Board of Regents
June 2003 - MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
of the
BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
UW-Milwaukee
Held in the Union, Wisconsin Room
Thursday June 5, 2003
10:00 a.m.
- President Gottschalk presiding -
PRESENT: Regents Amato, Axtell, Bradley, Burmaster, Connolly-Keesler, Gottschalk, Gracz, Marcovich, Mohs, Olivieri, Richlen, Randall, Rosenzweig, Salas, Smith and Walsh
ABSENT: Regent Davis
- - -
WELCOME REGENT EILEEN CONNOLLY-KEESLER
Regent President Gottschalk welcomed Regent Eileen Connolly-Keesler, who was appointed to the board by Governor Doyle to succeed Regent Emeritus Pat Boyle. She is executive director of the Oshkosh Area Community Foundation and holds a bachelor’s degree from UW-Green Bay and a master’s degree from UW-Oshkosh.
- - -
BUDGET UPDATE
Noting that the budget process has been long and difficult for all concerned, Regent President Gottschalk remarked that the chancellors were given a challenging and thankless task in determining how each institution would handle its budget cuts within a set of four guiding principles: Cut administration first; merge or eliminate majors or programs with small enrollments; support a move-to-the-midpoint policy for tuition; and as a last resort, adjust enrollment targets to reflect decreased staffing, if necessary.
Each institution, he explained, engaged its faculty, staff, students and community members in open forums to determine, from the ground up, how to manage its cuts, as opposed to detailed, top-down directives from the regents or system administration. While some might disagree with specific results, all voices were heard; and any concerns with ongoing impacts can be reconsidered in the board’s upcoming exercise on re-thinking the UW System.
Turning to legislative actions, President Gottschalk indicated that the Joint Finance Committee approved the Governor’s proposed budget with some modifications. A provision, that would allow the UW to spread the proposed position cuts over two years, rather than taking them all in the first year, is especially beneficial for the UW Colleges, which could have been significantly harmed by the original proposal. He also was pleased with the bipartisan vote and the fact that the committee did not seek to over-ride campus-based decisions by micro-managing the UW’s cut.
While a $250 million cut could not be called a victory, he believed that it could have been worse and that Engage Wisconsin was a successful endeavor. The process used in determining specific cuts was the right one, and that message had been conveyed convincingly to lawmakers.
He expressed great appreciation to the chancellors, provosts, faculty, staff and students for coming to grips with the budget problems and to the university communities, alumni groups, foundations and other organizations, community leaders, editors, parents, regents emeritus and other friends of the university for the supporting visits, phone calls, letters and emails that made a difference with lawmakers.
At the system level, he thanked Vice President Linda Weimer, who did fine work in coordinating Engage Wisconsin, and her colleagues in University Relations, Margaret Lewis and David Miller who worked tirelessly, informing legislators and correcting misconceptions as they deliberated on specific budget issues.
Finally, he expressed gratitude to regent colleagues who took the time to make contacts and spread good words about the university.
With respect to the future, Regent Marcovich, President Lyall, and he had begun to give form and substance to the re-thinking study; and drafts of a case statement and structural outlines will be shared with regents and chancellors.
- - -
THE SCHOLARDHIP OF TEACHING AND LEARNING: THE NATIONAL AND STATE SCENES
In opening remarks, President Lyall noted that the UW System and UW-Milwaukee have a national leadership role in the scholarship of teaching and learning. She introduced Pat Hutchings, Vice President of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, which has been leading the way nationally on this issue. The foundation is a major national and international center for research and policy studies about teaching, with a mission to address the most difficult problems, including how to achieve lasting student learning and how to assess the impact of teaching on students.
Dr. Hutchings oversees all foundation programs and provides guidance to research initiatives. She joined the Carnegie Foundation in 1998, after serving as a senior staff member at the American Association for Higher Education. She has written widely on teaching, course portfolios, peer collaboration and the review of teaching. She holds a doctorate in English from the University of Iowa and was chair of the English Department at Alverno College before joining AAHE.
Dr. Hutchings began by stating that American higher education cannot afford not to learn from the innovative approaches that many faculty are trying with their students; instead, these innovations need to be used to improve student learning in the future. That, she said, is the promise of the scholarship of teaching and learning. The UW System has been involved in it for a number of years and is now in a position of national leadership.
As an example of the meaning of this work, she read a case study, titled “The Larrys”, which was about the dilemma of how best to teach students who, like Larry, are bright and hard working, but do not have the necessary background to succeed in a key gateway course, like introductory chemistry. The faculty member in this case had been trying new approaches, such as collaborative work, lab reports and online tutorials; but generating evidence of their effectiveness would require a major commitment of time and effort. She knew that other faculty viewed such classes as filters to weed out students not suited for advanced work and would view her efforts as a waste of time. Further, she knew that she needed to spend her time with her research team in the laboratory and that she needed to publish to ensure tenure. She thought it odd that research should be collaborative and team-based, while teaching felt so solitary.
Dr. Hutchings asked regents to work in pairs for several minutes to consider what needs and opportunities the scenario highlights, what it makes one hope for, and what a happy ending would look like. Upon conclusion of those discussions, she asked for comments from the board members.
While he agreed that collaborative learning could be helpful to some students, Regent Mohs pointed out that it also could allow a student to get through a course without really learning the material on the strength of another student’s work. Therefore, he was somewhat skeptical about considering that type of learning a solution to the problem.
Concurring with the importance of Regent Mohs’ point, Dr. Hutchings said it underlines the need for scholarly work to gather evidence on what strategies work best to improve learning.
Regent Walsh commented that, if a bright, hard-working student cannot succeed in getting through a gateway course, it indicates that different ways of measuring performance and success may be needed.
Dr. Hutchings agreed, explaining that the scholarship of teaching and learning is concerned not only with teaching techniques, but also with what is meant by success and how that can be measured.
