|
Academic/Student
Affairs Committee
|
|
Please
see attached and approved minutes of
special meeting held on January 11, 2005
|
|
(Committee
Members: Chair Regent Lynn Morrison-Hamilton, Regent Mike Foster, Regent
Kala French, and Regent Richard Roehm)
|
|
I.
|
Review
and Adopt Agenda.
|
|
II.
|
Approval
of Minutes.
|
|
A.
|
From
the November 17, 2004, meeting of the Committee.
|
|
B.
|
From
the January 11, 2005, conference call meeting of the Committee.
|
|
III.
|
Portion
of the Meeting Devoted to Chief Student Affairs Officers.
(1:30 p.m.)
|
|
A.
|
Discussion
Items:
|
|
1.
|
Follow-Up
on the Security Issues Raised at the November Meeting of the Board � Regent
Hamilton
|
|
2.
|
Other
areas of concern to the Student Affairs Officers?
|
|
IV.
|
Portion
of the Meeting Devoted to Topics of Concern to Both Academic & Student
Affairs Officers. (2:45 p.m.)
|
|
A.
|
The
Transfer Audit � Regent Hamilton and Roger Barber
|
|
1.
|
Follow-up
to the discussion at the January 11th meeting.
|
|
|
a.
|
Discussion
of an action plan for each recommendation
|
|
|
b.
|
Possible
solutions, work groups, timeline for proposals.
|
|
2.
|
Action:
ITEM 126-103-R0105, the Transfer Audit
|
|
3.
|
Angie
Grove, from the Legislative Audit Division, will attend the meeting to serve
as a resource during the discussion.
|
|
B.
|
Action:
ITEM 126-102-R0105, New Meeting Schedule for the Board
Attachment
|
|
V.
|
Portion
of the Meeting Devoted to Chief Academic Officers.
|
|
A.
|
Announcements.
|
|
1.
|
Level
I memorandum
|
|
2.
|
Level
II memorandum with academic program items on submission
|
|
B.
|
Discussion
Items:
|
|
1.
|
Academic Program Planning
|
|
C.
|
Action:
ITEM 125-2851-R1104, A.A.S. degree in Aviation in Bozeman,
MSU-Great Falls College of Technology. Cover
Summary Proposal
Budget Agreement
|
|
D.
|
Action:
ITEM 124-1007-R0704, Graduate certificate in Natural Resources
Conflict Resolution, The University of Montana-Missoula. Cover
Summary Proposal
|
|
E.
|
Action:
ITEM 126-101-R0105, Honorary degree policy revisions.
|
|
VI.
|
Other Business.
|
|
VII.
|
Public Comment
|
|
VIII.
|
Close: Review
Assignments, meeting schedule, meeting's main points.
|
|
Budget
and Audit Oversight Committee
|
|
The
Committee Convened at 1:00 p.m.
(Committee
Members: Chair Regent Mark
Semmens, Regent John Mercer, and Regent Lila Taylor)
|
|
b.
|
Enrollment
Reserve Policy Discussion
|
|
Associate Commissioner Rod
Sundsted indicated he will set up an enrollment reserve fund to cover
fluctuations in enrollment. The designated fund permits them to carry
the funds from year to year. The account would be set up campus by
campus, with funds restricted to use by each campus for enrollment shortfalls.
Mr. Sundsted will present the plan to the Board at either the March or May,
2005 Board meeting. It must be approved by the May meeting.
|
|
c.
|
Workers
Compensation Program Update
|
|
Item c. was an informational
item only.
|
|
d.
|
Athletic
Reports
|
|
The Committee agreed to hold
the Athletic Reports for the full Board.
|
|
e.
|
Shared
Leadership and Other Budget Adjustments
|
|
Commissioner
Stearns gave an overview of changes to the
Executive Budget.
|
|
f.
|
Commitment
to secure office space - ITEM 126-105-R0105 - Authorization for OCHE to
enter into a long-term commitment to secure office space; Office Commissioner
of Higher Education
|
|
Rod
Sundsted Indicated he was pulling this item from the Agenda since he heard
from several other parties interested in making proposals.
He will prepare an RFP to be presented to the Board at the March 17-18,
2005 meeting.
|
|
g.
|
Spending
Authority - ITEM 126-1012-R0105 � Spending Authority � Construction
of New Research Lab Facility: The University of Montana-Missoula Attachment
Attachment 2
|
|
This
project will be funded by indirect cost recovery funds.
|
|
h.
|
Increase
Authorization - ITEM 126-2003-R0105 � Increase Authorization to
Construct a Clean Room in the Engineering Physical Sciences Complex; Montana
State University-Bozeman Attachment
|
|
President
Gamble indicated there is a need for an additional $1.5 million for enhanced
designs and equipment costs.
The total is $3.5 million, all of it being federal dollars.
The project must go before the LRBP and the legislature.
|
|
i.
|
Native
American Student Center - ITEM 126-2004-R0105 � Authorization to
Submit Request to 59th Legislature for Authority to Construct a
Native American Student Center using Non-State Funding; Montana State
University-Bozeman
|
|
The
committee agreed to hold this item for the full Board.
|
|
j.
|
Utilize
Multi-Modal Variable or Fixed Rate Debt Instruments - ITEM
126-2005-R0105 � Authorization to Utilize Multi-Modal Variable or
Fixed Rate Debt Instruments, and win Interest Rate Swap Agreement, Series J
2004 Facilities Revenue Bond Issue; Montana State University Attachment
A Attachment B
Attachment C Bond
Resolution
|
|
The
fundamental financing on this item will be a swap, and the actual bonds will
not be sold until June 2005. The
campus will make a choice of using long term, or getting a better deal for an
eleven-year term. Before making
the decision, they will confer with the Budget and Audit Oversight Committee.
The committee agreed to hold this item for the full Board.
|
|
k.
|
Execute
a Lease for Space in a Private Sector Facility - ITEM 126-2852-R0105
� Authorization to Execute a Lease for Space in a Private Sector Facility;
Montana State University-Great Falls College of Technology Lease
Agreement
|
|
The
committee agreed to hold this item for the full Board.
|
|
RETURN TO ITEM i.
|
|
i.
|
Native
American Student Center - ITEM 126-2004-R0105 � Authorization to
Submit Request to 59th Legislature for Authority to Construct a
Native American Student Center using Non-State Funding; Montana State
University-Bozeman
|
|
Regent Mercer asked if the
O&M for this item was going to be given to the State. President
Gamble indicated it was his policy to ask the state to take care of their
buildings. However, if the state refuses to do the O&M, he will then
consider another approach. He indicated the LRBP committee encouraged
him to present the O&M to the State. Craig Roloff indicated the
O&M cost would be around $70,000 per year, with one third set aside for
major maintenance. President Gamble indicated Dennis Sunrud, MSU alum
will donate all the architecture, and will spearhead the fundraising for the
project. He believes he can raise about half of it in short order.
