IFO MnSCU Meet and Confer
Unofficial Notes
February 23, 2007
IFO Present: Nancy Black, Cathy Summa, David Bouchard, George Seldat, Mary Kesler, Stephen Bohnenblust, Annette Schoenberger, Debra Japp, Elizabeth Dunn, Cindy Phillips, Cindy Finch, Russ Stanton, Patrice Arsenealt
MnSCU Present: Chancellor McCormick, Bill Tschida, Melissa Fahnning, Gary Janikowski, Chris Dale, Mary Leary, Linda Baer, Gary Langer, Judy Borgen, Barbara Miller, Lynda Milne, Al Essa
State University President: Wilson Bradshaw, Metropolitan
Called to order at 8:13 a.m.
Legislative Update S. F. No 513:
MnSCU: The main language has to do with nursing. We sent proper language to the legislature that said the colleges and universities would be working through this 3 million request. When we testified that’s what we said. We have a good pipeline with the two-years, and we have an understanding that the language will be changed to include the universities. Senator Pappas’ office has the corrected language. They asked us to split up all of our requests into different bills. Whenever they put together the Omnibus Bill, we’ll work with them to make sure this will be corrected. It was inadvertent that the state universities were left out of the bill.
IFO: We spoke with Senator Sheran and she didn’t know the process for correcting this language.
MnSCU: Usually you need to amend, these bills were a formality.
IFO: She introduced the bill; the Omnibus Bill has to be put together by March 9. We’ll look for it then or before.
MnSCU: Jerry Janisech has been on top of this.
Chancellor: Did we make a mistake in sending it?
MnSCU: I don’t think so. I’m not sure where the mistake happened but I’ll make sure it’s corrected.
Code of Conduct:
IFO: We have reviewed the language and we’ve sent it out on campuses. I have 17 faculty who responded at my campus. As we looked further, our concern with the code of conduct is that it attempts to paraphrase what’s required in the statutes, and we’re not convinced that that paraphrasing clarifies the problem. Whenever you try to describe statutory language you should be trying to make it simpler and we’re not sure it does. A better approach may be to assemble a list of the relevant statutes. If the policy isn’t going any further than statute, then let’s just have the statute readily available rather than paraphrase which may do a disservice. That’s our bottom line with the policy. Chancellor, I’m not sure if you looked over any of the statutory language, but I would encourage you to do so. The language is perhaps well adapted to an 8-5 type Department of Transportation employee. The language could be interpreted in an opposite way we would want for faculty. It creates concerns. As part of my P.D.P, I participate in expos and does that mean I cannot sell my art work? The state law doesn’t address the unique situation with faculty. I’m not sure any of us want to take that to the legislature at this point. What we need to do is find a way that allows faculty to do what you want and need and we all want faculty to do without pushing efforts to inhibit that.
Chancellor: If you don’t have language, does that mean it will be less adaptive or more so? Does any of our interpretive language help?
IFO: No, that’s not my sense.
Chancellor: Are there other things you are hearing that we ought to listen to?
MnSCU: When this came up we were asked for help. We wanted to consolidate all of the references and then to try to help them with the answers that have been given in the past, those were the two purposes. It’s always difficult when we try to create a single document trying to address all of our employees from custodians to administrators.
IFO: Let sleeping dogs lie comes to mind. (Read an email from different faculty members who would be adversely affected by the paraphrased interpretations.)
Chancellor: In my own case, I was invited a month ago by the American Council to attend the major summit. I have a process where I need to get my board chair to approve this.
MnSCU: We are trying to get away from that kind of mind set where someone would think they are prohibited, it doesn’t prohibit those kinds of things or travel and meals.
IFO: A fixed amount of money…
MnSCU: (…referring to travel and meals approved in advance for no more than the actual expenses incurred)
IFO: ...an employee may not receive compensation from a source other than the system,… There are other pieces. We have to acknowledge there is some disconnect from the statute to what is desired amongst faculty. If we just reference the statute, we are not in a different position. If we start paraphrasing we are creating a different set of problems.
