Budget and Financial Management
Faculty Grievance Procedure
Faculty Performance Evaluation
Graduate Programs in Arts and Sciences
Interdisciplinary Studies and Cooperative Programs
Nontraditional Students and Off Grounds Programs
Planning and Assessment
Residential and Academic Life
Student Academic Support
Teaching and Technology
The University ranks first in the Commonwealth and first among the nation's public institutions both in rates of undergraduate retention and in time to degree: 79% graduate in four years; 91% in six years.
The number of undergraduate students earning degrees in fewer than four full years has increased steadily over the last five years, from 39 to 69 students.
The University recognizes credit for competency through the College Board's Advanced Placement Program and transfer credit (which includes dual-enrollment course credit); as well as through qualifying scores on examinations for the International Baccalaureate, the General Certificate of Equivalency (GCA) A-level, the French Baccalaureate, the German Abitur, Cambridge Level A Examinations, SAT II in English composition and foreign languages; and through examinations and placement tests administered locally.
For the class that entered in 1994, 1,336 students (48%) received AP credit; 548 students (20%) received 13 or more hours of AP credit--the equivalent of one or more college semesters. In all, the 2,764 members of this class entered with 17,234 hours credit through the AP program--the equivalent of 5,745 courses.
In addition, 210 members of this class received some transfer credit, most of it from dual enrollment courses taken as part of their high school programs.
Another large group of students who complete 12 or more hours of college work after high school are formally designated transfer students. There are 615 transfer students entering in the fall of 1995--337 from Virginia 2- and 4-year colleges--and the number increases annually.
The University of Virginia now offers provisional admission to students after one year in the honors program at Piedmont Virginia Community College. They then continue through the second year at PVCC, fulfilling the specific requirements that will allow them to transfer to the University for their last two years.
Information about shortening the time-to-degree has been made widely available for undergraduate students in the College of Arts and Sciences, Engineering, Nursing, and Architecture, starting in August 1995. This information includes additions to the catalogue, newsletters, First-Year Book, and the University's electronic home page; announcements at meetings of students, parents, and faculty advisers; special meetings and advising for students who enter with more than 12 AP credits; and the preparation of a document entitled How to Graduate in Three years.
University scholarship funds meet approximately 85% of demonstrable student financial need.
The University currently offers a joint B.A./M.T. degree, enabling students to earn both a bachelor's degree from the College of Arts and Sciences and a master's degree in teaching from the Curry School of Education in five rather than six years. Approximately 100 College students complete the program annually.
Other cooperative programs that allow students to earn two degrees in less time than the degrees would take if pursued separately include those established with Mary Baldwin, Hampden-Sydney, Lynchburg, and Longwood colleges; and those listed below under Interdisciplinary Studies.
To publicize existing opportunities to shorten the time-to-degree by providing relevant information to high school counselors and to include this information in undergraduate admissions material, on the Internet, in the First-Year Book distributed to entering students, to association deans and lower division faculty advisers, and to departments.
To highlight the tradeoffs implicit in the accelerated strategy in all distributed materials and advising sessions.
To offer admission up to one year in advance to high school students earning University-equivalent credit at levels which promise continued accelerated progress at the University.
To train faculty as "three-year degree advisers" in each of the major departments and to assign them students meeting advanced levels of academic standing for guidance and supervision.
Many of these changes have already been made; the rest are in process.
To review the existing policy for granting credit for Advanced Placement (AP) achievement scores, to correlate test performance with a student's ability to succeed in UVa courses, and to incorporate reviews of AP test scores in all assessment reviews of undergraduate major programs.
To open the residential colleges to more entering first-year students wishing to accelerate progress toward their degrees and able to demonstrate their readiness to benefit from upperclass living arrangements. Qualified students would bypass the "first-year experience" and move directly into the second-year class with whom they would eventually graduate.
To develop more one- and two-credit options, either elective courses or "extra-credit" options in existing courses, to enable students on accelerated tracks to increase the numbers of credits earned during regular semesters.
To target financial aid to support accelerated degree progress, within the limits of prevailing University financial aid guidelines.
To waive the expectation of summer earnings in the calculation of financial aid eligibility following submission of valid degree credits from summer study and satisfactory academic standing.
To offer priority in course enrollments to students on accelerated tracks upon demonstrated need for specific courses to complete degrees early and upon approval by academic advisers.
To provide specialized academic support to accelerated-track students through an assigned association dean in the College of Arts and Sciences.
Budget and Financial Management
Computer System Subcommittee
Surveyed peer institutions to determine what budget and financial management systems they used.
Surveyed all schools and departments within the University to determine their needs and suggestions for improvements to the budget system.
Developed and issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for a new budget and financial management computing system that would provide the central budget office as well as each school and department with the tools necessary to efficiently prepare, amend, and monitor the budget.
Identified leading contenders for a contract award by attending demonstrations and site visits.
Alternative Budget Models Subcommittee
Examined ways to improve the budget and financial management process by identifying problems with the current budgetary process and evaluating the feasibility of implementing a responsibility center management or other alternative model to ensure appropriate allocation of resources in accordance with identified institutional priorities.
Computer System Subcommittee
To institute a new budgetary computing system by the budget year 1997-98 in order to provide a comprehensive set of budget, planning, and analysis tools to managers across the University that would increase access to financial information and would be fully integrated with the central system as well as flexible enough to keep pace with the ever-changing financial and planning requirements of the University
by developing budget and planning modules which include the central administrative components of the system and on-line access for some, if not all, departments,
by developing a financial analysis module including the tools necessary to project, plan, budget, and track the deployment of financial resources within schools and departments.
Alternative Budget Models Subcommittee
To continue to study the feasibility of moving to a responsibility center budget model.
The University, through an RFP process, engaged Coopers and Lybrand to help it assess the administration of the capital outlay program, make recommendations for improvement, and evaluate the state's role in the process, suggesting alternative approaches that involve more delegation of authority.
Coopers and Lybrand spent three months at the University conducting the following activities:
interviews with officials responsible for the capital outlay process in the executive and legislative branches of state government,
20 individual interviews with customers and with Facilities Planning and Construction (FP&C) staff,
6 project team meetings to map the capital outlay process, and
compilation of performance metric data on 27 projects.
The draft report is to be received in September with a final report delivered in October.
