Contract Faculty ReportDepartment of Philosophy Program Review

Department of PhilosophyCollege of Arts and Sciences

Seattle University

Prepared by:

Yancy Hughes Dominick, Ph.D., Core Lecturer, Department of PhilosophyWilliam H. Smith, Ph.D., Core Lecturer, Department of Philosophy

Draft: December 10, 2010Revised: January 10, 2011

Visible/Invisible: The Status of Full-time Non-Tenure Track (FTNTT) Faculty in the Department of Philosophy

OverviewThis report provides a comprehensive description of the status of full-time non-tenure track (FTNTT) faculty in the Department of Philosophy at Seattle University. Prepared at the request of the Department Chair, Professor Burt Hopkins, this report is an appendix to the Fall 2010 Department of Philosophy Program Review, completed in advance of the University’s accreditation review in 2011. Under broad category of “status,” the report provides:

1. A description of the FTNTT faculty position in the College of Arts and Sciences, including a brief description of current practices regarding FTNTT faculty in the Department and comparable departments in the College (Section I).

2. A profile of the current FTNTT faculty in the Department, including statistics regarding teaching,

scholarship, and service, with comparative data for FTNTT faculty in the College outside the Department (Section II).

3. Comparative data for FTNTT faculty at the University’s peer institutions, including figures

regarding tenure density, salary, and benefits (Section III).

4. A summary assessment of the status of FTNTT faculty in the Department based on the most accurate data available (Section IV).

IntroductionThe purpose of this report is two-fold. The first aim of the report is to address the dearth of reliable information regarding the role, responsibilities, and performance of FTNTT faculty at the University. Although FTNTT faculty – called Core Lecturers or Senior Lecturers in the College – have been integral to the delivery of the Core Curriculum since 2004, no study detailing their contributions to the Department, the College, and the University at large has ever been conducted. The institutional data concerning FTNTT faculty in the College is decentralized, largely anecdotal, and when it exists, has typically been compiled in an ad hoc fashion. According to the University’s internal data reported to accreditation institutions and external survey bodies (such as U.S. News and World Report), FTNTT faculty are counted with tenured and tenure-track (TT) faculty in the University’s faculty-staff profile under the category of “full time faculty.” However, this category of “full time faculty” -- which is used in calculating important assessment metrics, such as student-to-teacher ratio -- ignores the distinction between tenure and non-tenure track faculty. As a result, the unique position of FTNTT faculty is systematically obscured in the University’s existing internal data. This occlusion renders the University’s official statistics regarding “full-time faculty” impotent for the purposes of accurately assessing the current performance of FTNTT faculty and guiding future decisions regarding the FTNTT faculty lines in the Department and the College. Thus, the first intention of this report to correct an institutional blind-spot regarding a particularly significant but misrepresented faculty constituency. The second aim of this report is to illuminate that which is currently hidden in the University’s data described above, that is, the exceptionally high performance of FTNTT faculty despite a lack of internal and external visibility. Although FTNTT are counted equally with TT faculty in official statistics and

relied on heavily for teaching and service, they are not compensated or supported in a commensurate fashion when filling these vital roles for the University. To give a few concrete examples:

1. Despite shouldering more than half of the teaching load in the University’s Core Curriculum – teaching 64% of Core Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III courses in Philosophy (72 of 113 sections) and 68% of all students in Philosophy Core courses (approximately 1861 of 2730 students) – FTNTT faculty in the Department are not included in the College’s Faculty and Staff directory nor do they have permanent and well-marked office space in which to conduct student meetings.1

2. Although FTNTT in the Department consistently raise the academic profile of the institution

by publishing in top academic venues and delivering papers at both national and international professional conferences, they are supported by the College at the rate of only $250 annually for such activities, just 17% of the $1500 in faculty development funds awarded annually to TT faculty for similar scholarly work.

3. Regardless of the length of their employment or quality of their past performance, FTNTT

faculty are hired and retained exclusively on one-year contracts; consequently, FTNTT faculty regularly undertake significant service responsibilities involving multi-year appointments without the assurance that their contract will be renewed in the following academic year. For instance, FTNTT in the Department currently serve (or have served) in two-year appointments on the Colleges’ Faculty Staff Assembly Coordinating Committee and the University Honors Faculty Advisory Board.