IFO: Every fourth year we make a P.D.P., it would seem to me that this is essential (getting permission to do this sort of thing). In order to be promoted, you have to complete your plan, what this appears to be saying is I can make a plan, my dean and department, provost, president could approve it but I can’t do this because someone at MnSCU didn’t realize what the contract says. I want to know if it’s in the plan and if it’s an approved plan is that adequate or do we need another level of bureaucracy?
MnSCU: That’s a valid point and a good suggestion, I’ll take that back. It will probably depend on the level of detail in the plan.
IFO: The plans are for 4 years, how much detail can you give?
MnSCU: So you are saying it’s not in the plan? It has never been the IFO’s position that the employer is in the position to approve or disapprove but they comment. The distinction of performing the work at the request of the employer but not under the direction of the employer is different, the contract allows for consulting. That is perhaps the distinction, when you do something for the National Science Foundation, it may not be under the direction of the employer but is part of your professional development.
Chancellor: I was listening to Cindy Phillips’ letter. If we answer that letter would that help this person?
MnSCU: Generally people are misinterpreting that they wouldn’t be able to do those things, but there needs to be a campus process to approve this.
IFO: Is it the intention of MnSCU to direct the local campuses to change the way they are interacting with us on these things? I never have to wait for the approval. Are you changing the process of reimbursement from the National Science Foundation (NSF), which is a set fee? They cover air fare and provide you with a small honorarium. The piece that says you can’t accept anything in excess of the travel expenses is where we have the problem. How detailed do we have to get in our requests?
MnSCU: In my own opinion, that probably wouldn’t be enough information, if they don’t know the amount you’re being reimbursed. It’s an issue of disclosing where and when expenses are being reimbursed and that additional compensation is being received. I think the law requires it. Someone has to determine there is not a conflict of interest and it’s appropriate to what a person’s doing.
Chancellor: The principle is that we know that some of the faculty we want to hire and retain will be the kind of people who we need to do these actions. We don’t want our faculty to feel they should not be involved in those kinds of things. If the president approves it, then that would be approved.
MnSCU: It seems like it would and again the letter really points out when someone reads this or just read the statute they would certainly think that would be prohibited. Maybe we need more language.
IFO: The code of conduct was in a way developed for people who wanted direction, the problem here and the number of documents that come out are trying to fit one whole group; we are quite different from some of the other units. The language does confuse us more than need be.
Chancellor: If Cathy is on that review team, does this benefit our students? That might be a good question.
IFO: I’ve been invited to do some presentations in Prague and Slavakia. Our administration has applauded this project and sees it as beneficial.
IFO: When Cathy gave her example, she referred to a leave/travel form. A lot of this is based on doing it during state time. If we were assured that MnSCU was not going to make the argument that you are violating these policies because you are doing it on a duty day under our contract, then that would go a long ways toward reassuring faculty. There is language in here on doing it on state time, and many of these things are happening during academic duty days. If we were assured this wouldn’t come back and slap us on the face…, we want an understanding.
MnSCU: The comment period closes next week sometime, Gail isn’t back until March 6.
IFO: I think the problem is you don’t want anything that impedes the faculty. What abuses are you trying to get at? We have a process. If you travel the president knows. There’s a fine line with some of these things and faculty need to feel confident that there won’t be someone who comes back to them and says you shouldn’t have done that. We need to feel confident that intentions are honorable.
IFO: The people sitting around this table will step up and question. A number of faculty would make a decision by reading this that they can’t participate, and that will hinder people’s choices and I would caution you.
MnSCU: This wasn’t done to limit abuses, it’s because Gail’s office is called to interpret the language. I do think that by and large if someone on a campus approves the travel form and doesn’t raise the issue that somehow you’re doing this on work time and you need some leave provision, then they are approving that it isn’t being done on work time.
Chancellor: We have a legislator who had to resign over his kid using his cell phone.
MnSCU: We take your comments seriously. If we need to extend the deadline, we will but we will try to clarify these issues for you.
IFO: I think the less said the better. We have offices that are trying to get us engaged in the community training programs; I participate with leaders of non-profits. Those are on held on weekdays they are not on weekends. I’m paid an additional sum of money to do that, it isn’t all covered by the travel form.
MnSCU: If you do that and no one said that’s ok, it could come open to question if there is some document or process for approval.
