Proposal to Streamline Departmental Functions: Part I, Teaching
These recommendations are motivated by short-term goals rather than long term
program transformation. For the next several years, we should expect to have more
work spread among fewer faculty, and to find it increasingly challenging to maintain a
large slate of service courses, a successful undergraduate major, a high quality graduate
program, and to sustain the department’s historically strong research environment. To
address this, a number of specific “austerity measures” are suggested to make the
department more efficient, and most important, to free up faculty to pursue critical
teaching and research missions in an equitable way. None of the changes we suggest
need be permanent; in fact, we suggest it is more appropriate to view these
recommendations as a temporary way to streamline some functions of the department.
In the future, as we build back up critical areas of our program, all these decisions
should be revisited.
I. Curriculum and Scheduling
The data below illustrates how a sharp decline over the last 8 years in the number of
tenure track faculty has made it difficult to maintain the department’s commitment to
high quality teaching across the curriculum, including its programmatic service courses.
Fall 2003
Fall 2004
Fall 2005
Fall 2006
Fall 2007
Fall 2008
Fall 2009
Fall 2010
Classes
taught by TT
48
52
52
44
37
36
37
351
Math191
Math192
Math291
Math392
Stat251
Stat371
4/7
5/8
5/8
4/8
1/8
1/7
52/8
1/8
3/4
4/4
3/5
2/5
2/5
1/5
2/5
1/5
4/4
4/4
4/4
4/4
1/4
1/5
2/5
33/5
3/3
4/4
3/3
2/3
2/3
2/3
2/3
24/3
1/2
2*/5
3**/5
2*/5
3**/5
0/5
1/5
35/6
1/1
1/2
2***/2
2/2
1*/2
1*/2
1/2
1/2
TT = Tenure Track
x/y = (number of sections taught by TT)/(total number of sections offered)
* Gabriel Lampert, a well-qualified (and now retired) college track statistics instructor, is included in these
counts since he represented experienced and competent coordination of Stat 251 and 371.
**Includes Gabriel Lampert teaching two sections.
***Includes Gabriel Lampert teaching one section.
1
Includes two courses that were taught by Caroline Sweezy until late September and are now taught by
non-tenure track faculty.
2
Includes Louiza Fouli and Dan Ramras each teaching two sections.
3
Includes Caroline Sweezy and two sections taught by Marcus Cohen.
4
Includes Louiza Fouli teaching two sections.
5
Includes Tiziana Giorgi teaching two sections.
If a modest effort is made to have tenure track representation in the large sections of
Math 142 and 210, and in Stat 251, as well as in programmatic services courses such as
191, 192, 291, 392 and Stat 371, then tenure track faculty will need to be responsible for
roughly 15 of these courses a semester. Because of our current reduced level of faculty,
course buyouts, sabbaticals and leave, we can cover roughly only 18 more courses. To
address this, we suggest the following changes.
A. Course offerings

A temporary hold should be imposed on proposing new courses, programs or
degrees that require additional departmental resources.

Since some sections of Math 142 will be taught in large sections, this course
should meet 3 hrs a week, rather than the current 4 hours. Currently, the large
section of 142 meets for two 100-minute periods. Based on input from the
current instructor, this is too long of a class period to be effective for this
particular student population in the setting of a large classroom, and many
students do not stay for the entire class duration. Students would benefit more
from using this extra time to utilize the tutoring center. Grading support for this
course is also essential.

Because of low enrollment, scheduling difficulties and lack of faculty, offer each
of Math 279, 280, 331 and 332 once a year; e.g. 280 and 331 in fall and 279 and
332 in spring. Because of lack of faculty to cover it, CS should teach Math 278 for
the foreseeable future.

Because of low enrollment and lack of faculty to cover them, comprehensive
sequences that are not required for the PhD degree should be offered every
other year. Specifically, Math 531/532 and Math 591/592 should be offered
every other year, in alternating years.

Because of low enrollment and lack of faculty to cover them, graduate courses
that are cross-listed with an undergraduate course that is not required for the
mathematics major or Masters should be offered every two years. Such courses
include Math 453/503, 454/504 and 466/506.
B. Grants and course buyouts
To help balance resources, faculty applying for or holding grants that impact or draw on
department resources should regularly summarize these impacts for the department
head. Examples of possible impacts are course innovations or additions of new courses,
faculty buyouts and new graduate assistantships.
C. Participation of tenure-track faculty in service courses
Tenure-track faculty involvement in service courses is important for maintaining the
quality of these courses, to assure program continuity, and for attracting potential
majors to mathematics. Having all tenure-track faculty participate in these courses
demonstrates that there is a balanced generation of student credit hours among all
faculty. However, with fewer faculty available to cover courses (see the table on page
1), scheduling becomes more challenging. Having a structure in place that addresses
these issues in a fair way will simplify scheduling and help to balance course
responsibilities. The following are suggested targets for tenure-track faculty
participation in service courses. The list excludes Math 190 since the college track
faculty are well-qualified for this course, and we do not have enough tenure track
faculty to cover this as well as the programmatic service courses. For similar reasons,
Math 480 is omitted.

