 |
MINUTES |
 |
|
MINUTES |
|
ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS
MINUTES OF A MEETING
February 13, 1997
Table of Contents
REPORT FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
REPORT FROM THE PRESIDENT OF NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY
REPORT FROM THE PRESIDENT OF ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
REPORT FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
REPORT FROM THE ARIZONA FACULTIES COUNCIL
<<<<<<>>>>>>
ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS
MINUTES OF A MEETING
February 13, 1997
A meeting of the Arizona Board of Regents was held on
February 13, 1997, in the Rincon Room of the Student Union at the University of
Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. President Munger called the meeting to order at 10:30
a.m.
PRESENT: Regent George H. Amos, III
Regent Eddie Basha
Regent Rudy Campbell
Regent Arthur Chapa
Regent Kurt Davis
Regent Judy Gignac
Regent John Munger
Regent Jonathan Schmitt
ABSENT: Regent Don Ulrich
Regent Fife Symington
Regent Lisa Graham Keegan
Also present were: President Manuel Pacheco, Dr. Paul Sypherd, Mr. Joel Valdez, Dr. Saundra Taylor, Dr. Martha Gilliland, Dr. Randy Groth, and Mr. Greg Fahey, University of Arizona; President Lattie Coor, Dr. Milton Glick, Dr. Christine Wilkinson, Mr. Allan Price, Mr. Paul Ward, Dr. Charles Bantz, and Dr. Elaine Maimon, Arizona State University; President Clara Lovett, Dr. Jeanette Baker, Dr. Charles Connell, Dr. Sarah Bickell, and Mr. Sam Polito, Northern Arizona University; Executive Director Frank Besnette, Board Counsel Joel Sideman, Secretary to the Board Judy Garza, Dr. Mary McKeown, Dr. Thomas Wickenden, Mr. Tony Seese-Bieda, and Ms. Norma Salas, Central Office; and Dr. John Schwarz, Chair of Arizona Faculties Council.
All lists, reports, summaries, background materials, and other documents referred to in these minutes can be found in the February 13, 1997, Documents File.
Regent Schmitt led the Pledge of Allegiance.
President Munger told the audience the first meeting of the University of Arizona Search and Screening Committee would take place on Friday, February 14. The following people will be members of the committee: Chair John Munger, Lawrence Aleamoni, George Amos, III, Edith Auslander, Jennifer Aviles, Joseph Cesare, Michael Cusanovich, Kurt Davis, Judy Gignac, Jay Gonzales, Susan Heckler, Travis Hirschi, Olden Lee, N. Scott Momaday, Kathryn Munroe, Wendelyn Nichols-Julien, Joaquin Ruiz, Jonathan Schmitt, John Schwarz, Paul Tang, and Rhonda Wilson. Frank Besnette will service as Ex Officio Member.
Esther Capin, former Regent, spoke in support of the request from the University of Arizona to grant departmental status to the Women's Studies program.
President Munger announced that Items 9 and 12, had been removed from the Consent Agenda to be discussed during the regular agenda. The remaining items on the Consent Agenda, which are marked in these minutes with an *, were considered as consent matters and were adopted unanimously upon motion of Regent Basha, seconded by Regent Gignac. There was no individual discussion of these items except the January 14 and 15, 1997, Minutes.
The Board approved the December 10, 1996, Executive Session and the January 14 and 15. 1997, Regular Meeting minutes.
Resources Committee Consent Items
*Renovation of Grady Gammage Auditorium Orchestra Shell: Revised Project Approval (ASU)
The Board granted revised Project Approval to Arizona State University for the Grady Gammage Stage Expansion to allow for the establishment of a project budget contingency, and authorized ASU to continue construction for the addition and improvements necessary for the moving of the orchestra shell and associated renovation at Grady Gammage Memorial Auditorium for the total project cost of $1,625,200.
*Internal Audit of Student Health Service (NAU)
The Board reviewed and accepted a written internal audit report of Northern Arizona University's student Health Service. There were no findings reportable to the Board, but seven internal recommendations presented to the university administration.
*Proposed Joint Venture Involving University Medical Center Corporation and University Physicians, Inc.
The Board consented to University Medical Center Corporation's (UMCC) proposal to enter into a joint venture with University Physicians, Inc. (UPI), in the form of a limited liability company, for the purpose of providing primary health care on campus and at satellite clinics, and to capitalize that joint venture as may be required from time to time.
*Naming of the College of Law Building in Honor of Alumnus James E. Rogers
The Board authorized the University of Arizona to name the building in which the College of Law is located The James E. Rogers Law Center. Mr. Rogers is an alumnus who earned his baccalau-reate degree in Business in 1960 and a J.D. degree at the College of Law in 1962 at the University of Arizona. In recognition of generous support that is significant for the long term future of their College, the law faculty supported a proposal to permanently name the building in which their College is located in his honor. Given that the College has moved three times in its history, the intention is that the name would be transferred in the event of any future shift of location.