These surprising facts indicate that FTNTT faculty are both visible and invisible at the University: they are among the most visible instructors, but are largely invisible to the prospective students whom they will teach; their scholarship bolsters the University’s academic profile, yet they are eligible for only a fraction of the College’s faculty development funds; they are consistently involved in the University’s long-term planning initiatives, but their professional futures remain in limbo until late spring when their year-to-year contracts are renewed. In light of these considerations, the second intention of this report is to make visible the conspicuous but unheralded labors of FTNTT faculty. Finally, it must be noted that this report takes place against the background of the disintegration of the tenure-track job market over the last three years. In philosophy as a discipline, 347 jobs were posted internationally in the October 2007 issue of American Philosophical Association’s Jobs for Philosophers, the benchmark publication for the health of the philosophy job market. After the collapse of the global financial markets in 2008, that number fell to just 140 jobs in 2009 (a 60% shortfall) and 157 jobs in 2010 (a 55% shortfall). This steep decline in the availability of jobs of all kinds, and tenure-track jobs in particular, has especially affected FTNTT faculty who would ordinarily pursue tenure-track employment elsewhere. Although exacerbated by the financial crisis of 2008, the extremely limited availability of tenure-track positions corresponds to the erosion of tenure-track positions in academia over the past 30 years. The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) reports that from 1975 to 2003 the percentage of FTNTT faculty increased from 13% to 19% of the overall share of faculty in higher-education, while the number of tenured or tenure-track positions fell from 57% to 35% over the same period, mostly due to large increases in the numbers of part-time (PT) faculty (see Figure 1).

1 AY 2009-2010, according to course-load data from the College of Arts & Sciences.

Given these national trends, and the increasing likelihood that the market for tenure-track positions across the country will not rebound after the 2008 financial collapse, FTNTT faculty currently serving at the University have a strong desire to stay in their current positions. I. The FTNTT PositionDrawing on faculty interviews, as well as the College and University Handbooks, this section of the report provides a preliminary definition of the FTNTT faculty position, focusing especially on roles and duties corresponding to the College’s Core Lecturer designation. A. Definitions. According to the A&S Faculty/Lecturer Online Resource Guide, the part-time and full-time non-tenure track positions are divided into three ranks:

Lecturer: In the College of Arts and Sciences, the title of “Lecturer” is given to adjunct faculty (see University Faculty Handbook for policies regarding appointment of adjunct faculty). Core Lecturer: In the College of Arts and Sciences, the title of “Core Lecturer” is given to full time non tenure-track faculty who are hired to teach primarily (though not necessarily exclusively) in the Core Curriculum. Senior Lecturer: The title of Senior Lecturer may be given to a Lecturer who has fulfilled the following criteria:

1. possession of the terminal degree in one’s field 2. five or more years of service at Seattle University

3. record of excellent teaching

The title of Senior Lecturer is given by the department chair in consultation with the appropriate divisional Associate Dean. 2

In the Department, there are currently nine (9) FTNTT faculty on one-year renewable contracts: eight (8) Core Lecturers and one (1) Senior Lecturer.

Outside of the Department, the number for Core Lecturers and Senior Lecturers is indeterminate, but estimated to be 25-30 FTNTT positions. The FTNTT designations are not consistently applied across departments in the College, making an accurate count of FTNTT impossible until the position has been standardized both in theory and in practice. B. Initial Hiring and Renewal of Contracts for Continuing FTNTT Faculty.3 According to College policy, FTNTT faculty are to be hired in keeping with the following guidelines:

1. Continuing appointments: If the department recommends rehiring a faculty member who is in a full-time non-tenure-track position already, an annual performance review must be conducted and submitted to the dean's office by April 1, beginning with the first year of the faculty member’s employment at SU. The recommendation to rehire must be approved by the department and submitted to the dean's office at the same time as the annual review. 2. New appointments: For new full-time non-tenure-track appointments, the position must be advertised, including at least one advertisement outside Seattle University. Candidates should be interviewed for the position and references should be checked. The recommendation to hire must be approved by the department and submitted to the dean's office for approval before a verbal offer is made to the candidate.

