I am the son of teachers. My dad was a professor of psychology for 35+ years at Michigan State University. My mom was a Grammy-award winning choir director who taught at all levels of education. Growing up, I never was deprived of much. As public sector employees, they earned a reasonable salary and received reasonable benefits. They were home when I went to school, and they were home when I returned. Plus, they had summers off (though dad often taught summer courses).

So, I am quite intrigued and dismayed by the recent action of the Wisconsin governor toward public sector employees, and, in particular, school teachers.

Some may think that public sector teachers are getting rich off taxpayers. But, let's look at what compensation public sector school teachers do and do not receive.

Unlike most private sector employees, there is no promotional ladder to climb that promises higher compensation and benefits. A human resources professional can go from a specialist to a generalist to a VP of HR. An AP History teacher in 1995 will still be an AP History teacher in 2005, 2015, and 2025 (if they are still teaching). There is no corner office one can strive to achieve. He or she cannot aspire to the Senior Executive VP of AP History.  At best, there will be negotiated salary increases from year to year.

Unlike some private sector employees, school teachers receive no double digit percentage raises for excellent performance. Kids score higher on the statewide test or on the ACT, the teacher is not going to be showered with incentives.

Unlike some private sector employees, school teachers receive no profit sharing when the school district does well.

Unlike some private sector employees, school teachers do not receive stock options that could blossom down the road. There is no IPO money available for the local high school.

Unlike some private sector employees, school teachers are not offered a 4-5 digit signing bonus to teach 4th grade science.

Unlike some private sector employees, school teachers do not receive significant perquisites at their workplace. My grandma's neighbor use to work at Stouffer's and her refrigerator was stocked with the latest food stuffs. Another friend worked for Chrysler and would get significant discounts on the latest automobile. School teachers don't get a discount on pens or erasers. There are no free Post-It Notes. Postal workers do not get stamps at a 40% discount.

Certainly, those who choose the teaching profession because they are passionate about what they do. They are not expecting an extravagant compensation package. However, a social contract developed over several decades that basically said please take care of our children, and we will provide you with quality health care and a strong defined benefit plan (which was a common benefit offering in the private sector as little as 30 years ago).

That social contract is in danger of being broken.

What is a school teacher really worth? Who will choose to teach your children as those rights earned over decades of negotiation are challenged and eroded?

In my efforts as professor, I have always been interested in the effect altering class policies and changing incentives has on student behavior. I fiddle around with changing attendance policies, the grading scale, the number of exams, the point values of exams to see the impact on how students approach the class.

For the past few semesters in the statistics class I teach, I've asked students to fill out a survey telling me things such as the name they liked to be called, their e-mail, etc. One question I've asked recently is "what specific goal is your grade for the class?" Assuming that students are not exactly thrilled about taking the subject, and assuming the students have the foresight to know it is a tough subject, I've expected an array of answers crossing the spectrum of the grading scale. However, the Lake Wobegon effect has held true, and the students have responded with very high opinions of themselves. Last semester, some 65 students answered, on average, a goal of 3.77 on a 4.0 scale (while the final average grade was a 2.77....I'm sure there were quite a few disappointed souls).

This semester is no different. Once again, the average grade goal was 3.77. In one section 23 (of 31) students had an A for their goal, with another 4 stating an "AB." In the second section, 18 (of 28) listed an "A" as their goal with another 8 listing an "AB." Only one student across two sections listed a grade below a "B."

I added a new question this semester, asking students, "What specific grade do you expect to receive in this class?" immediately after the question about their grade goal. Were students confident in their stated goal, or did they have high aspirations, but knew they realistically might not achieve them? 86% (51 out of 59) thought they would receive the grade they set as a goal.

So, the results beg a number of questions:
1. Is there a student grapevine? When I was choosing classes as an undergraduate, I would ask around about which professor to take, and how difficult he or she might be. Whenever I return exams, students always compare their scores to the person next to them. Are students sharing this information outside of the classroom as well? Do students really know how difficult the class might be?
2. Should we be managing expectations of students? Should I publish the average grade of previous semesters in my syllabi each semester, so that students know what grade they are likely to earn? Should the average grade be published when students register for classes (along with teacher ratings)? What other efforts should be made to temper student expectations?
3. What role does external or internal locus of control play?