*Amendment to Board Policy 6-201, Conditions of Faculty Service Post-Tenure Review (Second Reading)
The Board approved the proposed addition to ABOR 6-201 (H), Post-Tenure Review. The proposed addition mandates the design and implementation of post-tenure review processes at each university in accordance with the "Common Elements" (CE) document approved by the Board. The proposed policy language specifically incorporates by reference the CE document and is designed to provide flexibility by permitting future changes in the CE document to be approved by the Board without the need for changes to Board policy.
*Report on FY 1996 Projects Funded by the Dwight D. Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Education Program Grants
The Board received a written report on the 13 proposals recommended by a review panel of individuals knowledgeable about education in mathematics and science and approved by the Executive Director. The funded proposals are: 1) Aiming at Science, Dr. Barry Lutz, NAU; 2) Central Arizona Mathematics and Science III, Ms. Joël Clark, NAU; 3) Collaborative Real-World Middle Level Mentoring Project, Dr. Frederick Staley, ASU; 4) Focus on the Standards Project, Ms. Gloria Lindner, NAU; 5) Mathematics Teachers for Today and Tomorrow for Second Language Learners, Dr. Maria Fernandez, UofA; 6) Problem Solving Demonstration Classrooms in Biology, Dr. Julie Luft, UofA; 7) Project ARTIST: Journey Through the Solar System, Dr. Larry Lebofsky, UofA; 8) Project Explorer, Dr. Ron Zambo, ASU West; 9) Science in Action: A Collaborative for Enhancing Elementary Science Education, Dr. Catherine Wilcoxson, NAU; 10) The Arizona Questions, Questioners, and Questioning Project: Partnerships for Inquiry-Based K-12 Science Education Transformations, Dr. Ann Kerwin, UofA; 11) The MASTER Project; Mathematics and Science Teaching and Excelling Through Research, Dr. Bruce Cordell, Arizona Western College; 12) Virtual Professional Development, Dr. Martha Narro, UofA; 13) Weaving Indian Networks II, Dr. Diane Ebert-May, NAU.
*Report on academic Degree Program and Organizational Unit Changes
The Board received a written report on the academic program and organizational unit changes approved by the Executive Director as follows: ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY: Disestablished the Learning and Instructional technology (Ed.D) program, the counselor Education (Ed.D) program, the School Library Science (M.A. and M.Ed.) program, and the educational Administration and Supervision (M.S.) program. Arizona State University East: Changed the name of the Department of Aeronautical Technology to the Department of Aeronautical Management Technology; Changed the name of the Department of Electronic and Computer Technology to the Department of Electronics and Computer Engineering Technology; Changed the name of the Department of Manufacturing and Industrial Technology to the Department of Manufacturing and Aeronautical Engineering Technology; and Disestablished the School of Technology to change the name to the College of Technology and Applied Sciences. Arizona State University West: Changed the name of the program Bachelor of Science in Recreation and Tourism to Bachelor of Science in Recreation and Tourism Management. UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA: Changed the name of the major in German for the M.A. degree to German Studies; Changed the name of the major in German for the B.A. degree to German Studies; Changed the name of the UofA School of Library Science to the School of Information Resources and Library Science; Changed the name of the undergraduate minor in Library Science to Information Resources and Library Science; Changed the name of the major in Library Science for the M.S. to Information Resources and Library Science; and Changed the name of the major in Library Science for the Ph.D. to Information Resources and Library Science.
Regent Amos moved to reconsider the January 14 and 15, 1997, Regular Meeting Minutes. He asked that the first sentence of paragraph 3 on Page 12 be amended to read, "Regent Amos asked if the contract contained a 'hold harmless clause' that indemnified the university for environmental damage that might be done by a future owner. The motion to reconsider and amend the January 14 and 15, 1997, Regular Meeting Minutes was seconded by Regent Gignac and approved by the Board.
REPORT FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
President Pacheco announced the National Science Foundation had recognized the University of Arizona as one of the 10 national leaders in integrating research and education with a $500,000 grant. Dr. Pacheco reminded the Board the latest space shuttle carried the NICMOS (Near Infrared Camera System), which was designed and built under the direction of Professor Roger Thompson of Steward Observatory, to the Hubble Space Telescope.
President Pacheco reported the College of Pharmacy ranks third in the nation in external research support. The American Pharmaceutical Association selected Dean Lyle Bootman as recipient of the 1997 Research Achievement Award in the pharmaceutical sciences.
Dr. Pacheco reported the number of enrollment applications for fall 1997 is higher than the number received last year.
REPORT FROM THE PRESIDENT OF NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY
President Lovett reported NAU has one of the 24 national undergraduate research teams participating on a NASA project on the affects of gravity. She said NAU is making plans to host the Big Sky Basketball Conference as they expect to finish Number 1 in the Conference. Dr. Lovett reminded the Board the building at NAU Yuma was dedicated last week, providing another opportunity for NAU, Arizona Western Community College, and the community of Yuma to join together.
