Board of Regents
February 2003 - MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
of the
BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
Madison, Wisconsin
UW-Madison
Held in the 1820 Van Hise Hall
Thursday, February 6, 2003
10:30 a.m.
- President Gottschalk presiding -
PRESENT: Regents Axtell, Barry, Boyle, Brandes, Burmaster, Davis, Gottschalk, Gracz, Jones, Marcovich, Mohs, Olivieri, Randall, Rosenzweig, Salas, Smith and Walsh
ABSENT: None
- - -
WELCOME TO THE NEW REGENTS
Regent President Gottschalk began the meeting by introducing four new members of the board:
Danae Davis, Director of Staffing and Diversity at Miller Brewing Company in Milwaukee, was appointed by Governor Doyle to succeed Lolita Schneiders. A graduate of UW-Oshkosh, she was honored by that institution as one of four distinguished alumni for the year 2002. She also holds a degree from the UW Law School.
Peggy Rosenzweig, who succeeds Phyllis Krutsch on the board, is a former State Senator who represented the communities of Wauwatosa, West Allis and the northwest side of Milwaukee. She began her state government career in 1982, representing Wauwatosa in the State Assembly. Regent Rosenzweig is a 1978 graduate of UW-Milwaukee and has five sons who all are graduates of UW-Madison.
Jesus Salas, who succeeds Alfred DeSimone on the board, is an instructor at Milwaukee Area Technical College and at UW-Milwaukee. Regent Salas, who has been active on a number of boards and committees related to Chicano and migratory labor issues, is a graduate of UW-Milwaukee’s School of Education and holds a Masters Degree in Political Science from UW-Madison.
David Walsh, who succeeds James Klauser on the board, is an attorney and partner in the Madison office of Foley and Lardner, specializing in telecommunications law. He has served on a number of advisory boards to UW-Madison and received the Distinguished Alumnus Award from the UW Business School in 1997. Regent Walsh holds an undergraduate degree from UW-Madison and a law degree from Harvard.
Also introduced was Mark Bradley, of Wausau, who has been nominated to the board by Governor Doyle and will fill a seat in the future.
-
Remarks by Governor Doyle
Introducing Governor Jim Doyle, Regent President Gottschalk noted that the Governor took his undergraduate degree from UW-Madison and his law degree from Harvard. He began his distinguished career of public service in the Peace Corps. After serving as a lecturer in the UW Law School and as Dane County District Attorney, he was elected to the office of Attorney General in 1990 and became Wisconsin’s 44th governor in January of this year.
Governor Doyle began his remarks by stating that he sees the UW as providing opportunity to the state and beyond, holding out the promise of a world class education to qualified Wisconsin students.
Regent Jesus Salas, he continued, is one of the many talented people who have benefited from a UW education and contributed much to the state. Growing up in a family that first came to Wisconsin to do migrant labor, he entered public school here and made his way to the UW where he found the opportunity that led to future success. The Governor stated his commitment to ensure that the UW continues to provide that opportunity to people from all backgrounds.
Turning to Wisconsin’s budgetary crisis, he stated that, while the people of the state remain strong and vibrant, state government’s fiscal situation is deeply troubled. In these difficult economic times, he said, it is necessary to protect what is most important. In that regard, he pointed out that the state faces a $452 million deficit in this year alone and a $3.2 billion deficit in the coming biennium. Stating that the nation’s economic slump is not the sole cause of the problem, he explained that Wisconsin’s situation was made worse because no money had been put aside for a rainy day.
The Governor observed that, in his travels across the state, people had made clear to him that they want the problem resolved and that they are willing to make sacrifices to get through current difficulties. Now, he said, it is up to state leadership to do what needs to be done. Therefore, he had called the Legislature into special session to deal with immediate cuts that can be made. He had proposed reductions of $161 million at this time, recognizing that there are only five months left in the fiscal year and most funds have been committed. In that regard, he expressed appreciation for President Lyall’s cooperation and willingness to work on this problem.
Stating that it is very important that the next budget be responsible, fair and balanced without raising taxes, he added that cutting spending thoroughly does not mean cutting it thoughtlessly. In that regard, he said that to slash education would undermine the asset that makes the state most attractive; to walk away from programs that provide health care to seniors and working poor would place the most vulnerable of the state’s people in jeopardy; and to walk away from obligations to local government would force those who depend on essential services like police and fire protection to pay the price.
The Governor pointed out that the long-term solution is economic growth that produces the kinds of good-paying jobs that keep university and technical college graduates in Wisconsin and that education is essential to creating economic growth. In the world economy, he indicated, Wisconsin’s generations-long commitment to education will help to position the state as a place of highly educated people and a well-trained work force able to provide the sophisticated services that are needed.
Noting that the university has a crucial role to play in that regard, he applauded the efforts made to date and commended Regent Smith for his leadership in expanding the university’s role as a vital player in the growth of Wisconsin’s economy.
He emphasized that economic opportunity, new jobs and higher wages are needed to make prosperity available to all of the state’s citizens. For that reason, he stated, education is his top priority.
The Governor emphasized, however, that the huge budget deficit means that the university, along with all other areas of state funding, will need to do more with less but will not be asked to do more than its share. These budget cuts, he said, will result in a significant reduction in the state workforce. In order to resolve all these problems, he continued, Democrats and Republicans will need to work together without excessive partisanship and with understanding that good ideas can come from both parties, as well as from other parts of state and local government and from the private sector.
In closing, he stated that his proposed budget will be a tough one but will be designed to protect Wisconsin’s basic values, the most basic being education.
Stating that the UW must be protected and improved, he pointed out that 29 of 30 high tech clusters in the nation are located near major research universities and that UW –Madison is the largest in terms of research spending of any public university in the country.
-
HIGHER EDUCATION REAUTHORIZATION ACT
President Lyall introduced David Ward, President of the American Council on Education and former chancellor of UW-Madison. The ACE represents more than 3,000 two and four-year colleges and universities, both private and public.
Dr. Ward began his presentation by citing a number of issues that overlie political deliberations in Washington about higher education: 1) The prospect of war with Iraq and related security issues; 2) Concern about deficits at both the national and state levels; and 3) The issue of accountability for higher education. He thought the great challenge will be to help Congress identify problem areas, rather than taking actions that impact higher education as a whole and may turn out to have harmful impacts. It is important, he explained, to know where members of Congress stand in these issue areas in order to work effectively with them on reauthorization of the Higher Education Act.
Another matter affecting HEA deliberations, he continued, is the politics of Congress. With the House of Representatives being highly disciplined politically, it is necessary to work with leadership in order to make progress on any given issue. In contrast, considerable bipartisan behavior is found in the Senate, making it possible to build coalitions more readily.
With regard to the executive branch, he indicated that the Department of Education is strongly committed to K-12 education and generally is not as attentive to higher education. In the White House, however, some domestic advisors are quite interested in higher education accountability matters.
To be successful in this environment, Dr. Ward felt it is best to attempt to influence HEA reauthorization in the executive branch before it goes to Congress. He thought that it would be difficult to negotiate about the bill in the House and that most negotiating would occur in the Senate. Changes made in the Senate would need to be approved through a conference committee with the House.
Noting that reauthorization of the Higher Education Act occurs every four to six years, he indicated that the most important issue involves student financial aid, the major problem being the large growth in the proportion of aid distributed by loans, while the level of grant aid, which helps those whose incomes would prevent them from attending college, has not risen nearly as rapidly. The problem is exacerbated at the state level, when tuition is raised to compensate for reductions in state support. With regard to financial aid, ACE supports: Increased funding for Pell Grants; elimination of front fees for federal student loans; increased options for loan repayment; counseling for students who encounter difficulty; discounts for those who find employment in publicly virtuous activities; and increased loan limits for those who need them.
Stating that ACE places great emphasis on access to postsecondary education for low-income students, Dr. Ward explained that, in the second half of this decade and the first half of the next, the children of immigrants will double the number of 18 year olds who want to go to college. Pressure for access will be enormous, with the brunt being felt in California, Texas and Florida, due to the compounding demographic effects of a large burst of immigration in the 1990’s.
As to the question of how the federal government can address this issue, Dr. Ward explained that the belief in Washington is that economic development eventually will resolve the states’ structural deficits and that federal spending will help to drive up employment and grow the economy.
As access to higher education has increased greatly in most states, taxpayer ability to support that level of access has been strained and the question has arisen as to what proportion of the cost should be paid by students who reap a lifetime of benefit from the education they receive. Without overt policy decisions being made, Dr. Ward said, costs have been shifted to students. While costs have increased fairly slowly and predictably, tuition has increased much faster so that on average students now pay about one-third of the cost and much more in states like Michigan and Pennsylvania.
To address this problem, he suggested rethinking financial aid and viewing it as a way to help states out of their financial deficits. The states could charge moderate tuition to be paid by those who can afford it. These tuition increases would be accompanied by a large infusion of federal financial aid that would allow states to meet the high demand for access and support those students who cannot afford the higher tuition. Private institutions, he noted, have always charged high tuition to those who can afford to pay and financed the education of low-income students. An easily understood and generous federal grant system would permit the states to decide as a matter of policy the proportion of educational cost that should be borne by students rather than simply increasing tuition in response to a budget crisis.
Turning to the matter of accountability, Dr. Ward explained that elsewhere in the world ministries of education create highly uniform systems of higher education, while the genius of higher education in this country is choice and diversity, creating the greatest range of educational options anywhere in the world. American higher education is admired for this diversity, he said, because the message of the 21st century is customization, not standardization, to meet the needs of young adults and society.
