Senate President Ann Tedards called the regular meeting of the University Senate to order at 3:09 p.m. in 100 Willamette. Members of the senate joined President Tedards in observing a moment of silence in memory of Senator Alan Wolfe, professor of Japanese, who passed away on January 21, 1998.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
Senator Paula Burkhart corrected the minutes of the January 14, 1998 meeting asking that on page 2, paragraph 3, in the first sentence the words "if any consideration …" through the end of the sentence be struck and replaced with, "the president if he saw any evidence of the ‘political will’ to provide funds to back fill campus budgets that would be disadvantaged if a new funding model is established that moves away from the BAS model to a per student basis funding model." With no further changes, the minutes were approved as corrected.
President Tedards received unanimous consent to her suggestion that Committee Reports be heard next on the agenda in order that Mr. George Sheridan, chair of the International Affairs Advisory Council, could make his report before leaving the meeting to teach a class.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
International Affairs Advisory Council. Mr. Sheridan alerted the senate to the feelings of the International Affairs Advisory Council concerning the possible revisions contemplated for the vice provost for international affairs position recently vacated by Mr. Richard Steers. Mr. Sheridan, who also serves as interim vice provost, reported that the council felt strongly about the importance of preserving a high level administrative position in international affairs. Such a position is important in order to make the internationalization of the university credible and productive internally, and particularly, externally. The council felt that one person should hold this position, and that the position should not be paired with other administrative entities.
Additionally, the council is focusing its attention on sharpening the image of international affairs on the campus, that is, how the international segments of the curriculum project themselves to prospective students as well as current students. The council also is participating in the process for change as a solution team looking for ways to recruit more international students to the campus. And finally, the council is beginning an initiative to bring all the international elements of the campus together in a common place where resources and services for student can be provided in a more responsive way than what is the case currently, where programs are somewhat scattered across the campus.
STATE OF THE UNIVERSITY
Process for Change Update. Provost Moseley brought the senate up to date regarding the ongoing process for change project. Eighteen Solution Teams, including five standing committees, have been appointed and are meeting to address the challenge put forth to higher education from the governor – how to make ourselves more student centered; in other words, how to better meet the needs of the students and the needs of the state. The provost circulated a list of fourteen topics to be address by the solutions teams based on the issues areas identified in the first phase of the process for change, and also a timeline for completing the project. A working meeting with interim reports will be held March 5th; final solution team reports due by March 19th. The deans and the president’s staff will consolidate these reports by the middle of spring term and report back to the faculty for comments and feedback. Implementation of the best ideas is planned for fall term 1998.
The provost then answered some questions from the floor. Senator David Cohen, physics, asked how the eighteen reports will be prioritized. Provost Moseley responded that the deans and the president’s staff will be the first filter of the reports, looking at all the ideas generated from solution teams. They will produce a single report which will be brought back the senate and university community for review sometime in April.
Senator Michael Olson, ASUO, asked what was happening with the international students, particularly the Asian students, who are having financial difficulties due to the volatility of the international financial markets. Provost Moseley said there was a fund of $50,000 that has been set aside for scholarship help for international students based on need. The money is part of an endowment made to the university specifically to be used for international students. The Office of Financial Aid is administering these funds.
Senator Clare Lees, English, asked how already existing budget cuts and changes are being factored into the process for change. Provost Moseley responded that the current budget cuts are tentatively viewed as a temporary measure to get through the current biennium. With the expectation of a new budgeting system resulting from the governor’s task force report, the hope is that the current round of budget cuts and those of the past few years will not be frozen in place.
Announcements and communications from senators. The secretary reminded everyone that the call for nominations for elected faculty committees and councils, as well as the senate, will soon arrive in mailboxes. Secretary Steigelman asked senators to encourage their constituents to consider standing for election themselves or to nominate a worthy colleague. Nominations are due the end of winter term.
Report from the Educational Technology Committee. Senator David Boush, business, reporting from the Educational Technology Committee explained that the purpose of the committee is to support access to and use of technology for students. A $50 per term assessment of every student generates a budget of about 2.5 million dollars per year. The largest budget item ($800,000) goes back to the deans to use in labs and classrooms as appropriate, with the next largest allocation ($580,000) returned to the students in the form of financial aid to work as GTFs and lab assistants. About $500,000 goes to the computing center, and remaining sums go to the libraries and other laboratories. The budget is primarily for maintenance of what already exists, rather than a means to obtain new hardware. The UO has a national reputation for being a "wired" campus – we have done a great deal on a relatively lean budget. One noteworthy aspect of the educational technology budget is that no monies are built in to replace items as they wear out. The hope is that other funds will be available when that time comes. This raises the questions of whether to ask for higher fees in order to do more for students – and to be able to maintain the support mechanisms currently in place – or, cut back on services to save and carry forward some of the budget for future replacement needs.
