Meeting, October 13, 2005
Gallagher Business Building, Room 123

DRAFT

Members Present:
E. Ametsbichler, D. Beck, C. Bruneau, K. Canty, G. Cobbs,  J. Crepeau, J. Carter, D. Dalenberg, S. Derry, M. DeGrandpre, A. Delaney, P. Dietrich, D. Doyle, L. Frey, J. Gannon,  F. Glass, C. Hand, K. Hill,  S. Justman, C. Knight,   M. Kupilik, B. Larson, C. Lawrence,  D. McCrea, J. McNulty, V. Micheletto, C. Nichols, D. Potts,  E. Putnam, B. Reider, D. Schuldberg, P. Silverman, R. Skelton, A. Ware, S. Yoshimura

Members Excused:
S. Brewer, J. Campana, F. Cardozo-Pelaez, S. Gordon, B. Knowles, S. Li, C. Loisel,  J. Luckowski W. Freimund, T. Herron, C. Johnston,  L. Knott, G. Smith,  F. Snyder, J. Sommers-Flanagan, S. Stiff, H. Thompson, M. Tonon

Members Absent:

S. Gaskill L. Gillison, S. Greymorning, W. Holben, K. Kane, M. Monsos, Y. Reimer F. Rosenzweig, J. Sears, D, Six, A. Sondag, K. Unger

 

Ex-Officio Present:
President Dennison, Provost Muir, Vice President Duringer, Registrar Bain, Associate Provost Staubs and Walker-Andrews,  Director of Planning, Budgeting and Analysis Bill Muse, and UFA President Kupilik

Guests: Jim Lopach, Faculty Athletics Representative, Jim O’Day, Director of Athletics, and Jean Gee, Associate Director of Athletics

 

 

Chair Crepeau called the meeting to order at 3:13 PM.

Registrar Bain called roll.

 

 

Communications:

 

President Dennison
Comprehensive Campaign:

President Dennison provided a little background on the recent public announcement of the Comprehensive Campaign.  Typically these campaigns go through a quiet phase until a significant proportion of the target amount has been achieved.  This fall the campaign has reached approximately three quarters of the $100,000,000 goal.  Current commitments total 72 million and are made up of endowments to scholarships, fellowships, professorships, support for on-going programs and facilities.  He proposes that a progress report be given at the next Senate meeting on the campaign’s priorities and projects.  It is a significant undertaking and given the campaign is 72% complete there is a fairly good chance of achieving the objective will be achieved. 

 

 Fall Enrollment Outcomes:

Senators were provided a summary of fall enrollments and the President explained the variance between the projection and actual.  The information is fairly clear and sobering. Student head count was up by 44, but this is primarily the result of an increase of 207 students at the College of Technology. The Mountain Campus had a decrease of 163 students.  In full-time equivalents (FTE) this is 27 over fall of 2004. 

  • College of Technology increased by 97 FTE;
  • Resident undergraduates decreased by 160 FTE;
  • Nonresident undergraduates increased by 6 FTE;
  • Western Undergraduate Exchange Students (WUEs) increased by 87 FTE; and
  • Graduate enrollment remained almost flat.

The declining resident undergraduate trend noticed in the spring is continuing and it seems to be more serious. The small increase in nonresidents is still positive given the past situation.  Western Undergraduate Exchange Students are up due to the practice of over booking, similar to the airlines, based on speculation that not everyone will show.  Approximately 90% of the students enrolled because of the significant scholarship opportunity.  These quality students are offered 150% of resident tuition.  The University will have to be cautious in the future because there is only a certain number authorized under the agreement Montana has with the other participating states.  Some states such as Idaho take every student that applies.  This works if the legislature agrees to supplement the difference.  In Montana the policy is to maintain as much of a balance as possible so that it is a resource sharing program rather than a subsidy program.   A drop in the average number of upper-division credit loads is responsible for 70 FTE.  The reason for the decline needs to be analyzed.

The most significant issue is the variance of 196.55 FTE, or 1.7% from the projection and the actual enrollment. This will have to be addressed to get back on track for fall of 2006.  The total revenue shortfall for the fall is approximately $500,000.  In addition, there was a $300,000 summer shortfall, and approximately $250,000 shortfall in the mandatory waiver account which is the result of more honor students accepting the four-year guarantees, more dependent fee-waivers, and Native American fee-waivers.  The mandatory waiver projections will have to be re-calibrated to prevent future shortfalls.  Together, these require a little less than half of the contingency fund for the year.  There is a chance the situation will improve in the spring, but – given historical patterns – the worst case will produce results similar to the fall.  The problems need to be addressed.