Quality control in this diverse setting, he pointed out, is achieved through accreditation. Although many find the process expensive and burdensome, he stated that accreditation still provides the best means of non-governmental regulation of quality through a peer-group structure, giving the public and the government reassurance that their money is being well spent. With the current regional organization, he observed that accreditation is achieving mixed results. He commented that what is needed is a national system with some standardization of basic issues that would also be fitted to the specific mission of the institution. He also suggested that accreditation needs to be more transparent, with Internet availability of the findings of accreditation reviews.
If accreditation could be reformed in that manner, he thought many accountability issues concerning cost could be satisfactorily addressed. As to outcomes assessment, he noted that many states, including Wisconsin, hold their higher education systems accountable for a variety of outcome indicators and it would be redundant and costly to have this process duplicated by the federal government.
Turning to another issue in reauthorization, Dr. Ward referred to Title Six of the Higher Education Act, which funds international trade and area studies. While this portion of the act deals with matters of high national priority, it has relatively little funding, and the Department of Education has decided to take some strong initiatives in this area in connection with K-12 education. In that regard, he pointed out that language acquisition needs to take place before college and, for those without language aptitude, there is not much value added in language study after age 18. One proposal, for example, that might be incorporated into Title Six is that students who show an aptitude for languages in high school might receive grants to study less commonly known languages in college, which would build a base of people with needed language skills. There also is interest in self-paced learning in languages, which is a more effective way to acquire language skills than in classes of students attempting to learn at the same pace.
Another issue for Title Six, he continued, concerns customizing and expanding programs abroad. Currently, 50% of college freshmen wish to study abroad, but only three percent actually achieve that goal. There also is interest, he indicated, in internationalizing both the undergraduate curriculum and the K-12 curriculum.
Noting that there has been a move in Congress in recent years toward less regulation of colleges and universities, he pointed out that security issues raised by the September 11th terrorist attacks have resulted in a move toward heavy re-regulation and unfunded mandates concerning international students. What needs to be done, he indicated, is to work out a system to deal with legitimate security concerns and track foreign students in an efficient and customer friendly way.
A second issue in this area, he noted, is concern in the administration about foreign students taking certain sensitive courses. Indicating that this type of issue would be very difficult to manage on the campus level, he said that ACE’s position is that if a subject is sensitive enough to be classified, it should be restricted by rules that apply to all students, both American and foreign.
A third manner of concern, he continued, is surveillance of Middle Eastern and Moslem students which needs to be done in a manner that addresses legitimate security concerns while also protecting civic liberties on campus and avoiding measures that have high costs but low outcomes.
With respect to affirmative action, Dr. Ward indicated that ACE organized a brief on the case before the Supreme Court that was joined by almost every higher education association in Washington. At this point, he explained, there are at least three positions on the matter: 1) The plaintiffs’ position that admission to college must be based solely on academic records; 2) the President’s position that there is a public interest in diversity, but that the Bakke decision does not provide a constitutional means of achieving it; and 3) the position taken by many in the higher education community that they are open to other means of achieving diversity but that, if the Bakke decision is reversed, it will be difficult to find a means to create an appropriate level of diversity, bearing in mind that the Texas solution may not be found constitutional.
In discussion following the presentation, Regent Burmaster observed that it is important to work in partnership with K-12 education in Title Two. She also suggested that loan forgiveness could be considered as a means of addressing the impending teacher shortage which would help to improve Wisconsin’s economic situation.
Dr. Ward concurred, indicated that ACE is focusing on broad policy areas, such as financial aid policy and economic recovery as a means of drawing congressional attention to the area of education.
Regent Burmaster added that it is difficult in a state like Wisconsin, with strong accountability based assessment, to implement a federally imposed system with standardized accountability for K-12 education.
Regent Boyle agreed with Dr. Ward that federally imposed uniform standards would be undesirable for higher education, and noted that the UW System’s accountability report provides a series of valuable measures. His main criticism of accreditation is that it focuses on process rather than on outcomes and does not really measure quality in a meaningful way. He asked what ACE is doing to change the criteria used by regional accrediting associations.
Dr. Ward replied that slowness in reforming accreditation to include outcomes assessment comes more from resistance by university governance groups than from resistance by accrediting agencies. Both the North Central and Western accrediting groups are now dividing the process into two stages, with the first focusing on compliance in such areas as fiscal propriety, and the second dealing with outcomes assessment. After that, findings need to be made transparent so that Congress and the public can see that these new accreditations are more about quality assessment than was the case in the past.
Noting that education today is seen as a seamless process throughout life, Regent Randall pointed out that there are other major reauthorizations taking place, such as Head Start and the Work Force Investment Act. He commented that all these acts currently before Congress demand some kind of integrated articulation, and he encouraged ACE and other organizations with advocacy responsibilities to work together on these matters.
Dr. Ward concurred, indicating that it would be helpful to involve the business community with its need for qualified workers. He felt finding a policy that other constituencies could buy into would be more beneficial than the current process in which each group lobbies for its own cause.
Regent Davis expressed interest in a needs-based tuition program and inquired about the likelihood of bipartisan support given the challenge of budget deficits.
Dr. Ward replied that it would be necessary to engage constituencies other than higher education to make the case to the Republican leadership of the House. He thought it also would be necessary to work with groups like the White House forum on business and higher education in order to generate support and mount a broad campaign.
With regard to affirmative action, Regent Davis asked about the basis of ACE’s support for the University of Michigan and whether Dr. Ward believes that there is an academic and merit basis on which admission decisions can be made.
In response, Dr. Ward indicated that ACE’s history has been strongly connected with the civil rights movement and that his predecessor was involved in helping Michigan with the case and its appeals. The organization, he added, remains a primary coordinator of most matters that have a bearing on civil rights. The Bakke decision, he pointed out, only affects about 25 universities to which admissions are highly competitive, with most others having admissions that are open enough to make it a non-issue. If the Court reverses the Bakke decision, it would infringe for the first time on the autonomy of private institutions, which is of concern to many who do not support affirmative action. The ACE’s position is based on preservation of university autonomy and on the array of variables that should be considered in admission decisions.
To the second question, he replied in the affirmative but indicated that a lot of good judgment must be involved. Noting that prediction of college success is difficult, he said the best indicator is the GPA from the last two years of high school and that the SAT is a helpful predictor in the sciences. There is a threshold level below which a student probably will not succeed in college, he said, adding that above that level prediction is difficult because there are many other factors that influence student success. In that regard, he considered it important to take some risks in admission decisions rather than limiting criteria to a narrow number of high school measures.
Regent Salas expressed interest in Dr. Ward’s comments on language acquisition and asked how bilingualism can be promoted in a political culture that has generated initiatives against bilingual programs.
In response, Dr. Ward indicated that globalization means that bilingualism will be increasingly important for people to cope as citizens of the world. While the matter is an important political debate, he noted, in 20-30 years a number of states will become bilingual regardless of any policy. To promote language acquisition, he said that language training at the secondary level needs to be improved and that language exposure should begin before high school. At this time, he felt it is being taught too late and in a way that does not work well – three credits at a time. At the university level, he suggested that a student with weak second language skills should be able to take nine credits of it in a semester to have an effective level of exposure. In addition, instructional technology is needed to provide self-paced learning, using the Internet to connect with native speakers. At this point, he felt that foreign languages are being taught quickly and effectively only in the intelligence community and the military and that most people with an undergraduate degree in a language do not speak it very well.
Speaking in opposition to affirmative action in college admissions, Regent Mohs commented that the population of the United States is strongly in favor of eliminating race preferences in admission decisions. Surveys by the Washington Post and other entities have shown 80% of respondents oppose such preferences. He found the ACE’s brief in the Michigan Case not compelling for two reasons: First, it was based on a sociological study that claimed racially diverse classes to be important in learning. This claim, he said, does not hold up to scrutiny. Second, he continued, the brief argues that universities be allowed to racially design their own classes, which requires discrimination. He also disagreed with the position that opponents of using racial preferences in admissions favor totally arithmetic admission processes. This, he said, is not the case. The belief is only that racial discrimination should not be part of the process. In conclusion, he stated that he and other opponents of racial preferences will rejoice when the racial and ethnic mix of the student body represents the nation as a whole but do not believe that adding more discrimination to cure the results of past discrimination is the proper means to achieve that goal.
Dr. Ward did not believe that the way Michigan applies preferences is discriminatory, but concurred that American democracy will be best served when higher education serves the full range of talent from its populations.
Regent Jones asked if other organizations were collaborating with the ACE on the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act.
In reply, Dr. Ward indicated that, while the current effort is to reach consensus among higher education associations, it also will be necessary to form a broad coalition with advocacy from sources outside of higher education if major gains are to be made in financial aid and other areas.
Regent Smith noted that many of the subjects addressed by Dr. Ward, including tuition, state support, accreditation and study abroad for students were among those with which the Board of Regents have been dealing for a number of years. On the matter of affirmative action, he noted that the realities of today’s world recognize the importance of diversity and asked how the ACE planned to proceed once the Supreme Court hands down its decision.
Dr. Ward replied that workshops are being planned on the basis of different hypothetical outcomes. If the plaintiffs win, he thought college applicants will contest the Texas solution, and higher education organizations would need to decide its position on defending that and other means of achieving diversity. If the court declares the Bakke solution unconstitutional and also sets forth other means to create diversity, institutions would need help in determining how best to deal with admissions in a new environment.
Chancellor Wells commented that affirmative action has not created diverse campuses and that moderate tuition with a strong financial aid component may do more to accomplish that objective.
Dr. Ward agreed that is true on a national basis but added that the elite private institutions would argue that only through Bakke-like solutions can they achieve diversity.
Referring to the administration’s position that better preparation in the secondary schools would help to solve the problems that affirmative action tries to address, Chancellor Zimpher observed that there is a disconnect in Washington between the Higher Education Act and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and a disconnect in dialog between higher education leaders and the Department of Education, along with a lack of federal incentives to create a P-16 educational system.
