I was recently in a meeting where the term 'collegiality' was deployed in what I regard as an unusual way.
In short, in my institution, they have started assigning faculty a lot more non teaching and research related tasks. This includes things like helping freshmen move into dorms, making phone calls to prospective students, staffing tables at local events to recruit students, having faculty staff tables for events on campus, etc. Our administration claims that those who enjoy doing those things and do so willing are "being collegial" while individuals who do not volunteer for non-teaching related tasks are "not collegial."
IN short, I've never heard the term used in quite this way. Has anyone else encountered this usage?
Not precisely, no.
I have heard it used with regard to faculty service before, but more in terms of traditional committee service or academic advising.
In fact, I personally definitely find it not very collegial when faculty skip out on this kind of service.
However, here is one definition from Websters:
relating to or involving shared responsibility, as among a group of colleagues
Its general enough to fit your administration's definition, though I haven't seem many schools use it that way.
Will admin/student affairs pitch in and assist with your teaching prep, classroom teaching, grading, research, conference presentations, and publications? They generally can't, anyway, due to lack of expertise.
If you're at a college with a well-resourced student affairs unit (now viewed as much more important than academic affairs on many campuses), they should have plenty of resources and motivation for doing their own jobs and not asking faculty to do so. Why not have other students happily help with things you list?
If your faculty colleagues willingly go along, the precedent is set and that's that. If your campus is not unionized and/or doesn't have strong faculty camaraderie, could be trouble.
When the leaves begin to fall and dean sends your department a bundle of rakes, is that a subtle hint about the meaning of "collegiality"?
You should ask the deans to grade your papers, and point out that to refuse would be uncollegial.
I would also tell the deans that they need to be congenial too, and your oven needs cleaning, so they should bring their merry maids outfits.
This is exactly the way my former institution thought of "collegiality."
In other words. "If you don't do my scut work for me, I'm going to accuse you of not being a team player, collegial, whatever."
Collegiality is used as a device of discipline in all the ways described above, but I want to also point out that it is a word deployed more often against scholars of color, women, the untenured or contingent. And with greater detriment to their careers.
It's like "civility" for 2019.
We have a low bar for collegiality: don't undermine the work of your colleagues. It sounds as if the administration is failing to meet even this modest standard.
Some time ago, I think now almost 20 years, the AAUP put out a statement regarding "collegiality" and concluded that it should not be used as
a separate category in tenure and promotion decisions because its too broad of a category and is too subject to abuse. Now, if the real issue is that the person has been hiding out on the Parking Ticket Appeals Committee for 20 years and hasn't even attended those meetings, then say so. If the real problem is that person isn't following the dept. approved curriculum for majors, then say so. And so on.
As for an administration that wants to hand on everything to faculty (probably without extra compensation) because they can't afford to hire the appropriate staff, well, you can fight against it a little, especially if you (a) have a union (b) have a handbook with clearly delineated duties, all of which must be approved by a super-majority before making it into the handbook. However, in the end, if you lose the fight or have to give in a bit as you are fighting the fight, I'm not sure then that there is much you can do about it. You have a job. You can do the job, or walk (or run!).
Quote from: Ruralguy on June 14, 2019, 06:33:13 AM
Some time ago, I think now almost 20 years, the AAUP put out a statement regarding "collegiality" and concluded that it should not be used as
a separate category in tenure and promotion decisions because its too broad of a category and is too subject to abuse. Now, if the real issue is that the person has been hiding out on the Parking Ticket Appeals Committee for 20 years and hasn't even attended those meetings, then say so. If the real problem is that person isn't following the dept. approved curriculum for majors, then say so. And so on.
It was 20 years ago, and it can be found here:
https://www.aaup.org/report/collegiality-criterion-faculty-evaluation (https://www.aaup.org/report/collegiality-criterion-faculty-evaluation)
QuoteNothing is to be gained by establishing collegiality as a separate criterion of assessment. A fundamental absence of collegiality will no doubt manifest itself in the dimensions of teaching, scholarship, or, most probably, service, though here we would add that we all know colleagues whose distinctive contribution to their institution or their profession may not lie so much in service as in teaching and research. Professional misconduct or malfeasance should constitute an independently relevant matter for faculty evaluation. So, too, should efforts to obstruct the ability of colleagues to carry out their normal functions, to engage in personal attacks, or to violate ethical standards. The elevation of collegiality into a separate and discrete standard is not only inconsistent with the long-term vigor and health of academic institutions and dangerous to academic freedom; it is unnecessary.
We do not take collegiality into account in tenure/promotion decisions, it has never come up in any of the meetings I've attended, and our reasoning is exactly in line with the quote above: it is unnecessary.
And to be accurate here, the OP did not report that his institution was attempting to implement "collegiality' as a separate tenure evaluation category. However, I do feel that there is some danger of this if they are throwing around the word "collegiality" if you don't take on extra uncompensated tasks.
Quote from: Ruralguy on June 14, 2019, 09:22:16 AM
And to be accurate here, the OP did not report that his institution was attempting to implement "collegiality' as a separate tenure evaluation category. However, I do feel that there is some danger of this if they are throwing around the word "collegiality" if you don't take on extra uncompensated tasks.
