VCEA Workload Guidelines

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of these guidelines is to articulate transparent expectations for faculty regarding distribution of time spent on various aspects of faculty life. This guide is based on WSU’s Workload Policy. We seek to account for the diversity of activities among individuals, providing formal recognition and value of these contributions, as well as equitable assignment of primary duties needed to run the unit (includes a school or a department at VCEA). These assignable duties include teaching, service to department/school and university, and leadership (working group, committee), while accounting for the variable nature of research and graduate student support. It is recognized that other categories beyond research/teaching/service (including administration) may be delineated to the upper administration in the future, necessitating further clarification for the unit.

These guidelines are intended to clarify and document the broader college- and university-level policies, specifically for the unit. As stated elsewhere, these are not intended to be a measure of suitability for tenure or promotion, which are the guidelines articulated elsewhere. VCEA T&P guidelines are available online. The guidelines apply to tenured/tenure-track (T/TT) and career-track (CT) faculty. 

Furthermore, the guidelines in this document apply to faculty past their transitional periods of their respective careers. For instance, the guidelines for newly recruited tenure-track faculty are based on their respective offer letters during the pre-tenure period. Similarly, some faculty may be in transitional periods (e.g., while switching to major committee and/or leadership roles at the department, or while the ratios between research/teaching/service change as reflected in any change of appointments). For such faculty, the guidelines are typically negotiated at the school or department leadership’s discretion during the identified transitional period. In this document, “Director” refers to the school director or department chair. 

Following is a brief description of the three categories of effort and a justification for the proposed workload balancing process. Following that is matrix for assignment guidance. This guideline is applicable for all the units in VCEA except the School of Design and Construction (SDC). SDC will have a separate guideline commensurate with their mission.

Workload Categories

Research

The description of research for the unit is in line with that delineated in the Voiland College of Engineering and Architecture’s (VCEA) tenure and promotion guidelines and the WSU Faculty Manual. It consists of scholarly work with and without graduate and undergraduate students. However, for the purposes of this workload assessment, some additional weight is given to researchers/graduate students supported by a faculty member using external funds. A faculty member’s research contribution to the overall total workload is measured by Graduate Student Equivalents (GSE), as detailed below. An assessment of the productivity associated with research is also included at the end of this document. In the VCEA model, we explicitly include effort towards graduate student mentoring within the research (scholarship) category.

Teaching

The classroom educational mission of the unit is one of the key pillars of our role as a land grant institution of higher education. The teaching component of workload is measured through the number of course equivalents (classes of 3-credits) with the number of expected courses to be taught depending on the level of research productivity, as measured by GSEs, and variable administrative responsibility. We recognize that not all classes have the same nature, even with the same number of credits, and thus may not require the same number of hours per week. For instance, teaching a class for the first time, developing a class, managing many teaching assistants (TAs), running a class with one or more laboratory sessions, or having an unusually large or small number of students. These aspects vary widely among the VCEA units based on the curriculum needs and majors and hence cannot be easily generalized. The Faculty Manual further defines teaching to include graduate and undergraduate student mentoring, online instruction (including Global Campus), academic advising, program assessment, and educational outreach.  Each unit should define the granular details for maintaining equity in workload assignments for teaching, with corresponding guidance for satisfactory and meritorious performance for the different components of teaching as needed. Each unit will seek the Dean’s approval for their workload policies and performance expectations. Once approved, the Dean’s office will seek final approval from the Provost.  

Service

The final component in this workload component is service, broadly defined as additional contributions to the department, the college, the university, or the profession. These responsibilities can manifest in a large variety of ways. It is generally expected that all faculty will contribute in some way to service. The default service workload will be 20% for most faculty (average of 8 hours per week) or will be adjusted to the value in their original offer letter.

Administration

Credit will be given for significant administrative service, in the form of a course teaching reduction, for leadership in specific roles like associate school director/associate department chair, curriculum committee chair, ABET coordinators etc. Other course relief may be granted at the discretion of the Director (Head of the department) and Dean for similar time commitments for which the unit receives some benefit, either explicitly or to its reputation, and care is taken as to not negatively impact timely course offerings at the school. Please note that the University workload policy includes a category called, “administration” – this category is intended for titled positions at the level of chair or higher, or for titles that serve more than one unit as defined by the Dean. 

Workload Allocation

The overall justification for the coefficients for the GSEs is to provide credit for the faculty who are active in research. The adjustment in credit is the same, in that they attempt to measure the individual’s various contributions to the operation, reputation, and education of the unit. 

Graduate student equivalents (GSE)  

Faculty at different points in their careers or with different desires or circumstances find themselves advising and funding different numbers of graduate students and other researchers. We wish to incentivize externally funded research in the VCEA, which both elevates our rank and reputation and supports the department and VCEA financially through F&A returns. 

External support (grants, contracts, service centers) of research staff, post-docs, and PhD students is highly valued and contributes to overhead (F&A) returns to school/department to help support overall school/department operation. Teaching assistantships and faculty startup-funded students also support research and student training, but do not add supporting dollars to the department and thus represent operational costs. Similarly, for the overall reputation of the school/department, PhD and research staff are valued more than MS students due to their overall scholarly productivity, which enhances school/department and VCEA reputation. Other graduate students advised but not funded (such as self-supported) still require faculty time; even advising of non-thesis MS students is valued.