REPORT FROM THE PRESIDENT OF ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
President Coor reported faculty from ASU are teaching courses on Maricopa Community College campuses. A new project, called the ASU West-Glendale Community Colleges General Education Transfer Center is designed to create courses in a Center on the ASU West Campus taught by faculty members from Glendale Community College. Phoenix College and Paradise Valley Community College have also expressed interest. Some courses would be team-taught by faculty from both ASU West and Glendale Community College. It is hoped this pilot project will be in place by fall of 1997. Dr. Coor reported an ASU student, Jordan Eichman, has been chosen as one of the 20 outstanding students by U.S. Today in their College All American Academic Team.
Regent Gignac congratulated ASU for having 5 football team members named to the PAC 10 All Academic Football Team and 5 more receiving honorable mention. No other team placed more players on the All Academic Team this year, although Stanford University also had 5.
REPORT FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Executive Director Besnette reminded the Board they should begin thinking about nominations for the annual Regents Award.
REPORT FROM THE ARIZONA FACULTIES COUNCIL
Dr. John Schwarz said many faculty members believed the issue of faculty workload and teaching hours had been resolved several years ago. However, he understood the issue had been brought forward by the Joint Legislative Budget Committee and the Report from the DeMichele capital review committee. The faculty is aware of and concerned about perceptions held about the sufficiency of faculty workloads, both as seen as a whole and as they have to do with instruction. The faculty would like to deal with this issue in the same manner the Board and faculty joined in a collaborative effort to address the issue of tenure. At the next meeting, they would like to present the outline of a plan to examine this issue in a direct, honest, and thoughtful manner, reach a consensus about recommendations that are considered appropriate, and truly address and answer questions that now exist in people's minds.
Regent Davis chaired this portion of the meeting.
Final Report on the Arizona University System Annual Report Card
Mr. Tony Seese-Bieda, Ms. Carol Diem, and Mr. Jonathan Keller, Central Office Staff, Mr. John Wilson and Mr. Rick Kroc, UofA, Dr. Milton Glick, ASU, and Dr. Marie Zeglen, NAU, joined the meeting for this discussion.
Regent Davis presented the first Arizona University System Annual Report Card. He said the input for this document had come from numerous sources and he believes it is an outstanding product. The purpose of this report card is to communicate more effectively with elected officials and the general public.
Regent Davis explained the rating scale, "Needs Improvement" at the low end, "Superior Performance" at the high end and "Satisfactory Performance" in the middle. The recommendations that fell between categories have Plus or Minus attached.
There were no comments on Category 1: Improving the quality and effectiveness of undergraduate education, Category 2: Demonstrating the quality of instruction, and Category 3: Demonstrating excellence & innovation.
Regent Amos suggested the next Report Card add more emphasis to the measurement of the quality programs at the universities, such as the CORe program at the UofA. He would like to see this added to Category 4: Improving the utilization of resources. He also questioned the grade for Participation of faculty in instructional activities in this Category. He believed this might be an area that Needs Improvement rather than Satisfactory. Regent Gignac suggested a
"Minus" after the Satisfactory rather than changing the rating. She believed this rating is similar to Access to core faculty by undergraduates students in Category 1 and that rating was a "Needs Improvement."
Regent Davis answered this had been considered, but it was decided this rating met the guidelines of today. It is possible those guidelines will be changed in the future; then the rating would change if the statistics did not improve. Regent Gignac said she did not believe holding steady met the definition of Satisfactory Performance and Regent Amos said he believed it might be a credibility issue.
President Pacheco asked the Board to carefully examine the data on this issue, not the anecdotes, as they deal with this in the future. President Coor agreed; and called the Board's attention to the fact this rating includes instructional activities, not just instruction hours. Regent Campbell complimented everyone who spent the hours required to produce this report. He agreed there should be improvement in instructional hours; but he also agreed faculty spend more hours in non-instructional hours, such as class preparation and grading, than the Regents and the public understand.
Regent Chapa suggested future report cards add one additional category: Superior Performance would mean goals had been exceeded, Satisfactory Performance would mean goals have been met, Needs Improvement indicates work is being done to improve, and Unsatisfactory would be the new rating. Regent Davis explained a lot of discussion had taken place to decide the definitions of the ratings. Changing the definitions now would mean changing many of the grades in this report.
Regent Gignac suggested the words, "the hours spent on instruction-related activities have increased" be underlined. Regent Davis agreed and suggested there also be a footnote stating the Board plans to undertake a full review of this issue. Regent Amos said he would also like to see this rating say "Needs Improvement." Regent Schmitt said he supported the current "Satisfactory" rating as he believed the Board will direct a thorough review of this issue. Regent Amos said he would at least like to see a "minus" put next to the "Satisfactory."