Although this building is not at the top of the strategic process, it is in
the five-year and longer plan. It is opportunistic at this time to place
it high on the list now. President Gamble said it should replace some
other $8 million piece on the LRBP. Dr. Fleming stated the President had
convened his Advisory Council, and Tribal Elders representing each tribe in
the state, and presented the concept, which was enthusiastically received.
The students also support the project. The purpose of the facility is to
replace their current 1100 square foot room in a basement and replace it with
a multipurpose building with a computer lab, social area, tutorial area, an
area for counseling, meeting space, and a round room of 2600 square feet.
There will be classrooms for seminars and other instruction. Dr. Fleming
said he wants to start raising funds as soon as possible after this item is
approved. They would like to start working with the architectural firm
of Dennis Sunrud in July 2005 with completion of the plans by September 2005.
Funding should be accomplished by October 2006, with groundbreaking in April
2007. Doors would open August 2008. President Gamble said they will not start
construction unless the money is in hand, and they have a handle on the major
donors at this time. If approved by the Board and the Legislature, it
will go into high gear with the funding in hand by October 2006. Regent
Mercer asked if this project would put any pressure on other campuses to do
the same thing, to which President Dennison replied that UM has the approval
and is in the fundraising stage at this time. Commissioner Stearns
indicated that in visiting six of the seven reservations, each is in some
stage of development of cultural centers. Henrietta Mann said that the
Montana Constitution recognizes the native culture of Indians. While
there is a house and presence on the UM campus, MSU has only a room.
Native students need to be made to feel at home. Students from the
reservations do experience culture shock. The center will be open to any
student from anywhere in the world, as well as to members of the local
community. Commissioner Stearns recommended this project be a
partnership with the state, with the donors funding the building and the state
handling the O&M. Regent Mercer expressed that the state is not
going to put up one dime for this building, meaning they don�t believe it is
important to the state. It seems awkward under the circumstances to ask
them to pay for the O&M.
|
|
a.
|
FY
06-07 Budget Discussion
|
|
Chair
Semmens explained that Pam Joehler had done a
meaningful report for the Board.
His conclusion is that the campuses have done a good job of delivering
on the mandate of the Board to keep quality with limited resources.
However, he said it is wrong to characterize it as no resources.
He was surprised at the huge disparity between the campuses.
He said the Board needs to be more attentive to that issue.
Rod Sundsted pointed to the one-time reductions at UM which impacted
the smaller campuses receiving the funds.
He mentioned that at MSU-Northern, their numbers are very low which
doesn�t seem logical.
This issue needs more attention.
Regent Mercer asked that with the increase per student as shown at
Bozeman, did UM sacrifice quality since their numbers are minimal.
President Dennison indicated the dollars were sent to the smaller
campuses, and this was discussed with administrators and students.
There would have been layoffs and fewer classes if they had not
transferred the funds.
Regent Mercer asked if this was masking some other problems, such as
painting that wasn�t done.
President Dennison indicated UM had some increased class sizes, or they
used temporary faculty for the first year and picked up tenure track in the
second year instead.
Chair Semmens indicated that what UM did was recognize that the
allocation model does not consider the incremental revenues from non-resident
students. This
was a proper allocation of state dollars.
Regent Mercer indicated the Board should make the decision on transfers
to save the campuses.
The smaller campuses should be allowed to sink or swim.
The
Committee discussed the Budget Worksheet handed to the Committee.
Chair Semmens indicated that as an example, if everything was adopted
for UM, there would be an 8.5% increase in tuition per year over the biennium.
President Dennison indicated the tuition would range from 4% to 12%,
with lowest rates at the COTs, a slightly larger amount at Montana Tech
because of historic problems, and at UM-Missoula 7.5% for resident students
and 8.5% for non-residents. The
issue of declining enrollments weighed heavily on a few campuses, and it was
agreed the committee would meet in the evening to resolve the issue.
|
|
The Budget and Audit Oversight
Committee adjourned at 5:07 p.m.
|
|
Staff
and Compensation Committee
|
|
The
Committee Convened at 5:15 p.m. (Committee Members
Present:
Chair Regent John Mercer, Regent Richard Roehm, and Regent Mark
Semmens. Also
Present: Regent Lila Taylor, and Commissioner Stearns OCHE
Staff member: Kathy Crego
|
|
a.
|
Multiple
year Contracts for Non-tenure Track - ITEM 126-104-R0105 � Approval
of Pilot Program on Multiple year Contracts for Non-tenure Track Faculty;
Office Commissioner of Higher Education � President Geoff Gamble
Attachment
|
|
Action:
Committee
members unanimously recommended Board approval of policy 711.3 allowing the
appointment of non-tenure track faculty at non-union campuses.
The policy is effective through April 1, 2008, before which time the
Commissioner of Higher Education will report to the Board of Regents relative
to the use and continued need for the policy.
|
|
b.
|
Minutes
of 11/15/04 committee meeting
|
|
Minutes
of
the November 15, 2004, Staff and Compensation Committee meeting were
unanimously approved.
|
|
c.
|
Salary
Guidelines � Revised per 11/15/04 meeting
|
|
Action:
Incorporating
the modifications recommended at the November 15, 2004, meeting, the
procedures were unanimously recommended for endorsement by the full Board.
Additional recommendations will be presented to the committee at the
March 2005 meeting.
Committee members would like to see a more precise approach to such
salary increases.
|
|
d.
|
Lump
Sum Bonus provision
|
|
Discussion:
A
brief report was presented on the use of lump sum bonuses within private and
public sector organizations.
The concept of lump sum bonuses was endorsed.
Staff will work with Regent Roehm to develop eligibility criteria and
program details.
A recommendation will be made to the committee at the March 2005
meeting.
|
|
e.
|
Dependent
Tuition Waiver
|
|
Discussion:
Utilization
of the dependent partial tuition waiver was reviewed.
The dependent tuition waiver was implemented in the 2004 summer session
on a pilot basis. The
waiver is subject to collective bargaining for those individuals covered by a
collective bargaining agreement.
There was no opposition from campus representatives in regard to
continuation of the dependent partial tuition waiver.