IFO: The problem not addressed is the autonomy. There’s been a dramatic change when I’ve had discussions with people on my campus and they’ve said they need to talk to the OOC before they can decide. The impression is that the campuses are looking back to the OOC before they make decisions.
MnSCU: In the training, we probably can’t convince you, but we are not trying to get people to call us for answers. The issue may be training.
IFO: How many of those phone calls are from 4 year faculty?
MnSCU: Very few, they are from the administrators mainly.
IFO: You said you would think that it is important for a faculty member to provide more information on the nature of reimbursement and I just heard you say if the dean signs off then that would be sufficient, I heard a contradiction.
MnSCU: I was responding to Cindy doing it on state time or not. I think that issue would be resolved there, it doesn’t get to the other issue if the administrator knows about compensation. I think for them to say it’s ok, they need to know there’s reimbursement compensation and in many cases they’ll know. With the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) for example, we know those arrangements and probably don’t need more info.
IFO: Is the onus on the faculty member or the dean?
MnSCU: Again I’m not pretending to give the legal answer, I would say it’s in everyone’s interest if there’s compensation they should ask or say something. Some people will say we had no way of knowing, or I thought they understood.
MnSCU: We have the same issues if you say less or ignore these standards. People may be better served if more information is given.
IFO: Let’s say you’re invited to Florida to give a lecture during the academic year, and you’re paid a stipend.
Chancellor: For me, I would ask for vacation days and ask the Board to approve it.
IFO: We only have three (3) days of personal leave.
Chancellor: I wouldn’t take the honorarium but I would have to take vacation days.
MnSCU: Situations like that happen all the time. Faculty need to tell them there is compensation and maybe take personal leave - that would be nice. Faculty are going to be gone from time to time.
IFO: So I have to consult for free?
MnSCU: I didn’t say that but you have to be careful to first insure your own obligations are covered and if what you are doing is for you personally or are you honoring your obligation to the State for these duties?
Chancellor: Cindy said Moorhead is fine, don’t make it worse.
IFO: There is additional skepticism on the textbooks statutes which says you can accept textbooks. However, in your policy you go beyond the statute to say if I sell my textbook I can’t keep the money.
MnSCU: Gail isn’t here, that is not an interpretation that is new. This has existed for a long time.
IFO: I haven’t heard this on my campus and it’s not in the statute.
?: It’s always good to look at what you’re trying to accomplish if the goal is to pull together a single resource. We try to look at the law of unintended consequences. If by taking an action you trigger something you didn’t intend, it may provide a chilling situation. You’ve seen how these situations are being dealt with on the campuses effectively. You want to increase transparency….different campuses are different, trying to do it centrally can be difficult.
Chancellor: I see Gail as general counsel for MnSCU. She’s also the Board’s counsel, she’s my counsel, and she’s the president’s counsel.
IFO: We’ve beaten this to death, but there are still quite a few questions. I want the next version to come back to meet and confer because we need the same understanding. I’m still not clear as to what is or not prohibited.
Academic and Student Affairs Policy Council:
IFO: We are here to discuss Policy 3.36 and Procedure 3.36.1. Ron Dreyer came to the IFO Academic Affairs Committee meeting and we enjoyed our conversation. The issue we have deals with page 5 of the procedure on authorized academic awards listing the mission statements of the different institutions in MnSCU and notes that for each institution. The procedure says “may offer” we were told this comes out of state statute and the statue says “shall offer” rather than may offer. We’re concerned about mission creep. What was the intent of that language?
MnSCU: I will send you a note determining that the word will be corrected.
IFO: Thank you, along with that we’ve had two Academic and Student Affairs Policy Council meetings and we had about 60 pages to go through in 5 hours with 20 people. We need more meetings and things change as they go through the various arenas of the Leadership Council.
MnSCU: I have made it clear to staff this is complex. Their target for Board reading is May. If we don’t make that we have no train schedule. If we don’t feel this is enough time, we’ll hold off. The new and improved approached to policies has been more fruitful.
IFO: When you integrate something like this, there are a lot of pieces you need to look into.
Chancellor: I don’t think in any way we are mission creeping [reference to two year colleges offering baccalaureate degrees].
