Meeting of 21 May 2003 Academic Council Portland State University 11 Am--2 PM

The meeting was begun by a teleconference with Denise Yunker on the impact on OUS personnel of PERS legislation. She said that the recent spate of bills modifying PERS had catalyzed a flood of questions about the optimal time to retire. She noted that, based on current statute, the "sweet spot" was April 2004. OUS analysts, meanwhile, believe that the new statutes will be "bulletproof"--inescapable through even the severest court tests. Discussion of her report among the provosts led by Moseley of UO centered on their desire to assure faculty that the new PERS-related laws will leave them relatively harmless so as to avoid a mass exodus of faculty panicked about saving their retirement accounts. Moseley wanted to "lock in value."

Yunker said she was looking for the same thing, and noted that, in her view, OUS could "coast for awhile" on the PERS issue, but also admitted that there was "not much substantive information" available and would not be for awhile on the impact of the changes. VC Clark said "we are benumbed by the changes."

On conclusion of the discussion with Yunker, a second phone conference ensued with Grattan Kerans. He announced that there will be a work session in the Legislature on 27 May on the OUS budget. He noted that the Republicans in the House were impatient with their Democratic colleagues and are threatening a break in the cooperative effort at budget approval that has prevailed to date, if the Democrats "don't get real" (meaning unspecified) about the budget. The break will, of course, be along party lines, but Speaker Minnis is also threatening to split Ways and Means into House and Senate budget committees, a maneuver which would give House Republicans a great deal of leverage in the budget negotiations due to their numerical superiority in that chamber.

Kerans said there are two issues for OUS in the negotiations: 1) agency budget fund balances--Ways and Means is going through fund balances in all budgets with a fine tooth comb to find spendable dollars before going to the voters asking for new revenues. OUS is unalterably opposed to this tactic, as it would be disastrous for the institutions; 2) in general, the committee's philosophy appears to be "take what you can and leave an IOU." Again, Kerans sees this as a disaster for the system and the institutions. OUS will resist as stoutly as it can.

Kerans said that "inside" the budget a key problem is fee remission, the abolition of which would be devastating as well. That, he thinks, is off the table, but still a lot of work is going on in the Legislature and the Governor's office to take care of high-need students. Another piece that is being worked on by OUS is retention of interest generated by its funds.

Other bills of interest:

• *Teachers Ed bill--OUS wants it to die;
• *HB 2817--Son of 2015 (statewide commission): OUS is trying to kill it also;
• *SB 380--Signature research: Kerans believes it's in good shape; OUS will offer amendments that all interested parties can agree to;
• *Flexibility initiative--Also in good shape, but not scheduled for work session yet; th esticking point appears to be Pebb-related language OUS desires (rejected by PEBB and Governor's office); probably OUS will have to yield on this element inorder to move the initiative forward;
• *HB 3314--This bill, which would take dollars back from faculty (or other) retirement account commensurate with the amount one makes for work in the phasing out period, is, according to Kerans, "veto bait," assuming it even makes it to the Governor's desk.

Following the Kerans briefing, VC Clark took note of the fact that Strategic Plan is essentially the joint ed boards' statement on the issue of quality. Within the plan is also a statement on mission differentiation. The Oregon Student Lobby also wants a statement on affordability and access from OSBHE.

Several handouts were passed around including Version #17 of the Board's statement on Quality. There was a discussion on the status of efforts totrack quality from the perspective of of students by OUS institutions. This is apparently a vexed question. Provost Minahan of WOU questioned the quality statement's evolution and wondered about the current iteration if it (and by extension) the Board was saying, as it seemed to him to be doing, that access and affordability trumped quality. VC Clark and OUS staff present at the meeting strenuously denied that this was the case. UO Provost Moseley interpreted the issue, in light of the demands of OSL on one hand and the desires of the Academic Council on the other (with all other constituencies between considered), as one of striking the proper balance between quality and access/affordability. But while all elements--quality, access, affordability--have been vitiated over the last decade, quality has been the "shrunk" most of all and is the element most in need of restoration. Indeed, all those present seemed to agree that it must be restored to its proper significance in the higher ed equation and, it was reported, the Board has announced that quality cannot be cut any further.

Following this discussion there was a staff report on the impending Supreme Court decision on the Michigan affirmative action case. The ruling is expected in July, but OUS will make no immediate announcements concerning it when it is revealed. Rather, OUS counsel plan to study the ruling, gauge is impact on OUS policy and practice, and decide on necessary steps should there be any impact on OUS institutions.

For a new gender-related pay study, "The Status of Women Faculty in the Oregon State System of Higher Education," staff is collecting data. It will be compared to a study that came out of a similar study regarding pay that followed an important pay equity suit (the so-called Penk case) of the mid-80s. In this connection, Provost Minahan wondered if there would be any study of what he termed "the 800 lb. gorilla" of the demographics of part-time faculty. He noted that OUS needs comparative sex, race, and age breakdowns for the part-time/full-time and tenure related/fixed term cohorts in order fully to understand the equity issues at play in the system. The staff and VC Clark emphasized that they regarded this as a necessary piece to be filled in, but that it would not be part of the current study, although they would no doubt collect much of that data in the course of their investigations.

There was discussion of a draft proposal for an undergraduate certificate program in "Language and Culture" at OSU. This will be a way for OSU undergrads interested in language/communications (in essence, social linguistics) issues to gain coursework in partial substitute for a Linguistics major, which OSU lacks. While there was, in general, no objection to the proposal, Lorraine Davis, VP Academic Affairs at UO, indicated that according to anthropologists from her faculty who reviewed it, a part of the proposal relating to Oregonian Native languages would be impossible to implement as there is not currently enough expertise in the state to offer courses in the subjects nor are the languages systematically recorded. OSU Provost Randhawa said he would ask the proposal team to take note of that view as they prepared the next iteration of the proposal.

A proposal for an M. Ed. program in "Teaching and Learning" from UO was also discussed with ultimate approval from the Council.

Two OHSU proposals were discussed. The first proposal was to revise a specialty program in its MS degree in Nursing to emphasize management inside a complex helath system. Formerly entitled "Innovative Leadership and Management," it is proposed to be called "Health Systems Management." The second request is to gain approval to deliver this degree to Taiwan at Chinese Culturte University in Taipei. A third proposal--really an alert at this stage--was to let everyone know that the Biomedical Informatics Division is evolving into a freestanding department which will eventually come forth with a proposal for a full fledged Ph.D. program.

A brief report was given by OUS staff member Holly Zanville on the 28-29 April Northwest academic Forum meeting she attended. No news of significance to IFS was reported.

There was a discussion of a news item relating to the acceptance by the State Board of Education of a statewide transfer degree in Business proposal. It is expected that about half of Oregon community colleges will adopt this degree. In response, Provost Minihan noted a statistical artifact in his enrollment figures and inquired of the group if it appeared in their enrollments. He noted that of community college transfers to WOU, 95 percent arrived as freshmen; only about 5 percent came as sophomores or juniors. The provosts from Eastern and OIT concurred that this was the case. The significance of this fact was not discussed.

At 2 PM the meeting was adjourned.

Craig Wollner