President's Message

Mitch Silverman

During the past year on a number of occasions I have received calls from bargaining unit members who have alleged that they were being verbally and psychologically harassed in carrying out their assigned duties. The abuse has ranged from verbally chastising them in private to being verbally abused in front of colleagues to the use of innuendo to indicate the faculty member was acting in an incompetent manner. In each case the faculty member wanted to know what they could do to stop the abuse they were suffering. When told that they could file a grievance the typical response was that they did not want their identity to be revealed and were afraid of possible retaliation from the individuals abusing them. Since the abusers, in many cases, were in supervisory positions in which they were evaluating the faculty member their concern appeared to be warranted.

However, unless the faculty member is willing to come forward and file a complaint there is little the union can do to help rectify the situation. On several occasions we have raised the abuse issue at consultation with the administration of the University. Yet little can be done to stop the abuse if the faculty member is unwilling to make a formal complaint through use of the grievance process. After discussing this issue with the administration it is my feeling that we could make significant progress in stopping abusive behavior if we had specific claims that could be justified on the basis of having grievances filed. It is the USF/UFF's position that individuals have a right to an abuse-free work environment and that this right is guaranteed under the contract. If you feel that you have been the victim of abuse and are willing to file grievance feel free to contact me.

Tenure Nightmare

Mark Klisch

In scenes that would be more appropriate in a poorly written mystery novel, recent events that came to light in one of our colleague's tenure application evoke a combination of reactions - profound distaste about clumsy manner in which the matter was handled, but at the same time a back-of-the-neck chill that this mess could happen to any of us. Picture this, if you will. A new professor comes to USF, puts herself into her work totally, with that "eyes on the prize" attitude that is necessary in order to clear all the hurdles in the tenure and promotion process. She publishes (and publishes), she teaches undergraduate and graduate courses, she works on committees, she advises students, she takes on all of the "requests" for extra service made of her by her Chair, and she puts together a truly meritorious T & P package.

Her application is supported at the initial levels, but then she is told that it is not being supported by her Dean. Surprised, she tries to find out why. Here is where the really bad script comes into view. When she met with the Dean, she finds out that the decision was made on the basis of poor student evaluations, some of which were absolutely damning in their review. The professor leaves the meeting dejected, but not so much so that she doesn't go back to the data. What she finds is the core of this horror story, that somewhere in the review process student evaluations from other courses, courses she had never even taught, were included in her file, and interestingly these were the ones that contained the damaging statements. Also interesting is the fact that other evaluations (positiveones) from courses she had taught were omitted from her file. The professor asked for a re-compilation of her student evaluation data, and an attempt was made to do so. However, this too contained gross numbers of errors, still including missing data. A UFF grievance was filed at this point. So, ``Who done it?'' How many errors are there in other T & P applications in that College? Is this personal or just incompetence? The mystery is unsolved, and may never be. We are told that ``mistakes happen'' and that perhaps no T & P file is completely accurate. With so much at stake in the T&P process, this is not acceptable. Review your application with a fine tooth comb. Let your union representative know if there are any irregularities in the process. Protect your rights, because there's no shortage of bad mystery novellas out there.

Mark Klisch is the Chapter Grievance Chair. Mystery novella fans can contact him at 974-9273 or

Distance Education

Greg McColm

Correspondence courses are back. Of course, they've changed. Instead of packets trekking the mail, there are web-pages, with course materials (from handouts to video recordings) and links. But the motivations are the same. Some students want a higher education but have other commitments. Some administrators believe that distance learning can be cheap. And there is ... Modern Technology.

A lot of courses have online components. Professors can post handouts, course materials and interactive programs so students can do quizzes and get instant feedback from the computer. The trick is doing all this without classroom meetings. Most students need feedback and, um, motivation (or menace). Some feedback can be handled by sophisticated software, but such software is expensive to buy and use. The alternative is to rely on e-mail, regular mail, phone calls, etc., to maintain teacher-student contacts. You may be noticing that good online teaching is labor-intensive, and works better for smaller classes. So much for saving money.

How well does it work? Surveys suggest that it depends on the students, the course, the teacher, the weather, etc. The only clear result is that student evaluations of distance courses tend to be lower. For professors, setting up and running any online operation is a lot of (usually uncompensated) work. And online course material can be valuable, so universities have been claiming proprietorial rights; some dream of academic control or at least enforced conformity; some have no policies ... or worse.

And many administrators are still fantasizing about recording lectures and doing without faculty. The Brave New University would consist entirely of administrators in expensive office buildings, with internet servors in the basement -- and perhaps a few adjuncts on call. Indeed, the gullibility of administrators is becoming legend. One recurring true story is of a slick salesman who sells expensive software to an over-clever administrator who did not rely on faculty input. The software turns out to be useless. Meanwhile, the salesman leaves town, looking for new marks. The Web is a dangerous place for small children and administrators.

While distance learning is not a panacea, it is an opportunity for students with no other options. It is also a lot of work. In view of past abuses and misunderstandings, it is about time that we start getting sensible policies on paper.

Tenure & Promotion Workshop

The Union held a Tenure & Promotion Workshop on March 1. Over forty faculty came. We thank Professor Kathleen Heide of the Criminology Deptartment and Professor Robert Welker of the Accounting Deptartment for their presentation.

Chapter Elections

Each year in March, the Chapter elects new officers. The officers are nominated in a Chapter Meeting (or within a week afterwards), and then elected the following meeting. For details, consult the Chapter Charter & Bylaws on our web-page.

For the next academic year, the officers are: M. Silverman, President; R. Welker, Vice President; M. Doherty, Secretary; F. Zerla, Treasurer; and A. Mac Miller, Vice-President for Sarasota. The Senators are S. Banoob, M. Klisch, A. Mac Miller, J. Notaro, A. Shapiro, M. Silverman, S. Singh, H. Vanden, R. Weatherford, and R. Welker.

UFF Chapter Meetings

The Chapter meets every Friday payday during lunch time at CIS 2084. Sandwiches & soda are provided for $ 1. Come and join the movement.