PSEO Update:
IFO: When will we have the exceptions report? Issues come up about language. We’re concerned about the governor’s concurrent enrollment and its uses interchangeably with PSEO. In the 2001 report I noticed that it called for more monitoring of PSEO, improved counseling, and national standards. There was a financial loss across the system of $6.3 million dollars.
MnSCU: The taskforce has been meeting monthly since October. They have 19 members. The group reviewed the national standards and Rep. Davnie has a bill on something to do with potential reimbursement. The U of M is accredited and I don’t think any of our camupses are accredited in this area. Rep. Seifert also wanted to resurrect the bill that no policy should get in the way the right of anyone to teach PSEO. We will add language on the definition of concurrent enrollment on non-PSEO instruction offered in high school. We have ongoing concerns on Crookston. Other new language was given. We also brought to the table exceptions language saying you will meet this regardless, instead you have to meet the credentialing or show evidence of exceptional teaching.
IFO: I appreciate you’re having conversations with Crookston. We’re helping teachers on the side who need help trying to teach. Crookston has no supervision on these policies.
MnSCU: If you are teaching the concurrent enrollment in a smaller school with both non-PSEO students in the classroom with PSEO students. I wish this wasn’t going on but think this may be the only way to deliver PSEO to rural schools. The exceptions report will address this.
IFO: We’re concerned with the flip side - on the requirement of students having to take PSEO, we want to know what the standard is and how are they enforcing that.
MnSCU: I will get back to you with that.
IFO: Are they taking on-line courses?
MnSCU: Yes, Lake Superior.
IFO: Also we’re concerned about the support structure for people teaching the PSEO and the quality of education for students enrolled in PSEO in our system. The mentoring aspect required for these high school teachers, has two components – understanding the content and the pedagogy of these younger learners. The mentoring needs two sides. In order to do that effectively, the faculty need some support in terms of their time.
IFO: The $6.3 million loss, can you explain that? What does this really mean?
MnSCU: Let me look into that. Each of your campuses incurs that loss if you participate in PSEO. I’ll get back to you.
IFO: It’s our understanding the student text books are paid by the school district. That helps.
IPESL:
IFO: At our last meeting I believe we asked for an accounting of the full $12 million devoted to this project and the $4 million for IPESL.
MnSCU: (Gave a handout.)
IFO: Thank you.
IFO: We want to know what each campus spent.
MnSCU: Awards for excellence is a different process. We are likely not to know what the expenses are until January 2008.
IFO: When you know, we want to know.
IFO: So all of the money outlined has gone to the IFO, MSCF and ASF?
MnSCU: All the funds are only used for salary and benefits to the campuses as you see here.
IMS Advisory Council:
(Two handouts were given by MnSCU.)
MnSCU: We want to update you on the IMS Advisory Council and the general state of the Information Management System. Also I want to give you an update on some of the activity going on. We’re going through two major changes, technology shoring up and this year the theme is stabilization - shoring up the levies - we’re not doing major engineering. Item two is just as important – it is culture change and processes by which we deliver a project and approach technology - that’s the hard part. Technology is hard but not as hard as cultural change. Coming to the IMS update this year we launched the IMS Advisory Council as a new entity as part of the governance. It’s really to advise Linda Baer in terms of the academic requirement and the operation of our IMS environment. The signal change in that body needed to be driven by the academic faculty and IT needs. We had our first meeting; it went well. Dr. Baer started out with the council vision and charge. Then we had a very good discussion among council members, what the issues are and what we want to undertake. We had an election of the executive committee, David Bouchard was elected the chair. There is a list in the handout of the members of the executive committee. Rhonda Ficek is the past chair. The work now is to transition the work of the committee to David and provide him with the support he needs. The first major agenda item is the D2L upgrade. Last night I sent David the outline of the project plan. That’s just the first in a series of meetings. Linda is anxious to start getting the recommendations from this group.
IFO: What is the Crisis Team and what do the enterprise projects consist of?
MnSCU: If a problem occurs related to D2L, we’d want a group to manage the crisis that needs to go beyond the people in IT.