From my experience in the circling-the-drain category, the real danger is realizing there's not enough money to pay people to do all the necessary tasks and thus putting pressure on everyone still employed to take on extra tasks from the institutional to-do list. The problem won't be newer folks not getting tenure because of "collegiality"; the problem will eventually become the institution closes because many students will experience the lack of resources and go elsewhere.
The question I have for Morris Zapp is: what are you doing to get out? If there's been an uptick in the stream of competent administrators and support staff leaving without hiring equally competent people, then the abuse of the term "collegiality" is far less worrying than the fact that people who can get other good jobs have left and are, at best, being replaced by warm bodies willing to give the job at shot at the pay offered and, at worst, are not being replaced but instead have the tasks distributed to anyone else still employed at the institution.
Yes, Polly, but the road to ruin is paved with bad intention, such as roasting a few junior faculty for not being collegial.
Quote from: Ruralguy on June 15, 2019, 01:55:36 PM
Yes, Polly, but the road to ruin is paved with bad intention, such as roasting a few junior faculty for not being collegial.
Perhaps I'm unclear: we're already well down the road to ruin when junior faculty are being told that being collegial means picking up all the extra tasks in an effort to eke another year out of a place that likely will be closing.
The problem is not whether that's collegial or not; the problem is we're already so far down that road that junior faculty should be getting out for their own good. Period.
This is a solid case for STFU while applying out to anything.
Quote from: Morris Zapp on June 13, 2019, 10:35:02 AM
This includes things like helping freshmen move into dorms, making phone calls to prospective students, staffing tables at local events to recruit students, having faculty staff tables for events on campus, etc.
Quote from: polly_mer on June 15, 2019, 02:35:06 PM
Perhaps I'm unclear: we're already well down the road to ruin when junior faculty are being told that being collegial means picking up all the extra tasks in an effort to eke another year out of a place that likely will be closing.
The problem is not whether that's collegial or not; the problem is we're already so far down that road that junior faculty should be getting out for their own good. Period.
It's possible that the administrators pushing these extra tasks on faculty are making clumsy attempts to get faculty more involved in recruitment and retention. They've heard that students like interaction with faculty, so they're pushing faculty to interact. Our upper level admin has been exhorting chairs to push for more student interaction. One misguided VP cited just these types of activity as "wonderful opportunities to build relationships with students!" We're not circling the drain, just dealing with upper level admin who joined the get-faculty-involved-with-students-outside-class bandwagon at their latest conference.
In my opinion, it's better use of faculty time to encourage them to interact with prospective and current students as nurturing teachers. Giving engaging guest lectures, teaching master classes, judging science fairs, or otherwise being involved in high school activities as a nurturing teacher from the university
may help with recruitment. Interacting with students as a nurturing and caring teacher by participating in co-curricular activities
may help with retention. Being seen at campus events, with a smile and maybe a few positive non-academic words to students,
may help with retention. Helping with dorm move in and staffing tables at generic meet-and-greet events does not suggest a nurturing teacher, which is what's needed for recruitment and retention.
Trying to shame reluctant faculty into recruitment and retention activities by accusing them of being uncollegial is a poor tactic. It results in resentful faculty who are unlikely to project the delighted-to-meet-you attitude needed for successful r&r activities. Explaining why helping with recruitment and retention is in the faculty's best interest and suggesting a range of ways to help without pressuring people is much more likely to succeed than trying to shame faculty into roles where they're uncomfortable and resentful.
Stepping off my soapbox now.
Quote from: Vkw10 on June 16, 2019, 07:00:52 AM
Trying to shame reluctant faculty into recruitment and retention activities by accusing them of being uncollegial is a poor tactic. It results in resentful faculty who are unlikely to project the delighted-to-meet-you attitude needed for successful r&r activities. Explaining why helping with recruitment and retention is in the faculty's best interest and suggesting a range of ways to help without pressuring people is much more likely to succeed than trying to shame faculty into roles where they're uncomfortable and resentful.
Yes, I agree. The fact, though, that the tool being used is shame instead of pointing out realities and offering a broad range of activities that appeal to many faculty members indicates a failure somewhere. You may be at an institution that isn't obviously circling the drain in the next five years, but there is something amiss if the administration is going to a new push to manual labor with moving in instead of a renewed emphasis on the other activities.
It does sound like an amorphous impossible to verify or quantify metric that would give adminiscritters an excuse to can someone, more or less like being a quote unquote team player?
Quote from: kaysixteen on June 17, 2019, 06:47:39 PM
It does sound like an amorphous impossible to verify or quantify metric that would give adminiscritters an excuse to can someone, more or less like being a quote unquote team player?
Bing, bing, bing! Yes, that's exactly how some places abuse the term.
Of course, nothing prevents abuses of the other three areas for progress for tenure as well. I still laugh every time I encounter the idea that "no one" has ever been denied tenure for lack of service because I personally know multiple cases. I've known people who had a tough time getting tenure even when handily meeting the bar for all three categories as people comb through the record for ways to dismiss evidence and then bring back a ruling of "insufficient" in whatever category they can manage.