Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes
March 12, 2014, 3:10 P.M. Skaggs Building, Room 169
Call to Order
Chair Lodmell called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m.
Registrar Joe Hickman called roll.
Members Present: B. Allred, L. Ametsbichler, J. Banville, A. Becker, T. Beed B. Borrie, M. Bowman, S. Bradford, M. Brooke, J. Bunch, J. Carter, T. Crowford, J. DeBoer, S. Galipeau, S. Gordon, M. Hamon, K. Harris, L. Hart-Paulson, S. Hines, W. Holben, L. Howell, M. Kia, U. Kamp, H. Kim, A. Kinney, C. Knight, R. LaPier, B. Larson, G. Larson, B. Layton, S. Lodmell, P.Lukacs, D. MacDonald, M. Mayor, N. McCrady, J. Montauban, M. Raymond, S. Richter, D. Schuldberg, J. Sears, D. Shepherd, D. Sherman, A. Sondag, S. Stan, A. Szalda-Petree, E. Uchimoto, N. Vonessen, A. Ware, K. Wu,
Members Excused: J. Bardsley, J. Cavanaugh, A. Chatterjee, M. DeGrandpre, D. Erickson, L. Frey, E. Gagliardi, L. Gillison, L. Gray, M. Horejsi, C. Kirkpatrick, J. Laskin, A. Larson, C. Palmer, S. Tillerman, K. Zoellner
Members Absent: A. Belcourt, H. Eggert, J. Glendening, K. McKay, S. Shen, K. Swift, T. Van Alst
Ex-Officio Present: Provost Brown, Interim Associate Provost Lindsay
Minutes: The minutes from February 12th were approved and the meeting began with the UM Minute.
Committee Report:
ASCRC Chair John DeBoer
· The correction item on the curriculum consent agenda was considered first and approved.
After some discussion the rubric for the Global Leadership Initiative was approved. The criteria used to grant the rubric were clarified:
o The courses do not fit in any existing rubrics at the campus or MUS level.
o The rubric is distinct from existing rubrics.
o It offers a unique and attractive opportunity for study that will promote the University.
o It is organized around a clear, coherent, and focused area of study.
o It will be recognizeable and meaningful outside of the campus environment.
The rubric does not institutionalize the GLI Program. Faculty propose rubrics for courses according to the content of the course. The rubric will not be owned by GLI. Proposals for rubrics or new courses within a rubric are reviewed by the Curriculum Committees and then sent to OCHE for system-wide approval and inclusion in the Common Course Numbering course list. The student FTE still follows the faculty member. Majors can determine whether to accept GLI courses as fulfilling electives per the process described in the editorial catalog change procedure.
· Revisions to Policy 201.00 Curriculum Review Procedure were approved. The chair’s signature on curriculum forms indicates there has been an internal review by the department.
· The revision to Procedure 201.3.3 Editorial Catalog Changes was also approved. The following item will no longer require review by Curriculum Committees.
o Revising the list of approved electives within major, minor, option, or certificate requirements with the consent of the faculty and chairs/directors of affected programs
This addition is intended to maintain the interdisciplinary spirit of crosslisting. These requests were previously made on program modification forms.
Provost Brown
President Engstrom is in Seattle at the University Foundation Board of Trustees Meeting. The primary topic is the capital campaign.
Celebrate Academics Event
Next week is the annual Celebrate Academics event. On Wednesday there is a luncheon highlighting UM students’ achievements. Starting at 12:30 p.m. on Friday there will be a campus conversation on the future of online programs at UM. A panel discussion with current UM online programs will follow a virtual keynote presentation by Nancy L. Zimpler, the Chancellor of State University of New York that has had a lot of success with online programs. The discussion will take place in TODD 203 and 204. Senators were encouraged to attend.
Searches
Candidates for the Missoula College dean will be on campus shortly after spring break. The Search Committee for the Davidson Honors College Dean is in the process of Skype interviewing 8-9 candidates.
Wintersession
Comments regarding the Wintersession proposal will be collected until March 27th. These will be compiled for the President and Provost to consider. Comments are also being collected from staff and students.
Legislative Update
The MUS Research Initiative is still intact. It seems to have a fair amount of traction. Because of this the two Vice Presidents for Research and the Deputy Commissioner are in the process of developing a RFT with specific criteria, so that the minute the initiative is approved the campuses can move quickly. Since the legislature will want to see results of the new research funding when it convenes again in 2017, there will only be a two-year period to demonstrate any kind of accomplishment. Other items at the legislature are moving along with the acceptation of the pay plan, which has not yet had hearings. Unfortunately SB 143 which would allow concealed guns on campus is also moving along.
Questions:
Faculty members in Psychology are concerned about possible changes to winter and summer session. Many of their students rely on the winter and summer session courses. The concern is that psychology students’ throughput, retention, and graduation rates will suffer. The Department has been asked to eliminate its summer offerings Faculty were encouraged to send their concerns to the Provost’s Office email.
The Provost received a thoughtful correspondence from the Psychology Department Chair. He did not order the reduction of summer offerings. Any specific recommendations to meet worst case budget reductions were made by the deans. Contingency planning is required given the uncertainty of the budget. The College of Humanities and Science’s approach to summer offerings is more deliberate than others. The Provost already has an appointment scheduled with Dean Comer and Associate Dean McNulty to discuss the best strategy moving forward.
It seems wintersession could be used for students to engage in community service in in Montana. This could help change the culture of how Montanans view the University. The Provost is open to this idea and would like to see it fleshed out in writing. Emphasis on special experience is exactly the kinds of activities that should take place during wintersession.