IFO: IT issues, as they relate to the Instruction Management System, have a component with academic impact. The place to get the academic insight is from the faculty. In the last month we’ve been working to see that these mechanisms are in place.
IFO: I have a question about the release workgroup.
MnSCU: With the new version of D2L there is a whole set of features that are new modules - learning objects, and blogging. We don’t want to just turn it on but systematically say this new capability exists. The workgroup will determine from a technology and policy perspective and determine what is required and bring that to the group. Instead of just releasing new features, we’ll do it systematically and understand the consequences.
Chancellor: Does that mean you’re in a pilot?
MnSCU: If it’s necessary, a pilot may be required.
Chancellor: I understand Black Board withdrew their lawsuit. What will be the impact for us?
MnSCU: It’s too early to tell. It will probably take a year or two to understand the impact. The early reading is this is having a negative impact on Black Board. There’s a groundswell of antipathy toward Black Board.
IFO: You mentioned you want to provide support to David Bouchard. What do you mean by support? It looks like David Bouchard will be assuming a lot of responsibilities and effort.
MnSCU: He will set the agenda for the group and working with the Executive Committee.
MnSCU: He just sent an outline for David to review. Content will come from Al Essa and David adds the intellectual content.
IFO: An important thing we’ll have to do is make sure information is provided and the input gets back to this committee and disseminated properly through it and the scheduling of our next meeting. We thought it was critical that our next meeting had to have some detailed information on the D2L roll-out in June, this is pretty urgent. Al mentioned we will replace the version we have now with 8.1 without necessarily all the functionality. We are so tied into that - we needed the content.
IFO: Some of the questions are related to summer school.
IFO: Yes, in particular at Metro we start in May. We will be converting in the middle of the semester. We are getting close to being ready to present that information. People have a lot of different concerns so we need to get that to them and let them react.
MnSCU: From an IT perspective, our focus is on what we are calling enterprise projects - this is on our website. These are the projects we’re working on this year. They are in six goal areas. From a people and culture perspective this is all pretty new. There is a crude diagram on slide six. We established a project management office that sounds more glorious than it is. It’s lightweight but has to do a lot of heavy lifting. Starting with an agreed upon list of projects then budgets and it’s a big challenge to make sure we’re getting tighter in terms of the project. We’ve make some progress this year. If you look at the left side of the diagram on project selection, that’s the process that projects are brought to us. We have a lot of stake holders who have some initial ideas we’re sharing in an informal way. When I meet with David Bouchard on Monday we’ll discuss that, but we are in early stages. How do we select which project IT works on? We’re starting the process of which projects we’re going to work on.
IFO: I saw a recent job description for faculty reassigned time on assimilation and gaming.
MnSCU: Games and simulations are very successful and looking for faculty interest in part time or full time release to continue that information.
IFO: One other point to consider about portfolio management is the projects we select are things that we are doing as a system. Ken Nemi and Judy Borgen met with the IFO Budget Committee. As Al described, we need to fix the system and get it stable. If we’re going to deliver academic value we need to make sure the projects are selected for academic priorities. We want a mechanism to determine what faculty actually need to hopefully steer the budget to generate academic value.
MnSCU: We have a preliminary assessment on which applications need to be upgraded or retired. Data gathering - that all is tied into this.
Chancellor: I’m listening very carefully and am encouraged by the partnership.
IFO: This is a very big challenge but I’m nervous about funding. What will we do if we don’t get our budget?
Chancellor: That is with the Board at this point.
MnSCU: CIOs were representing our campuses.
IFO: The governor has earmarked $30 of the $140 million as one-time money; we need to be careful.
MnSCU: One of our major risks is that our culture is based on thinking of everything in terms of one-time money. Behind the scenes we are focusing on the budget models. It’s not good enough just to do projects; you have to build in the reoccurring costs. You don’t start any project unless you understand the reoccurring costs.
IFO: I had a question last time on the budget that has been planned for IT. We heard there would be 70 employees hired, what is the purpose of that?
MnSCU: I think that’s an estimate. The actual number will depend.
IFO: I’m not asking about the numbers per se.