Action:
Committee members recommended full Board approval of removal of the
sunset clause and continuation of the dependent tuition waiver policy.
|
|
f.
|
Data/Research
Position for OCHE
|
|
Discussion:
OCHE Staff will present a proposal and draft job description for
consideration at the March 2005 committee meeting.
|
|
g.
|
Classified
Staff � MAP optional pay report
|
|
Discussion:
FY 2004 information regarding lump sum bonus and strategic pay awards
to classified staff was distributed for information purposes.
|
|
h.
|
Committee
by-laws
|
|
Action:
Chairman Mercer requested that the charge to the committee be placed on
the March 2005 meeting agenda for discussion.
|
|
The Staff and Compensation
Committee Meeting Adjourned at 5:36 pm
|
|
Full Board
Convened at 7:30 a.m.
|
|
|
President Trebon welcomed the Board
of Regents and said he was proud of the collaboration between Carroll College
and the Montana University System, noting that education is a whole cloth with
some different perspectives.
|
|
|
SYSTEM
ISSUES
|
|
a.
|
Round Table discussion Governor
Schweitzer and Lt. Governor Bohlinger
|
|
Neither Governor Schweitzer nor Lt. Governor
Bohlinger was able to attend the meeting.
The round table discussion will be rescheduled for the March 17-18,
2005 meeting. Chair Mercer
indicated he hoped these round table discussions would become a regular part
of the Board meetings.
|
ROLL CALL
|
|
Roll Call Indicated a Quorum
Present
|
|
Regents Present:
Mike Foster Vice Chair, Kala French, Lynn Hamilton, John Mercer Chair, Richard
Roehm, Mark Semmens, Lila Taylor, and Superintendent of Public Instruction
Linda McCulloch ex officio was represented by Cathy Warhank. Also present was Commissioner Sheila M.
Stearns
Regent
Absent: Governor
Brian Schweitzer ex officio, excused
|
|
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
|
|
Regent
Hamilton MOVED for APPROVAL of the
Minutes of the November 17-19,
2004 meeting in Missoula, MT
|
|
The
Minutes were APPROVED unanimously on a 7-0 vote
|
|
|
SYSTEM
ISSUES continued
|
|
c.
|
Report from Shared
Leadership for a Better Montana Economy Steering Committees � Committee
Representatives
|
|
Associate Commissioner Dave
Gibson emphasized that although his office did a great deal of work in this
process, the recommendations were those of the steering committees, and not
his staff. Although many recommendations are listed, they are not
prioritized and his mission is to see which can be done in a specified period.
The document is still being rewritten. Mr. Gibson indicated the document
is also available on the web site. Commissioner Stearns acknowledged
that in the spirit of shared leadership, they had followed the direction of
the Board to involve others from around the state. Senator Keenan served
on the committees about a year ago and he is most interested in business
partnerships with the Montana University System. The
Commissioner indicated that as they continue to work through the process they
will connect with other leaders in the public and private sectors.
|
|
d.
|
Update on Trust Lands Issue �
Regent Richard Roehm
|
|
Regent Roehm said he was
glad to see some motion toward resolution of this issue. Especially
noteworthy was the final paragraph of the Commissioner�s memo. The
Commissioner and Senator Jon Tester will meet in the governor�s office
tomorrow afternoon to further define legislation on this issue.
Commissioner Stearns thanked Chief Legal Counsel Catherine Swift for
shepherding this issue toward a possible solution. She said it will take some
time for the new administration to get up to speed on this, but there is a
Bill Draft LC 734 which was drafted by Greg Petesch at the request of Jon
Tester. It appears that the language of the Constitution and the Trusts
make enough of a liability that the legislative legal counsel has urged a
resolution on how the process works. The past diversions of funds are a
different issue. Commissioner Stearns indicated she believes it is
preferable for state agencies to resolve differences without litigation. However,
in this issue, any
citizen has standing to sue in regard to the proper administration of trust
lands and income by the state.
|
|
f.
|
Report on Supreme Court
Decision on Snetsinger, et al. v. MUS � Catherine Swift
|
|
Chief Legal Counsel
Catherine Swift reported it was three weeks to the day that the Supreme Court
decision was handed down. She explained that UM employees had brought
suit against MUS policy as in violation of the Constitution. The MUS
policy is like many others. The system pays the full premium for all
employees, and they are then allowed to pay an extra charge for a spouse.
The plan states it must be a lawful spouse. In Montana, there are three
ways to create a lawful marriage: solemnization, and declaration, which are
statutory, and common law marriage, which is well recognized in Montana, but
is not statutory. MUS policy attempted to recognize common law marriage
and allowed an affidavit of common law marriage. Four members (the
majority) of the Court found that an affidavit does not create a marriage,
while three members said it did create or verify a marriage. The Court
therefore, held that the MUS allowed opposite sex couples onto the plan
without benefit of marriage, while denying that option to same sex couples.
The Court, applying an equal protection analysis held that it was
unconstitutional to treat same sex couples differently from opposite sex
couples solely on the basis of sexual orientation. The decision is not
about marriage or classification based on marriage. MUS is not the only
system to use this affidavit, but they have suspended its use. They now
plan to gather data from the campuses and to speak with actuaries, review the
needs of employees, follow the directives of the court, and take into account
those already on the plan and the overall health of the plan and return to the
Board at the March 17-18, 2005 meeting with options for changes in the plan.
The next open enrollment begins April 1. Chair Mercer indicated the
Court tried to dance around this issue and left it to the Board of Regents to
be the arbiter. He suggested one option is for the Board to say they
must be married. Another option is to look at it from the insurance
standpoint. If someone is willing to pay for insurance, then the system
would be willing to provide it for a father, nephew, or others living with the
employee. However, it needs to be financially feasible for the plan.
Chair Mercer said the Board will not be the ones in Montana to determine the
status of same sex marriage. Catherine Swift indicated the policy needs
to be either narrowed or broadened, and data will be presented to the Board at
the March 17-18, 2005 meeting.
|
Following
a ten-minute break, the Board reconvened at 9:00 a.m.
|
|
b.
|
Round Table discussion with
Legislative Leadership
|
|
Present
at the meeting were:
House Minority Whip Monica Lindeen, House Republican Leader Roy Brown,
Speaker Gary Matthews, Senate President Jon Tester, Senate Minority Leader Bob
Keenan
Chair Mercer indicated this
time was dedicated to a roundtable discussion, with no speeches. It was
intended to build on existing partnerships and continue dialogue between the
Board and the Legislature. Senator Tester indicated communication is
always good. He said the Montana University System is one of the main
economic drivers in Montana. It is important to develop a small business
climate to keep people in the state, and to meet the needs of the MUS to be
successful in moving society forward with a better quality of life, standard
of living, and the ability to keep kids in the state. Increased tuition
is an increased tax. There is a direct benefit from that tax, but if MUS
is priced so high it drives kids out of state for education, it is an
unfortunate loss for Montana. Senator Tester believes the state must be
competitive in tuition, and must be affordable. Further, the university
system and the colleges of technology need to be responsive to the business
needs in the state. From a legislative standpoint, they need to give the
Board flexibility to answer those needs. It may mean more dollars.
Senator Tester said the base to education is K-12, and if it is no good, the
university system does a lot of work in remediation. He said he is
sensitive to tuition since he has children in college. When he grew up,
his parents paid his tuition, but he can�t do that for his own children.