Regent Davis called the Board's attention to the page entitled, "Scope, size and character of the universities." This is a place that offers a quick highlight of happenings at all the universities and at each university specifically.
Regent Chapa moved to approve the Report Card, with the exception of the rating for Participation of faculty in instructional activities in Category 4, and asked the Council of Presidents to consult with the Provosts and faculty leaders and bring a workplan to the Board in March on how the issue of faculty workload will be examined and reviewed over the next few months.
Dr. Schwarz explained the faculty would like to have its workload examined within the context of all of the missions of the universities and their units. Teaching, which is central, needs to be examined in terms of instructional activities, and instructional activities need to be examined in terms of other expectations, given the mission of the universities and the units. Executive Director Besnette said an important component of this issue is having a clearer understanding of the allocation of time and attention of faculty to this teaching, learning, instruction function--especially of undergraduate students.
President Coor said he believed 3 issues should be considered during the discussion of faculty workload: the Hurwitz measures which include measures related to instructional activities; options for the "coin of the realm" as faculty credit hours is not an adequate description; and how much emphasis is placed on how faculty members spend their time. Regent Davis suggested the Work Plan agreed upon by the Board in March be distributed to legislators so they can understand what the Board is trying to accomplish in this area.
The motion made by Regent Chapa was seconded by Regent Gignac and passed by the Board.
Regent Amos moved to change the rating on Category 4: Improving the utilization of resources, Participation of faculty in instructional activities, from "Satisfactory" to "Satisfactory-." Regent Basha seconded the motion. Regent Davis said, using the current measurements and evaluations related to peer institutions and others, he believed the current rating is appropriate and should not be changed. Regent Schmitt stated his agreement with Regent Davis, especially since the Board is moving forward with the faculty teaching load initiative. Regent Basha agreed with the statement made by Regent Schmitt. The motion failed with Regent Amos voting yes and the other Regents voting no.
Regent Amos asked that the faculty workload study attempt to compare the Arizona universities with peer institutions. President Munger thanked Regent Davis for his work on this project.
Update on 1st Session, 43rd Legislature, with Possible Adoption of Positions on Specific Legislation
Mr. Allan Price, Mr. Greg Fahey, Mr. Tony Seese-Bieda, and Dr. Mary McKeown joined the meeting for this discussion. Mr. Seese-Bieda updated the Board on the budget as it is moving through the legislative process. The Joint House and Senate Subcommittees on University Funding passed their recommendations on university budgets last week. The House Appropriation Subcommittee adopted a budget that provides a total of $19.5M in new state general funds, with $8.2M earmarked for a faculty teaching incentive program, leaving $11.3M to fund the programs and services the Board requested. The Senate Subcommittee adopted a budget that would provide $19.3M. In addition, it is likely the legislature will approve $13M in salary increases, but that has not been discussed at this time.
Regent Davis said it had been suggested President Munger send a letter to the legislature and the Governor, reenforcing the Board's position that the Governor's budget numbers be the ones used, informing them what the Board is undertaking in regard to teaching load, and the possibility of the Board undertaking the project of examining all the varying tuition levels to see where that would lead. The letter would request time for the Board to complete the projects it has underway before changes are ordered.
Regent Munger said the numbers currently being proposed by the legislature are down currently from the $40M the Board requested, a number agreed to by the Board and the Governor. He believed the Board had negotiated budget numbers in good faith and was not certain the numbers being recommended represented a good faith answer. Regent Davis said the suggested letter is a way of dealing with the legislature on this issue, with the assistance of the Governor and his staff (OSPB). Regent Gignac suggested the inter-university group should be calling the legislature's attention to the results of polls that show taxpayers would rather have more money invested in education, including higher education, than have a tax cut. Regent Davis reminded the Board the Joint Legislative Budget Staff (JLBC) was part of the negotiations that resulted in the universities submitting a budget request that met the $40M guideline; however, he believed the universities were in a better position this year than they were at this time last year as far as the budget recommendations from both the Governor and the legislature.
Regent Schmitt expressed his displeasure with the fact the budget recommendations disregarded the priorities established by the universities and the Regents.
Regent Davis asked if there was general agreement from the Board that President Munger send a letter to the Governor and the legislature asking that the Governor's budget numbers be used and informing them what the Board is doing in regard to teaching load and examining differential tuition.
Mr. Price informed the Board there is a footnote in the budget allocation $8.2M for a teacher incentive grant to the Board of Regents. It states that aculty teaching more than 6 hours at ASU and the UofA and more than 9 hours at NAU will qualify for incentive money, and the Board is charged with developing a plan that starts with that requirement and includes other criteria. This plan would then be reviewed by the Directors of the JLBC and the OSPB before being implemented. Regent Chapa said he did not see why NAU should be treated differently than the other two universities; it could cause problems. Regent Davis said the Board should defend its prerogative, constitutionally and statutorily, to make those types of decisions. Regent Munger agreed. He also said credit hours is not a good way to evaluate faculty workload. Regent Amos said the Regents and the universities have worked hard to prioritize a reasonable budget request and it should not now be ignored.