By using technology, develop the University Master Plan into a dynamic "work in progress" that can be easily updated to incorporate new information and changed circumstances. The Master Plan should assist planners in considering not only site plans for individual buildings, but also allow consideration of projects in relation to their effects on the remainder of the grounds and associated infrastructure systems such as lighted pathways, utilities, and bike paths.
Concentrate available planning resources on projects that have the best chance of being funded; a shorter list of projects can receive better planning, scoping, and budgeting. The planning effort should be coordinated by the Architect for the University and the FP&C. It should be an ongoing process, continuously identifying capital needs, rather than an intermittent process that starts and then stops every two years when the biennial submission to the state is due.
Pursue with the state further delegation of authority for capital outlay management, particularly once funding authority has been granted.
Focus the capital outlay management process around the customer; assign project managers to specific customers rather than to a given project(s).
Clarify the role of the project manager as project leader; provide internal training and staff development; expand the project manager's authority for getting results and measure performance on achieving the desired results.
Improve project administration through standard project tracking and reporting tools; consistently report key information to senior management.
Conduct regular, independently monitored assessments of FP&C performance.
The committee recommended a more streamlined and efficient decanal structure designed to reduce overlap, allocate clearer responsibilities, and establish a framework for more imaginative and venturesome leadership by
eliminating the positions of Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, Dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, and Director of the Center for Advanced Studies,
uniting the leadership of Arts and Sciences under a single dean. The Dean of the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences will be responsible for the duties previously exercised by the Dean of the Faculty, the Dean of the College, and the Dean of the Graduate School. This consolidated leadership in Arts and Sciences will allow for a more effective decanal structure within which to direct undergraduate and graduate programs, coordinate development activities, enhance research efforts, foster interdisciplinary programs for instruction and research, and plan for the future.
creating a new half-time position entitled Vice Provost for Graduate Studies. The Vice Provost is responsible for
overseeing graduate programs in all schools reporting to the Provost,
directing the Center for Advanced Studies and overseeing departmental and program reviews by visiting committees,
chairing the graduate committee charged with offering advice regarding maintenance and improvement of academic programs and reviewing proposals for new graduate courses and programs,
coordinating interdisciplinary programs across departmental and school lines.
These changes were put into effect on 1 July 1995.
The percentage of minority students enrolling at the University has dramatically increased in the past five years. Nearly 30% of the undergraduate class entering in the fall of 1995 have identified themselves as African-American, Asian-American, Hispanic, and Native American. The entering class also contains 92 international students, a record for the University, and 125 others who hold permanent resident visas or are refugees.
The University maintains the highest graduation rate of undergraduate minority students among major American public universities. Since the fall of 1985, the graduation rate for African-Americans has averaged 69.7% in four years, 79.4% in six years.
The faculty loan-line program was expanded, providing financial support to seven schools in attracting and retaining 24 minority faculty (including women in male-dominated disciplines).
A new half-time position of Vice Provost for Faculty Recruitment and Retention was created to assist academic units in recruiting and retaining qualified individuals from diverse backgrounds.
Special initiatives such as the Presidential Fellows Program, the Administrative Intern Program, the University Tuition Waiver Program for full-time employees, the Skilled Crafts Apprenticeship Program, and the joint UVa/MACAA/CATEC (University of Virginia/Monticello Area Community Action Agency/Charlottesville-Albemarle Technical Education Center) program for training medical records clerks were created to increase diversity and opportunities for development among the University staff and general faculty.
The College of Arts and Sciences added a "Non-Western Perspectives" requirement for the bachelor's degree; other academic units have begun to integrate similar requirements in their curricula.
A comprehensive annotated bibliography of 33 recent diversity-related University reports was compiled and filed with the EO/AA Office for distribution and reference.
Beginning in the summer of 1996, the Department of Government and Foreign Affairs will host the Ralph Bunch Summer Institute, whose mission is to encourage African-American undergraduates to pursue graduate studies. Eminent professors from historically black colleges and universities visit the Institute and deliver guest lectures. In addition, extensive coaching on the Graduate Record Examinations is given, informal sessions on applying to graduate school are held, and recruiters from major universities provide advice. Ten students are invited to attend the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association where a special program is arranged for them.
On faculty hiring:
The Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Office should continue to monitor hiring and promotion decisions throughout the University, standardize the procedures for and the reporting of these decisions, assist schools and departments in taking active steps to recruit women and members of minority groups, and assist in corrective actions when deficiencies are found. The Vice Provost for Faculty Recruitment and Retention should cooperate with and assist these efforts.
Within schools under the authority of the Vice President and Provost, the existing program of loan lines for hiring African Americans and women should be continued and, if feasible, expanded. The Vice President and Provost for Health Sciences should consider implementing a similar program.
Each graduate and professional school should ensure that it is taking steps to recruit graduate and professional students from among minority groups and women into disciplines in which they are now underrepresented.
The University should continue to provide financial support to programs that promote the academic study of issues related to diversity. The University should also encourage voluntary faculty associations with a similar aim.
On diversity in staff and general faculty:
As with tenured and tenure-track faculty, the University should undertake more active efforts to recruit minority and female applicants for higher-level positions in the staff and general faculty, and to establish outreach programs to encourage minorities and women in central Virginia to seek employment at the University. Conversely, in any restructuring or downsizing, precautions should be taken to minimize the adverse effects on minorities and women.
Unit and department heads, along with the Division of Organizational Development and Training should support and encourage the efforts by lower level staff to obtain training and education, so that a higher proportion of minorities and women in these positions can become eligible for promotions.
On diversity in the curriculum:
Increased attention should be given to providing institutional encouragement and support to individual faculty members (which might include summer support or released time) to revise and develop courses that consider alternative viewpoints, different cultures, traditionally excluded groups, and controversies over diversity itself.
The Coordinating Council on Diversity (see next section) should sponsor regular discussions between faculty and administrators from different parts of the University to increase awareness and cooperation in efforts to promote diversity in the curriculum across programs, departments, and schools.