Dr. Ward agreed but reported that some progress is being made. For example, higher education leaders are meeting with the Department of Education and have discussed such issues as life-long learning. He felt that more discussion of higher education’s contributions to pre-college learning would be needed to interest the department in the Higher Education Act reauthorization. The administration also is interested in security and economic growth matters, both of which are areas that can be addressed by higher education.
-
2002 accountability report
President Lyall began her presentation by noting that the UW System was one of the first in the country to issue public stakeholders reports. Beginning in 1993, the UW accountability reports have shown progress on a series of indicators ranging from access rates and faculty workloads to graduation rates; credits-to-degree; research funding; facilities maintenance; student, employer, alumni and employer satisfaction ratings; study abroad; and undergraduate research opportunities.
Where possible, the report benchmarks the UW against national or state measures and its own progress over time. A balanced scorecard approach is used with recognition that the university serves multiple constituencies, some of whose expectations may conflict.
In addition to presenting 20 performance measures and how the UW is doing in comparison to benchmarks and targets, the report includes sections on the context in which the university operates and the resources available to carry out its mission, a compendium of other relevant reports, and breakdowns by campus of many measures. There also is a set of campus-specific benchmarks and measures. Four indicators common to all campuses are performance related to enrollment targets; retention/graduation targets; student engagement in co-curricular activities including internships, practica, and volunteer work; and performance related to credits-to-degree targets. Other indicators have been added by each institution to reflect its own goals and local impacts.
-
Operational Environment
President Lyall reported that demand for UW admission increased substantially as a declining economy sent more students back to college in search of degrees and professional certificates. Although fall 2002 enrollments grew 2,400 FTE over target, the state budget reduced the university’s base budget by $44 million. Despite that reduction the university sustained its commitment to implement the first half of the Economic Stimulus Package by increasing enrollments in high-demand majors and by continuing regional economic partnerships with local businesses across the state. The UW continues to diversify funding sources: GPR now provides 31% of the total budget, down from 33% at the start of the biennium, while tuition (18%), gifts and grants (29%) and program revenue (22%) provide the rest.
The UW System maintained an overall access rate of 33% of Wisconsin high school graduates, compared to a national average access rate of about 22%. The President noted that it is Wisconsin’s high college access rate that drives the higher-than-average state spending on higher education. If the state were to reduce its access rate to the national average, 8,000 fewer Wisconsin high school graduates would have the opportunity to go to college in-state each year, and the economic future of the state would be less bright.
Reporting that a UW education remains affordable compared to other states, she stated that the average cost of a UW education takes about 14% of median family income in Wisconsin compared to 18% nationally. Other states have been increasing state financial aid substantially as tuition rises, and Wisconsin last year took the important step of linking state financial aid to tuition increases as a way to maintain affordability.
Instructional workloads have shifted as campuses work to accommodate base budget cuts and maintain access to courses. Campuses have filled some faculty vacancies with instructional academic staff with the result that faculty now teach 59% of total student credit hours, instructional staff teach 33%, and graduate assistants teach 8%.
External research funding rose by $41 million last year, reflecting a continuing flow of research advances in biotechnology, genetics, agrigenetics, and engineering materials, as well as the selection of UW campuses as national demonstration sites for important research in teaching and the application of humanities and social sciences to national problems. The President noted that research generates thousands of good-paying jobs statewide and helps Wisconsin retrieve a portion of the funds the state sends to Washington each year. UW research has generated more than $1 billion in economic impact throughout the state, making it one of the state’s most important industries and a key to growing future incomes in Wisconsin. She added, however, that uncertainty about the federal budget deficit and the possibility of war may cloud future prospects for continued growth in research budgets. The UW will be asking Wisconsin’s congressional delegation to sustain the national investment in research.
-
2002-03 Accountability Indicators
Goal 1: Ensure widespread access and increase the pool of eligible applicants
With regard to this goal, President Lyall reported that the UW has done well in maintaining service rates for traditional Wisconsin high school graduates (33%), increasing participation in pre-college programs (up about 27%) and expanding distance education opportunities statewide (enrollments up 24% and course offerings up 12%). Pre-college programs served more than 10,000 students last year, up from 8,000 the year before. Enrollments of new freshman and degrees granted to students of color rose 7%. It remains a challenge to increase service to non-traditional students and to bring the service rate for students of color (23%) closer to the overall rate of 33%.
Goal 2: Increase persistence and graduation rates
President Lyall reported that both second-year retention rates (79.5%) and six-year graduation rates (61.9%) exceed their national benchmarks of 72% and 48% respectively. The second-year persistence rate for students of color (74%) is above the national average. A challenge for the future will be to meet new benchmarks by increasing the second-year persistence rate to 82% and the six-year graduation rate to 64% with the fall 2004 cohort of entering students.
UW students rate overall academic support services higher than other institutions nationally, but significantly fewer UW graduates rate the quality of their academic advising as good or excellent. Advising has remained a top priority for budget requests and students at several institutions have supported differential tuition initiatives to improve advising. The university will continue to address this challenge within budget constraints.
Goal 3: Improve learning competencies and foster critical thinking skills
With regard to this goal, President Lyall reported that a large share of UW graduates (75%) believe their education helped them think critically and apply theories and concepts to practical problems. These responses equal the national benchmark responses from other four-year institutions. UW graduates perform beyond the benchmarks in their pass rates on professional exams. A challenge in this area is to ensure that programs keep up with professional practice standards that are rising steadily and often have significant associated costs.
Goal 4: Provide students the ability to function in the global community
It was reported by President Lyall that the number of bachelor’s degree recipients who studied abroad for a semester or longer rose slightly (from 3,212 to 3,336) over the past year, constituting about 8.5% of all bachelor’s degree graduates, compared to about 3% nationally. Causes for a slowdown in study abroad may include the September 11th terrorist attacks, along with the recession and its impact on families’ ability to pay for there experiences.
A survey of recent graduates indicates that significantly fewer UW graduates compared to the national benchmark say that their education contributed to understanding people of other racial or ethnic backgrounds or afforded the opportunity to converse with students whose personal values, political opinions, or religious beliefs differ from their own.
Goal 5: Provide student opportunities for guided research, mentoring, and citizenship learning
With regard to this goal, President Lyall reported that UW graduates participated more in co-curricular activities and did more academic preparation outside of class in teams or other collaborative modes, but had somewhat fewer internship opportunities than national counterparts. UW graduates rate their opportunities to talk with faculty about career plans and their participation in community-based projects far above national averages, but indicate that their opportunities to work with faculty on undergraduate research projects lagged behind other universities. Noting that undergraduate research efforts are relatively new, she expected this indicator to rise over the coming years.
Regarding student use of instructional technology, UW graduates used e-mail more often than national counterparts to communicate with instructors, but used the Internet less often to complete academic assignments, and indicated that their UW education gave them somewhat fewer personal computing skills than they would have wished to gain in college.
Goal 6: Stewardship of resources
It was reported by President Lyall that the UW is meeting its targets for investment in faculty professional development, for keeping administrative costs low, and for reducing the number of credits taken by undergraduates. Both faculty and student satisfaction with availability and quality of computing services is rising. Enrollments in collaborative degree programs involving two or more UW institutions rose, as did the number of 2+2 and other articulation agreements with Wisconsin Technical College institutions. Substantial progress has been made in upgrading classrooms with basic technology, but significant needs still remain to equip classrooms with full distance learning technologies. In that regard, the current state deficit may further constrain progress if capital budget allocations for renovation and maintenance are reduced or frozen.
Overall, the President stated, the UW met or exceeded targets on 11 out of 20 measures; seven measures showed mixed progress; and two (study abroad and increased understanding of racial/ethnic differences) remain challenging.
The good performance documented in this report, President Lyall emphasized, reflects the hard work of thousands of faculty and staff, the leadership of chancellors and public support for the university’s mission. Budget cutting challenges, however, are forcing tough choices and will require even greater efforts if the university is to maintain its core capacity to serve Wisconsin in the future.
The President indicated that the report documents a number of continuing challenges and tradeoffs: Substitution of instructional academic staff for faculty as budgets and positions are cut; the struggle to maintain aging buildings and adapt them to modern instructional needs; the effort to increase retention/graduation rates by improving advising; the need to balance service to traditional and non-traditional students; and the need to balance access and affordability. An open dialog with students, elected officials, graduates and the public is needed, she said, about these tradeoffs and where they are taking the university in the long term.
In closing, President Lyall observed that all share a desire to maintain the long-term capacity of the UW System to educate Wisconsin’s sons and daughters and contribute to the state’s economic recovery. In the year to come, it will be necessary to ensure that, as required cuts are made, the core capacity to serve Wisconsin’s future is not sacrificed.
In discussion following the presentation, Regent Salas expressed particular interest in student access and advising and suggested that institutional reports be made uniform in providing breakdowns of access for students of color by racial/ethnic groups. Consistency in reporting, he indicated, would help in analyzing such problems as the gap in graduation rates between different minority groups and other students. He also suggested that the UW adopt the US census means of breaking the Latino grouping into its respective sub-groups.
Regent Axtell pointed out that the study-abroad participation rate of 8% shows substantial progress from the 4% rate five years ago. He also thought that the report should reflect the fact that the 25% target is an ambitious ten-year goal and that the UW is not way below its target at this time. While the current budget contains $1 million per year for study-abroad grants, he was concerned that future budget cuts would diminish such opportunities. He suggested that alternate means be explored for supporting deserving students, such as asking campus foundations to seek corporate support so that graduates will have the advantage of these experiences when the enter the work force.
Noting that numbers of non-traditional students have declined over the past 10 years, Regent Axtell asked for an update on what proportion of new applicants are non-traditional students and what can be done to increase service to those students specified in the UW’s Enrollment Management 21 plan.
