Final Approved 10-16-08
Meet and Confer
October 2, 2008
Admin: Michael Spitzer, Earl Potter, Mitch Rubinstein, Steve Ludwig, Diana Lawson, Dennis Nunes, and Judith Siminoe
Faculty: John Palmer, Judy Kilborn, Michael Connaughton, Michael Tripp, Robert Johnson, JoAnn Gasparino, Frances Kayona, Bill Hudson, Debra Leigh, Mark Jaede, David Warne, Balsy Kasi, Polly Chappell – Note taker
New Business
4. Summer School Allocations
FA: What I would like to do is deal with the New Business items to be sure they are taken care of. It’s my understanding from our last Meet and Confer that the Summer School Allocation document would get shared when it was available and that the information would go out to the colleges so they could begin a process of planning summer school. My folks have seen the allocation document and we did not see any deviation from past practice. So, Dennis, I assume that’s one of the reasons you’re here today.
Admin: Essentially. You’ve received the document for summer 2008 as we’ve analyzed and compiled the data. And the allocation for 2009 summer, the processes remain the same, and they have for quite some time. I have indicated to the summer session administrators in the colleges the amount that I consider tentative until we’ve had a chance to talk about it here at Meet and Confer. But I wanted them to have that so they could begin that discussion as quickly as possible to produce a schedule for next summer. That’s it. As far as I’m concerned, I think I sent several copies to distribute. I provided those to the Administrative Meet and Confer team and that’s where it is. And I’m talking to the deans and asking them to begin discussions. Following this meeting, I would make that the final amount as opposed to a tentative amount so they’re certain what they have in hand. By the way, just as a side, this summer we were up approximately 2-1/2 percent. The system as a whole was down. We were up today, I think, 26 FYE over summer the year before. It’s important to us: those 300 FYEs we have over Mankato and the rest of the summer sessions in our system is relatively undeveloped.
Admin: Two questions. The first one has to do with the allocation. Is there any feedback you’ve had with regard to those allocations for this coming summer?
FA: We have a mature system of determining funding and people are not surprised that their behaviors drive the outcome each year. So, they’re not surprised when they’ve had low enrollment classes and they suffer a low enrollment penalty. I think the colleges have begun actively to put together what will be a good summer schedule.
Admin: That’s what I understand. We’ve met with each of the Associate Deans, who often take the leads in those discussions. And they are anxious to improve on the offerings of last summer.
FA: So, that one is taken care for another year.
Approval of Minutes
1. August 21, 2008 and September 4, 2008
Admin: Just a second. Can we go back to approving the minutes?
FA: Oh. We do have minutes that have been reviewed by both sides for August 21st and September 4th. The important part of the September 4th notes is that there is a charge to a task force included in those minutes. With the approval of the minutes, what we will do is share that language with FA members and solicit volunteers to participate on that shared task force. So, I would expect that at the next Meet and Confer we’ll come back with the three names from our side.
Admin: Which one?
FA: Policy on Religious Observances.
Admin: Okay. I know we talked about a task force when I read through the notes. I didn’t get the impression that we came to that conclusion.
FA: Oh?
Admin: Actually we talked about a task force as one possibility. We talked about looking at a draft document prepared by Administration, but I didn’t think we came to that determination. But I guess it could be done.
FA: Can we check the record?
FA: Did you bring a copy with? I didn’t.
Admin: I didn’t.
FA: Pending review of the minutes. When I read it that fit with what I recalled. There was a narrow charge. It was preliminary I think. If I remember the President’s words were “part of the scope would come next.”
Admin: Yes. There was that discussion.
Admin: What we need to do is find a way forward we like. There’s some confusion about what that is. With the issue, we don’t want to revisit a lot of complicated issues that have been discussed in the past. The primary issue is that there is not policy, which caused some difficulty last year. One was an incident that highlighted a professor’s refusal to let Muslim students leave class for five minutes to pray. The other became apparent when some folks observed that we were making email announcements about certain religious holidays and asking folks to be flexible about students who needed to be absent from class so that they could participate. But we didn’t comment on all observances, so it was seeking balance in how we communicate with the community about religious observances. So, those were two issues related to class absences and communications around the observances of different faith communities. It’s not the Christmas tree in Atwood kind of conversation, but specifically those things. The conversation could start with a proposed document that we write. I’m for the shortest path to closure, but also we need to take the most likely path which may not be the shortest path. Personally, I’m really open to what we do.
FA: Could we not proceed parallel, that is there would be preparation of a document to be reviewed by a small group?
Admin: Yes.
FA: My understanding, the small group we defined, was no more than six.
Admin: Yes. That sounds like a good idea.
FA: We’re approving the minutes?
FA: Are we also agreeing to that median stance where the Administration would bring a document for a group of six who would then begin the process of vetting that document?
FA: I believe that’s what’s happening. It’s going to take us two weeks for us to end up with names. What I hope would occur was when the group came together there would be a document they could look at.
FA: I want to note that the President and Provost are both shaking their heads yes. (Laughing) I want it clear in the minutes that we agreed to something. Thank you.
FA: Thank you. Is Dennis here for a short time or a long-timer?
Admin: He’s serving a long sentence.
Admin: For the duration.
Admin: He has a couple items here and he’s also representing someone who could not make it.
FA: Okay. I’d like to dispose of the new business items.
New Business
1. Request for participation in Searches:
Assistant Director of First Year and Transition Programs
FA: You’ve asked us for participation for a MSUAASF position. You’re asking us for two people on a committee that would have a total of five if my memory is right.
Admin: I believe so.
FA: We will go forward with finding two people to participate on that committee.
