OtherWise Philosophy

Why the WMU-AAUP continues to thrive in the face of incredible challenges

Despite ongoing legislative attempts to throttle collective bargaining efforts by making it harder for unions to maintain robust membership, WMU faculty overwhelmingly continue to support the WMU-AAUP. In fact, though some form of so-called “right to work” laws have been in place in Michigan since 2013, 90% of eligible WMU faculty continue to support the union as full dues-paying members.

As some collective bargaining units across the nation have struggled to maintain membership in the face of increasing anti-union challenges, our union membership numbers are especially impressive. Out of a total of about 900 eligible faculty, only 45 tenure-track and 11 term faculty have committed to opting out. While we continue to reach out to to a handful of additional WMU faculty who have not yet submitted cards, the overall numbers are remarkably positive. Again, 90% of WMU faculty continue to fully support the Chapter as dues payers despite explicit attempts to dilute our solidarity.

No doubt this success is due, in part, to the WMU-AAUP’s implementation of a comprehensive member outreach plan in recent years designed to respond to the latest anti-union threats. This plan has included direct, intensive outreach to new faculty, including over the summer, and ongoing targeted communications throughout the year in the form of letters, phone calls, office visits, and emails. In addition to this painstaking work by WMU-AAUP staff and officers, AAUP department representatives (Association Council members) are on the front lines with respect to engaging with colleagues who have questions about membership, or somehow simply forgot to submit their dues card.

Our member outreach plan, combined with plain old elbow grease, is surely part of the secret to the Chapter’s impressive success, but the deeper explanation is likely much simpler: the WMU-AAUP’s impressive record of fighting for fair salaries and decent benefits, of doggedly standing up for faculty rights, and of offering critical guidance through a maze of bewildering processes, especially the rocky shoals of tenure and promotion.

In short, WMU faculty have a deeply rooted ethos of supporting our collective bargaining unit because of the value it brings to our individual and collective professional lives. As higher education withstands wave after wave of insult and assault, including threats to the basic viability of the professoriate, we invite you take a moment to celebrate the fact that WMU faculty are standing strong. We are, in fact, more united than ever in our commitment to fight for what is right and fair as we head into another negotiating season.

OtherWise Philosophy

The invisible labor of WMU professors: Three lessons from your own workload stories

Probably the most striking conclusion of the workload comments faculty have shared with the WMU-AAUP this semester is that, when it comes to research, teaching, and service, we professors are in the best position to tell our own stories. In fact, in sharing the interesting, sometimes idiosyncratic, details of their work responsibilities, faculty have described feeling isolated and misunderstood, not just by administrators, but sometimes even by faculty colleagues.

For example, one faculty member observed that “there seems to be an assumption that because I have a heavy teaching load that I must not care about scholarship, but I never stopped writing and publishing articles even though I’m given almost no time to do it.” Conversely, another professor shared that he is almost afraid to talk about how low his official teaching load is with colleagues outside his department because “it gives people the wrong idea. The fact that my official teaching credits are low doesn’t do justice to how much time I’m actually required to spend working with individual graduate students.”

Other faculty described frustrations about how research, scholarship and creative activity are recognized and valued. As one professor explained, “Scholarship in my field takes time and my department understands this. But for people in departments that emphasize lots of co-authored articles rather than books, it must look like I’m just sitting on my ass.” Another faculty member emphasized the painstaking process of securing and managing external grants, and of how this “basically becomes an entire job unto itself, in addition to the actual research the grant is supposed to fund.”

Not surprisingly, service was another area about which faculty expressed frustration, suggesting that too much of this work was rendered invisible by “bean counting administrators.” One professor described the increased pressure he’s felt over the years as his department’s faculty numbers have dwindled. “At the same time, the service demands have gone up,” he said. “There seems to be no recognition that fewer faculty members are being asked to do more and more.” Another faculty member explained that much of what claims her time seems to fall outside the recognized workload parameters, for example, “Every single week a handful of students stop in for informal advising discussions. I want to help them, but they aren’t even ‘my’ students. Am I supposed to turn them away?”