Regent Salas observed that teaching need not be a solitary endeavor and can benefit from collaboration, as much as learning can. Just as effective research often is done in a team setting, he noted, effective teaching and learning can result from working together collaboratively. He added, however, that most classrooms are not structured to accommodate collaborative student work.
Dr. Hutchings indicated that one aim of the scholarship of teaching and learning is to create the kinds of communities that alleviate the isolation of teachers.
In response to the question of what a happy ending would look like, Regent Burmaster thought one answer would be for institutions to reward and recognize faculty who balance research and teaching and to build communities of teaching and learning. The goal, she added, should not be to filter people out, but to help learners to find success.
With respect to reward systems, Dr. Hutchings felt that part of the answer is for faculty to produce solid evidence of student learning in ways that can be rewarded through the institutional decision-making context.
Regent Marcovich cautioned that some collaborative learning or teaching groups might tend to sink to the lowest level of the participants, which could impede complete learning. In addition, he was concerned about the possible loss of star teachers who prefer to teach by themselves, rather than in collaboration with others.
Dr. Hutchings indicated that one question revolves around what is meant by collaboration in teaching – whether it means team-teaching together in the classroom, collaborative design of curricula, or co-assessment of students.
Regent Olivieri inquired about the role of the Board of Regents in the area of teaching and learning and what the board could do to help faculty who want to improve student learning, perhaps in such areas as rewards, tenure criteria, and sabbatical policy.
Regent Smith commented on the importance of keeping the focus on “the Larrys”, with recognition that students learn differently from one another.
Turning to an example of the kind of results that have been obtained in the scholarship of teaching and learning, Dr. Hutchings referred to the case of Professor Dennis Jacobs, of the University of Notre Dame Chemistry Department, who last year was named Carnegie Professor of the Year from the research university sector for his work in this area. The problem he faced was that too high a proportion of competent students were performing poorly and leaving scientific fields or even leaving the institution.
In response, he introduced a number of instructional innovations in experimental sections, including an emphasis on key concepts and small group work on questions too challenging for an individual student.
In order to quantify outcomes, he tracked grades, retention and achievement in subsequent science courses for 4,000 students over several years. He also conducted focus groups in order to hear from individual students about the experience and analyzed videotapes of small group work in order to determine what actually happened in the groups.
The results were: 1) the quality of student performance increased dramatically; 2) the retention rate of at-risk students rose 55%; 3) at-risk students were twice as likely as before to get an A; and 4) the same results were obtained when other instructors taught the course using Professor Jacobs’ design, showing that the improvements did not simply result from Dr. Jacob’s individual teaching skill.
In response to a question by Regent Olivieri, Dr. Hutchings indicated that the content of the course and the tests were the same; only the learning strategies changed.
Similar changes were adopted by faculty in engineering and physics at Notre Dame. Tracking of students was done through the university’s Office of Institutional Research. Notre Dame has involved other campuses in this work, and Professor Jacobs has moved on to do further work on service learning and other dimensions of teaching and learning chemistry.
In a nutshell, Dr. Hutchings said, the scholarship of teaching and learning consists of :
- Faculty seeking better classroom strategies;
- Documenting effectiveness;
- Sharing results with colleagues; and
- Changing the way business is done.
It requires an ethic of continuous improvement and serves as an antidote to teaching by the seat of the pants. Today, she explained, there are places where budding faculty are inducted into the work of teaching, not just research, in their field – something that traditionally has not been done as much as it should be. Finally, it entails faculty bringing their knowledge, skills and values as scholars to their work as teachers. In doing so, it takes advantage of the ways that they have been taught to behave by tapping into scholarship.
Dr. Hutchings then quoted as follows from an article by Randy Bass, a faculty member in American Studies at Georgetown University: “One telling measure of how differently teaching is regarded from traditional scholarship or research within the academy is what a difference it makes to have a ‘problem’ in one versus the other. In scholarship and research, having a ‘problem’ is at the heart of the investigative process…But in one’s teaching, a ‘problem’ is something you don’t want to have. And if you have one you probably want to fix it. Asking a colleague about a problem in his or her research is an invitation; asking about a problem in one’s teaching would probably seem like an accusation. Changing the status of the problem in teaching from terminal remediation to ongoing investigation is precisely what the movement for a scholarship of teaching is all about.”
Turning to context and rationale for the scholarship of teaching and learning, Dr. Hutchings pointed out that today many more students are going on to college than was the case in the past. In a sense, going to college has become a requirement for life in the middle class and no longer seems optional to many students. More and more of these students are nontraditional or come from underrepresented groups, and they come with varying levels of preparation. This creates challenges and shows up in graduation rates that are at issue nationally, although the UW’s rates are higher than the national average. Faculty are finding that what used to work in the classroom no longer works as well. The scholarship of teaching and learning provides a means to address these challenges.
Several decades of research, Dr. Hutchings indicated, have provided new insights into how learning happens. Noting that one of the most important variables in whether learning occurs is what the student already knows, she remarked that an agenda for the scholarship of teaching and learning involves examining the learning that students bring to their college classes. Another finding is that students are more likely to learn in powerful and lasting ways if they are told what they are expected to learn and can connect those goals with their goals for themselves. Finally, it is clear that education takes place not only in the classroom, but across the university. In that regard student success entails partnerships between classroom activities and out of class learning, such as experiential learning, service learning, and international internships.
With regard to new approaches to learning, Dr. Hutchings indicated that many faculty are trying new strategies that involve technology. Another approach involves active learning, such as use of collaborative groups and out-of-class learning.
Turning to the matter of accountability, Dr. Hutchings explained that the university needs to be accountable to a diverse circle of stakeholders who have different perspectives on its work. Evidence about the quantity and quality of student learning and success, she pointed out, is an essential part of these accountability measures, and the scholarship of teaching and learning is a means of producing that kind of evidence.