FA: Many faculty won’t know what this position is. I believe this is a position of an Assistant Director and Transition Programs. This is the one we had reevaluated by MnSCU for a higher rating?
Admin: Yes.
FA: Could we get a paragraph or a few sentences that clarifies that. People would be more willing to participate if they know what they’re looking for.
Admin: I’ll provide that to you.
FA: Thank you.
2. Change in Department’s Rosters
FA: You asked to announce the change of roster that’s going to be published.
Admin: Correct.
FA: There was a question in our group as to whether a name had to be associated with that.
Admin: We have done that in the past and we’ve had a couple of occasions where people have objected to having their names named in that context. But it’s a change of a departmental roster; a faculty member from one department to another in the COE.
Admin: Did we answer the question of whether we’re publishing a name or not for the roster change?
Admin: I thought I answered it by not mentioning the name.
Admin: Is that okay?
FA: I know the name. In my agenda for our group, I listed the two departments. That it’s a change in the rosters in HPERSS and HURL.
Admin: That’s all the information we’re required to share.
FA: When these minutes come out it will be a public document. Our purpose here is to give notice that we’ve been informed of that change.
FA: Thank you.
3. Clarification of Student Absence Policy (FA) (10/02/08)
FA: This comes out of the most recent faculty handbook. It deals with absences. I’ll give you a minute to read through it. For any absence that is approved by the Provost’s office, faculty are required to allow them to make up any and all work. Our question is at this point I don’t think this is being followed. Actually the Provost pointed this out about a year ago. This is obviously felt in Athletics, Drama, and any thing that is an official university sponsored event. Our question is: are we going to follow this? I can tell you from an athletic perspective that 99% of the faculty out there will allow student athletes to make up work; it’s that remaining 1% that is very troublesome to work with. If this policy were actually in effect, I think it would help out a lot of student athletes and other students on campus as well.
Admin: In putting together that handbook we didn’t invent this policy. It was an established policy that we collected from other policies in place.
FA: How does the faculty member secure the approval of the Provost for an event?
Admin: You mean when I’m not hiding? (Laughing)
FA: I don’t know. As a faculty member who has had a number of athletes, it’s easy to look at an athletic schedule and realize when sporting events are happening. It’s not easy to know if there are practice schedules that may result in an absence. I do know that there are other events that you would think would be university approved. What’s the difference between a Provost-approved event where the absence is authorized or an event where it isn’t approved and the absence would be covered by the policy on the faculty’s course syllabus?
Admin: My understanding, with regard to athletics particularly, is that the coaches prepare material for the students.
FA: Correct.
Admin: And the students brought that material with the coach’s signature on it to the faculty member and requested that accommodation. In the six-plus years I’ve been the Provost no one has ever come to me and asked me to authorize an event as an official university event under this policy.
FA: Let me give you a couple what ifs. What if a student comes to me and says I can’t be in your class such and such a day because I have a field trip down to Minneapolis for X. Is that a Provost-approved absence? I could tell you that in one semester I had students from football, from theatre who were making a trip for some sort of competition, which I just happened to know about but I might not have, players. Faculty, particularly new ones, may not know what needs to be excused or not, and faculty at Senate have indicated concern about whose class takes precedence if you have a field trip. Do you just say: “fine, go away on your field trip, forget about my class”?
Admin: That last example is an area that is cloudier than some of the other instances that you cited. I would suggest that we have a group of people get together to come up with some guidelines in regard to this topic.
FA: I’d like to point out that you are correct. Student athletes take a letter to their professors at the beginning of every semester indicating what dates they’ll be gone. Student athletes are not supposed to be missing classes for practice. Like I said 99% of the faculty out there honor that request, but there are every year faculty that will flat out not allow them to make it up, or count it as an absence and dock them a day, or count that absence as not excused.
FA: Can we refer this to the Academic Policy Working Group?
Admin: We could.
Admin: No. You have two questions. One, you have an established policy that some faculty are not following. That policy needs to be enforced.
Admin: We need to get information about faculty members who are not cooperating in order for the policy to be enforced.
FA: Up until now it’s been my job to try and work out some agreeable solution in those instances and sometimes I’m successful and sometimes I’m not.
Admin: That sounds like a conversation between you and the Provost about difficulties enforcing this policy with a small number of faculty, which would involve department chairs in the discussion communicating with the faculty member about an expectation that their behavior needs to change to be consistent with the policy.
FA: Some of this may be clarification of normal processes. When I say clarification, for example faculty and coaches responsible for approved university activity will write a schedule of events and the names of students involved in advance. Who do they give this to? That may sound like an odd question, but Bill can verify that I had an athlete come to me and say I can’t come to class on Friday, and I’m thinking baseball? Hello? So I coordinated with him and he played his part and said, “yes, the student doesn’t have an excuse for baseball.” But, I think if faculty know from reading this that they should get it in writing from the coaches, it would be helpful to people.
FA: According to this policy for those to be excused absences they need to be approved by the Provost’s office.
Admin: With respect to the other questions, which you were asking about, what might the other activities be? I know we have some conflicts among the faculty about how that issue is managed. And that wouldn’t be appropriate for discussion.
Admin: That’s what I was getting at with things like field trips and other issues.
FA: If the faculty and coaches responsible for the activities instruct the students, provide a letter and materials and instruct the students to distribute that among their professors, that satisfies this requirement.
