Approved October 20, 2005
Meet and Confer Notes
September 8, 2005
Admin: President Saigo, Provost Spitzer, Steve Ludwig, Anne Zemek de Dominguez, John Burgeson, Diana Burlison, Bernadette Wilson, Mark Nook, Rex Veeder, Patty Dyslin (note taker)
Faculty: Judy Kilborn, Frankie Condon, JoAnn Gasparino, Jay Herath, Balsy Kasi, Andrew Larkin
Meet and Confer Notes of April 28, 2005 and May 12, 2005 – Approved.
The meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. All members introduced themselves to the group.
AD: I’d like to welcome everyone to this first Meet and Confer. This has been quite a week with classes beginning and students returning to campus. Last week was another busy week with Convocation activities and the welcoming of new faculty and staff to our campus and ending the week with the honoring of President Wick by naming the science building. My remarks, when they were originally drafted, listed his service as half a decade, when indeed, it was half a century of service – 55 years. Almost 200 people attended the reception and program, and it was a wonderful event. Michael will talk to you about some upcoming issues, but we have the right to move forward with the Applied Doctorates which will change the initiatives and focuses a little bit. Michael tells me that we had 70+ faculty here at the workshops on how to write grants and contracts. We are really blessed with all of the planning that’s taking place. Was it yesterday, Michael, that we had three advancement individuals/CEOs present the strategic plan for the advancement group, and it fits so nicely into the priorities that we have. I did ask them to come back with criteria which we could measure. We have a technology plan and a fiscal master plan and that is being fitted into the NCA accreditation and assessment, and we are looking to be in a positive place. The 4% increase in tuition was well received at MnSCU. As you know, some of the institutions had asked for 10%, and the trustees voted for a 7% cap. With our focus on excellence and opportunity, it’s important that we keep our tuition affordable as much as possible. We are also moving towards focusing on retention and recruiting in the coming year, and Mark Nook was there. We are also discussing how we can increase our new students – freshmen, transfers, and students who have been here to stay on to complete their education in 4-6 years. We went around the room and at the leadership council meeting, and it didn’t pass my consciousness when Dick Davenport from Mankato said this was the largest freshman class that they have ever had in the history of Mankato. So that doesn’t mean just for one year - that means this will filter through to subsequent years. This year we’re down about 150 FTE. So I’m asking that as we move through this next year for Meet and Confer, that faculty and administration work together to look continually at the focus on recruitment and retention because that is going to be something that the system is going to continually advertise and put out for public consumption, and we will be compared to the other six 4-year institutions.
Also I’ve had a couple or requests for interviews and have declined them because there is a rumor that I have my house up for sale. That’s my neighbor’s house (laughter). I just signed a 2-year contract, and I’m glad to be here, so I hope that will put any rumors to rest.
AD: We’ll cover some of the topics that President Saigo alluded to as part of today’s agenda, so let’s move to those. We have minutes from April 28 and May 12, 2005 that we were unable to approve at our last meeting. I think we’ve all gotten them. Do we approve those minutes?
Task Force on Student Program Completion (FA -1/20/2005)
FA: We are currently soliciting volunteers for the committee. We’re going to bring those names to the next Senate meeting on September 13th for an election and Senate approval, and then we’ll bring the names back to Meet and Confer on September 22nd.
AD: This is an important task force. As President Saigo said, graduation rates are being reviewed and looked at, and sometimes when parents are considering which institution to send their children to, they want to know what the graduation rate is of that institution. If we look like we’re behind others, that’s not a very positive thing in terms of helping us recruit those students. We really need to work hard and focus on retention, and as we do that and students move through, our graduation rates will, we hope, improve. This taskforce will be one in which faculty and administration can work together to plan various steps that can move us forward.
FA: So we’ll keep that on the agenda?
AD: We’ll keep that on the agenda. Yes.
AD: Let’s go to the new business. Because Frankie has to leave early, we’ll move item 10 up to number 2 and we’ll start with number 1.
AD: I assume that most of you have heard about Constitution Day and the requirement by the federal government that we have activities on campus on September 17th celebrating the U.S. Constitution. This is a relatively new requirement. I think this is the first year, but it’s going to be a permanent fixture. When September 17th falls on a Saturday, as it does this year, we have the option of celebrating Constitution Day either the week before or the week after, or both. We have a display set up in the library regarding the Constitution. We have references on some web sites that students can look at and Rex, you had a couple of other items to mention…
AD: Yes. Chris Inkster has set up a wonderful display. Also, Michelle Hammes has put together a booth in Atwood that’s going to be there all week – the week of the 18th – with a display and various things, but also a Constitution quiz. So if you’d like to take the Constitution quiz and see what’s going on, I encourage you to check it out. She thought it might be fun to take some of the questions required to become a citizen of the United States and include them in the quiz. I’d like to thank everyone who has contributed to this effort. Also, I understand that Michelle has contacted Democratic Citizenship faculty to encourage them to do things in their classes pertaining to the Constitution.
FA: How does the federal government, under what auspice do they require this?
AD: Well they require us to do it by saying that if we don’t do it, we won’t get any federal financial aid. So it really is a good thing for us to comply. Convocation Week debriefing?
