Right Time

Late this week, I received a letter from our longest serving faculty member.  This person has served for over 50 years as a full-time faculty member and continues to be an excellent teacher, an outstanding colleague and a respected scholar.  The letter started off by stating “Much to my own dismay, I have come to the conclusion that now is indeed the time to begin the process of my retirement.” The letter continues by noting that “there are moments when inevitability takes precedence over all else and I must defer.”

This faculty member will be retiring at the end of the 2013-2014 academic year when she will have completed 54 years of service.  Prior to that time she plans to maintain the same sustained high level of activity that has characterized her decades of service up to this time.  In addition she plans to help create a new institute on campus and plan a detective-fiction conference.  As you can tell, this person has been and continues to be a tremendous asset to the University and she will be missed.

Not every career works as smoothly.  When I first arrived at Hofstra there was a person who was both an excellent teacher and a nationally recognized scholar.  This person was one of a handful of Hofstra faculty that I had heard of prior to joining Hofstra.  But this person never wanted to leave even though, over the years, the person’s abilities declined until what remained was a shadow of the original outstanding scholar/teacher.  No colleague ever spoke to this person about what was happening but many colleagues suggested to department chairs and deans that it was, and had been for a number of years, clearly time for the person to go.

When is the right time to go?  The easy answer is when you are still at the top of your game, or in baseball terms, when you are still a 300 + hitter.  Life and finances sometimes makes that hard to do.  Lack of feedback also makes it hard to do.  I never cease to be amazed when faculty or administrators come to talk to me about the diminished skill set of a colleague without every talking to the colleague, even though this happens on a regular basis. Why can’t they talk first to the person they are talking about?  Students also tend to talk to other students about faculty but you can’t expect them to talk to the faculty member about these issues even though they are being shortchanged. Teacher evaluation programs can help but that feedback alone may not be sufficient.

For someone who has served many years, a soft landing is essential.  On-going comprehensive feedback is also essential.  The feedback can’t just be there when everything is going well.  With that combination together with the common sense of the overwhelming majority of faculty, I think the answer to when is the right time to retire will be clear.

Evaluation

Part of what attracted me to higher education in the first place and still attracts me is the shared governance environment.  Economics was the discipline that excited me, and higher education was the environment where I felt most comfortable and most productive. And from my experience shared governance works well in most places and in most cases.  My first experiences were in the area of curriculum, beginning with the department’s efforts to fine tune the economics major and subsequently extending to the committee that reviewed the undergraduate curriculum.  On the department level and on the university level, the process went well.  Faculty working with department chairs or deans scrutinized the curriculum, updated courses and reviewed requirements.

If you look at curriculum, if you look at standards, if you look at much of what happens in the academic area, we have a model for highly educated and highly intelligent individuals working together.  But the shared governance process isn’t perfect and there are areas where the process is significantly less effective.  Perhaps the area of greatest weakness is faculty evaluating other faculty.  More than a few faculty are uncomfortable making any negative comments – even when fully justified and reflective of the faculty member’s opinion—about other faculty.  In one of the first personnel cases that I had to deal with as dean, a department personnel committee chair said to me that he and his committee had only recommended positively on a personnel matter (and made only positive statements) because the committee knew that I would recommend against.  They wanted to be the “good” person and they were more than comfortable with the dean being the “bad” person.  And when the person I had just recommended against came in to see me, his first point was how could I have found fault with his record when all his colleagues in the department and in the same field had recommended positively. Not a comfortable moment.

More than a few times, faculty have come to see me to alert me that so and so is a “problem”  for  x reason and should not be (fill in the blank ) reappointed, tenured, promoted, selected as chair, etc.  But the individuals talking to me are also candid in saying that they do not want their opinion made public because they have to work closely with that person, or have the office next door, or that person will be reviewing them next year, etc.  I always indicate to the person talking to me that it is much much harder to follow up on a concern when the person raising the issue doesn’t want in any way to be identified. (In certain cases—such as allegations of sexual harassment—I also indicate that I need to report the allegation and cannot agree to not identifying the person who has brought the matter to my attention.)