In order to pay off their school loans, they will need to leave the state to
earn better salaries. Senator Keenan said he had served on the Shared
Leadership group and was supportive of it, and had a long list of ideas to implement. He stated the reservations in Montana are the place to
some of the work. He suggested the possibility of picking
up the dark fiber optics from defunct businesses and putting them to use.
As far as Shared Leadership is concerned, he feels it is still at the general level, and he likes dealing with specifics, but he is grateful for the
communication. Representative Matthews said that affordability is very
important. This session is not like the last one, which was dealing with
a very poor budget and had a difficult time. This session is much more
positive. He said he thinks the efforts of the Board of Regents on
Shared Leadership are wonderful. He is glad they are looking at those
ideas and plans. He remembered in 1999 that there was a lot of the Board
looking for money, and now they are saying they want to help fix the problems
in Montana. He hopes many of those ideas will remain.
Representative Brown appreciated the idea of bringing the two groups together.
He also appreciated the efforts of Shared Leadership. He suggested one
of the biggest issues facing the state in which MUS could help is the
transmission of energy. Perhaps a partnership could be formed to make
the electrical transmission system work better. Another problem he
mentioned is the economics of wind energy. Some say it is good, and
others say it is not. Representative Brown suggested the minds in the
MUS could offer ideas and solutions. He said there are partnerships
between industry and campuses that are working, such as the refineries in
Billings who partnered with the College of Technology to train their workers,
and the business pays for the cost. There is also the possibility of a
medical school in Billings. Another issue that can be worked on together
is distance education. Representative Lindeen said she was also involved
in Shared Leadership and believes there is value in bringing all these folks
together to talk about partnering. She recommended the Board be sure
there is buy-in from the campuses for Shared Leadership. It is a
challenge when dealing with the culture of the system. She said that the
MUS plays a key role in workforce training. She is impressed, and stated
the key is that the MUS continues to be responsive to curriculum changes to
reflect the changes in industries and jobs of the future. The changes
must be done quickly. Ideally, the two-year campuses are the place to do
this. Chair Mercer said he hopes the Board can provide information and
answers on educational issues, but he would also appreciate their addressing
other things that affect the system. He asked if they had suggestions on
how better to interact with the legislature or others. It was mutually
agreed by members of the roundtable that the Board has been doing a good job
of reaching out and improving lines of communication. The Board was
encouraged to continue to this. It was also agreed that informal
brainstorming sessions on big issues would be beneficial. Senator Keenan
emphasized the importance of developing distance learning. Senator
Keenan said that Carl Venne, Chairman of the Crow Nation had visited him.
He is trying to move the Crow Nation forward. They have billions of
dollars of assets such as water, coal, timber, and manpower with 70%
unemployment. He is trying to figure out how to get things done.
He mentioned coal bed methane and didn�t know where to start. Senator
Tester indicated he called DEQ and they provided a CD that helped Mr. Venne.
The BIA also gives the Crow Nation $5 million a year of highway money.
Senator Tester told him he could also get a state match for federal dollars.
He recommended the Board invite Carl Venne to a discussion.
Representative Lindeen invited the Board to attend any of their meetings,
which are on Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday in room 137 of the Capitol.
Representative Matthews thanked the Board for the nursing program at Miles
Community College. He said that distance learning has been a big issue
for them and their hospitals. Chair Mercer offered a heads up to the
panel regarding the presentation of the MUS budget. It is being put
together in advance so the legislature will know what the tuition will be in
advance. He told the panel the Board wants them to know what they are
buying for their money. They will be buying down the cost of tuition.
It will be their responsibility to determine what level the state will pay,
and what level the students will pay. Senator Tester said he thought
that was great, and that he appreciated the frankness. However, he also
mentioned that the fees were becoming prohibitive. Chair Mercer
indicated that is one of their mixed messages. He believed that fees had
been topped out, but students desired to impose huge fees on themselves.
He asked if the Committee would be willing to work with the Board on the
revision of the allocation model so they would be more involved in analyzing
it, and understanding its implications. Vice Chair Foster gave an open
invitation to the panel members to attend any of the Board committee meetings
as they work on various issues. Chair Mercer offered to meet again with
the panel at their convenience in March.
|
Following
a five-minute break, the Board reconvened at 10:00 a.m.
|
|
e.
|
Congressional Delegation Staff
on Research and Economic Development - Regent Mike Foster
|
|
Staff
Present: Jim Foley and Holly Luck of Senator Baucus� office, Jeff
Gerard of Rep. Rehberg�s office, and Todd Casper and Betsy Allen of Senator
Burns� office.
Chair
Mercer explained the Board is interested in knowing ways to improve their
working relationship with the Congressional Delegation. He also
expressed that the Board wants the delegates to see the university system as
more than asking for things. If they have an idea or problem that needs
to be tested, he hopes the MUS would be the place to test it. He
suggested that if they have problems they can�t solve, the MUS has thousands
of people with ideas. He said they would adjust the schedule of the
Board to get together with any one of the delegates, or even have a special
meeting. Vice Chair Foster said there is great potential and optimism
for the future. He looks forward to the opportunities for communication
if the staff can make it to the Board meetings. He recalled when
President Dennison had brought up the issue of Reauthorization, and what an
opportunity it would have been for a great dialogue if the delegation staff
had been at that meeting. Betsy Allen indicated one problem with
communications is that constituents don�t understand the congressional
process. Jeff Gerard said he looks forward to entering into discussion,
and although education is outside his field, he is involved in shared
leadership. Holly Luck said she was delighted to participate in Shared
Leadership since she had never been part of the process. Her primary
responsibility is the Senator�s schedule. He was delighted with the
exchange and wants it to continue in the future. He appreciates the
cooperation from the campuses and education is one of his major priorities
this session. Senator Baucus� job bill is funding for two-year
schools. Jim Foley complimented the Board for including the Delegation
in their meeting. Montana is unique in having Representative Rehberg on
the House Appropriations Committee, Senator Burns on the Senate Appropriations
Committee, and Senator Baucus on the Finance Committee. He expounded on
Senator Baucus� job bill indicating it was introduced last year to create
competitive grants for two-year campuses to match with businesses to be
brought into the state. 80% of jobs are coming out of two-year
institutions. Another focus of the delegation will be tax incentives.
He noted that Perkins was cut for reauthorization. Mr. Foley indicated
their bosses had instructed them to take this meeting and future meetings very
seriously, and to be partners in moving this state forward. Regent
Semmens said it is remarkable what the Congressional Delegation can do for
Montana. He mentioned specific ideas to work on together are
Reauthorization, opportunities for the research universities, access to higher
education with such things as need based scholarships and grants, especially
in the rural areas, and distance education. A final area is two-year
institutions. Vice Chair Foster indicated that in the area of grants,
the Workforce Development Committee is working on several, and he invited the
members of the panel to attend the committee meetings at any time.