In the Department, all of the FTNTT positions were filled as a result of international searches. Each of the positions was advertised in the spring edition of the Job’s for Philosophers, which draws an international audience. At least some of the current FTNTT faculty in the Department were hired with the understanding that their contracts were renewable for up to three years; however, after three years their contacts would not be renewed. Given the collapse of the job market described in the introduction, this three year term limit policy was suspended by the Chair in Fall 2009.

In the Department, hiring is done by the Chair. No comprehensive data regarding hiring outside of the Department was collected for this report. However, anecdotal testimony indicates that hiring has moved from ad hoc decisions by department chairs to regional searches advertised and reviewed in full compliance with the College’s guidelines. C. Orientation. According to the College’s published guidelines, FTNTT faculty are invited to attend the university’s New Faculty Institute and Seminars as well as the College of Arts and Sciences New Faculty Training. According to the Provost’s Office published policies for recruiting and hiring full-time faculty, faculty are expected attend the New Faculty Institute. The College guidelines also indicate that departments are to provide an orientation and mentorship to all new faculty, both PT and FTNTT faculty. FTNTT faculty who are serving as academic advisers go through a four-part training program, including University Advising, College Advising , SU Online Advising, and Core Advising. FTNTT faculty who do advising are also intended to work with the Advising Coordinator and/or the department whose majors they are advising to receive ongoing training, mentoring, and supervision.

2A&S Faculty/Lecturer Online Resource Guide - Lecturer Policies.3A&S Faculty/Lecturer Online Resource Guide College Policy for hiring full-time non-tenure-track faculty (Adopted May 9, 2001)

In the Department, orientation and continued faculty support are provided by the Department’s Contract Faculty Liaison, a role most recently filled by Professor Marylou Sena. Professor Sena also organizes and leads annual seminars on Core pedagogy with FTNTT faculty. These seminars meet on a quarterly basis and, in addition to a discussion of pedagogy, typically involve the close-reading and discussion of an important philosophical text that will be taught (or will enhance teaching) in Core Philosophy courses.

Outside of the Department, Professor June Johnson fills a role analogous to that of Profressor Sena in the Department of English . The Department of English also notably conducts annual workshops for all faculty teaching in the Core, including both FTNTT and TT faculty. D. Annual Review. Like tenured and tenure-track faculty, FTNTT faculty are reviewed on an annual basis in April using the College’s Annual Professional Review for Non-Tenure Track Faculty form. All FTNTT have a peer review of teaching during the first year.

In the Department, additional peer reviews of teaching are conducted in at the discretion of the Chair. As a matter of best practice, FTNTT faculty routinely request informal peer reviews by the Department’s Contract Faculty Liaison in order to improve their teaching performance. E. Faculty Development Funds. According to the College Handbook, FTNTT faculty with the rank of Senior Lecturer are eligible to apply for faculty development funds at the same rate as TT faculty, currently $1500 for presenting a paper or creative project. FTNTT faculty with the rank of Core Lecturer are eligible to apply for faculty development funds at a rate set annually by the Budget Manager, currently $250 for general support. Core Lecturers may apply to receive $400 of support for preparing a new course; however, these funds cannot be used to support travel or to present a creative scholarly work. In addition, the application for these lines of support is mutually exclusive -- that is, if support for preparing a new course is sought, then general support cannot be obtained, and vice versa. PT faculty are eligible to apply for remaining funds from the pool of faculty development monies annually, up to the rate of $300 when five or six (5-6) courses are taught. F. Workload. The College specifies that FTNTT faculty have a standard workload of seven (7) courses. One or more sevenths of their load may be assigned to advising or to a significant service project, with the approval of the department chair and the appropriate divisional Associate Dean.

In the Department, FTNTT faculty primarily teach Core classes, but they also regularly teach upper-division courses for majors. This opportunity is special to FTNTT faculty in the Department. Outside the Department, opportunities for upper-level teaching are sometimes available in the Department of History, but almost never in the Department of English.

According to the A&S Faculty/Lecturer Online Resource Guide Expectations, other duties of FTNTT include “attendance at department meetings, availability to students, and other standard service is included in the salary for teaching.”

