IN THE MAIIEROF AN ARBITRATION

FANSHAWE COLLEGE

and

ONTARIO PUBLIC SERVICES EMPLOYEES UNION

GRIEVANCE OFOBRIEN

BOARD OF ARBITRATION

JANE H DEVLIN CHAIR

PETER HETZ COLLEGE NOMINEE

JON MCMANUS UNION NOMINEE

ROBERT J ATKINSON FOR THE COLLEGE

RICHARD a BLAIR FOR THE UNION

OPSEU NO 97A106

HEARING DATES JUNE 23 DECEMBER 8 1997

The grievance which was filed by KarenOBrien involves a claim

that she was improperly classified as a partialload Instructor when assigned to

teach a nursing practice course in the fall of 1996 It is the position of the Union

that the Grievor ought to have been classified as a Professor

The class definitions for Professor and Instructor are set out in the

collective agreement as follows

CLASS DEFINITION

PROFESSOR

Under the direction of the senior academic officer of the College or

designate a Professor is responsible for providing academic leadershipand for developing an effective learning environment for students This

includes

a The designrevisionupdating of courses including

consulting with program and course directors and other facultymembers advisory committees accrediting agencies potentialemployers and students

defining course objectives and evaluating and validating these

objectives

specifying or approving learning approaches necessaryresources etc

developing individualized instruction and multimedia

presentations where applicable

selecting or approving textbooks and learning materials

b The teaching of assigned courses including

ensuring student awareness of course objectives approachand evaluation techniques

carrying out regularly scheduled instruction

tutoring and academic counselling of students

providing a learning environment which makes effective use of

available resources work experience and field trips

evaluating student progressachievement and assumingresponsibility for the overall assessment of the studentswork

within assigned courses

c The provision of academic leadership including

providing guidance to Instructors relative to the Instructors

teaching assignments

participating in the work of curriculum and other consultative

committees as requested

In addition the Professor may from time to time be called upon to

contribute to other areas ancillary to the role of Professor such as student

recruitment and selection timetabling facility design professionaldevelopment student employment and control of supplies and equipment

CLASS DEFINITION

INSTRUCTOR

The Instructor classification applies to those teaching positions where the

duties and responsibilities of the incumbent are limited to that portion of the

total spectrum of academic activities related to the provision of instruction

to assigned groups of students through prepared courses of instruction and

according to prescribed instructional formats and limited to instruction

directed to the acquisition of a manipulative skill or technique and under

the direction of a Professor Notwithstanding such prescription the

instructor is responsible for and has the freedom to provide a learningenvironment which makes effective use of the resources provided or

identified work experience field trips etc and to select suitable learningmaterials from those provided or identified to facilitate the attainment bythe students of the educational objectives of the assigned courses

The Instructorsduties and responsibilities include

ensuring student awareness of course objectives instructional

approach and evaluation systems

carrying out regularly scheduled instruction according to the

format prescribed for the course including as appropriateclassroom laboratory shop field seminar computerassisted individualized learning and other instructional

techniques

tutoring and academic counselling of students in the assignedgroups

evaluating student progressachievement assumingresponsibility for the overall assessment of the students work

within the assigned course and maintaining records as

required consulting with the Professors responsible for the

courses of instruction on the effectiveness of the instruction in

attaining the stated program objectives

In addition the Instructor may from time to time be called upon to

contribute to other activities ancillary to the provision of instruction such as

procurement and control of instructional supplies and maintenance and

control of instructional equipment

The evidence indicates that two nursing programs are offered within

the Health Sciences Division of the College Of relevance to this case is the six

semester diploma nursing program the graduates of which are eligible to write an

4

examination to qualify as Registered Nurses The program consists of a

combination of theory courses which are taught in a classroom setting laboratory

courses in which students are taught practical skills such as taking blood

pressure dispensing medication and bed making and clinical courses in which

students have the opportunity to apply the skills learned in theory and laboratory

courses in a health care facility Prior to the fall of 1996 instruction in all three

components of the program was provided by Professors

Among the courses offered in the first semester of the nursing

program are Nursing 121 a nursing theory course and Nursing 179 a clinical

course in nursing practice The descriptions and learning outcomes for these

courses are set out on course information sheets as follows

NURS121 NURSING THEORY

Course Description

This course introduces the concept of wellness and basic human needsand some minor interferences Emphasis is placed on the knowledge and

skills necessary to apply the nursing process in the care of clients of all age

groups

Learning Outcomes

At completion of this course the student will be able to

I demonstrate beginning ability of client assessment and the

identification of client strengths and some problems

ii demonstrate beginning ability to plan and implement nursing care

NRSG179 NURSING PRACTICE

Course Description

In this course the student applies the knowledge gained in NRSG176 and

NURS121 in the clinical setting hospital and community agencies The

student begins to identify the health needs of clients as emphasis is placedon the assessment of needs preventative care and promotion of health