Though no single, overarching theme emerged from the workload stories shared with the WMU-AAUP, three were repeated enough to serve as cautionary lessons.

  • First, there is the recognition that the work faculty do across colleges varies, sometimes dramatically, and that no numerical system can fully do justice to this diversity.
  • Second, the best experts for determining what counts as meaningful research, teaching and service work in a given field are to be found in that field; WMU faculty are the best experts with respect to workload evaluations.
  • Third, more discussion is needed among faculty across departments and colleges to better understand and appreciate the diverse value we bring to WMU. Now, if only we could find the time!

Below are additional examples of labor that faculty feel may be misunderstood or rendered invisible. What did we miss?

– writing, customizing, and uploading student reference letters for graduate schools, professional programs, and academic employment

– engaging in industry consulting work that may be both expected and appropriate to one’s academic role

– informal academic and personal advising of undergraduate students, especially those who arrive underprepared

– driving time to teach courses at WMU distance learning sites, especially in the winter

– serving on diversity and inclusion initiatives, especially for faculty of color

– remaining current in one’s academic discipline, especially when one’s field is international in scope

– dealing with the ongoing demands of accreditation reports and other documentation

– completing a myriad of WMU online trainings, for example, cyber security and bullying

– direct individual supervision of students, especially graduate students, in required internship or performance activities

– completing time-consuming academic program review documentation as periodically required by administration, especially when this work has no apparent consequences

– piecing together small funding opportunities for routine academic work in the absence of sufficient support for conference and research travel (especially when international)

– completing professional activity reports, especially when one’s accomplishments do not fit neatly into its categories

– work done for the Lee Honors College, for example, scholarships, thesis committees, and serving as speakers

– participating in curricular overhauls, for example, essential studies

– facilitating the needs of increasing numbers of students who require special accommodations, for example, extra exam time

– assisting with departmental, college, and university recruitment efforts, e.g., spending time with prospective students and their families

– multiple (rather than streamlined) progress (and midterm grade) reporting for undergraduate students, for example, those on probation

If you haven’t yet had a chance to share your workload story with us, please send it!

Note: Faculty find much of this work to be both important and satisfying, but wish that it were better factored in during formal and informal assessments of their overall contributions. Also, some details have been altered to preserve anonymity.

OtherWise Philosophy

2020 WMU-AAUP negotiation team selected

The WMU-AAUP is proud to present our 2020 negotiation team:

Robert White, chief negotiator, School of Music
Regina Garza Mitchell, Educational Leadership, Research and Technology
Andrew Hennlich, Frostic School of Art
Michael G. Miller, Human Performance and Health Education
Glinda Rawls, Counselor Education and Counseling Psychology

Given the importance of assembling a dedicated, prepared, and effective negotiating team, the WMU-AAUP scrupulously follows a carefully delineated selection process (see below). These steps are meant to maximize faculty members’ opportunity to participate, while also respecting the need to compose a team with complementary strengths.

The result of this year’s process was a clear endorsement by the Executive Committee of the five 2020 members listed above, a selection unanimously upheld on Friday by a vote of the Association Council. We want to express our appreciation to all of this year’s nominees, including those not selected, as we pull together in solidarity to support Bob, Regina, Andrew, Michael, and Glinda.

Steps for selecting the team:

  • In September, a call for nominees was sent to the entire bargaining-unit faculty; members could self-nominate or nominate colleagues.
  • In October and November, the Executive Committee (comprised, according to our bylaws, of representatives from all of WMU’s colleges), interviewed nominees who had confirmed their willingness to serve on the team.
  • After all candidates were interviewed, there was in-depth discussion among Executive Committee members of candidates’ individual strengths, as well as how those strengths might best combine to create a formidable team.
  • Multiple votes were taken by the Executive Committee, with additional opportunities for discussion, resulting in a clear endorsement of the 2020 members.
  • The Executive Committee’s recommendations were unanimously approved by the Association Council on Nov. 15.

