por-ration hit).
Regardless of what some faculty members would want to believe, the university's
major mission (as with most universities) is to teach. While research is important,
teaching is what universities do and that should be the backbone of this university.
Professors who want to research should still be required to carry at least 12
credits hours per semester, unless there is some type of outside funding source
that will carry the expense of the Professor's research and all the expenses. We
need to get back to our core mission.
The travel office is terrible. We should NOT have to show our personal credit card
statements for compensation. I gave official receipts from a 125 year old scientific
society as proof of payment and this was not good enough. Total BS.
For its size, this university has way too many colleges. Most 15k schools I've seen
have only about 5. All this redundant administration at the college level is
expensive. some consolidation seems a logical place to get serious about saving
some money.
Business and finance was not surveyed. This is the weakest function of the
University. The policies and procedures are often byzantine and incredibly
outdated. For example, the lack of an effective corporate credit card program for
purchasing research supplies is substandard. The burden of accounting
paperwork and lack of flexibility in rebudgeting federal research funds is also very
much behind the current standards in research intensive universities. The system
is fiscally conservative to a paralyzing extent. Fiscal responsibility is paramount,
but so is effective use of faculty time. The clumsy accounting and purchasing
policies are a significant drain on active research faculty and office staff.
Mechanisms for tracking property and clearing out obsolete property are very
poor, again usurping valuable faculty and staff time for what should be a very
straightforward process.
I am continuously frustrated with the way the administration is handling the current
budget deficits. Multiple things to do with teaching and faculty professional
development are cut but I cannot seem to see anything else that is being cut. It
leads me to believe that the university values other things above their faculty.
Every faculty member should be treated as a valuable member of his or her
department regardless of his or her degree and tenure status. Until we can do
this, we are hurting our mission and our commitment to our students.
USA is already a tier 4 university. With the way things are going (e.g., online
courses), I think we're well on our way to becoming the worst school in the
country.
I would like to see a tenure process for administration
Opportunity for all faculty to voice their opinion in an honest, open, professional
environment would be a great start. Being treated as a professional would also
be greatly appreciated
(1) The administration has become huge and well paid. Faculty see the call for
"efficiency" with understandable cynicism.
(2) The university has too few public events of an intellectual nature. The addition
of football has further skewed the balance between sport and intellect. Until the
administration develops a sincere interest in scholarship, the problem will worsen.
The University has over-committed to activities that will drain us financially...For
the first time in my tenure, emotional decision-making without regard to evidence,
is ruling the day.
In the College of Medicine there seems to be a disconnect between the health
care providers and university administration, perhaps due to insufficient
understanding of what we do, why we do it and what is the service we provide to
our community.
Univ is spending money on things not related to students and teaching - football,
band, bell tower, et. How will these things increase student learning? Faculty do
not have enough $ to travel to professional conferences but there is a bell tower.
Priorities are not in sync with what this univ espouses as important. Faculty need
more support.
The focus on excellence in recruiting students, on excellence of students and
faculty currently on the campus, and the university as a member of the local
community should be something to consider...
The faculty should be given the option of joining a union. Our professional
interests can best be protected by unionizing.
Please, stop allowing unprepared students to enroll. It is highly unethical, and a
sad statement on both the local and state level that it is allowed to happen.
Nursing faculty work year round (on the same tenure/non-tenure clinical tracks as
other faculty). Because of the high volume of students (on campus and online), it
would be nice to have more faculty so that current faculty could be offered
opportunity to fully support the University's goal of teaching, scholarship and
service. When asked to continue to give more of our time for no more
compensation, it is difficult to do other things such as service and scholarship.
There are only 24 hours in a day.
USA is very weak in recruiting administrative positions from outside the university.
USA football is a luxury we can't afford