President Lovett stated her objection to the differential treatment of NAU faculty. Regent Davis said the Board should ask the legislators to communicate their areas of concern to the Board via resolution, rather than as a footnote in the budget; then give the Board time to act on those concerns. This could also be communicated in the letter. President Munger agreed. He said Regents have been talking to legislators about the progress the Board is making, but it is hard to get the message across.
Regent Campbell said it bothered him there is this much trouble getting funding for higher education at a time when the economy is at an all time high. He dreads the day when the economy is not doing this well. The Board agreed to proceed with a strongly worded but respectful letter.
The following positions were adopted by the Board on proposed legislation affecting Arizona's public universities: HB 2161 - Honors endorsement for high school diploma Support subject to "adequate resources" being made available to carry out development and implementation; HB 2172 - Technical corrections to ballot referendum; AHEC Neutral position and monitor; HB 2178 - Prepaid tuition Neutral position and monitor; HB 2201 - Tobacco Tax to fund ASPIRE program Support; HB 2279 - Technology development; technology extension service Neutral position and monitor (Regent Basha voted against this position; he believed the Board should support).
The Board recessed at 12:50 p.m. and reconvened at 1:55 p.m.
PUBLIC AWARENESS - UPDATE ON LEGISLATION (Continued)
HB 2305/SB 1110 - State budget process; 2 year budget cycles Neutral position and monitor; HB 2314 - University research royalties (A motion to monitor failed with Regents Chapa, Campbell, and Davis voting for and Regents Gignac, Schmitt, Amos, and Basha voting no.) Oppose and monitor closely (with Regent Davis voting no); HB 2394 - National Guard tuition waivers oppose; HB 2410 - Health insurance for temporary and part-time employees Oppose (With Regent Schmitt voting no); HB 2444 - Excess credit hours tuition penalty Oppose; SB 1020 - Universities work study Neutral position and monitor with push for appropriation (With Regent Basha voting no); SB 1109 - Community colleges, upper division Oppose (With Regent Davis abstaining and Regent Chapa not voting due to a possible conflict of interest); SB 1055 - College savings plan Support; SB 1110 - State budget; program review Neutral, monitor closely; SCR 1001 - Technical correction in constitution Neutral position and monitor; SB 1279 - ASU Night law school Oppose (With Regent Schmitt abstaining); HB 2297 - Study creating vet med school Monitor and seek participation of WICHE commissioners in study committee.
Regent Campbell chaired this portion of the meeting.
Workplan for Implementing Technology-Delivered Education Programs in Arizona
Dr. Milton Glick, Dr. Paul Sypherd, Dr. Charles Connell, and Dr. Charles Bantz joined the meeting for this discussion. Regent Campbell outlined the proposed workplan for technology-delivered education. The plan consists of the following four goals: Goal I. Develop a full assessment of the educational benefits and resource implications of future efforts to utilize technology-delivered university education to meet the needs of Arizona; Goal II. Identify approaches to organizational, policy, and funding issues regarding technology-delivered education through the collaborative development, start-up, and evaluation of prototype programs and courses; Goal III. Develop the necessary additional campus and statewide infrastructure for student, technology, and academic services to implement and sustain collaborative, technology-delivered education; Goal IV. Establish an organizational structure and identify for collaboratively developed, technology-delivered, public university education in Arizona. Each goal area contains objectives and timetables. A full-scale review of the collaborative prototype programs and funding requirements will be scheduled in the next four to six months.
Regent Campbell informed the Board the universities will more fully develop the bullet points under Goal 1, Objective 1, The proposed purpose and rationale include these components: and bring them back to the Board in March. The workplan also describes a full-scale review of technology-delivered education by the Board in the next four to six months.
Dr. Glick told the Regents the universities propose to increase access to students who presently don't have convenient access to Bachelor's degrees and higher. They intend to bring back for full discussion this summer a cost benefit analysis, including a market analysis and a business plan, as well as ways of accomplishing this goal using non-technological means and those associated costs. However, the expanded purpose and rationale will still come to the Board in March. Regent Gignac asked that the word academic be inserted in Goal II so it will read, Identify approaches to academic, organizational, etc. as that was how the original goal read when presented in September. She commented the action and status lines were missing from Objective 6 of Goal II.
She was told that was inadvertently omitted and should say: Action: Ask the Provosts together to develop a statewide evaluation team and to have an evaluation team on each campus as well. Status: In progress.
Regent Davis asked that Goal III, Objective 2, keep the state in the analysis process so the universities can piggyback on what the state is doing, if anything. The Provosts were instructed to work out a time frame for bringing the discussion to the Board with Executive Director Besnette. Upon motion of Regent Gignac, seconded by Regent Davis, the Board approved the Workplan as presented. Dr. Glick said an RFP would now be issued for the marketing study.
