Statewide Meet and Confer IFO & MnSCU

UNOFFICIAL NOTES

April 8, 2005

PRESENT IFO:  Becky Omdahl, Annette Schoenberger, Cindy Phillips, Mary Kesler, Steve Bohnenblust, Nancy Black, Richard Gendreau, Debra Japp, Pat Arseneault, Cindy Webber, Dave Larkin

PRESENT MnSCU:  Chancellor McCormick, Don Mercado, Chris Dale, Deena Allen, Gary Langer, Jim Jorstad, Gary Janikowski, John Ostrem, Linda Milne, John Shabatura, Becky Sobolewski, President Danahar, Linda Baer, Ken Niemi, Leslie Mercer, Bev Schuft, Renee Hogoboom

Called to order at 8:45 a.m.

Legislature Update:

Chancellor:  We were granted $213M in bonding bill projects from our legislature this year.  That will account for all of the projects we requested.  The state university presidents worked very hard to support these projects.  Campus support makes a difference.  Thank you for lobby days.  We did get a cut back on HEAPR funds. 

MnSCU:  Overall spending targets will be out next week.  

Academic and Student Affairs Policies:

MnSCU:  If you are aware of any specific policy issues that need revising, please let me know.  Next year we’ll review PSEO, transfer and doctoral delivery.  (A handout was given.)  Some of you have heard about this proposed policy 3.30 College Program Advisory Committees and 2.2.2.0 Major Program of Study Advisory Committees.

IFO:  We can agree that these two policies do not apply to the state universities.

MnSCU:  (A handout was given Proposed Policy 3.31: Graduate Follow-Up System and Repeal of Carry Forward Technical College and Policy 4.2.1.5 Employment Follow-Up Consumer Information.)  This language is simple.  The Technical College system had this policy; we will bring this back next month.  There is a problem for faculty with AS degrees.  They are required to have an articulation agreement.  We think this is the right position to take.

Three points were brought to our attention by the presidents at the Leadership Council:  1. proposal for generic AS degree on Math and Science with a guaranteed transfer like with an AA; 2. nervousness that our colleges will have at least one articulation agreement with a university – they’ve had some difficulty.  It’s not always easy to match a two year degree with four year programs; 3. degree granting authority for the Associate in Fine Arts degree.  The policy council hasn’t yet discussed this. 

IFO:  The IFO Academic Affairs Committee looked at Policy 3.17 Degrees, Diplomas and Certificates.  We want to caution you against using examples in the policy.  An MFA should not be lumped in with MA or MS.

A handout was given on the MnSCU Revised Policy & Procedure Development Process.  We will be looking at this internal document next time.

Reimbursement for OOC Committee Meetings:

(A handout was given.)

MnSCU:  We discovered there are two standard forms that are being used for reimbursement.  If you want a single standard form, let us know.

IFO:  Faculty who attend OOC Committee Meetings should receive the reimbursement form at the meeting.  Please ensure people know where to submit it as well.

Web Registration for Courses:

IFO:  We heard reports that students were having much difficulty registering online.  At Metro, students registered for courses and it didn’t go through on the ISRS.  There was no way to follow-up.

MnSCU:  That surprises me; we’ll have to take a look into that.  Could be the interface.

IFO:  At SCSU, we were told there were three (3) days when students were unable to register.

MnSCU:  We do go down on occasion and that is less serious than student registrations not computing.  I’ll look into both of these issues and get back to Nancy.

IFO:  These are things that upset students – we couldn’t access their transcripts. 

Chancellor:  We need to improve communications so faculty can be more supportive.

IFO:  In the last 2-3 years, ISRS was rough getting started but now has become a good tool.  I can advise a student in one visit.  We complain because we’re a little frustrated right now but it’s a good system.

MnSCU:  The hardware is so expensive – we’re down about 10% of the time. 