On the overall climate on issues of diversity:
The President should establish a Coordinating Council on Diversity consisting of, among others, the Vice Provost for Faculty Recruitment and Retention, the Director of the EO/AA Office, the Director of Academic Support, and the highest officials under each of the vice presidents with responsibility for issues of diversity. The President should charge the Council to coordinate efforts to achieve diversity; to survey staff, faculty, and students on issues of diversity; to establish and preserve a record of such efforts; and to work closely to encourage the undertaking of diversity initiatives with schools and departments, with existing centers and offices (such as the Luther P. Jackson House, the Women's Center, the Engineering School Minority Office Programs), and with interested student organizations. This Council will replace three current committees (EO/AA, Women's Concerns, Interests of Persons with Disabilities), but appropriate subcommittees may be created at the Council's discretion.
The Coordinating Council on Diversity should undertake a continuing assessment of the working environment for minorities and women, and, where the assessment finds a hostile or unwelcome environment, recommend corrective action, including appropriate discipline of offending employees.
The position of Chair-Elect was created to provide continuity in Senate leadership.
The Committee of Elected Members, which meets without reporters or ex officio members present, was created to allow and encourage more open discussion and debate among Senate members.
To provide Senators with a clearer sense of constituency, election procedures in the College of Arts and Sciences have been revised to elect one Senator from each of the 25 departments as well as 11 at-large Senators, instead of 36 Senators elected at-large.
A constitutional amendment process was initiated to clarify the role of the Faculty Senate as a means of providing the faculty perspective in the University's decision-making process
by making the Chair of the Senate the presiding officer at Senate meetings, instead of the President of the University,
by making academic general faculty with the rank of Acting Assistant Professor and above eligible for election to the Senate,
by including academic general faculty of professorial rank, as defined above, along with tenured and tenure-track faculty in calculating the allocation of Senate seats for each school.
by including a statement of responsibilities of Senate members in the Faculty Senate Constitution and By-Laws,
by giving ex officio members of the Senate voice but not vote.
The participation of the Faculty Senate in University administration was increased by including the Chair of the Faculty Senate as the Senate's liaison with the President's Senior Cabinet.
The administrative capacity of the Faculty Senate was increased
by allowing the Executive Council to act when it sees a need for prompt action, and not just when an emergency exists,
by reducing the number of standing committees in the Senate from 10 to 5, and clearly defining the duties of each committee,
by providing the Faculty Senate with the services of a full-time staff assistant in addition to the half-time secretary presently assigned.
That the Senate follow up recommendations of the 1994-96 University Self-Study.
That the Senate continue the Self-Study process by identifying issues of importance to the University and selecting a few each year for further study and action.
* These changes in faculty governance, the amendments to the Senate By-Laws, and the recommendations were approved by the Faculty Senate on 27 September 1995.
Faculty Grievance Procedure
In order to minimize the administrative costs and faculty time in dispute resolution and to have grievances settled in a manner fair to both the grievant and those complained against, the committee revised the faculty grievance procedure in a document entitled Faculty Grievance Policies and Procedures, which was approved by the University Senate on 26 April 1995.
The new policy streamlines procedures and establishes clearer guidelines by
using dispute resolution mechanisms already in place at the school and departmental level, and eliminating multiple and frivolous applications,
limiting the amount of materials presented,
clarifying which disputes warrant the attention of the full Senate Grievance Committee,
ensuring that the policies and procedures are adequate to the task and increasing the likelihood that the process will be kept in the hands of the University and out of the state and federal courts.
The following information is included in the new procedures document:
the structure, terms, and scope of authority of the Grievance Committee, including the policies for determining whether a dispute should be settled by the Grievance Committee itself or by a formal hearing (with a separate Hearing Panel),
conduct of the Grievance Committee investigations, including a list of matters excluded from the committee's jurisdiction, the authority to reject insubstantial complaints, an explanation of what is to be included in the request for investigation, the criteria for the response to the request for investigation, the scope of the investigation, and the instructions for conducting and concluding the investigation,
the policies to follow in the event of a formal hearing, including a list of disputes for which formal hearings are appropriate, the makeup of the hearing panel, what is to be included in the statement of charges and the answer, the timeline and procedures for the hearing, and the decision and appeal process.
Faculty Performance Evaluation
Review of Current Policies
The status of mentoring and reviewing junior faculty members at the University was considered and the committee ascertained that the main evaluations of untenured faculty members are reviews in the third and sixth year of service. In addition, the committee found an effective informal mentoring process in place between senior and junior faculty members.
Each school's written tenure policy was examined, and faculty were interviewed to determine the extent to which written policies are being followed. The committee found that all schools had adequate written policies and operational procedures. Some of the documents need to be more complete, in accordance with the recommendation given below.
The status of post-tenure review at the University was reviewed by the committee, which found that although each school has a written policy for promotion to full professor, there are no written documents describing post-tenure review procedures after that promotion. Annual post-tenure reviews, of varying rigor, are conducted throughout the University.
As stated in the Faculty Handbook, it has been the University's policy for many years "to award salary increases based on merit."
All faculty members, in all stages of their careers, should undergo rigorous, consequential, and documented annual performance evaluations. Each review, to be conducted by department or division chairs or deans, should include the faculty member's written annual report, student evaluations (and teaching portfolios, if available), and thorough one-on-one discussions of the faculty member's teaching, research, service, assignments, future plans, and salary. In large departments, each faculty member should be reviewed annually, although the one-on-one discussions might take place on a biennial or triennial basis.
In the event that improvements in performance are necessary, the faculty member and his or her supervisor should work out an appropriate response. When the supervisor is a departmental chair, the dean of the school should be apprised of the situation. Subsequent annual reviews should monitor the faculty member's progress.
Department chairs should take special care to use the annual performance evaluation as part of an ongoing program of advice for untenured faculty members, and they should encourage and facilitate informal mentoring by senior faculty.
The following items should be included in all written tenure policies:
a listing of the criteria for tenure or reelection,
a description of the promotions package to be prepared by the candidate and an indication of the approximate date for submission,
a description of the decision-making process that will occur, an indication of what administrative individuals or committees will be involved, and the time frame involved in reaching a decision,
a description of the termination procedures that will apply in particular situations,
a description of the appeal procedures available to the faculty member,
a statement of approximately how often the existing policy must be reviewed by administrators and faculty. We recommend that no more than five years should elapse between reviews.
A written copy of the tenure policy should be distributed to each new untenured faculty member before or upon his or her arrival at the University.