Learning Outcomes

At completion of this course the student will be able to

apply beginning nursing skills in clinical setting while giving care to clients

of all ages

The course information sheet for Nursing 179 also indicates that

for purposes of evaluation students are required to complete two data collection

assignments one nursing care plan weekly journals weekly research of clinical

assignments and one process recording

In addition to the course information sheet for Nursing 179 there is a

document entitled Guideline Objectives which contains a series of modules

setting out the objectives to be achieved during the course which extends over 12

weeks and generally involves six hours two days a week The document covers

subjects such as the nursing process patient needs communication and nursing

techniques There are also a number of appendices to the document dealing with

matters such as guidelines for journalling nursing diagnosis definitions and

nursing care plans

The evidence indicates that course information sheets are prepared

and revised by Professors assigned to teach the particular course who are

required to ensure that the curriculum is developed and updated The Guideline

Objectives document for Nursing 179 was prepared by Professors assigned to

teach the course in conjunction with the curriculum committee and the Co

ordinator of the nursing program During the relevant period theCoordinator

was Judy Weed

The Grievor KarenOBrien is a Registered Nurse who graduated

with a nursing diploma from Sheridan College in 1977 She obtained her BScN

in 1988 and herMScNin 1993 Prior to joining the faculty of Fanshawe College

in 1990 she worked in various clinical settings and taught in the nursing program

at Laurentian University for one year Subsequent to 1990 the Grievor was

classified as afulltime Professor and taught primarily in the laboratory and

clinical components of the nursing program In the spring of 1996 following the

expiry of a no layoff agreement between the parties which was in effect from

April 1 1993 to March 31 1996 the Grievor was issued a notice of layoff She

was subsequently laid off in the summer of 1996

In midAugust 1996 the Grievor was offered a position as a partial

load Instructor to teach the clinical course in either the first or fourth semester of

the nursing program She elected to teach Nursing 179 the first semester clinical

course As to the circumstances under which this offer was made it was the

evidence of Patricia Kirkby Chair of the Health Sciences Division that during the

summer of 1996 it became apparent that in view of increased enrolment

additional instruction would be required in the clinical component of the program

Ms Kirkby also testified that for a number of years consideration had been given

to assigning Instructors rather than Professors to this component and although

she suggested that this matter was the subject of extensive consultation she

acknowledged that it was not discussed with the Union In any event at some

point in the summer of 1996 a decision was made to offer the Grievor among

others a position as a partialload Instructor to teach a course in the clinical

component of the program In late August the Grievor and other Instructors

attended an orientation session which was conducted by Ms Weed At that time

the Grievor was provided with a number of documents including the Guideline

Objectives document and draft job descriptions for both Professor and Practice

Instructor The College indicated that to date these job descriptions have not

been finalized

As indicated previously the Grievor elected to teach Nursing 179 in

the fall of 1996 and the evidence indicates that she had previously taught this

course on one occasion when classified as a Professor In both instances the

course was conducted at St Marys Hospital a long term care facility At this

facility one Registered Nurse is assigned to two floors and much of the dayto

day care is provided by Registered Practical Nurses and Patient Care Partners

who assist residents with activities such as bathing dressing and eating

The Grievor testified that when she taught Nursing 179 as a

Professor there were approximately nine to ten students in the course and she

initially assigned each student to care for a resident on one of two floors of the

Hospital The Grievor was often the only Registered Nurse on these floors and

had a professional responsibility with respect to the care provided The Grievor

also reviewed and modified the assignment of students to residents on a weekly

orbiweekly basis taking into account the ability of the student and the needs of

the resident In the final weeks of the course most students were assigned to

care for two residents

When classified as a Professor the Grievor met with each student

once a week to the discuss the health care needs of the resident or residents to

whom the student was assigned the students plan to address those needs and

9

any concerns or questions raised by the student In addition the Grievor

conducted a one hour conference with all students daily The Grievor testified

that either during these conferences or in discussion with individual students she

ensured that the care provided was appropriate and for this purpose assisted

students with problemsolving and critical thinking She testified that there was

also a discussion of issues such as the relationship between theory and practical

skills the appropriateness of the care provided by staff at the Hospital the nature

of the care required by residents and the role of other health care professionals