In the vast majority of cases, the personnel process works well.  Where it doesn’t, everyone is done a disservice.  We are not providing the person being evaluated with the objective feedback necessary to resolve outstanding issues which can interfere with that person’s success.  We are not providing the university with the complete accurate picture that will allow uncompromised merit based decision making in areas where the consequences of bad decisions are often long term.  In this era of expanding outcomes assessment regarding curricular matters, we need to also undertake an outcomes assessment of shared governance and the evaluation process.  Overall, I am sure we will get high marks, but I am equally sure there is substantial room for improvement.

Change

I was fortunate enough to get an opportunity to teach after just one year of graduate school.  At that time, I was appointed as an adjunct to teach a basic macroeconomics course at the same institution that I had just graduated from a year earlier.  My name appeared in the course schedule but thanks to the efforts of a friend of mine, no one knew that I was teaching this course.  All my friend did was start a rumor that the Berliner who was teaching the economics course, was a “famous economist” by the name of Berliner who had taught at Leipzig before the war.  I was, of course, unaware of this but noticed when I came into class the first day, that there was a great deal of conversation taking place between the students as soon as I moved to the front of the room.  I could clearly hear one student near the front saying to another with almost a sense of disappointment “it’s only Herman.”  What a way to start your teaching career.

I was especially fortunate that at the time that I started teaching, there was a program being run where a small number of new instructors were invited to a seminar on teaching and were even paid to attend the seminar.  I was selected and was pleased to have the opportunity.  The seminar consisted of weekly meetings and also consisted of the person teaching the seminar (a senior History faculty member) coming to your class to observe your teaching.  The new faculty in the seminar were recent PhDs and graduate students, who were also teaching while completing their education.  The conversations were great and allowed us to work through the issues that inevitably arise during the first semesters that a person is teaching.  I was somewhat nervous when it was my turn to be observed; the lesson went well, however, and I felt very positive when I entered the meeting with the seminar teacher.

At the start of the meeting, I was told that I did an excellent job explaining economic concepts, getting the class to participate, and integrating current economic events into the discussion.  I was next asked a question that I wouldn’t be asked today—how old was I?  I didn’t have any sense as to why I was being asked an age question but it wasn’t a secret and I quickly answered 22.  I was next asked what I thought the age range was of the students in my class.  And though I didn’t understand the basis for this question either, I once again answered very quickly—somewhere between 18 and 24 years old.  What was going on and how did this relate to an observation of my teaching?

The mystery was solved in the next minute.  The seminar teacher summarized his observation by saying that he thought I did a terrific job and that the students were interested and involved in the class.  He next said, and I have held onto this advice for decades, “please remember that as your teaching career continues and you get older, you will need to change how you relate and how you communicate with students.”  What works when a 22 year old is talking with 20 year olds doesn’t work when a 40 or 50 or 60 year old is talking with and helping to educate 20 years olds.  We continuously get older, and clearly our “traditional” students don’t.  We also need to be cognizant of the fact that student demographics also change as we age.

It isn’t enough for us as educators to just remain current in our subject matter.  We need to continuously reflect on how we are communicating and relating to our students.  And we need to recognize that it becomes harder as the age gap widens and as there are various shifts in the age of the students we are teaching.  However, without the communication working well, being an up-to-date subject matter specialist is not enough.

Technology Trumps Collegiality

Last night I had the pleasure of attending the drama department production of Cabaret.  I thought our students did a terrific job and the production was without doubt at a professional theater level.  During the intermission, I went over to a senior faculty member in drama and we had a chance to catch up for the first time since last spring.  The faculty member commented on how much harder it has become for faculty from throughout the University to just get a chance to talk.  And he talked with fondness about on-site registration.  Up to about 15 years ago, every semester just before the semester began, on-site registration took place.  During this registration, students who had not yet registered and those who wanted a change in program had the opportunity to do so by coming to a large room that had at individual tables, faculty representatives from every department.  For much of the time, the faculty in the room were busy advising students.  But there were periods of time before, after and during when the faculty had moments of time to mingle with other faculty.  It was a good opportunity to catch up with colleagues and inevitably you would also get a chance to meet new colleagues.   You would also interact with administrative colleagues, and in every administrative position I have had, I always made sure I attended at least part of the on-site registration. Every semester you could count on on-site registration to provide the opportunity for faculty from all areas to spend time together.  That opportunity ended when on-line registration began.  Much more convenient and a real improvement for students but the mingle factor was lost.

