Some ISU faculty members are feeling pressure this year due to the Promotion and Tenure Document, passed last April by the Faculty Senate and the comments of Provost Rollin Richmond at the Jan. 11 Faculty Senate meeting.

During the meeting, Richmond said he would not support tenure for faculty who had shown excellence in teaching but not in research.

Peter Sherman, associate professor of statistics, said this contradicts a new provision in the Promotion and Tenure Document that states faculty members with excellent teaching methods may receive tenure after being reviewed by their department.

“At a [research-oriented] university, which ISU is, faculty are hired based on their research possibilities, not teaching skills,” Sherman said.

He said more pressure has been placed on the faculty to develop good teaching skills, which is very time-consuming.

“There is a huge amount of pressure on faculty to become better teachers,” Sherman said. “But we still have a provost that wants research.”

Richmond said he does not think the new expectations for the faculty are too high.

“I believe that faculty needs to recognize that teaching is a primary function of the university,” he said. “We need to do that better.”

Richmond said faculty members need to work on their teaching skills in a way that works best for them and then make a judgment on how they divide their time between research and teaching.

John Robyt, professor of biochemistry, biophysics and molecular biology, agreed that teaching is important, but he does not like the current approach.

“It’s a big mistake for the administration to make this division,” he said. “It’s not in the best interest of the university or the students.”

Robyt said he feels research is a very important part of faculty work at a university, but that teaching should be equally important.

“Everybody at a university should be a scholar,” Robyt said. “But you want to make sure the emphasis is not in one area more than another.”

Sherman also said he agrees that research is an essential part of a faculty member’s work, but he added that it is beneficial when the professor applies the information so that students can understand it.

“It effects better communication and thinking about research,” he said.

Richmond also said teaching is beneficial to research projects and said both would play an equal factor when faculty is considered for tenure or promotion.

“If that individual is a poor teacher, I will not recommend them for tenure,” he said. “We are looking for a balanced approach to the missions of this institution.”

Sherman said although some faculty are seeing problems in the new Promotion and Tenure Document, he doubts any changes will happen soon.

“For the time being, I don’t believe there would be enough impetus to have a change,” he said.

Richmond also sees few changes in the future of the Promotion and Tenure Document and does not feel they are necessary.

“I don’t think I’m saying anything differently than my reading of that document suggests,” he said.