Administrative Response to FA Retrenchment Questions

The recent letter presented to President Potter from the FA asks for specifics and a justification for individual retrenchment decisions that were made this year. In the following document, we have provided an explanation why each department was identified as part of a set of departments that received retrenchment notices. Though we are providing individual explanations for each department, it is important to understand that we needed to approach our retrenchment decisions as a decision set.

The university needed to reach a certain level of reduction through retrenchment to achieve necessary budget reductions. We estimated in a report to the Faculty Association Meet & Confer on July 8 that we would need to reduce probationary lines by approximately 20, as well an estimated reduction through BESI of 30, and a reduction of 30 through attrition. Combined, the University needed to yield approximately $6.5 million in salary savings in order to meet a total reduction of $14 million.  

Identifying the number of faculty lines to be eliminated through retrenchment for FY12

Following is an overview of the budget reduction strategy for the Academic Affairs unit:

The critical factor in the decision set was not the number but the total salary savings from those reductions. In the end we needed to notice 26 individuals in order to achieve the nearly $2.5 million in salary savings required.

Criteria used for retrenchment decisions:

Before a more thorough discussion of the retrenchment decision criteria, it is important to address a few misconceptions in the document provided. The questions and statements attempt to draw a one-to-one relationship between Strategic Program Appraisal and retrenchment. The intent of Strategic Program Appraisal was to develop a long term programmatic focus and strategic academic priorities. It occurred at the program level, with multiple programs within a single department having multiple outcomes from SPA. Retrenchment is about achieving immediate budgetary compulsions. It occurred at the department level, so a more complex and comprehensive analysis of information related to department activity, including a comprehensive view of all of the SPA recommendations, was necessary. You reference the inclusion in an enhancement category as an argument against retrenchment. A correct reading of the category is continuation or enhancement, and even enhancement may not occur immediately but in the longer term, as financial conditions improve.

You have raised questions about the criteria used and possible inconsistencies. We used the criteria that were outlined in the document, “Approach for Noticing Probationary Faculty by August 1”, which was shared with the Faculty Association at the July 8 Meet & Confer. The criteria are as follows:

Criteria to identify elimination of faculty lines

v Centrality to mission and alignment with strategic priorities.

v Student demand: number of majors and graduates including expected future trends.

v Reduction in number of departments offering similar programs with substantial disciplinary overlap, consistent with recommendations regarding consolidation and reorganization.

v Program connectedness and impact on other programs.

v Excess capacity and current cost structure comparisons

v Additional information available from Strategic Program Appraisal.

In a separate attachment, we have provided a spreadsheet for each department that includes quantitative measures for each department as well as the results of Strategic Program Appraisal for programs within those departments. We used the attached data as part of our consideration. As you can see, we used common metrics for capacity and productivity (number of graduates and active majors minors and graduate students, including change over time; student FYE to faculty FTE, including change over; tuition to expense ratios; and location in the MnSCU band). Also included in this spreadsheet is the impact of Strategic Program Appraisal on programs within the department. It was common for departments with multiple programs to have programs in two or more of the SPA categories. Since, according to the contract, retrenchment is done at the level of the rostering unit (in our case, the department), we needed to look take a comprehensive look at different criteria as they relate to the department. In some instances, a program within a department was slated for continuation while others were slated for elimination. If a look at the capacity and cost information indicates that a reduction in force is appropriate – especially when considered along side of other departments in the college – than that department was considered for retrenchment. The contract requires that we notice the least senior individual and probationary before tenured. This would require that the individual in the department that was probationary be retrenched, even though he/she may be from the program that was in the continuation category. As you are well aware, the University must abide by the IFO contract on retrenchment procedures, even though retrenchment by program in this instance would have been a better choice for the university.

Timing was another contractual complexity. In your letter, you question the decisions related to retrenchment prior to the completion of SPA. As described in the memo “Probationary Faculty Retrenchment List” given to the Faculty Association on July 22:

“Considerable uncertainty remains regarding the financial picture for FY 2012, including budgetary reductions from reorganization, response to the MnSCU Board Early Separation Incentive (BESI), and additional attrition. The following retrenchment decisions were made with the best available information at this time and to ensure the University’s flexibility in meeting its financial obligations for FY 2012.”

Contractually, we were required to meet the August 1^st and Sept. 20^th deadlines. If we had waited until after Strategic Program Appraisal was complete, we would have missed these deadlines and would have been unable to make decisions in time to impact the fiscal year 2012 budget. We have made it clear to the Faculty Association that the retrenchment decisions were made with the best available information and that as more complete financial information is available, we could revisit those decisions.

It is critical to note that the criteria used are a mix of qualitative and quantitative information. Decisions were not driven by a single formula but were made by considering each department against the criteria in order to develop a prioritization of all departments within the colleges. Against that prioritization, we developed a subset of departments where probationary lines were available and identified departments for retrenchment until we reached the necessary amount of budget savings. An exception to this is in a case where all of the programs within a given department were eliminated. In this instance, all faculty in a department were noticed because there will no longer be programs in which to teach beyond the teach out period. We also attempted to spread the retrenchment across colleges and LR&TS so that no single unit was held harmless or overly impacted in the process.

Impact of General Education

Strategic Program Appraisal was designed to systematically consider our portfolio of majors, minors and graduate programs. It was not intended to address general education, though the impact of general education courses were included in the data related to student/faculty ratios, tuition to expense ratio, and MnSCU band location. General education impact is a challenging consideration, especially since the data that was used was based on a program that no longer exists. With the move to the Liberal Education Program (LEP), it is unclear what the future demand will be for any one department. Given the new LEP structure, courses that were the sole provider in the Core that was part of the previous general education program may not see the same levels of demand long term as new courses are approved for a specific goal area.