Inquiring about use of survey results in the accountability report, Regent Axtell noted that a major indicator of quality is satisfaction of graduates and employers with the education they have received. Associate Vice President Frank Goldberg explained that surveys are incorporated on a three-year cycle. The National Survey of Student Engagement was used in the first year, followed by a survey of recent graduates. An employer survey that will give include appropriate benchmarks is being sought.
Regent Axtell added that accountability reports originally were intended to earn flexibilities from the state, many of which had not been forthcoming. He suggested better marketing and communication of the report as a powerful measure of accountability. Employer and alumni surveys, he emphasized, are strong indicators of customer satisfaction and provide the report with increased credibility.
Expressing particular interest in the advising issue, Regent Jones said that his experience as a student has borne out the view that students consider this issue a top-priority concern. He asked how anticipated budget reductions will affect student ability to receive proper advising and to graduate on time. The issue, he pointed out, affects the UW’s ability to properly steward taxpayer dollars and to make sure that students become productive, taxpaying citizens.
In response, President Lyall indicated that it would be ideal if students could be required to see an advisor at least once a year and perhaps once a semester. However, she noted, the university lacks the personnel needed to provide that level of service and continues to struggle to provide adequate advising staff. In addition, coming budget cuts are expected to take more positions from the university at a level that will affect all services. While technology could be used to provide some additional advising, she observed that the problem can only be addressed adequately by providing access to advising staff on a fast turnaround basis.
Regent Jones commended student, chancellors, faculty and staff for their efforts to find different and creative ways to address this issue. Recognizing that tough choices will have to be made, he hoped it would be possible to preserve the student/academic advisor ratio because of the important impact of advising on retention and graduation.
Commending President Lyall for an excellent accountability report, Regent Olivieri commented that it is one of the most important documents the board receives and that it measures progress toward reaching the board’s priority goals. In terms of the report’s message, he felt that there are three areas of particular interest to the public. First, in the area of providing student access, the UW continues to do very well. Second, in graduating students, the UW is making good progress toward its goals and making continuing to improve in that area, although there remain concerns about the gap in graduation rates for students of color. Third, he thought the public is very interested in how well prepared students are for their careers after graduation. Data in this area shows UW students achieve high marks on graduate and professional school admission tests and in other areas. He suggested that these three points be emphasized in articulating the message of the report.
With regard to student access, Regent Olivieri noted the Governor’s earlier comments on the importance of access to the state’s economy and the commitment to opportunity that the university represents. In making the difficult choices ahead, he urged that enrollments not be reduced in attempts to cope with budget reductions.
In the area of credits to degree, he pointed out that the report shows continued progress in reducing credits without diminishing quality. Noting that this is an important efficiency measure, he observed that some campuses have made exceptional progress and commended the chancellors and faculty for their efforts in that regard.
In that fund raising is an increasingly important part of a chancellor’s role, Regent Olivieri noted that the report does not measure progress in raising non-GPR revenue except for research funds, and suggested that goals be set in this area and progress measured on an annual basis.
Regent President Gottschalk noted that, because these funds are raised by private foundations, there is a question about including them in the accountability report.
Regent Rosenzweig recalled that she and others had not focused on the UW’s accountability reports when she served in the Legislature and suggested that it might be helpful to modify the format in order to facilitate campus comparisons and to show progress over time. She also thought survey information is important to show how graduates are faring. The question, she observed, is how to best draw attention to the very good story that the report has to tell.
With regard to peer comparisons, Regent Walsh suggested that comparisons to Big Ten states and other nearby peers would be more meaningful to the Legislature than national comparisons. He asked about the availability of that kind of data.
Dr. Goldberg noted that the peer data in the report are for public universities nationally and that different UW institutions have different peer groups.
Regent Boyle indicated that the Education Committee will try to identify a small number of quality-related factors that can be used in a more simplified message to various stakeholders.
Regent Mohs agreed with the importance of selecting key indicators and focusing on them in order to persuasively convey the report’s message. He expressed concern about the reduction in courses taught by faculty, which is a measure of quality on which elite universities rank high, and about the possibility of reducing the number of advisors who are needed to maintain quality service to students.
Regent Marcovich observed that, while the accountability report should receive an “A” grade, efforts to convey its message deserve only a “C”. He suggested that it might be helpful for regents to engage legislators in face-to-face discussions about the report and answer their questions and concerns.
Regent President Gottschalk suggested that meeting with the appropriate committees in both houses would be the best place to start such a dialog.
Regent Davis concurred, adding that communication needs to be ongoing, rather than limited to one meeting. She welcomed the opportunity to join in marketing the success story contained in the report and agreed that focus should be placed only on key elements, candidly identifying what is going well, what challenges remain, and what is being done about them.
She also felt there are connections that could be further explored among graduation rates, study abroad participation, and preparing for diversity in the world. If these areas were viewed together rather than as separate issues, she thought some solutions might be identified that would be helpful in all three areas.
With regard to surveying employers, she suggested working with universities that may already have done effective employer surveys and with organizations such as the Milwaukee Metropolitan Association of Commerce or the Greater Milwaukee Committee.
Regent Smith suggested that it would be helpful to be specific in identifying what legislative actions the university would like to have taken to deal with particular issues.
Regent Axtell agreed, noting that when the report was first created the objective was to achieve specific flexibilities that would give the President of the System the CEO powers needed to be held accountable for results. He thought there had not been an effective effort to keep that goal in the forefront.
President Lyall noted that flexibilities granted by the state over the past decade have allowed the university to serve about 16,000 more students than peers with the same budget.
Regent Barry suggested producing a list of all state-mandated reports and that the new administration might be amenable to eliminating some of minimal value. In addition, he thought the value of the accountability report should be highlighted.
Discussion was concluded and the meeting adjourned at 1:50 p.m.
_____________________________
Judith A. Temby, Secretary
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
of the
BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
Madison, Wisconsin
UW-Madison
Held in the 1820 Van Hise Hall
Friday, February 7, 2003
9:00 a.m.
________________________________________________________________________
REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD.. 1
Resolutions of Appreciation: 1
Resolution of Appreciation: Alfred S. De Simone. 2
Resolution of Appreciation: James R. Klauser 4
Resolution of Appreciation: Phyllis Krutsch. 5
Resolution of Appreciation: Regent Lolita Schneiders. 7
Report on the December 13th meeting of the Educational Communications Board 8
Report on the January 28th meeting of the Wisconsin Technical College System Board 9
Report of the February 5th meeting of the Hospital Authority Board.. 9
Funds from Blue Cross/Blue Shield.. 9
Milwaukee Partnership Academy Presentation.. 9
Appreciation to Governor Doyle for his Visit and Comments on Budgetary Challenges 10
REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE SYSTEM... 11
Passing of Special Friends. 15
report of the business and finance committee.. 17
Program Review of Stewardship of Art, Science, and Special Library Collections 17
Quarterly Gifts, Grants, and Contracts Report.. 18
Report of the Vice President.. 18
UW System Trust Funds Acceptance of Bequests. 18
Principal Expenditure UW System Trust Funds: Louise C. Smith Bequest 19
UW-Stevens Point: Contract Extension with Chartwells. 19
Report of the Education Committee.. 19
Federal Higher Education Reauthorization Act and Wisconsin.. 19
Accountability and Quality in a Time of Budget Reduction.. 19
Report of the Senior Vice President.. 20
report of the physical planning and funding committee.. 21
Report of the Assistant Vice President.. 21
UW-Madison: Authority to Construct a Botany Garden Expansion Project 22
UW-Oshkosh: Authority to Construct a Titan Stadium Maintenance Project 22
UW-Whitewater: Authority to Execute a Land Use Agreement and Accept a Gift-in-Kind. 23
communications, petitions, memorials. 23
Memorial Resolution: Dr. Laurel Blair Salton Clark and the Crew of the Space Shuttle Columbia. 24
UW-Madison: Honorary Degrees. 25
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
of the
BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
Madison, Wisconsin
UW-Madison
Held in the 1820 Van Hise Hall
Friday, February 7, 2003
9:00 a.m.
- President Gottschalk presiding -
PRESENT: Regents Axtell, Barry, Boyle, Brandes, Davis, Gottschalk, Gracz, Jones, Marcovich, Mohs, Olivieri, Randall, Rosenzweig, Salas, Smith and Walsh
ABSENT: Regent Burmaster
- - -
The minutes of the December 5 and 6, 2002 meetings stood approved as distributed.
- - -
REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD
Resolution of Appreciation: Alfred S. DeSimone
Presenting a resolution of appreciation for Alfred S. DeSimone, who resigned from the board after serving for almost eight years, Regent Marcovich remarked that Regent DeSimone had been a voice of reason and common sense who always kept foremost in mind the board’s primary duty to educate students. He and his wife, Bernie, also had been very generous in their financial gifts to the university.
The following resolution was adopted by acclamation, with a standing ovation in honor of Regent Emeritus DeSimone.
Resolution of Appreciation: Alfred S. De Simone
Resolution 8650: WHEREAS, Alfred S. De Simone has actively served the citizens of Wisconsin with vigorous enthusiasm and spirited commitment for seven years and beyond as a member of the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents; and
WHEREAS, Regent De Simone has offered valuable guidance for the duration of his service as a member of both the Physical Planning and Funding Committee and the Committee on Student Discipline and Other Student Appeals; and
WHEREAS, he has advanced the sound fiscal management of the UW System through his membership on the Business and Finance Committee and Audit Subcommittee; and
WHEREAS, he served on the Special Regent Committee for UW-Oshkosh Chancellor search and the Regent Committee for UW-Parkside Chancellor search, which resulted in the successful appointments of Chancellor Richard Wells and Chancellor John Keating; and
WHEREAS, Regent De Simone is a celebrated alumnus of UW-Madison and UW-Milwaukee, and the UW System is grateful for his ardent support as a member of the board of the University of Wisconsin Foundation; and
WHEREAS, throughout his meritorious career he has personally promoted the excellence of the UW System, having served as president of the University of Wisconsin Alumni Association, president of the alumni club in Kenosha and charter president of the UW-Parkside Foundation; and
WHEREAS, in the full spirit of the Wisconsin Idea, Regent De Simone has served the state of Wisconsin with great honor and distinction by devoting his time, energy and dynamic leadership to championing the UW System for nearly four decades;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System commends Regent Emeritus Alfred S. De Simone for his outstanding service and enduring dedication to the state of Wisconsin and the institutions of the UW System.