FA: I’ll turn that over to Frankie…
Convocation Week Debriefing (FA) (9/8/2005)
FA: We have survived convocation week… (laughter)
AD: You have survived…(laughter)
FA: I kept a list of things that took place during the week that I thought worked well and things that didn’t work well and some ideas to think about for next year. We scheduled a debriefing for the people who are on the convocation planning committee and Sue Prout and Jean Duininck. I’d like to give you a snapshot of some of those notes. Under the heading of things that worked well, attendance at almost all of the sessions was really remarkable. We had chairs and had planned for 250 people to attend the keynote address, we set up 50 additional chairs, and we still had people standing. We lost count at 300. Eighty-one people came to Vincent Tinto’s workshop immediately following that for 100- and 200-level faculty, and I think that there were 37 at the later workshop. All of the sessions were similarly well-attended, particularly early in the week. Other things that worked well. We haven’t finished processing through all the session evaluations yet, but in snapshot form, the program for the new faculty elicited a very positive response – particularly the CTL/FA New Faculty Orientation. New faculty reported that they were surprised that this session wasn’t required -- that they had lots of questions and wanted more information than what we covered there. They asked for a new faculty handbook. The technology sessions for faculty were fairly well-attended. The people who attended said that they couldn’t believe that that session wasn’t required and they thought that all new faculty should be there. So we need to look again at the new faculty orientation sessions.
AD: Can I comment on that piece because at the luncheon for new faculty, one of the comments that a number of them made to me was that they were just overwhelmed with information, and there was information overload, and we should try to spread it out a little bit more.
FA: Other things that went well. The Boyer model session went very well and was well attended. There was a request that emerged during that session, and shows up in the evaluations, for administration participation in on-going Boyer model sessions. I think we’ll probably follow-up on that session, and for next year, we may want to talk about some kind of on-going conversation through the year about the Boyer model.
There were some things that didn’t work so well or that we need to think about doing differently for next year. One of those things was that there were people who needed to be at the table at the Convocation planning process and were not there. That is my responsibility. Sue Prout needed to be at that table and Jean Duininck needed to be at that table. They need to be part of the Convocation planning committee. There was one person who was representing the administration on the committee who didn’t participate. We need to make sure, I need to make sure, that I have the players in the room for Convocation planning, and we need to make sure that we have people representing the administration who are committed to participating in the process.
A couple of other things that didn’t work so well from my perspective…. There were sessions that the planning committee never got to review or comment on that were put into the program, and they competed with other sessions. We didn’t have descriptions for them so they didn’t have descriptions in the program. We need to talk about how sessions get on the program and let the program committee look at the timing of the sessions and things like that. We need to make sure that sessions fit with the theme of the program and don’t compete with other sessions, so that was a problem. That’s what I can think of for now. Are there other things that you noticed?
AD: Anne Zemek de Domiguez is not here now, but will be here later. She didn’t have that many people attend her Affirmative Action Search Workshop. It seems that a lot of the grievances that we get and the difficulties we have on campus are irregular issues dealing with search processes, and again, looking at some of the words you’re using, would it not be a good idea for all department chairs or all potential chairs of search committees to participate in this session?
FA: I think one thing, if I can respond to that… I think one thing that we need to be thinking about in relation to what Frankie was talking about earlier with needing to have all of the program options out there so people can look and see how they’re structured. That may have been at a time that was competing with other things – I don’t know. I heard about half-a-dozen people say that they wanted to go to that but they were prevented by another obligation. I think if the Convocation committee can look at everything that’s being offered, then they can look at things that are likely to conflict or draw the same people. We’re new at this. This is the first time we’ve used this model. I think it’s a wonderful model, but I do think we need to have everything there that we’re going to do so that it can be framed in a way that we can get the best attendance.
FA: I was aware of that. That is one of the sessions/workshops that didn’t go through the Convocation planning committee. We had a number of them in the program, and I wasn’t able to look at their placement in relationship to other things that were going on. That’s why I think it would help tremendously for us to be able to give thought to the placement of various programs in relation to what is going on at the same time during the concurrent sessions. This session would be very useful, but we need to be able to place it n the program so that there is an opportunity for better attendance.
AD: I agree with Roy about the importance of this session. At this time, people don’t even know whether or not they are going to be on a search committee. They may not even know if their department is going to have a search. So maybe these sessions can be offered at different times throughout the year. We’re talking about the workshop you held during Convocation.
AD: What about it?
AD: We heard that there was poor attendance.
AD: Twelve people.
AD: We’re saying that perhaps one of the reasons perhaps is at this time of the year nobody really knows if they’re going to be on a search committee or even if their department is going to do a search. So it might be more appropriate to offer that type of workshop at some other times during the year.
FA: That situation came up also around Lynda Milne of the MnSCU CTL. A request came forward from that session to do follow-up sessions. We may want to work together on that and set a November date.
AD: November may be a little late, perhaps the end of October or very early November.
AD: We may want to put those positions out there by the end of this month. We’ve always waited too long for this type of search. What I’m saying is that we want to move aggressively on identifying the possibilities for these positions this Fall.
AD: That would seem appropriate. One thing is that of faculty retirements - the contract encourages notification of that in October. So a lot of the searches are based on retirement.
AD: The other large number of searches that I think you would look at have to do with those who are fixed-term and need to be filled by probationary faculty. Positions exist, and we can identify them relatively early and say ‘Okay, let’s start now to fill these positions.
AD: Some of those have already come in.
FA: Another suggestion, a couple of other related things that have to do with Convocation… One is that one of the values the planning group was working with was the value of hospitality. What could we do in these sessions that would bring together a number of constituencies. At the keynote address, we wanted there to be faculty and staff and RAs and administrators altogether in the same place having breakfast together and sharing the experience of hearing the keynote speech. There was a really good response. In fact, the response was so good that several people on the staff asked if they could be included in the CETL luncheon. I realized in hindsight we could easily have done that -- that I could have arranged things so that we could invite staff to that luncheon. One thing that occurred to me in thinking about that is that I would hate to invite staff to that CETL luncheon and then only give faculty awards for teaching and service. I would very much like for there to be staff awards given out at the luncheon next year. I would like to brainstorm and maybe come up with staff awards that would recognize staff contributions to student learning. So I would just lay that out for you. The other thing that became clear to me over the course of the week is that we, under the heading of hospitality, offered people a lot of food during the course of the week. The response to the breakfast was really overwhelming. People really liked that first breakfast before the keynote. But I think maybe next year we will not offer the CETL reception for new faculty during convocation week but reserve that as a reception during Faculty Forum Day or during the January workshop.