By assigning coefficients to these different scenarios, VCEA quantifies the current annual value of these research and training activities towards the overall unit’s enterprise. By prioritizing externally supported students and researchers, we implicitly account for research expenditures. By also counting other student advising, we show our value of the student-centric component of research advising. At this time, we are not giving explicit ‘credit’ for supporting undergraduate researchers, given the much more heterogeneous nature of their time commitment and contributions. However, VCEA recommends below calculation. 

Paid undergraduate students (UGs) as GSE coefficient = Total $ paid to UGs within a year / Total $ paid to a PhD student in the same unit. (1)

Or

Unpaid (volunteer) undergraduate students (UGs) as GSE coefficient = (Total time to UGs within a year / Total hours of a PhD student work in the same unit)*0.25. (2)

Graduate student equivalents Matrix

Supported category	Funding source	GSE coefficient
Research scientist/ professor	External funds (from T/TT PI)	1
Technician (full time)	External funds	1
Post-doc	External funds	1
PhD student	External funds (RA[1], [2])	1
PhD student	Self-support, Dept, College, or University funds (TA, startup, ORAP$)	0.5[3]
PhD student	Traineeship support (e.g., NRT, GAANN)	0.75
MS thesis student	External funds – federal, state, industry (RA)	0.75
MS thesis student	Self-support, Dept, College, or University funds (TA, startup, ORAP$) or traineeship support (e.g., NRT, GAANN)	0.33
MS non-thesis student	Self-support, Dept, College, University funds	0.1
Undergraduate students	External or voluntary	(1) and (2) above

Leadership course relief  

Time-consuming leadership roles in service to the school/department, VCEA, university, or professional society, or other activities which are highly valued by the school/department, such as extensive fundraising, are eligible for credit. The faculty may have reduced teaching due to significant contribution to such activities. In this way, we can attempt to equitably and transparently quantify the value of differential contributions in research, teaching, and service. 

The following leadership roles are approved for a one-course relief in the unit. Other similar ones may be offered at the direction of the Director and Dean. All roles are a one-course relief (i.e., one fewer 3-credit class than would be expected per calendar year based on the GSE matrix). School director’s workload assignment will be at the discretion of the dean and will be negotiated between the dean and the school Director.

Types	Examples (may be defined slightly differently for each unit)
Major unit-level faculty administration/leadership role	Associate/Deputy Director, Graduate Studies Chair; Undergraduate Curriculum Chair, Lead for ABET accreditation (year prior)
Major research leadership roles	Director or Lead PI for major center or institute at the college or university level, funded predominantly through external sources (including federal funding agencies and industry)

Additional teaching release may be granted to faculty who lead and submit full proposals for major center-level grants (e.g., NSF ERC, NSF STC, DOE Research Centers, NIH Research Centers). However, such releases must be discussed with and approved by the Dean in advance.

Teaching expectations depending on the research level  

Note that a course equivalent is defined by default as a 3-credit course. All course numbers below assume this, but equivalencies are understood (i.e., three 2-credit courses = two 3-credit courses). Credit for multi-instructor courses is based on proportion of teaching contribution. Course equivalent expectations (per academic year, AY) are before reduction from leadership responsibilities described above.

Type of faculty member	# GSE per year (avg.)	# course equiv. per AY	Notes
Instructionally active	0	≥6	intentionally empty
Moderately Research active	GSE<3	4	intentionally empty
Research active	≥3 and <6	3	This is the nominal expected course load.
Highly/Exceptionally Research active	≥6	2	intentionally empty
Entry-level	-	2	For untenured faculty for first two years after starting (unless negotiated differently)

Additional Guidance

• GSEs are calculated at the end of each calendar year, based on the supported students from the previous year. Since it is not always the case that the same number of students are advised in spring and fall semesters, the total GSE is calculated then divided in half.
• The determined GSE and the resulting course load expectations based on GSE and leadership positions will be documented in the annual review in ~February for the following calendar year, to ensure transparency of expectations. Any extenuating circumstances should be documented by the individual faculty member in the annual review.
• For co-advised graduate students, the default is for each faculty co-advisor to take credit for 50% of the GSE. In rare cases, such as when one faculty member supplies all the external funding and the other one is a secondary advisor, another credit arrangement can be made between the co-advising faculty, providing that total fraction of the GSE does not exceed 100%
• For faculty near the thresholds of the GSE limits (within 0.25 GSE), consideration will be given for assessing the faculty member at the more highly research active category for the purposes of course assignments. Any ambiguity will be addressed at the discretion of the Director.
• It is recognized that occasionally, due to unforeseen or extenuating circumstances, additional overload requests for teaching may be made by the director, in order that the curriculum and student experience can be maintained.
• Additional course buyouts below the above the determined course equivalent expectations may be approved at the discretion of the Director and Dean. When considering buyout requests, the Director is expected to prioritize programmatic needs. A course buyout, if approved, can be provided by using funds constituting 15% (or whatever the current VCEA policy dictates) of the faculty member’s 9-month salary plus associated benefits. This can be provided from grants (as allowed by agency), gifts, or other contracts. 