The Grievor also testified that in the clinical course students were

given an opportunity to apply skills learned in both the theory and laboratory

courses She explained however that in carrying out procedures at the Hospital

students had to be cognizant of the response of the individual resident She also

explained that in the first semester the focus was on wellness and that emphasis

was placed on communication both with residents and staff members at the

Hospital Students were taught to recognize and negotiate residents rights

Moreover students interacted with members of other health disciplines and by

this process were socialized into the nursing profession

As to the evaluation of students the Grievor testified that when

classified as a Professor she assessed the students ability to meet the

0

requirements of the Guideline Objectives document based upon her observations

of students and the written documentation submitted by the students which

included a nursing care plan in which students were required to apply the nursing

process involving assessment planning implementation and evaluation In

addition students were required to submit a process recording and maintain a

journal outlining their interactions with residents and the appropriateness of their

response to situations which arose in the clinical setting

When classified as a Professor the Grievor testified that she

reported to the Coordinator although she did not do so on a regular basis nor

was there supervision of her work at the Hospital The Grievor however kept the

Coordinator apprised of the students progress in the clinical course and from

time to time discussed concerns with regard to particular students As a

Professor the Grievor attended Divisional meetings which were held monthly and

involved all Professors in the nursing program As well she attended level

meetings which were held either monthly orbimonthly and involved Professors

teaching in a particular year of the program Moreover in some although not in

all semesters the Grievor participated on committees such as the curriculum

committee the progress committee the development committee and the

marketing and recruitment committee When classified as a Professor the

Grievors standard workload form SWF included time for assigning students to

residents and travelling to the Hospital

The Grievor testified that when assigned to Nursing 179 in the fall of

1996 there was no difference in her teaching duties when compared with those

she had performed as a Professor In particular she testified that in the fall of

1996 she was responsible for assigning students to residents for providing

instruction and guidance to students and for ensuring that the course objectives

were met She also testified that she had essentially the same relationship with

theCoordinator as she had when classified as a Professor and that as she

recalled she spoke with Ms Weed on only one occasion in the fall of 1996 in

connection with the progress of students in the clinical course As an Instructor

however the Grievor was not required to attend Divisional or level meetings nor

did she participate in committee work She also acknowledged that apart from

updating her own materials for Nursing 179 she was not involved in the design or

revision of the course

As to the nature of the instruction provided in Nursing 179 the

Grievor testified that some of the instruction was directed to the acquisition of a

manipulative skill or technique such as taking blood pressure but that this was

not the primary focus of the course In this regard she explained that students

12

had to learn to interpret results in the context of individual residents and take into

account the human response when providing care

In contrast to the evidence of the Grievor Ms Kirkby expressed the

view that the instruction provided in Nursing 179 is limited to the acquisition of a

manipulative skill or technique as it relates to the handson application of nursing

theory Ms Kirkby also testified that the Guideline Objectives document

constitutes a prescribed instructional format although she acknowledged that the

Grievor had discretion with regard to the teaching methods utilized to achieve

those objectives According to Ms Kirkby the Grievor also provided instruction

under the direction of theCoordinator Ms Weed

As well Ms Kirkby testified that in the fall of 1996 the Grievor did

not fulfill a number of the responsibilities of a Professor In particular she was

not involved in the design revision or updating of courses nor was she involved

in the provision of academic leadership which included participating on curriculum

and other consultative committees In this regard Ms Kirkby testified that for a

number of years prior to 1997 and in the 199697 academic year in particular

virtually all Professors in the nursing program were involved in developing a

collaborative curriculum with the University of Western Ontario Nevertheless a

document introduced by the Union indicates that in the fall of 1996 there were a

number offulltime Professors in nursing and other programs who were not

involved in curriculum or other consultative committee work Moreover Ms

Kirkby did not dispute that there were sixfulltime Professors in the nursing

program who did not perform this work during the period from 1992 to 1996

Finally the Union produced a SWF for an Instructor in which time was assigned

under complimentary functions for attending Divisional and program team

meetings

It was the submission of Mr Blair on behalf of the Union that while

there is some overlap in the duties of the Professor and Instructor classifications

