Meyer Memorial Boardroom, Portland State University

Portland, OR

Friday, December 5, 2008

 

Present (Senators): Lani Roberts (OSU), Craig Wollner (PSU), Kerry Loewen (EOU), Ike Nail (WOU), Ellen Siem (SOU), Lee Ayers (SOU), Robert Mercer (PSU), Mina Carson (OSU), Kate Hunter-Jaworsky (OSU), Kathie Lasater (OHSU), Sarah Andrews-Collier (PSU), Grant Kirby (OIT), Jane Perri (OIT), Jeff Johnson (EOU), Duncan Carter (PSU), Kirsten Lampi (OHSU)

 

Present (Visitors/Guests): Bob Turner (OUS), Dannelle Stevens (PSU), Hannah Fisher (PSU, student rep to OUS Board)

 

 

IFS President Lee Ayers called the meeting to order at 1:00 PM.

 

Campuswide Learning Outcomes - Dannelle Stevens (Chair, Institutional Assessment Council, PSU) (1:00-1:40 PM)

 

The Institutional Assessment Council was created about 2 years ago to oversee and coordinate assessment for the entire PSU campus, manage accreditation, and further campus-wide conversation on learning outcomes.  Oregon is one of a few LEAP (Liberal Education and America’s Promise) states.  How do we assess various campus-wide initiatives such as diversity and sustainability?  Currently they take samples of student portfolios to assess these initiatives.  SB342 addresses common course numbering and, by extension, learning outcomes for general education courses. 

 

Why do we do assessment?  Assessment makes us better teachers, knowing whether students are accomplishing objectives, program goals, and campus-wide goals.  PSU’s Institutional Assessment Council came up with 7 campus-wide learning outcomes.  An IFS member commented that it is hard to tell what experiences students from other schools have had.  Learning outcomes need to have meaning across organizations, and schools need access to information about how a student has done with respect to particular learning outcomes. 

 

Comments on assessment programs on other campuses/discussion: 

·       OIT's assessment program is going to be used by NWCCU as a model for similar programs. 

·       OSU’s Baccalaureate Core includes several campus-wide initiatives (e.g. diversity, healthy living).  They are re-evaluating the Baccalaureate Core.  Within the College of Engineering, every course has goals mapped to 14 learning outcomes for the College. 

·       SB342 addresses first the 90 hours of college credit (lower-division general ed.) and the Oregon Transfer Module (OTM)

·       OHSU was told by NWCCU to integrate learning outcomes across schools, which is difficult, because schools are diverse and siloed. The OHSU School of Nursing has undergraduate learning outcomes that cross all School of Nursing programs on all campuses. 

·       EOU has been working on general education outcomes.  They have an artistic creation outcome. 

·       What are the benefits of learning outcomes (besides the fact that they are required for accreditation)?  Students will have many careers in their lives.  It is helpful for them to be able to think of their education in broader terms rather than just their specific degree and put their education in a broader, more flexible framework. 

·        If students know why they are taking particular classes, they will see them as more than just a specific subject but as part of a larger whole.  We need to tell students why they are taking a particular class.

·       How will learning outcomes be communicated to students at PSU?  They don't know yet.  The University of Wisconsin posts them everywhere. 

·       With general education learning outcomes, we will be able to say that any OUS graduate has specific characteristics and/or experiences.

·       It can be challenging to work with people who have been teaching a long time, getting them to approach a topic in a different way.  Just because an instructor resists doesn't mean the approach isn't right or that they aren't doing it.

 

Opening remarks by Wim Wiewel, new PSU President (1:40-2:10 PM)

 

The Pacific Northwest is the most regionally distinct area in which he has lived.  He commented on the respect between the public and private sectors, egalitarianism, openness to deliberation and compromise.  PSU has always been an institution of struggle and hope, but he also sees it as an institution of glory.  PSU’s engagement with its community is partly the result of its history of struggle. The university needed to engage with the business and political community and demonstrate its relevance in order to survive. 