Montana Partnering for Affordable College Tuition (MPACT)
For several years the President has been considering Montana’s need to do something similar to other states in respect to the tuition cost problem for a significant group of potential students.  Last summer during the strategic planning process the Regents agreed and identified the issue as finding a way to take the cost out of the equation so that those students who are qualified would have the opportunity. Between now and the next 10 years the number of Montana high school graduates will decline by 18-19%.  Nearly half of these students don’t go on to college, and 15% go to college out of state.   Over the past 4-5 years a slightly smaller percent of high school graduates are taking the ACT or SAT.  Not only is the cohort shrinking but the number of graduates thinking about college is going down. These facts indicate that the university requires a much larger market share to simply stay even.

The net cost of a Montana college education can lead to challenging debt loads for many Montana families. Data still indicates that there is a reasonable return on the investment of a college education in financial terms and quality of life. A student from a lower income family that hears stories of students graduating with $20,000-25,000 debt will draw the conclusion that college is not possible.   This is a real issue for Montana families at the median income ($35,000) or below.  The current situation is represented by the data below. 

Cost (1-yr)

Expected Tuition Assistance

Tuition & Fees

 $4,894

Pell Grant

$4,050

Room & Board

   5,646

Federal SEOG*

     800

Books & Supplies

      800

College Work Study

$2,000

 

$11,340

 

$6,850

 

- 6,850

   *supplemental educational opportunity grant

 

 $4,490

 

 

x 4 or 5

 

 

 $17,960

or  $22,450

So the challenge is to create a program that will provide a more affordable college education opportunity to modest income level Montana high school graduates.  There are several programs around the country where students have a guarantee of tuition and fees and certain other components. These programs have been successful in increasing participation rates, but attrition rates have increased as well. Therefore, the President’s charge to the Office of Planning, Budgeting and Analysis and Admissions was to tailor a program to fit the goals and resources of The University of Montana, and the demographic and financial profiles of students and families in Montana.  The program will be available to dependent students with Pell Grant eligibility who meet the academic requirements of a high school GPA of 3.0 and an ACT score of 25 for the mountain campus and a GPA of 2.5 for the College of Technology. 

                                                                       

The program is based on the expected family contribution (EFC) which is a computation determined from information provided on the federal application for financial aid. The equation takes into account the student/parent income/assents (excluding farms) and the number of dependents in college and in the household.   There were several examples used to show the EFC and the MPACT award. A household with a $0 EFC could be guaranteed an award of $2,000.  However, there is a bit of a problem in that the university is currently using all of its federal/state work-study money for enrolled students, so if diverted to this group there will be a problem for enrolled students.  Therefore, funds must be found for the $2,000 college work-study grant as well as the MPACT award.   The awards are in declining amounts based on the EFC.

 

Projections are to penetrate 15% of the market or 62 students the first year, then up to 93 the fourth year.  This is a conservative estimate.  Once the program is known students should prepare for the opportunity.  The projected cost for the first year on the mountain campus would be $151,600 and $540.245 for the fourth year, and $44,312 and $105,383 for the College of Technology respectively.  The projected total cost for the four years takes into account the following:

 

1st year

4th year

Direct Program Costs

 

 

       MPACT Awards

195,912

645,628

       Work Study

193,200

628,618

                Total Direct Costs

389,112

1274,247

Promotional Costs

75,000

20,000

Marginal Costs

 

 

    Instruction & Student Support

177,351

534,914

Marginal Revenue

 

 

         Tuition and Fees

269,266

997,909

         General Fund

117,056

353,056

                Total Marginal Revenue

386,322

1,350,965

Projected Cost of MPACT

255,141

478,195

 

Calculated into the equation is the general fund subsidy for the education of every resident student.  This year the legislative session included within house bill 2 language that mandates general fund be reverted for shortfalls in meeting enrollment targets. This is a balance across the Montana University System and is calculated on the basis of biennium.  Never the less it is an issue of concern. 

The program was presented to the Board of Regents in response to their discussions and they were unanimous in saying a pilot project was needed in order to have data in place by next fall to present to the legislature to make a case for matching funds or total funding by the legislature. 

The MPACT program addresses the “tuition gap” for Montana families at or below the median income.  This is something the Governor would like to have addressed.  This is a mechanism to do that and perhaps gain his support. It will mitigate the declining pool of resident high school graduates by appealing to those that are capable.  It will improve the yield of students at the upper range of the academic profile. According to various studies, students will persist if the financial burden is eliminated, therefore the plan will improve retention. It provides an incentive for academic achievement in K-12.  Once students are aware of the requirement they will prepare.  Next years graduates will not have time to prepare.  

