******************************************************************
Page 4891 Minutes of Senate Meeting 228 18 Jan 1995
THE SENATE OF MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
Minutes of Meeting No. 228
18 January 1995
Synopsis: The Senate
(1) Heard a lengthy report on the University budget from Provost Dobney.
(2) Learned the progress on establishing the Administrative Evaluation
Commission.
(3) Requested a response from the Provost on Proposal 7-95: Modification
of the Grading System
(4) Formally approved the amended Proposal 12-95: Search Procedures for
Deans and University Administrators.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
President Bornhorst called the meeting to order at 5:30 pm on Wednesday,
January 18, 1995 in Room B37 of the Electrical Energy Resources Center.
Secretary Jobst called the roll. Absent were representatives from
Chemical Engineering, both ROTC units, IWR, and NaGrp 2. Brian Whitman,
from the Graduate Student Association, attended as a liaison.
2. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS
Visitors included Ellen Horsch (Human Resources), Dave Ouillette
(Registrar's Office), Francis Otuonye (Mining), Eric Obermeyer (Grad
student, ME-EM), Duane Thayer (Metallurgy), Debbie Lassila (Provost's
Office), Bill McGarry (Chief Financial Officer), Jim Lutzke ((Tech
Topics), Kris Lipman (MTU Lode), Jim Pickens (Forestry), and F. Dobney
(Provost).
3. AGENDA ADJUSTMENTS
Bornhorst's adjustments were to sections 6 and 7. Strike "6. B. Finance
Committee" and under "7." add an "A. Proposal 7-95: Modification of the
Grading System," change the current "A. Proposal 4-95 to "C" and items
"C" and "D" to "D" and "E" respectively. [Appendix A. NOTE: only
official Senate and Library archival copies of the Minutes will contain a
full complement of appendices.]
Mroz MOVED to approve the agenda adjustments; with Irish's second.
With no discussion and no objections, Bornhorst declared the agenda
adjustments approved: the Motion CARRIED.
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Meeting 226
There was no discussion. Irish MOVED with Vanek's second to approve the
Minutes of Meeting 226. On a voice vote with no dissent, the motion
CARRIED.
5. REPORT FROM SENATE PRESIDENT
A. PROPOSALS SENT TO THE ADMINISTRATION
1. 6-95: Policy on Discrimination and Harassment [Appendix B.]
2. 11-95: Membership for University General Education Committee
[Appendix C.]
3. 15-95: Statement on Professional Ethics [Appendix D.]
B. PROVOST MEETING
Bornhorst said that at a meeting with the Provost on 1/16/95 the Senate
Officers discussed proposals in progress and other issues of possible
Senate concern. Bornhorst also said the Provost agreed to return to the
Senate on February 8 to discuss the Strategic Plan and the Budget
following the January 27 BoC meeting.
C. BOARD OF CONTROL MEETING
Bornhorst said he would attend the January 27th BoC meeting in Novi and
told the Senate to inform him of any issues he should cover in his
presentation.
6. COMMITTEE BUSINESS / REPORTS
A. UNIVERSITY BUDGET
Provost Dobney began his discussion by stating that a budget helps him
identify and set priorities for University goals so that he may allocate
funds appropriately. Some, he noted, have complained that the budget is
generated from top down, but all University units have had ample
opportunity to offer feedback.
Dobney said that initially, his office, after consulting the
University Long Range Plan and then conferring with the University
community, has developed eight goals. He pointed out that the eight are
not listed by priority because the equality of goals shows the importance
of all segments of the University.
From year to year, however, Tech does set priorities, Dobney said, as
conditions change. He then showed a series of transparencies identifying
the eight goal areas and Tech's current strengths and weaknesses in each
[Appendix E].
UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAMS
Among the current strengths are the low faculty to student ratio, which
has occurred because the Administration has made major investments in
instructional staff, even during a time when enrollment has been
declining. Of the weaknesses, Dobney identified the decline in
enrollment, the failure to produce student diversity, the lack of good
methods for assessment of instruction, and the lack of accreditation for
the Business School. A final weakness is the inadequate residential life
for students.
FACULTY
Among the strengths are the addition of 36 new faculty lines, the
diversity of faculty, and the shared University governance. Of the
weaknesses, Dobney pointed out the faculty pay, which, according to the
Oklahoma State University survey, is below the national average by 8% for
Assistant Professors, 10% for Associate Professors, and 11% for Full
Professors. Tech has also made only a marginal increase in minority
faculty.
