[phas-faculty_staff_others] Fwd: Summer Model Question

[Carlos Bertulani]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Stephen Starnes <Stephen.Starnes at tamuc.edu>
Subject: Re: Summer Model Question
Date: March 4, 2025 at 4:37:48 PM CST
To: Carlos Bertulani <Carlos.Bertulani at tamuc.edu>

Carlos,

I did send it to Kurtis and Heungman already. I did this as part of my initiative to try and get administration to provide some incentive for faculty to mentor REU students in the summer. The REU grants allow summer salary for the PI and Co-PI, but not for other faculty mentoring REU students. As PI on the Chem REU grant, I find it troubling to ask other faculty to mentor REU students for free. This is perhaps why most REU grants are only given to Ph.D. generating departments whose faculty have doctoral and post-doctoral students in lab who can help mentor the REU students.

Heungman and I will meet with Kurtis hopefully next week when he returns.

On a more broad scale, I think all faculty mentoring students in research over summer should have some compensation, especially if those students are enrolled in tuition generating courses, such as 518.

Stephen




On 3/4/25, 4:31 PM, "Carlos Bertulani" <Carlos.Bertulani at tamuc.edu <mailto:Carlos.Bertulani at tamuc.edu>> wrote:


HI Stephen,


Thanks for the message. May I ask you if I can forward your message to my department? More about this later.


Carlos






On Mar 4, 2025, at 4:27 PM, Stephen Starnes <Stephen.Starnes at tamuc.edu <mailto:Stephen.Starnes at tamuc.edu>> wrote:

Hi Carlos,
As one example where the summer business model could be improved, see the attached.
I am strongly of the opinion that faculty should receive some compensation for mentoring students in research over the summer. In Chemistry, for example, we have an undergrad research course (Chem 418) and of course at the graduate level Chem 518 thesis. All of these classes generate tuition for the University, but the faculty (or departments) don’t see any of that money, it just disappears into the University’s coffers. Other courses that generate tuition which do require time and effort from faculty are 595s, maybe 489 and 589 courses (even though they are independent study courses, they do require some faculty time/effort and they do generate tuition dollars).
The attached shows how much tuition dollars Chemistry, Physics and Biology generated through these non-load classes summer 2024 (which faculty get no compensation for, even though they can require much more work than a traditional teaching course – it is MUCH more time intensive for me to train new students to work in a research lab that it is for me to teach a course that I have taught 50 times. I think my numbers are correct. Chem: $5414, Physics: $12,185, Biology: $3323. If formula funding was included, then the University receives even more funding for these courses being taught.
Dr. Cheriyath and I both think that the new model should compensate faculty for their efforts in research that is tied to courses for which students pay tuition.
Compensating faculty for their efforts directing students in research in summer would be a tremendous morale boost! And might spur even more summer research activity on campus. In my humble opinion, this benefits both faculty and students.
That’s just one example where I think the model could be improved. Whether administration will agree, I do not know. But pushing this is one of my main emphases on the committee.
Stephen
<Sciences and Math summer tuition on non-load courses.pdf>






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.tamuc.edu/pipermail/phas-faculty_staff_others/attachments/20250305/f1c1e3ab/attachment.htm>