A systematic and rigorous post-tenure evaluation process should be established in each school or department of the University under the following conditions:
a minimum of bureaucracy and time commitment from faculty,
flexibility to allow for differences among departments and schools,
a clear linkage between the post-tenure review process and faculty rewards, including an appropriate response in the event of unsatisfactory performance,
the possibility of different weights assigned to scholarship, teaching, and service over the course of a faculty member's career should be recognized,
inclusion of student opinion, such as course evaluations, in post-tenure evaluations,
an emphasis on improved morale and motivation throughout the review process.
If review committees are involved, faculty outside the immediate academic discipline of the person being reviewed should be included.
See next page
Faculty Performance Evaluation*
Critical review is a natural element of a productive academic career. A faculty member's work is reviewed regularly in many different ways. Teaching is evaluated twice-yearly by students; proposals for funding are evaluated by individual reviewers or panels of specialists; papers and books submitted for publication are reviewed by authorities in the field; published books are reviewed by other scholars; a faculty member's lifetime contributions in teaching, scholarship, and service are carefully scrutinized when the individual is considered for hiring or promotion; and annual reviews of all faculty members are conducted throughout the University.
There are common elements of the annual reviews carried out in all departments and schools: key information comes from the annual report prepared by each faculty member describing the year's teaching, research, and service; reviews are carried out by department or division chairs or by the dean; and the reviews are used to decide merit salary increases. However, there is substantial variation in the thoroughness of the reviews and in the feedback provided to the individual faculty members. The process is dependent upon the styles of individual department chairs and deans as well as upon the established practices in the various schools. Thus, the value of the reviews is widely variable.
An annual performance review that incorporates reviews of teaching and scholarship is a necessary exercise to determine a salary increase, but it can be and should be much more. Done correctly, it is a good personnel practice, providing an occasion for self-evaluation and reassessment of the role a faculty member is playing, which may evolve significantly during the course of a career. It is an opportunity to acknowledge and recognize good work, point out areas for improvement, and, in a few cases, identify productive new uses of a faculty member's talents. It is a means of ensuring that the diverse talents of the entire faculty are productively applied to the many responsibilities of the University. In addition, performance review can help identify resource targets--places where additional resources could re-energize a faculty member whose energy or morale has run low or could lift an already productive member to new levels of achievement.
The system of performance reviews should be continued and enhanced where necessary. All faculty should be reviewed annually by department or division chairs or deans. Each review should include the faculty member's written annual report, student evaluations (and teaching portfolios, if available), and thorough one-on-one discussions of the faculty member's teaching, research, service, assignments, future plans, and salary.
To be most effective, the review must, at least periodically, not only deal with the previous year's performance, but also take a longer range view, one that is consistent with the cycle of academic performance and change. In cases that are difficult to evaluate or where there appears to be reason for serious concern, peer evaluations can be obtained. In the event that improvements in performance are necessary, the faculty member and his or her supervisor should work on an appropriate response, which should then be monitored by the supervisor. Finally, the school or department must effect a clear link between the performance review and faculty rewards.
* This position paper, produced as a result of and coordinated with the preceding issue
statement, was adopted by the Faculty Senate of the University of Virginia on 12 September
To provide faculty members with clear information concerning retirement plans by
distributing brief memoranda outlining retirement plans to newly hired faculty members,
encouraging faculty members approaching retirement age to seek advice concerning how to update and review their individual plans, including issues of when to retire, the tax advantages of a living trust, and borrowing "on margin,"
reviewing, rewriting, and redistributing all faculty and staff retirement and benefit information in a short "Benefits and Retirement" booklet and making this information available on-line,
clarifying to faculty that the Faculty Benefits Office is responsible for handling all issues concerning faculty benefits and retirement, including medical insurance, benefits, retirement options, and advising.
To reinstitute an incentive retirement plan in the form of a Phased Retirement Option while continuing to study the various incentive options for retirement, tracking those who have elected these options, and considering other options.
The Incentive Retirement Program for Faculty has been extended to 30 June 1996.
To hire a planning and financial advising firm to provide scheduled services for faculty and staff during the 1995-96 academic year.
To continue to offer certain benefits for retired faculty, such as free parking, professor-emeritus status, office space, secretarial assistance, computer access, library privileges, and a mailing address.
Note: In order to translate the above recommendations of the first committee on faculty retirement into specific, implementable programs, a second committee has been formed. This follow-up committee, which will complete its work in the fall 1995 semester, has a three-fold task:
to reduce the uncertainties of retirement for faculty members by clarifying retirement options, providing information in user-friendly form, and establishing a system for counseling faculty members throughout their careers at the University,
to create and implement a flexible, feasible, and attractive series of retirement options for faculty members--options which might include, for example, phased retirement, financial incentives to retire, or early retirement with health benefits to age 65 or beyond,
to enhance the climate of retirement, especially for faculty members who desire to continue their relationship with the University and to have continued support during the retirement phase of their professional careers. The committee should determine which areas of support are the responsibility of the central University administration and which belong to the former departments or schools of retired faculty.
Graduate Programs in Arts and Sciences
For the recent NRC ratings of UVa's graduate Arts and Sciences Departments--ten of which are ranked in the top twenty of their disciplines nationally--see the school report on the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences.
Reduced the number of graduate students in Arts and Sciences by 3.8%. Established further reductions for the fall of 1995, at which time Arts and Sciences will exceed its goal of a 5% overall reduction of graduate enrollment.
Reduced graduate enrollments in 17 Arts and Sciences departments, including the following:
Anthropology cut entering graduate class from 15 to 10 students and discontinued small graduate courses,
Art reduced graduate enrollment by 50% and shortened Ph.D. program,
Economics eliminated the Comparative Economics Program and discontinued underenrolled seminars,
English has reduced enrollments 15% for each of the last two years and is designing courses at the 500 and 300/800 levels to mix undergraduate and graduate students,
French has cut its graduate enrollments by more than 50%, now enrolling 5 to 8 students a year,
Government discontinued the M.A. in Public Administration, and reduced entering class from 151 to fewer than 50 students,
History reduced its entering American history graduate class from 33 to 12,
Religious Studies eliminated 4 of 7 graduate subspecialities,
Drama has reduced the number of courses offered by admitting an acting cohort of 17 students every three years rather than 28 students each year.