 

Senator Gillison asked where the initial funds will come from.

 

The President responded that the funds will come from the contingency account.  The contingency account is equal to approximately 2% of the total budget. Next year that will be about 2.3 million. 

Senator Frey is concerned that this will be a risk given the amount the contingency fund will have to cover to enrollment shortfalls this year.

The President replied that the contingency account replenishes next year. If something is not done, the account will continue to be drained. MPACT has the potential of bringing the account back up. 

 

Senator Doyle asked when the program would start to be publicized. The President answered right now.

 

Senator Dietrich asked whether this program was separate from the Capital Campaign program. It is separate, but the president has heard from groups that share the concern.  A Bitterroot foundation has indicated an interest in participating in something like this. The President does not know how many similar groups exist.

 

Senator Schuldberg asked about the impact of tuition increases.  The President responded that adjustments would be made to take into account tuition increases. 



Provost Muir

The Provost announced that UM has garnered the opportunity to host the National Conference on Undergraduate research in 2010.  This is the result of efforts of Garon Smith and others.

 

Faculty should have recently received a memo from the Provost about a subsidy for non-resident doctoral students on research grants.  If you did not receive the memo and would like one inform the Provost’s office.

 

The new admissions policy presentation at the Board of Regents was successful.  The Academic and Student Affairs committee approved the progression to phase three.  Other things are going on behind the scenes to strengthen the plan.  The general consensus is that this approach will help students be successful.

 

The non-tenurable report isn’t quite ready for presentation.  Every year tenurable faculty members are being added.  Last year the tenurable faculty numbers grew faster than enrollment and this is a positive occurrence.  

 

UFA President Kupilik

UFA President Kupilik indicated that there have been some questions regarding faculty evaluation and unit standards.  During negotiations last year there were many different proposals to change the procedure and the way unit standards were created.  Late in the process both sides agreed to remove everything from the table and just bargain compensation. This means unit standards and faculty evaluations for the next four years remain the same as they were last year. If you have any questions consult the contract.

Chair’s Report
September Board of Regents Meeting:
Chair Crepeau gave his impressions of the September Board of Regents meeting highlights.  The Regents now have committees that review various issues and report to the full Board. He attended the Academic and Student Affairs Committee meeting on Wednesday.  One of the main items discussed was the cost of textbooks.  Representatives from the campus bookstores gave presentations.  UM’s representatives provided insightful information about the publishing industry.  Soon there could be a pilot program to distribute textbooks in an innovative way--separating the intellectual property costs from the printing costs.  Students would be charged a separate fee for intellectual property, and would choose the method of delivery for the material.   This could feasibly reduce the cost of a $110 dollar textbook to $30 bound paper copy.  The bookstore is currently negotiating a pricing structure with the publishers.

Bookstore representatives came to an ECOS meeting to address the concerns expressed at the September meeting.  They explained the complexities involved with ordering and asked how the bookstore could communicate better with the faculty. The Bookstore must shop for used books early in order to save students money. They also discussed the approach they are working on to save students money.  When the bookstore is further along with the pilot program, ECOS will consider having them communicate to the Senate.

 

As the Provost mentioned earlier, phase three of UM’s new admissions policy was presented to the Academic and Student Affairs Committee and voted to approve.  This policy directs students to COT to develop the skills to be successful at the mountain campus.

 

The Committee approved the Paleontology Field Station in Glasgow Montana.  The Regents learned that MSU does not have the only known paleontologist in the state, UM Professor George Stanley is internationally know for his work in paleontology.

 

The Montana University Faculty Association (MUSFAR) met with the Regents at the Thursday morning breakfast meeting.  The new board representative for MUSFAR is Shannon Taylor, a professor in business from MSU. MUSFAR asked the Regents about the administrator salary increases and were given salary data from comparator institutions. The data showed administrator salaries at 60% and faculty salaries at 80% of comparator institutions. 

 

According to the Regents there will be faculty other than those representing faculty governance also appointed to the General Education Council.  The Deputy Commissioner of Higher Education, Roger Barber will make the selection. UM’s nominations to the General Education Council include:
                       
                        Karen Hill, Applied Arts & Science

                        John Eglin, History

                        Garon Smith, Chemistry

                        Jennifer McNulty, Math

                        Celia Winkler, Sociology

                        Audrey Peterson, Curriculum & Instruction
           

MUSFAR provided information about the steps faculty take to mitigate cost of books for students and came across as student advocates.