the collective agreement specifically limits the duties to be performed by an

Instructor In this case it was contended that the Grievor did not provide

instruction according to a prescribed instructional format as the Guideline

Objectives for Nursing 179 did not specify the pedagogical methods to be used

Moreover it was contended that the instruction provided by the Grievor extended

well beyond the acquisition of a manipulative skill or technique as it pertained to

interpretative skills and matters such as the psychosocial assessment of

residents Mr Blair further contended that the Grievor had little interaction with

the Coordinator during the fall of 1996 and clearly did not provide instruction

under her direction

4

Furthermore although the College relied on the fact that the Grievor

was not involved in curriculum development it was submitted that this accounted

for only a small percentage of the Grievors time when she was classified as a

Professor and could not be construed as a core function of the Professor

classification In the result Mr Blair submitted that the Grievor was improperly

classified as an Instructor in the fall of 1996 and asked the Board to find that she

ought to have been classified as a Professor

It was the submission of Mr Atkinson on behalf of the College that

the issue in this case is not simply whether the Grievor performed the duties of an

Instructor during the relevant period Instead consideration must be given to the

duties of both the Instructor and Professor classifications and a determination

made as to which is the best fit In this regard Mr Atkinson contended that

while there is some overlap in job duties the distinguishing features of the

Professor classification are set out in paragraphs a and c of the class

definition and relate to the design revision and updating of courses as well as the

provision of academic leadership These responsibilities it was submitted were

not carried out by the Grievor in the fall of 1996

As to the Instructor classification Mr Atkinson contended that the

class definition affords an incumbent considerable latitude with respect to the

t5

teaching methods to be used It was further contended that the Guideline

Objectives document for Nursing 179 constitutes a prescribed instructional format

and that the instruction provided by the Grievor involved handson skills training

and therefore was directed to a manipulative skill or technique as provided by

the class definition Moreover it was submitted that the nature of the Grievors

interaction with theCoordinatorwas consistent with that to be expected in a

collegial academic setting In the result Mr Atkinson contended that the Grievor

was properly classified as an Instructor in the fall of 1996 and asked that the

grievance be dismissed

In determining whether the Grievor was properly classified as an

Instructor when assigned to teach Nursing 179 in the fall of 1996 we agree with

the College that it is not sufficient to simply consider whether the Grievor was

performing the duties of an Instructor as set out in the class definition Instead

consideration must be given to the definitions for both the Instructor and

Professor classifications and a determination made as to which is the better fit

In the Boards view this approach is consistent with that adopted in Lambton

College of Applied Arts and Technology and Ontario Public Service Employees

Union June 24 1981 Palmer unreported and Ontario Public Service

Employees Union and George Brown College May 12 1993 Mitchnick

unreported

As both counsel acknowledged there is some overlap in job duties

between the Instructor and Professor classifications There are however certain

distinguishing features and in the Boards view in determining which of the two

classifications is the better fit consideration must be given to the language of the

class definitions In this regard the Board notes that the class definition for

Instructor explicitly restricts the duties that may be assigned to an incumbent of

that classification In particular the definition provides that the duties and

responsibilities of an Instructor are limited to the provision of instruction through

prepared courses of instruction and according to prescribed instructional formats

Moreover instruction is limited to that directed to the acquisition of a manipulative

skill or technique and is to be provided under the direction of a Professor

Notwithstanding these requirements however an Instructor is free to provide a

learning environment which makes effective use of resources and select suitable

learning materials from among those provided or identified to facilitate students

attainment of course objectives The nature of the duties and responsibilities to

be carried out by an Instructor are then delineated and the definition concludes by

providing that an Instructor may be called upon to contribute to other activities

such as the procurement and control of instructional supplies and equipment

As to the nature of the duties performed by the Grievor in the fall of

1996 as indicated previously the Grievor taught Nursing 179 the clinical course

l

in the first semester of the nursing program The applicable course information

sheet provides that in this course students apply the knowledge gained in the

theory and laboratory components of the program in a clinical setting In addition