Also long lost is the social interaction that took place at the University Club when I first started teaching.  At the end of the day and especially at the end of the week, many faculty met for a drink. I don’t miss seeing my colleagues drink, but the socialization was welcome.  I know that faculty still have many opportunities to interact. There are department meetings, school or college meetings and full faculty meetings. The department meetings tend to bring together most if not all the full time faculty in that department.  The school or college meetings often bring together a substantial minority of the faculty in that unit (with smaller units tending to attract a larger percentage to these meetings) and the full faculty meetings at their fullest often attract just a fraction of those eligible to attend.  There are other meetings that attract faculty, most often along political or philosophical lines.   But the regular opportunity to have a large number of “random” faculty just meet—not united by a discipline, not united by a school or college, not united by politics or a philosophy, and not united by a drink, in fact often just united  by being assigned to registration duty, is sorely missed.

Add to this that as scholarly and family obligations have increased, faculty are much less likely to spend extra time on campus and you have a clear sense of the collegiality divide that now exists on most colleges and universities.

I have a very high regard for my colleagues.  Faculty tend to have a high regard for other faculty. We should all look for more opportunities to spend time together.

Mentoring

Earlier today, a dean came to see me regarding the future of a faculty member. This faculty member came to Hofstra with outstanding graduate school credentials and is an outstanding teacher.  This person also has a much sought after area of specialty and has been very active in University service.  At this point in time, the faculty member is getting ready to stand for tenure and the dean voiced a concern that the faculty member did not yet have sufficient scholarship to stand successfully.  At the end of the day, the standards for tenure are the standards for tenure.  If at the conclusion of the tenure probationary period, the faculty member’s record in scholarship doesn’t meet the approved standards, the person should not and will not stand successfully.  This is especially clear since these criteria originated with the tenured faculty in the department involved.  But how does an untenured faculty member who is outstanding in teaching and service end up in a position like this?


There can be any number of reasons but one often stands out—a lack of mentoring.  Untenured faculty need systematic periodic feedback and higher education usually does that well: annual evaluations, reappointments, all provide (hopefully comprehensive) feedback on a regular basis.  But the feedback alone is a necessary but often not sufficient condition to assure a successful tenure candidacy.  Mentoring can make a enormous difference.  The human element—taking the time and effort to work closely with untenured faculty—is critical so there is not only regular structured feedback but also continuous informal feedback and support.  For example, a mentor with experience and a track record in research is in a position to co-author an article or book with the untenured faculty member.  In this way the person’s initial efforts to be published are supported and facilitated.  In other cases, having a mentor read your work before submission serves as a valuable review which can ultimately increase your chances of having an article accepted.  Even advice on which journals to submit to is another valuable mentor service.

Shouldn’t the chair carry out the mentor function for all tenure track faculty in that department.  There are good arguments on both sides of the issue.  A chair, in her or his role as a department leader, should view mentoring as part of the job.  It is not unreasonable to assume that for any chair, support of the department faculty has to be a top priority.  Some chairs do this very well; others rarely do it.  And it can’t work without there being a proper chemistry between the individuals.  But some tenure track faculty believe—rightly or wrongly—that having a chair as their mentor places them in  the awkward position of talking through issues and concerns with the person in the organization that will be making a pivotal judgment on their reappointment or their tenure or their promotion.  Can a chair be a source of both formal and informal feedback? Being candid with such a person raises the worry that the information you share will ultimately be used against you; usually not the case but there are no guarantees.

All departments should develop a formal mentoring process from the day that the person starts through the time the person stands (hopefully) successfully for tenure.  The process should start with and focus on the chair but there also need to be alternatives that involve senior faculty members in the department collectively (with the chair) making sure every tenure track faculty member is continuously mentored and supported. 

Many chairs and many faculty will tell you that mentoring takes places so that there is no need for another formal policy.  It does take place but this safety net isn’t always in place across the board and consequently good tenure candidates could be lost in the process.  We can do a better job for these candidates which ultimately means we are doing a better job for the department school or university involved.  We are also then treating tenure candidates the way we would want to be treated.