Leadership Development Program:

MnSCU:  Anita Rios was introduced as starting her position at MnSCU in January to assist in the training of staff and leadership except for teaching faculty.  The next Leadership Development Program sponsored by MnSCU is scheduled to occur in July or August 2006 – were encouraging increased faculty participation.  We’ll be asking administration to nominate faculty participants.

IFO:  This is too late in the year.

MnSCU:  Faculty applying would be aware of the time period.

IFO:  Faculty should self nominate not chairs or VPs.  Why are department chairs nominating faculty?

MnSCU:  This decision was made by Bill Tschida.

IFO:  Department chairs are faculty – I would strongly encourage you to include the FA Presidents in your list of nominators.  Contractually we speak for faculty.  We are requesting that the FA Presidents be included.  Time is short and we want to participate.

Chancellor:  Work closely with this group, you have to train leaders to bring the kind of change we need.

IFO:  You mentioned something about a facilitator?

MnSCU:  We used Chair Academy from Mesa for the last one and we have received excellent feedback.

IFO:  Can faculty self-nominate? 

MnSCU:  We will get back to you.

HRA Update:

MnSCU:  Eide Bailley is set to accept reimbursement.  $3,300 is already in the queue to be reimbursed to faculty.  We need an LOU with the IFO and the plan document needs to be signed.  Bill Tschida is signing for us today.  DOER will not be involved and they need to change their plan document to indicate faculty go directly to Eide Bailley.

IFO:  Why were we given $600/$500 for this account and not told there would be $31 per year in fees?

MnSCU:  The interest may offset some of that amount.  We’d need 6% interest to make up for the offset.

IFO:  We told faculty $600, now it’s less $31 – the contract says $600 period.

National Center for Academic Transformation:

(Two handouts were given.)

MnSCU:  At the presentation in Phoenix on March 18, on Redesigning Introductory Courses, we heard from four (4) faculty talking about their projects and reported the same as Carol Twigg’s report.  There has been a decrease in withdrawal rates – all cost savings came back to the department.  Rios College was represented by a dean – Rios has 25,000 online students and 55,000 total and they use commercial courseware or software.    None of us were very impressed with this opening Rios’ example given by Carol Twigg but after having discussions with other users we were calmed.  On the faculty side, a faculty member felt we needed to do more research on these 30 online projects.  Our biggest obstacle is a lack of funding.  We are searching for funds.  We’ve given you a copy of our draft proposal and sent to CAOs.  We’ll put this on the meet and confer agenda next time.  We don’t know how widely these models can be applied.  All the faculty who presented admitted their campus did not broadly utilize these courses.  They’ve all increased student task time.  We are also pursuing a conversation with the Bush Grant.  We’re trying to find the best practice to improve student performance.

IFO:  How do they serve the underserved?

MnSCU:  Projects we’ve heard about served underserved students as well if not better than traditional courses.

IFO:  We have heard that students are able to take retakes on tests until they pass.  The data supports increased faculty time.  (Thank you for sending Debra Japp to this conference.)  Many of the institutions have had to cut corners to survive by doing some of these things.  To implement this center would be very expensive.  We’ve got the cheapest model now – doing cheap large lectures has caused some of our problems.  Some of us have been doing this now “out-of-hide” - the team approach of this model is attractive.  The idea of creating this from the ground up with experts is seductive yet expensive.  Original participants received large grants from the Pew Foundation.

MnSCU:  I appreciate the people who put time into this.  We want to pursue better student learning.

IFO:  The savings would be long term as you manage to attract more students.

Chancellor:  We can turn student retention into cost savings.  We’re willing to look at every way.  Your statement “cheapest model” is a great way of putting things.

IFO:  We’re doing a lot of this right now.  If we can fine tune it would be of help.  Psychology has been doing this for years.   We have to make sense of this; the departments should get the cost savings if they exist.  If not, it will affect morale.  We need support on the campuses.

MnSCU:  We need a high level administrator on each campus to make these decisions.  We will send Nancy Black the proposal and put this on the May meet and confer.