 

At the Thursday Board of Regents meeting Paul Polzin, the Director of the Bureau of Business and Economic Research presented the results of a the Montana Business Recruiting Experience and Worker Preparation Survey.  The results were somewhat interesting.  Only 4.5% of the respondents indicated they would utilize a customized non-degree training program. The PowerPoint presentation may be viewed at: http://www.bber.umt.edu/pubs/microsoft/brdofregentspresentation2.ppt

The plan for the construct of the Executive Education Building addition to the Gallagher Business Building can be found at the link below for those interested:

http://www.montana.edu/wwwbor/ITEM128-1012-R0905ATT2.pdf

 

Chair Crepeau will be providing a summary to the Senate of each of the Regents meetings.

 

Unit Standards Committee:

The College of Technology has a separate union and is currently in contract negotiations and is dealing with the contentious unit standards issue.

 

The Unit Standards Committee under Faculty Senate oversight is clearly a University Faculty Association contractual obligation.  Therefore, Chair Crepeau delegated the activation of the committee to a UFA member of ECOS, Linda Frey.

 

The UFA CBA calls for five-year evaluation of unit standards for compliance with current   university standards found in section 10.000.  There is a back log of standards that require review.  The University standards have not changed.  However units may have higher standards than those outline in the CBA.  One reason for an increase in standards is the desire to qualify for the Carnegie Extensive Research designation.

 

Report on Intercollegiate Athletics to the Faculty Senate

Jim Lopach, Professor in Political Science and the NCAA Faculty Athletic Representative appointed by President Denison for the past ten years introduced Athletic Director, Jim O’Day and Associate Athletic Director Jean Gee.

 

In 2004 President Dennison appointed an ad hoc Athletics Oversight Committee to consider academic reform issues in Athletics. The committee created additional responsibilities for the Faculty Athletic Representative, the Athletic Director, the University Athletic Committee, and President Dennison.  The Faculty Athletic Representative was charged with reporting to the Faculty Senate every fall on issues related to academics and athletics, thus the report today. The University Athletics Committee will report to the Senate in the spring. 

 

  1. Responsibilities of the Faculty Athletic Representative:
    The principle duties of the Faculty Athletics Representative are to represent the President and the Faculty to make sure that academic values are represented and interjected into the activities and decisions of the department of Athletics.  He is also in charge of certifying the academic eligibility of every athlete (approximately 270) twice a year.  This is done in conjunction with Jean Gee, the Athletic Academic Coordinator Laura Hinkey, Registrar Phil Bain, and with representatives from various departments when necessary to interpret rules.   He also serves on the University Athletics Committee which meets monthly to discuss a variety of oversight activities such as academic advising of athletes, grade point averages, graduation rates, gender and minority equity, and other things. Many of these items will be reported to the Senate in the spring by the University Athletics Committee Chair, Kathleen Wetsel.   Working very closely with the Associate Athletic director, he investigates, determines and reports infractions of big sky conference and NCAA rules to the conference, NCAA, and President Dennison. Lastly he attends Big Sky Conference meetings to represent UM concerning academic issues and medical hardships.   Primarily he watches for rule changes that would have a negative affect on the academic pursuit of athletes and tries to offset, mitigate or prevent them.

  2. UM Athletics recent academic record:
    Associate Athletic Director Jean Gee highlighted the Spring 2005 grade point average report. This document is distributed to faculty via campus mail every semester.  It is important to have a benchmark to see how the student athletes are doing.  Therefore the student athlete measure is compared to the general student population.  This comparison has been done for 11 years and shows that student athletes perform at a higher accumulative and term GPA than the general undergraduate student population.  This has a lot to do with NCAA rules requiring certain academic expectations for students to compete.

 

The 2004 graduation rate report shows that 70% of student athletes graduate.  This is the highest rate in the Big Sky Conference and the Department of Athletics is very proud to share this with the faculty and the state.

Jean Gee briefly explained the 2003-04 missed-instructional days report.  The high numbers listed for track are misleading.  The team has several sections (tracks) and does not send every track to each meet. Athletics have proctored exams on the road to accommodate students’ academic responsibilities.

 

The Athletic Director, Jim O’Day assured the Senate that the Department of Athletics job does not end when the student’s eligibility ends, it continues until the student graduates. 