Redeployed resources saved from graduate reductions to undergraduate programs. Many departments that formerly had undergraduate-to-graduate teaching ratios of 1:1 now report changes: Anthropology 3:1, Art 3:1, Drama 2:1, Economics 2:1, English 3:1, Government 5:3, Philosophy 5:3, Religious Studies 3:2, Psychology 2:1, Slavic Languages 3:2.
Shortened the average time to graduate degrees, which is now 6.4 years for the Ph.D., 2.5 years for the M.A.
To continue efforts to determine the "right size" of graduate programs, taking into account the three functions of graduate students at a research university as students and learners, as teachers and teaching assistants, and as researchers and research assistants. Important elements are
allowing time to train students before they are expected to teach,
not expecting students hired on research grants to teach,
considering the staffing of laboratories.
To waive additional tuition charges for advanced graduate students taking courses after 54 graduate credit hours if they are in good standing and are conducting research under the supervision of faculty members.
To revise the current formula for allocating fellowship funds to graduate departments by
funding graduate programs on the basis of appropriate size, not actual size,
defining more carefully the quality and attractiveness of each program using such criteria as regional distribution of applicants, relative GRE scores of applicants and entering students, and program evaluations such as the National Research Council reports,
measuring Ph.D. production by time to degree and the relative success of placement of degree recipients as well as by the number of degrees awarded.
Among other options to be considered are
providing a number of departments the opportunity to apply for specific fellowship allocations on the model of the Academic Enhancement Program,
redistributing the three-year allocation of President's Fellowships so that the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences contribution is $14,000 for the first-year and $3,000 a year for the second and third years,
allowing the department to apply to retain the remaining funds to support another student if a first-year President's Fellow fails to make outstanding progress or fails to return,
increasing funding for the President's Fellowship program to attract more outstanding applicants, which could be achieved by increasing the number of annual awards or increasing the amount of the awards.
To establish an Evaluation and Funding Committee, advisory to Dean of the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, to evaluate and compare graduate departments and programs in four respects: undergraduate teaching, graduate teaching, scholarship, and service.
These recommendations have been forwarded for consideration to the Vice Provost for Graduate Studies and the Provost's Council.
Interdisciplinary Studies and Cooperative Programs
One of the responsibilities of the new Vice Provost for Graduate Studies will be to coordinate interdisciplinary programs across departmental and school lines.
Over two dozen interdisciplinary programs have been recently established or strengthened:
Sixteen programs in Arts and Sciences now draw from the course offerings and faculty expertise of various departments to fashion courses of study that meet the changing needs of students and society (e.g., American Studies, Asian Studies, Latin American Studies, Political and Social Thought, Russian Studies, African-American Studies, and Women's Studies).
The Interdisciplinary Major Program (IMP) has been developed to allow students to design, with faculty approval, individual programs of study that link several fields and departments.
Cooperative programs have been established between the Darden School and the Law School (MBA-JD), the Law School and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (JD-PhD), the Darden School and the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (MBA-MA in Asian Studies), the Nursing School and the Darden School (MSN-MBA), and the College of Arts and Sciences and the Curry School of Education (BA-MT). And there are many other cooperative programs: the Law School, for example, offers joint master's degrees in Law and Business Administration, Planning, Accounting, English, History, Economics, Government, Philosophy, and Sociology.
In the School of Engineering and Applied Science, interdisciplinary programs have been established in Transportation, Environmental Engineering, and Engineering
The Health Sciences Center has developed interdisciplinary graduate programs which offer--in cooperation with the departments of Chemical Engineering, Chemistry, Physics, Biology, Microbiology, and others--both pre-doctoral and degree-granting programs in such fields as biotechnology, molecular medicine, cell and molecular biology, and biophysics (Ph.D.).
See also the report for the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, pp. 81-82.
For interdisciplinary and cooperative programs...
That statements of administrative support for faculty participation in interdisciplinary work be included in the Faculty Handbook and in policy statements regarding promotion, tenure, and other evaluative procedures.
That interdisciplinary and cooperative programs be promoted at the University by
clarifying to students that exemptions are possible to the 18-hour cap on courses taken for credit outside of the College for undergraduates demonstrating academic interest in interdisciplinary or interschool work,
cross-listing courses designated as interdisciplinary in the Undergraduate Record, the Graduate Record, and in the Course Offering Directory.
For international programs
Since 1994, three new overseas programs (Russia, India, and England), two new exchange programs (Finland and Hong Kong), and a new program bringing French scholars to the University to teach have been introduced. Overall, the University sponsored five overseas study programs and participated in four student and faculty exchange programs in 1994-95.
The number of undergraduates from the College and professional schools studying abroad has increased from 319 in 1993-94 to 440 in 1994-95, and is projected to increase to 500 by 1995-96.
The number of international research scholars visiting the University between 1993 and 1994 has increased 43%, from 115 to 164.
For international programs
That an English as a Second Language (ESL) program be started in the summer of 1996.
That avenues for the restoration of financial aid for UVa students studying abroad during the summer on UVa sponsored programs be explored.
That a committee be established comprised of at least two international students, a representative of the International Student and Scholar Program, and the Chair of the International Student Committee to convene in the fall of each year to review the pre-arrival literature for portions that should be rewritten to meet the needs of students arriving from abroad.
That off grounds housing information be disseminated on the Internet in order to make such information readily available to prospective international visitors.
Nontraditional Students and Off Grounds Programs
The University has continued to expand its services to non-traditional students--those who are enrolled in continuing education programs on grounds and at other locations offered by the Division of Continuing Education, Nursing, Medicine, Law and by other University units; nondegree students pursuing course work on grounds (Citizen Scholars); and those participating in short-term noncredit programs off and on grounds (such as Darden executive programs). In 1994-95, 25,000 individuals (for an FTE count of 3,500) were served by such programs.
At the request of the committee, the Athletic Department has agreed to permit access to athletic facilities by students enrolled in continuing education courses on grounds.
Honor Code. The committee identified three options which will be presented to next year's Honor Committee, with whom the final decision rests: (1) continue the system as is but enhance orientation for nontraditional students and faculty operating off grounds. The committee recommended that the videotape on the honor system be made available to nontraditional students and faculty operating at off grounds locations; (2) develop a separate code for nontraditional students with differing trial procedures and jury pools; (3) cease application of the disciplinary procedures of the code for nontraditional students.