Policy 1.B.1.1:

MnSCU:  We will take a day in June, July and August to review the 1.B.1.1 and will bring to a meet and confer.  We will ask for a rep on this review committee.

IFO:  You are handling this over the summer and faculty are out.  We appreciate you are agreeing to approach this and we are eager to get going.  You need to think about how you are going to compensate faculty for working on this policy review over the summer, or maybe you want to not pay your committee members and make it equal.

Chancellor:  Can we pay for this?

MnSCU:  I’d be willing to do that.  We make these decisions on a case-by-case basis.  I don’t know we have the money in our budget or now.

IFO:  We are talking about three days.

Chancellor:  You need to first see if our people are available.

MnSCU:  I emailed people yesterday. 

IFO:  What is the composition of the committee?

MnSCU:  4-5 designated officers, 1 from the Attorney General’s Office, MnSCU general council, labor relations plus one rep from each union.

IFO:  We’d need to have our Equity Advocate, Pat Arseneault, assigned to the committee.  We want this to move ahead.  Please get back to us on what you anticipate.

MnSCU:  We’ll do some ITV as well.  Can we move forward with this in June then?

IFO:  Yes, if compensation is in place.  We need continuity.  We’ll have Pat there.

Polytechnic Recommendation:

(Two handouts were given.)

MnSCU:  We need to review what we are calling polytechnic.  After a year of work, we now have these recommendations. 

IFO:  Is the system offering financial support?  We have efforts on our campuses with local businesses already.

MnSCU:  I’m hoping the center will secure financial support plus other sources too but I don’t know what funds we’ll end up with until we hear from the legislature.

IFO:  I have students who managed to graduate high school with two years of math.  Is the Board of Trustees doing something with this K-12 issue?

MnSCU:  This is a parallel discussion.  You’re right; if you’re attending a state university you will need at least three years of math. 

IFO:  It takes four years of math to be prepared for the state university system.  The idea that three years is sufficient is wrong.  You need influential people to talk to the businesses in their school districts.  It’s difficult for these students to catch up.

MnSCU:  The P-16 effort, COPE and the Department of Education are all involved.

Chancellor:  Could we discuss with faculty, presidents and deans the possibility of recommending to the Board of Trustees the creation of a statement of what we need from the high schools and would it be different for State Universities vs. CC/TCs?

IFO:  In these types of discussions, have we talked about remedial programs?  A lot of these students won’t get the importance of these things in high school.  They fail at college and are not attracted to the field.  We need to look at not only the top end of the issue but the bottom.  The first couple of years they are blindsided by college.

MnSCU:  The Presidents are meeting with K-12 all the time.  Department to department meetings in math/science, it always seemed too little and the college open admissions policy causes more issues.

IFO:  Think about the remedial side.

EEOD Executive Director:

MnSCU:  Cindy Phillips, thank you for taking part in this search committee.

IFO:  We marched to a short timeline that disturbed me.  We waded through 70 applications and made it down to 6 finalists.

MnSCU:  At this point they are scheduled to meet with the Chancellor, Board of Trustees and Office of the Chancellor staff.  We should be making a selection at the end of April beginning of May.  Those names are public now.  We are down to three finalists and have a search firm checking into their backgrounds.  These finalists have skills in working with underserved students. 

Transfer Staff:

MnSCU:  Linda Lade moved over to Mike Lopez’s area and Jerry Johnson accepted the Interim Vice President at Hennepin Technical College.  We’re sad to see him go. 

IFO:  Can we get another campus person to fill these two positions?

MnSCU:  I don’t have a timeline for filling these positions available but this is a priority.

IFO:  We are concerned; transfer is a key issue and now we have no transfer staff.  We are getting the signal that this has slipped from MnSCU’s list of priorities.

MnSCU:  This is not a slip in priorities – Larry Selin is helping us out (a MnSCU hired consultant).