FA: I would agree there is a need for some sort of conversation. For almost 15 years I’ve coached the speech team. Our season runs from October to May, and even when I went semester by semester and provided this information, there were faculty—more than one percent—that said that is not a university sponsored activity. It gets paid for by student government so it’s a club sport and I’m not letting people go. But it is a co-curricular in my department. So there is a gray area and it directly impacts players and theatre and some of those areas where their funding is primarily from student government sources. So does that exclude them from being recognized in this way? I do think we need to make some clarification on what goes where. Maybe it’s departmentally sponsored activities… I don’t know the answer, but I do know that in the course of doing my duties I’ve encountered this when there was not a clear definition of which activities met this standard.
FA: Robert’s point is a good one. The students are responsible for providing the letters to the professors. And they do. I think what it boils down to is the sentence that says: “All university scheduled events that are approved by the Provost’s office…” I think it starts with that approval and then it becomes official.
FA: Not being one that likes to create committees just to create committees, it seems to me that there are some questions here. The President spoke accurately, we have a policy and we ought to enforce the policy that we have. Some of the areas there is some ambiguity about whether it’s a university event or not. In a sense we’re talking about academic matters. We do have joint committees. We have a committee in the FA on Academic Affairs. This often turns into faculty and faculty conflict that my class is more important than your class. So, perhaps we ought to ask our Academic Affairs Committee to grapple with this and the Academic Policy Working Group to be prepared to discuss it.
Admin: To what Bill was saying, if we put a group together to discuss the university schedule of events approved by the Provost’s office, the deans are designees of the Provost in making some decisions when it comes to curriculum. So, where does that approval for things like different kinds of competitions in terms of the deans approving these activities for students within their programs?
FA: In my opinion it starts in the Provost’s office. You might be able to approve it for students taking classes, but what if they’re in a different college? It gets trickier.
FA: It seems to me we have a lot of questions. I floated a way of addressing these questions.
FA: I’m wondering if the Administration would be willing to have that approved by the Provost’s office considered by the leadership team in terms of what might be the most reasonable as part of the policy.
FA: My sense is that the issues in question have been articulated here. The detailed work that would be wordsmithing could be handled through a couple committees. I trust your leadership team has a way to get to the Academic Affairs Policy Working Group with their ideas.
Admin: I would hope so. We need to know who is on that first.
FA: Yes, we do.
FA: How large is the problem? What’s the nature of the problem? Are we over prescribing the situation? Are we creating policy for a matter that is not of great magnitude? I don’t know the answer to those questions. Most of the faculty are complying fine with policy for competitions then that’s not a real serious problem. If there are other areas where this is unsettled, we should address it without the level of power and deliberations. Sometimes we have a great response for a small problem or a problem that is for a small number of people. It could be handled in a much easier fashion.
FA: I think we have the ability here to make a few minor changes in an established policy that can help answer questions and perhaps prevent interfaculty conflict. I also think there might be a growing need for this as we look at globalization. Because one of the things that hasn’t come up, what about short trips in spring term, for example to South Africa? Is that a Provost-approved event? What about activities that might occur as part of our developing community service where people might be going for a day to do community service attached to a particular class? So, I think this is going to be a bigger question rather than a smaller one if we move in the directions we talked about.
FA: I’d like to point out that Robert is correct as far as Athletics goes. It is a fairly small number of student athletes; however for that young man or woman who is affected it is of great magnitude. As in the past, I can’t resolve every one of them such as a lower grade being given for the course. It’s a small number but a big deal for that person affected.
Admin: We’ve already said that the policy should be enforced. The Provost will enforce the policy. You need to talk to the Provost about those incidents so that we have the knowledge we need to act on. That’s a separate matter from… I smile because you’re carefully trying to shift the responsibility for resolving this conflict of faculty and faculty to have the Administration create some kind of framework that removes from the faculty the need to discuss. That’s what it’s about. As you say, the trips, the service projects, the field trips, the research trips…
FA: I’m smiling too because I can give you two specific examples that happened today. In my department they have water festivals so some of the students wanted to go help the elementary school kids to learn about water. They were missing my class so basically I asked to get from the faculty, send me a note and we can work it out. Today one student said in the middle of my class he had to meet this Accounting professor because the only time he is available is now. I said, “is he more important than me? Can you give the name? I can call him right now.” But he was afraid. He didn’t want his grade to be affected. So I said okay. I didn’t want to put his name on it, but if you tell me the instructor I can talk to him. I don’t have a problem. He still didn’t want to do it. It’s not right. Faculty cannot find a time to meet. I go back to Robert’s point of should I call the dean to say that faculty shouldn’t do this?
FA: I wouldn’t frame this as a faculty versus faculty issue. The question is of a couple things: one, the opportunities need to be reimaged and restructured in the university in the way we approach the world. We have to be working and thinking in different ways in these changing conditions. How do we address meeting student needs in the academic structures that we have? That would avoid the “My class is more important than your class” or this activity supersedes this or whatever. But if you look in the sense of the whole student and the entire university experience and the opportunities afforded to students. That approach would be possible for progress in this discussion, because nobody’s class is more important.
Admin: That is a very wise the glass is half full formulation of the work of the group.
FA: The question is: which is the appropriate group? We do have an Academic Affairs Committee. There is an Academic Affairs Policy Working Group soon to have four Faculty Association members on it. It strikes me that that’s a good place for this discussion to occur.
FA: In which?
FA: Both.
FA: Who starts?
Admin: The way we have that policy written and worded is we discuss issues of concern to the university community. We then draft some language. Typically we’ve taken that to the Academic Affairs Council, and out of that comes a proposal from the Council of the Provost. It then goes to the Academic Affairs Committee of the Faculty Association. It might be a good idea to take it here.
FA: I just hope that the question is framed in such a way that it really speaks to service students in a way that maximizes their experience.