Library Services, Computer and Information Resources. The committee supports the initiative under development by the University Library and Division of Continuing Education to provide library services to nontraditional students. The committee also encourages the Office of Information, Technology, and Communication (ITC) and the Division to explore provision of computer/information resources to nontraditional students.
Future Planning. The committee recommends that the following principles should govern the University's thinking with regard to nontraditional students:
Programs and teaching directed toward nontraditional student populations are an important part of the University's public service mission;
To the extent reasonably possible the University should provide comparable teaching excellence and academic support for on grounds and off grounds students;
In order to enhance effective use of available funds and human resources, issues affecting nontraditional students and off grounds programs should be integrated, at an early stage, into University-wide planning.
Planning and Assessment
In addition to the planning and assessment activities detailed in the school and departmental reports, there are currently six ongoing assessment programs directed by the Office of Institutional Assessment and Studies in place at the University:
Longitudinal Study. A cohort of 20% of the undergraduate class of 1992 was tracked to compile data on what students learn and to observe changes in student goals, attitudes, opinions, behaviors, and satisfaction. A new longitudinal study has begun tracking the class that entered in the fall of 1995.
Assessment in the Majors. All undergraduate departments and programs, following a rotating six-year schedule, develop and implement two-year plans for evaluating student achievement in their major programs.
Assessment in General Education. All undergraduate schools of the University assess the effectiveness of their programs of area requirements or general education electives.
Assessment of Continuing Education. The Division of Continuing Education assesses student achievement in the programs in each of its regional centers. Procedures include student and employee surveys, portfolio analysis, and external examiners.
Special Assessment Projects. The Office of Institutional Assessment and Studies works with departments and units, including the Office of the Dean of Students, the Office of African-American affairs, the Office of Students with Disabilities, and the Teaching Resource Center, who request assistance with planning and evaluation efforts.
Alumni Assessment. This effort seeks to determine the extent to which alumni have benefited from their University education.
The merger of the Office of Institutional Planning and Studies and the Office of University Assessment to form the Office of Institutional Assessment and Studies resulted in a total reduction of staff from 9.8 to 7.4 FTE positions.
A planning and evaluation advisory committee should be formed, headed by the Executive Vice President, the Vice President and Provost, and the Vice President and Provost for Health Sciences.
Commitment to customers should continue to be a guiding principle for the University's administrative and academic support activities. Each faculty and staff member must focus on achieving a level of internal and external customer satisfaction that is consistent with the quality and reputation of the academic programs that we strive to provide. The concepts of benchmarking, evaluation of services to customers, continuous improvement, and process simplification are key to the University's future success and must be an integral part of the ongoing planning and assessment undertaken by every operating unit within the University.
Schools and departments should continue a formal process of student learning assessment, every five to six years, integrated with the existing system of outside visiting committees supervised by the Shannon Center for Advanced Studies.
The Office of Institutional Assessment and Studies should continue to serve as a central clearing house and resource for all units and departments seeking data and assistance on matters of planning and evaluation.
The Office of Institutional Assessment and Studies should more closely coordinate its work with the Office of Organizational Development and Training.
By approving pilot projects for decentralization of administrative functions in finance, purchasing, and human resources, the state provided a mechanism for reducing costs and restructuring. In order to implement these projects effectively the committee on process simplification
established a "team-based" infrastructure for assessing and implementing process improvements,
conducted a thorough review of core functions in finance and accounting, purchasing, and human resources,
identified 20 process teams that are charged with specific re-engineering tasks and goals,
established a three-year plan for team deployment and support mechanisms to ensure successful project completion,
implemented ways to promote communication between process simplification teams and Information Technology and Communication.
Proceed with a three-year plan to deploy 20 process improvement teams.
Process training, administrative training, and team training should be coordinated by the central administrative units for the purpose of educating users about new processes and procedures.
All new hires who will use administrative systems to purchase, hire, or otherwise conduct their business should receive training on related systems during their probation period. Such training should also be used as a professional development tool for current employees.
The University should promote the use of on-line transactions in place of paper transactions whenever the former are readily available.
Residential and Academic Life
Increased attention to efficiency combined with a more aggressive summer conference program (approximately 80,000 bed nights in 1994) have allowed the University to maintain the low cost to students for University housing. In 1995-96, costs to students for University housing will place UVa in the bottom third compared to other state colleges and universities in Virginia.
Four Area Coordinator positions--two full-time general faculty and two part-time graduate students--have been created by the Office of Residence Life and the Housing Division to provide necessary program support, supervision, and "adult" presence within the residential areas.
The technology in all first-year residential areas has been upgraded to connect them to the computer network allowing 24-hour communication with library systems, electronic mail, and the Internet.
Established a plan to accommodate the increased enrollment by the year 2005, of 1500 additional students, most of whom will be undergraduates. (See Appendix for proposed on grounds Enrollment Plans.)
Established a planning process for the development of a residential college for law students, the first of its kind in the country.
As part of the University community negotiations about developing the West Main Street corridor, discussed creating housing near the Health Sciences Center for health professional students.
Two residential colleges as well as language houses added to further support small communities within the larger University.
To appoint a task force to evaluate the first-year experience to compare the advantages of housing all first-year students together with the advantages of mixing first-year students with upperclass students, either in the residential college system or in upper-class dormitories or in both.
To evaluate alternatives to new dormitories for housing the resident student population: considering, for example, conversion of upper-class dorms to first-year dorms, conversion of dorms to residential colleges, moving more upperclass and graduate students into the community.
To assign the Office of the Dean of Students the responsibility to (1) assess the level of involvement in the educational life of the University by students who live off grounds, and (2) develop a plan that responds to any deficiencies.
To evaluate regularly the manner in which students are selected to participate in specific residential programs (e.g., Lawn, residential colleges, and language houses).
To continue progress toward a ratio of one resident staff member to 50 students in the upperclass residential areas.
To develop and enhance residential areas for graduate and professional students.
To disband the Residential Life Committee.
These recommendations are currently being implemented. The Residential Life Committee has been eliminated.
Student Academic Support
The following changes have been implemented in order to streamline programs, minimize costs, accommodate a changing student population, and create additional undergraduate programs.
