Categories
Archives
- February 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- August 2004
- September 2003
- November 2002
- December 1969
The Question of Collegiality
Is "collegiality" a valid category in assessing whether a faculty member merits promotion? This statement from the American Association of University Professors explains in the plainest terms the dangers of separating collegiality out from those criteria traditionally taken into account at most institutions of higher learning: teaching, research, and service. The statement argues that by necessity, collegiality is a component of all of these areas, indeed, for one's overall performance as a faculty member. Separating collegiality as its own category could, the AAUP argues, have a chilling effect on a faculty member's expressions of dissent in various areas where such dissent is constructive and important (such as curriculum committees or job searches), and thus threaten academic freedom, and it could tend to enforce homogeneity. The UFCT 1460 stands by, as always, the procedures laid out in Article XVI of the Collective Bargaining Agreement when questions of reappointment, promotion, and tenure are raised.
–Suzanne Verderber
Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed. | By Suzanne | February 2nd, 2008