Synopsis: The Senate
(1) heard a report on the provost search.
(2) heard a report on Advancement activities.
(3) heard a report on Enrollment Management activities.
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
President Seely called University Senate Meeting 324
to order at 5:33 p.m. on Wednesday, 15 December 1999,
in Room B45 EERC.
Secretary Reed called roll. Absent were At-large Senators Tom Drummer, Sonia Goltz, and Carol MacLennan, representatives from Army/Air Force ROTC, ME-EM, Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Mining Engineering, Institute of Materials Processing, Academic Services-Engineering, Finance and Advancement, and Student Affairs and Educational Opportunity. Liaisons in attendance were Anthony Moretti (USG) and Ted Soldan (Staff Council).
2. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS
Guests included Gail Mroz (Michigan Tech Fund),
Gary Neumann (Enrollment Management), Bill McGarry
(Finance and Administration), Bill Bulleit (Chair, Provost
Search Committee), and Dean Woodbeck (Tech Topics).
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Long MOVED and Blanning seconded the motion to
approve the agenda as presented. The motion to approve
PASSED on voice vote with no dissent. [Appendix A.
NOTE: Only official Senate and Library archival copies of
the minutes will contain a full complement of
appendices.]
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM MEETING 323
President Seely made a correction to the minutes on
page 8258. The following sentence should read "The
members are Christ Ftaclas, Ellen Horsch, Shalini
Suryanarayana, Tom Snyder, and Bill Kennedy, Chair"
(not Chris Passerello). Seely noted that Christopher Edlin
will be the GSC representative and there is not yet a USG
representative. Vanden Avond MOVED and Prince
seconded the motion to approve the minutes of meeting
323 as corrected. The motion PASSED on voice vote
with no dissent.
5. REPORT FROM SENATE PRESIDENT
The Senate Officers, Jeanne Meyers, and Debbie
Lassila met to review general and specific amendments to
the Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty Handbook relative to
the semester conversion. A proposal will be brought to
the Senate for editorial amendments in two categories:
changing quarters to semesters and title changes. The
specific amendments deal with sabbatical leave, tenure,
and conflict of interest procedures. The sabbatical leave
proposal will be available for formal discussion and
debate at the January 12 meeting.
Seely will reconvene the Tenure, Promotion and Reappointment Task Force to complete its review of the tenure policy prior to Senate debate. The policy for approval to tenure changes are different than normal. The Committee on Academic Tenure is charged with conducting a referendum of the academic faculty on any changes. The Senate will debate changes and pass a resolution to be forwarded to the Committee. If the referendum is successful it will be forwarded to the administration for approval.
The Conflict of Interest Procedures are still interim. Seely will ask the Research Policy committee to examine the procedures and determine if changes need to be made. Final recommendations will be brought to the Senate for debate.
The Administrative Evaluation Commission questionnaires are due on Monday, December 20.
6. COMMITTEE BUSINESS/REPORTS
A. Provost Search Committee Report [Appendix B]
Bill Bulleit, Chair of the Provost Search Committee,
distributed and reviewed a report. The Committee is
being assisted by Issacson Miller, a search firm from
Boston, MA. Twenty-nine resumes have been received as
of 4:00 p.m. today. The position description,
advertisements, and search criteria were developed in
October. Ads have appeared and the committee's goal is
to have public interviews of the final 3-4 candidates in
March with an offer being made in early April. These are
goals, and may change as the process develops.
Senator Snyder asked about the role of the Board of Control in the search and selection process. Bulleit replied that it is ultimately the Board that approves the hiring decision, but the committee will discuss how to transmit the impressions from the public interviews to the Board. This could take the form of an 'acceptable/not acceptable' indication for each of the publically-interviewed candidates. The concern is that without some sort of input after the public interviews, the Board may approve a candidate judged unfavorably by the campus community.
B. Advancement Report [Appendix C]
Gail Mroz continued her presentation from the
previous meeting. She discussed MTU to Tech Fund
transfers, and President Seely reviewed other
Advancement activity budgets. Mroz reviewed the
demand fund report, which includes moneys held on
behalf of the University or individual departments that
may be used at the department's discretion; these funds
include demand scholarship moneys.
The cost of building projects and associated fund-raising results were reviewed. Senator Snyder asked how the University is covering the immediate costs since much of the money raised for the building projects is in the form of pledges or other deferred payments. McGarry responded that there is $21 million available for bridge funding, and that gifts in hand account for all but $7.8 million of the building commitments.
Mroz also reviewed fund-raising in 1999 vs. 1998, the policy and procedures book, the gift valuation policy, and noted that Price Waterhouse Coopers audited the Tech Fund books and noted no exceptions or adjustments.
C. Enrollment Management Report [Appendix D]
Gary Neumann presented a report on enrollment
management. Target enrollment levels are 6300
undergraduate students, with a target of 1600 new
students next year to maintain our current levels. He
reviewed strategies to hit these targets, including new
recruiting strategies.
Neumann presented an academic profile of entering students from 1996-1999, Including summaries of ACT scores, class standing, and SAT scores. He also reviewed estimated revenues from increases in undergraduate enrollment, noting that a goal is to be less reliant on general/auxiliary fund sources for financial aid. Neumann will return to the next meeting to present more information on Enrollment Management.
8. ADJOURNMENT
Davis MOVED and Malette seconded the motion to
adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:37 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted by David D. Reed
Secretary of the University Senate