Expressing gratitude for the recognition, Regent DeSimone wished the new regents as much enjoyment and dedication as he had experienced during his tenure on the board.
He recalled working on behalf of the UW for 36 years in a variety of capacities, beginning in 1965 when he agreed to help the UW-Madison Athletic Department resolve some financial debt. The university continued to draw on his fund-raising and leadership skills as a member, Chair of External Relations, and President of the Wisconsin Alumni Association. He also served for 12 years on the UW Foundation Board where he worked with former Chancellor David Ward on the successful initiative that matched money from the foundation and the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation with state dollars to boost funding for the university. He also had helped raise funds for the university as a member of the Bascom Hill Society and by successfully promoting legislation to authorize the sale of license plates bearing logos of UW institutions. Eight years ago, he had been appointed to the Board of Regents by Governor Thompson.
In conclusion, he noted his pride in having raised funds and personally given gifts to the university for over 35 years and he promised to stay involved in helping the UW in its continuing work with the Legislature and in other areas. Finally, he expressed special appreciation that members of the board are not concerned with personal agendas but are focused on what will benefit the university, its students and the state.
Regent President Gottschalk presented a commendation from Governor Doyle for Regent DeSimone’s “outstanding service and enduring dedication to the State of Wisconsin and the University of Wisconsin System”.
-
Regent Smith presented the following resolution of appreciation for James R. Klauser on his departure from the board, and it was adopted by acclamation.
Resolution of Appreciation: James R. Klauser
Resolution 8651: WHEREAS, James R. Klauser has benefited the citizens of Wisconsin with distinguished service during his nearly two years as a member of the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents; and
WHEREAS, Regent Klauser has championed to the citizens of Wisconsin the significant contributions of the UW System to the state’s economic prosperity, social progress and competitive advantage in the global marketplace; and
WHEREAS, as chair of the Business and Finance Committee, Regent Klauser has helped the UW System to be a prudent, effective and efficient steward of fiscal resources; and
WHEREAS, his memberships on the Executive, Personnel and Teaching Excellence Awards committees have furthered the excellence and quality of faculty, staff and students throughout the entire UW System; and
WHEREAS, Regent Klauser’s service to the UW System adds to a distinguished career that includes his tenure as Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Administration, special counsel to the Governor and memberships on scores of state boards and commissions; and
WHEREAS, as a graduate of UW-Madison, Regent Klauser understands and appreciates the influence, quality and impact of public higher education in Wisconsin and has done everything he can to see that others might benefit from a UW System education; and
WHEREAS, Regent Klauser personifies the spirit of the Wisconsin Idea by his devotion of time, energy and careful leadership beyond the boundaries of expectation, positively impacting every UW institution across the state;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System commends Regent Emeritus James R. Klauser for his extraordinary service and skilled stewardship of higher education in Wisconsin.
Regent Klauser, who was unable to attend the meeting, had been honored at dinner the previous evening.
-
Presenting a resolution of appreciation for Phyllis Krutsch on her departure from the Board, Regent Mohs recalled that, when she retired from the board after completing her first term, she invited him as her successor to his first function as a regent: a conference on effective teaching of American history. Through this and other activities, he came to understand her deep commitment to education on many levels. He also expressed gratitude for her journeyman work as Chair of the Committee on Board Effectiveness, noting that her expertise and effort in this area has been of great benefit to the board.
The following resolution was adopted by acclamation, with a standing ovation for Phyllis Krutsch.
Resolution of Appreciation: Phyllis Krutsch
Resolution 8652: WHEREAS, Phyllis Krutsch has provided the citizens of Wisconsin with outstanding service as a member of the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents; and
WHEREAS, in her two terms as a Regent, she has provided more than a decade of service to the UW System, advocating the significant contributions of the university to the state’s economy, quality of life and unique position as a world leader in public higher education; and
WHEREAS, as chair of the Committee on Board Effectiveness, Regent Krutsch has helped the UW System Board of Regents to operate more effectively, efficiently and productively; and
WHEREAS, her memberships on the Business and Finance and Academic Staff Awards committees and her liaison to the Association of Governing Boards have supported quality improvements throughout the entire UW System; and
WHEREAS, Regent Krutsch’s service to the UW System Board of Regents underscores a distinguished career of public service which includes, among others, two terms on the school board in her home community of Washburn; and
WHEREAS, as a graduate of UW-Madison, Regent Krutsch values the influence, quality and impact of public higher education in Wisconsin and has done everything she can to see that others might benefit from a UW System education; and
WHEREAS, Regent Krutsch exemplifies the spirit of the Wisconsin Idea through her commitment of time, energy and thoughtful leadership, and has positively affected citizens in every community in the state;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System commends Regent Emeritus Phyllis Krutsch for her outstanding service and effective leadership on behalf of higher education in Wisconsin.
Expressing appreciation for this recognition, Regent Emeritus Krutsch stated that it has been a great privilege and wonderful experience to serve on the board. In that regard, she noted that her first term, from 1990-1997, had been followed by an opportunity to study public university trusteeship. Being reappointed to the Board of Regents after completing that study allowed her to share some of what she had learned with the board.
While the state and university are facing very challenging times, she observed, the UW is well positioned as a leader in higher education in terms of the opportunities offered to the citizens of the state and is in the top tier of universities on important measures such as access and affordability for students. From her experience as liaison to the Association of Governing Boards, she knew that the UW System is viewed as a high quality educational system. This excellent reputation, along with a highly regarded system president, she noted, makes it possible to attract outstanding campus leaders, including a stellar group of chancellors.
Having a system-wide governing board, Regent Krutsch pointed out, gives Wisconsin advantages other states do not have in that the board is positioned to make decisions in the interests of the state as a whole.
In determining system-wide priorities, she noted that the board must consider the strengths of each institution and how resources can be deployed in creative ways to maximize student access through means such as enhanced collaboration with the technical colleges. In that regard, she pointed out that the national report card considered access to postsecondary education as a whole, rather than access to four-year colleges alone. Noting that advanced placement courses provide another avenue of access, she suggested creative thinking about how talented retiring high school teachers might contribute in that regard.
She also recommended that attention be paid to the kinds of information needed to make decisions on a strategic, rather than an opportunistic, basis. In that regard, she urged further attention to thoughtful analysis of institutional, as well as system-wide statistics, when considering how to make best use of resources and that care be taken in distinguishing between the kind of data the board needs for thoughtful policy-making versus what data may be used for public relations.
She observed that the board is one of the strengths to the UW System and that one of the strengths of the board is its sense of collegiality. Noting that this does not exist automatically and has not always been present on other boards she has studied, she urged that the board be vigilant in protecting and cherishing its tradition of collegiality and open discussion. Another reasons that the system concept works well, she remarked, is that regents do not bring to the board loyalties to specific campuses; rather, they look across the entire system for the best opportunities to deliver highest quality education in the most cost-effective way.
Regent President Gottschalk indicated that Regent Krutsch had offered to come to the board’s retreat in the summer and continue to share her expertise in examining the board’s operation.
-
Regent Brandes presented the following resolution of appreciation for Lolita Schneiders on her departure from the board, and it was adopted by acclamation.
Resolution of Appreciation: Regent Lolita Schneiders
Resolution 8653: WHEREAS, Lolita Schneiders has served the citizens of Wisconsin with commitment, vitality and grace during her term as a member of the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents; and
WHEREAS, in the tradition of sifting and winnowing, Regent Schneiders provided thoughtful study and analysis as a member and vice chair of the Physical Planning and Funding committee; and
WHEREAS, she has served as chair and member of the Academic Staff Awards for Excellence committee, whereupon she led efforts to recognize the institutional loyalty, professionalism and devotion of academic staff members who serve students and the public; and
WHEREAS, all sectors of public higher education in Wisconsin benefited from her insight as the Regent member on the Wisconsin Technical College System Board; and
WHEREAS, having 16 years experience as a state representative, and having served as a member of the State Building Commission and the Joint Finance Committee, her support for the UW System underscores her dedication to public service in the state of Wisconsin; and
WHEREAS, Regent Schneiders is a longtime friend of the university, having graduated from Central State College (now UW-Stevens Point) with a degree in education, having served on the Friends of the Golda Meir Library Board, and having continued membership on the UW-Milwaukee Board of Directors for the Friends of the School of Education; and
WHEREAS, by devoting her time, energy and attentiveness to state citizens and students from throughout the UW System, she has served the state in true fulfillment of the Wisconsin Idea;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System commends Regent Emeritus Lolita Schneiders for her remarkable tenure and honorable service to the citizens of Wisconsin and the students of the UW System.
Regent Schneiders, who was unable to attend the meeting, had been honored at a dinner the preceding evening.
-
Report on the December 13th meeting of the Educational Communications Board
The regents received a written report on the December 13th meeting of the Educational Communications Board.
-
Report on the January 28th meeting of the Wisconsin Technical College System Board
Referring to a written report on the January 28th meeting of the Wisconsin Technical College System Board, Regent Barry, President of the WTCS Board, noted that at every meeting there are a number of new program approvals and program discontinuances that are evidence of the continual refocusing and reallocating that is done to respond to changing needs. Major themes recently have been initiatives in health care, manufacturing and technology. With regard to the former, he indicated that a $23 million Health Science Center will be constructed at Northwest Wisconsin Technical College. Funding sources include $19 million in federal funds, obtained with the leadership of Congressman Obey, and alliances with several health care providers in the area.
