OATdb Archive

2014 - 2015

English, Department Of

Goal
Quality Instruction
Faculty in the Department of English will demonstrate quality in the instruction of their classes.

Objective
To Teach Effectively
The Department's faculty will maintain a level of instruction at or above the average for all departments at SHSU.


KPI
Demonstration Of Teaching Effectiveness
Successful teaching will be demonstrated by faculty performance on the Individual Development and Educational Assessment (IDEA) Class Evaluation System. The IDEA survey is a nationally-normed, university-adopted evaluation instrument which measures student perception of instructor teaching. The faculty of the Department of English will average at least 3.9 (the university's average) on the IDEA student evaluations of teaching. Part of quality instruction is also adherence to stringent student evaluation; courses need to be interesting yet not too easy.


Result
Teaching Effectiveness, IDEA Scores
The faculty of the Department of English averaged better than the university's average of 3.9. The averages are as follows:

Tenured/tenure-track faculty: 4.5
Lecturers (adjunct faculty):     4.2
Graduate Assistants:              4.3

Average for all teachers: 4.33

Discussion: The average of 4.33 IDEA summary score reflects the good instruction that the Department of English provides. This average is slightly higher than last year's average of 4.3, so it is fair to say that we have at least held our own in student assessment of faculty teaching effectieness. Much of the teaching in English consists of service to other departments, as we offer the core freshman and sophomore courses. Full faculty scores are slightly higher (4.5) than adjunct and TA scores (4.2 and 4.3, respectively), which reflects the fact that adjuncts and TAs teach mostly freshman composition--courses that are required of all students as part of the core. Adjuncts and TAs are doing amazingly well, when this fact is taken into consideration.

Action
Achieving And Maintaing High Quality Teaching
All IDEA scores for all sections will be monitored closely, with special attention to sections that score below the university average of 3.9. Individual conferences with instructors will be held in the spirit of support, with the goal of identifying the reasons for lower scores. Often the reason is that the course is an obligatory course that students are not eager to take; however, even in these courses it is possible to improve the scores without compromising high expectations and rigorous teaching. In adjunct hiring, in addition to the overall qualifications, special attention will be paid to the applicants' potential as classroom instructors. A mandatory teaching workshop will be offered immediately prior to the beginning of the fall 2015 semester for all adjuncts and teaching assistants. All graduate teaching assistants will be assigned mentors--experienced professors who are successful instructors themselves.

Goal
Research And Creative Activities Productivity
The Department's tenured and tenure-track faculty will engage in research and publication.

Objective
To Engage Actively In Research And Publication
The number of peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and grant proposals by the Department's tenured and tenure-track faculty will serve as indicators of active research agendas.

KPI
Research Agenda
The number of peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations, and grant proposals by the Department's tenured and tenure-track faculty will serve as indicators of active research agendas.

Presenting a paper at a meeting of a professional association and/or publication of one article will certify research productivity. 

This year (2014) we expect that research productivity will increase (and not decrease) when compared to 2013.

Result
Research Productivity
The following listing provides a summary of faculty research and publication productivity. The numbers listed follow this format: # published/# accepted for publication/#submitted to a publisher for consideration

1. Publications
Books                                      2/1/2
Chapbooks                               0/1/0
Edited books                            2/0/0
Peer reviewed articles                7/3/3
Book chapters                          2/5/0
Dictionary/Encyclopedia             0/1/0
Non-peer reviewed articles       15/0/0
Conference proceedings           1/0/0
Poems                                 11/15/0
Short stories                          5/0/0
Book reviews                          1/1/1
Other                                    5/0/14

Totals
Published pieces = 49
Accepted = 27
Submitted = 20
Total faculty with a piece either published or accepted for publication = 17 (68%)

2. Conference Presentations = 40

3. Grant Activity
4 grants submitted—1 funded internally @ $15,000, 3 funded externally @ $1,000, $34,000, and $193,448

4. Student Research (under faculty supervision)
Thesis Completion = 6
Graduate Student Publications = 6
Graduate Student Conference Presentations = 7/8 (indicates co-presentation)
Undergraduate Research = 6
Undergraduate Publications = 2
Undergraduate Conference Presentations = 5

Discussion: These figures indicate that, in the aggregate, English faculty are engaged in research and publication. Further, English faculty work with both graduate and undergraduate students to mentor these students and help them prepare papers for publication and presentations to conferences.

In the Plan for Continuous Improvement from the 2013-14 report, we specified that the number of publications by the tenured/tenure-track faculty would increase from 42 to 45, that the number of presentations would be at least 27, and that 100% of faculty would either publish or present at least one piece of scholarship. We met the first two of these. Faculty published 49 individual pieces of scholarship and made 40 conference presentations. We fell short, however, with the third--our goal was 100% of faculty either publishing or presenting, but of the 24 faculty in the department, 21 (87.5%) met this goal. Of the three who did not, two simply had an off year, for these two faculty generally engage in substantive research activities.




KPI
Number And Quality Of Publications
The number of faculty publications will be noted; however, it is important for the faculty and administrators to understand that quality is much more important than quantity. Quality is defined as publication in peer-reviewed print journals or presentation to peer-reviewed conferences. The expectation is the publication of one peer-reviewed article (or equivalent) per faculty member per year.

Result
English Faculty Publications
Faculty in the Department of English saw  the following number of pieces published, accepted for publication, or submitted for publication:

Published = 49 (11 faculty)
Accepted for publication = 27 (10 faculty)
Submitted for publication = 20 (9 faculty)

In sum, 21 faculty members either published, saw accepted for publication, or submitted for publication a piece of scholarship. This represents 87.5% percent of the department's faculty.