AD: I think we need to consider whether there are certain contractual issues regarding awards to faculty and staff. Some contracts have awards for exceptional services. There are some other awards, MMA, MAPE, not all contracts have them. They are negotiated in the various contracts. The award process can be fraught with some hurt feelings, political or collective bargaining issues.
AD: It gets to be complicated.
FA: Jean would know about that?
AD: She does. I’m not sure they know the history of those awards…
FA: There are, of course, MSUAASF awards…
AD: MSUAASF people do contribute to learning, and I would certainly like to be able to recognize them.
AD: I think we could look into this. The union issue may or may not be an overriding consideration.
FA: Regarding the convocation attendance, I was wondering, correct me I’m wrong. Some of the colleges had activities that conflicted with the programs on a specific day.
AD/FA: Only one. (several people speaking at once)
AD: Only one and only on one day.
AD: I met a lot of new faculty, Frankie, and everybody felt really good about being here, and they were pleased… food equals friendship. They all felt that they had been warmly welcomed to this campus. Maybe about 1/3 were, say, veterans, and they pretty much said the same things, which were positive feelings. And again, I talked about a tipping point… there comes a time in any type of group where the feel-goods will start taking over and it becomes contagious. So I want to thank you and your group because it did make that point. People really responded – the weather was good, they were learning things, it was for their benefit and to benefit their students and the institution, and the more feelings of a new person coming in of welcome and contributing to the society here will set them in good stead when, you know, it gets rougher. Again, I thought it was very well done, and I appreciate all the work you all did.
FA: I just simply wanted to say that I’m really pleased that this model seems to be working and that people are being able to come to the table and look at and be involved in planning this Convocation. I really appreciate, Frankie, your sensitivity in making sure that other folks who need to be at that table are included for next year. I think that will make a huge difference.
AD: Anything else on this topic?
AD: I would like to add more kudos – the diversity sessions went very well for the new faculty. I haven’t seen any evaluations, this is from anecdotal responses.
AD: Next item:
Centers of Excellence (FA – 9/8/2005)
FA: We all know that MnSCU is moving forward rather rapidly with proposals for Centers of Excellence. We wanted to take this opportunity to provide some information, and I want to ask some questions that faculty have been asking about the Centers of Excellence. I have a list of questions, but I’m just going to start with two really simple ones. First of all, what proposals are going forward from SCSU, and who’s working on those proposals? What departments and what partnerships do these represent?
AD: There are three proposals that are being worked on at the university at this point. One of them is a nano-tech/bio-tech proposal with the College of Science and Engineering, the Engineering Department and Dakota County Technical College, and I think Anoka-Ramsey Community College is involved in that as well. Our second proposal also included the College of Science and Engineering. It has to do with Health Sciences. We’re working with North Hennepin Community College, I think St. Cloud Tech, a number of the health facilities in this region – primarily to offer the clinical component of the Clinical Lab Science degree and Nursing. Those are the primary areas for that. The third is the College of Business putting together a proposal focusing primarily on computer networking and security areas related to business. I’m not sure. I think one of the potential partners fell by the wayside just this week, so I’m not sure who the other two-year partners are. The people working on them; on the College of Business Proposal – Mike Pesch and Denny Bristow are working on that. For the Science and Engineering ones – Ben Baliga and David DeGroote are working on that one – the nanotech one. And the Health Sciences – David DeGroote is working on that one. I’m assisting him with both of those, but primarily the second one. A lot of the preliminary work for these was done over the summer. The proposals are due relatively soon. We just got the final version, I think it’s the final version, of the RFP and some of the information that needs to be incorporated. We’re kind of feverishly trying to finish these up.
FA: Do any of these proposals or programs have to be tied to some other department?
AD: They all have to have partner institutions. The requirement for the Centers of Excellence proposal is that one of the state universities has to be the lead institution, and there has to be at least one two-year college partner.
FA: A follow-up question and a number of questions follow from that follow-up question. We were wondering if we could get copies of the proposals when they’re done?
AD: I don’t see why not.
FA: I should follow-up with the rationale for it.
FA: We do need to be concerned about the impact the proposals might have on other departments, colleges, programs, financial curricular equipment lab, and I just wanted to turn things over to Balsy for a minute. He just brought in a situation that illustrates why we need to do this.
FA: One of the requirements of an accreditation was the need to get some new equipment. The purchase of the equipment was approved, and when the department went to get the funds released, the department chair said that money has been pulled out to support some other project. If they come back asking about the equipment, what do we tell them?
AD: I hadn’t heard about that. The notion behind the Centers of Excellence is that any funded proposal would receive $1-1.8 million that would be added to the base budget for the institution. There are certain in-kind things that each campus has to provide in order to meet the criteria for the proposal, but I don’t know that that’s what happened in the instance you mentioned.
FA: That’s fine…
FA: Some of this may be because the process is very fast, and then decisions are supposed to be made October 18th – is that correct?
AD: We’ve got until the end of September to submit our proposals.
FA: We’ve also had questions about criteria used to assess the proposals and about the curriculum process and the curriculums involved.
AD: I think you received information from the Chancellor’s Office with regard to the criteria that…
FA: I just got that…
AD: I just got it too. So you have that and you can distribute that to your membership. Any curriculum that gets developed as a consequence of any of these proposals, out of necessity, has got to go through the regular curriculum approval process.
FA: So you said we can have copies of the proposals?
AD: Yes, when we have them.
FA: When is the deadline?
AD: I think it’s October 4th. I’m not certain of the date. I’ll have to check.