We invite anyone with an interest in participating in future negotiations, or with additional questions about the selection process, to contact us at staff@wmuaaup.net or give us a call. Together we are stronger!

OtherWise Philosophy

How committed is our campus to shared governance? An AAUP questionnaire lets you do a quick assessment.

Based on your experience, how well is WMU doing at enacting the principles of shared governance? See any areas of improvement or cause for concern? Feel free to share your thoughts with the WMU-AAUP at staff@wmuaaup.net or give us a call.

Climate for Governance

Do the trustees, the administration, and the faculty model collegiality, respect, tolerance and civility towards other members of the campus community and each other?

Are negotiations and communications among university constituents open and carried out in good faith and in an atmosphere of trust?

Institutional Communication

Does consultation by the administration with faculty leadership allow time and a mechanism for leadership to consult with their constituents before offering recommendations?

Does the faculty as a whole, in addition to faculty representatives, have timely access to information necessary for faculty members to give input into governance processes?

The Board’s Role

Do members of the governing board have appropriate individual qualifications with regard to education and experience?

Is the board inappropriately involved in the day‐to‐ day operations of the institution?

Do board members inform themselves on governance issues by keeping up with the literature and participating in training opportunities and meetings of the Association of Governing Boards or the AAUP?

Does the board respect and support the facultyʹs traditional role in institutional governance?

The complete document is here.

OtherWise Philosophy

WMU faculty see sudden increases to teaching loads based on admin’s review of professional activity reports

With the Oct. 15 deadline for faculty PARs looming, concerns about who sees these reports and how they are used take on new urgency. And since many faculty find the reporting system to be cumbersome, incomplete, or misleading, this makes it especially alarming that the PARs might be used by administrators to assess faculty achievement, as has occurred recently.

For example, on the tail end of phased retirement, Prof. Kent Baldner is finishing up a three-decade career at WMU, one that has combined research, service, and a predictable teaching load. He was surprised, then, to receive an email last semester informing him that, with only two semesters remaining at WMU, he would now be required to teach an additional course.

“When I queried about why I was being asked to teach an additional course, the reply was that we were short-staffed that semester,” explains Dr. Baldner. “I wasn’t happy, but felt it was my turn to ‘pay my dues,’ and so I agreed without arguing or complaining. When I asked what additional course they needed me to teach, I was told it didn’t matter. That struck me as odd.”

Dr. Baldner’s experience is not isolated. A number of other College of Arts and Sciences faculty members also report having been suddenly informed by their chairs that they were to be assigned additional teaching work. As with Dr. Baldner, institutional financial constraint was sometimes offered as the rationale, at least initially.

For example, another senior professor reported that his chair insisted that his sudden extra course assignment was a consequence of “lack of college funds for part-time instructors,” as directed by the CAS dean, Dr. Carla Koretsky. “But when I asked the dean about it, she denied that that was the case,” he said, and he was no longer required to teach the extra class after all.

Financial exigency is not the reason given to all faculty members unexpectedly faced with increased teaching loads. Others, the majority of them long-time, senior professors, have reported being told by their chairs that, last year, the CAS dean had conducted a unilateral, comprehensive review of faculty professional activity reports and that their names had appeared on her resulting list of underperformers with respect to scholarly activity. Apparently, no other workload category was scrutinized, nor were details provided about what criteria the dean had used. The result, their chairs informed them, was that they would be assigned more teaching, either in the form of additional classes or higher enrollment caps.

For example, Prof. Sarah Hill first learned of the prospect of a higher teaching load from her departmental director, who explained that he had been obliged by the dean to increase it. Dr. Hill points to lengthy email exchanges she had with her director and Dr. Koretsky, confirming that the dean insisted that Dr. Hill’s work was insufficient to justify a research-faculty teaching load. Dr. Hill has been told she will face this increased teaching load for the foreseeable future, unless and until she has met the dean’s standards.