Report on Continuous Organization Renewal Program (CORe)(UofA)
Dr. Martha Gilliland, assisted by Mr. Michael Ray, summarized for the Board a report on the Continuous Organizational Renewal Program (CORe) at the University of Arizona. These quality initiatives were begun as ways to improve processes and reallocate resources. This also led to a process to decide which resources would receive the reallocation. The quality projects became aligned with the strategic plan. A host of initiatives were identified and implemented that were directed at the undergraduate experience. At the same time, those initiatives were accompanied by three additional thrusts: a focus on career development for all employees so that they had the tools and expertise to carry forward those initiatives, an emphasis on technology in support of instruction and paperwork reduction, and a highly organized effort to streamline administrative processes and administrative structures. A report was issued that summarized the results of this effort and summarized the next steps the university plans to take.
Regent Gignac commended the university on the impressive list of accomplishments displayed in this report. Regent Chapa agreed and said he believed it would be a good handout to legislators.
Program Assessment Review (PAR) of the Universities' Extended Education Programs
The universities extended education programs are being reviewed by the Governor and legislature using the Program Assessment Review (PAR) process. The Board received a calendar identifying the key activities and events related to this review as well as briefing papers for the three universities.
President Lovett explained NAU's extended education program is organized in a different manner than the program's at the other two universities. The programs are non-credit bearing and often are non-standard (not following the academic year). However, discussions are still being held with OSPB and JLBC about additional tasks that may be necessary to review NAU's statewide programs. If degree programs are included, it will may mean a review of four or five colleges.
Regent Amos chaired this portion of the meeting.
FY98 State Operating Budget Recommendations from the Governor (OSPB) and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC)
There was no discussion of this item because it was discussed during the Public Awareness Committee agenda earlier.
Status Report on Multiyear Bonding Plan
Regent Amos summarized the history of the Multiyear Bonding Plan. He reported Executive Director Besnette and university representatives met with OSPB and JLBC to resolve the status of the bonding plan prior to its resubmission to the Joint Committee on Capital Review (JCCR).
Dr. Besnette reported the Council of Presidents has been considering the recommendations of the DeMichele external review committee and will bring a response to the Board in March. He told the Board the universities agreed with many of the comments and are already working to implement some of the recommendations. There were two areas the committee did not have time to review, debt structure and space/classroom utilization. Mr. DeMichele will be meeting with a small group of people to better understand the debt structure, the history of the debt, how it has been used, how it has been retired, and financing alternatives for capital construction. The utilization study is in the organization process.
Dr. Besnette also reported Board and university staffs met with the Directors of OSPB and JLBC last week to discuss the multiyear bonding plan. It was agreed the DeMichele committee had clarified many issues. Staffs from the Board office, universities, OSPB, JLBC and other state agencies such as the Arizona Department of Transportation and the Department of Administration will be working on some of the DeMichele committee recommendations that are common to all state building systems, such as the building renewal formula and the issue of adding infrastructure to that formula.
Executive Director Besnette said the universities plan to bring their updated multiyear bonding plans back to the Board in March. He asked if the Board would like an in-depth review in March of the three major projects in the multiyear bonding plan that have been the subject of the most discussion and would add the greatest amount of new space over the next few years: NAU's Chem/Bio Building, UofA's Information Technology Building (IF), and ASU's Liberal Arts Building. The Regents could then determine if they are comfortable with the projects moving through the process. Regent Gignac said she would appreciate an update on these buildings.
Regent Schmitt called the Board's attention to an article in the Arizona Wildcat called "No Cash." Because of the enrollment decline at the University of Arizona, there is a $1.8M budget shortfall. The Deans and department heads are being asked to shoulder $1.6M of this amount. However, he believed the university had budgeted $1.7M for the IF Building and he felt this money should go to academic programs rather than being held for a building that had not yet received final approval. He also believed the Student Union renovation project should be higher in the priority for use of capital dollars than the IF building. President Pacheco asked the Board to reserve judgment on the issue until the university had a change to present its request.
Permission to Sell Football Season Tickets to the Sun Angel Foundation (ASU)
President Coor told the Board ASU has transferred football season tickets at the face value to the Sun Angel Foundation since 1981. The Foundation then sold those tickets at a premium and used the money for the benefit of ASU. Since 1986, the Sun Devil Club also joined in that same endeavor. The university is in the process of consolidating both organizations within the ASU intercollegiate athletic program. Accordingly, the university wishes to transfer all the tickets to the Sun Angel Foundation this year. Also, Dr. Coor informed the Board there is currently underway a study of a new system of creating giving clubs for creating access to these tickets. However, if a new plan is adopted, none of the current ticket holders of either the Sun Devil Club or the Sun Angel Foundation tickets will have to participate in the plan in order to continue a lifetime of access to the tickets they have. Upon motion of Regent Basha, seconded by Regent Campbell, the Board approved Arizona State University's sale of up to 32,000 football season tickets for the 1997 season to the Sun Angel Foundation.