With regard to the beginning of the national movement toward the scholarship of teaching and learning, Dr. Hutchings referred to a report released in 1990 by the Carnegie Foundation called Scholarship Reconsidered: New Priorities for the Professoriate by Ernest Boyer, who at the time was president of the Carnegie Foundation. In that report he argued that higher education needs a broader conception of scholarship and that the enterprise of scholarship has been hijacked by research narrowly defined. To fulfill the many missions of higher education, he promoted a broader conception of scholarship, including integrative work, applied work, connection with the community, and the work of teaching. It was this report that coined the phrase, “the scholarship of teaching”.
Since that time, many institutions, including the UW System, have re-examined their reward systems to align them more closely with a broader conception of scholarship. In a national survey done in 1994 by the Carnegie Foundation, 60% of institutions reported that teaching counted more in the reward system than it had five years previously. Along the way, many campuses also undertook fundamental reforms of undergraduate education, looking at new approaches in the classroom, new curricular designs, and reinvigorated general education.
Dr. Hutchings then described the Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (CASTL), with which she and colleagues had been working for the past six years. The academy has programming at three levels – with individual scholars, with scholarly and professional societies, and with campuses.
In the scholar’s program, individual faculty apply to do research focused on their students’ learning. Participants are selected through a national competitive process, with 114 faculty having gone through the program to date and another 26 about to begin. These faculty, Dr. Hutchings said, produce powerful examples that others can build on and often become agents of change on their own campuses.
Professional and scholarly societies in the program have included the American Chemical Society, the American Historical Association, the American Sociological Association and allied health fields. These organizations advise faculty on what matters in their professions and collaborate with faculty on teaching and learning and on new standards for judging a student’s work.
The CASTL campus program, which is designed to help institutions find ways to support the scholarship of teaching and learning, is coordinated by both the Carnegie Foundation and the American Association for Higher Education. In the first five years of the program, about 200 campuses made a public commitment to the scholarship of teaching and learning. Activities have included new professional development programs and new publications. Many are finding ways to involve students and offices of institutional research.
In March the foundation announced 12 campus cluster leadership sites which will become focal points for advancing the movement. The UW System is one of those sites.
In conclusion, Dr. Hutchings predicted that, over the next five years, faculty will increasingly use their talents as scholars to improve student learning, campuses will develop programs and rewards to support faculty in this work, and graduate programs will turn out new faculty who are better prepared to bring students to higher levels of learning. When all of these things happen, the educational needs of states and society will be more broadly met.
The next portion of the presentation was made by Tony Ciccone, Professor of French and Director of the Center for Instructional and Professional Development (CIPD) at UW-Milwaukee, and by Lisa Kornetsky, Director of the Office of Professional and Instructional Development (OPID) and a senior academic planner for UW System Administration.
Dr. Ciccone began his remarks by indicating that the UW System leadership site focuses on supporting the work of individuals and institutions across the system in advancing the practice of teaching through scholarly inquiry into student learning.
Turning to UW-Milwaukee’s initiatives, he said that the campus-wide discussion on the scholarship of teaching and learning, initiated by Chancellor Zimpher in February 1999, led to the creation of a Center Scholars Program designed to create models of scholarly inquiry into student learning for UWM’s faculty. The success of this work led to national presentations and recognition for achievement from the American Association for Higher Education. That recognition resulted in grants to connect UWM expertise with UW System priorities, as well as initiatives to connect the scholarship of teaching and learning to student success at UWM -- especially to the work of the Black and Gold Commission on the student experience – and in efforts to connect the scholarship of teaching and learning to assessment.
Dr. Kornetsky explained the Office of Professional Instructional Development has been involved in the scholarship of teaching and learning since 1998, working to develop a sustained initiative across the entire UW System. Bringing to this initiative more than 25 years of faculty development centered on teaching and learning, the office has developed several programs that focus on the scholarship of teaching and learning, including the Wisconsin Teaching Fellows Program and the Wisconsin Teaching Scholars Program, giving faculty and instructional staff across the system the opportunity to do this work and model it for others. The initiative has been expanded through numerous conferences and presentations, including the 2000 Student Learning Conference at which 11 Carnegie scholars from across the country presented to over 150 UW faculty and staff.
Dr. Ciccone noted that in 2001 OPID and CIPD joined forces, combining campus expertise with the tradition of system-wide faculty development in which OPID is a national leader. A collaboration was developed with faculty from several campuses to support individual faculty and campuses, while creating connections between and among campuses.
As of July 1st, Dr. Kornetsky indicated, the leadership site will be open for business on the UW-Milwaukee campus under the direction of Professor Renee Meyers, a former UWM center scholar and a former OPID representative who has been involved in this initiative from the beginning. The leadership site is a joint UW System/UW-Milwaukee initiative to advance the practice of teaching through scholarly inquiry into student learning. The site will have an advisory board with membership from each UW institution. In the best tradition of the UW System, all institutions will benefit and contribute to the collaborative work of the leadership site.
After three years, the intention is to measure success through meeting the following goals: 1) Development of a well-established leadership site that is known and accessed across the UW System; 2) scholarship of teaching and learning initiatives at each campus that have demonstrated outcomes on student learning and faculty development; 3) collaboration between and among campuses with similar strategic objectives; 4) individuals at each campus with expertise in the “doing” of the scholarship of teaching and learning who can take a leadership role; 5) training tools that are available to system faculty/staff and those outside the system for clearly defining what this work is; 6) core membership in the cluster from members of other Wisconsin institutions and faculty development centers beyond the state; 7) national recognition for Wisconsin for leadership in the scholarship of teaching and learning; 8) external funding to support the Leadership Site and some of its activities; and 9) linkages between the scholarship of teaching and learning initiative and larger system priorities, such as retention, advising, curriculum infusion, student access, teacher preparation, and assessment of student learning.