In practice, service to the University beyond teaching is not stated in the standard FTNTT faculty contract. In the Department, FTNTT faculty have traditionally not attended department meetings, but there is no official policy regarding such obligations. However, FTNTT faculty in the Department meet at least once per academic year at the request of the Chair to discuss the current needs of the Department, the likelihood of contract renewal in the following academic year, and related issues.

Outside of the Department, in the Department of English, FTNTT faculty attend department meetings on an invitation-only basis; in the Department of History, they are required to attend, except when matters of hiring appear on the agenda. II. Profile of Current FacultyIn this section, data regarding the current makeup of the FTNTT faculty in Department and their

contributions to teaching, scholarship, and service to the University are presented. The information reviewed is drawn from the following sources: (1) a Fall 2010 survey of current FTNTT faculty in the Department and the College, conducted in preparation for this report by the authors;4 (2) personal interviews with FTNTT and TT faculty in and outside the Department; (3) previous survey data, collected in 2009 by FTNTT faculty outside the Department; and finally, (4) data drawn from the College’s own published records. A. Employment & Hiring

1. Degreesa. Department: All nine (9) FTNTT faculty hold doctoral degrees in Philosophy.b. Comparative data: In English, at least two (2) FTNTT faculty do not hold doctoral

degrees. Comprehensive data across the College has never been complied.2. Average length of employment

a. Department: 3.1 years.b. Comparative data: 4 years.

3. Hiringa. As indicated in I.B, the Department hires its FTNTT faculty on the basis of national and

international searches; it therefore endeavors to staff its courses with the most qualified faculty available internationally. Similar comparative data was unavailable at the time of this report.

B. Teaching & Workload

1. Courses taughta. Percentage of Courses Taught Overall (AY 2009-2010)

i. Department: FTNTT taught approximately 57% of all courses (75 out of 131 sections) in Philosophy (Figure 2), instructing approximately 64% of students (1911 out of 3004) in Philosophy courses overall (Figure 3).

Figure 2. Figure 3.

b. Percentage of Core Courses Taught (AY 2009-2010)

i. Department: FTNTT faculty taught approximately 64% of Core Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III courses (72 of 113 sections) in Philosophy (Figure 4),

4All nine of the FTNTT faculty in the Department completed the survey and fifteen responses were collected from FTNTT facutly outside the Department

instructing 68% of students (1861 of 2730) in all Philosophy Core courses (Figure 5).

Figure 4. Figure 5.

2. Teaching evaluationsa. Teaching evaluation data for FTNTT faculty must be collected and calculated by hand,

as the College does not distinguish between courses taught by TT faculty, FTNTT faculty, and PT faculty when collecting evaluations. The data gathered here focuses on the Global Evaluation, the average score across all categories surveyed by the College on the student evaluation. Each category is rated on a scale of 1 to 5 (5 representing excellence). The Global Evaluation score is the measure used by the College to determine the quality of the course as a whole. Scores are ranked in the following fashion: 3.8 or below does not meet expectations, above 3.8 meets expectations, above 4.0 exceeds expectations, above 4.5 substantially exceeds expectations.

i. Department: according to the best available data (AY 2007-2010), FTNTT faculty perform on a level comparable to their TT faculty colleagues and consistently outperform PT faculty in the Global Evaluation score when compared across similar courses. While a greater sample size is needed to substantiate these findings, these data indicate that length of employment, institutional support, and career stability improve teaching performance in the classroom.

AY 2007-2008

Course TT FTNTT PT

PHIL 110 4.23 4.06 3.72

PHIL 210 4.20 4.24 N/A

PHIL 220 3.94 3.88 4.16

Ethics 3.95 4.11 4.01

Upper Division 4.50 3.89 4.65

Overall 4.16 4.04 4.14

AY 2008-2009

Course TT FTNTT PT

PHIL 110 4.33 4.02 N/A

PHIL 210 4.24 4.00 N/A

PHIL 220 3.71 3.72 4.22

Ethics 3.74 4.12 3.99

Upper Division 4.64 4.20 N/A

Overall 4.13 4.01 4.11

AY 2009-2010

Course TT FTNTT PT

PHIL 110 4.15 3.95 2.98

PHIL 210 N/A 4.09 4.62

PHIL 220 4.30 3.96 4.37

Ethics 4.52 4.30 3.87

Upper Division 4.63 4.31 3.86

Overall 4.40 4.12 3.94

C. Scholarship

1. Conference participationa. Department: In 2008-2010, FTNTT faculty participated at both national and international

professional philosophy conferences including the American Philosophical Association (APA) and Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy (SPEP) meetings. This participation involved at least the following:

