Section 1.2 - The defined workload conversion per course credit hour (3-4 credit hours = 1 unit) should include a university-level treatment or minimum guidelines for the scaling factors/formulas that academics use in percent effort modeling for clarity and consistency across faculty experiences both within the same department and across departments specifically with how high(er) instructional time courses are assigned and handled. While I understand the need the for flexibility, minimum standards should be made explicit.
In my experience at other institutions, when these are not explicit and left to individual unit development there exists not only the potential in having just the appearance of standardization (while sharply nonstandard) but also increase interpersonal conflicts when courses with 0-credit hour instructional obligations are left out of these models. Applying this definition to the courses I currently teach:
I can teach a 4 credit hour course with a combined lecture/lab setup for 36 students (4 hours lecture, 2 hours lab) - this 6 hours of instructional time would equal 1 unit
I can teach a 4 credit hour course with separate lecture and lab for 108 students (3 hours of lecture, 6 hours of lab) - this 9 hours of instruction time is worth the same 1 unit even though I spend 1.5x more time in direct instruction/interaction with the students
A hypothetical scenario (using what I've experienced at other institutions)
If we assume a 5 unit workload across the semester (2u Teaching 2u Research 1u Service each semester), that academic units treat the above courses as equivalent, and further decide that courses are assigned based on seniority then we have placed more competitive pressure on securing the 6 hours of labor and placed faculty that can teach multiple courses into direct competitive conflict. If we simplify this to a department with 2 faculty members and 4 classes (2 of each as described above), the senior faculty could take 2 of the 6 hour instructional time courses and be in class 12 hours per week while more junior faculty would be left with the 9 hour instructional time course and be in class for 18 hours per week. If each has the same investment/expectation in research and service then you can see how this scenario plays out in doing an addition 6 hours of direct instruction per week and when carried out over a 15 week semester the junior faculty would be expected to spend up to an additional ~90 hours of direct teaching time even though the courses are the same unit value.
Commentor: Stephen Rice
Submitted on: 4/2/2026 3:41:23 PM
On behalf of:
Individual Staff
Section 1.2: I agree with Randy Byington's comment on converting credit hours to workload units. Is the intention of this section to set parameters for the college/departmental policies described in section 10.4, i.e., to indicate that a workload unit based on credit hours must consist of no fewer than 3 and no more than 4?
6.4: If I interpret it correctly, this clause could be clarified by rephrasing to: "Banked units expire if not redeemed within three (3) consecutive academic semesters following the semester in which they were granted."
9.1: This section seems to lack explicit provision for time spent in new course development or preparation. Consider a scenario in which a faculty member teaches a new or new-to-them 3-credit-hour course with 23 seats and an actual enrollment of 12 (high enough to run but under its capacity). They will likely spend less time grading than anticipated, but their contact hours and prep time (reading, lesson planning, assignment design) will be the same as if the course were full. What prevents their teaching workload from being prorated based on enrollment rather than based on the total time that the course demands?
10.5: "Office hour" should be defined. Does this mean availability to students at scheduled times (as many of us use the term with students)? Or does it mean, more broadly, the expectation for faculty to be working on-site? Or something else?
13. Should this section specify the period in which a written appeal may be submitted to the Provost/designee? (For example, “one (1) written appeal annually” or similar?)
Commentor: Rachel Mazzara
Submitted on: 4/2/2026 2:19:28 PM
On behalf of:
Individual Faculty
Sorry for the second comment but I just noticed that the definition of Academic Unit includes programs. That would add a 5th level of workload policies.
Commentor: Randy Byington
Submitted on: 4/2/2026 9:50:44 AM
On behalf of:
Individual Staff
Ambiguity
There is considerable ambiguity about levels of workload policy. For example, in the terms definitions Academic Unit is defined as “A department, center, library, school, or program within Academic Affairs that reports to the Provost and Senior Vice President for Academics.” without mention of colleges.
Section 4 of the policy states that each academic unit and school must establish workload policies (i.e. there would be no college level workload policies).
The opening general statements say that " It [the policy] sets university-level standards while allowing colleges and Academic Units flexibility to implement discipline-specific workload models.Section 10 says that “Colleges and Academic Units will develop policies as designated by this policy” this adds a College level workload policy".
These are just a few of the examples of the ambiguity around levels of workload policies. Do we intend to change from two levels (university and departmental) to four levels of policies (university, college, school, and department?