MnSCU: We did some initial planning, I think of it as there are infrastructure challenges and we have a good idea of what it’ll take. We will have to put in significant resources, part of the 70 people will cover the infrastructure, then we’re planning once we get the portfolio management piece going either rebuilding applications and supporting people, who those positions will be allocation. We’re targeting for doing a better job and place more emphasis in terms of supporting campus structure. This isn’t just about the IT environment. We have 110 employees now.
IFO: In looking at the 70+ positions some are programmers, it is suggested that you add to the fact that the $10 million goes back to the campuses. Are we creating a highly centralized program?
MnSCU: A significant number of the positions of the 70 will be dealing with security.
Chancellor: It’s not about running this office.
IFO: It’s important to recognize that the number of employees you want to hire is the same number of permanent faculty you have at Metro. We’re looking at that number.
MnSCU: I can defend the number of positions but we are going to have to be careful if we get the money we don’t end up like people who are starved who hit the lotto; we need a plan that is supported.
IFO: I think the heart of the issue is not that we’re opposed. My primary concern is I would have liked to have seen the system office go after equally as strong a line item to invest in our campuses and increase the faculty to increase enrollments. We’ve invested in new buildings in the sciences that has increased the number of students; we don’t have enough faculty to accommodate the students we have. It would be more helpful to engage in a conversation when we have competing needs.
Chancellor: The line item of $10 million for the under-served, innovative proposals, and $3 million for nursing. I think everyone is about putting more capacity out to the campuses. They can’t do these things if they don’t get the money. Every one is about putting out more resources. Think we should have had the computer office in Bemidji instead of here centrally - it might have looked better. I don’t think we’ve done a good job and I blame myself.
MnSCU: $70 million sounds like a lot of money. Put it in perspective - the U of M is investing $60-70 million in their financial system. Cal State is spending $450 million on their administrative system – equivalent of ISRS. $70 million sounds like a lot but it is, you can’t add more faculty without buildings and facilities to go with it.
IFO: I have to say that this Board of Trustees has not said anything about if we have enough faculty. Are we providing a quality education to the best that we can because of the expertise of our faculty? We have 8-9 nursing positions open in Mankato. We need faculty desperately. What’s really discouraging to me is instead of saying words of encouragement to the faculty we hear that the BOT want it on a dashboard to measure our productivity - our institutions require creativity and innovation that the faculty provide on a daily basis.
Bradshaw: I’m working with technology. It occurred to me that when we start talking about positions and dollars, while both are important, Al said something earlier we should think about. This request for technology is based on what we are trying to accomplish; it’s not just the one-time costs. The question is large appropriation - what does it take to get something done and to sustain it? Some of that will be one-time money and it may help us understand better in how we can communicate what these dollars are for. It frustrates us when we start talking about 70 positions and not putting the focus on what we are trying to accomplish.
IFO: I respectfully disagree with President Bradshaw and the Chancellor. For example, with technology we all recognize we need improved technology. Let’s look at the priorities with D2L version 8 learning objects and repositories built into that. This has taken substantial IT support; maybe some of the campus needs vs. system priorities may be out of whack.
Chancellor: They are priorities of the Board, I’ll just say that. Number one priority is inflation and we worked hard on that. There is a communications problem. And I appreciate your point.
IFO: There is a communication problem, and I don’t know how to reach the Board with this. We compared the cost per student vs. the privates and we deliver at less than half the price. Sometimes that’s lost because of the unfortunate relationship we seem to have with the Board. It doesn’t matter how may times we talk about the criteria for promotion and tenure to the BOT; when you have five criteria and you try and fulfill that on the campus that’s called bait and switch on the part of the administration. When you add another layer on faculty (i.e. code of conduct) faculty view it as punitive.
Chancellor: I have a responsibility to make a recommendation to them.
MnSCU: There is a miscommunication the version 8 upgrade and what comes with it. We’re not paying any additional money for this, and rather than turning it on just willie-nillie we want to go through the process with the IMS Advisory Council, and ask if we want to turn this on or not.
IFO: This is the sense of change, before it wasn’t recognized as an issue. We’re at a point where recognition of faculty input is what is important in delivering academic value.
MnSCU: There’s a reason this IMS Advisory Committee reports to me instead of Ken Neimi.
IFO: In the Senate discussion only $4.5 million of the $70 supports the academic system. Is that true?