FA: If you reconsider the idea of faculty and faculty conflict, it may be about… You could reframe that or rethink that in terms of which is the class the student... You know the student needs for meeting their responsibilities. That puts the student in an awkward position. So, we could rethink it that way if we don’t want to be talking about faculty and faculty conflict.
FA: The Provost acknowledged that Mitch’s idea of the starting point was a good idea. Bill brought this to our attention. And I believe, Bill, you had a definitive answer to narrow part of your question, which is if we got a policy it’s going to be enforced.
FA: So when it comes to Athletics, am I to assume that your office is officially approving those absences?
Admin: Yes.
FA: Thank you.
Unfinished Business
1. Email as Official Communication, Redux (ADM) (03/13/08)
Admin: We have a new draft document. We’ve made some changes to it. It’s not our intent to discuss the document today, but rather give you an opportunity to look it over, study it, have consultation about it, and then come back and discuss it at the next Meet and Confer.
FA: Thank you.
2. Overhead on Grants (FA) (02/28/08)
FA: Do we have a report? I believe Steve was going to be meeting with Dennis and having a conversation about this?
Admin: Yes. We talked to Diana also. The general issue of the overhead rate of the grants is constrained to a certain extent by regulations around charging differentially, different things that are grants. So, we’re obliged to charge the same rate for various grants. The other issue of going back and reviewing the overall rate for grants is kind of waning. I’m a little concerned about Dennis’s activity as we’re moving through the Sponsored Programs. You’re continuing appointments from acting to interim. So, I guess when Dennis is ready if he would like to engage in that conversation. If it’s not a problem here, I’d like to engage the conversation when the final person is on the ground so we can review the overall programs.
FA: There are obligations that a certain rate…?
Admin: A common rate.
FA: Where does that rate…?
Admin: We talked about this. They have a rate that we’re supposed to represent to outside entities in particular I believe is what the federal concern is. We’re not supposed to show favoritism to some grants.
FA: As I understand it, it is possible to negotiate direct costs with various agencies and funding sources.
Admin: Right.
FA: Funding sources have policies where they may or may not… all their private funders. All their money goes directly...
Admin: I’m not the grants person. I understand this is true. There are some granting agencies that refuse to pay some cost. And there is also the indirect cost calculation, which is a little bit different. It is somewhat more inclusive of the overhead cost calculation. Maybe I should give this over to Dennis.
Admin: You’re right Robert some agencies define indirect and we then at this institution need to make a determination if in fact we can accept that grant with their constraint. Not all will accept the amount that we have determined is appropriate to our direct costs. And there can be negotiations. And in some cases, I understand, not in my period of time here but some grants have not been accepted on the basis of cost.
FA: My point is that even federal agencies negotiate indirect costs with institutions.
Admin: Yes.
FA: They may allow more or less indirect cost with those grants. Now is that still…?
Admin: As I understand we had to, it was before my time, but we had to engage in a study of indirect costs and in fact following federal guidelines and how that study was conducted, and 33% is a function of the outcome of that study. I don’t know if it was three years ago, or four…
CAUCUS
Admin: We’d like to take one more opportunity to come back with precise and clear responses to you about indirect costs. So, if we could delay it once more, we would appreciate it.
Admin: I would appreciate that we have all your questions as clearly stated as possible so we can answer those particular questions when asked.
FA: I’m seeing Robert nod his head.
FA: We can, formally.
Admin: That’d be helpful.
3. Sponsored Programs (FA) (04/03/08)
FA: At the last Meet and Confer there was an agreement to have a meeting where the Provost, the Dean of Undergraduate Studies, and I were going to meet to discuss the issues surrounding this. That meeting was scheduled yesterday for next Wednesday. Our group talked about it, and asked me if it would be possible to bring two other people to the meeting: Robert and Frances, who bring perspectives from a couple other places.
Admin: Of course.
Admin: I don’t have any problem with that.
FA: My memory was that the meeting is 11:00, Wednesday of next week.
Admin: I believe you’re correct, John.
4. Policy on Religious Observances (ADM) (04/03/08)
FA: We took care of this item in the discussion of the minutes [above].
5. Status of 1.B.1. Task Force (FA) (05/01/08)
FA: Early on, I think at the first Meet and Confer, you made a request that the task force not be disbanded. You said that there was still work that the task force needed to have given to it with questions. Subsequent to that, it’s come to our attention that there are some other issues, perhaps that the task force could provide guidance and direction on. We’re wondering when that task force might be called back together.
Admin: We have a timing issue now that Susan Moss will be on a two week leave and she is not here now, and we need her at the table to conclude our work. So, I would say not before the first of November.
FA: And should we then formulate some background on the questions and issues we see?
Admin: Yes.
FA: Thank you.
6. Vehicle Use Authorization (FA) (08/21/08)
FA: This will be on statewide Meet and Confer tomorrow. Judith, I appreciate you got back to me when I sent you the example of a problem that was occurring on another campus with regard to data privacy of student records concerning whether or not they could drive a car, a state vehicle or on state business. You assured me that on this campus the information about student’s abilities to drive automobiles is being held in the way that is appropriate.
Admin: Restricted.
FA: Restricted. We continue to have concerns over exactly what the policy is. That’s why it’s at statewide Meet and Confer to determine if a memo written by Keswick Joiner is in fact the new policy. There’s a public policy that came from DOFER—it used to be the Department of Employee Relations and they added Finance.
Admin: So, DOER became DOFER?
FA: DOER became DOFER.