IFO:  We look forward to this area being staffed.

224 Duty Days:

MnSCU:  The last time we met with our state university presidents they advised us of a special situation to warrant an exception to the 224 duty day limit.  Shortly a memo from Vice Chancellor Bill Tschida will be sent to the state university presidents to inform them that we are willing to individually approve exceptions to this 224 duty day limit when approved by the state university president(s).  Vice Chancellor Tschida is also going to speak with our auditor John Asmussen to see if there are any policy implications deviating from that limit.  He’ll look into this and will provide a report maybe in early fall addressing these issues and will put together a policy or procedure to delegate authorization to state university president to make those exceptions.  Bill Tschida has already approved an exception at Moorhead.  I looked into the situation at Moorhead.  The amount paid to this faculty member was determined at the state university level.  The Mankato administration determined the appropriate amount not the Office of the Chancellor.

IFO:  A problem we have with grants being approved through MOAs with a higher rate of pay, is that we now have to provide documentation that the grant would allow that rate of pay.  Some grants do not allow pay above their regular rate of pay.  The MOA at Mankato is off the table until we can meet that requirement.  We met with a dean yesterday to figure this out.

MnSCU:  Does that MOA address the daily rate or just a lump sum?

IFO:  Just a lump sum.

MnSCU:  Can we specify a daily rate?

IFO:  The payroll system uses a daily rate of pay.

MnSCU:  I think we can do this.

IFO:  We need to make sure the grant permits this payment system.  Without the 224 duty day Office of the Chancellor limit, this wouldn’t be an issue.  You’re skirting around this.  An MOA is really not needed.

MnSCU:  We believe that there is accountability in public policy issue and 224 days is compensation for a full year of work.  We need to ask John Asmussen (MnSCU Auditing Department) if there are any issues with going over the 224 duty days.  Exceeding the 224 duty day limit makes that document implicit. 

IFO:  I’m working 228 duty days. 

MnSCU:  Administration has the right to ask for documentation.

Chancellor:  We’re a long way from where we were a month ago.  It is our intent to have the state university presidents make this decision.

Centers for Excellence:

(A handout was given)

MnSCU:  We do not know where the legislature will go but we need to have our own timeline.  In May, we’ll have the presidents talk about the COE.  The timeline looks at sending out a RFI (Request for Information).  The proposal is not binding, it only presents considerations.  In the summer we’ll bring an RFP (Request for Proposal) process when you get back.  We’ll talk in October and we’ll have review teams looking at this.

IFO:  If this is not funded thoroughly, will the legislature move forward?

MnSCU:  The proposal does not carry a budget, we need to identify resources.  I’m working with DOER and Economic Development.

IFO:  Have you considered foundation grants?

MnSCU:  Good idea, we’re trying to let the Board of Trustees know we are targeting some businesses

Chancellor:  This is not easy.  The state universities have had foundation grants.

MN Online Update:

(Two handouts were given.)

MnSCU:  When I joined you at your IFO Board of Directors meeting, you asked for a handout on becoming a peer reviewer for new online courses.  Here is that information.  This chart shows the cycle and application form.

IFO:  Thank you, we appreciate having this information.

Data Security:

MnSCU:  The delivery of higher ed courses is dependent on networking and computer systems.  We have a lot of private and confidential data and we need to comply with laws and new health information.  We have a lot of information to protect.  There is some legislation being heard about notification of breeches of information.  We’re responsible by law to notify faculty if they are at risk of theft.  Information on training and awareness for faculty, students and administration are being developed.  We’ll education people on how to better secure their electronic information.  We are working with the U of M and can share resources.  This will continue to evolve so we have more campus ownership.  We’ll do awareness campaigns.  We hope to have the awareness program in place by this fall.  Let us know if you have questions.

IFO:  This serious issue has been raised by faculty on campuses.

Chancellor:  I feel good about how we are working together and are making progress.

Adjourn 11:45