-
Report of the February 5th meeting of the Hospital Authority Board
A written report was provided on the February 5th meeting of the Hospital Authority Board.
-
Funds from Blue Cross/Blue Shield
Regent Boyle, who serves as liaison to the Public and Community Health Oversight and Advisory Committee, reported that Blue Cross/Blue Shield have sold some of their stocks in converting to a non-profit organization. This first sale is expected to net about $35 million for each of the state’s two medical schools, with 35% going to community projects and 65% to research. Mandated by the Insurance Commissioner’s order in this matter was establishment of an advisory committee made up of four members from the medical faculty and four community health advocates. That committee has been selected and has met frequently in the past months to establish criteria and priorities for distribution of the funds and ensure that the commissioner’s order is complied with. The results of these efforts will be brought to the Board of Regents in April for approval. Funds will be located in the UW-Madison Foundation and distributed administratively through the UW Medical School.
-
Milwaukee Partnership Academy Presentation
Reporting on a presentation made recently by the Milwaukee Partnership Academy to the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education, Regent Randall noted that the conference was attended by 1,500 persons, including representatives of UW teacher education programs. It is clear, he observed, that Milwaukee’s initiative to bring together partners for KP-16 education is unique in the nation and is being closely watched.
Noting that the four-year-old partnership has enjoyed the ongoing support of the Board of Regents, he said that a primary goal is to improve teacher quality which also is one of the board’s priorities. A second goal is to increase student achievement at all educational levels – specifically to insure that all students in the Milwaukee Public Schools are able to read, write and do math at grade level. As a means of reaching this goal, literacy coaches have been placed in each of the schools.
A third goal is to address systematic issues across educational institutions, which has involved participation of schools of education in the Milwaukee area, along with participation by former Lieutenant Governor Farrow and by Regent Burmaster in her role as State Superintendent of Public Instruction.
With respect to funding these initiatives, meetings had been held with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which was considering a request to support reorganization of the Milwaukee Public High Schools – an initiative put forth by Superintendent of Schools Bill Andrekopoulos. The Partnership Academy has adopted that goal and also is pursuing grants from the Joyce Foundation and the National Science Foundation. If all were awarded, the grants could bring in more than $10 million to further the work of the partnership. The MPA has hired two directors: Christine Anderson and Dan Donder who are running the operation on a day-to-day basis.
In conclusion, Regent Randall stated that the continued support of the Board of Regents and other partners is needed to make a real difference in the performance and achievement of young people in the Milwaukee Public Schools. If that does not occur, he noted, it will be more difficult to improve university access for students of color and to improve the work force of the state.
-
Appreciation to Governor Doyle for his Visit and Comments on Budgetary Challenges
Regent President Gottschalk expressed appreciation to Governor Doyle for taking time from his busy schedule to speak to the board the preceding day. Noting that his visit illustrates his high regard for and commitment to the UW, Regent Gottschalk was heartened by the Governor’s heartfelt historical and contemporary appreciation for the university and its contributions to the well being of Wisconsin citizens.
However, he said, the state faces daunting obstacles in attempting to make ends meet. As the Governor mentioned, recent fiscal estimates have shown the state budget for 2002-03 to be almost $400 million out of balance. The Governor asked the Legislature to consider cutting $161.5 million from state spending this year. In that regard, Regent Gottschalk stated the university’s gratitude for exempting instruction and research from that reduction. However, it will be necessary to cut another $6.9 million from institutional support with five months remaining in the fiscal year if the Legislature approves the Governor’s plan. This will be accomplished, he emphasized, with no adverse impact on enrollment.
In a national context, he pointed out that states across the country are experiencing similar financial difficulties and that many universities are being asked to cut their budgets in the midst of the academic year. With massive deficits looming for Wisconsin in the next biennium, there is every reason to believe that the UW’s fiscal situation will get worse before it gets better.
Turning to the accountability report presented the preceding day, Regent Gottschalk indicated that the UW met or exceeded its targets in eleven categories, including access, retention and graduation rates. Areas needing improvement include providing an environment that fosters ability to function in a world community and increasing access and success rates for students of color.
The funding situation, he pointed out, directly affects the ability to meet and achieve future goals. While 11 of 20 targets were met this year, 13 were met in 2002 and 14 in 2001. Noting that reduced funding reduces the capacity to mount programs and provide student services needed to achieve these goals, he stated concern that budget cuts in a GPR student support base already $1,000 below the national average are taking their toll.
The accountability report, he observed, is a national model of ways to benchmark the progress of higher education institutions on important measures like retention and graduation rates.
In conclusion, he stated appreciation for the observations of David Ward, President of The American Council on Education, about the Higher Education Reauthorization Act and for the UW System’s recommendations that President Lyall forwarded to Congress.
- - -
REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE SYSTEM
Noting that the Governor’s budget address is to be delivered on February 18th, President Lyall stated that the UW must be part of the solution to the deficit and UW campuses have been working since last November to identify priorities and potential cuts to programs and positions. This is a process that requires consultation with faculty, staff, and students, and system-wide coordination among institutions to ensure that a balance of programs is maintained across the system. The magnitude of the cut, its timing, how much can be offset with tuition increases and what provisions may be made for increases in financial aid will affect the final decisions. In preparing for these cuts, the President noted that the institutions are still absorbing $51 million in base cuts since school started last year.
Since last fall, she continued, campuses have been making cutbacks wherever they could without affecting the students enrolled for 2002-03. All campuses have made administrative cuts, including:
- Reducing GPR travel by more than $1 million (about 50%). This has restricted faculty travel to professional meetings and student opportunities for field study.
- Printed matter and publications have been restricted to information that parents and students need to select a school, a major, and courses, along with information directed to alumni and donors as part of fundraising efforts. From now on, publications will carry a disclaimer when they are not published with GPR funds.
- Advertising has been eliminated except for job notices that are legally required and public events information that serves the local community.
- There has been selective replacement of vacancies to maintain instructional capacity to serve the fall 2003 entering class. The UW System has reduced salaries and personnel costs by more than $20 million and nearly 300 positions in 2002-03, a year when enrollments exceeded targets by 2,600 FTE.
These personnel cuts have had a range of impacts, including: reduced library hours; elimination of risk management and security staff; elimination of positions in accounting and psychological testing; deferred replacements of staff in alumni relations, custodial positions, and information systems; and reduction of student work-study positions.
Turning to the future, she observed that the extent of future reductions in faculty and staff will depend on the size of the 2003-05 cuts and any offsetting tuition revenues.
To manage future cuts, she suggested the following principles:
First, whatever cuts are necessary in the short run, the UW should work to preserve its long-run capacity to serve students and that state.
Second, in keeping with efforts to minimize administrative costs, the University first has looked to cut administrative expenses that are least related to serving students, meeting legal accountability responsibilities, and generating external revenues. This will mean slower service and longer wait times for students, parents, legislators and other constituents.
Third, the university should look to eliminate or merge academic programs and majors that have small enrollments or parallel programs elsewhere, taking care to coordinate such eliminations across the system. For students, this may mean that the majors and programs they want can be obtained only at one or two campuses in the system. In some cases, they may need to apply out-of-state for specialized and especially expensive programs.
Both administrative and program cuts, she pointed out, require elimination of positions and personnel. Because the budget is 85% personnel costs, large dollar savings cannot be generated without affecting jobs and people. These decisions, she continued, will be made conscientiously, observing administrative rules and campus procedures for notice periods and appeals, and every effort will be made to assist employees who are laid off in finding new opportunities within the UW and state government.
Fourth, in order to mitigate the effects of large base cuts on student access, the university should support a move-to-the-midpoint policy for tuition, coupled with matching need-based financial aid. Thus, the President said, state subsidy dollars should be removed first from those that can afford to pay and last from those least able to pay. The move to the midpoint should not occur all in one year and financial aid should at least parallel the rate of tuition. Noting that current tuition levels are at the bottom of the university’s peers, she observed that moving to the midpoint would implement the regents’ long-standing policy of moderate and predictable tuition.
Fifth, President Lyall stated, after all these steps have been taken – cutting administrative costs, eliminating programs, and moving tuition to the midpoint – if further position/personnel reductions are necessary, there may be a need to review and adjust enrollment targets to reflect the elimination of faculty and staff.
She emphasized that adjusting enrollments is the fourth – not the first – step in the process and would be driven only by necessary reductions in faculty and staff that eliminate the ability to provide the sections, labs, and other educational services that students need to graduate in timely fashion. The UW’s obligation, she noted, is to serve its students well at whatever scale is possible with available resources.
Finally, she indicated that there are a number of restructuring options that could be examined to reposition UW institutions over the long run to operate with much reduced state support. These might include: Exploring the “Cornell model” that privatizes certain professional schools and programs within the university or charter status for the UW System. Noting that each of these options has pros and cons that should be carefully weighed, she remarked that, depending on the depth and permanency of the ongoing budget reduction, restructuring may be a way to meet the goal of preserving the university’s core mission and capacity to serve Wisconsin.
-
Noting that small businesses (those employing fewer than 100 people) generate 80% of all new jobs and that 95% of Wisconsin businesses fall in that category, President Lyall observed that the state’s economic future depends on repositioning Wisconsin as a place where a person with a good idea and hard work can find encouragement, venture capital and intellectual expertise to launch and grow a new business. UW-Extension’s Small Business Development Center, under the direction of Erica Kauten, helps entrepreneurs put it all together. There is a small business assistance office at each of the 13 UW campuses across the state where advice is available on topics ranging from management to marketing to finance. Quick assistance also is available from the new Business AnswerLine. The SBDC’s Entrepreneurial Training Center can help develop a business plan, qualify for a Department of Commerce grant, make referrals to potential investors and provide other assistance. Last year, SBDC served over 11,000 individuals and business owners working to build Wisconsin’s growth opportunities.