GRADUATE PROGRAMS
Dobney called the Senate's attention to the strengths in this area, the
two new graduate programs (a PhD in Computer Science, and an MS in
Industrial Archeology). The weakness are the heavy reliance on state
support for GTAs, the lack of space for growth, and the lack of a review
system. Leifer referred to the administration's goal of 1400 grad
students. Leifer said the University cannot afford internal funding for
even 1000 grad students.
Provost Dobney was then asked about the apparent underuse of space in
the new M&M Building. The Dean of Engineering is looking at the space
there, he replied. Dobney also pointed out that tenants do not want to
completely fill a new building; they should have room for growth.
******************************************************************
Page 4892 Minutes of Senate Meeting 228 18 Jan 1995
RESEARCH, SCHOLARSHIP AND CREATIVE ACTIVITY
Of the strengths here Dobney pointed to the growth in sponsored research
and the appointment of Michigan Tech as the home for the Industrial
Archeology Journal. Among the weaknesses are the fragmented approaches
to research, the shortage of lab space, and the low number of block
grants we have generated.
STAFF
The strengths include the number of TQE teams, the Sick Leave Pool, and
the revitalized Wellness Program. He also cited the decreasing
University bureaucracy (a decline from 11% to 7.5% for institutional
support). The weaknesses include the decline in the numbers of academic
support staff in comparison with the increase in faculty, and the failure
to pay competitive staff salaries.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SERVICES
Dobney mentioned the new Banner computer system as a strength, as well as
the Library Automation, which should begin soon. The weaknesses include
the Library holdings, and the campus computing facilities.
PHYSICAL PLANT
Efficient operation is the first strength the Provost mentioned, along
with the planning for the new buildings: the ESE, the Forestry Addition,
and the Fine Arts Center. The weaknesses are the delay in Tech's ability
to start on the Forestry addition, the lack of space in the Van Pelt
Library, and the outdated science facilities.
RESOURCE ACQUISITION
Dobney focused primarily on weaknesses here, mentioning the decline in
state aid, the costs of Tech retirement system, and the decline in
funding caused by the lower student enrollment.
BUDGET PRIORITIES
Dobney listed them as
> Salary Parity by 1998,
> Library Materials Acquisition,
> Computer Support,
> Business School Accreditation,
> Funds for the Planning of the New ESE building,
> Student Enrollment Gains,
> Improvement of Student Life, and
> Academic Infrastructure Support.
1995-1996 BUDGET PREMISES
Dobney said the University expects a tuition loss of $500,000, resulting
from the additional decline of 70 students next year; and this number of
students, he added, may be even larger. Dobney proposed a tuition
increase of 5%, and a grad student increase of 25 people.
The State may offer an increase of 6%, but this is optimistic.
Indirect Cost Recovery (ICR) is estimated to increase at upwards of 10%,
with Auxiliary Enterprises producing $3.6 million, and a lab fee ceiling
of around 5%. Lab fees, of course, are a "pass-through," going directly
to the sponsoring departments.
At this point Heyman mentioned the need to examine whether the money
on retention is well spent.
EXPENDITURES
Dobney said financial aid would only go up for GTAs by the amount of
tuition increases.
The 1% realignment will continue. Sciences and Arts have used the
Dean's discretionary moneys, but that's no longer possible: now the Dean
must pass along this to the Departments, as the system is supposed to
work.
Dobney talked at length about this controversial system. He asked
the Senate how else to realign funding, moving moneys from low-need
programs to emerging areas. He mentioned the system used by his
predecessor, in which the Provost absorbed all positions which opened
during the year, including retirements. In this method the Provost makes
the choices of where to take back, but the current method allows the
Deans and Chairs to make these decisions. Other methods are to eliminate
University programs, but he showed a table indicating that Tech's number
of degree programs (35) are already much smaller than those in other
state schools (55 is the next smallest). Another possibility is a
further reduction in staff, but this has already occurred over the past
several years, and it can't be cut any more. Finally, the University
could consider a Full Funding Budget, in which each department supplies a
certain percentage of faculty salaries--from grants, research, etc.
Bulleit argued that the 1% realignment will eventually hit teaching
faculty since researchers bringing in grant moneys are not going to be
cut. Dobney said that the Deans need not take the 1% from all
departments evenly. A senator asked where the 1% would be going, and
Dobney said to the priorities already discussed. Bornhorst asked about
the 1% from last year, which came to about $500,000 the Administration
received. Dobney said it paid for new positions in ME, EE, BS, and FA.
Bornhorst pointed out that some funds that ended up with faculty also
came from staff reductions.