FA: But it’s several weeks?
FA: Okay. Thank you very much.
Doctorates (Admin – 9/8/05)
AD: As you know, MnSCU has been approved to offer Applied Doctorates in a number of fields. There are four that we’re looking at. Educational Administration, Applied Psych, Audiology and Nursing. Among those, we are most ready in the Educational Administration and Applied Psych areas. I know that there are some faculty from the Educational Administration department working on developing a curriculum to support our proposal. We’re a little behind on the Nursing because we don’t have a master’s degree yet in nursing, and our emphasis right now is on developing an accelerated degree program in nursing and an MS in nursing. The Nursing Applied Doctorate looks like it’s being developed across MnSCU as a collaboration among the various programs that are offering graduate nursing programs - we have representatives attending those meetings.
We’ve had a meeting on campus – I don’t remember the date – where Mitch Rubenstein came down from the Academic Program Review office at the Chancellor’s office and talked about the topic of Applied Doctorates with those faculty and administrators who were interested. He will be here again. There is another meeting. Unfortunately Kate Steffens left town yesterday afternoon, and I didn’t have a chance to ask her the date when that meeting is scheduled. I think it’s the end of this month. I will get the date to you, Judy, and you can send it out to the campus and invite any faculty who are interested in learning more about this process. MnSCU has to have some board policy changes in order to authorize various campuses to offer doctorate degrees. I don’t think we need to make any mission changes to our mission statement because we don’t specify what degrees we can award. MnSCU is in the process of developing a process of approving proposals. They don’t have them in place yet. We have them for master’s degrees. There’s some discussion about the number of external reviewers who would have to look at the proposal, etc. That’s still being worked out. MnSCU’s sense, I believe, is that the first Applied Doctorate would be available to be offered by Fall 2008.
FA: We have some concerns about workload issues. How soon will we get this information?
AD: We don’t know that.
FA: I think that it’s important that the negotiating team start thinking about what contractual language needs to go into the contract to facilitate this because there are a lot of things that we cover at the master’s level – workload issues for example.
AD: Clearly there has to be some consideration of the faculty depending on how much teaching they would be doing in a doctoral program. There would be research expectations that are more stringent for some faculty, and there would have to be some adjustment to teaching loads as a consequence.
FA: As workloads are redistributed, that would mean that faculty who are teaching exclusively in undergrad programs would (unable to transcribe)…. We would need to have an open conversation about those kind of issues.
FA: The other concern is the speed at which this is moving. I’m glad to hear Fall 2008 because I have heard 2007.
AD: That’s been mentioned too.
FA: I did attend the meeting this summer. I think it was in July sometime. It was well attended by faculty. Some of these issues were raised and discussed. Another one that was raised was library resources. Obviously, if we have difficulty providing library resources for the programs we have, with doctoral programs, there will be a need for many more scholarly publications than we currently have even though they’re applied doctorates. I will go ahead and send out the date when I get it. I would like to encourage everybody to encourage those people who might be interested in attending and finding out what’s going on.
ACT and NSSE (Admin – 9/8/2005)
AD: This item is primarily informational. We have received results from ACT Student Opinion Survey and the 2005 administration of the NSSE Survey and will make those available shortly to the Faculty Association. I’ve given Judy some summary data that we pulled together from both of those and will have more information available shortly. We also have a draft that is being distributed to the colleges for departmental review of an academic data book for the last three years. We will have that information available as well. We need to go through that and make sure the data is accurate before we publish and distribute it. Any questions on that? We’ll spend some time on the NSSE and ACT results at future Meet and Confer meetings.
Fall Enrollment (Admin – 9/8/2005)
AD: Judy asked me to provide some information on Fall enrollment. As of this morning, we are 192 FYE behind the final numbers for last Fall. My guesstimate is that we will end up being 50 to 100 FYE behind the final numbers for the year – that’s last year – and I think it’s important to note that last year’s final number was below our target, so being behind that is not a good thing and will affect the bottom line on next year’s budget. Consequently, that makes all the more important what President Saigo was saying before about recruitment and retention of students in order to maintain or be as close to the enrollment targets as we can get. We’d like to try to increase our efforts to recruit transfer students for the Spring to end up as close as we can to our target enrollment. We’ll be calling on faculty to help make this happen.
FA: So given the drop, are there plans underway, or on-going conversations to do anything different in terms of graduation rates and retention?
FA: Care to share? (laughter)
AD: There are a number of things that we’re looking at trying to do differently, and there are several things that we’ve been doing, and they just haven’t had an impact yet as well as we like to them to have had. One of the things we’ve had to contend with is the kind of image problem that students have reported that they couldn’t get into the classes they need. Well, we’ve addressed that for incoming students. We didn’t have that problem this year, and I don’t think we had it last year, so I think that we can push that reputation aside. We’re developing and expanding the First Year Experience program. One of the reasons for that is to improve retention. The Admissions folks are being asked to put together a document that would specify targets for the particular kinds of students and particular locations. There are a number of those kind of initiatives.
FA: Thank you.
AD: I’m planning on meeting with the Enrollment Management Committee. They’re supposed to have a plan – so they’ll have a plan. I’ve asked Mark and Michael to take to the deans and get their input on other factors. Gardner said that taking attendance is a way to address this issue. We need to work together as a group. We need to be talking with counselors and principals, we have 90,000 alums to get the word out, and we need to encourage our faculty to also participate in this recruiting process. The second issue is to have task force look at the Gen Ed program and the Transfer Curriculum. Then the third, that’s John Burgeson and his group, is to encourage more transfers from two-years institutions to here or to develop more portal programs. We need to be looking at many ways to increase relationships with other institutions to generate transfers. We need to continue to work to build trust and understanding. The competition to attract students from the Twin Cities is increasing, and we need to work together to come up with ways to address that issue.