Reporting that Ms. Kauten and Chancellor Sorensen were launching a specialty Center for Innovation and Development at UW-Stout, President Lyall said the center will provide business counseling and education to entrepreneurs, building on the market research and expertise of UW-Whitewater’s Wisconsin Innovation Service Center. The Whitewater center specializes in new product assessment, while the Stout center will focus on helping entrepreneurs convert ideas to cash by developing business plans, obtaining financing and building management skills.
-
It was reported by President Lyall that the National Science Foundation has awarded a $374,000 grant to UW-River Falls to support Professor Mark Bergland’s project on “Developing Computer Simulations of Protein Laboratory Procedures for Case-based Learning in International Biology Curricula and Pre-service Science Teacher Education.” This project will further teacher education and teaching materials in lab-based science.
-
President Lyall reported that the UW system-wide Instructional Technology Summit was held in December at UW-Eau Claire. The summit brings together staff from all UW campuses to work together to manage campus technology in an increasingly tough fiscal environment. Noting that technology is one of the most rapidly rising cost areas for the university as well as for many businesses, she said that this type of collaboration helps to control costs and stretch the value of IT expenditures. The summit also helps set priorities for the UW System IT Plan, presented to the board each fall.
-
It was reported by President Lyall that the System Administration Procurement Office recently negotiated a $1.2 million reduction in software maintenance costs that will benefit the whole system. For this accomplishment, she recognized Ruth Anderson for knowing the market and optimizing the educational discounts that can be obtained as a system.
-
President Lyall noted that death in December of Robert Taylor, former UW-Madison journalism graduate and news editor at WIBA radio for many years. He served as an assistant to three UW presidents and in 1968 became a university vice president for public relations. He returned to UW-Madison in the 1970s and taught there until his retirement in 1986. His wife, Judy, remains in Madison.
President Lyall also noted the passing of former Regent Roy Kopp, at age 97, in Naples, Florida. Mr. Kopp, of Platteville, served on the Board of the Wisconsin State Universities before merger and was the first President on the Board of Regents of the UW System.
- - -
Commenting that President Lyall’s remarks about the budget were both interesting and profound, Regent Axtell asked that copies of her statement be circulated to the members of the board.
Regent Rosenzweig suggested that it would be helpful to have information about the Cornell model and about the process through which the Hospital Authority was created.
Regent Smith referred to discussion at the Education Committee meeting about how quality issues differ from campus to campus. Noting that budget cuts also are local in their impact, he suggested that the regents hold hearings around the state to which the public, area legislators, students and faculty would be invited to discuss some of these local issues. This type of opportunity to listen, learn and discuss, he felt, would help the board in dealing with the management challenges posed by the coming budget reductions.
Referring to the principles set forth in President Lyall’s statement, Regent Olivieri stated his agreement with setting forth the steps that would be taken before enrollment reductions are considered. To mitigate the impact of budget cuts, he felt that tuition should be moved toward the peer midpoint as soon as possible. If the time came to consider enrollment issues, he urged that these matters be addressed by the individual campuses, rather than on a system-wide basis.
Regent Axtell expressed concern about the impact on revenues of recent non-resident tuition increases and asked if information on that matter could be provided. President Lyall indicated that in the past year, the result had been loss of around two million dollars. Regent Marcovich added that an increase in the non-resident student population would substantially increase revenues for the university.
Regent Jones urged that discussion of tuition levels bear in mind the different income levels of students and the populations from which they come. He also pointed out that campuses have differing capacities in terms of enrollment, some having more room to grow than others.
Regent Mohs agreed with President Lyall’s principles for making budget cuts and concurred that enrollments should not be reduced until all other alternatives are exhausted. With respect to nonresident tuition, he observed that students from other places are valuable, not only for the revenue they provide, but for the diverse geographical perspectives and superior academic qualifications they bring to campus.
Regent Davis commented that public hearings are most helpful when testimony is directed to a specific agenda and suggested that stakeholders be asked to comment on the areas of access, affordability and quality.
Regent Brandes felt that the first purpose of the hearings should be education of the public about the university in such areas as student access and demand. With regard to priorities, she commented that two crucial areas are the UW’s academic quality in which Wisconsinites take justifiable pride and adherence to the missions that distinguish UW institutions and provide important doors of access for students.
Chancellor Wells suggested that external stakeholders be especially encouraged to attend the public hearings in order to bring the visibility of the system as a whole to the local level. Chancellors, he added, have been working to unite internal stakeholders and have obtained considerable support through involvement of campus governance units.
Provost Spear noted that admission standards at UW-Madison are the same for resident and nonresident students. Nonresident enrollment is decreasing as tuition increases.
Concurring that public hearings are a good idea, Chancellor Reilly felt they would enhance public understanding of the university and would fit well with the board’s “Engage Wisconsin” theme.
Regent Barry said that the hearings need to be understood as an educational process on impacts at the campus level and principles for implementing cuts. Care should be taken, he cautioned, that the hearing not be perceived as lobbying or an effort to avoid having the UW take its fair share of cuts.
While public hearings might serve an important purpose, Regent Olivieri did not think they would provide the kind of information needed to formulate a strategy for dealing with large budget cuts. Noting that different campuses might have different approaches to this matter, he thought communication from the chancellors, including observations about their stakeholders, would be the best way for the board to be advised of the situation at the various institutions.
While he had some concern about the value and perception of public hearings, Regent Mohs expressed willingness to participate, noting that some, but not all, testimony may be predictable.
- - -
report of the business and finance committee
Regent Olivieri, Chair, presented the report of the Business and Finance Committee.
An overview of the UW System annual financial report was explained by Doug Hendrix, Associate Vice President of Financial Administration and Dwan Schuck, Director of Financial Reporting. Regent Olivieri commended staff for the enormous amount of work and time it took to prepare this report due to several changes required under a new reporting model.
-
Program Review of Stewardship of Art, Science, and Special Library Collections
Ron Yates, Director of the Office of Operations Review and Audit, reported on the review to ensure proper policies and procedures are in place to manage and preserve library collections owned, borrowed and loaned by UW institutions. Mr. Yates noted that UW-Madison’s Elvehjem Art museum is the only American Association of Museums (AAM) accredited museum in the UW System.
-
The Trust Funds Annual Report was presented by Doug Hoerr, Assistant Trust Office. Although market values have declined the past two years, Mr. Hoerr reported that UW System investments have performed favorably relative to selected benchmarks, and administrative costs associated with the management of Trust Funds are very low.
-
Kris Andrews, Federal Relations Coordinator, described the current federal environment and noted that there is an enormous amount of interest in higher education. She noted the areas of fiscal year 2004 that are important to the UW System – research and development; and education and funding for the National Institute of Health and National Science Foundation
Letters have been sent to congressional officials requesting the Higher Education Reauthorization Act be changed to allow for more grant opportunities. Student supported service grants is an important issue for the UW System’s institutions.
-
Quarterly Gifts, Grants, and Contracts Report
Vice President Durcan reported on the second quarter gifts, grants and contracts report for 2002-03. VP Durcan noted a total of $578 million, an increase of $66 million from the comparable period of the previous fiscal year.
-
VP Durcan discussed a report listing institutions in other states who not only doubled their tuition increases at the beginning of the school year, but imposed mid year tuition increases of 6% to 9%.
Ms. Durcan noted that the Joint Audit Committee of the Legislature will be reviewing administrative expenditures and staffing
-
On behalf of the Business and Finance Committee, Regent Olivieri presented the following resolutions to the Board of Regents as consent agenda items. The motion was seconded by Regent Jones and it passed unanimously.
UW System Trust Funds Acceptance of Bequests
Resolution 8654: That, upon the recommendation of the President of the University of Wisconsin System and the Chancellors of the benefiting University of Wisconsin institutions, the bequests detailed on the attached list be accepted for the purposes designated by the donors, or, where unrestricted by the donors, by the benefiting institution, and that the Trust Officer or assistant Trust Officers be authorized to sign receipts and do all things necessary to effect the transfers for the benefit of the University of Wisconsin.
Let it be herewith further resolved, that the president and Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, the Chancellors of the benefiting University of Wisconsin institutions, and the Deans and Chairs of the benefiting Colleges and departments express their sincere thanks and appreciation to the donors and their families for their tremendous generosity and devotion to the values and ideals represented by the University of Wisconsin System. These gifts will be used to sustain and further the quality and scholarship of the University and its students.
Principal Expenditure UW System Trust Funds: Louise C. Smith Bequest
Resolution 8655: That, upon recommendation of the President of the University of Wisconsin System and the Dean of the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Nursing, the principal and income balance of the Louise C. Smith bequest become available for spending.
UW-Stevens Point: Contract Extension with Chartwells
Resolution 8656: That upon the recommendation of the President of the University of Wisconsin System and the Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, the Board of Regents approves an extension of the contract with Chartwells to provide dining services at the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point.
- - -
Report of the Education Committee
The report of the Education Committee was presented by Regent Boyle, Chair.
Federal Higher Education Reauthorization Act and Wisconsin
Regent Boyle pointed out the recommendations the UW System Task Force will emphasize in their response to the Reauthorization Act. These include allowing Wisconsin’s successful teacher education initiatives to move forward; categorizing the UW Colleges as 13 discreet entities, not as one institution where financial aid is concerned; encouraging efforts being made in terms of student financial aid; and discounting and/or forgiving loans, especially in high-demand, but low-paying fields such as nursing and special education.
-
Accountability and Quality in a Time of Budget Reduction
Discussion of the committee focused on three questions regarding the quality of a UW education.