“The whole situation has been demoralizing and time-consuming,” says Dr. Hill. “After going back and forth with my director and the dean, and gaining little clarity about who came up with these evaluation standards or whether they had even been written down anyplace, I gave in and accepted that I would have to teach the extra course.” The “kicker,” says Dr. Hill, was when the “extra course” she had been assigned to teach was cancelled on August 26 due to poor enrollment, just two days before the start of the Fall semester.

“So,” Dr. Hill explains, “all summer long I worked to prepare for this extra class — further reducing my time for research, and then they cancel it.” Dr. Hill is also concerned that the consequences of this belatedly cancelled, extra teaching assignment had ramifications for students beyond the impact on her workload. “An apparent desire to punish me for alleged underproductivity,” she explains, “has punished students who were left to scramble at the last minute to find a new class.”

Although the stories shared by faculty differ in the details, they have much in common: Faculty were informed by chairs either that WMU can no longer afford part-time instructors, necessitating additional teaching labor from them, full-time bargaining unit faculty, or told that the dean had identified them as underperforming scholars based on her personal review of their professional activity reports. Again, the criteria used for assessing research, and scholarly and creative activity across the diverse departments that comprise CAS — everything from physics to creative writing — were not provided. Nor were faculty apprised of an appeals process to challenge their new designation as teaching-active, rather than research-active, professors.

Some faculty have successfully challenged the additional workload assignment through appeals facilitated by the WMU-AAUP, and this is an option that all affected faculty can explore. However, some faculty colleagues report they are giving up. Some describe feeling shamed at having been singled out through an unscheduled evaluation of their research that they did not even know was underway, and exhausted at the prospect of yet another bureaucratic battle. As one faculty member put it, “I don’t have the energy both to be an effective professor and fight with administrators about whether my scholarship is worthwhile.”

An additional damaging consequence of this administrative initiative seems to be that some mid-career and senior WMU faculty members are now considering retirement. “It simply isn’t worth it,” explained one professor, who is still over a decade away from traditional retirement age. “My department is seriously understaffed, so I was stressed out plenty before all this began. I simply can’t remain healthy working in an environment in which admin never seems to think I’m working hard enough.”

OtherWise Philosophy

Post-tenure review, working conditions and FARs

As you may recall, last spring the WMU-AAUP fielded concerns from faculty about surprise performance evaluations leading to increased teaching loads. Since we are continuing to hear from faculty about this, we want to make sure all Chapter members are aware of the issue, and also get your assistance as we continue to assess the scope and depth of the concern.

First, the reports we’ve received are:

– that individual tenured faculty member are being subjected to surprise reviews of their “research productivity” by deans and/or chairs which is then being used to justify increased teaching loads. Some faculty are already working with this increased load, others have successfully appealed it, and others are still unaware that these changes may be on the horizon

– that the FARs (formerly PAR, “faculty activity report”) are serving as the primary, or even sole, basis on which “research productivity” is being assessed by deans and/or chairs; faculty have raised concerns about the appropriateness of using FARs for this purpose, especially given widespread questions about their legitimacy and accuracy.

– that the tenured faculty undergoing these performance reviews by their dean and/or chair have not been informed of the criteria they are being judged by, or about what process they might use to appeal this redesignation as teaching-focused, rather than research-focused, faculty members

– that there seems to be a general lack of awareness across colleges and across campus about these significant changes in faculty working conditions. While a number of individual faculty from various departments described open conversations and email exchanges about this with their deans or chairs, the flow of information is murky and partial, leaving some faculty colleagues feeling isolated and overwhelmed as they consider how best to respond, including whether or not to file a formal workload appeal

With this in mind, and so that we can get a better idea of the scope and depth of these concerns, please talk to your departmental colleagues, your chairs, and your WMU-AAUP departmental rep with the following kinds of questions:

– Have chairs received a “dean’s list” of faculty who have been designated underproductive and slated for greater teaching burdens?

– Have faculty colleagues been privately contacted by a chair or dean and informed that they should expect higher loads based on these reviews?

– Have faculty facing higher loads been provided with concrete details about the assessment of their scholarly activity and been provided instructions for how to challenge it?