I'm sure there is a study in here somewhere.

These are heady times in our little hamlet called Green Bay. The excitement is palpable as our football team is playing in Super Bowl XLV. Everywhere you turn, people are dressed in green and gold and conversation inevitably turns to what will happen in this weekend's game.

However, some are taking this weekend's festivities a bit far. At least one Green Bay organization is experiencing a significant number of personal and family illness days being submitted for Friday, February 4, 2011, and Monday, February 7, 2011. Amazing how people can anticipate being sick several days in advance.

With 85-90% of TVs in this area expected to be turned to the Super Bowl on Sunday, it is understandable that absence might be a little higher the day after, especially if the home town Packers emerge victorious.

So, how does your organization handle absenteeism on the day after the Super Bowl? Will cases of personal and family illness be subject to verification by a doctor?

Confession: I will be attending the game and flying back from Dallas on Monday. So, count me as absent.

If its early-January, it means that many college professors and students are on winter break. It also means that it is the heart of tenure and promotion season. Untenured faculty are busy preparing to submit their application in the hopes of gaining that next step in their academic career.

For most schools, the tenure and promotion is one and the same. At the school where I work, this decision is decoupled....you may earn tenure before being promoted from assistant to associate professor.

So, what is the process and what is the criteria to earn tenure and to be promoted? Lets first look at the criteria.

According to our faculty handbook, the criteria for tenure and promotion falls into five categories:
1. Academic Preparation - Does the individual have a doctorate or similar terminal degree in their field?

2. Teaching Effectiveness - Does the individual demonstrate effectiveness as perceived by the candidate, students and colleagues? Evidence to support effectiveness involves student evaluations, inviting colleagues to observe their efforts in the classroom, as well as efforts to be current in the course content.

3. Student Advisement - Does the individual regularly meet with students and advise them not only on their class schedule, but on their job/career choice after college? In addition, the candidate may serve as an advisor to one or more student organizations.

4. Scholarship and Professional Activity - Does the individual demonstrate professional competence in his or her discipline and show promise as a scholar committed to continual growth? Evidence may include, but are not limited to, things such as research projects, creative activities, convention or workshop participation, presentation of papers, and publications (preferably peer-reviewed; preferably in a higher "quality" journal).

This is often the major delineation in a faculty's career path. You may earn tenure at our institution by showing scholarship potential, but promotion often hinges on turning that potential into production (while maintaining continued competence in the other criteria). Promotion from associate to professor would require sustained competence over time in all criteria.

5. Collegial Activities - Does the individual provide evidence of effectiveness in meeting the collegial expectations of the College? This may include such activities as productive participation in one's discipline, serving on an array of college committees, as well as activities that promote the stature of the applicant and the College.

In meeting these expectations, the individual should reflect upon and articulate how these accomplishments meet the mission of the College.

For tenure, individuals typically can apply after their fourth year, and must apply within 7 years of starting the position. This "tenure clock" can be affected by whether you had worked at another institution, or had earned tenure elsewhere. For promotion from Assistant to Associate, you must have worked 7 years as an Assistant Professor, with at least 2 years at our institution. For promotion to Professor, you must have worked at least 5 years as an Associate with 3 of those years at our institution.


What does the tenure and promotion process entail? The candidate must submit an application to the Academic Dean that includes:
1. An updated curriculum vitae
2. Letters from colleagues, both within and outside the candidate's discipline, that address how the candidate has met the criteria
3. An application essay (which can run upwards of 50 pages) that details how the candidate met the criteria, and how they will contribute in the future.
4. Other supporting documents (teaching evaluations, publications, syllabi, etc.).