This year’s summer schedule compared to last year shows approximately a 40% reduction in lower- division courses. Professor Uchimotto is very concerned about the loss of summer offerings. For example, his son was planning to take two summer courses, and both have been canceled. His son is now looking into other options including taking online courses from MSU. Perhaps it would be wise to invest in summer courses to entice students to come to Missoula and perhaps stay. Currently, because of budget cuts and cuts to summer offerings, there are no introductory language courses being offered this summer.
Health and Human Performance has also been discussing cutting summer courses because it does not have a lot of options to reduce the budget. However, cutting summer courses seems like a mistake since summer courses are an important part of HHP curriculum for many students.
Provost Brown: Budgets are in flux. The Legislature is still in session and the Board of Regents has not set fees. And we don’t know potential enrollment figures. We have to be prepared for the worse, but it could be better. Some of the assumptions made used in planning for the worst case scenario include no growth in new students and the same mix of in-state to out-of-state students. There are also assumptions made about the pay plan, utilities and, how much to put into the reserve. These details will need to be worked out. Hopefully, as more information is learned we will be able to add money back in to budget planning. This approach is being used to avoid additional cuts in the middle of the year which is what took place the last couple of years.
Provost Brown: Preliminary enrollment projections are very favorable from a budgetary stand point (more out of state students). The Office of Planning, Budgeting, and Analysis is working on revised modeling using a different mix of students.
Chemistry students actually are required to take courses during the summer to graduate on time. If the summer Chemistry options are canceled, the department will likely have to direct students to enroll at another university to complete their degree on schedule. The Provost has received a communication from the Chemistry Department outlining the situation.
Is there no way to structure summer courses on an on- demand basis? The Provost and Vice President Reid are engaged in a conversation about this possibility. This suggestion also came up in a meeting with the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate.
Students will start registering for summer courses tomorrow. It is problematic to let students register for courses and then cancel them.
Has there been any progress regarding equalizing UM’s tuition with MSU? There has not been any effort on this because the current plan working through the legislature involves a tuition freeze for resident students. However, if the tuition freeze is off the table, the argument for equalizing tuition is ready to go.
Both Missoula College and the College of Humanities and Science appeared to have dropped Math 121 and 122 this summer. This could create a gap and cause students to lose a semester in the sequence. It seems there should be some coordination between the two campuses to assure minimal course offerings.
If the worst case scenario changes, will it have any impact on summer offerings given registration opens tomorrow? There can be additions to the curriculum. Some courses can be listed on the schedule but not open. The budget is really in flux, so it is tough to plan. There will likely be some additions to summer offerings. It won’t happen by tomorrow, but it will before enrollment is closed. Areas where students are dependent on summer courses will be addressed. There still could be some drop off in summer enrollment, but hopefully it won’t be significant.
Associate Provost Nathan Lindsay and Professor Mary Ann Bowman – Affordable Book Plan / Rafter
A frequently Asked Questions document was disseminated to senators and a brief update on the Committees process was given. The Committee has been working with Rafter over the past two months. The proposal sent out is what would be sent to the Board of Regents if the faculty and students approve. The proposal was discussed at ASUM last night.
The Text Book Affordability Plan involves both Rafter and the Book Store. Professor Bowman first learned of Rafter in the fall and was fairly skeptical. As a member of the committee, she has been persuaded of the benefits of the program. It does appear to reduce the price of books for the collective students. There might be individual students that could find books cheaper. What is compelling in her view is that the program levels the playing field. Students will not be disadvantaged because they don’t have money for books because their financial aid money has not yet arrived. This could enhance student success and therefore support retention. After listening to Rafter respond to questions, she is assured that UM will not be impacted in a negative way by participating in a pilot program.
The proposal outlines a two-year pilot starting with first-year freshmen. The following year would include those students and the incoming freshmen. The cost the first semester would be $252. According to Associate Vice President Sharon O’Hare 1400 students wait for their financial aid and often have to make a choice between rent, food, or books. Under this plan that would not be the case. Textbooks would be provided for everyone enrolled in the Rafter plan.
ASUM Vice President Sean McQuillan provided a brief update regarding the ASUM meeting. There was a productive discussion regarding the affordable book plan. He thinks the plan is a good idea and is right for campus. The two student members on the committee were the biggest skeptics and they have had all their questions answered. They support the plan and think it would help students.
Jon Aliri, General Manager and Eamon Fahey, Chief Operating Officer from the UM Bookstore shared their experience in working through the logistics with Rafter. They brought the idea forward as an experiment given the magnitude of the increasing textbook cost problem. If this doesn’t work, they will bring forward another experiment. The Book Store has a lot of data on courses and student book buying behavior.
There has been a lot of feedback from faculty which helped to develop the proposal. On March 25 and 26 Rafter will be on campus to meet with Faculty, Staff and Students. There will be meetings at 10:00a.m., 12:00p.m., 2:00p.m., and 4:00pm on both days and an additional meeting at 6:00 p.m. on Thursday. The Committee wants you to come and ask the tough questions. A survey will also be available for you to provide input in advance of the meetings. The committee hopes there will be a lot of faculty and student participation at the meetings so that a decision can be made in April regarding whether or not to move forward with the Affordable Book Plan.
Questions:
Would publishers still provide desk copies under this plan? Publishers are looking at who is leveraging the secondary market. It is possible that desk copies could be built into the plan. Rafter is currently in negotiations with publishers.
The cost analysis showed that much of the cost is attributed to general education courses. Looking across all majors, the majority of students will save money. There will be a few that will pay more. Faculty are still encouraged to keep the cost down. The software used by faculty to choose their books will list costs. There should be total transparency regarding the cost for students. Two years from now an analysis will be done of the actual cost. Faculty may do such a good job of keeping the cost down, the flat fee could be lowered. The two drivers for the plan are cost (keep it steady) and student success.