 

PSU’s priorities:

 

1.            Civic engagement

2.            Improve the quality of student experience. PSU does well with graduate and transfer students but not as well with freshmen.  Their 6-year retention rate is 38%, which is very low.  To address that problem, they are investing more in advising, student housing, and student life.  PSU is, in a sense, 3 universities in one—selective graduate school, open/accessible transfer institution, and intensive college experience for freshmen.

3.             Achieving global excellence.  Students should be able to get excellence in a local, public institution, but they can’t be excellent in everything.  They have chosen to focus on sustainability, for which PSU benefits from both the region and OUS.  They are also emphasizing collaboration, e.g. joint programs with OHSU (Masters in Public Health, MBA in health management, joint appointments in chemistry.  This way both schools gain the benefits of collaboration without a formal merger.

4.            Expanding educational opportunity, P-20.  PSU is part of a joint task force with Portland Public Schools, and they are looking to expand it to other districts. 

5.            Acquire resources (through fundraising and grants/contracts), and use them efficiently.  They currently have grants totally $40 million and hope to double that.  Public funding is inadequate.  Nearly every leader agrees that the fiscal structure is broken, so why don’t they vote that way?

 

Q & A:

o                  Budget: No one knows, but he isn't preparing for a doomsday scenario. 

 

Jules Kopel-Bailey (2:10-2:50)

 

IFS had a question/answer session with Kopel-Bailey, newly-elected representative for District 42 in Southeast Portland.  Key points from the session:

 

·       He works for Eco-Northwest

·       He commented on the recent David Brooks column that suggested stimulating the economy through higher education.  Kopel-Bailey is an advocate for universities as source of economic stimulus, a way to attract and grow companies in Oregon. 

·       He is concerned about cuts to human services in the governor’s proposed budget.

·       Can prison building from Measure 57 be suspended?  Probably, and he hopes so. 

·       Student preparedness when they start college: He is concerned about the quality of K-12 education and is looking at ways to improve it despite budget issues. 

·       Oregon is in the bottom 3 states for accessibility of higher education, because it’s too expensive here.

·       Do small OUS schools have a voice with the Legislature?  Many are in rural areas.  They may have gained influence, because they have worked together and approached the entire Legislature as a system of regional universities.

·       Studies of students who didn't finish a four-year degree in four years show that significant factors were race (big difference) and attachment to a university/engagement/connection with institution.  Why is race such a major factor?  A study showed that minority students have artificially higher discount rates (how decide how many years to pursue schooling vs. earning money).  Kopel-Bailey speculates that they think their wages will be lower because of race, so it isn’t worth it to stay in school as long.  According to an IFS member, studies show that some people suffer from PTSD when racist activities are directed toward them.

·       How well is higher education telling its story?  We would like feedback from him after he's been in the Legislature.  His perception going in is that people still view higher education as a luxury.

·       The problem is the size of the pie.  If voters will never accept a sales tax, is there another way to increase the size of the pie?  He thinks people might be willing to dedicate some kicker funds into an educational endowment fund.  We need to have a robust rainy day fund.  Stable tax systems tend to be really regressive (e.g. sales taxes on food), while more progressive systems (e.g. taxing luxuries) tend to be unstable, leading to fluctuating revenues.  Need a progressive tax system with something like a rainy day fund to smooth it out.

·       Discussion of an as-yet-unpublished study on evidence-based practices in criminal justice system: If the study shows limited benefits of incarceration, will that change incarceration rates?  How much do we put into people society deems as failures vs. our future?  The study doesn't address education tradeoffs but looks at family therapy, etc., and how they relate to incarceration. 

·       Brief discussion of decriminalizing marijuana as a way to reduce incarceration and increase the tax base.  Chances of passage very slim. 

·       New OSU/PSU/OHSU building for Portland's South Waterfront is in the Governor's proposed budget.

 

Jesse Cornett (PSU) and Lisa Pinheiro (Chancellor's Office): a roundtable on the upcoming legislative session (2:50-4:20 PM)

 

Pinheiro is a member of the government relations staff for the Chancellor.  She has been with the Chancellor's Office for 11 years and in legislative work for 25 years. 