Admin: The material that I saw from Mr. Joiner who is in Risk Management in the Office of the Chancellor is based on some long discussions between the office of Risk Management, which is in the Department of Administration for the state and with DOER, then DOFER, regarding employees. There’s been a long negotiation because the universities are different than typical state agencies with students driving and with characteristics that are different. So, this is our expectation. It is, I believe, subject to your Meet and Confer process, so whether it is cast in stone or something I think they will be very rigid on. Some will just need explanation. And some perhaps will be changed. I don’t know. But that policy is the expectation. And some have been contingent on insurance carriers and what they do to give us no latitude. That doesn’t affect faculty, it could theoretically affect staff, and those under 21 or drivers from out of state. That was in place July 1 as a result of lack of insurance. So, it isn’t all within the purview as to what to change. What I saw most recently from Mr. Joiner is the expected policy.
FA: The turning point at this point relative to the student, implementing the policy with students is the operational definition of state business or in this case university business. And he has provided an interpretation of what that is. What we have not been told is that in fact the position of the Office of the Chancellor and the Trustees. That takes a very narrow definition of what university business would be. The concern we have long term is as this migrates into our bargaining, and then there are some specific things that are in the actual agreement that people are supposed to sign that are troublesome. And you can’t do anything about this as far as we know. This is happening between the state Risk Management Office and the Chancellor’s Risk Management office.
Admin: I believe the things you’ve said are correct, John. But I don’t know for certain what your concerns may be.
FA: What does DOFER stand for?
FA: Department of Finance and Employee Relations.
7. FA: Representation on Academic Affairs Working Group (ADM) (08/21/08)
FA: I was told on Tuesday of last week that our Academic Affairs Committee met Wednesday of last week and was going to come back to us with names. So, I will provide Mitch names on Tuesday evening following Senate.
8. Guest Parking (FA) (08/21/08)
Admin: I have some materials to distribute. I happened to visit Faculty Senate regarding some discussion on the budget processes and I arrived in the discussion about parking and I offered that this would be coming forward. This is a statement of the background and previous practice and some recent developments, and then some proposed resolution to parking issues around parking we have on campus. We’ve made some changes to accommodate this fall as we discussed previously. I am interested in your comments on these. I will be sharing with other bargaining units and with the students and of course with directors of various units and how it might influence them. So, I’m hoping that we can get to resolution and have a parking program that we’re consistent on for awhile, that works well.
FA: Thank you.
Admin: Sure.
FA: We will be back to you I hope by next Meet and Confer with some thoughts.
FA: It says on the back, daytime visitors as opposed to evening, can you tell me when the cut off would be? I’m assuming it is based on time.
Admin: We stop enforcing parking at 7:00 p.m., and we also have evening permits that we issue that begin at 3:00 p.m.
FA: Okay. Thank you.
New Business
1. Request for participation in Searches:
Assistant Director of First Year and Transition Programs—discussed above.
2. Change in Department’s Rosters—discussed above.
3. Clarification of Student Absence Policy (FA) (10/02/08)—discussed above.
4. Summer School Allocations—discussed above.
Progress Reports on Long-term Concerns
1. Academic Plan (ADM) (10/18/07)
Admin: I’ll give just a brief report. The Leadership Team had a meeting on Monday with regard to the Community of Scholars Work Group Report. We reviewed the recommendations of that group, we gave some feedback to the chair, that will get back to the work group. We recommended a couple of changes. This week those ideas will be submitted to and discussed by the Strategic Planning Committee. They’ll come back to the Leadership Group and we’ll have some more definitive responses. Other work groups will be going through a similar process.
FA: I do realize when “the” is used, it’s not being used to exclude other leaders. The Leadership Team, I understand, is made up of excluded managers.
Admin: Correct.
FA: But it’s not meant to say there aren’t other leaders on this campus.
Admin: Absolutely not. There are many and more prominent leaders.
Admin: Michael’s information is all correct, but it probably needs to be generalized a bit. There are a number of things that the group will work on over the years. And Lisa Foss drafted a document, which the Strategic Planning Committee has seen that shows how that work will flow from that team to Strategic Planning Committee and back and then out to the campus, so that all these issues are fully vetted and discussed. We hope to incorporate all the feedback as it is processed; hopefully by the end of the year. It’s very complicated, but the whole process has been vetted by the Strategic Planning Committee.
2. Diversity Plan (ADM) (11/01/07)
Admin: The task force met for the first time yesterday. I’ve asked Shahzad Ahmad and Jane Olsen to co-chair the task force. When we met the student component had not been completed. It is now completed and the task force is fully constituted. The task force will spend its first few meetings organizing its work and probably creating subgroups within the task force to do different pieces of the work. Lisa Foss has been assigned as staff support so if there’s analysis and research documents she’ll have someone for that. We said in the initial meetings that we will pay for visits to best practice campuses or to bring people here to consult with. Among the more important pieces of our discussion yesterday in my own mind was pointing out wanting to include community members in our plan, and that our plan should not focus on just the campus alone. On the other hand the plan should not assume responsibility for changing St. Cloud. So, we’ll work to find that focus on the campus. The plan should include our commitment to organizations like Create Community which operates as an interface between community and campus. We need connections outside the campus. Also, there will be groups in the Twin Cities that will be asked to join the conversation with us. Commissioner ____ Cobell (Please provide name) expressed an interest and volunteered to come up and meet with the task force. The first month and a half the task force’s work will be organizational in nature. Some of you were there. I welcome anyone to comment on their observations. Some of you are on the task force but couldn’t be there because of scheduling.
FA: I was there. One of the things that struck me about this meeting was that it’s not just to look at numbers in terms of recruiting but really to look at it more broadly, and have a discussion about our dreams and hopes for the university and this area, which I found very refreshing and very exciting.