The materials are submitted to a Faculty Personnel Committee who will review the materials and render a decision. The decision is forwarded to the Dean who also renders a decision. If there is disagreement, the Chair of the Committee and the Dean will meet with the President to discuss the decision. If all agree, the President will forward the recommendations to the Board of Trustees for approval. If the Committee does not recommend tenure, the recommendation is not submitted to the Board. There is a Faculty Review Committee available for appeal if individuals who are denied tenure feel the wrong decision was made. If a person does not earn tenure, and has no more opportunities to apply, they are given a one year terminal contract. At our campus, candidates for tenure are reviewed in the fall and candidates for tenure are reviewed in the spring. Promotion to Associate Professor does not require approval by the Board of Trustees, while promotion to Professor does.

How does your organization make promotion decisions? Is it this detailed? If not, would you consider adopting such a process?

With the MegaMillions jackpot reaching $330 million tonight (208.3 million if you take the cash option….nothing to sneeze at), it is very tempting to reach into one’s pocket and take a stab at winning. However, knowing the odds of winning may temper your enthusiasm of putting any more than a few dollars toward that chance.

According to the MegaMillons website, to win you must match 5 out of 56 white balls, and 1 out of 46 yellow balls. It is much easier said than done. The odds of accomplishing the above task are a little over 175 million to 1.

Sometimes it is hard to put into perspective what a 175 million to 1 shot might be. Take getting struck by lightning? It has been calculated that getting struck by lightning is 587,000 to 1. In comparison, you are more likely to be struck by lightning several times than winning the MegaMillions jackpot. Obviously, this will be influenced by a number of factors such as the time of day, your geographic location, and the month of the year.

What about the chances of fatally slipping in the shower or bathtub? Oddsmakers place it at 3,333 to 1. You would have to slip over many times over to match the chance of winning the MegaMillions (but, given that it is fatal, you only slip once).

What about catching a foul ball at a baseball game? Certainly it depends on where you sit or how crowded the stadium might be. But, the odds are 776 to 1. You are just as likely to catch more than a handful of foul balls as you are of winning the MegaMillions.

Tax season will be upon us soon. I hope you have kept your records straight, though the odds of getting audited by the IRS are 180 to 1.

So, go ahead and put a dollar or two on your favorite numbers, and dream about what you would do if you won $330 million dollars. Just be realistic about your chances.

If you did win....what would you do with the money? Would you use any of it to make HR better?

I was perusing my alma mater's student newspaper when I came across this article:

"Re-posting on WikiLeaks could affect job prospects."

The reporter, Summer Ballentine, writes:

For some students, posting links to WikiLeaks on social networking sites might be another hurdle to landing a job in an already competitive job market.

WikiLeaks, an organization working to provide government and leaked information to the public via the Internet, released additional confidential government documents to numerous media organizations last week, and has since sparked a worldwide debate.

Students planning to find work or internships in the federal government after graduation were recommended not to post about or comment on WikiLeaks on social networking sites by college career advisers across the country — including at MSU.

Jaimie Hutchison, field career consultant for James Madison College, said an e-mail was sent Friday advising MSU students against posting statements on social networking websites about WikiLeaks.

However, the information in the e-mail is not based on any official James Madison College or MSU policies, she said.

Although the decision is up to students, they should be aware of possible implications of their actions, Hutchison said.

“I don’t know what the outcome of this will be — I just want students to have a heads up,” she said.

“The important thing for me as a career adviser is to make sure students have the information I do.”

The statement was influenced by a similar letter sent to some students at the University of California, Berkeley, Hutchison said.

A couple of thoughts:

1. The article gives opponents of social media yet another reason to strike fear into the hearts of those who use it. It once again signals that using social media can be an unwise proposition....be careful what you post or you won't get a job.

2. Are recruiters/HR managers really using postings of a political nature by candidates to influence their decisions? Are career advisers going overboard in expressing their concerns to students about such postings?

The use of social media sites, such as Twitter and Facebook, in the classroom is growing, as is student time spent on exploring such sites. However, little research has been done to examine the impact on grades. Does actively participating in social media (Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, blogs, YouTube, etc.) impact one's academic performance? Is social media usage impacted by the ownership of smart phones?