In closing remarks. Dr. Kornetsky noted that the scholarship of teaching and learning is at the heart of the university’s mission and that the work of faculty in this area merits support and recognition. The scholarship of teaching and learning, she said, connects directly to ongoing attempts by the Board of Regents to define quality and student success.
In discussion following the presentation, Regent Bradley asked how this initiative connects to UW-Milwaukee’s efforts to aid the Milwaukee Public Schools. In reply, Dr. Ciccone indicated that several Centers Scholars projects have focused on learning by students who are preparing to be teachers. This work will benefit future K-12 education. Dr. Hutchings added that there are efforts at the national level to help higher education learn from K-12 education and vice versa. Making these connections, she remarked, is an important challenge.
Regent Bradley asked if the Carnegie Foundation is working to address concerns by members of Congress about the need to have measurements in higher education to justify tuition increases.
In reply, Dr. Hutchings stated that higher education needs to seize the accountability agenda and that one of the arguments for the scholarship of teaching and learning is that it puts the onus on educators to provide evidence about effectiveness in student learning and success.
Regent Smith remarked that the initiative is an exciting, in-depth effort. He asked what effect it would have on learning for “the Larrys” that would be different from their experience today.
Dr. Hutchings replied that they will have more positive views of learning and will be more likely to become life-long learners. Focus groups conducted by Professor Jacobs found that his students developed a more positive attitude toward the study of science than students with similar backgrounds who were not in the experimental sections. Dr. Ciccone added that the Larrys will also find that faculty care about their success and will support them. Dr. Kornetsky said the hope is that the Larrys will not only learn the material, but learn it more deeply and be able to retain it.
Regent Mohs referred to Dr. Hutchings statement that students are not coming to the university with the knowledge their professors expect and asked if there is a change in the students that prevents them from knowing what they should know and whether such distractions as access to unlimited cable channels and computer games causes students to fall behind.
In reply, Dr. Hutchings indicated that, while modern media and technology make some difference, the challenge for educators is to figure out how to make use of them in advancing learning.
Regent Rosenzweig expressed the hope that the scholarship could be designed to track Larry’s success in the future, which also is a concern of lawmakers at the federal and state levels.
Dr. Hutchings indicated that this is an important challenge and one that initially will be met at the local level through programs such as Dr. Ciccone’s. The hope is that this information can be aggregated so as to be meaningful in addressing larger questions.
Regent Axtell commented that it is much more difficult today than in the past to hold the attention of young people who are used to constantly changing images on television and in the movies. He asked how teachers can cope with this kind of situation.
Dr. Ciccone replied that many faculty now understand that the 50-minute lecture is not the best way to get students to learn. Strategies include the interrupted lecture, in which the teacher talks for 10 minutes and then poses a question on which students work individually or in pairs. This allows the teacher to find out how students are understanding the material and then move on accordingly. Another technique is to end the lecture by asking each student to write down one thing that still is not clear and then to start the next class by answering those questions. With regard to use of technology, he indicated that many faculty use video in class and also incorporate students’ internet skills into their teaching.
Dr. Hutchings added that asking students what they do not understand or what they consider the most important point from a class has the benefit not only of obtaining information, but also of making students more thoughtful and self-conscious about their learning.
Regent Mohs asked if these comments meant that students really are different than they were 25 or 30 years ago.
Dr. Ciccone replied that, from his perspective as a teacher with 28 years of experience, he did not believe that there is much difference in the way students pay attention in class. What has been discovered is that attention span wanes after about 15 minutes, as does ability to recall what has been said. However, there is no base-line information from many years ago with which to compare findings. While he and other faculty believe that students get more out of the class when it is broken into segments, the scholarship of teaching and learning can gather the evidence that will prove whether or not that is the case.
Regent Olivieri observed that, for many years, faculty did not really care whether or not Larry succeeded; in fact, the filtering process was viewed in some fields as a good strategy. Noting that in recent years Larry’s success has become a more important issue, he asked where resistance is found and what arguments are made against making Larry more central to thinking about the mission of higher education.
He inquired about policy implications and suggested that measurements of success should be concrete and fitted to the board’s accountability goals. He also suggested that the foundation fund studies to find out what happens to Larry.
Dr. Kornetsky indicated that, at this time, policy actions were not being recommended. The intention is to start with projects that will gather the kind of evidence that may later lead to changes in the reward structure and the ways in which faculty work. Noting the longstanding tradition of faculty privacy in the classroom, she remarked that what is being sought is a major culture shift into a communal way of thinking about teaching and learning.
Dr. Hutchings added that what is needed is an expectation of professional development of faculty in the area of teaching and learning that is made possible by investments that provide the necessary infrastructure and resources.
The discussion concluded and the meeting was adjourned at 12:00 p.m.
______________________________
Judith A. Temby, Secretary
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
of the
BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
UW-Milwaukee
Held in the Union, Wisconsin Room
Friday, June 6, 2003
9:00 a.m.