FA: Always good to have good news reported.
3. COE Climate Task Force (FA) (9/22/05)—discussed further below.
FA: Mark Jaede had some family responsibilities and he expected to be here around 4:00 so we’ll wait and see where we’re at when Mark gets here.
4. Intellectual property and releases from PR (FA) (08/30/07)
Admin: We made some changes to the earlier version of this document, which you have seen. We have done that in two regards. One being, the form for this release that you have seen before dealt with faculty, staff, and students so there’s a line on there for students’ parents, or guardians to sign off if they’re not over 18. So, what we’ve done at this point is to separate into two forms. We have a student form and a faculty/staff release form. There were also some changes made to the text so this document doesn’t imply in any way that a course of a faculty member or a staff is what is being released. The permission to release does not pertain to that. So please look this over and we will discuss it at the next Meet and Confer. If there are any changes or suggestions that you have to the form, please let us know. Judith, is there anything you wanted to add on this?
Admin: No, nothing.
FA: Thank you. We’ll get back to you.
5. Report on Budget (ADM) (10/18/07)
Admin: I’m reporting on the President.
FA: You report to him.
Admin: That too. As part of our budget process there is a Presidential Statement to be made about where the general guidance and preparation of records, so this is that general statement. An electronic copy has been sent to you, John, and to Dan Gregory on the Budget Advisory Group. It’s been some time coming because the way we follow MnSCU’s adoption of a budget they intend to present to the legislature. They didn’t do that until their last, more recent board meeting. So based on that and also some discussion with the Budget Advisory Group, the President is publishing this document. It has the links to MnSCU’s request and also the link to scenarios on our budget side of the campus. They are both available from the budget website. So, I encourage you to take a look. This is openers for that. As another note of an activity, we’re setting up for the week of the 20th, the week of fall break, a series of training sessions we made available to office managers and other budget managers on campus that will be similar to the presentation Dan Gregory did at Convocation. We’re working with him. That will help some of those people who really are in the nuts and bolts of the budgets in various departments of how they work and what the expense levels are and to get additional information. So, that’s where we’re at. We’re ongoing with our Budget Advisory Group. We’ve completed the carryover process and we’ll be sharing those carry forwards with the Budget Advisory Group of course and on campus. We approved the carry forwards that had funds to carry over. That’s pretty much where we are. As the President carefully points out, these are turbulent and could be very difficult times. But we’re working through it and we’re positioned about as well as we could expect.
FA: We would hope in October to receive a quarterly report as we did last year. The date last year was October 15, so a similar date will fall before the next Meet and Confer.
Admin: We’re on track to prepare that. The auditors are here now. And unless we can find something in that process, which we don’t expect, I’ve prepared the financial statement and I think that’s a reasonable estimate.
FA: It says “modest enrollment growth.” But Minnesota high schools are declining. What’s your projection for moderate tuition increase? The maximum amount you are thinking of?
Admin: Yes, the high school classes are slowly declining. I believe the bottom to be about 2014 or 2012, right about there. Our enrollment has been increasing slightly the last few years in part because we’ve remained successful at obtaining the freshman class that we intended and the transfer classes that we intend. And our location; we’re in an area in the state that’s growing a bit more than some of the rest of the state. I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention the fact that our graduate enrollment has been growing during that period, too. And also offering online courses has helped us to maintain some of that crowd. We’re just now in the process, by the 17th, to look at projections out into the future for MnSCU, and we’ll be looking at that. But it still seems reasonable to look at modest growth. Sometimes in the past when there’s an economic downturn it actually enhanced enrollment in higher education because the alternatives of work aren’t so great. And so, that indirectly might have something to do in respect to enrollment. The moderate tuition increases right for the state universities they’re looking at about 4% in the discussion that we’ve had with the board, with some uncertainty about that given what the state may or may not do with the allocation. It may influence their discussion. The board is having a hearing on their budget next week and they’ll present it to the state. There will be another revenue forecast in November and we’ll just get more information as we go. We’re trying to share as much as we can and provide the links to campus. We also have a sub group with the Budget Advisory Group that is considering our assumptions because we’re trying to get some of those things. What is reasonable for tuition? Changing the cost is an appropriate issue. What might be the bookends for those sorts of things? As time goes on, we’ll be closer on those. We will probably make decisions on next year’s budget before we know some of those answers.
Admin: As we approach the 30th day, share what we know about enrollment.
Admin: Our enrollment this year compared to last year is up somewhere in the 20s FYE; as of this morning our summer enrollment numbers were up by 26 FYE. So, we’re up about 50 FYE, ahead of where we were last year. We are currently ahead of our final numbers from last year.
Admin: Our budget was predicated I believe on 62 student increase from last year.
Admin: We’re pretty close to that.
Admin: So we’re coming close to that. One would expect if we’re up in the fall that we’ll be up a little in the spring.
Admin: Today is the 28th day based on a 30 day enrollment, which will be Tuesday. So Tuesday morning we’ll have the data on our 30 day enrollment numbers.
FA: There is a rumor we heard from several departments about pushing down the deadlines for planning 2010 budget. It’s a rumor. It would surprise me that it happened.
Admin: There has been no push on us from MnSCU.
FA: Actually, I’m one of the people who brought that forward because I heard it. I wasn’t aware we had a date for department budgets. Do we? You’re shaking your head.