Full Time Workload
Section 1.2 “Teaching 3–4 credit hours equals one workload unit subject to differentiated workload (see Section 7) and the Definition of Credit Policy”
Why define a 3-4 credit hour as one workload unit at the University level when it isn't and a teaching workload unit is in reality not defined at the university level but is left to the discretion of the College, School, and Department.
Section 1.2 - The defined workload conversion per course credit hour (3-4 credit hours = 1 unit) should include a university-level treatment or minimum guidelines for the scaling factors/formulas that academics use in percent effort modeling for clarity and consistency across faculty experiences both within the same department and across departments specifically with how high(er) instructional time courses are assigned and handled. While I understand the need the for flexibility, minimum standards should be made explicit.
In my experience at other institutions, when these are not explicit and left to individual unit development there exists not only the potential in having just the appearance of standardization (while sharply nonstandard) but also increase interpersonal conflicts when courses with 0-credit hour instructional obligations are left out of these models. Applying this definition to the courses I currently teach:
A hypothetical scenario (using what I've experienced at other institutions)
If we assume a 5 unit workload across the semester (2u Teaching 2u Research 1u Service each semester), that academic units treat the above courses as equivalent, and further decide that courses are assigned based on seniority then we have placed more competitive pressure on securing the 6 hours of labor and placed faculty that can teach multiple courses into direct competitive conflict. If we simplify this to a department with 2 faculty members and 4 classes (2 of each as described above), the senior faculty could take 2 of the 6 hour instructional time courses and be in class 12 hours per week while more junior faculty would be left with the 9 hour instructional time course and be in class for 18 hours per week. If each has the same investment/expectation in research and service then you can see how this scenario plays out in doing an addition 6 hours of direct instruction per week and when carried out over a 15 week semester the junior faculty would be expected to spend up to an additional ~90 hours of direct teaching time even though the courses are the same unit value.
Section 1.2: I agree with Randy Byington's comment on converting credit hours to workload units. Is the intention of this section to set parameters for the college/departmental policies described in section 10.4, i.e., to indicate that a workload unit based on credit hours must consist of no fewer than 3 and no more than 4?
6.4: If I interpret it correctly, this clause could be clarified by rephrasing to: "Banked units expire if not redeemed within three (3) consecutive academic semesters following the semester in which they were granted."
9.1: This section seems to lack explicit provision for time spent in new course development or preparation. Consider a scenario in which a faculty member teaches a new or new-to-them 3-credit-hour course with 23 seats and an actual enrollment of 12 (high enough to run but under its capacity). They will likely spend less time grading than anticipated, but their contact hours and prep time (reading, lesson planning, assignment design) will be the same as if the course were full. What prevents their teaching workload from being prorated based on enrollment rather than based on the total time that the course demands?
10.5: "Office hour" should be defined. Does this mean availability to students at scheduled times (as many of us use the term with students)? Or does it mean, more broadly, the expectation for faculty to be working on-site? Or something else?
13. Should this section specify the period in which a written appeal may be submitted to the Provost/designee? (For example, “one (1) written appeal annually” or similar?)
Sorry for the second comment but I just noticed that the definition of Academic Unit includes programs. That would add a 5th level of workload policies.
Ambiguity
There is considerable ambiguity about levels of workload policy. For example, in the terms definitions Academic Unit is defined as “A department, center, library, school, or program within Academic Affairs that reports to the Provost and Senior Vice President for Academics.” without mention of colleges.
Section 4 of the policy states that each academic unit and school must establish workload policies (i.e. there would be no college level workload policies).
The opening general statements say that " It [the policy] sets university-level standards while allowing colleges and Academic Units flexibility to implement discipline-specific workload models.Section 10 says that “Colleges and Academic Units will develop policies as designated by this policy” this adds a College level workload policy".
These are just a few of the examples of the ambiguity around levels of workload policies. Do we intend to change from two levels (university and departmental) to four levels of policies (university, college, school, and department?
Full Time Workload
Section 1.2 “Teaching 3–4 credit hours equals one workload unit subject to differentiated workload (see Section 7) and the Definition of Credit Policy”
Why define a 3-4 credit hour as one workload unit at the University level when it isn't and a teaching workload unit is in reality not defined at the university level but is left to the discretion of the College, School, and Department.