Faculty still struggling with how to handle student absences

By MARTY LEVINE and SUSAN JONES

Whether, and how, faculty are supposed to respond to students’ absences and their requests for remote or recorded class materials has fueled concern at the University Senate’s Educational Policies committee over the past two months.

At the Nov. 18 meeting, committee co-chair David Wert, faculty in the School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, suggested that weather closings, added to absences for COVID or other reasons, were about to complicate the issue over the winter. “Now we enter weather into the picture. … Can (students) now request a Zoom link to class? Are (faculty) more or less required to provide this?” Can faculty voluntarily provide such links — or recorded lectures?

Another committee co-chair, history faculty member John Stoner in the Dietrich School of Arts & Sciences, suggested that deans should communicate how individual professors can or must deal with such decisions. But Senate President Robin Kear responded that faculty should be wary of too much guidance. Right now such decisions are up to the instructor, she noted, and “I would leave it up to the faculty member.”

We should encourage faculty directly, Stoner said, to “please communicate with your students. … It could be more of a friendly reminder than a mandate coming from on high.”

As for counting absences, committee members pointed out that the weather policy says, in part, that “faculty, staff and students should use their own discretion” when doing deciding if they can make it to campus or class. But the policy also says that faculty could follow their dean’s guidance.

Committee member Kevin Shaver, economics faculty in the Dietrich School, recommended that faculty should get guidelines from their deans on remote, recording and absence policy parameters but be “empowered” to make a decision within them.

The committee concluded it would seek clarifying language within the policy.

At their October meeting, committee members had discussed whether individual schools were already requiring or strongly recommending that faculty record their classes to accommodate absent students.

Wert said that, in his school, where he is an associate professor of physical therapy, his department is still recording classes. “I receive a ton of questions about the need to do that,” he said. “There are faculty who have some concerns because it is an additional requirement. It does require some additional time and effort on their part. Sometimes it doesn't make sense to record, and I still receive a lot of questions about the specifics of when is it required (and) when is it appropriate not to.”

Student representative Danielle Floyd, president of the Student Government Board, asked if there was a uniform policy “around when professors should record; what the expectations are? Or is it up to each of the different departments?”

Stoner said Educational Policies formed a subcommittee last year to look into just these questions.

“We're still hearing that colleagues are being strongly encouraged, which especially depending on whether you’re appointment-stream faculty or tenure-stream or tenured or depending on the power dynamics could be perceived as more than a strong encouragement if one's position is a little more contingent than another’s,” Stoner said.

In October, members had also discussed a section of the provost’s memo on “Religious Observances and Student Well-Being during the Academic Year” that asked faculty and students to work together to resolve classroom absences caused by non-disability-related illnesses or mental health issues.

Stoner said that the memo might be in conflict with the faculty handbook “and some of the other policies about how faculty are free to determine things like attendance policies, individually.”

The Educational Policies and Student Admissions, Aid and Affairs committees have agreed, Stoner said, to put together a joint subcommittee to talk about the provost’s statement.

He said while faculty understand the spirit of Provost Ann Cudd’s message, the committees want to “take a look at this question of student wellness, how (the message) was handled, what policies are in place and what policies might need to be changed.”

The memo said: “To the extent students experience non-disability-related illness, physical impairment, mental health concern, distress, or trauma, including distress or trauma related to current events, they should not be penalized for related absences, and modifications should be made for their continued academic progress. In turn, students should make faculty aware of their need for such modifications as soon as practical.”

Clarifying the language of older policies in general is a current task for Pitt’s academic side, reported Amanda Godley, vice provost for graduate studies. Her office is trying to update and clean up outdated and contradictory academic regulations, as is the office of Joe McCarthy, vice provost for undergraduate studies. McCarthy said that an additional motivation is that older regulations present “some structural barriers to equity.”

For one, he said, Pitt has a “kind of arbitrary 150-credit requirement for someone getting two degrees.” This has become particularly burdensome since some dual majors are now dual degrees, he said. “Those are the things we are looking to ferret out and fix,” including school-by-school rules for counting credits doubly or singly when class requirements overlap for both degrees, he added. Such rules will be either standardized or abolished, McCarthy said, to allow students to satisfy both degree requirements with fewer than 150 credits where possible.

Marty Levine is a staff writer for the University Times. Reach him at martyl@pitt.edu or 412-758-4859. Susan Jones is editor of the University Times. Reach her at suejones@pitt.edu or 724-244-4042.

 

Have a story idea or news to share? Share it with the University Times.

Follow the University Times on Twitter and Facebook.