Admin: We don’t have a hard and fast date. We were trying to get the information out that we just got now and encourage people to talk about it. We have a date of the end of the term for the colleges, and in turn the vice presidents, to have their budgets rolled up. We’re giving substantial latitude in particular to the deans and departments on how they wish to fashion, and they needed this guidance at least. We talk about parameters generally being flat, but they needed this guidance for certain to put it together. I also know that Michael has also been publishing some deadlines around filling positions. So that’s also out there because we’re making decisions. But we also know those decisions will be continued into the spring as perhaps faculty choose to go elsewhere or later to retire or whatever may be the case.
FA: Thank you. Do you have a follow up?
FA: I’m assuming since you didn’t mention in any shape or form we’re not one of those universities that has investments in one of those shaky banks or institutions? (Laughter) I’m sorry, I had to ask.
Admin: We’re prohibited from investing our funds in such areas. We did confirm with the foundation they didn’t have funds in the common funds also.
FA: Thank you.
3. COE Climate Task Force (FA) (9/22/05)
FA: Mark has arrived. Could you give us an update?
FA: I’m happy to say that we’ve been able to come up with dates to have the consultant, Pamela Lassiter, coming on to campus for a preliminary visit. It will be in about a week and a half from Monday the 13th through the morning of the 15th. She’s going to be on campus to meet with Dean Steffens and Provost Spitzer and also with the task force to provide some background from the situation here and the kinds of issues have left us to engage her in for the kind of work that we’re hoping she’s going to do so that we can give her some feedback on things like design of survey instruments and of procedures in order to collect data in a way that invites broad participation and a feeling of confidence in the process and a feeling of security about being able to speak in a forth-right manner without repercussions. I will know more about how that went in about a week and a half. But this is really the first material step in this process that involves actually bringing someone in from the outside and actually getting the process off the ground here. I’m happy to be able to say that. If anyone has any input into the process that they would like to be considered before the surveys get designed and so on, talk to me sooner rather than later if you feel the need to be involved in the process. I can’t make any promises about exactly how much time, but this would be the moment if you have a concern about how that’s moving forward. Let us know so we can take that into account.
FA: Thank you, Mark.
6. Article 22 Task Force (FA) (02/01/07)
FA: Fifty percent of that task force is in the room. We are meeting on Tuesdays at 11:00. Michael, do you want to report?
Admin: Just briefly. We went through and made some changes and clarifications to the PDP/PDR calendar and the Promotion and Tenure calendars. There were some concerns about how the schedule deals with potential for a non-renewal of first year faculty members that we were able to clarify so that if a first year faculty member is to be non-renewed that person must be told by November 1st of the second year and then must be notified of the PDR by the end of the fall semester so that the process can take place in a way that meets with requirements of the contract. So we’re in agreement about that process and satisfied that we were fulfilling it contractually. So, those things are done. There are some other topics that we wanted to address at the meeting on Tuesday, next week.
FA: Will those documents come here? The calendar?
Admin: Sure.
FA: The calendar that deals generally with PDP/PDR that has been posted is available and accurate and was met and conferred on last spring.
Admin: We didn’t change any of the dates. We just clarified some of the text.
FA: This group hasn’t seen the non-renewal piece.
FA: The non-renewal piece is a separate piece that the task force has a draft of that will be reviewed at the next meeting. The intention would be that that would come back to Meet and Confer after we’ve given it one more look.
FA: That’s what I wanted clarification about.
7. Status of Administrative Searches:
Provost, AVP for Faculty Relations (FA) (05/15/08)
AVP Research & Faculty Development
Dean COFAH
Associate Dean COSE (renewed by FA) (10/2/08)
Associate Dean COSS (updated by adding at meeting 10/2/08)
FA: We have a number of searches going on and I made a mistake in memory, there is another search in the COSS for an Associate Dean that on my original list was present. Can you update us about those searches that were recently populated?
Admin: We have membership identified from the faculty for the searches that are on this list. There’s a search for the Assistant VP for Faculty Relations. That is nearing… that’s ongoing. I think the members of that search committee are reviewing the credentials at this point. The others have been constituted with membership but they haven’t yet been convened. That will happen shortly. So we do need members for the Associate Dean in Social Science.
FA: I think you have them.
Admin: I’ve got them? It’s not on this list.
FA: What happened is the committee was formed last spring, and then going forward with a national search was postponed. So we do have a committee. We can make sure you’ve got the same names we’ve got.
Admin: Okay.
FA: So, who can our members expect to be hearing from in terms of the first meetings of these search committees?
Admin: Depends on which one.
FA: Well, start with the AVP Research and Faculty Development.
Admin: John Burgeson.
FA: Then Dean of the COFAH?
Admin: Mitch.
FA: Associate Dean COSE?
Admin: John Hoover.
FA: Two of the members of the search committee for the VP of Faculty Relations are here. We are in a process now of determining the number to be invited for phone interviews.
Admin: Okay.
FA: That will happen I believe on Thursday of next week.
Admin: That will be very helpful. The other, not so much a search, but a task force representation request we had, was for membership on the Comprehensive Facilities Plan. We were hoping you had names for that.
FA: We’ve put out a second call for that.
Admin: You didn’t get any one?
FA: No.
Admin: Just double the MAPE representatives for the faculty who won’t participate.
FA: That would be one thing you could do. (Laughter) You could do that.
Admin: We said we wanted a representative of the faculty and I said there was some wiggle room in the discussion for a representative from Community Studies in particular.
FA: That’s what I recall.
Admin: If you only get one, we could go to Community Studies and appoint someone perhaps under their area of expertise through the Administration if that might be helpful to you.
FA: I’m going to make one more attempt to try and stir up interest.