This fall, a colleague, two students, and I attempted to answer these questions. An online questionnaire asking students about social media, and its usage, was sent by e-mail to all students (approximately 2,100) at a small, liberal arts college.

The following hypotheses were posed:

Hypothesis 1a: Students with smart phones are more likely to be involved with social networking than students without smart phones.

Hypothesis 1b: Students with smart phones will spend a longer amount of time on social networking than students without smart phones

Hypothesis 2: Social media use will differ based on class standing.

Hypothesis 3: Social Science majors will utilize social media more than Natural Science or Humanities and Fine Arts majors

Hypothesis 4: A negative relationship exists between social media use and grade point average.

What did we find?

Of the approximately 2,100 surveys sent, 430 were received (20.47%). The primary respondents were freshman (42.5%) followed by sophomores (21.6%), seniors (19.8%) and juniors (14.8%). Gender was queried, but more than two-thirds (69.6%) chose not to answer. A significant majority (83.4%) had a grade point average (GPA) above 3.00, with 45.1% self-reporting a GPA above 3.50, 38.3% with a GPA between 3.00 and 3.50, 13.3% between 2.50 and 3.00, 2.7% between 2.00 and 2.5, and 0.5% below 2.00.

31.7% of students were able to access at least one networking site on their phone, with 98.5% able to access Facebook, 72.7% able to access YouTube, 58.3% able to access Twitter, 49.2% able to access MySpace, 45.5% able to access blogs, and 34.8% able to access LinkedIn.

Of the 430 respondents, 97% use one or more of the following social networking sites: Twitter, YouTube, blogs, Facebook, LinkedIn, or MySpace. The largest percentage of respondents used Facebook (95.4%), followed by YouTube (90.7%), reading blogs (27.6%), Twitter (17.6%), LinkedIn (7.2%) and MySpace (3.9%). Given the small sample size for MySpace, we chose not to include it in our analysis.

The time spent on the social networking sites echoed the order listed above, with 78.3 % indicating they spent the most time on Facebook, followed by YouTube (58.4% ranked it 2nd), reading blogs (41.7% ranked it third), Twitter (26.3 % ranked it fourth), and LinkedIn (43.0 % ranked it last).

How much time do students spent on social networking sites? Students, for the most part, spend less than 15 minutes a day on most social media sites. However, Facebook is the exception. A significant majority of students (77.2%) spend more than 30 minutes a day on Facebook.

FINDINGS

There was general support for hypotheses 1a and 1b. Students who have smart phones were more likely to both access social media tools and spend time engaging with others. From an educational standpoint, this means there may very well be a “digital divide” between those who are making connections with others, and those who might be left behind. Similarly, professors may have to be wary of assigning projects involving social media to students as some may have an advantage in completing the work than others.

There was partial support for hypothesis 2. Juniors and seniors were more likely to use Twitter and LinkedIn, and read blogs, then their younger colleagues. However, other than Facebook, there was no significant difference in the amount of time spent accessing these sites. As expected tools such as Twitter and LinkedIn have more relevance to older students as they try to connect with others in their job search or find work. Similarly, perhaps younger students use Facebook longer as they are building their social connections, whereas older students already have a well-established network of friends and colleagues.

There was also minor support for hypothesis 3. Social science majors were more likely to use LinkedIn and spend more time on Facebook. However, it was the Humanities and Fine Arts majors who were more likely to use Twitter and read blogs. Perhaps the difference lies in the emphasis placed on the written word, and Tweeting and reading blogs has more appeal to this group.

Finally, there was little support for hypothesis 4. GPA did not play a role in the use of any of the major social networking tools, and minutes spent on several of the sites did not differ. The major difference lay in time spent with Facebook, which did show a negative relationship between time spent on the social network and one’s grades. As noted in table 1, while most students spent 15 minutes or less accessing that particular tool, Facebook was the only social networking site where a majority of students spent more than 30 minutes of their time accessing. Students and teachers should be concerned about its impact on learning.