University Staffing Model

In the Staffing Model, I think the following areas of the staffing process should be included in the model: orientation and staff development; annual review (tenure unrelated); peer reviews. If a faculty member received tenure, you would hope that the faculty member had gone through an orientation of what was expected of them when they were first hired.

Too often, faculty find themselves not prepared with knowledge of the technology in order to teach the students. Whether it is knowledge in how to use equipment, like an LCD projector, or how to maintain an online classroom, faculty should be willing to gain or improve this knowledge through available staff development courses. It would be a very good part of the staffing model of an educational institution to include orientations and staff development for faculty to keep them up to date with new teaching theories, studies, and/or methods. Too many faculty have had to depend on the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) for many workshops to keep them prepared to meet students’ educational needs. AAUP is inundated constantly for requests for more development courses and also better understandings on the legal definition of academic freedom. It is this academic freedom that should also be taken into consideration when staff are selected and recruited. This academic freedom is the right to learn and teach in academic institutions (Kaplan and Lee, 2007, p. 303).

Annual reviews should cover tenure and non-tenured faculty in the staffing process. If it is only for tenured faculty, then the institution would scare quality teachers away for the fear that their tenure would be taken away from them (Argosy, 2009).

Peer reviews would encourage collaboration within a learning community. As mentioned within the Winston and Creamer model (Argosy, 2009), the supervisor is aware and tries to share this awareness of the wants and needs of the institution. It is through this awareness that the supervisor could add to the peer review to a teacher. It is their academic right to learn and to teach. A teacher can be the leader (as teacher) or a student (teacher always updating knowledge) (Kaplan and Lee, 2007, p.303).

The peer reviews would allow any of the colleagues to give feedback on the services that were given from faculty on staff. This would also allow supervisor to comment too. In this type of review, faculty would be more acceptant of it because even the supervisor would be giving feedback as a peer and not at a superior. This would ensure the team atmosphere to attract and retain faculty already on staff.

In conclusion, as long as faculty feel like they have a say in working within the educational institution, faculty would feel that they would want to stay. Orientation and staff development would allow faculty, in the administrative and faculty level, to increase their leadership skills. These skills would eventually be learned and practiced on recruiting and selecting prospective faculty members.

References

Argosy University. (2009). Staffing Practices in Higher Education. Retrieved on 3/25/09 from www.myeclassonline.com/ec/crs/default. learn

Kaplan, W. A., & Lee, B. A. (2007). The law of higher education, student version. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.