Regent Hamilton said that a big issue for Montana students is the expected
family contributions, which are significant for Montana families. Expecting low and middle income families to
have those resources in ready cash is often unrealistic.
Chair Mercer requested the panel to provide the Board with a presentation on
the federal appropriations process at a future meeting. He asked the
panel if there was anything that could be changed in lobbying by the campuses.
Todd Ketzer said that everything now comes through each side of the university
as a package. In the past, all the professors used to call them.
They are happy with the presentations and impressed with how well they have
studied the bills. They know where the money is and tailor their
proposals around it. Jim Foley told the Board to give them proposals on
access and how it should work in rural areas, and they would see if they could
make it happen. He said further that any item given to them is on the
burner that day. Regent French asked the panel if they would give a
presentation to the Board on Reauthorization at a future meeting. Vice
Chair Foster indicated round table discussions would become a regular part of
the Board meetings.
|
|
END SYSTEM ISSUES
|
|
President
Gamble requested the ability to hold part of his report until Friday morning.
He indicated that his written report outlined key points, but he called the
Boards attention to Neil Cornish in the Physics Department at MSU-Bozeman who
continues to receive international acclaim for determining the size and shape
of the universe. He believes he could be on track for a Nobel Prize.
Interim
Dean Frazier gave an overview of his brief time at Helena College of
Technology indicating much has been accomplished at the campus to stabilize
enrollment and communication problems. He is also pursuing an
opportunity started by Alex Capdeville when he was at the Helena Campus, and
is attempting to arrange training of employees in four state departments.
If they find they are unable to deliver everything requested, they are willing
to broker with the state departments to put together training programs from
the other MUS campuses. Mr. Frazier indicated it might be time for the
system to look at a system wide communication plan and to lay out parameters.
He finds that they don�t talk together, but at each other. He
suggested the possibility of putting individuals on different campuses for a
week at a time to interact. He further expressed that resource
diversification at the small campuses is just as important as at the large
ones. He asked the Board to think of the small campuses when they are
reallocating resources, and how they can better work with organizations and
private companies. Mr. Frazier believes there are three thirds to the
MUS and often the two larger thirds get a lot of the focus. He asked the
Board to consider making time to focus on the smaller campus needs during
their discussions. He also asked if they are communicating well enough
with the high schools and elementary schools. He has always believed in
Shared Leadership, but this is a long-term process. Montana on the Move
had a good meeting in Helena last week, and it also has great potential, as
does Shared Leadership.
Chancellor
Sexton thanked the Board for the attention they gave to his initiatives and
the questions he raised. He said an important issue the Board needs to
work on soon is pricing. The University of Phoenix is establishing its
first site in Montana in Billings. He said part of the quality that
needs to be retained is 24/7/365. He said the campuses need latitude to
establish their own pricing, with some classes being loss leaders that will
balance out in the end. He also encouraged the Board to strengthen their
advocacy for building the infrastructure for two-year education.
Chancellor Sexton indicated he hesitated to bring the next issue to the Board,
but believes the discussion needs to start on expanding their offerings into a
comprehensive community college. They need to go to the community and
seek financial support, and they need the support of the Board. He
believes the groundwork has been laid. Chancellor Sexton said that
probably the most contentious issue concerns Board policies. He
understands what the Board and system are trying to accomplish with policies
and revisions. To build a quick case, he said when they go through the
budget discussions, Montana has a great return for its investment. One
reason is the ingenuity of faculty and staff on the campus. When the
Board passes policies, he understands the need for unity, but they need to be
careful not to use the policies as silver bullets. The campuses need to
retain their uniqueness. There is no single solution for all the
campuses in the budget discussion. Regent Semmens said they need to talk
about the tuition policy and market realities. He asked if Chancellor
Sexton actually meant a transition to a local district and local mill support
when he discussed expanding to a community college. Chancellor Sexton
said that is what they need to discuss. He said that where community
colleges now exist they have community support. He said in order to
build and make the transition to a community college, it would best be based
on demographics, with a larger percentage of diversity in the population, and
a very effective advisement system is needed. Regent Semmens asked
Chancellor Sexton if there are Board policies that restrict his faculty from
pursuing research. He replied it is a combination of things, a big
one being resources. Regent Semmens then clarified that it is not
policy, but resources that limits them.
Chancellor
Storey reported that Experience One is quite remarkable. There are only
three schools in the country that have been able to do it, and they are all
private schools. UM-Western is the first public school to use the
system. They are not dealing with how to schedule time, but what to do
with that time. It is working and succeeding. Student reports are
uniformly good. Only one student said the class was too difficult and
challenging. There is a great retention rate, which is now higher than
in the past. The faculty are working hard to learn to teach in the new
environment. They have plans for faculty to travel to Colorado Springs,
visit courses, and have meetings to learn techniques. Chancellor Storey
hopes the Board understands there could be speed bumps along the way. He
also commented on the Ag Conference held at Western, which brought 150 people
to campus. They held dinner for the community in the arena and more than
300 people attended. The conference was quite successful and covered
many controversial issues. They also held a recent meeting to consider
converting heating of the campus to timber by-products. There were about
40 or 50 people in attendance from MUS, federal, state and city and they were
all enthusiastic. Chancellor Storey indicated that just the other day,
the small local radio station in Dillon ran an ad for the University of
Phoenix. It caused him to pause. That is the largest university in
the world, and he is concerned that they feel it is worthwhile to run an ad in
Dillon. He echoed his peers in reminding the Board that the quality of
the campuses is directly related to quality faculty. The one thing that
keeps him awake at night is that the salaries they offer faculty are too low.
He said they have terrific people teaching who are very dedicated.
President
Karas offered the help of Flathead Valley Community College to Chancellor
Sexton in his efforts to move toward a community college. She reported
they were delighted with the settlement of the suit on the Bond issue.
However, the cost of construction and materials has increased over the two
years. They will review all of the plans over the next few weeks and
decide what will need to be downgraded. They are continuing plans for a
Center for Allied Health Partnerships with Kalispell Hospital and MSU, and UM.
She recommended the Board invite Sandra Ellman to speak to them on
accreditation and the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities as
they will be reviewing the standards over the next two years.
Regent
Roehm referred to Chancellor Sexton�s desire to convert the College of
Technology to a Community College, and said he believes the Board needs to
have some sort of transition plan for the colleges of technology. He
realizes not all are ready to make that move now. He suggested the Two
Year Committee discuss the feasibility of such a plan and urged the committee
to give a report to the Board at the March 17-18, 2005 meeting. Chair
Mercer indicated he preferred to have the Commissioner brainstorm with the
two-year campuses and other leaders.