________________________________________________________________________
REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD.. 13
Resolution of Appreciation: Regent Emeritus JoAnne Brandes. 13
Resolution of Appreciation: JoAnne Brandes. 13
Report on the May 21st Meeting of the Wisconsin Technical College System Board 13
Report on the June 4th Meeting of the Hospital Authority Board.. 13
REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE SYSTEM... 13
Appreciation to UW-Milwaukee Vice Chancellor Don Melkus. 13
The Milwaukee Idea: Now More Than Ever.. 13
Update on Fall 2003 Enrollments. 13
Summit on Criminal Justice at UW-Oshkosh. 13
New MBA Extended to Waukesha. 13
Chancellor Keating, Vice Chair of NCAA Presidents' Council 13
Extension Helps Families Get Health Insurance Coverage. 13
Chancellor Miller Gets leadership Awards. 13
An Opportunity to Help Students. 13
REPORT OF THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE.. 13
Report of the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs. 13
Presentation by UW-Milwaukee on the Black and Gold Commission. 13
Report of Education Committee Works and Accomplishments. 13
Implementation of the Excess Credit Policy. 13
Report on Remedial Education. 13
Report on Promotions, Tenure Designations, and Related Academic Approval Items. 13
PK-16 Partnerships and Initiatives. 13
2003-04 Tenure Designations and New Tenured Appointments. 13
UW-Milwaukee: Center for Charter Schools Contract with the Woodlands School, Inc. 13
REPORT OF THE PHYSICAL PLANNING AND FUNDING COMMITTEE.. 13
Report of the Assistant Vice President.. 13
UW-River Falls: Authority to Increase the Scope and Budget of the Child Care Center Project 13
REPORT OF THE BUSINESS AND FINANCE COMMITTEE.. 13
2003-05 Unclassified Pay Plan Recommendation.. 13
2003-05 Unclassified Pay Plan Recommendation (Modified) 13
Report of the Vice President.. 13
LAB Administrative Audit Update.. 13
UW-La Crosse: Differential Tuition for Academic Excellence Initiatives. 13
UW-Superior: Differential Tuition for Library Initiatives. 13
Resolution of Appreciation: UW-Milwaukee. 13
Industrial Relations Research Institute, UW-Madison.. 13
UW-Madison: Industrial Relations Research Institute Exemption. 13
election of officers of the board of regents. 13
CLOSED SESSION………………………………………………………………………………………...24
Request for Review of UW-Extension Decision. 13
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
of the
BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN SYSTEM
UW-Milwaukee
Held in the Union, Wisconsin Room
Friday, June 6, 2003
9:00 a.m.
- President Gottschalk presiding -
PRESENT: Regents Amato, Axtell, Connolly-Keesler, Bradley, Burmaster, Davis, Gottschalk, Gracz, Marcovich, Mohs, Olivieri, Randall, Richlen, Rosenzweig, Salas, Smith and Walsh
ABSENT: None
- - -
The minutes of the May 8th and 9th meetings stood approved as distributed.
- - -
REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD
Resolution of Appreciation: Regent Emeritus JoAnne Brandes
Presenting the following resolution of appreciation for Regent Emeritus JoAnne Brandes, Regent Marcovich noted that she was his good friend and mentor throughout his tenure on the board. The resolution was adopted by acclamation with a standing ovation.
Resolution of Appreciation: JoAnne Brandes
Resolution 8697: WHEREAS, JoAnne Brandes has served the citizens of Wisconsin with continuous commitment and skilled stewardship during her term as a member of the University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents; and
WHEREAS, through her visionary guidance as chair and member of the Education Committee and 21st Century Subcommittee, she has helped shape the future of teaching and learning for generations of UW students; and
WHEREAS, she has served as chair and member of the Academic Staff Awards for Excellence Committee, leading the board’s recognition of academic staff members who exhibit institutional loyalty, professionalism and devotion in serving students and the public; and
WHEREAS, she has contributed sound judgment and fiscal leadership experience as vice chair and member of the Business and Finance Committee and Audit Subcommittee, and as a member of the Executive and Personnel Matters Review Committees; and
WHEREAS, she has helped guide the direction of several UW institutions through her service on special chancellor search committees for UW-Madison, UW-Oshkosh, UW-Eau Claire and UW-Parkside, as well as a search committee for a UW-Madison Law School Dean; and
WHEREAS, Regent Brandes has brought considerable experience and global perspective to the board through her work as senior vice president, general counsel and secretary for Wisconsin-based JohnsonDiversey, and is a friend to the UW and the state, having graduated from UW-Eau Claire, and having served as a member of the Governor’s Commission on the Glass Ceiling, and the chair of the Wisconsin Child Care Council; and
WHEREAS, in the spirit of the Wisconsin Idea, she has devoted her time, energy and valued leadership toward improving the experience of UW students and the betterment of Wisconsin communities;
BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System commends Regent Emeritus JoAnne Brandes for her remarkable tenure and distinguished service to the citizens of Wisconsin and the institutions of the UW System.
Regent Emeritus Brandes recalled that her involvement with the UW System began with her attendance at and graduation from UW-Eau Claire. While a student, she served as a representative to the UW/WSU Merger Implementation Committee and helped to draft the shared governance language set forth in Chapter 36, Wis. Stats.
Stating that it has been an honor and privilege to serve on the Board of Regents, she expressed great pride in UW’s rich tradition of excellence and the outstanding people who continually grow that excellence, even during these very challenging economic times.
In that regard, she stated her utmost respect for the chancellors and the great leadership and talent they have brought to Wisconsin. She thanked system staff for their unselfish dedication, wisdom and humor and thanked board staff for their competent and gracious assistance over the years.
Expressing appreciation to President Lyall for her outstanding leadership, she noted that the UW is very fortunate to have her at the helm.
She remarked that all of her fellow regents have enriched her life and expressed appreciation for their unselfish dedication of their time and unique talents to public service on the board. In that regard, she expressed gratitude to Regent Smith for his great leadership through very difficult times, and she thanked Regent Mohs for the honesty and respectfulness that he always brought to their debates. She expressed appreciation for Regent Burmaster’s friendship and thanked Regents Axtell, Olivieri, Randall, Gottschalk, and Gracz for the pleasure of working and strategizing with them. Finally, she thanked Regent Marcovich for his special friendship and for the creativity and harmony with which they worked together, even though they were very different from each other in many ways.
In conclusion, Regent Emeritus Brandes said that she will always remain one of the UW’s strongest supporters and advocates, and she wished the regents success in continuing to lead the great University of Wisconsin System.
-
Report on the May 21st Meeting of the Wisconsin Technical College System Board
The board received a written report on the May 21st meeting of the Wisconsin Technical College System Board.