FA: Two things related to that. I’m hopeful that the task force can get moving on that this fall, and hopefully at our January meeting, we’ll help contribute to that. You mentioned something about a task force on Gen Ed and Transfer Curriculum. Is this something different?
AD: It’s the Gen Ed Committee and the work that’s being done through the current structure. What we do with Gen Ed has an impact on transferability.
FA: Very definitely.
AD: Along those lines, the Gen Ed Committee got their website up and running this summer and it will be updated as often as needed.
FA: Will that be formally announced?
AD: One of the workshops during Convocation week was a workshop on Gen Ed, and Judy mentioned specifically at that workshop that the word is beginning to get out.
AD: I don’t know if it’s appropriate, but I gave a charge to five CEO’s that put together the strategic plan for the advancement of the university. We really are in competition with other 4-year universities. We are in a competition; we are being judged. It would be helpful if we could get this feeling that we had before this sense of competition, to make this institution as good as possible.
FA: Regarding enrollment, I have offered to go visit high schools. It would be nice to have a list of faculty who are willing to participate in recruitment efforts. I would really like to be called upon to do this.
AD: Thank you for your offer. This is serious. We live by our enrollment numbers.
AD: It’s a relative situation - if we’re down 1% and everyone is down 1%, the allocation we receive will be the same. If we are down and everyone else is up, we will lose money. We could also see a reduction in state support.
Counseling Center: Structure and Supervision (FA – 9/8/2005)
FA: First a little bit of context. I think that everybody knows that recently the Director of the Counseling Center resigned from St. Cloud State. We’re looking into the situation. Another part of the context is the fact that that position was a MSUAASF position. Two of the other state universities have changed that position over to an IFO position. So the Executive Committee brought in the five faculty members from the Counseling Center into our meeting this week and discussed where we are, what the situation is having a MSUAASF director in charge of faculty. They have gone back to discuss it among themselves, and that’s where it’s at right now. The faculty at the counseling center are discussing their structuring situation.
FA: We understand that the Administration would probably like to start a search for a position.
FA: We are asking officially that you hold off until we get feedback from the Counseling C enter. We’re prepared to bring it to Meet and Confer next time and come back with a recommendation based on input from the faculty at the Center. We’re simply asking that you defer hiring that position until we have a chance to bring something back to Meet and Confer.
AD: So the next Meet and Confer is in two weeks.
AD: So you would have something by then.
FA: We hope to. Yes.
AD: Can we count on that?
FA: You don’t see any issue with that do you?
FA: No, I don’t.
FA: It’s in our interest to resolve this as soon as possible.
Anoka Ramsey Community College Portal Programs (Admin – 9/8/05)
AD: We’re offering some courses at Anoka-Ramsey Community College through a portal agreement with that institution. At the moment there’s one program that we’re offering and that’s in information media which is offering some courses for the master’s degree. We have some courses in Gerontology and Public Administration with both the Science Department and Community Studies offering classes. As we move forward to develop these into full programs, those departments feel that there is demand, and they wish to move forward, you will have departmental recommendations approving. Are we offering some BES coursework as well?
AD: No, we are not offering BES coursework this semester. We would need help from the departments.
FA: Can you talk a little bit about what might BES look like? I’m having a hard time getting my mind wrapped around that idea. Usually students have a real specific take on what they want to do and how they’re going to do it. I’m not so sure I understand how it might work in partnership with a portal.
AD: I can explain to you the philosophy we would like develop. These programs – like the portal project – seem to be aimed adult students who have finished a two-year degree and are place bound but would like to earn a four-year degree. I could probably go to departments and ask if we can offer one of their courses - 60 credits scattered across the curriculum could be offered. That does not seem to be a particularly good approach because you don’t really get to self-select the courses; we select them for you. What we want to do is try to develop some concentrations/clusters, so Biology Department says – and I’m just picking them out of thin air: we have four faculty who would like to go down there and teach. So we could provide 12 credits of biology. We want to define some clusters and identify demand and then try to develop those things that student might want. Gerontology is offering two courses. It would be nice to have several more. I don’t think we really have the resources to offer Bachelors of Science. BES offers us and students some flexibility. It will probably have to be supplemented with online courses. We will have to be creative. Staff will be meeting with departments this year to find out what the interest is.
FA: I actually have a series of questions. I’m not sure what the difference is between a portal and an off-site program.
AD: They’re the same but with different names.
FA: So it’s the intention to take people who have earned degrees at those schools, or maybe not, and just offer our courses down there and get our degrees down there. Is that the idea?
FA: Also, Michael, you mentioned that there were some courses toward a Masters in Information Media?
AD: We’re offering some courses now, and the department wishes to offer the degree there, and we did a proposal to MnSCU to replicate the program the department indicated unanimous, I think unanimous, support. Certain academic programs, particularly at the graduate level, tend to attract working adult students, but there isn’t a critical mass in St. Cloud to provide sufficient enrollment to offer those courses. In the Twin Cities, where the population is so much greater, we can in fact generate the necessary critical mass.
FA: So Gerontology is an example of that?
AD : Gerontology might be an example of that as well. Public Administration would be another example.
AD: Anoka Ramsey did a survey, and in that northwest sector of the metropolitan area, they have the fewest bachelors degree citizenry of the entire metropolitan area. We’ve been pushing our graduate studies, and I think we finally overtook Mankato on the number of students enrolled. I will tell you that that St. Mary’s, St. Thomas and St. Scholastica are aggressively in there as well.
AD: There are new billboards all over the Twin Cities advertising Bethel’s new MBA.
AD: Mankato has a billboard on Snelling at I-94.
AD: There are also instances where private institutions are holding classes in public facilities.