- What do members of the Education Committee consider the most effective indicators of a quality education in describing the value of the UW System to the state?
- What would be the consequences of budget reductions on these quality indicators?
- How can the System and the Board most effectively communicate quality to the public and to political decision-makers?
Regent Boyle continued by emphasizing that quality means different things to different stakeholders. Regent Axtell pointed out four indicators to consider: 1) Access; 2) Retention, 3) Graduation Rates, and 4) Alumni and Employer Satisfaction. A number of chancellors and provosts expressed concern that using the same indicators for each institution would misrepresent the institutions by not taking into account their individual missions and student populations. While differing missions is crucial to evaluating institutions, Regent Boyle stated that legislatively, a cohesive decision needs to be made at the System level.
Two suggestions were presented regarding marketing accountability indicators. In terms of recounting the value of the institution, analysis should be done in the local community and each institution would communicate with their own legislators; and demonstrating how valuable the UW System is to the citizens of the state. Communicating how the System contributes to state priorities such as economic development, brain gain, preparing students for employment and health issues would demonstrate the value of the University System to the state.
-
Report of the Senior Vice President
Associate Vice President Ron Singer outlined three criteria the Education Committee will be using when looking at future programs:
- Programs responsive to a demonstrative critical state need such as special education and health care;
- Programs where delay in the implementation would place at risk unique, time-senstive funding and/or collaboration opportunities;
- Programs with a revenue and cost structure that will result in enhancement of resource for the institution.
Associate Vice President Singer announced that the Office of Academic and Student Services is developing an expedited program approval process. It will be developed in consultation with provosts and the System Program Planning Advisory Committee. This process will maintain the appropriate program array and meet quality control and faculty governance procedures.
-
Regarding the process an institution goes through during accreditation, the following steps were identified: (1) The Regional Accreditation Association identifies the criteria and the focus of the review. Each institution may identify one area they would emphasize, i.e. Liberal Arts Education, Special Education, etc. (2) The institution will do a self study which would take about a year, followed by a campus visit from the Accreditation Association. The report from the Association would follow. It was noted that UW institutions have been very successful, with very few recommendations for change or improvement.
In discussion, Regent Olivieri pointed out that this may be a good time and a good opportunity to be very vigorous about new programs, and to be very vigorous about the analysis of programs already in place, as this will be important in dealing with budget issues. President Lyall noted that the number of new programs approved from year to year offsets the number that are eliminated or merged
Regarding accountability analysis, Regent Rosenzweig suggested that each campus be compared on an equal basis so that it is meaningful to the public.
Commenting on upcoming reauthorizations, Regent Randall felt it imperative that these are done on a timely basis, as they will be occurring within the next two to three months. As an example, a goal has been set for attracting more non-traditional students and for increasing the number of students in pre-college programs. Their education is paid through funds administered by some of these acts which are up for reauthorization. Regent Randall continued that in a job survey taken in October, 2002, more than 13,000 jobs were available in the southeastern part of the state. 80% of those positions required at least a high school degree and some training beyond. Access to the UW System and the Technical Colleges will be very important for these students.
Regent Boyle stated that there is no intention of disbanding the report, but presenting it to different stakeholders with different needs and interests, and being flexible in communicating to stakeholders is the focus of the committee.
- - -
report of the physical planning and funding committee
The Physical Planning and Funding Committee report was presented by Regent Gracz, Chair.
Report of the Assistant Vice President
Nancy Ives, Assistant VP reported that the Building Commission approved about $76.5 million for various projects at their December meeting. The overall State building Program is on hold in consideration of the state’s budget deficit. For the University System that will include 30 major projects totaling $305 million and over 500 maintenance and small projects and studies, totaling $150 million. Ms. Ives indicated that the construction industry has a significant impact on the state’s economy. Projects currently on hold equates to almost a $1 billion economic impact, including 3,800 jobs who would pay $13.6 million in income taxes. System Administration and the campuses will continue to advocate for important projects, particularly those funded with little or no GPR funds.
Ms. Ives reported that there has been discussion on how to identify ways to streamline the existing building process. All projects over $500,000 require specific enumeration in a biennial budget regardless of funding source. The Board of Regents has recommended that the law be changed to exclude cash funded projects.
Regent Gracz presented the following resolutions to the Board of Regents as consent agenda items. Regent Randall seconded the resolution and it passed unanimously.
Resolution 8657: That, upon the recommendation of the President of the University of Wisconsin System, authority be granted to add the UW-Madison Kemp Natural Resources Station project at an estimated project cost of $655,000 ($515,000 Gifts and $140,000 Federal Grants) to the 2003-05 Capital Budget.
UW-Madison: Authority to Construct a Botany Garden Expansion Project
Resolution 8658: That, upon the recommendation of the UW-Madison Chancellor and the President of the University of Wisconsin System, authority be granted to construct a Botany Garden Expansion project at a total estimated cost of $385,000 Gift Funds.
UW-Oshkosh: Authority to Construct a Titan Stadium Maintenance Project
Resolution 8659: That, upon the recommendation of the UW-Oshkosh Chancellor and the President of the University of Wisconsin System, authority be granted to construct a Titan Stadium Maintenance project at an estimated total project cost of $552,000 Program Revenue – Cash.
Resolution 8660: That, upon recommendation of the UW-Platteville Chancellor and the President of the University of Wisconsin System, the Design Report be approved and authority be granted to construct the Ullrich Hall Renovation project, at a total estimated project cost of $6,956,000 of General Fund Supported Borrowing.
UW-Whitewater: Authority to Execute a Land Use Agreement and Accept a Gift-in-Kind
Resolution 8661: That, upon the recommendation of the UW-Whitewater Chancellor and the President of the University of Wisconsin System, authority be granted to: (1) execute a land use agreement between the Board of Regents and the UW-Whitewater Foundation to enable the Foundation to undertake an Athletic Administration Annex facility project and remodeling of the first floor of the Stadium Athletic Building, and (2) accept the gift-in-kind of the completed new and remodeled facilities, valued at approximately $1.4 million.
- - -
communications, petitions, memorials
In a statement of remembrance, UW-Madison Peter Spear noted that the university community was untied in grief and mourning for the seven astronauts who were lost on February 1st. An alumna of UW-Madison, Commander Laurel Clark earned a bachelor’s degree in Zoology in 1983 and an MD degree in 1987. Dr. Clark will be remembered, he continued, for the enthusiasm she brought to Columbia’s mission and for the passion with which she embraced the risks and opportunities of space travel. In that regard, he noted that she had specifically asked to assist with the research projects sponsored by UW-Madison that flew on Columbia. Provost Spear stated that the UW-Madison community is committed to carrying on her legacy. In closing, he indicated that plans are under way to establish a scholarship for her son.
The following resolution, presented by Regent President Gottschalk, was adopted by acclamation.
Memorial Resolution: Dr. Laurel Blair Salton Clark and the Crew of the Space Shuttle Columbia
Resolution 8662: WHEREAS, the seven astronauts aboard the final mission of the United States Space Shuttle Columbia will forever be remembered as national heroes who were committed to fearless sifting and winnowing for the benefit of all humankind; and
WHEREAS, the Columbia’s crew included Mission Specialist Laurel Blair Salton Clark, of Racine, Wisconsin; Commander Rick D. Husband; Pilot William C. McCool; Payload Commander Michael P. Anderson; Mission specialist David M. Brown; Mission Specialist Kalpana Chawla; and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon, the first Israeli astronaut; and
WHEREAS, Dr. Clark was an esteemed and loyal alumna of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, having received her Bachelor of Science in Zoology from the College of Letters and Science and her Doctorate in Medicine from the Medical School, and a decorated Commander in the U.S. Navy; and
WHEREAS, during the 16-day mission, which was entirely dedicated to research in the physical, life and space sciences, the crew conducted approximately 80 scientific experiments, including two designed by UW-Madison’s Wisconsin Center for Space Automation and Robotics; and
WHEREAS, the Columbia and all seven crew members were lost February 1, 2003, as the shuttle returned to the Earth’s atmosphere; and
WHEREAS, the performance of the flight members aboard the Columbia, who looked past the danger of their journey with great courage and positive energy, should serve as inspiration to scientists around the world who continue their quest for knowledge;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that during this time of national and international tragedy, the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System extends its deepest sympathy to Dr. Clark’s husband, son and entire family, as well as the families of all crew members; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that with highest respect and enduring gratitude, the Board of Regents recognizes the valor and personal sacrifice of the shuttle crew, and, with most sincere appreciation, praises the countless achievements of Dr. Laurel Blair Salton Clark and the legacy of all those aboard the Space Shuttle Columbia.
- - -
The meeting was recessed at 11:40 a.m., and reconvened in open session at 11:50 a.m., at which time the following resolution, moved by Regent Marcovich and seconded by Regent Axtell, was adopted on a unanimous roll-call vote, with Regents Axtell, Boyle, Davis, Jones, Marcovich, Mohs, Olivieri, Randall, Rosenzweig, Salas, Smith, and Gottschalk (12) voting in the affirmative. There were no dissenting votes and no abstentions.
Resolution 8663: That, the Board of Regents recess in Closed Session, to confer with Legal Counsel, as permitted by s.19.85(1)(g), Wis. Stats.
The Board arose from closed session at 12:50 p.m., having taken no actions. The meeting was adjourned at 12:50 p.m.
The following resolution was adopted on October 11, 2002, but not announced at that time pending acceptance by the nominees.
Resolution 8664: That, upon the recommendation of the Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the President of the University of Wisconsin System, approval be granted to award the following honorary degrees, subject to acceptance by the nominees:
Dr. Carl Anderson: Doctor of Science
Dr. Neuma F. de Aguiar: Doctor of Science
_____________________________
Judith A. Temby, Secretary