-
Report on the June 4th Meeting of the Hospital Authority Board
The board received a written report on the June 4th meeting of the Hospital Authority Board.
- - -
REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE SYSTEM
Appreciation to UW-Milwaukee Vice Chancellor Don Melkus
Chancellor Zimpher expressed appreciation to Vice Chancellor Melkus, who was retiring after 33 years of dedicated service to the UW System and UW-Milwaukee. She also thanked him for overseeing all Board of Regents visits to UW-Milwaukee during her five-year tenure as chancellor.
-
The Milwaukee Idea: Now More Than Ever
Chancellor Zimpher introduced Professor Steve Percy, the chancellor’s deputy for the Milwaukee Idea and director of the Center for Urban Initiatives and Research. Presenting an update on the Milwaukee Idea, Dr. Percy recalled that UWM embarked on what came to be the Milwaukee Idea in 1998, in an exciting initiative to strengthen the university and to help the community in facing challenges in such areas as educational performance of school children and a diminishing industrial base in the region.
Noting the state’s long tradition of outreach through the concept of the Wisconsin Idea, he observed that the Milwaukee Idea, with its commitment to serve Milwaukee and southeastern Wisconsin, is the right way to meet societal and state expectations that the university be relevant and connected to its communities.
The origins of the Milwaukee idea were in an ambitious process in which 200 campus and community people were asked to identify areas of collaboration that would strengthen the community and the university. Key guidelines were that ideas must be bold; must move the university forward with large steps; must embrace the expertise of faculty and students across traditional academic disciplines; and must reflect community engagement in planning, implementation and evaluation.
The Milwaukee Idea is composed of three board areas of action: 1) Education and the Arts; 2) Economic Development; 3) Environment and Health. Included in the first area are initiatives that range from training teachers to be effective in urban schools, to preparing people to live and work successfully in a global world, to training young people in information technology, to operating creative partnerships in the arts.
To promote economic development, UWM is supporting creation of new small businesses, undertaking research on changing economic conditions, providing non-profit leaders with skills to manage their agencies effectively, supporting innovation in industry and encouraging technology transfer.
In the area of environment and health, the university is promoting healthy living, expanding understanding of environmental pollution and remediation, advancing knowledge about preservation of fresh water resources and creating architectural designs and plans that will help to shape the future urban environment.
As a result of the Milwaukee Idea, Dr. Percy observed, not only is UWM invited to be at the table when key Milwaukee leaders meet, the university now has opportunities to help set the table by acting as a lead convener in initiatives to improve Milwaukee. An important example, he indicated, is the Milwaukee Partnership Academy through which the university has joined with city, state, and schools in a commitment to bring all public school students to grade level or better in reading, writing and math.
Dr, Percy indicated that the Milwaukee Idea has opened the door to new ideas about educational programs for the 21st Century, such as a path-breaking global studies undergraduate degree program and programs in non-profit management. With its focus on community connections, the Milwaukee Idea affords new opportunities for service learning, internships and experiential learning in partnership with community organizations.
Noting that the Milwaukee Idea has generated national attention, Dr. Percy announced that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has commissioned a case study of its work as a model for other universities. In addition, a major publisher has published a volume on the first phase of the Milwaukee Idea.
Further, he continued, the Milwaukee Idea has expanded access to financial resources from local foundations that have contributed millions of dollars to Milwaukee Idea initiatives. The university also is becoming much more competitive in obtaining federal grants and contracts.
Concluding his remarks. Dr. Percy noted that the Milwaukee idea is not an add-on, nor is it about becoming a social service agency. Rather, it is a commitment to sustain community engagement that strengthens the core research and teaching missions of the university. To provide an example of the Milwaukee Idea in practice, he introduced Professor Allen Zweben, director of the Center for Addiction and Behavioral Health Research, which is the home base for the Healthy Choices initiative.
Beginning his remarks, Professor Zweben indicated that the center was started in 1991 after UWM was awarded two major NIH grants, one in conjunction with Marquette University, focusing on prevention and treatment of substance use problems. To support their research efforts, the two universities formed partnerships with a number of health care organizations, with the present consortium involving Aurora Health Care and Rogers Memorial Hospital.
The overall mission is to guide health care decisions. Specific goals include interdisciplinary research in mental health and substance abuse and education of community providers in the etiology, prevention and treatment of mental health and substance abuse problems.
In addition to federal grants, support comes from contributions by consortium members, private contributions, and state and county contracts. Current projects deal with development of assessment and tracking techniques for treatment and research, pharmacologic trials, HIV prevention studies, mentoring projects and development of innovative behavioral treatments.
The Healthy Choices Initiative, he continued, has allowed the center to expand community partnerships and enhance contributions to the community. Faculty and staff have applied their expertise to such issues as partner violence, reduction of student drinking, and screening and intervention in primary care and managed care settings. State and local providers have been educated in state-of-the-art screening, diagnostic and intervention methodologies, and new prevention efforts have been conducted on campus.
Projects have included public school-based alcohol, tobacco and other drug programs, a social norms marketing project to reduce drinking on campus, an undergraduate curriculum on alcohol and drug issues, as well as other health concerns. Partnerships have made it possible to reach underserved populations, such as the homeless and individuals at risk for HIV, and to achieve positive recognition in the Milwaukee community.
Success in recruitment of subjects, along with high quality scientific work, has given the program wide recognition in the addiction field and has been instrumental in bringing new federal dollars to the state. Federal grants have been received for a $2 million project to match different alcohol treatments with various subsets of patient groups and for another $2 million study to test the efficacy of combining mediation and psychotherapy in treating alcohol problems. The latter study is being conducted at other sites as well, including Harvard University, Yale University, the University of Washington, Brown University, and the University of New Mexico. It has received international and national recognition and is expected to have an important impact on alcoholism treatment in years to come.
