|
VOTE:
All constituencies voted on the Professional Development recommendations which passed unanimously.
PRESIDENT’S RESPONSE:
I spent a great deal of time thinking about professional development (PD) during the summer break – prompted by the recommendations made by the committee in response to last year’s Governance charges, and subsequent discussions with Dean Pat Sensi.
The sheer number of the recommendations made by the PD committee for 2003-2004 speaks volumes about the committee’s dedication and focus. I would like to acknowledge the wonderful work of the committee and encourage them to continue their self-analysis of PD programs and funding. I salute their tenacity and diligence, particularly the co-chairs Phyllis Shafer and Martha Nobel, and respond here enthusiastically and optimistically knowing how seriously the committee will work on the charge for 04-05 – to develop an assessment model for a current PD program. I look forward to working with Martha and her new co-chair, Ellen Musen, in the year ahead.
I see in these most recent recommendations a true recognition of the value of needs assessment and an integrated, comprehensive professional development program for all employees. That said, I want to preface my reply with a ‘heads-up’; in the near future, I will be sharing with you and the PD committee, a draft of a revised platform philosophy for PD at Brookdale that I shall author. Your input and the input of the committee (in the form of an additional Governance charge) will be critical as we refine and define this approach to PD.
Building on the “Professional Development Operations and Resource Handbook 03-04”, the committee’s work from last year, I envision a collegially evolved plan based on a series of Learning Hierarchies (the handbook refers to “competencies” but I find that term limiting) It will focus on the personal development of individual employees which I truly feel in turn will lead to greater organizational development. I believe that a strategic approach to ‘people development’ – focused on employees’ knowledge areas, subject matter and personal growth – will ultimately lead to greater organizational renewal and innovation. I’m preparing a ‘white paper‘ for your review and I look forward to our discussions.
All told, I counted 30 recommendations from the PD committee; I will respond here to items as needed – the committee doesn’t need me to prescribe how to divide its budget, or whether it can accept requests that don’t follow the guidelines on the website. It has managed quite ably to this point, adapting as times change.
Please note that I make some additional recommendations of my own here, as well.
Faculty
1. I propose asking the Office of the Executive Vice President for Educational Services to fully fund the Adjunct Faculty Reception, believing that it is first and foremost, an Educational Services responsibility to ensure excellence in teaching. PD and Human Resources (HR) would, of course, continue to collaborate with her office, on the intent and contents of the program. I assume this program includes an evaluation component – for adjuncts who attend the reception as well as those who don’t.
2. Raising the maximum award to $350 makes sense; perhaps only those presenting at a conference or program, or having an extraordinary circumstance, would be permitted to receive additional funds from the Executive Vice President for Educational Service’s office. However, I caution that for the current budget year, the total dollars in the PD budget will not rise.
Budget
1. Perhaps I don’t understand the recommendation about a “separate budget line…for college-wide PD activities”; the Human Resources office maintains a sizable budget for such activities, and some discretion regarding institutional priorities is HR’s prerogative. Also, the Executive Vice President for Educational Service’s office is well-funded for PD. It is my hope that mutual discussion about programming continually takes place in the committee and is incorporated into HR’s and Educational Services agendas, and vice versa. Please advise if this is not so.
2. The emphasis on aligning department goals and college-wide initiatives with PD funding is overdue and welcomed.
Needs Assessment & Measurement of Outcome
1. We must define a way to collect, collate and compare the volumes of data collected separately each year by faculty, administrators, staff and the police, on their year-end professional development activities and identified needs. I will ask Deans Sensi and Kegelman to report back to me by January 2005 with recommendations on how best to collect and assess this information.
2. An assessment tool or rubric should be utilized for all programs, HR and/or PD-initiated, with outcomes reported as consistently as intentions, within the framework of the “institutional philosophy” which is currently being evolved initially by me. PD’s charge from Steering for the coming year is one I strongly support. Without evaluation, a program is in danger of becoming moribund or obsolete.
Competencies
1. Perhaps the best place to maintain the Adjunct Faculty web-based Handbook is the Teaching, Learning and Technology Center, the ultimate in PD for the computer literate. I ask that the committee work with Dean David Murray to task, and ask that Dean Murray report back to me by November 2004 with his recommendation.
2. I urge the committee to develop a broader-based “mini-grant” program to highlight the new or unusual skills of their colleagues. In return, I would assume the responsibility for funding the Technology Mini Grants, and administer them through the Grants Office; and award them in conjunction with the Educational Excellence Awards from the Foundation. I would ask the PD committee to fund the recognition reception held each year for the awardees, a cost typically borne by my office. I would like to see the two ‘internal funding’ sources complementing each other – by design, not happenstance. I would like to see coordinated, non-redundant criteria, and I reserve the right to approve – or disapprove – of those criteria. I ask that the PD committee work closely with Laura Qaissaunee, Director of Grants, and Tim Zeiss, Exec. Director, of the Foundation, on how to best handle these awards in a planned, coordinated fashion, and report back to me with their recommendations by January 2005.
Recognition
1. Often, we move so quickly from one initiative to another that we forget to take the time to enjoy our success. The value of a ‘thank-you’ cannot be overstated, yet it is often forgotten. I will work with Steve Nacco and the Special Events people to ensure that our annual social and recognition events continue. I would ask Dr. Nacco and Dean Sensi to collaborate with the PD committee on some of the more ‘unique’ recognition ideas and ask that they report back to me in December 2004 with their recommendations.
OUTCOME:
|