FA: I do think it will really help a lot that there has been a shift in the number of graduate students in our kind of race with Mankato. In the past they’ve been able to offer really strong stipends and tuition remission. I think we’re in a much better position now that we’re giving graduate students better pay to draw more graduate students.
FA: The last time around we had problems with a sister institution (Metro State) going in on what they perceived as their territory. The other thing about BES is that students would put together programs that has some sort of rationale and is unique to that individual person. I don’t see how we can do something like that by sort of randomly offering courses.
AD: After you finish Gen Ed, (self select students), many departments already have a BES major within their departments. Ideally, this would be less burdensome on the department. We haven’t identified which might appeal to students.
FA: I hear what you’re saying. If we take this to the Senate and somebody would say, ‘Well what are we going to do, are we just going to take this random step and courses and call that a degree?’
AD: That’s not what we’re talking about doing
FA: How do we answer that question?
AD: I think we answer by saying the idea we have behind what we’re talking about is coming up with some logical connections between certain disciplines and having a cluster of courses in each of those so that it’s like a mini major, and you give students some choices within a sort of free reign. If they’re not interested in those choices, then that’s not the program for them, or they can take some additional courses on campus.
AD: And we’re looking at using established BES majors – physics has one. It’s a prescribed program that at the same time provides quite a bit of freedom.
FA: Thank you for the information:
Searches Planned – (Admin – 9/8/2005)
AD: We’ve worked with Larry Chambers getting a search firms together for Dean of the College of Business, Dean of the College of Social Science, Vice President of Student Live and Development. Larry, I think, is soliciting proposals. He has a few of them, and we’re getting ready to search those three with a search firm. For the Affirmative Action search, we’ve got two proposals that Larry and I are looking at. I believe we’re going to choose one of the two of them, and that search firm will do a separate search for the Affirmative Action position. I think at a previous Meet and Confer, we talked about getting a new search committee established because the old search committee – well things may have changed – it was quite a large one. I know Bernadette has different commitments now. The composition of the search committee at that time was 7 faculty members, one MSUAASF, one AFSCME , one MAPE , one Student and administrators. So I think at this time we’re hoping we can have seven appointments from you for that search committee.
FA: Seven’s an odd number, why not the normal six?
AD: We’ll take six.
FA: Seven’s fine.
AD: I think it had to do with each college being represented.
AD: I don’t know where the rest of them came from. I think we had someone from the Counseling C enter. I’m not sure how that worked out, but it was meant to be representational, so that’s where we are. Also during this item, Rex, do you have something to talk about?
AD: Michael, did you have something you wanted to say?
AD: Well, with the dean searches, I believe we had six faculty on each of the dean searches the last time around, and we should get the same number for the current searches.
AD: The request for membership on student life search committee already went out.
FA: And I would like to talk about that if I could. (handout distributed) I got this today. You’ll notice the date on it is August 8th. I’m going to be a bit grumpy for a minute. This went over to my faculty office, and I see that you’re requesting membership by September 9th, which is a little impossible right now since I just got this today and that the committees going to begin by September 15th. When I took office June 1st, I e-mailed and I sent print memos to both Academic Affairs and to the President’s Office notifying folks there that I was in my office, my office is was in North Office Center, 2nd floor. I sent a similar message to the Deans. It would really be helpful in moving things forward if mail could go to the Faculty Association Office at the North Office Center. Along with this, there are also two grievance responses that have been sitting in that box for a month. Fortunately, I’d gotten those electronically, or we could have a timeliness issue. But I’d like to ask the Administration’s help getting these things moving forward by making sure that things go to the North Office Building. So I’m done being grumpy. In terms of the timeline, what can we do? Certainly for the other positions, I will put out a request for seven faculty for the Affirmative Action search, six for the two dean searches. I think we need to talk about what happens with the search committee for the Vice President for Student Life and Development on several levels. First of all, if I put a call out today for faculty participants, assuming we’d like to make up the committee, we need to take these to Senate. Senate is Tuesday, and there is no way I can get volunteers in time to get them approved for Senate. If I squeeze it in perhaps I can get that, but not everybody who’s interested in serving would perhaps get the word and be able to respond that quickly. We’re not likely to get the best candidates that way also. So realistically, at this point, we need two Senates to get this taken care of. Had I received this on August 8th, I could have had members for the committee by September 15th. I’m not sure where we stand with that.
AD: We’ll convene the committee at a different time.
AD: At a different date? That really works for me.
FA: So it looks like it will be two Meet and Confers before we will have names to you. But we also have one other issue that we need to discuss, and that is the number of faculty. We’re not okay with the number on the committee. We would like our normal six. I know you think this is a mantra, but, I think that for this position, there are some really serious reasons why six are important. First of all, it’s important because faculty are rostered under this person. This person will be their direct supervisor, and we’ve had issues with supervision for some of those faculty. Counseling Center comes to mind. So I think that it’s really important that we have faculty input on that. I also think it’s important because the Vice President for Student Life and Development works very closely with First Year Experience, and we would like faculty to be getting involved with that. I’m sure if I’m forgetting something, so I’m going to take a break and see if somebody has something to add and I’ll check my notes.
AD: What kind of composition are we talking about?
FA: Making it representative of the colleges.
AD: We’ll take it under advisement.
FA: Would you like us to take this forward to Faculty Senate? Would you like us to come up with our normal six and bring it back to you?
AD: When can you get this on the Faculty Senate agenda?
FA: I can put this on the agenda for Tuesday – to talk about this. I know the agenda is already out, but I could add it to the agenda. We could talk about the number being requested. I could request names. I can pretty much assure you though that the faculty will come back and say they want six.
AD: Is that what we had for the last search?
AD: The make up of the committee is similar to what we had last time. This has gone to Meet and Confer with MSUAASF. They have a strong interest in this position.