to the course information sheet there is a Guideline Objectives document

containing a series of modules specifying the objectives to be achieved by

students during the course Although these objectives are set out in some detail

in the Boards view the document cannot be characterized as a prescribed

instructional format within the meaning of the Instructor class definition While

the Board recognizes that this definition affords an incumbent some latitude in

providing a suitable learning environment the document nevertheless details the

objectives to be achieved rather than outlining the instruction to be provided

This is perhaps not altogether surprising given that the course necessarily

focuses on issues which arise in relation of the health of individual residents

Moreover even if the Guideline Objectives document could be

characterized as a prescribed instructional format we are of the view that the

Grievor duties were not limited to instruction directed to the acquisition of a

manipulative skill or technique In this regard the Board notes that this aspect of

the Instructor class definition was previously considered in St Lawrence College

of Applied Arts and Technology and Ontario Public Service Employees Union

March 25 1981 Weatherill unreported That award involved a course which

was remarkably similar to the course taught by the Grievor in this case except

that the St Lawrence College award concerned a clinical course in the health

care aide program rather than the diploma nursing program Moreover although

the Board in St Lawrence College award did not adopt a better fit analysis and

considered only the class definition of Instructor the comments of the majority of

the Board are nevertheless relevant to the interpretation of that definition In this

regard the majority determined that in supervising students in the clinical course

the Grievors work was not limited to instruction directed to the acquisition of a

manipulative skill or technique On this issue the Board commented as follows

we have taken an overall view of the grievors work in the supervisionof the clinical work of students in the Health Care Aide program that workbeing of the essence of the grievorsteaching activities With respect toeach day at which students are in attendance at a nursing home or homefor the aged the grievor chooses the patients with whom each student is towork matching as far as possible the condition and needs of the patientwith the instructional and practice requirements of the student There is a

preconference of an hoursduration at which nursing care plans are set

up by the students and reviewed with them by the Grievor The studentsthen go about the nursing care tasks that are involved During the course

of the twelveweek clinical program the curriculum is followed and manyguideline requirements are dealt with Throughout this time the Grievormay be the only Registered Nurseapart from a Head Nurse on the floorof the institution and necessarily bears professional responsibility for thecare given to residents At the end of the day there is apostconferencewhere the days activities are analysed and discussed

Certainly many of the tasks learned by the Health care Aide studentsinvolve manipulative skills While there is as with any skill a cognitiveelement involved it remains for example that changing a bedpan is a

manipulative skill despite the view of the Teaching Master to the contraryA great many of the particular skills which the students must learn and

practice are quite properly described as manipulative notwithstanding that

they are to be performed with care and sensitivity to individual needs Thislatter aspect of the work however serves to highlight the distinction we

see between the grievors work and that of an instructor whose work islimited to the acquisition of a manipulative skill or technique Thegrievors work is not so limited but is surely fundamentally directed tothe teaching of attitudes planning abilities the activation of patients andthe performance of nursing care tasks for which the manipulative skillsrequired are a necessary but not sufficient foundation

Although the College submitted that the majority of the Board in the

St Lawrence College award incorrectly interpreted the term manipulative skill or

technique and contended that we ought to decline to follow that award we note

that the St Lawrence College award concerned precisely the same language in

issue in this case which was interpreted in the context of circumstances

substantially similar to the circumstances of this case Accordingly we are of the

view that it would be inappropriate to depart from the reasoning in the St

Lawrence College award unless we were convinced that the award was clearly

wrong This is particularly so when the prior award was rendered many years

ago and the language of the class definition remains unchanged In fact to come

to any other conclusion would simply encourage the parties torearbitrate issues

which would appear to have been settled for some time in the hope that a

differently constituted board may adopt a different interpretation

20

In this case the Board is not convinced that the interpretation of a

manipulative skill or technique adopted by the majority of the Board in the St

Lawrence College award was clearly wrong We also note that as in the St

Lawrence College award when teaching Nursing 179 the Grievor was

responsible for assigning students to residents conducting conferences with

students and reviewing nursing care plans As well she was often the only

Registered Nurse on the floors of the Hospital to which students were assigned

and was professionally responsible for the care provided Moreover although

some of the instruction was clearly directed to the acquisition of manipulative

skills such as taking blood pressure and transferring residents instruction was

not limited to such skills but extended to matters such as the psychosocial

assessment of patients planning communication both verbal and nonverbal as

well as a variety of issues requiring students to take into account the response of

individual residents when carrying out nursing tasks

Furthermore although the Instructor class definition specifies that

instruction is to be provided under the direction of a Professor the evidence

indicates that there was little contact between the Grievor and Ms Weed In fact

as the Grievor recalled she spoke with Ms Weed on only one occasion

regarding the progress of students in the clinical course In the result it is

apparent that in a number of significant respects the Grievor did not fit within the