Report of the Budget Committee. Mr. John Nicols, history, reported that the Budget Committee, in defining its role and deciding how it would operate, has offered to take a low key but sensible approach to budget issues, and supply information back to the provost as to how the faculty might feel about cuts, spending, and so forth. The Budget Committee realistically cannot second-guess the decisions made by the provost, but it can as a faculty committee ask and raise questions. In regard to questions about equity, the committee can do little to certify equity or inequity; rather, if faculty have questions along these lines, they should direct them to the appropriate dean who can give that kind of an accounting to the inquiring person. Mr. Nicols also reported that the current budget cut is not as bad as originally projected. It is estimated now at 3 million dollars instead of 5 million, and it is recurring. If for some reason the present funding model (the BAS model) does not change, balancing the budget is still very risky business. But looking forward to a different, per student funding model, things should improve in the next biennium.
Report from the Interinstitutional Faculty Senate. Mr. Paul Simonds, anthropology, reported that the state board and the chancellor’s office are preparing the system’s budget for the next biennium (1999-2000) while the legislature is preparing its separate budget. Mr. Simonds stated the if the system is not in the governor’s budget at the level it desires, the legislature will not add to it; and, if the system is not in the legislative budget, whatever the governor proposes, the legislature will dispose. He further noted that the IFS along with representatives from the Association of Oregon Faculty, the state and Portland State AAUP, the American Federation of Teachers, and the chancellor’s office agreed to support a two year freeze on tuition in exchange for the Oregon Student Association’s support of strengthening faculty salaries. Mr. Simonds reported that students are far more visible to legislators in Salem than faculty are, and consequently, have more clout. Faculty have relied almost exclusively on lobbyists from various organizations to voice their opinions, but legislators tend to ignore faculty issues unless their presence is obvious. Mr. Simonds encouraged university senators to participate in legislative matters by calling their state senators and representatives and make faculty opinions known. Advice on how to do this effectively can be sought through the Office of Legislative and Community Relations.
Before moving on to unfinished business, President Tedards made a few other announcements. She noted that Mr. Lynn Kahle, business, is a new addition to the senate, appointed to replace Senator Dale Morse who resigned his senate seat when he was named interim dean of the Lundquist College of Business. President Tedards also reported that the newly elected Undergraduate Council had convened and is also functioning as one of the Solution Teams in the process for change.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Senator Olson called up from the previous senate meeting a motion to reconsider the vote on US Motion 97/98-8, as amended, to extend the classes drop/add deadlines which reads:
Be it resolved that the University of Oregon allow all students eight academic days to drop classes and ten academic days to add classes at the beginning of each academic term. For academic terms that are shorter than ten weeks, the drop and add deadlines will be applied appropriately.
President Tedards asked if there was any discussion on the motion to reconsider. Surprisingly, none was heard, and the motion was put to a vote with results of 8 in favor and 22 opposed. Thus, the motion to reconsider US 97/98-8 failed.
NEW BUSINESS
Senator Linda Kintz, English, informed the senators that since the last senate meeting, a notice of resolution regarding the Riverfront Research Park had been circulating and was intended to be given at this meeting. However, a recent memorandum from President Frohnmayer sent to members of the senate regarding the proposed research park resolution prompted supporters of the resolution to make the following statement instead:
In view of President Frohnmayer’s expectation that such a review would subsume all the questions raised in the draft of the resolution he examined, including development north of the railroad tracks,
And in view of President Frohnmayer’s willingness to consider the advice of the Faculty Advisor Council on how to structure a review process inclusive of the range of opinions held by members of the university community,
The makers of the resolution choose to rescind the Notice of Resolution at the present time.
The decision to rescind the Notice of Resolution at this time is made with the understanding that, because legislative decisions on the Riverfront Research Park must be made shortly, such a review process must begin in a timely fashion.
ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no further new business, President Tedards adjourned the meeting at 4:13 p.m.