FA: We might have had four the last time. I don’t know. As Judy pointed out, the conditions have changed with regard to the amount of academic activity that this Vice President has taken on, and we’re happy that that’s the case. But the way the University’s organized – faculty groups – we have five colleges, and we have independent groups such as the library and the Counseling Center, and it will be difficult to have full representation if we only have four faculty members. That would mean only four colleges at the most would be represented, and we leave one college without a representative and or another college/library. So that’s why we always keep coming back with six. Any other number doesn’t work so well for us. We’re certainly appreciative and respectful of the interests of MSUAASF and that they are highly involved with this as well, so we don’t want to put them in a less powerful position. Are there MAPE employees in this unit?
AD: I don’t know - I will check.
FA: I can’t see the reason for having a representative of MAPE. Are there MAPE people who report to this Vice President?
AD No, they report through this VP.
FA: It certainly makes sense if this group has to work with the Vice President.
AD: Interpreters are MAPE and report through this VP.
AD: The President will get back to you on this. Why don’t you solicit your members without necessarily getting into the numbers on the committee, and we will get back to you?
FA: We certainly can take this proposal to the Senate, ask them if they want four, and ask them if they will be okay with four. We can have that conversation. We can begin moving forward and begin collecting names in some way, but we maybe should come up with a different date that we should be targeting. Maybe you could come up with a suggestion. I’m thinking two Meet and Confers from today.
FA: There needs to be a seamless connection between Student Life and faculty, so I want the faculty to be thinking about this. I don’t know what the magic number is, but it is critical to be involved in the process.
FA: What I can say is that we will bring it to Senate on Tuesday. I can’t say we’ll have anything for you next week.
AD: I need to finish up. We have a hiring situation in one of the units. It concerns the Counseling and Psychological Services. They hired a fixed-term person, an emergency hire, and didn’t make an announcement. They didn’t realize this was necessary. This is perhaps understandable considering all of the shifts and changes in various areas.
AD: No search was done either.
AD: No search was done. No announcement, no search. They’re in a bind. They need to have this done. The problem is that, of course, we understand the implications with regard to Zmora, and we understand the faculty interest in this in terms of having the proper search conducted. We’d like to proceed with the proper documentation. According to the Chair, all members of the department agree with the hire.
FA: We agreed with the hire, but it’s my understanding, I might be wrong, we thought it was an emergency hire.
AD: It is. But a search still needs to be done.
FA: It’s part of the need to figure out the structure and organization of that department and that center so that we can make sure that departmental processes, which would include searches, are followed. Are we talking about an MOA possibly, or are we talking about some other form of sign-off?
AD: Well, we had a situation in the past where there’s a letter acknowledging the situation along with the appropriate recognition that this shouldn’t happen again – shall not happen again.
FA: So are we moving on to #9?
AD: No, this is something else. This just came up today, so I’m attaching it to the Searches Planned item.
FA: That’s what I thought you were doing. (laughter)
FA: Have we violated any laws – is that the concern?
AD: We are concerned about the fact that there was no search, and in the past, there may have been situations where emergency hires didn’t require a search However, under Zmora, and appropriately, we shouldn’t do these things. We want to make sure there’s equal access to the process, and what we’re missing here is that equal access to the process.
FA: Were faculty involved in this process?
AD: The interim director.
FA: We were asked if it would be okay if a choice were made between two people, and when we got back, we found out who it was.
AD: So the faculty were not involved…
FA: We were involved in saying that we would be ok if so-and-so accepted.
AD: Faculty in the colleges have had explanations and processes explained to them on numerous occasions about what the appropriate procedures are to follow in conducting a faculty search. The Faculty in the Counseling Center haven’t had that because they didn’t have that opportunity, so they need to go through some kind of orientation I guess. So they acted as a department, but they didn’t follow the appropriate procedures.
FA: My concern, first of all, is that we didn’t break any laws. We’ve had a lot of problems, and that’s why we’re so careful about our searches.
AD: It’s a one-year fixed-term appointment.
FA: It went to someone very deserving…
AD: It was considered an emergency situation.
FA: What are you asking of us?
AD: It’s important that you understand what happened here, and in the department’s interest, the Chair has spoken to us about this and is very concerned, and I imagine the rest of the department is too. They’re in a situation where things are happening, and they need to have somebody on board. The emergency is now the emergency times two. So we’d like to go ahead with this hire with the understanding that this cannot happen again.
FA: I think this has happened many times where an emergency hire is necessary.
AD: What we like to do – especially the past couple years – is that if there is the need for an emergency hire, we’ve asked the department to do an abbreviated search and advertise the position. In this case, that didn’t happen.
AD: That’s the problem…
FA: Actually FA should get notification of that also, and obviously that wouldn’t have happened. So the emergency hires simply have changed after Zmora.
AD: There actually aren’t any hiring laws out there that our hiring process comes next to that we can actively violate. Obviously discrimination is violation of discrimination law. But, what I wanted to say is what I’m seeing a lot of … the Zmora hiring rules are set out in a court order, and there are something like four or five paragraphs outlining what should be done during normal search procedures. What it says, prior to any offer of full-time employment, even for emergency hires, the position must be announced, and the dean must do certain things. What we’re seeing are appointments going through that are …. Appointments that are combined up to make it a fixed term and then, of course, there hasn’t been any search conducted. The other thing we’re seeing are emergency appointments willy-nilly. And = emergency appointments are completely permissible, but an emergency search has to be done. There has to be a search for every fixed-term position unless it’s a rollover. The rollover rules are pretty clear, and we try to enforce them as much as possible. Under Zmora, emergency hire no longer allows us to pick someone out and put them in the position. Basically what’s going on here is that people want to simply appoint this person without going through the regular process. It wasn’t announced, and the position wasn’t searched. It makes no sense now that a person is actually at a desk - it makes no sense to go through a search.