END
DISCUSSION WITH CAMPUS LEADERS
|
Return to Top
|
|
ACADEMIC/STUDENT AFFAIRS ITEMS
|
|
b.
|
Presentation on Transfer Audit by Angie Grove, Legislative Audit Division
|
|
Ms. Angie Grove indicated
the report she was sharing with the Board is the same one she presented to the
Legislative Audit Committee. She said the issue is being given back to
the Board to apply management controls, establish time lines, standardize
decision-making, and determine where decisions will be maintained. She
was able to compile her data from Banner. Board policies are limited in providing guidance in this process.
The general education core is not consistent, and there is wide variation
among the two year programs and the number of credits required to graduate or
transfer. A second series of recommendations is to clarify and enforce
the core in place, coordinate the two-year degrees, and recommend clear
criteria for a cumulative grade point and what minimum grade is needed to
pass. Her audit targeted nursing, which has unique problems. Some
of the complexities are caused by three levels, LPN, CNA, and RN.
However, the transfer problems are mainly between the LPNs and the others.
All curricula are comparable and cover the basics of the same things.
However, the number of credits required varies from 45 to 70, which can be
$3000 difference in cost. When transferring, it takes an average of 152
days to decide if credits are transferable. What will be accepted into
the RN programs varies from 12 to 41 credits. Ms. Grove indicated more
leadership is required, with the creation of policy to standardize the number
of credits, the kinds of degrees, and that transfer agreements are in place.
Across the
board, it takes an average of 73 days to decide if credits are transferable. Chair Mercer said some people may have thought the MUS would be defensive
about this audit, but hoped that Ms. Grove had found it to the contrary.
He asked the Commissioner and faculty members to address the manner in which
this audit can be acted on rapidly. Commissioner Stearns indicated that
the system intends to use this audit and will respond quickly. There
have been favorable responses from legislators, but she was shocked at the
number of legislators who believe the MUS makes transferability difficult to
keep students longer in order to get more money. Deputy Commissioner
Barber attended the hearing on the Audit with Commissioner Stearns and said it
was very clear they needed to respond quickly. His initial recommendation of
September 2005 was not acceptable. They then had a special meeting of the
Academic/Student Affairs Committee and developed a work plan. Small
workgroups will work on each of the eight recommendations, with representation
by registrars, admissions staff, and faculty members. They will bring
the greater part of their recommendations to the March 17-18, 2005 meeting,
with perhaps some being brought to the May 19-20, 2005 meeting. Ms.
Grove indicated her department has offered to help the work groups and they
will keep the Audit Committee informed. Things are in motion, and she
will write a formal memo at some point to give the implementation status of
each recommendation. Faculty representative Keith Edgerton indicated the
faculty are completely committed to this. He was concerned about the
perception in the legislature that they would deliberately keep students from
transferring to get more money from them. He said faculty are committed
to working with the Audit office and the Board of Regents to address all these
issues and to rectify them as soon as possible. Regent Semmens asked if
there was student representation on the work groups. Mr. Barber replied
no, but hopes some would join the effort. Student Regent French is
involved in a workgroup and is committed to keeping students informed.
|
The
Board recessed for lunch at 11:50 a.m.
The
Board reconvened at 1:10 p.m.
|
|
a.
|
Report from Academic/Student
Affairs Committee � Lynn Hamilton
|
|
Regent
Hamilton indicated the Student Affairs Officers had identified
security needs and brought their report to the Committee.
It was discovered that a system wide report had been done on security
issues and they plan to involve the full Board in discussion of best practices
from that report.
The SAOs also identified two more issues, which they hope to discuss in
March or May, at the Board meeting: Student Financial Aid and Retention.
|
|
2.
ITEM 126-103-R0105 - The
Transfer Audit
Regent Hamilton moved APPROVAL of Item 2.
Motion
approved unanimously on 7-0 vote
|
|
B.
ITEM 126-102-R0105 - New
Meeting Schedule for the Board Attachment
Regent Hamilton moved APPROVAL of Item B.
Motion
approved unanimously on 7-0 vote
|
|
1.
Level I memorandum.
There was
discussion among the Board of the use of the Level I and Level II processes
for approving programs.
|
|
2.
Level II memorandum with academic
program items on submission.
Regent Hamilton indicated the items on the
Level II memo were up as Submission Items, and would be presented to the Board
for Action at the March 17-18, 2005 meeting.
|
|
C.
ITEM 125-2851-R1104 -
A.A.S. degree in Aviation in Bozeman, MSU-Great Falls College of
Technology. Cover Summary
Proposal Budget
Agreement
There
was some discussion about the perceived competition with the Rocky Mountain
College BA program in aviation. Following
testimony from students and citizens, President Oates was convinced this
program is no real threat.
Regent
Hamilton indicated the Committee recommended that Item C. should be held over
until the March 17-18, 2005 meeting to give the Great Falls College of
Technology and Rocky Mountain College an opportunity to work out an
articulation agreement for their two programs.
|
|
D.
ITEM 124-1007-R0704 -
Graduate certificate in Natural Resources Conflict Resolution, The University
of Montana-Missoula. Cover
Summary Proposal
Regent Hamilton moved APPROVAL of Item D.
Motion
approved unanimously on 7-0 vote
|
|
E.
ITEM 126-101-R0105 -
Honorary degree policy revisions.
Regent Hamilton moved APPROVAL of Item E.
Motion
approved unanimously on 7-0 vote
|
|
END
ACADEMIC/STUDENT AFFAIRS ITEMS
|
|
|
ADMINISTRATIVE/BUDGET
ITEMS
|
|
a.
|
Report from Budget & Audit
Oversight Committee � Mark Semmens
|
|
Rosi Keller from UM gave an
update on the progress of the MUS Workers Compensation Program. Chair
Mercer requested continued reports about every 18 months.
|
|
ATHLETIC REPORTS
|
|
Pam Joehler of the
Commissioner�s office stated that every year staff prepares a summary of the
Athletic reports. Typically they are done in late fall, but were delayed
a couple months this year. She had sent her summary memo and the report
to the Board. She reported that NCAA had changed their reporting
requirements for the campuses, and suggested they should change their format
to match that of the NCAA. There were a few kinks this time, but those
will be worked out next year. Vice Chair Foster asked how many athletes
are Montana students. And referring to the last page on graduation
rates, he noted 70% at UM, 63% at Montana Tech, and 18% at UM-Western.
He said these are important figures and asked if a record is kept comparing
resident to non-resident rates. President Dennison indicated that
typically they don�t, but it could be done. He also said that the rate
of Montana athletes to non-residents is about 65% but it varies year to year.
Regent Semmens asked if Ms. Joehler had any data for comparison on how Montana
stacks up against similar institutions. She replied no, but she will
research it for him. President Dennison emphasized it must be comparable
system to system. Regent Semmens noted the drop in the Athletic deficit
at MSU, and President Gamble indicated they are on track with their five-year
plan. Regent Hamilton asked how they monitor compliance with Title IX.