i. 28 papers delivered at regional, national, and international conferencesii. 5 conference commentsiii. 4 conference panels chairediv. 4 additional conferences attended

b. Comparative Data: In 2008-2010, the 15 FTNTT faculty survey respondents outside the Department delivered at least 10 conference presentations.

2. Publications

a. Department: In 2008-2010, FTNTT faculty in Philosophy produced at least:i. 1 monographii. 2 edited booksiii. 13 book chapters or articles in top international journalsiv. 10 book reviews

b. Comparative Data: In 2008-2010, the 15 FTNTT faculty survey respondents outside the Department produced at least:

i. 1 monographii. 1 edited bookiii. 5 articles or book chaptersiv. 1 short storyv. 5 book reviews

D. Service

1. University Programs Serveda. Department: FTNTT faculty in teach philosophy courses in support of many of the

University's high-profile academic and residential-learning programs. These include:i. 10 Core Freshman Seminar coursesii. 2 Matteo Ricci College coursesiii. 1 Leadership Learning Community courseiv. 2 Faith and Great Ideas Learning Community coursesv. 3 Diversity, Citizenship, and Social Justice coursesvi. 4 Hurtado Learning Community coursesvii. 2 University Honors courses

2. Faculty Development

a. Department: FTNTT faculty regularly participate in Departmental, College, and University faculty development programs. These include:

i. 1 University Sustainability Workshopii. 3 Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning Workshopsiii. 8 Philosophy Contract Faculty Seminarsiv. 1 Philosophy Core Writing Assessment Workshopv. 4 Core Freshman Seminar Faculty Workshopsvi. 1 Justice in the Curriculum, Core Summer Seminar

3. Additional University Service

a. Department: FTNTT faculty also represent the Department in a variety of strategic leadership roles across the University, often in trail-blazing programs and academic initiatives. These include:

i. 1 Zen Meditation group leaderii. 1 Academic Advisor (Philosophy)iii. 2 scorers for CAPE (University Assessment of Student Writing exam)iv. 1 Coordinator of Philosophy Core Lecturer Colloquium seriesv. 1 Coordinator for inaugural lecture of the Learning Communities Speaker Series,

helped bring a Noble-Prize winning speaker from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to deliver the first lecture.

vi. 1 Faculty Sponsor, Elie Wiesel Ethics student essay contestvii. 1 Faculty Sponsor, National Conference for Undergraduate Researchviii.1 published poet, nominated Best New Poet in ’09ix. 2 Journal Refereesx. 1 Faculty Advisory Board, University Honors Program

xi. 2 Colleagues in Jesuit Education, Office of Jesuit Mission & Identityxii. 1 Faculty Member, Hurtado Residential Learning Communityxiii.1 Representative, Faculty-Staff Assembly Coordinating Committee

III. Comparative DataIn this section, statistics are presented comparing FTNTT compensation and the number of FTNTT faculty at the University with other institutions and with national and regional averages. The data were compiled using the following methods: (1) direct contact with individual universities; (2) consultation of AAUP reports; and (3) and John Bean’s “What You Would Make at Gonzaga” document, widely circulated in the College early this year. A. Percentage of FTNTT Faculty. As of Fall 2009, FTNTT faculty make up 41% of the full-time faculty in the Department (9 out of 22), and 32% of the full-time faculty at the University as a whole. At peer institutions, the percentage of FTNTT as a share full-time faculty is noticeably lower, as the following data indicate:

● Creighton: 23%● Loyola Marymount: 18%● Loyola U. Maryland: 28%● Santa Clara: 27%● U Denver: 24%● U San Francisco: 6%

According to the AAUP, FTNTT make up 32% of full-time faculty at National Private Master’s Degree Universities, and 25% of the full-time faculty at all National Master’s Degree Universities. Again, the percentage of FTNTT faculty in the Department and the University stands out when compared to similar institutions (Figure 6). Figure 6.