 

Cornett is PSU’s Director of Government Relations and co-chair of Higher Education Lobby Network (HELN) this year.  HELN is comprised of advocates from all the universities plus industry and other educational partners, including a faculty representative.  HELN isn’t convened or chaired by the Chancellor's Office.  The Oregon Student Association always co-chairs. 

 

Higher education did very well in the last legislative session.  The Governor's Recommended Budget includes increases for higher education.  Two years ago, that wasn't the case, and the higher education community rallied.  This time, the Governor's Recommended Budget recommends cuts for human services and community colleges, leaving the impression that higher education is treated very well even though the increase is very small.  Cornett is concerned that we will be targeted for proposed cuts, because some groups will feel that we have a disproportionate share.  Pinheiro agreed that it can only get worse.  We will have to defend the Governor's budget. 

 

Key points from the discussion:

 

·       To tell our story, we need lots of people.  Quantity counts more than quality in the legislative process.  K-12 usually has much greater numbers rallying in Salem. 

·       We talk about a K-20 system, but we lobby as separate systems.  The Oregon Student Association is talking with the Chancellor about coordinating with K-12.  That can be difficult, because there are 197 school districts in Oregon. 

·       Why is the Governor's Recommended Budget more generous to us than to community colleges?  The Governor understands concerns about tuition increases and people returning to college in an economic downturn.  He fully understands and supports the workforce component of community colleges.  An OPB program suggested that he has proposed less funding for community colleges, because they can raise funds through local property taxes, while we cannot. 

·       Should we downplay faculty talking to legislators instead of students, so it won't seem like we're defending our own jobs and raises?  Cornett doesn't think so.  We need lots of faculty, students, and parents involved.  According to Fisher, the Oregon Student Association has students in Salem all the time.  They need faculty to accommodate students who need to miss class to lobby the legislature. 

·       Some OUS schools are having trouble filling tenure-track positions due to low pay.  We aren't talking about that, the cost of failed searches, or the effect on quality of not filling tenure-track positions. 

·       Who has the most influence on legislators?  Pinheiro used to think it was students, but she sees that faculty and university presidents have a great deal of influence too. 

·       Concern expressed about faculty who have to take second jobs to afford to live in expensive areas like Portland and Ashland.  What are we losing because of that?  Students also have to work more and attend fewer classes because of tuition increases.  We need to be sure legislators hear these stories. 

·       Pinheiro said that Oregon higher education has fared better under Republicans.  Democrats have more of an allegiance to human service needs. 

·       Every legislator has a community college in his/her district, but they don't all have an OUS institution. 

·       Now we are focused on holding our own--no salary increases, new enrollment money, or other increases—but that doesn’t change our message: The investment they made in 2007 was to support the system's long-range goals. 

·       We need a war for education, because wars are funded.  We should work with K-12.  How are we going to say, This is where we're going to be in 2 years, 5 years, 10 years, and here's how we'll get there.  Dave Frohnmeyer said, "Fund us or set us free" - privatization for some institutions if they can't be funded. 

·       OHSU's partnership with community colleges has been well-received in the legislature.  At OIT, partnerships with community colleges pull out freshmen and sophomores, so they lose funding to support their technology.  That's somewhat true at OHSU too, but OHSU is the only public program in the state that offers an accelerated baccalaureate program in nursing, so they're still drawing in students.  OIT has more transfer students than incoming freshmen, and they take courses that are funded at a lower level. 

·       Is membership on Ways & Means fairly stable?  Yes.  We will see lots of the same faces this session. 

·       Will they take the Governor's Recommended Budget down to current funding levels?  In February or March, they'll release their own budget and do just what they want.  The budget will be based on the May revenue forecast, then the legislature will negotiate with the governor. 

·       We need a larger discussion about how the OUS should reposition itself instead of just defending against budget cuts.  We need to change the way the state looks at higher education.  They have to develop a single message before the session starts and target it to leadership and the public. 

·       It’s important to know when to lobby and when to back off.