Large Section Math 142: (N – C) tenure track faculty members, where N =
number of large sections, and C = number of college track faculty who are willing
without coercion to teach this course. When not enough people request this
course, the Large Sections rotation system discussed below is used to fill these
courses. (142 might be taken off this list)

Math 191 and Math 192: At least two tenure track faculty members should serve
as co-coordinators for these courses. When not enough people request to teach
this course, the Calculus rotation system discussed below is used to fill these
courses.

Large section Math 210: N tenure track faculty members, where N = number of
large sections offered. When not enough people request to teach this course,
the Large Sections rotation system discussed below is used to fill these courses.

Math 291: At least two tenure track faculty members.

Math 392: At least two tenure track faculty members.

Stat 251: At least one tenure track faculty member who can serve as coordinator
for the course.

Stat 371: At least two tenure track faculty members.
To facilitate these targets, a modified version of the Schedule Preference form would be
used beginning Spring 2011.
************************************************************************
Sample scheduling form
COURSE AND TIME PREFERENCES FOR SPRING 2012
TEACHING SCHEDULE FOR TENURE TRACK FACULTY MEMBERS
Service courses. Choose at least 3 service courses you prefer to teach. The expectation
is that in a typical semester a faculty member will teach at least one service course.
-------MATH-----large section 142*
co-coordinator 191**
co-coordinator 192**
large section 210*
291
392
-------STAT------251
371
Prefer
Prefer Not
* If not enough people choose the large sections of 142 and 210, then the Large Section Rotation
Schedule will be used to select instructors for these courses; see [website] for the rotation
schedule.
** If not enough people choose to co-coordinate 191 and 192, then the Calculus Rotation
Schedule will be used to select instructors for the these courses; see [website] for the rotation
schedule.
Do you prefer to teach 2 service courses ___ or 1 service course and 1 other course___?
(Check one)
Other courses. Mark your preferences for each course.
[Include here the usual table, minus the classes listed above.
This table should include small sections of 142 and 210, if some
are to be offered.]
**********************************************************************
Notes on the suggested scheduling form:

In anticipation that the large section courses 210 and 142 will not be popular
choices, a rotation system is suggested as follows. The associate department
head maintains a Large Section Rotation List on the department’s internal
website. In the beginning the list consists of three tiers of faculty: full, associate
and assistant. Each of these tiers is ordered alphabetically, and no associate
professors will be drafted to teach 210 or 142 until all full professors have taught
at least one of these courses; similarly, no assistant professors will be drafted to
teach 210 or 142 until all associate professors have taught at least one of these
courses. (Within each tier, if it seems fairer, to “seed” the list a randomly chosen
cyclic shift could be applied to each tier of names, so that alphabetical order
begins at, say H, then wraps around.) Upon receiving the course preference
forms, the associate head reviews these to see how many, if any, faculty have
selected “prefer” for 210 or 142. Among those selecting 210 or 142 as a
preference, the associate head assigns them to their preferred courses in the
order in which they appear on the Large Section Rotation List. If not enough
people volunteer for 210 or 142, then the Large Section Rotation List is used first
to fill 210, then 142. Once a person teaches the course, his/her name is moved
to the bottom of the Rotation. Due to the extremely difficult situation we have
with the Statistics courses it is suggested that Tony Wang not be included on
either of these lists, since he will be needed to cover statistic courses.

A Calculus Coordination Rotation List similar to the one described above for
Math 142 and 210 would be implemented for co-coordination of Math 191 and
192. The Calculus Coordination Rotation would be independent of the Large
Sections Rotation, to assure a fair distribution of these tasks. As above, due to
the extremely difficult situation we have with the Statistics courses, Tony Wang
not be included on either of these lists. Pat Baggett should also be exempted
from the Calculus rotation.

The term “expectation” on the preference form here intentionally ties in with
performance evaluation criteria: Normally, part of “meeting expectations” for
teaching is participating in the department’s service course offerings.

One can hope that the scheduling forms and rotation lists need only be
temporary. As the department builds back up, and we have more faculty to
cover courses, we can revert to our previous, more instructor-friendly course
preference format.