Instructor classification when assigned to teach Nursing 179 in the fall of 1996

As to the classification of Professor the introductory paragraph of

the class definition indicates that a Professor is responsible for providing

academic leadership and for developing an effective learning environment for

students Ms Kirkby testified that the Grievor carried out the latter but not the

former responsibility in the fall of 1996 As to paragraph a of the definition the

evidence indicates that the Grievor was not involved in the design revision or

updating of courses In particular and among other matters she did not engage

in consultation nor was she involved in defining evaluating or validating course

objectives specifying or approving learning approaches or selecting learning

materials

As to the teaching duties set out in paragraph b of the class

definition Ms Kirkby acknowledged that the Grievor carried out all of these

duties in the fall of 1996 Moreover although the College maintained that there is

significant similarity between these duties and the corresponding duties and

responsibilities set out in the Instructor class definition the latter definition

contains limitations not applicable to the Professor classification In this regard

regularly scheduled instruction provided by an Instructor is to be carried out

22

according to the format prescribed for the course The Instructor definition also

contemplates consultation with the Professor responsible for the course regarding

the effectiveness of the instruction in attaining course objectives

Paragraph c of the Professor class definition specifies that an

incumbent is responsible for the provision of academic leadership which includes

providing guidance to Instructors and participating in the work of curriculum and

other consultative committees There would appear to be no dispute that

providing guidance to Instructors was not a responsibility carried out by

Professors in the nursing program prior to the fall of 1996 as all instruction was

provided by Professors As to committee work the evidence indicates that there

were a number of Professors including some in the nursing program who did not

perform this work in the fall of 1996 The GrievorsSWFswhen classified as

Professor also indicate that in some semesters she was not involved in

committee work although she did attend Divisional and level meetings

Nevertheless the Union introduced a SWF for an Instructor which included time

for attending Divisional and program team meetings Accordingly it does not

appear that attendance at these latter meetings can be regarded as a

distinguishing feature of the Professor classification

In the result while it is apparent that the duties performed by the

Grievor in the fall of 1996 do not fit squarely within either the Instructor or

Professor classification based on the analysis set out above we find that the

Professor classification is the better fit Although the Grievor was not involved in

designing revising or updating courses she carried out the teaching duties of

that classification Moreover although she did not participate in committee work

this responsibility is not carried out by all Professors in each semester

Furthermore the instruction provided by the Grievor was not subject to the

explicit limitations set out in the Instructor class definition

The grievance is therefore allowed and the Board finds that in the fall of

1996 the Grievor was improperly classified as an Instructor and ought to

have been classified as a Professor Accordingly she is entitled to compensation

and the Board shall remain seised for purposes of implementation of this award and to

24

deal with remedial issues which cannot be resolved by the parties

DATED AT TORONTO this 3rd day of April 1998

Chair

See Addendum Attached Peter Hetz

College Nominee

Jon McManus

Union Nominee

ADDENDUM

Re Fanshawe College OPSEUGrievance RLOBrian

Although Iam in agreement with the outcome of the award in this case I do

not agree with all ofthe reasoning employed to reach that outcome

Firstly the evidence is clear that the hallmark of the Professor is that heshe

can be and is assigned the various duties outlined in the class definition It is not

surprising that not every Professor is assigned curriculum committee or other

committee work in each and every semester This does not take away from the fact

that Professors arc assigned this work not Instructors In the fall of 1996 the

Grievor was not assigned this work The fact that not aH Professors were assigned

committee work in the fall of 1996 does not necessarily support the conclusion that

the Grievor should be classified as a Professor

Secondly the phrase under the direction of appears in both class

definitions As the Board points out the Grievor testified that she has essentially the

same relationslfip with fle Coordinator of the Nursing Program when she was

classified as a Professor and as an hzstructor Mymdetanding ofthe evidence was

that there was very little interaction in both situations This is not surprising given

the acadenfic enviromnent of a community college where teachers whether the are

Professors or Instructors are employed to instruct students and are given the

freedom to do so Direction and guidance is given to incumbents of either

classification if and when it is necessaLw to do so The fact that little direction or

guidance was given to the Gvor as an Instructor in the fall of 1996 does not

necessarily mean that she should be classified as a Professor