FA: I do think that this situation is different in one respect though. It’s different in that frequently when emergency hires happen the way you described, the department isn’t consulted. At least in this case, the department has been consulted. I think we clearly need to get out the word on hiring processes and procedures to all departments.
AD: Maybe we should have a process where there is more oversight over every hire. Why did this go forward without approval from any administrator?
AD: I signed off on it. As the interim director, I thought it was ok. This is the first I’m hearing that this was wrong.
AD: This is a slightly different case, and I wouldn’t expect this to be happening too often. And it’s important to get the word out and make sure that all of the areas know the correct procedures for hiring.
AD: There are a number of things that Anne and I have learned, and we will be having a debriefing on the process.
AD: It seems that we always are going back, and I agree with what Andy is saying. The thing that gets us in trouble constantly is that we don’t follow these procedures.
FA: It seems to me that maybe it might be appropriate to bring this back to Frankie and maybe try and figure out – is there some way we can build this information into the on-going training? And maybe we need to ask that people who do searches have attended this. We really need to look at that sort of thing – or that someone in every department has gone through this sort of training. I think it’s really complicated. I’ve done a bunch of searches through my department pre- and post-Zmora, and there all kinds of variables that can happen, and I can certainly appreciate how, in this circumstance, it might happen where they’re not doing the kind of hiring that happens in an academic department that is constantly getting lines or constantly having staff searches. That’s one thing. The other thing is that obviously, the fact that faculty were involved with this and administrators were involved that we can learn from this. I’m not bothered by the fact this happened. I understand how it happened. I just wish they’d known, but we’re resolving things as well as we can, and I think we should just move forward with this.
AD: Should we document this in some way?
FA: Yes, we need to.
AD: We’ll send a memo.
AD: I think we need to add a caveat to this – all search committees and/or their search chairs have to go through an education process with Anne’s office and that we don’t approve of any search until that’s done. I understand what you’re saying, Judy, but you hold us to certain standards, and it seems that we get into trouble when we say, “On the one hand you have this and on the other hand you have this.” I’d rather have one procedure and follow it regardless and make sure that it happens. When we start making exceptions, then we get into trouble. This institution has had trouble over the years because of these kind of procedures that are not followed, and having people not educated is not an excuse or where we want to be. And I’m sorry to be tough on this, but I think that’s where we get in trouble. What happens generally is we agree, move on, and then this happens again and you hold our feet to the fire. I want everybody educated in all the procedures so we have no difficulty from this time forward.
FA: I have to say I agree. We have to follow the procedures. We have to be careful.
FA: I acknowledge that we have to be careful. I have a couple concerns. First of all, I do think it would be important for Anne to be able to train people in the process and the Affirmative Action paperwork, and I’m wondering if there something we can do – perhaps offering workshops again and making sure we get the word out so that she’s not in her office with a trail of people out the door needing to be trained. I’m a little concerned about the logistics of that.
AD: We need to do some workshops. Once we’ve identified that we’re going to have some searches and the departments have identified the chairs, the chair should attend one of those workshops. We’ll schedule them at a time when we can have a number of people come in at the same time. We’ll have a couple of times on the schedule rather than having each person individually. There’s one other search item that was the next item on the agenda….
FTNP Appointment – fifth year (Admin – 9/8/2005_
AD: and that had to do with an appointment in one of the colleges where the contract specified that after meeting and conferring, the president may appoint a faculty member to a fifth year, which is the case here. So we’re notifying the FA that this happened in one department. I had talked to Judy about it before the contract was approved.
FA: can you talk about, without revealing confidentiality, about the rationale for that?
AD: There was a rollover. The department had approved the rollover, and there was a 3-credit change in the assignment that was not in the assignment before. So it was one of these things – it was our determination that the 3 credits was not a substantial change. There was an interpretation that “this is really a different position” – no, it’s not. This is the position. You’ve been doing it now for five years, so we’re just making it clear that you can’t do this position again.
FA: Why isn’t this made into a probationary position?
AD: I believe this was a failed search. It was a probationary search that failed and went to a fixed-term search to fill the slot.
FA: Thank you for the formal notification.
Attendance Policy (Admin – 9/8/2005)
AD: The last item on the agenda is the attendance policy. An AAC committee is developing a policy on attendance they will bring to Meet Confer when it is drafted. I just wanted to bring that to your attention that it will be coming. One of the things that we discovered from both John Gardner and Vince Tinto, is when you require students to attend class, they tend to be much more successful students. Surprise…. (laughter) They participate in discussion, and they master more of the material better. So we’d like to do something with regard to attendance, and we’ll bring something back to this group. I hope to have it by the next Meet and Confer.
FA: Do you have any notion of whether or not this might include the possibility of an early warning system?
AD: Well we’re also working on an early warning system, but that would be a separate process, a separate piece. It would be partly connected to attendance, but it’s also connected to student performance.
FA: The early warning will actually be early notification that will inform all students of their progress in class.
FA: Will faculty be able to choose not to take attendance?
AD: We’re not ready to address that yet.
AD: Are there any other comments on this or any other topics?
AD: I just want to get back to Judy on the Vice President search. Are you going to get back to us with a better date?
FA: We should probably think about the date in relationship to Meet and Confer. Let’s assume that they say four is okay. We need to approve those at the next Senate, so we’re talking two Senate meetings, which transfers into two Meet and Confers.
AD: So we really shouldn’t attempt this until after the next Meet and Confer?
FA: No, in two Meet and Confers we should be able to bring information back.
AD: So we should get this off our schedule then.
FA: Thank you very much.
AD: Thank you.
FA: Let it be noted that we finished our first Meet and Confer early by six minutes.
Meeting was – adjourned at 4:54 p.m.