Admin: Whenever we have one of these construction or renovation projects we have a lot of faculty with interest in how that’s going to turn out, yet we can’t get representation for this, which is an important campus wide facilities.
FA: To paraphrase the President of the United States, “I feel your concern.” I believe he said pain, but…
Admin: Any ideas why you aren’t getting any response?
FA: Robert is our designee to go out and look at the comprehensive plan for Executive Committee, and he did brief us on that. I don’t know why. You would think… I hear a lot of grousing once the building is built. (Laughter)
FA: I hear grousing when people are being displaced or moved.
Admin: I usually hear the grousing in process. Afterwards it’s usually pretty good.
FA: I would expect that people would have interest in participating in that kind of activity. Why they don’t, maybe there’s a doctoral dissertation out there.
Admin: I’m anxious to start. And I’m reticent to start without faculty but I really need to get going.
Admin: I may direct him to start.
FA: Please do.
Admin: Yes. Because we have an architect and the clock is ticking. We’ll certainly welcome people in the process as they get here, but we need to move.
FA: Two things we could speculate about the reasons for lack of participation: the number of committees people serve on; and I would just say people can certainly be encouraged by anyone to put their names forward. There’s no rule about that. Sure, the Faculty Association appoints but, that doesn’t mean if you know good people you can’t encourage them to come forward.
FA: Who’s the chair in Science and Engineering Associate Dean Search?
FA: John Hoover.
FA: One comment, I think it would be better to let the campus know faster about transparency on this. So we start the search processes faster. Sometimes they feel like they are getting postponed and postponed. We won’t get good candidates.
Admin: I agree.
FA: If the President would direct the Vice President to move forward, that would force the President of the Faculty Association to take action. One of the actions might be that the President of the Faculty Association would have to serve on that committee or there would be no faculty representation. So, please put me in that position.
Admin: As they say in the movies, make it so. (Laughter)
8. Formation of Ad Hoc Faculty Committee on Interim, Temporary, Emergency and other such appointments (FA) (05/15/08)
FA: We have a group working on this. We’ll have a report in the spring.
9. Foundations of Excellence (ADM) (04/17/08)
FA: This is a joint undertaking. We have the co-chair, Dave Warne.
FA: The process is going forward in making the final recommendations for the dimension groups for the foundations. We meet tomorrow at 3:00. The members of the steering committee that went to North Carolina, Michael and myself, and after that I suspect we’ll have some announcements about the final committees that are made up. The Faculty Association has made their recommendation last Tuesday. We’ve populated based on every volunteer that was a full member and that was also based on their first choice or balancing across. So, from the faculty side, given the recommendation from the Executive Committee, we have three to four members on each of the dimension groups. I have not yet seen the final set of volunteers that came forward from the other constituencies but I understand that we’ll probably be finishing and finalizing that in some way. Then there will be an announcement of dates for an open house to get started on the dimension committees when they are finally finalized they will meet with either Michael Gilbert or myself and we will go through with them the information provided by the foundation to get them started on their task. We’re in a pretty good place. We’re ahead in the process than it was anticipated in July. We hope for an April 1st final report. I’m not sure if I have anything else at this time. We’ll have more conversation tomorrow about those processes and announcements.
Admin: Thank you.
FA: I might add that Michael Gilbert has been tireless in these processes and has in fact been able to pick up some Administrative slack around our course schedules for some of the Administrative detail. At this point the perception I have working with the Provost’s office, we have a good start and a good relationship to finish the project.
Admin: Thanks, David.
10. Task Force on 9-month Appointments (ADM/FA) (04/17/08)
11. University Scholars and Endowed Chairs (FA) (05/01/08)
FA: Items 10 and 11 are questions of who’s going to convene the group. I believe we have our three and you have your three.
Admin: Dennis is going to do one and Diana the other one. Dennis has the 9-month appointments.
FA: That makes it clear, doesn’t it?
FA: Didn’t we also have the question when?
FA: Sure.
Admin: I expect that we’ll have our first meeting in November [University Scholars and Endowed Chairs].
Admin: I expect we’ll have our first meeting in October [Task Force on 9-month Appointments].
FA: Is this a bidding war? (Laughter)
Admin: Anyone want to try for September? (Laughter)
12. Alnwick Summer Program Recommendation (FA) (04/17/08)
FA: The last item is under discussion at our committee level with the Vice President and we’re just waiting.
Admin: There was a meeting that took place between the Associate VP for International Studies and the International Studies Committee and the British Studies Committee to talk about some of the issues relating to the cost of the program at Alnwick and some of the things we need in order to make that program affordable to the university. The enrollments have been down, we’re losing some money. The session that took place between the Associate VP and the committee was very productive from what I’ve been told. There was some good discussion. Some ideas that were put forward about some changes that could be made, and the committee is working to develop some documents to deal with that. And we should hear from them shortly about what their proposals will be.
FA: You just want to make the meeting longer, Judy. (Laughter)
FA: I’ll wait a minute before I respond to add length onto the meeting. What process do you think you’re going to use to bring those documents forward?
Admin: That is a Faculty Association Committee so that will come through the regular process for committees to submit information into the Faculty Senate.
FA: So, we’ll review it and bring it here then.
Admin: A small thing that’s not on the agenda, but that I would like to advise you of. We’re sending a schedule for fire drills in the buildings likely in the week of the 20th. They will not be all simultaneous. They’re scheduled for 10 minutes before the end of the class hour so they don’t eat up the entire period. We believe it prudent that we have drills at least once a year so we’re prepared. I’ll send the material to you as soon as I have a draft and date that they need to tie down. We can do them in the residence halls now.
Meeting adjourned at 4:36 p.m.