Oversight of tutoring for undergraduate students was transferred to the Office of Student Academic Support within the College of Arts and Sciences. This office provides group tutoring as requested by students in College courses, assists other undergraduate schools at the University (Nursing, Architecture, Education) if tutoring is needed, and coordinates with programs offered through the School of Engineering and the Department of Athletics. The Office also provides a listing of services throughout the University as a referral guide.
The Learning Needs and Evaluation Center was merged with the Counseling Center, so that both undergraduate and graduate students could have one point of entry for assessment of academic and personal needs. Tutoring for special-needs students is now offered through the Office of Student Academic Support.
The Academic Achievement Program, which combines a basic course in Learning Strategies with at least one cognate course in science, social studies, or humanities for students experiencing academic difficulty, should continue to be funded in order to help students improve their study habits and to develop strategies for long-term self-improvement.
The summer transition program should be phased out after the summer of 1995 in order to serve a larger number of students, to run programs that are more cost-effective, and to recognize new student needs (in English as a second language, for example). The Fall Transition Program should be revised and strengthened, with a stronger programmatic focus, so students could enroll in an orientation seminar in one semester and a course in Learning Strategies in the other. Individualized tutoring and specialized classes in English, Mathematics, and ESL should also be made available as needed.
A continuing effort should be made to coordinate available services and to integrate academic support services for athletes into programs available elsewhere.
The implementation of these recommendations is under way.
A rationale will be developed, in collaboration with representatives of the College of Arts and Sciences, for the PG/MT (Post-Graduate Master of Teaching) program comparable to that which exists for the BA/MT program, and a flexibility will be introduced into the PG/MT program that will take into account the particular educational, personal, and career background needs and goals of the individual entering students.1
BA/MT and PG/MT programs will have courses or components of courses to insure that students who are preparing to teach at the middle school level are receiving an adequate background in the particular needs of pre-adolescent/adolescent students and in the curriculum and instructional practices appropriate for these students.1
Each course within the current programs will be examined and recommendations made to instructors on how the content can be modified to insure more instruction and guidance in the increasingly important area of home-school communication and relations.1
The BA/MT and PG/MT programs, as well as specific courses, will have more emphasis on content-specific instruction across the board, particularly in math, science, and literacy.1
A PG/MT program should be developed in which the length of time necessary for completion is reduced to 15 months for future middle and high school teachers.1
Pre-Service Preparation of Teachers in the Curry School of Education
The pedagogy courses should be designed to be less generic and more targeted to the high school, middle school, or elementary school teacher.
The chairs in the College of Arts and Sciences should identify those courses which provide the background necessary for effective teaching of the discipline at the elementary, middle, and high school level.2
The Dean of the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences should appoint a committee to consider an undergraduate major in general science that would be appropriate for prospective elementary and middle school teachers.
Each Arts and Sciences department chair should designate a faculty member to serve as academic advisor to the students preparing to teach in that discipline.
The Curry School should become the primary source for information concerning the preparation of teachers.1
In-Service Programs for Teachers Through the Division of Continuing Education
The Provost should appoint a University-wide oversight/steering committee (representing such units as the Curry School of Education, the College of Arts and Sciences, the Center for the Liberal Arts, and the Science Education Center) whose role would be wholly or in part to articulate a clear purpose and academic rationale for the nature, level, and delivery of in-service courses.3
Procedures to insure greater academic control should be established by each school which offers courses through the Division.
The Dean of the Curry School should assume responsibility to insure that courses designated 589 be one-credit workshop courses whose credit is not applicable to graduate degree programs without an advisor's approval.
The Dean of the Division of Continuing Education should be charged by the Provost to insure that, beginning in 1996-1997, the Division offer a larger proportion of courses in the discipline areas and in discipline-specific pedagogy.3
1See the Curry School report, pp. 83-86, for the implementation of these programmatic and advising changes.
2 Six departments--English, French, Spanish, German, Slavic, and Classics--have begun this task with the support of a grant awarded to the Center for Liberal Arts by the Modern Language Association.
3These recommendations have been forwarded to the Task Force on the Future of Continuing Education.
Improving teaching is one of the chief goals of the Self-Study, and dozens of accomplishments and initiatives toward that goal can be found in the reports of the schools (see, for example, the School of Law); the departments of Arts and Sciences; the issue reports on Interdisciplinary Studies, Student Academic Support, Teacher Education; and the unit report on Information Technology and Communication (see Classroom Technology Initiative).
In addition to these efforts, the Teaching Committee was asked to undertake an examination of the balance between teaching and research at the University, and was specifically charged with strengthening the incentives for superior teaching, reviewing evaluation procedures, expanding the role of the Teaching Resource Center, and developing school- and University-wide programs for enhancing the quality of apprenticeship teaching and the effectiveness of the learning experience of both undergraduate and graduate students.
Each school and department should take steps concerning incentives for effective teaching
to ensure that success in tenure, promotion, and ongoing faculty evaluation depend on effective teaching as well as on significant research and creative work,
to encourage faculty, through summer grants, to improve their courses, enhance their classroom presentations and pedagogical strategies with advanced technology, and explore the connections between their research and teaching.
Concerning the evaluation of teaching
to ensure that criteria for evaluating the quality of teaching are developed and clearly defined,
to ensure that all courses are evaluated by students,
to instruct faculty members to assemble teaching portfolios based on the criteria developed by schools and departments,
to review the teaching portfolios of its faculty members annually as part of the basis for making salary recommendations. The number of workshops conducted by the Teaching Resource Center on developing portfolios should be expanded.
Concerning teaching assistants
to strengthen training programs for graduate instructors in those departments that employ advanced graduate students as teaching assistants. Characteristics of strong programs might include
assigning teaching assistantships and distributing course materials to TAs well before classes begin,
involving faculty members in the training of new TAs, rather than leaving that responsibility to experienced TAs,
designing an orientation to follow the August Teaching Workshop offered by the Teaching Resource Center in which at least one faculty member, together with experienced TAs, discusses departmental requirements of TAs, professional ethics, and effective teaching techniques,
requiring TAs to take part each semester in at least one additional training session organized by the department or the Teaching Resource Center,
requiring graduate students whose native language is not English to have a SPEAK score of at least 230 and to be screened by the staff of the Teaching Resource Center and by departmental faculty. Those failing to meet these standards must complete the three-hour course, LING 111.
requiring TAs of large courses to attend the classes and meet regularly with the faculty instructor to discuss aspects of the course,
encouraging faculty members to work with TAs and evaluate several papers and exams together to ensure fair and consistent grading across all sections of a course,
requiring TAs to gather students' comments by the seventh week of the courses they are teaching and discuss the comments with faculty members,
evaluating separately from the faculty member those TAs who teach in multi-section courses,
instituting at least one form of supervision beyond student evaluations, such as classroom observations, self-evaluation, videotaping, or the creation and review of a teaching portfolio.