Whitt argued that each department's enrollment would be used to
indicate how much a cut they would have to take. No, Dobney said, it's
Productivity, and he cited Forestry as a department with low enrollment
but high productivity in terms of research and grants. Whitt continued:
The temporary popularity of a program is a bad way to determine cuts.
Dobney said that the administration never based any major decisions on
the numbers from only one year.
The Provost said that other methods are available for returning
funding from the departments to the Provost, such as his office absorbing
all faculty lines that come vacant because of retirement or resignation.
Beck said departments might then pass all their faculty through to tenure
and thus shield themselves from cuts. Dobney admitted that the method
could provoke countervailing pressures, but he said the University has
absorbed the 1% for the past two years without major discomfort: "Doesn't
that indicate," he asked rhetorically, "that we had some fat?" Bulleit
countered, however, with the analogy of chipping away parts of a column
holding up a building.
Beck said the Administration should request more information from the
bottom, and he cited improvements to Fisher. The University replaced all
the blinds in the building instead of installing what was needed: new
storm windows. The idea for the changes in the health plan, he
continued, also came from below.
BUDGET
Dobney said that the University, to achieve salary parity, needed to
raise salaries 3% over inflation for the next several years, but it just
can't be done. He said he hoped the retirement system funding method
might be modified. Currently it requires large sums be set aside for
future costs. He argued that paying costs as they arose would be better.
******************************************************************
Page 4893 Minutes of Senate Meeting 228 18 Jan 1995
Whitt asked about legal fees the University pays, and Debbie Lassila
replied that these have dropped $100,000 from last year: from $350,000 to
$250,000. The savings went to GTA funding, the Senate learned.
Heyman asked about a breakdown of lump sum budget figures. Whitt
argued for the 1% to go to the Library. Dobney said that the University
hopes to decrease the rise of medical costs, but we will probably only
break even with the new system.
Glime argued for adding the fringe benefits to the salary statements
when comparing Tech salaries with other schools. Bradley said the low
cost of living in the UP might also be figured in, but Dobney said not
everything in this area was cheaper. Beck suggested a University shop,
which could be shared by the entire school. Dobney said he will also get
input from the BoC at the next meeting. The state is doing well
financially, Dobney said, but the governor wants to return tax moneys
rather than distribute them to those dependent on the state for funding.
6. B. COMMITTEE REPORTS (CONT.)
C. ADMINISTRATIVE EVALUATION COMMISSION
Bornhorst identified several items of interest regarding the evaluation
of the administration: (1) Ballots for commission members are now being
counted, and results should be available at the next Senate meeting; (2)
The guidelines for completing the evaluation identified September [1994]
as the date to begin, but the time frame required for this process was
overly optimistic. Commission candidates, for example, were not
immediately forthcoming. (3) The original completion date was set at
March 1995, but now, Bornhorst asked, what date should be set for the
commission being assembled to begin its work and be expected to finish?
(4) Another element is finding an outsider, but what is the role for such
an individual? Should this person be involved in all aspects? Bornhorst
then introduced Steve Vanek, chair of the Administrative Policy
Committee, who has been working on finding a candidate.
Vanek said Linda Belote is the committee's nominee. Belote, former
MTU Social Science faculty member and then Dean of Students, now has the
same [Dean] position at the U of MN-Duluth. Her travel costs should be
relatively modest. Vilmann MOVED, with Whitt's second, to close the
nominations. In the discussion, Bornhorst asked if the Senate had other
nominees, and, when none was forthcoming, asked if anyone objected to
voting only once--not only to close the nominations but also, since she
is the only nominee, on the acceptance of Dr. Belote. There were none.
On a voice vote, the motion CARRIED, and the Senate accepted Linda Belote
as the outside individual on the commission.
7. OLD BUSINESS
A. PROPOSAL 7-95: A/B GRADING METHOD
Bornhorst asked the Provost to reconsider this proposal and return with a
response. The Senate's option is to take it to the BoC, but they would
rather avoid such an action.
Leifer asked why the Provost had denied it previously. Bornhorst
said "cost."
B. AMENDMENT TO PROPOSAL 12-95: SEARCH PROCEDURES FOR DEANS AND
UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATORS
[Appendix F.] Bornhorst reminded the Senate that this proposal had passed
previously, but the proposal had included unresolved, substantive,
editorial changes, and thus the Senate must approve the changes. Keen
MOVED, with Grimm's second, to approve the amendments to Proposal 12-95.
There was no discussion, and on a voice vote the motion CARRIED without
dissent.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Huang MOVED and Keen seconded to adjourn. Motion CARRIED. Bornhorst
declared the meeting adjourned at 7:30 pm.
Submitted by
Jack Jobst
Secretary of the University Senate
.