Workload Measurement

For VCEA [except for the School of Design and Construction (SDC), which has distinct tenure and promotion requirements], the baseline 3-credit course workload is defined as 10% on an academic year basis. This is the equivalent of 8 hours per week out of a 40-hour workweek. This accounts for approximately 3 hours of in-class work, plus minimal preparation time and some office hours. Additionally, Teaching Assistant (graduate student) mentoring contact hours are embedded in this number. 

Below is a matrix for the workload equivalencies for all the foreseen types of appointments. The dean and unit Director must approve deviations from these categories.

Typical 9-month appointment	Threshold GSE equiv.	#classes taught/y	Teaching	Scholarship/ Research	Service	Administration
Highly research active, administration	≥6	1	10%	60%	30%	intentionally empty
Highly research active	≥6	2	20%	60%	20%	-
New faculty	-	2	20%	60%	20%	-
Research active, administration	≥3 and <6	2	20%	50%	30%	intentionally empty
Research active	≥3 and <6	3	30%	50%	20%	-
Moderately research active, administration	>0 and <3	3	30%	40%	30%	intentionally empty
Moderately research active	>0 and <3	4	40%	40%	20%	-
Instructionally active TT, administration	0	5	50%	20%	30%	intentionally empty
Instructionally active CT, administration	0	5	50%	20%	30%	intentionally empty
Instructionally active CT	0	6	60%	20%	20%	-

Assessment or Research Productivity and Impact

Given the different research percentages for faculty, there must be a differential expectation for productivity and output. It is understood that every faculty member is different and will have more impact in some areas than others. If scholarly output, as assessed during the annual review, is less than expected (i.e., needs improvement versus meets expectations or exceeds expectations) for the given research percentage (as assessed on a rolling 3-year basis), the Director and Dean can change the workload to require more teaching. However, the faculty is expected to bring the scholarly output to required level as soon as possible. The scholarly output cannot be replaced with additional teaching in the long-term. The absolute metrics for this will be different for every field and unit in the VCEA, but the categories for consideration by the Director are as follows. See university level guidance for more information.

Measurable scholarly impact type	Example	Especially meritorious
Proposal activity	Number of proposals submitted, dollar value	Large dollar value, highly competitive grants, competitive proposal by invitation, PI on large team (or multidisciplinary) proposals
Grants/projects awarded	Number of awards, dollar value;	intentionally empty
Priority to extramural funds (federal, state, industry) versus internal (university, college, department), program competitiveness	Large grants with high external visibility, PI on multi-institutional or multi-disciplinary grants	intentionally empty
Conference presentations	US and international conferences; also invited seminars at other universities	Invited/keynote/plenary talks
Award recognition	Department/college/university awards.	intentionally empty
Priority to external society awards	Major external professional society awards, fellow status	intentionally empty
Publications	Number of publications;	intentionally empty
Priority to peer-reviewed journal articles, conference papers (depending on unit); books, peer reviewed public reports also considered	Large numbers of journal articles; un-edited textbooks	intentionally empty
Quality of publications	Must be assessed by each area/sub-area with a unit	Very high impact journal papers as determined by various impact metrics; High impact (peer-reviewed) conference venues in selected areas (e.g., computer science).
Other products	For example, software tools, open access data repositories for community, standards and protocols.	Tools adopted by whole technical community
Patents, disclosures, commercialization	Priority to patents licensed/sold to industry. Low priority to granted patents.	Commercialization of WSU inventions using external (non-WSU) funds
Demonstrated student success	Advised undergrad and grad students awards, internal and external	External funded fellowships

Review and Adjustment of Policy

Every faculty member’s workload will be reviewed and re-assessed as part of the annual review process. To avoid constant changes based on yearly fluctuations in activity, the units will use a rolling average over a three-year window to reassess activity and workload allocation. If an adjustment is deemed appropriate by the Director, then the Director typically discusses the adjustment plan with the faculty member prior to making changes. The final decision at the unit level on any workload adjustment is at the discretion of the Director. Any adjustment done in the workload allocation of a faculty member needs to be documented along with a rationale (typically as part of the annual review document or occasionally in subsequent email exchanges) and this adjustment needs to be shared with the VCEA Dean. Ultimately VCEA Dean needs to approve such changes.

Appeals and Grievances

It is typically expected that any adjustment to a workload allocation is mutually agreed upon between the faculty member and the Director. In rare cases, where a faculty member does not agree with the workload adjustment made by the Director, the faculty member has the right to appeal the decision to the VCEA Dean for further consideration. A college-level committee to hear such grievances will be constituted by the VCEA Dean to hear such cases and provide an independent recommendation to the Dean. This recommendation is then reviewed by the VCEA Dean for further consideration. The final decision on the resolution to any such grievances rests with the VCEA Dean.