Concerning junior faculty
to reinforce the expectation that junior faculty will demonstrate an ability to teach effectively.
to assist junior faculty in developing into effective teachers by
encouraging them to teach courses in the areas of their research interests,
allowing them to teach the same courses several semesters in a row,
not forcing them to teach certain courses simply because no one else wants to,
allowing them to team-teach with senior faculty when appropriate,
giving them the benefit of working with experienced TAs or lab assistants,
not assigning them excessive committee work and administrative service.
to require departments or schools to provide junior faculty members annually with comprehensive evaluations of their performance in all areas, especially teaching.
See also the report on Faculty Performance Evaluation, pp. 41-45.
The Vice Provost for Research should consider revising section 1 of the instructions concerning Faculty Summer Research Awards in the Humanities and Social Sciences.
The section currently reads as follows:
"No grants will be made for research that is intended to result in the production of a textbook, for writing that is essentially commercial, or for the preparation of teaching materials that will be required by the applicant in the performance of his or her own normal teaching duties."
We propose the following revision:
"No grants will be made for research that is primarily intended to result in the production of a textbook or for writing that is essentially commercial. Summer research grants are designed to support research rather than the preparation of teaching materials, but since successful research often has significant implications for a grantee's teaching, applicants are welcome to forecast those implications as part of their application materials."
The University should continue to support the excellent work of the Teaching Resource Center.
See the separate report for the Teaching Resource Center, pp. 125-128.
Teaching and Technology
Every school and academic department has launched, formally or informally, an initiative linking the power of advanced information technology to its teaching mission. These initiatives, many of which are described in the following two sections, range from the use of digitized images in Art History, Architecture, and Engineering courses, to multimedia classroom teaching in Commerce and Arts and Sciences, to the study of electronic texts in literature classes. In addition to these departmentally and school-based initiatives, we now have a series of University-wide programs and projects to strengthen teaching through technology. These are described below.
Established in 1992, the University's Institute for Advanced Technology in the Humanities (IATH), has become a national leader in bringing information technology to bear on scholarship and teaching in the humanities. The seminal work of faculty fellows at the Institute has served as a catalyst for other faculty members at the University, who regularly seek help from past and present fellows in introducing technology into their classrooms. In the present academic year (1995-96), IATH will also support its first group of visiting fellows from other institutions.
The library has expanded its electronic initiatives from an original electronic text center in the humanities to include art and architecture images, numeric data, geographic information, sound and special collections materials. Many faculty use the electronic resources in teaching their undergraduate classes. For example, as increasing numbers of manuscripts are reproduced in electronic facsimile, faculty can include primary sources in their coursework for students without putting fragile and irreplaceable originals at risk. Support from the General Assembly for VIVA (Virtual Library of Virginia) has also allowed us to provide such important texts as the corpus of English-language poetry to the year 1900 for course work.
A new program called the Teaching + Technology Initiative (TTI) was launched this fall (1995) with the support of the Information Technology Center, the Provost's Office, and the Executive Vice President. The aim of the TTI is to provide funding and time each year for a small group of faculty members to develop innovative instructional projects that use technology as a major component. The twelve faculty members chosen for this year's fellowship program will be developing new technologically based teaching methodologies in a wide variety of disciplines, including chemistry, religious studies, English, engineering, and architecture. It is hoped that each year's group of fellows will not only enhance their own teaching but also share their discoveries and their technological expertise with their colleagues.
The Multimedia Resource Center (MRC), now in its second year, is charged with providing basic multimedia services to the University. In the spring of 1995, it conducted 35 multimedia classes, with 70 departments and 155 people participating. The MRC has moved to a newly enhanced location in Wilson Hall, which is now the official hub of classroom technology.
In conjunction with the development of the MRC, new state funding, and internal savings of $250,000 from restructuring efforts, technologically sophisticated classrooms have been created in Wilson hall. All classrooms have network access, overhead projectors and screens, and whiteboards as well as access to new technologies. There is a multimedia lab with 25 computer workstations and sets of laptop computers which may be checked out and used in any of the classrooms.
To assist students and faculty in navigating an increasingly complex information environment of both print and electronic formats, the Library has expanded its user education programs. Each semester short courses (generally 90 minutes with hands-on practice) are offered on a range of topics from "Internet Basics" to "Text and Image Scanning" to "Creating World Wide Web Documents with HyperText Markup Language." These courses are in high demand and teach essential skills such as effective information identification and retrieval. The courses also teach students how to produce and disseminate their own documents in electronic form. This ability is important for their UVa classes as well as their future careers. Over 9,000 students took library classes in 1994/95 and the number will increase in the current year.
To continue, and, if possible, expand support of IATH in order to provide the strongest possible incentives for scholars in the humanities to involve technology in both their teaching and their scholarship and, at the same time, to strengthen IATH's role as a national leader in the field.
To develop the TTI program in order to involve as many faculty as possible in the use of new technologies for teaching. Seminars and forums offered during this first year of the Initiative should be widely publicized and funds sought to increase the number of fellows participating in the program for the next two or three years.
For the near future, to target faculty members as the primary user group for the Multimedia Resource Center and, within the next two or three years, to train a significant percentage of the faculty in the use of new technological resources.
To continue to provide classrooms with technological equipment and network access.
To develop a series of discipline-specific courses at the 200-level that will introduce first- and second-year students to the special uses of technology for study and research in the particular disciplines they expect to declare as their major fields. A pilot program, which will probably include the departments of History, English, Psychology, and Art History, is presently in the discussion stage under the guidance of the Vice President for Information Technology and the Vice Provost for Instructional Development and Innovation.
For further information, see the sections on technology in individual school and department reports. See also the unit report on Information Technology and Communication (p. 114) for a detailed discussion of ITC's Classroom Technology Initiative.
Return to contents page Return to beginning of "Issues"