·       Pinheiro suggests forming a subgroup of 3-4 IFS members interested in politics that she can contact when she needs letters written, faculty to lobby the Legislature, etc.  Ayers, Perri, Carson, and Roberts volunteered, and Ayers recommended Peter Gilkey.

·       They need to have faculty involved, because we will be around for a long time rather than the few years that students are in the system.  Legislators respect us and want to hear from us. 

·       The Chancellor's Office works with faculty unions.  AFT, SEIU, AOF (Associated Oregon Faculty), and AUP are represented in the Higher Education Lobby Network. 

 

Cornett distributed and reviewed a fact sheet from the Chancellor's Office on the Governor's Recommended Budget.   The capital construction budget is very robust.  An Interinstitutional Life Sciences Collaborative Complex on the list. 

 

Margaret Carter will be the Senate Co-Chair of Ways and Means, and Peter Buckley will be the House Co-Chair.   PSU has a close relationship with Senator Carter, but OUS will need to build a relationship.  Her focus is human services. 

 

Chancellor George Pernsteiner (4:35-5:15 PM)

 

Pernsteiner provided some context for the Governor's Recommended Budget, indicating that in terms of higher education, this budget is better than the budgets of other states.  He was Oregon's representative to the recent Commission of the States meeting.  Of the 40+ states who are cutting budgets, some are cutting their universities by 30% below current appropriations.  Two were cutting 20%.  In all the states that are cutting budgets, higher education systems are expecting to be told to decrease enrollment, hold the line on tuition, and keep nonresidents out.  Of all of the states that are cutting budgets, based on the Governor's Recommended Budget, we are cutting education the least.  Oregon was the only one of the states that are cutting budgets whose education budget was increasing while the overall budget is decreasing.  Pernsteiner said, "There is no governor in the country who gets it as much as ours does in terms of education."  In the governors' meeting with Obama, Oregon's governor was the only one who said that a stimulus package should include funding to fix up buildings, etc., for colleges and universities, because those projects are ready to go, while roads and other big infrastructure projects will take several years to be ready.  All of the governors told Obama that the best thing he could do for the states would be to pump more money into Medicaid.  Even a small change in the formula would result in huge amounts of money for the states.  If that happens, it will abate some pressure on other agencies in Oregon. 

 

We will probably know the budget situation for next year by June.  Question: Will the bottom fall out of the economy such that the Legislature has to use the Education Stability Fund and the Rainy Day Fund to get out of the current biennium?  In January, the state economist will issue a directional forecast to indicate trends.  The trend likely will be negative, resulting in additional cuts in the current biennium. 

 

The Governor's Recommended Budget does not include a tuition increase, though the governor has said he will put forth a 3.6% increase in an adjustment.  It isn't there now because a) it might be possible to avoid an increase, and b) if the forecast is down in March, the Legislature needs to discuss tuition policy.  The best way to do that is to talk about how much it has to increase from the current level rather than some proposed level.  If the March forecast is not down, there will be some money available.  They will try to use it to give faculty raises comparable to raises specified for classified staff in the current budget (step increase, ends up being 3% per biennium).  The current budget does not include any money for faculty raises. 

 

This budget includes a one-day furlough per quarter for every state employee for two years.  Other states are doing this. How will we implement furlough days for 9-month faculty employees?  They aren’t going to stop teaching or return federal research money.  How do you get around the fact that faculty are exempt from overtime, meaning that faculty pay is calculated by week, not by day?  Other states are furloughing for 2 weeks at the end of the year, but that doesn't solve the faculty problem.  Furloughs would also have to be bargained with each union.  Suggestions from IFS: 1) cancel classes Thanksgiving week; 2) cut office hours; 3) start fall term on 9/19 rather than 9/15. 

 

A cut of $16 million to the essential budget will be taken from administration, institutional support, academic support, and public service.  In year 2, the governor will request that money back from the Education Stability Fund, but it's unlikely that request will be funded.  It would be better to request the money back to support instructional support and student services.  Pernsteiner thinks the budget will get worse, so they wouldn't get the money back anyway.

