SENATE EDUCATIONAL POLICIES COMMITTEE

Minutes

April 30, 1997

Attending: Sue Whitney, Chairperson; Jean Blachère; David M. Crossman; Tom Cain; Jack Daniel; Barbara Fredette; Leon Khaimovich; Tom Metzger; Tony Silvestre.

Absent: Elizabeth Baranger; Jack W. Birch; J.; Kate Freed; Erika Nanz; Glen Nelson; Sharon Nelson-Legall.

1. Follow Up: Dr. Whitneya. Founder's Day: A letter was received from Mr. Park of the office of special events in response to our communication about the problems with the audio-visual aspects of Founder's Day. Special events staff believe that many of the problems were due to the late arrival of slides by the speakers.

More care will be needed next year so that slides can be rehearsed.

b. FAS Policy: A letter from the Senate to FAS was circulated. The letter described this committee's response to the request for a review of the FAS policy on "conflict of interest" and the assignment of text books.

c. Chairs' Training: Dr. Whitney summarized all of the responses received about our inquiry about orientation and training offered to department chairpeople in all units. The response from Pharmacy was inadvertently left out but will be added to the final copy. The draft summary was distributed for review. Dr. Whitney will prepare a final copy, include an introduction about our concern's, and send it out to the units as promised in our original request. Committee members were invited to send revisions to Dr. Whitney.

d. Pitt Promise: The Pitt Promise discussed at our last meeting was approved by the Senate.

2. Discussion on Enhancing Teaching

A discussion of peer evaluation arose. Dr. Daniel reported that the issue was a major agenda item (2 of 5 hours) at the recent Deans' Council meeting. Four Deans presented on peer evaluation in their schools. There is reason to believe that the importance and centrality of teaching is better appreciated in recent times and that it may represent a major cultural change.

The discussion moved to the adequacy of the staffing and support of the Office of Faculty Development. The committee concluded that the Office is not the only source of faculty development or assistance and that more information is needed from each unit before any conclusions can be drawn about the need for additional resources. The point was raised that there is an unevenness in the attention paid to teaching among departments and within other units. One method to increase attention is to apply pressure from above. Another method is to increase faculty interest in enhancing their skills and, thereby, raising the level of expectation about teaching among faculty. It was suggested that this committee send a mailing to all faculty advising them that since excellence in teaching is rightfully becoming more important in terms of promotion and tenure decisions, the support of the state legislature, and student enrollment and retainment, faculty need to know about the opportunities available at Pitt to assist them. The mailing would then describe the various opportunities including mentoring (in some units), peer evaluation (offered in various forms in different units), and the various other activities that this committee can identify. As faculty become aware of the support that their colleagues are getting in other units, they may begin to organize stronger programs in their own units.

There was a suggestion that this committee request that funds to enhance teaching be available similar to the University's fund for seed money for new research faculty or faculty with innovative research projects. These funds would be available for small projects but not basic resources that should be funded from other sources. Dr. Whitney asked that Dr. Cain and Mr. Khaimovich review existing grant guidelines for their relevance to the proposed project.

Dr. Whitney spoke to the value of the annual seminar on innovative ways of teaching. After discussion, the committee voted that a letter be sent by Dr. Whitney to CIDD requesting that the seminar be held two times a year.

3. Exercise on Pitt's Future in Teaching

Mr. Khaimovich led the committee in an exercise to identify members' beliefs about the directions that the University needs to move in teaching. The following are the statements written by each member in a news headline format:

A. The University of Pittsburgh receives AAUP award for excellence in teaching as a result of the following: A comprehensive teaching ethic is generally understood by everyone; Instructional resources are readily available; and Promotion and tenure deal equally with teaching and research.

B. The University excels in access to diverse students; Pitt professor receives the Noble Prize for teaching; Pitt leads nation in the production of Rhodes Scholars; Students report high satisfaction with the Pitt experience; "International": A way of life at Pitt

C. Quality-Excellence in undergraduate, graduate, and research

D. Pitt successfully reaches non-traditional students such as single moms, 50 plus, working professionals, and rural people

E. Pitt a knowledge-based university: Models of University functioning ar developed by faculty and actively used for planning

F. Campus of the future i.e. technology, computer literacy, and life-long learning; Distance education initiatives; Math throughout curriculum; Cooperation of faculty, students, and administration in shared governance.

G. Outstanding teaching environment; Research well meshed with teaching; Outstanding relationship with industry (outside world)

H. University of Pittsburgh will be recognized nationally for education; System to evaluate effectiveness of grades; Have devoted revenues to teaching excellence; Have adequate resources in all departments to enhance testing effectiveness.

The meeting adjourned at 3 P.M.

The Committee meets again on June 4, 1997 at 1 p.m. in the Physical Therapy Conference Room, 6th floor, Forbes Tower.

Respectfully submitted: Anthony Silvestre