Regent Gignac chaired this portion of the meeting.
Proposal to Establish the Department of Women's Studies (UofA)
Dr. Paul Sypherd and Ms. Dorothy Findley, a local business person who supports women's studies, explained the request to reorganize the Committee on Women's Studies as the Department of Women's Studies. Several Regents spoke on behalf of women's studies. Upon motion of Regent Gignac, seconded by Regent Basha, the Board authorized the reorganization of the Committee on Women's Studies as the Department of Women's Studies at the University of Arizona, effective immediately.
Planning for New Academic Degree Program: Requests for Authorization
Upon motion of Regent Chapa, seconded by Regent Basha, the Board authorized the extension of existing planning authority for Arizona State University to February 1998 for Manufacturing Engineering and Management (MM), Materials Science and Engineering (M), Materials Science and Engineering (M), Asian Languages and Civilizations (M), and Philosophy (D).
Implementation of New Academic Degree Programs: Requests for Approval
Upon motion of Regent Chapa, seconded by Regent Basha, the Board authorized the implementation of a Bachelor of Arts in Engineering with a major in engineering at the university of Arizona, effective immediately.
Annual Progress Report on Recruitment and Graduation of Minority Students
Dr. Thomas Wickenden, Dr. Christine Wilkinson, Dr. Saundra Taylor, and Dr. Sarah Bickell jointed the meeting for this discussion. The Minority Student Progress Report indicates the Arizona university system continues to move toward accomplishing the Board's goals to improve the recruitment and graduation of minority students. It has not been possible to assess progress towards Recruitment Goal 1 because the high school transcript study that determines the rate of eligibility in different populations has not been updated.
For Recruitment Goal 2, the report shows the percentage of the estimated eligible pool of first-year students in each racial/ethnic minority group that was enrolled in the university system exceeded the percentage of the estimated eligible pool of majority first-year students enrolled. Additionally, this portion of the report also discussed efforts to enhance recruitment of minority community college transfer students. A consistent trend upward in the proportion of community college transfer students who are minority group members is shown.
For Graduation Goal 3, the report shows mixed progress toward meeting the goal of reducing the difference between majority and minority graduation rates, with goals being met for some racial/ethnic groups for each student level. The goal was exceeded for Hispanics among first-year students, among lower-division transfer students, for Asian Americans, Hispanics, and Native Americans; and among upper-division transfer students, for African Americans.
Regent Gignac raised the issue of Department of Education participation in an eligibility study of the percentage of public high school graduates eligible to attend an Arizona university system university and asked if funding was the reason there had been no response to repeated attempts to contact the Department of Education. Executive Director Besnette said it was possible this is just not a priority right now with the Department, but he believes there is interest in the project.
Regent Gignac commented the Report shows the total number of new Arizona community college transfer students from Fall 1990 to Fall 1996 is down, total minority is up slightly, and African American and Asian American are down slightly. She asked if the universities could do more to work with the community colleges to increase these numbers. She was told the universities are working more closely with the community colleges in articulation and advising, but it will take a couple of years to see the results of those efforts. Regent Gignac also asked if those efforts would also increase the number of new resident first-year undergraduate students where the total number of minorities has gone down and was told the new first-year center is expected to help raise those numbers.
Regent Chapa emphasized he believed the universities should continue their efforts to recruit and retain community college transfers. Regent Schmitt said the percentage of students who graduate in all categories is unacceptable and the universities need to find the resources to help students finish their college career. He suggested the universities should provide the resources to fund the eligibility study if the Department of Education cannot. He was told it was not just a matter of resources. There is a need for Department of Education support so the high schools will respond to the survey. Dr. Besnette suggested a respectful but detailed letter, signed by all the Regents, be sent to Superintendent of Public Instruction Lisa Graham Keegan outlining how vital this information is to continuing the progress on this goal and monitoring the change of admission requirements that go into affect in 1998.
Upon motion of Regent Gignac, seconded by Regent Chapa, the Board accepted the 1996 Minority Student Progress report, agreed to continue to support the universities' efforts to seek funding to maintain and expand these programs designed to enhance the eligibility of Arizona high school students, and agreed to continue the communication with the Department of Education, as Dr. Besnette suggested, to try to complete the eligibility study.
Amendment to Board Policy Chapter 6 by Adding Section L., Arizona International Campus of the University of Arizona - Conditions Documents for Faculty, Administrative, and Professional Service (First Reading)
Dr. Celestino Fernandez and Mr. George Evanhoff , (retired from the UofA Human Resources Department) who was hired to help draft the policy, joined the meeting for this discussion.