 

 

3.  NCAA rule changes:
In August 1, 2003 new NCAA continuing eligibility rules were implemented.

The NCAA eligibility is determined by the academic progress rate (APR) and the percentage rule.  The old percentage rule was 25%, 50%, and 75%.  The new rule is 40%, 60%, 80%.  The increased standard will cause more athletics to graduate.  There are flaws in the system related to transfers, however. To address these the APR is reviewed each semester along with retention of student athletes and their eligibility.  If certain guidelines are not met the university could loose scholarship. Only three programs needed the extra measure to put them above the cut off score.  There will be schools in the conference that will loose scholarship

 

  1. Big Sky Conference rule changes:
    Big Sky Conference has stricter requirements.  As of     August 1, 2004 it requires a GPA of 1.6 after the first semester, and 2.0 after 3rd semester.  MSU wants to do away with GPA totally.  

 

  1. UM’s record of rules compliance:
    The Department of Athletics uses a self-reporting system for rules violations. The infractions are identified and reported.  More than one person is involved with reporting the violations as a method of institutional control.  The ten violations last reported are primarily related to recruiting activities (or prohibited benefits) and practice time.  There was no academic eligibility, ethical conduct, or financial aid violations. Most of the violations have to do with arcane, complex recruiting rules.  The reporting of these infractions is important because it demonstrates that the system functions well and will catch more severe infractions or prevent them from happening.   Athletics has not had an academic infraction for many years.

 

  1. Big Sky Conference developments:
    There were no issues affecting academics at the last Big Sky Conference meeting.  The     University of Northern Colorado has joined the conference.  While they can compete this year, they will not be official eligible for championships until 2007 in a few sports, and 2008 for most.  Planning the 9 team basketball schedule was challenging and resulted in a few Monday night games.

 

  1. Other topics of interest to the Faculty Senate and questions and answers:
    Jim O’Day thanked the faculty and deans for taking an interest in the student athletes.  Their involvement in recruitment has really made a difference with the athlete’s families.  

 

Jim O’Day commented on the deficit issue last year.  Athletics strives to be able to pay all of their expenses. Across the nation there are only 12 schools that can pay for their athletic programs.   These are big schools like Ohio State and Tennessee that have over 100,000 seat stadiums and television revenue. It is virtually impossible for a school our size to do this.  The goal of the Big Sky Conference is 50% institutional support and 50% private funds (ticket sales, private dollars raised, and any other revenue sources).  UM is at 70/30 where Montana State is at 40/60.  Athletics is the entertainment element of the university.  The more self sufficient athletics can be the more money available for other university needs.  Athletic events also provide economic impact for the state.  Athletics is a part of the University, is here for the students appreciates efforts of the faculty.

 

Senator Dietrich asked whether Athletics provided any support for club sports.  He had a student on the Men’s LaCross team that had to make his own arrangements with regard to finals.

 

Athletics cannot help club sports because of receiving NCAA revenues.  Athletics personnel do offer advice to club sports, but cannot coordinate the events because of resource constraints.

 

Senator Carter requested clarification regarding the missed day report.  Do the numbers reflect actual days missed or hours?  It might be more representative to indicated missed instructional hours.

The hours missed are accumulative, therefore could include partial 8 hour days.  

 

Senator Derry applauded the Athletics Department for their efforts.  He sees the dedication of the student athletes studying in the library.

 

Senator Reider requested that there be a faculty appreciation night at least once a year.  Jim O’Day responded that this is not possible for football, but will continue for basketball. 

 

Committee Reports:
ASCRC
ASCRC would like to reconfigure the Graduation Appeals Committee to assure continuity and institutional memory.  The change would add an additional faculty member to the committee and identifies the faculty members as the past chair, current chair, and chair-elect of ASCRC.   These changes are documented in the bylaw change under new business.

 

Old Business:

Voting on the General Education Committee membership bylaw amendment was postponed due to the lack of a quorum

 

New Business:

The Graduation Appeals Committee bylaw amendment was presented as a first reading.

Good and Welfare:

Senator Hand is the faculty advisor for the Lamda Alliance, a campus support group for gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered students.  She was wondering weather faculty would be interested in a training program to create safe zones.  There was an incident last week where a gay young man was threatened and stayed in his room for four days.  

 

Senator Derry indicated that the search committee for the Dean of the Library is chaired by Dean Fetz.  The vacancy announcement has recently been posted.  It can be viewed on the Human Resources web site.

 

Senator Micheleto reminded the chair that the minutes were not approved.

 

Chair Crepeau responded that according to Roberts Rules in the absence of any changes the minutes are accepted into the record.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 5:00 PM.