As faculty members continue to come forward, and as we work to get a fuller picture of this issue, please be in touch as soon as possible with your colleagues, your chair, and with us (staff@wmuaaup.net).

OtherWise Philosophy

Annual BBQ kicks off new academic year

Thanks to the efforts of WMU-AAUP staff, countless behind-the-scenes workers, and perfect weather, our annual member barbecue was a huge success. As we dive into another school year, one that promises both predictable and surprising challenges, it was gratifying to spend an evening catching up with old colleagues and meeting new ones. We faculty don’t have nearly enough opportunities to connect across campus and be reminded that the strength of the WMU-AAUP is in the determination and tenacity of its members.

As you’re looking for additional ways to connect with nearby and far-flung WMU faculty colleagues, here are a couple of possibilities for this semester:

  • Drop in discussion over coffee at Montague House this coming Tues., Sept. 10 at 9:30
  • New faculty luncheon for department reps (association council members) and new AAUP colleagues on Sept. 20 in Bernhard 157 at 1:30
    Fourth Friday happy hour for AAUP members on Sept. 27, 5:00 at Arcadia Brewing

Also consider following us on Facebook and Twitter where we make near daily posts, and keep an eye out for email updates. We are stronger together!

OtherWise Philosophy

Western employee objects to sudden closure of WMU childcare center: “It was awarded a huge federal grant just two years ago!”

WMU’s decision to close the beloved Children’s Place this summer has caught many in the campus community off guard, especially given the popularity and apparent success of the facility. Below is a letter of concern shared by a WMU employee. We’ve also included a 2017 WMU News article describing the federal grant. See previous posts here on thewmuaaup.com for more information about this issue.

“Despite the many reasons laid out by former President Haenicke for why such a facility was absolutely needed on our campus, the current university administration decided to shut down WMU’s childcare facility, The Children’s Place. They cite the usual financial reasons for the closure, despite the fact that it was awarded a huge 4-year federal grant just two years ago! In fact, I think this place must have the lowest overhead of any commercial daycare/preschool facility in the area due to its high dependence on student employees. Nevertheless, WMU claims financial hardship.

When they made that same claim about WMU’s Sara Swickard facility [a former private home on Knollwood converted to a WMU childcare facility in 1987], I asked to see the official financial reports that led to the decision and was told directly by the VP for Business and Finance that no such reports or written analysis existed. He explained that his people simply sat around a table verbally throwing out estimates until they could justify demolishing the building.

I find it telling that universities such as The University of Michigan, Michigan State, Oakland University, CMU, GVSU, and even EMU, all see the value of providing onsite childcare/preschool to university student parents, but WMU does not.”

Below is a WMU news article celebrating The Children’s Place 2017 federal grant

Children’s Place receives grant to support student-parents

October 29, 2017

KALAMAZOO. Mich.—Western Michigan University’s Children’s Place Learning Center was recently awarded a four-year federal grant totaling $718, 936 in partnership with the College of Education and Human Development. Starting Oct. 1, the grant provides $179,734 each year for the next four years. WMU is one of only four Michigan schools to receive the award.

Funded by the U.S. Department of Education, the Child Care Access Means Parents in School Program, or CCAMPIS, grant will help student-parents address the unique barriers they face while pursuing and completing their degree programs. Funds will be used to enhance programs including academic resources, parenting education, social support activities and staff professional development opportunities.

At the Children’s Place Learning Center, Pell-eligible WMU student-parents will receive a 50 percent child-care tuition discount under the grant program. Up to half of the spaces in each of the three classrooms will be dedicated for CCAMPIS.

CHILDREN’S PLACE LEARNING CENTER

Providing intentional activities focused on growth and development, the center offers pre-kindergarten, preschool, school age and toddler learning options for children ages 15 months to 12 years. Conveniently located in the middle of campus, it is committed to providing affordable child care for children of WMU students, faculty and staff, and the local community.