A Very Private Office

After I completed my PhD and accepted my first tenure track full-time teaching appointment, I was assigned a faculty office that I shared with three other full-time faculty.  I was on campus usually four days a week but I hated the office even though I liked my office mates.  Trying to talk with students and trying to grade exams, or trying to do research was seriously and negatively impacted.  It is impossible to talk to students about their future plans and ambitions, about courses they needed to meet requirements and graduate, and about economics.  Often I would just leave the office and do research in the library, and talk with students at a remote table in the cafeteria.  My situation was not unique in those days.  Many faculty shared offices with the same ramifications as I experienced.

Fast forward to today.  Every full-time faculty member at Hofstra has his or her own office and once again this is not a unique situation.  The facilities provided for faculty have been enhanced with the realization that a private office is a good investment.  The more comfortable a faculty member is on campus when having meetings with students and when doing research, it should follow that the faculty member spends more time on campus.  In turn the campus becomes more attractive to students with the easy accessibility to faculty. And for many years this relationship worked as predicted.

But the world has changed.  First of all communication is very different than when many of us went to school and very different from the way it was when we started working in higher education.  When I started teaching, a student would always be able to see me if they came during my regular office hours.  Typically, this was 4 hours per week.  Student could also make appointments to see me or any other faculty member; if the regular office hours didn’t work for a student or students, alternatives could usually always be found. Notes could be left in the department mailbox and a phone call to the office was also a possibility. Today, email, text messaging, Blackboard as well as other classroom management tools, provide a much faster and more convenient way of increased student/faculty communication (but you do lose the in-person contact).   In addition, the campus library, which often was key to a faculty member’s research or to a student’s education, has also felt the impact of technology.  As a starting faculty member, I often spent time in the Government Documents Room studying economic data and trends.  All the information is now available on-line with many more analytical options. 

Furthermore, many faculty look for a teaching schedule with fewer days per week on campus and often faculty live further away from the campus.  And students often have part-time jobs and some are looking for an earlier start and a later finish to the weekends which also leads to a more compact class schedule. For faculty the end result is less time on campus and less time in their private office.  Often an office is not occupied for extensive periods of time during the academic year.  Faculty need and deserve first rate office space.  But presently we are not using resources in the most efficient way possible. It’s time for a new model of space utilization.

Every Department Should Be a History Department

Recently I was asked to sit for an oral history interview covering my years at Hofstra.    Since my years at Hofstra go back more than half the time the University has been in existence, I enjoyed talking about and recounting key happenings.  At the same time, I was asked to suggest names for special 75th anniversary awards to those key individuals who made a major difference in the development of Hofstra from 1935 to the present.  Having been here so many years, I was able to suggest individuals who clearly made a difference but who are also mostly forgotten today.  True, these individuals, if they were faculty members, will likely be remembered by their students.  Or they could be remembered for their scholarship. But what if they were administrators, or faculty who championed or created key programs?  Who would know? Who would remember?

A Broad Education More Narrowly Defined

My first full-time teaching schedule was a four course, Monday-Wednesday-Friday schedule where I taught my first class at 9AM and my last class (a once a week graduate course ) ended shortly after 8 PM.  For as long as I was a full time faculty member, my schedule was virtually identical.  Only once did I complain to my department chair about my schedule – in my second year he presented me with a schedule that started at 8 AM and ended (one day a week) at 11PM.  I thought the hours were unreasonable and he agreed and modified it back to the way it had always looked.  My courses during those early years were filled regardless of the time. Many students, especially those who worked in addition to going to school, favored early classes or late classes and consequently almost every time slot had a robust enrollment.  The expectation was clear that as a faculty member I would be teaching an evening class virtually every semester and a relatively early morning class as well.

Faculty Blogs

At our mid-year commencement a few weeks ago, a faculty member I have known for many years asked me if I had been reading his Huffington Post blog on a regular basis. I answered yes and he asked me what I thought.

Before I share my response, let me tell you more about the faculty member. I actually have known this person since he was an undergraduate at The City College and I was teaching there as an adjunct while completing my Ph.D. One semester, there he was, registered for my basic economics course. And all during the course he complained that my economics was just not liberal enough for his liking.