Action
Publicizing Results To Faculty
The results reported here will be made available to the tenured and tenure-track faculty, with faculty names associated with individual accomplishments. The ultimate goal is 100-percent participation in research activities, defined as either publication or presentation.

The attached file, which presents a compilation of the results reported by the faculty on the 2014 Faculty Evaluation system (FES) form, was provided to the faculty for two purposes: (1) so that each faculty member could ensure that his or her activities had been reported fully and (2) so that each faculty could see the reported research and service activities of his or her colleagues. Thus, we have disseminated the results to the faculty.


Goal
Professional Activities And Service
The faculty will engage in professional activities and service at a level appropriate for the individual faculty member's rank.

Objective
To Provide Professional Service
English faculty will take part in service activities at local, state, regional, national, and/or international levels.

KPI
Professional Service Activities
The number of professional service activities--local, state, regional, national, and/or international--by the Department's tenure-track faculty will indicate engagement in professional service.

Result
Faculty Service Activities
Department of English faculty are highly engaged in fulfilling a variety of service commitments, as the following list of service activites attests:

Department = 53 (21 faculty)
College = 21 (15 faculty)
University = 47 (19 faculty)
Community = 13 (9 faculty)
Editorships = 5 (3 faculty)
Associate Editorships/Editorial Boards = 8 (5 faculty)
Other = 22 (9 faculty)

These activities represent substantive professional service on the part of our faculty, and every faculty member was active in terms of service. Thus, we met our goal of 100% of the faculty participating in service activities.

Action
Service Activities
English faculty are active in service, providing both substantive and substantial service in all areas. Adding to the service goals would mean diminished attention to research activities. Everyone serves in some capacity and needs to be commended for this. NOTE: For a summary of service activities, please see the file appended to the "Publicizing Results to Faculty" action statement immediately above this entry.


Update to previous cycle's plan for continuous improvement

Teaching: English faculty continue to provide quality instruction which is indicated by our IDEA scores. We had noted one way to try to help our lecturers (adjunct faculty) raise their average scores through one-on-one meetings with the department chair. This did not occur, for in February, 2015, we saw a change in the chair, as the previous chair resigned and an interim chair as appointed. As that interim chair, I was not involved with the OATDB until late in the Spring 2016 semester. Should the IDEA scores for individual teachers fall below the university’s average, I will schedule an informal conference with each teacher to offer help in raising those scores.


We did have mandatory meetings at the beginning of the Fall 2015 semester to discuss the syllabus and requirements for the courses our adjuncts teach, so we fulfilled that part of the previous Plan for Continuous Improvement.

We did not publish IDEA scores anonymously, for, as noted above, I was not involved with the OATDB until late.

Finally, the PCI for IDEA scores was partially met. Full faculty (that is, tenured/tenure-track faculty) exceeded the 4.4 mark with an average of 4.5, and TAs (Graduate Assistants) met the projected mark of 4.3. Adjuncts fell below the 4.3 projection with an average score of 4.2.


Research: With the change in departmental administration, Nuntii Evansensis has not been published. Instead, we publicized faculty research accomplishments by providing faculty with the file labeled “English Faculty 2014 FES Summary Form,” which provides a detailed list of all the publications (published, accepted for publication but not yet in print, and submitted), conference presentations, and service activities. Each entry is listed by faculty member, title, and venue. Thus, the faculty have been made aware of the department’s research and publication activities as well as grant activities (those submitted and those awarded). To remark faculty research accomplishments, individual books are noted via email to the faculty from the interim chair, when the faculty notify me of acceptance or publication.

We continue our First Friday Faculty Forum which provided faculty a venue for presenting their research to their colleagues. These meetings are generally well-attended and include both graduate and undergraduate students who wish to attend. Further, individual faculty have gathered in small interest groups to discuss research plans and projects and so to share research progress.

One part of the PCI noted that faculty “who did not publish during the previous evaluation period will be invited to a positive brainstorming session with the chair to identify areas of new research and realistic venues of publication.” This has not occurred in that specific format, again due in part to my coming to the OATDB late. However, I did discuss research plans with faculty during the annual evaluation conference required by the university. In this discussion, I asked about progress toward publication and whether the faculty member needed any specific support that the department could provide. Further, as I reviewed faculty research activities, I found that 22 of 24 faculty (92%) reported some kind of research activity, whether they published a piece of scholarship, saw something accepted for publication, submitted something for publication, or made a conference presentation. Of the two who reported no activity, one of those is an active writer for whom 2014 was an off year.

Finally, the PCI projections for research were partially met. We projected 45 publications; we saw 49. We projected at least 27 conference presentations; we saw 40. And as noted in the preceding paragraph, 87.5% of our faculty either published or presented, so we did not meet the third goal of 100% of the faculty either publishing or presenting. Despite this, I am confident that English faculty are active scholars whose research has a positive impact on both their teaching and the profession in general.


Service: We met our goal here. That is, 100% of English faculty participated in various service activities.


Plan for continuous improvement Teaching: English faculty teach well, as our average IDEA scores indicate. Should scores for individual teachers fall below the university’s average, I will schedule an informal conference with each teacher to offer help, including offering to observe their teaching—if they invite me to visit their classes—and to consider particular responses to specific questions on the IDEA form.

Research: We exceeded the previous PCI’s list of expectations in terms of research in all but one category, namely, that 100% of the faculty would either publish a piece of scholarship or present a paper at a professional conference. As for the various aspects to encourage faculty to publish, we completed each of those activities, with the exception of publication in Nuntii Evansensis. We did, however, publish faculty research achievement by circulating a list of faculty research and creative activities as reported on the 2014 FES.

Service: We achieved our goal that 100% of the faculty would provide service to the department, college, university, profession, and/or community. We will maintain this as a continuing goal.