Comments on the Sample Workload Form

These comments are most useful when simultaneously viewing the sample workload form.

After reviewing current year activities, we began to plan for the coming academic year.  Initially we identified the courses be taught (3), the terms in which they would be taught, and made reasonable estimates of the enrollment.  For each course I entered the course number, title, term, number of students, and credit hours (contact unit column).  We then discussed and counted the number of graduate students directed, identifying the level of the student and the number of terms for which direction would be required.  Summer term was included.  Expected graduation dates were established.  The cumulative number of student-quarters by level for which direction would be provided was determined and appropiate entries in the worksheet made.  In this case the faculty member was not on any other graduate committees beyond those being directed.  One directed study was anticipated for the coming year and the corresponding entry was made in the worksheet.  No teaching/research was being supervised but it was recognized that for some faculty this could be a substantial effort.

After discussing current and proposed research activities, it was agreed that a 50% research assignment was appropriate across all three academic terms.  Normally this would be accompanied by the establishment of expected outcomes - papers submitted, funding obtained or maintained, clients supported.   The appropriate values for the number of terms and designated effort were entered in the Research category of the worksheet.

Discussion of other activities led to the conclusion that acting as a stem head was the only other significant activity.    After discussing the duties it was agreed that on the average over the year, this would represent roughly one hour of work per week.  Thus a designated effort of 2% was appropriate for 3 terms.

Having completed our initial pass through the worksheet we returned to the course assignments.  The first was identified as a lecture course, junior level, that had been recently taught by the faculty member.  Thus no additional contact equivalencies were assigned.  The second course involved a design project that required additional effort from the instructor.  Thus one contact unit equivalency was assigned with a mode identification of d.  The third course was a technical elective that included a design project.  Two additional contact unit equivalencies were assigned based on modes d and e.

We then browsed to the end of the worksheet and were stunned to observe that the total designated effort was 100%.  Thus no workload adjustments were required (you won't be so lucky).  What if the total was not 100%?  If the total had exceeded 100%, a reduction in workload would need to be made.  Perhaps the assignment of a GTA to assist with one or more of the courses.  Perhaps shifting the stem head assignment to another individual.  Perhaps reducing the research assignment and expectations.  If the total had been less than 100%. an increase in workload assignment would be required.   In this case a natural area might be to encourage greater participation on graduate thesis committees.  Perhaps greater service activities in terms of committee involvement might be appropriate.  Perhaps the assignment of an additional course or the expectation that instructional technology be incorporated into an assigned course.  In any event appropriate adjustments should be made to bring the cumulative effort to 100%.