President Dennison indicated that is an issue that must be addressed campus by
campus. There are three prongs to this issue: the numerical composition,
increased opportunities for women, and whether the institution is serving the
interests of students. The accrediting agency looks at all three.
UM has been certified by NCAA and approved by the accrediting Board.
President Gamble indicated they did as well. Regent Hamilton asked if
there was a report they provided NCAA which could be provided to the Board so
they could monitor as well as answer questions. President Dennison
indicated it could become part of the report they provide the Board.
|
|
SHARED LEADERSHIP AND OTHER
BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
|
|
Commissioner Stearns gave an
overview of the Executive Budget. Regent Hamilton asked what the intent
of the Board was as they move through the process and identify initiatives
they consider important but which are not funded. Regent Semmens
indicated they should continue to support them. All could be done, and
would give a good return on the investment. Chair Mercer said any that
are not funded by the end of the session will not be done.
|
|
f.
|
ITEM
126-105-R0105 - Authorization for OCHE to enter into a long-term
commitment to secure office space; Office Commissioner of Higher Education
|
|
Item f. was pulled from the
Agenda. OCHE will put together an RFP and present it to the Board at the
March 17-18, 2005 meeting.
|
|
g.
|
ITEM
126-1012-R0105 � Spending Authority � Construction of New Research Lab
Facility: The University of Montana-Missoula Attachment
|
|
Regent Roehm moved APPROVAL of Item g.
Motion approved unanimously on 7-0 vote
|
|
h.
|
ITEM
126-2003-R0105 � Increase Authorization to Construct a Clean Room in the
Engineering Physical Sciences Complex; Montana State University-Bozeman
Attachment
|
|
Regent Taylor moved APPROVAL of Item h.
Motion approved unanimously on 7-0 vote
|
|
i.
|
ITEM
126-2004-R0105 � Authorization to Submit Request to 59th Legislature for
Authority to Construct a Native American Student Center using Non-State
Funding; Montana State University-Bozeman
|
|
Regent Roehm moved APPROVAL of Item i.
Motion approved unanimously on 7-0 vote
|
|
j.
|
ITEM
126-2005-R0105 � Authorization to Utilize Multi-Modal Variable or Fixed
Rate Debt Instruments, with an Interest Rate Swap Agreement, Series J 2005
Facilities Revenue Bond Issue; Montana State University-Bozeman Attachment
A Attachment B
Attachment C Bond
Resolution
|
|
Regent Roehm moved APPROVAL of Item j. with stipulation that MSU must
consult the Budget Committee before making their final decision to opt out.
Motion approved unanimously on 6-0 vote with Regent
Semmens abstaining.
|
Following
a ten-minute break, the Board reconvened at 2:50 p.m.
|
|
k.
|
ITEM
126-2852-R0105 � Authorization to Execute a Lease for Space in a Private
Sector Facility; Montana State University-Great Falls College of Technology
Attachment
|
|
Regent Hamilton said the
Board needs to discuss the growth in two-year education. Following the
restructuring of the MUS the two main campuses were to be the premiere research
campuses, those students who had prepared themselves would attend those
schools. There would be open admission for the other four-year and
two-year campuses. There are Board policies to reinforce that concept.
The Board was concerned about remediation and said it was not to be done on
the two main campuses so that current facilities would be used most
efficiently. The smaller campuses are more able to offer more personal
and intimate services. None of this has happened to the degree expected
because UM and Bozeman are still attractive to all students with their
amenities and communities. There remains a four-year mentality in
Montana. Regent Hamilton indicated she was not sure if there had been
careful conversation about the COT in Bozeman offering remediation. It
had been hoped with proficiency admissions that the need for remediation would
decrease. Such is not the case. Providing some background, she
said in the 1940s the Vo Techs were federally funded and the local school
districts wrote grants for the money and built them. They were most
closely associated with the school districts. When the federal money ran
out, the State put the Vo Techs into the MUS, which was a good move for
students. However, no transfer of resources went with it. This
transition makes Montana a model of how two- and four-year schools work
together. However, it did not address the resource situation.
Bozeman had chosen not to pursue a two-year campus. She questions if
expanding the Great Falls COT into Bozeman is the most appropriate use of
state resources considering the finite pool of money. If that is, she
then questioned why they should have the guise of doing no remediation at the
main campuses. She indicated she will oppose this item, not on the basis
that is doesn�t serve or is poorly planned, but that is has never been
discussed from the broader responsibility of this Board. Regent Semmens
asked if this program expansion will detract from the programs now offered in
Great Falls. Dean Mary Moe referred to their mission statement which
contemplates they will deliver courses on and off campus. She believes
they must think of higher education as not bounded by the local campus.
Currently, they deliver to students and teachers across the state in twenty
cities, and have satellites in communities like Big Sandy and Belt.
Regent Hamilton said her comments should not be taken as criticism because the
Great Falls campus is among the best in the system for outreach. However, they
are still not dealing with the issue of remediation at MSU. She wants to
know what percentage of the enrollment at MSU receives remediation. She
said further that they need to operate as a system, but it must be as the
Montana University System. Chair Mercer indicated he believes there
should be only one unit in a town, and it should include remediation as well
as everything else. He felt awkward authorizing Great Falls to establish
a campus in Bozeman when they already have one. Regent Semmens indicated
there are already four other campuses in Great Falls. He said that if
Chair Mercer was talking about pure duplication, or principally duplication
then he had a valid point. However, using the competencies of each
campus is important. He questioned why they would want to create within
the Bozeman campus something that is already handled by the Great Falls
College of Technology for remediation. Dean Moe said Great Falls is a
major city which needs higher education, and MSU-Northern fills their
four-year role. The College of Technology is MSU, their courses are
transferable to Bozeman, and the course names and syllabi are exactly the
same. Student Regent French indicated that from the perspective of a
student, MSU is no expert at remediation. The students teach themselves.
Regent Hamilton indicated she could support this item if she could see a
continuing commitment to two-year education from Bozeman and the Gallatin
Valley with dollars. Regent Semmens agreed that the financial aspect
should be thrown in the mix. Regent Hamilton asked President Gamble if
he could raise the cost of the lease by raising local funds. He
indicated he didn�t know but could follow up on it. He asked if Regent
Hamilton was recommending a mill levy. She replied it could be from the
private sector, business and industry or a mill levy. There is currently
a mill and a half on the books for colleges of technology. The Great
Falls community pays the levy, which goes into the general fund. Chair
Mercer said the Board needs to address the governance issues raised today, and
get a plan on how to deal with this issue. The communities benefiting
need to give assistance. When asked by Chair Mercer about the figure of
$170,000 being in the neighborhood, Dean Moe replied it was actually $260,000
and there was more space involved. Chair Mercer indicated the Board
needed to see these items earlier.
|
|
Regent Roehm moved APPROVAL of Item k.