MnSCU: It’s not true. Again, we have to get the data out there.
IFO: How much?
MnSCU: Registration, administrative, and academic - how do you slice it up? It’s going toward academic and student services. In terms of the $70 million, we do have to have a story as to what value we’re delivering. We’re beginning to share that information with the IFO and all of our stakeholders.
IFO: Initially IT was sold that student and faculty are getting into online and gave the impression that this would support that.
MnSCU: I read in the news that a course in Spanish was being offered at Brainerd Central Lakes College. What appealed to me about that course was that I want to improve my Spanish and the great write-up of the faculty who teaches the course. I went to register and wanted to take it every step of the way on-line. If I were a “real” customer I would have dropped out. I had my credit card in hand, but we were doing everything to defeat that purpose. What was my experience? I wanted to take one class. It took me time to find that course and when it appeared on the website, the faculty member’s name didn’t appear on the list. I had to register for the class and was told I needed to apply. I tried to apply online. I had to hunt for the application and I was presented with a four-page online application that asked me to send my high school transcript. The experience that I wanted is I should have been able to enroll in 20 minutes. It’s the supporting infrastructure for the course and it’s academic in nature.
IFO: There is a whole class of academic value that hasn’t been addressed before.
MN Online Committee:
IFO: We’ve asked for more people to serve on this committee.
MnSCU: We’ve taking that under advisement.
IFO: We are near the end of February. We want more information.
MnSCU: Before our next meeting we’ll talk about that.
IFO: Has there been any real assessment of online learning, who takes the courses and where are they from? Do we know if students learn as well or better online than they do in a traditional classroom? We want quality as you do. Do you have any data?
MnSCU: The report we provided to the Board of Trustees was in terms of demographics, age, gender and international students. Each campus did participate. In terms of quality, there is a website that shows it doesn’t make a difference but it depends on the student and the class.
IFO: I haven’t seen the PowerPoint presentation. Are we assessing whether we are reaching underprivileged students or first generation students?
MnSCU: We know it is important for students to understand what it is to be an online student. Mn Online will discuss the quality issues. We have this issue with the Center of Teaching and Learning. The issue with students and their outcomes goes back to faculty teaching and student enrollment. Right now we don’t have the data people to research this right now.
IFO: At a Board meeting there was a five minute movie of Mn Online and it gave the implication it was serving the underserved who can’t get to the campuses. We’re making these kinds of statements whether we come out and say it or not. The movie was careful not to make the statements, but the implication was there. You just said we don’t know, we don’t have that data, but we’re making statement to our Board and we don’t have any data.
IFO: We do have data, that half the online students were in the dorms on-site.
MnSCU: That’s a reflection of students who want to meet a schedule.
MnSCU: The foundation for this is a data problem. One of our goals as part of the $70 million is to have the ability so that decision makers have the ability to make certain types of questions. How many students are taking online courses, analyze the questions and be able to provide that to you in real time. Linda has asked for this capacity, it’s something she wants.
MnSCU: The video was stories from the actual students.
IFO: The implications of those stories we had a particular message, a well done video the message cannot be disavowed. The message was there. Where’s the data to back it up? It serves all these homebound students who were poor and mothers and when they are done they are productive members of society.
MnSCU: We will come back with Gary Langer’s PowerPoint presentation.
Bradshaw: We do have students in the Metro area who take courses on-site and online. That varies from institution to institution and I know that we can provide a wealth of data on the demographics and success of our students taking online courses. Maybe we can provide that data to you.
Quality of Compensation and Supplemental:
MnSCU: In our last deposit we had 450 people with double deductions. The state fixed that on the 25the of January and the state refunded that double deduction but the payroll went forward to TIAA-CREF and they posted those amounts. On the following paycheck on February 2 the State shorted T-C $81k, so we decided to just do a do-over, went back, took from the payroll the SRP. If the faculty member is active in SRP would have seen a posting on 1/19 and then it came back, the 450 people had an adjustment, with a higher posting on the 1/19 paycheck and then it was reposted. Chris Dale was a victim. Everything is resolved now. It only affected SRP.
IFO: We want reassurance for faculty who ask questions. We want to refer them to Gary Janikowski.
