Secrecy and Morale

In May 2008, the ad hoc Faculty Handbook Task Force completed its work on revisions of the Faculty Handbook. The product was submitted to the Office of Academic Affairs, then sent to the university editor. In September, the editor asked for responses to a list of questions about the text, and the task force contact responded to the questions promptly.

As a member of the task force, I have to admit that we took longer to do the job than we should have taken. The VPAA wanted the revisions to be submitted a year earlier. Partly, we were slow in doing our work. Partly there were some sticky issues that were not easy to resolve.

More than twelve months since the task force submitted its report, the faculty still have not received a draft of the revised handbook. Some deans and department chairs have received copies, but it is not widely available. Why is it necessary to keep a document such as this secret? Let the faculty see what has been proposed and think about it. Let them respond. If making revisions is worth doing, then talking them through should also be worth doing.

At a Faculty Senate meeting last October, we raised the issue of critical university documents which are unavailable to faculty because of the seemingly interminable approval process. A high-level administrator, with the authority to make such decisions, told us that there was no reason we should not be able to see them in their draft form. Specifically, we were asking about a Personnel Policy Manual.

Yet when the Senate President asked to receive a copy, the people who had it again hesitated. Eight months later, faculty still have not seen a draft of the Personnel Policy Manual.

In an institution committed to the dissemination of knowledge, information, a variety of perspectives, and critical reasoning, why would the practices of policy development have to remain behind closed doors indefinitely? These and other documents need to be made available to the people whose jobs and lives they effect. The steps and timeline for their approval, amendment, or disapproval should be clear and visible. The word of the times is "transparency."

It's time to get the Faculty Handbook out to the faculty. People who are consistently kept out of the loop of decisions and policies that determine their fate cannot be blamed for becoming suspicious. As my preaching daddy has said many times, "Tell the truth, and trust the people." Let's work on these documents together.

Mike Broadway

Memo: Five Priorities to Improve Faculty Morale

Quoted Document:

FIVE PRIORITIES FOR LIFTING FACULTY MORALE AND PRODUCTIVITY

This document was created by Dr. James Nelson, Jr. after input from twelve senior professors at Shaw

As you know, faculty members currently have no independent mechanism to recommend and effect change. Even our department, school, and general faculty meetings usually function as instruments to disseminate information from the top. The result is that great ideas informally discussed among a few teachers rarely get a chance to be collectively discussed or adopted.

Nevertheless, twelve faculty members in the last few weeks contemplated five priorities needed to improve faculty morale and productivity at Shaw University. Having found that teachers at Shaw often expend much energy either in expressing anger and resentment, or in suppressing those emotions to keep their job, we sought to visualize what outstanding work faculty could accomplish if their presence at Shaw evoked more positive emotions. To begin progress toward such a vision, our group generated the ideas presented below.


1. Restore yearly contracts, multi-year contracts and tenure

➢ Goal: To support long-term commitment in employees.

Our at-will clause states that “both you and Shaw reserve the right to end the employment relationship at any time.” This statement provides no process to address arbitrary decisions, stifles creativity, and ultimately destroys the bond a teacher has in students and the administration. The result is often mutual exploitation, where many feel the administration is using implied intimidation to exercise control and where the faculty may retaliate by legally quitting any time during the school year. Both actions work to the detriment of students. We suggest the bond between faculty and the institution should be one of mutual respect, trust and devotion. Contracts and tenure have been time tested ways that support excellence.

2. Utilize an Evaluation System to enhance faculty salaries

➢ Goal: To reward the services of those who have contributed dearly to Shaw University.

Faculty morale is decimated by the numerous rumors and gossip circulating around campus about new hires, staff, and even secretaries receiving monetary rewards far in excess of existing faculty. In order to ensure commitment, our long term, dedicated teachers need to feel that their services are valued and rewarded. Several suggestions offered by faculty include an annual salary review and publication of a salary scale based on merit which would take faculty rank and years of experience into consideration. Several faculty expressed dismay that the administration has not developed procedures that match their statements of the last few years about salary equity.

3. Institute a maximum twelve semester hour teaching load

➢ Goal: To allow faculty time to pursue other important University goals, such as research, service projects, committee work, and student-oriented initiatives.

A twelve semester hour teaching load is a universal standard that many believe enables a faculty to carry on other necessary enrichment activities valuable to the University. Many faculty members attempt to supplement their low salary by doing overloads. Some faculty reported they taught overloads but never received overload pay. Some deplored the new rules in January restricting or eliminating overload pay after the Fall, 2006 overload work was already done. Others resented that part-time, lesser qualified faculty were sometimes paid more than regular faculty for teaching the same overload courses. We also recommend that the overload pay policy be addressed since the pay is far below that of comparable institutions of higher education.

4. Include the faculty in the employment process

➢ Goal: To allow all faculty members to feel they have a stake in the growth of Shaw University.

Almost all in-house positions on campus are filled by administrators who select their desired person. Most times this is done without informing any other faculty of the vacancy or any apparent public attempt to find the best person. The result is that many faculty members neither feel appreciated nor do they have a stake in the growth of our University. Several faculty members suggested that all faculty be informed of and be able to apply for in-house positions. The faculty also felt that external positions should be advertised not only on Shaw’s web site, but in a national publication, such as the “Chronicle of Higher Education”. Faculty finally felt that each area should have an employment committee that should be consulted before finalizing new employment within their area.

5. Restore the Faculty Senate

➢ Goal: To institute proper respect and consideration for the ideas of faculty.

Our group feels that teachers are given little opportunity to get involved in the decision- making process of the university. Faculty must have input in establishing the agenda of faculty meetings. Faculty felt they must have a place where they can voice their concerns, concerns such as the very unhygienic conditions in the Tupper building, lack of cleanliness in many of our other buildings, lack of effective boards, chalk and erasers, huge potholes on campus damaging their cars, and the low quality of many students on campus. Many felt that it is important that the administration create a sense of involvement of the faculty. Faculty representation is mandated by SACS and will make the faculty feel committed to the growth of the University and thus more willing to serve. In addition to the creation of a Faculty Senate, faculty felt that the Senate should choose representatives to serve on the President’s Cabinet and on the Board of Trustees.