Motion
approved on 6-1 vote with Regent Hamilton dissenting
|
|
BUDGET DISCUSSION
|
|
President Dennison offered a
brief overview of financial aid in Montana. Yesterday his proposal had
been to use $200,000 the first year and $400,000 the second year to increase
Presidential Scholarships for anyone. Since their discussion, he offered
a revision that would use $120,000 the first year and $240,000 the second year
to increase the Presidential Scholarships, and they would be limited to
resident students. This will be done on a pilot basis and records would
be kept to watch the recruitment and retention. Regent Semmens believed
the Board should further explore merit-based scholarships, but hesitates
limiting it to one campus and taking it from tuition. Regent Hamilton
asked if there was any data on the migration of the best and brightest out of
Montana that showed if the rate had changed in the last ten years.
President Dennison said he had not reviewed that information. However,
other data shows that the number who leave the state for public education is
smaller than the number that come in for public education. However, if
all the private schools are added into the mix, there are more Montana
students leaving the state. Regent Hamilton asked if there is data they
could review on the incomes of the best and brightest that leave the state.
Her concern is that dollars are being funneled away from the neediest
students.
|
|
Chair Mercer moved APPROVAL of the proposal to pilot the Presidential
Scholarships with $120,000 the first year, and $240,000 the second year.
|
|
Chair Mercer said the
concept of merit is good, and this is very important to President Dennison who
is on the ground at UM. It is not a large amount of money and he will
have to prove to the Board it is going to do something. It is also
something that is in tune with the ideas of the Governor. Regent Roehm
asked what the increase would be in tuition to students at UM. President
Dennison indicated it would be 3/10 of one percent. Vice President of
ASUM, Vince Pavlish indicated that was not too great an increase for him.
|
|
Motion approved on 4-3 vote with Regents Roehm, Taylor and Semmens dissenting
|
|
Associate Commissioner
Sundsted indicated some adjustments will need to be made, but he urged the
Board to approve the working budget.
|
|
Regent Hamilton moved APPROVAL of the spending plan as amended
Motion
approved unanimously on 7-0 vote
|
|
Mr. Sundsted will get with
the campuses next week to make the spending plans work and will bring it back
to the Board. Regent Semmens asked the Commissioner to work out a time
for a conference call meeting with notice. He wants the Board to be of
like mind that differential tuition is important.
|
|
END
ADMINISTRATIVE/BUDGET ITEMS
|
The
Board recessed at 5:15 p.m.
Chair
Mercer announced the meeting would reconvene Friday morning at 9:00 a.m.
|
|
FRIDAY,
January 21, 2005
|
|
The
Board reconvened at 9:00 a.m.
|
|
a.
|
ITEM
126-104-R0105 � Approval of Pilot Program on Multiple year Contracts for
Non-tenure Track Faculty; Office Commissioner of Higher Education �
President Geoff Gamble Attachment
|
|
Kathy
Crego indicated the Committee had recommended Item a. for
approval.
|
|
Regent Roehm moved APPROVAL of Item a.
|
|
Regent Hamilton requested a
discussion on the necessity of targeting nursing faculty for this item.
Dave Dooley described the points which led them to believe it was desirable to
have a larger percentage of these contracts available to nursing than the
other departments on campus. There is a need to attract and retain part
and full time adjunct faculty in the hospital or other clinical settings.
All the adjuncts in their program have a Masters degree but not a Doctorate.
Faculty with a Doctorate enter the tenure track positions. They are
required to do research, whereas adjunct faculty are not. Generally,
adjunct faculty are by choice part time since they have other jobs. MSU
needs 55-60 adjunct nursing faculty and the multi-year contract allows the
campus to offer them a little more stability. Regent Hamilton
recommended the Board set parameters on this as a pilot program and to review
the data to measure the expected outcomes. At the conclusion of the
project, she also requested the campus to list the parameters it uses to
determine which employees are eligible for these contracts. She asked if
any faculty had concerns about this item. Keith Edgerton indicated it
had not been discussed, but one concern was that tenure track positions might
be converted to multi-year contracts instead. It could bring about a
steady erosion of tenure track positions. Mr. Dooley indicated the
administration has no intention of doing that. Chair Mercer said it
concerned him that the item had not been discussed at all the campuses.
Ms. Crego replied that it was not given wide circulation because it only
applies to non-union campuses. Warren Jones said the faculty
representatives on campus had discussed this item since March 2004. The
biggest issue was collective bargaining, and the consensus was that since they
are not covered by a union, this is a potential tool for attracting and
keeping good faculty. Mr. Edgerton said he had no problem with the
process, but is concerned that a highly qualified person may receive ten one
year contracts and wonder when they might ever get tenure. Mr. Dooley
said it is complex and depends on the circumstances of the person. Many
of the people who fill these jobs are uninterested, or not prepared for
tenure. They are comfortable and have no desire to work under the
requirements of tenure. Mr. Jones explained the policy is directed at
positions, not individuals.
|
|
Motion approved unanimously on 7-0 vote
|
|
Salary Guidelines
|
|
Kathy Crego told the Board
this item addressed unusual increases for employees on Regents Contracts.
This is only a start and it will be continued at the March 17-18, 2005
meeting. Regent Hamilton suggested that this offers no real guidelines
to campuses, and remembered suggestions to bring administrators under MAP.
Ms. Crego indicated this document was plagiarized from the MAP document.
|
|
Lump Sum Bonuses
|
|
Kathy Crego explained this
item covered the same individuals, and it too will be brought back to the
Committee at the March 17-18, 2005 meeting for further discussion.
|
|
Dependent Tuition Waiver
|
|
Kathy Crego said the
Committee had recommended this item be continued as a Board policy.
|
|
Regent Roehm moved to REMOVE the sunset clause from this policy to make
it permanent.
Motion
approved unanimously on 7-0 vote
|
END STAFF AND COMPENSATION
ITEMS
|
|
Workforce
Development Committee
|
|
Report
from the Workforce Development Committee
|
|
(Committee Members:
Chair Regent Mike Foster, Regent Kala French, Regent Lynn
Morrison-Hamilton, and Regent Taylor)
|
|
Vice
Chair Foster reported this was the initial meeting of the Workforce
Development Committee.
He hopes this committee will serve as a link to employers in the state.
The two-year campuses have a great working relationship with local
employers, but it is more of a challenge when dealing with industries across
the whole state.
The local level has better communication, and the Workforce Development
Committee wants to be available to public or private entities for
communication on various issues.
The committee will be sending a letter to inform everyone in the public
and private sector they can get on the committee agenda, and he hopes they do
so.
|
END WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE REPORT
|