Regent Gignac asked why it was necessary to have a restatement of the policies, with the exception of the changes necessary to go from an institution with tenure to one with long-term contracts. She wondered why the changes could not just be made under the auspices of the President of the University of Arizona. She also asked why there was a restatement of the current policy for administrators when there was no change to that policy. Dr. Fernandez answered the policies are under President Pacheco at the University of Arizona. The issue of the change from the tenure system to one of multiyear contracts is a major change in policy and it was believed it would be easier to have a section that dealt specifically with the Arizona International Campus (AIC) personnel so there wouldn't be any confusion. In that context, the administrators and professional staff were also included, even though the policy is essentially the same.
Under current policy with the three universities, the president of a university cannot set a salary in excess of the maximum salary that has been approved by the Board for that classification. Regent Gignac asked why that provision had been deleted for the chief campus administrator at AIC. She was told there is no maximum for professors and AIC intends to hire only professionals.
Regent Gignac asked if there is a three-year probation as one part of the new policy says there is and another part of the policy allows the chief campus administrator to waive that policy. Dr. Celestino answered there is a three-year probation period composed of three one-year contracts. Regent Gignac asked why there was no review period in this policy as the current policy on the Conditions of Faculty Service and Tenure mandates it be reviewed every five years. Dr. Fernandez agreed that needed to be added.
Regent Gignac asked if the definition for "just cause" for suspension or dismissal could be the same as in the other Board policy, unsatisfactory performance and was told it could be changed to make it consistent. She also noted that the "procedure to review allegedly discriminatory or unconstitutional actions" differs substantially from current policy. Dr. Fernandez said this was an unintentional deletion and would be changed. Regent Gignac recommended this policy be reworked before being resubmitted for first reading. She asked for an executive summary and a matrix that shows where the differences are between the proposed policy and the current policy as well as the reason for those differences so the Regents will have a clearer understanding of why the changes are being requested.
Regent Chapa expressed a concern that the document does not make it clear the AIC is operating under the President of the University of Arizona. He suggested a preamble be added to address this issue. He also asked that the term probation be removed from the document and the term "review period" or simply one-year contracts be used instead.
Regent Amos suggested some changes in 6-1200: adding after they have served their "three-year review"period (or whatever the new language becomes) after the words fixed-term positions and before the words for which they are appropriately qualified in H. 2.; including the words moral turpitude as just cause for dismissal or suspension in I. b.; making J. 2. b. consistent with H. 4. b.; adding the phrase the administrators decision is final to K. 6. In 6-1210 E. 1. a. (1),
He suggested adding the words moral turpitude.
Regent Davis explained he opposed this document on philosophical grounds as he believed having tenure at one or more or the Arizona universities means tenure should exist at all the Arizona universities. Regent Gignac asked again that the suggested changes be made and this document be brought back to the Board for first reading with an executive summary that provides a means for the Board to easily and readily identify the differences between this document and the existing document that is in Board policy. She would also like to see the reasons for the policy differences unless they are simply caused by the difference between tenured faculty and contractual faculty.
Provost Charles Backus, Vice Provost David Schwaim, and Director of Planning Sheila Ainlay from ASU East joined the meeting for the discussion of the next three items concerning ASU East. President Coor summarized the requested changes for the Board. Dr. Backus also explained the residential aspects of ASU East.
Proposal to Establish the East College (ASU) East)
Upon motion of Regent Schmitt, seconded by Regent Campbell, the Board authorized the establishment of East College at Arizona State University East.
Proposal to Establish the Department of Information and Management Technology (ASU East)
Upon motion of Regent Basha, seconded by Regent Campbell, the Board authorized the establishment of the Department of Information and Management Technology at ASU East.
Proposal to Establish the College of Technology and Applied Sciences (ASU East)
Upon motion of Regent Schmitt, seconded by Regent Basha, the Board authorized the name change of the School of Technology to the College of Technology and Applied Sciences.
Proposal to Establish a Department of Chicano/a Studies (ASU)
Associate Professor Edward Escobar joined the meeting for this discussion. Upon motion of Regent Chapa, seconded by Regent Campbell, the Board authorized the establishment of the Department of Chicana/Chicano Studies at Arizona State University Main Campus.
Regent Gignac was unable to attend the State Board meeting due to family illness, so she asked Dr. Besnette to make this report. Executive Director Besnette reported on the discussion of Senator Springer's bill regarding Yavapai Community College and NAU, noting the meeting took place approximately three weeks ago. The State Board voted to take no position stating they needed to know more about the bill before taking a position. The Community College Council of Presidents reported they had also taken no position. However, since that time they have taken a position of support.
The meeting adjourned at 4:20 p.m.
SUBMITTED BY:
__________________________________
Judy E. Garza, Secretary to the Board
APPROVED BY:
ATTEST:
___________________________________
John F. Munger, President
____________________________
George H. Amos, III, Secretary