 

We have the largest capital construction budget in our history--$980 million, several hundred million dollars larger than the current capital construction budget.  This increase is part of the governor's strategy to use public works to address economic problems.  He wants construction to start in March, but we can't take down a classroom building in March, so they will focus on other projects. 

 

There is no money in the budget for general salary increases.  There is money for PEBB increases of 5% per year.  They hope that will be enough to avoid co-pays. 

 

Because we got an increase from the governor, we are a target, and everyone is gunning for us--human services advocates, corrections advocates, K-12 advocates.  They had hoped that all of education would speak with one voice, but that isn't happening. 

 

Main points in Pernsteiner’s Q&A session with IFS:

·       Which K-12 groups are lobbying?  Oregon School Boards Association has been the most vocal.  Stand for Children has been mostly quiet. 

·       What do these groups do when they target us?  They spread stories about our ineffectiveness and inefficiency.  Some of our colleagues are using this as an opportunity to deal with old grudges against administration.  Lobbyists drop innuendoes when they talk with legislators.  OUS is getting lots of public record requests, especially for administrator emails. 

·       Are there ways that we can partner with K-12?  Yes.  Some districts are happy to do that.  The problem is outside lobbying organizations. 

·       Community colleges aren't happy.  They have 17 separate elected boards, so it's hard to coordinate a message.  We need to work with our allies, including community colleges, but it's hard to control their messages, and some are going off-message. 

·       Is the chancellor confident that all 7 campuses will work together and maintain a consistent message?  He is cautiously optimistic after talking with the 7 presidents. 

·       We have a good budget compared to other states.  Is that because we are already so near the bottom?  Are the others catching up to us in a race for the bottom? 

·       Is Pernsteiner optimistic that the governor's budget won't get slashed and burned by the legislature?  No, but he'd rather be defending the budget we have than try to climb up in this economic climate. 

·       We could be facing very painful reductions at a time when we've never been more successful.  We have more students than ever, exceeded our growth expectations and forecast, higher retention rates, graduating students more quickly and successfully than ever before, have some of the most productive research faculty in the country.  We can do everything right and still face big cuts, because of the economy. 

·       What about Washington and California?  They are facing 20% cuts and will probably increase tuition, which is already higher than ours is.  Cal State has capped enrollment and will probably have to raise tuition and reduce the number of course sections.  When that happens, OUS enrollment increases.  The University of California System doesn't yet know how big their cut will be and how they will address it.  They have a huge endowment, and earnings are way down.  Many private colleges are in the same situation.  Private colleges are probably in more dire situations than public colleges, because of reduced revenue from endowments.  We may lose some small, marginal private colleges, especially those who rely heavily on tuition discounting.  Some students may not be able to get loans because of problems with the secondary loan market. 

·       What will this mean for a whole generation of students and the future of the country?

·       Students who graduated last year are being laid off, and there are no jobs for current students about to graduate.  OUS expects a huge increase in graduate students, some of the most expensive students we have. 

·       Could we move money from capital to operating if we get federal funding for capital projects?  No, but we could do more capital projects. 

·       Is there a silver lining?  What are the opportunities?  On the national level: 1) if people believe in the value of higher education for a better future, this will get people's attention.  2) We will reinvent some of the ways we do business, focusing on things that will make students more successful, e.g. more online courses, more use of technology to extend ability to serve a lot of students at the same time.  3) We can come out of this in better competitive position compared to the rest of the country and the rest of the world.  We want to have people who are energized and capable of taking leading roles in the global economy.  If more students go to graduate school in tough times, we will build a base of educated people here in the US, especially important in the sciences and engineering, in which we've needed to increase numbers of US students.  They can help us be the leaders in the next economy. 

·       Oregon students understand sustainability, so they will be well-positioned in the new economy.  The governor is trying to position Oregon as the place for green when we come out of the recession. 

·       To come out with optimism is perhaps more important than what strategies we adopt. 

·       For the first time in 8 years, we aren't “swimming against the tide” with respect to the federal government.  The new administration is likely to be more supportive of higher education funding.

 

The meeting adjourned for a working dinner at 5:15 PM.