Another major project called “Heart-to-Heart”, is a $3.3 million study supported by the National Institutes of Health, involving UWM and the Milwaukee Women’s Center. The study deals with women seeking help for alcohol problems who also are at-risk for HIV infection and is the only study of its kind being conducted in the country. This study grew out of other collaborative efforts with the center, including a study addressing the treatment needs of cocaine-addicted women, a project on violence against women, and an evaluation project on temporary assistance to needy families.
Professor Zweben introduced Carey Tradewell Monreal, CEO of the Milwaukee Women’s Center, who had worked closely with UWM over the years and was active in developing the Heart-to-Heart study.
Stating that the project is bold and exciting Ms. Monreal credited all the partners from the Women’s Center and UWM who helped in formulating this initiative to serve high-risk women, and predicted that the study will be nationally replicated upon completion. Noting that she has been involved with the Milwaukee Idea since its inception, she thanked Chancellor Zimpher, Dr. Percy and others for expressing the Idea through such projects as “Heart-to-Heart”.
Chancellor Zimpher identified the following benchmarks that have guided her activities over the past five years:
1. Help make UW-Milwaukee a presence in the community. This has been done through fostering the Milwaukee Idea, strongly linking the university to metropolitan Milwaukee.
2. Enable better linkages with elementary and secondary education. In that regard, the chancellor indicated that UW-Milwaukee has one of the most substantial PK-16 partnerships in the nation. The Milwaukee Partnership Academy, formed to help close the student achievement gap and prepare high quality teachers, has been allocated more federal dollars than any partnership of its kind in the nation.
3. Provide for an enhanced development function. The former director of development for the Milwaukee Art Museum, Lucia Petrie, was hired after completing a $100 million capital campaign. Further, investment policies have been reframed and only paying members are being recruited to the foundation board. More than two million dollars in venture funds have been attracted to underwrite the upcoming capital campaign.
4. Generate more support for graduate education. UWM has realized a 67% growth in federal dollars since 1999, showing the ability to support its graduate program array. In addition, there have been 52 invention disclosures and 29 patent applications through WiSys.
5. Build strategic alliances with other higher education institutions. TechStar aligns UWM with Marquette, Milwaukee School of Engineering, the Medical College of Wisconsin and UW-Parkside in a powerful public/private partnership in technology transfer. Another important alliance is the College Connection through which UWM offers bachelor’s degrees on nine UW College campuses and three technical colleges, with 300 students and 54 graduates to date.
6. Ensure more high quality programs. UWM has expanded its Honors Program to build an academy of scholars and has made a strong commitment to teaching and learning through the Carnegie Initiative and the Black and Gold Commission on the Student Experience.
The university’s 6-year investment plan, adopted in 2000, ensures that resources to fund these initiatives are available.
Looking to the future, Chancellor Zimpher presented several ideas that she identified as her own thoughts, although triggered by conversations with deans, students, faculty and staff. They are intended to lay the groundwork for a more comprehensive plan to be delivered by December.
She indicated that UWM has chosen four peers against whom to benchmark future progress: the University of Pittsburg, the University of Illinois-Chicago, the University of Cincinnati and Virginia Commonwealth University. Each of these universities has a strong doctoral array averaging 51 programs, while UWM has 19. Each has more than 10 graduate programs in the top 20 rankings of US News and World Report, while UWM has four - - Architecture, Film, Library Science, and Occupational Therapy. Each has more students, averaging 30,000, while UWM is scheduled to reach that enrollment level in 2006. Finally, each has strong athletic programs; and UWM is on the way in this area.
With its strong campus-wide commitment to community engagement, access to statewide linkages, and extensive institutional partnerships, the Chancellor stated, the Milwaukee Idea has readied UWM to set its sights on matching or exceeding the nation’s highest achieving public urban research institutions.
Noting that reaching such a vision will be a stretch for everyone involved, Chancellor Zimpher offered five goals to help shape rethinking about UWM and the UW System.
Stretch Goal l: If you build it, they will come. Moving toward an enrollment target of 30,000 students, the chancellor indicated that applications are up 21% from last year and 55% over the past five years. While the university’s top 30 feeder high schools are in Metropolitan Milwaukee, there are growing numbers of applicants from across Wisconsin and the Midwest. Many students want to live in dorms, but there is a shortage of housing. The Columbia Hospital conversion to 450 residence rooms could extend to 2009, and Kenilworth’s graduate student housing will not be available until 2005. The stretch goal, therefore, is increased residential housing – soon, possibly located along Oakland Avenue or Capitol Drive. Both locales also could dramatically reduce housing demands in the already overcrowded neighborhoods adjacent to the university.
Stretch Goal 2: Bulking up. As a 21st Century urban public research university, the Chancellor indicated, the goal is to move at least 20 graduate programs into the top 20 rankings by 2020. To reach that goal, the process is to prioritize programs that are designated for growth; add a degree or cross-disciplinarity; and allocate positions to programmatic priorities. UWM’s Bulking-Up Plan, she explained, builds on the university’s most recent program array review, the academic roadmap presented in the 2000 investment plan, the university’s self-study for North Central accreditation, and the confluence of interdisciplinary First Ideas of the Milwaukee Idea. The intent is to focus resources on the 3Es: Education and the Arts, Economic Development, and Environment and Health. To find the necessary resources, the university will seek more endowed professorships, more capacity to reallocate funds to laboratory start-up costs, more cluster hires, and more funding for the Milwaukee Idea from the state.
Stretch Goal 3: TechStar Valley: The Chancellor indicated that UW-Milwaukee wants to be part of a rebirth of the Menomonee River Valley as a future home to sustainable redevelopment, including entrepreneurial companies producing jobs with family-supporting wages. The Valley, she observed would be an ideal location for expansion or engineering and applied science programs, and the university can be a major innovation engine to revitalize and reinvent manufacturing and lead technological advances. While the details may shift and some other site might turn out to be better suited, the intent is to move into a major capital initiative to give TechStar the incubator focus that has been missing.