According to the University’s 2010 Self-Study, the University reported that less than 30% of its full-time faculty were FTNTT positions as of Fall 2008. That number has clearly increased over the intervening period, as it now stands at 32% according to the most recent AAUP report. It should be noted that even

given the lower 2008 number, the University ranks 26th out of 28 peer intuitions with respect to tenure density among its full-time faculty (Figure 7). This comparison makes the Department’s current tenure density -- where 41% of the full-time positions are currently held by FTNTT faculty -- all the more striking. Figure 7.

B. Salary. FTNTT salary in the College begins at $35,000. This base salary was established in the original proposal for FTNTT in the College, but has not been adjusted for inflation or cost of living increases since the FTNTT position was approved in 2004. According to the US Department of Education, the average salary for a Non-Tenure-Track Instructor at the University is $54,556 and the average salary for Lecturers is $41,254. These reported salaries are markedly higher than the starting salary of $35,000 that is standard for FTNTT faculty in the College. As reported by peer institutions, the following are average salaries for FTNTT faculty elsewhere:

● Gonzaga University: $47,000 (Philosophy Lecturers).● Creighton: $49,761 (Instructor).● Loyola U. Maryland: $45,301 (Instructor).● Loyola Marymount: $65,194 (Instructor).● Santa Clara: $64,634 (Lecturer).● U. Denver: $51,173 (Lecturer).● U. San Francisco: $69,280 (Instructor).

According to the AAUP, average salary for Lecturers at National Master’s Degree Universities is $50,408, and the average at Pacific Region Master’s Degree Universities is $59,658. Again, these data indicate that the salary for FTNTT faculty in the College is markedly lower than that of FTNTT faculty at peer institutions and the reported national and regional averages (Figure 8).

Figure 8.

In addition, the average salary for Lecturers reported in the University’s 2010 Self-Study (see Figure 9) stands out as surprisingly low even when compared to other categories across the institution: Figure 9.

Given the 2007 salary data shown above, the University’s Self-Study indicates that Lecturers are the lowest paid category in the institution, drawing average salaries substantially lower than their TT colleagues. The Lecturer category is also the only designation in the University whose average salary falls below the Comparison Group Median. Moreover, the average salary of $41,000 reported for Lecturers, if extended to FTNTT faculty in the College, would constitute a substantial raise over the $35,000 base salary (roughly a 14.8% increase in salary if adjusted to the mean in Figure 9). C. Benefits. At the University, all FTNTT faculty receive the same medical, retirement, and tuition benefits as TT faculty. According to the AAUP, these benefits for FTNTT faculty at the University are valued at approximately $19,000. The data available from peer intuitions indicate that these benefits for FTNTT are at or in some cases above the reported averages for comparable intuitions and the region. A sample of readily available peer institution data:

● Creighton: $11,800● Loyola U. Maryland: $12,700● U. San Francisco: $30,300

According to the AAUP, the averages for National Master’s Degree Universities is $15,999, and the average for Pacific Region Master’s Degree Universities is $16,475. It seems clear from these figures that the University’s benefits package for FTNTT faculty is its strongest compensatory contribution to the well-being of its FTNTT faculty (Figure 10). Figure 10.

IV. Summary AssessmentIn conclusion, two features of the status FTNTT faculty in the Department seem especially striking:

1. FTNTT faculty members represent a substantial share of the full-time faculty both within the Department (41% of full-time faculty) and the University as a whole (32% of full-time faculty). They also carry an equally substantial share of the workload, teaching on average more than 55% of the all the courses taught in Philosophy and nearly 65% of the thousands of students served by the Department annually.

2. FTNTT faculty do not receive the recognition or support that is proportionate to their

contributions to the University. Given that the performance of FTNTT faculty in the Department exceeds -- and in many cases, substantially exceeds -- the College’s stated expectations for teaching, scholarship, and service, perhaps it is time to revisit the contract length, salary, and faculty development funds that are currently available to FTNTT faculty.