MnSCU: If you’re not getting the message, you need to put pressure on your HR offices.
MnSCU: We did inform the campus HR offices.
IFO: So when they backed out the transaction they backed out all the SRP?
MnSCU: Yes.
IFO: In defense of HR and payroll, they sent out the first notice but they didn’t send out another notice.
IFO: We realize it wasn’t your fault but it was the Department of Finance.
Draft of New Policy Long Term Emergency Management:
IFO: What are your intentions about students but no discussion about faculty? Do we have health coverage?
MnSCU: There is something in the policy. Steve Frantz will deal with the procedure. Generally the plan is to try to continue to follow whatever the collective bargaining agreement is. If people are sick they will go on sick leave, this is assuming the institution is still open, then they would use whatever is at their disposal.
IFO: If the institution closes…
IFO: We have total chaos on our campus when it snows, what are your intentions with regard to faculty and staff?
MnSCU: That will be in the procedure.
IFO: My question is in the last paragraph where it says there will be a work group that develops the procedure. Will faculty participate?
MnSCU: I believe they will be I haven’t talked to Steve Frantz.
IFO: With this the focus is on what you did with students but not faculty. My first day at Metro State was on November 1, 1991, during a blizzard. Faculty and staff were told that there were no classes but then were told they weren’t getting paid for that day if they didn’t come in. There was confusion.
MnSCU: In particular, health benefits wouldn’t be affected by a short term closure.
IFO: We’re talking about the long term emergency management.
MnSCU: Long term is at least seven days. With respect for health insurance you’re covered for the month. This is the policy and the policy won’t contain that level of detail; that will be in the procedures.
IFO: There’s a lot of detail for students and we’d like to see as much.
IFO: For the procedure, will there be more details with questions we are concerned with?
MnSCU: Yes.
IFO: Salary, health coverage, prior to the 2/3 date of the campus closing, but if we close after 2/3 what happens with grades? If the semester is done, are faculty still responsible?
MnSCU: Yes, there will be the systemwide procedure and the institution plan.
IFO: We want to understand at what level we should be involved in this process so we can be informed in that discussion.
MnSCU: On the campus level, it would be in the campus plan.
IFO: You said that Steve Frantz is intending to contact us?
MnSCU: No, I don’t know. I’ll check with him.
IFO: Health benefits and pay continuing, I didn’t hear you say pay.
MnSCU: It depends on the circumstances. As far as I know we don’t have any statutory authority to pay people for time not worked unless there is something in the collective bargaining agreement that authorizes that.
IFO: Just because the institution is closed doesn’t mean the faculty aren’t performing their duties.
International Baccalaureate:
MnSCU: We’re brining this to you (a handout was given). This is a policy that changed given the new information that came out following the governor’s Get Ready Get Credit program. This is the language going for the first reading to the Board in March. The language is changed to be more in line with the legislative language, it’s gone through the policy review committee and this is for you to see.
IFO: This became more complicated after we examined it. We think with PSEO and AP that we like that there are national standards and if students are given the national standards we have more academic credibility.
MnSCU: Are you saying that with PSEO and concurrent enrollment?
IFO: Yes, the feeling was instead of trying to assess that if we went with the national as we did with the AP score of three that would certainly simplify the students’ understanding. The problem with this was the international baccalaureate program was never intended to be pulled apart by exams but accepted as a whole. Now it seems that they are able to take exams on individual pieces of the six-part diploma.
Sidebar on Future Meet and Confer Dates:
Chancellor: Trust is so important. You’ve said it’s important for me to be here, but we‘ve agreed to these dates. I was asked to be a member of the US Department of Education on a three day meeting this week and this is important to all of you, this meeting is a part of the process. I should be there today but I didn’t want to break the faith on this one so I came back last night. My voice is not there. I’m trying to say that every once in a while I get in a predicament where I can’t be here. If I would have had time to explain it to you today you’d want me to be there instead of here. There just might be a predicament when I would have a conference. We’re agreeing to these dates but I might have a problem that comes up on short notice.
IFO: That’s fine - we followed you to Winona and we’ll follow you to Washington.
Adjourned 10:55 a.m.