The Children’s Place is accredited through the National Association of Education for Young Children, and has achieved a four-star Michigan’s Great Start to Quality rating. The center also participates in the Great Start to Readiness program and KCR4’s to better prepare 4-year-olds for kindergarten.

https://wmich.edu/news/2017/10/43438

OtherWise Philosophy

Faculty object to WMU’s sudden closure of childcare center: “This is clearly a gender issue”

As of June 14, WMU closed The Children’s Place Learning Center which had offered child care services to the WMU community. The process for making this important decision, and the context surrounding it, remain unclear. WMU’s brief closure notice on The Children’s Place website alludes to financial reasons and states, “This decision was very difficult to reach. We regret that it means you must look elsewhere to meet your family’s child care needs.”

The WMU AAUP shares the concerns expressed in the faculty letter below, which, as far as we know, has not received a reply from WMU administration. Further, we are deeply concerned about the process that led to a decision of this magnitude, given WMU’s expressed commitment to transparency and shared governance.

Update: WMU has advertised its plan to sell off the assets of the Children’s Place Saturday, July 20, including, “children’s toys, books, supplies, tables, chairs, lockers, shelving units and outdoor play equipment.”

Letter from the Women’s Caucus of the College of Arts and Sciences

Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 10:58 AM

Subject: CAS Women’s Caucus on the closing of the Children’s Place

To: Diane K Anderson

Dear Dean Anderson,

On behalf of the CAS Women’s Caucus, we would like to add our voice to the many others who have written to oppose the closing of the Children’s Place Learning Center. Because childcare disproportionately affects women faculty and students, this is clearly a gender issue. It is well documented that women academics pay a “baby penalty:” women with children are less likely to get hired, to get tenure or rise to administrative positions such as dean or provost, while men with children are more likely to advance in academic careers. Lack of childcare is a major barrier to women’s full and equal participation in paid work and in pursuing a degree. Having high quality child care on campus should not be considered optional; it is an essential service.

Childcare provision impacts student access and success as well as faculty recruitment and retention. Students with children will have less access to WMU and its undergraduate and graduate programs. As Dr. Bilinda Straight pointed out, we are already losing students to GVSU, this is yet another factor that will harm recruitment, particularly of non-traditional or contemporary students. Similarly, the ability of students with children to complete their degrees will be diminished; research has shown that students with children who use on-campus childcare are more likely to remain in school and are more likely to graduate. These same arguments apply to faculty recruitment and retention. For example, current caucus member Dr. Denise Ross noted that preschools have short hours. Having access to childcare at WMU from 7am- 6pm allowed her to teach afternoon classes, attend afternoon faculty meetings, and have writing time in the early morning and evening hours. In short, the Children’s Place mattered greatly for her professional growth, especially during the pre-tenure period.

Although there are other childcare centers in Kalamazoo, the closing of the center will hurt many families and it will hurt WMU’s reputation. What kind of message does it send to current and prospective students and faculty members when WMU, which prides itself on making its programs accessible to all categories of learners, closes down its campus childcare program? Wouldn’t it be a point of pride for WMU to maintain a facility that enables work-life balance for faculty and staff and helps retain undergraduate and graduate students who are juggling childcare responsibilities with their education?

The CAS Women’s Caucus believes that the administration needs to look harder for solutions to the budget issues related to the Children’s Place. We also question whether an essential service should be dismissed because it is not covering its costs. There are other programs that do not cover all their costs such as study abroad and sports programs. Under the Strategic Resource Management budgeting system that will be implemented, such valuable programs will be subsidized. Like study abroad programs, campus childcare benefits only a small proportion of our students, faculty and staff, yet they add value to everyone’s education and workplace experience, and they signal that equity and excellence are valued by the university. Alternatively, the costs could be met by adding $2-3 per student in student fees. The administration could also look to local foundations, such as the Kellogg Foundation, that may be willing to partner with WMU to help meet costs. WMU development officers could and should reach out to these foundations. The university should take at least another year to seek out alternative solutions. In short, closing the childcare center is short-sighted and will have negative consequences for many years to come—once the childcare center is gone, it will be exceedingly difficult to bring it back.

Sincerely,

CAS Women’s Caucus Steering Committee