We are concerned about the issues you raise regarding the faculty in the College of Education. We were not aware of the situation. A job layoff is an extremely stressful situation, and the University has made a commitment to providing support services to impacted individuals, including placement services to assist employees in finding future employment and the Employee Assistance Program to assist employees with the psychological transition. Please encourage the individuals to access these resources through the Human Resources office to help them with the transition.

Specific Department Retrenchment Notification Rationale

College of Science & Engineering

Aviation:  Data from multiple metrics indicate that this program was not attracting students. The status of the infrastructure to support this program has come into question and this has been brought into sharp relief by the external accrediting body. The quality of the graduates is beyond question, which is not the point relative to the question: what are we no longer able to do? The Aviation program was eliminated through the SPA process so all faculty in the program were retrenched.

CNA/Stats and ECE:  The Statistics & CNA department is a hybrid constructed a number of years ago.  The faculty offer degree programs in Computer Networking and Statistics at both the bachelors and masters level.  The graduate program in CNA offers the MSIA in conjunction with Information Science [IS].  The relationship between CNA and other programs are linked through the concept of a “computing” cluster. This cluster intersects with all or part of the curriculum/courses in Computer Science, CNA, IS, and Computer Engineering [currently sponsored by Electrical and Computer Engineering – ECE].  All of these programs are under-capacity based on FYE for upper division courses or graduates/FTE faculty.  The notification of probationary faculty in Stats/CNA and ECE relates to the future composition of the “computing” area.  The role of statistics across the university was part of the first part of program appraisal and widely discussed this summer and a number of different models have been proposed. The primary program appraisal question relates to the offering of “specialty” stats for a wide variety of disciplines and if this is the more effective and efficient approach.  Stats could be a larger department of university center or could be joined with math from which it came.  All these are questions which remain to be answered. 

College of Business:

Information Systems:  The IS department is made up of two groups of faculty: IS faculty who teach in the Information Systems and Information Assurance programs, and Stats faculty who teach stats courses for all College of Business students. The 'noticed' probationary faculty teaches Stats, but does not teach any IS courses. Because of the number of stats faculty in the College of Business, plus the number of faculty across campus who also teach stats, it was determined that excess capacity may exist in the discipline. 

College of Education

CEHEEP:  The CEHEEP department currently has 13 faculty members and has the potential to consolidate some of their programs in HIED and College Counseling with programs that are currently in the ELCP department which has 19 faculty members.  Five faculty members were noticed in this department.  The rationale was that we have two departments that offer some similar programs related to leadership and counseling and that some consolidation would help to save resources and to provide for more opportunities for students to have contact with students in related fields. There are also possible consolidations for the doctoral programs that both provide a core of courses related to leadership.  Although the graduate programs had strong reviews, we have a total of 10-15 graduate programs (if you include certificate/licensure programs) in these two departments with one major at the undergraduate level.  The cost of all of the graduate programs is high due to supervision and internships. There is little to balance these costs in either department.  

Child and Family Studies: The graduate programs in this department were recommended to be eliminated or reorganized.  Excess capacity appears to exist within the department considering the student/faculty and revenue/expense ratios. The notification of a faculty member in this department also is related to the future composition of teacher education programs at the university as we complete our work related to the teacher preparation initiative.

College of Social Sciences

Community Studies: In the Department of Community Studies, the Community Planning and Development Program serves regional needs, but falling enrollments (31% lower in courses in the major between 2005-06 and 2009-10) suggested rethinking its configuration or reducing faculty size. 

Geography:  The Geography Department includes several different programs: Geography major/minor, GIS minor, GIS M.S., and Geography M.S. (hereafter, “the Geography cluster”); Travel and Tourism major and minor; Land Surveying major; and Social Studies Education major. There are complications when programs of differing priorities are embedded in one department. The Geography cluster of bachelor’s and master’s programs is considered a candidate for changes that could reduce the number of faculty.  The Geography M.S. has been recommended or reduction or elimination because of concerns about strategic alignment and program completion rate; the other Geography cluster programs have been recommended for reorganization or consolidation. All faculty in the Geography cluster of programs, the likeliest candidate for faculty reduction, are tenured. It would not be possible to consider giving notice to any of them unless all probationary faculty in the department received notice first. 

College of Fine Arts & Humanities

Foreign Languages & Literature:  The noticing of faculty in FLL resulted in one probationary faculty member in the Spanish section receiving a notice. The faculty member is the only probationary member in a department, where two minors were placed in the category for consolidation or reorganization and two minors and one major were in the category of reduction or elimination. It is clear that there is capacity within the department.

Theatre, Film Studies & Dance: In TFSD, the Film Studies program was identified for continuation or enhancement, while the Theatre major and minor were placed in the category for consolidation or reorganization. The Dance minor was eliminated as a final action of the SPA process. The number of majors within the programs within TFSD is uneven. As a result, the department came to be viewed as having capacity.

Philosophy:  While the program was in the category for continuation at current levels or Enhancement, the low number of student majors was cited in the report for the SPA as a cause for concern. The number of students served by the PHIL 194 core course for general education is significant, and the Liberal Education program is an important component of the undergraduate experience at St. Cloud State University. In this instance, the capacity to offer the PHIL 194 and a low-enrolled major compelled a closer examination of the level of staffing within the department. The number of Liberal Education course sections that can be offered in any given academic year is limited to the resources available to the university. Financial constraints limit our ability to offer sections in this and in previous years. Additionally, having a course listed in the Liberal Education domain is not a mandate for the number of sections that has to be offered.

LR&TS

The Information Media undergraduate major and minor were eliminated as part of the first round of Strategic Program Appraisal. The remaining analysis of the non-credit generating contributions of the LR&TS faculty won’t be completed until January 2011 but the notices, by contract, had to be given by August 2010.