Stretch Goal 4: UrbanSphere. Drawing an analogy to Columbia University’s Biosphere research facility, dedicated to studying global environmental and climate change, Chancellor Zimpher explained that UWM is doing something similar by applying scientific expertise to the studies of the human condition as it exists in the city. This mission is all the more important, she noted, since projections are that 75% of the world’s population will reside in cities by 2025.
Stretch Goal 5: one major disruptive innovation. Referring to an article in the Harvard Business Review, Chancellor Zimpher indicated that the author and his colleagues argue that the current health care model is built around sophisticated health care needs that most people don’t have, provided by the most expensive experts and equipment. By delivering more health care less expensively and conveniently by clinical health professionals, such as nurses, in community settings, instead of focusing so much on physicians and hospitals, health care costs could be cut, while making care more accessible to more people. In that regard, she suggested that the university could help to create the impetus to shift all but the most serious care from hospitals to community and neighborhood health care centers, where allied health professionals can provide services where people live. Such an innovative approach, she remarked, would build on the university’s strengths in allied health fields, position it will for future federal funding, and allow the university to take a leadership role in advancing an agenda with far-reaching public health implications.
In conclusion, the Chancellor stated that now, more than ever, the values of the Milwaukee Idea can help UWM become a leader among peers and the economic, social and academic driver for the region’s future.
-
President Lyall reported that this year UW campuses awarded more than 29,000 degrees to graduates, noting that this infusion of highly educated people into the state’s workforce is a reminder of how important public education is to Wisconsin’s economic future. More than 80% of these graduates, she pointed out, will stay in Wisconsin to work, raise families and become productive taxpaying citizens – a real brain gain for the state.
Of the graduates, three-quarters earned bachelor’s degrees, while the rest completed master’s, Ph.D. or professional degrees. UW campuses graduate two out of every three new K-12 teachers in the state and 90% of the pharmacists, in addition to many nurses.
While the UW contributes in many ways to the state’s economy, she observed that the most important contribution is the benefit of providing this large number of skilled workers for Wisconsin’s job market.
-
Economic Summit IV
President Lyall reported that the UW will be sponsoring Economic Summit IV on October 27th and 28th at the Midwest Express Center in Milwaukee. The summit will be co-sponsored by the Robert W. Baird Company and its board chairman, Fred Kasten, with other sponsors including the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel and the Bradley Foundation. Expressing appreciation for these sponsorships, she also recognized Regent Smith who initiated the economic summits that have become a valuable part of the Wisconsin Idea.
-
Update on Fall 2003 Enrollments
With regard to fall enrollments, President Lyall noted that the overall target enrollment is 135,450 FTE students, which is the same as last year despite the net reduction of $100 million in base support and loss of 650 faculty and staff under the planned budget cuts. Noting that the consequences of these cuts will be felt in and outside of the classroom, she asked for patience by students and others as the university does the best it can to manage the coming reductions. .
-
Summit on Criminal Justice at UW-Oshkosh
President Lyall thanked Chancellor Wells and UW-Oshkosh for hosting a successful summit on criminal justice. Three hundred participants attended, including the Attorney General, the Lieutenant Governor and many community justice professionals from around the state. The conference provided an excellent forum to explore alternatives to incarceration, which is the most expensive means of dealing with criminal problems.
-
New MBA Extended to Waukesha
It was reported by President Lyall that the UW-Milwaukee School of Business will begin to offer it MBA degree at UW-Waukesha this fall. The program has been streamlined so that working adults will be able to get their degree in 16 months of concentrated coursework. She thanked Chancellors Zimpher and Messner for extending this degree opportunity to the fast-growing Waukesha market and for stretching resources as efficiently as possible.
-
Chancellor Keating, Vice Chair of NCAA Presidents' Council
President Lyall congratulated UW-Parkside Chancellor Jack Keating on his election as vice chair of the NCAA Division II President’s Council.
-
Extension Helps Families Get Health Insurance Coverage
It was reported by President Lyall that UW-Extension will serve as the lead agency for a $900,000 grant from the Robert Wood Foundation to help educate Wisconsin families on how to enroll for health care coverage through Medicare and Badgercare and to simplify the process for Wisconsin’s 70,000 uninsured low-income children.
-
Chancellor Miller Gets leadership Awards
President Lyall congratulated UW-Whitewater Chancellor Jack Miller on being named chair of the Board of Governors of the Renaissance Group – a national consortium of 36 universities committed to improvement in teacher education. One of every ten teachers in the country, she noted, is educated at one of those 36 institutions.
-
An Opportunity to Help Students
It was reported by President Lyall that interest rates on federal student loans will be at the lowest level ever for next fall. New student loans will carry a 2.2% interest rate, and those who already have student loans can refinance them at 3.2%.
Noting that the proposed biennial budget would divert $26 million of auxiliary balances to financial aid for students, she indicated that at today’s state borrowing rate of about 4%, the state could borrow the $26 million for an annual interest charge of about $1 million with students repaying the principle over time. The $1 million interest would support more than 5,000 Wisconsin students each year, 80% of whom would stay in the state to live and work. Over their careers, they would earn more than $3 billion and return many times the million dollars in taxes paid. She expressed the hope that the Legislature would see if there is a way to exploit these low interest rates to help students.
- - -
REPORT OF THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE
Regent Mohs, Chair, presented the report of the Education Committee.
Report of the Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs
Senior Vice President Cora Marrett’s report focused on education that is excellent, accessible and inclusive.
-
Presentation by UW-Milwaukee on the Black and Gold Commission
VP Marrett introduced Chancellor Zimpher who then introduced student members of the Black and Gold Commission which is composed of an equal number of students, faculty and staff. The group was formed to develop and implement recommendations on how to provide the best quality education for UW-Milwaukee students. Involved in college-wide activities, students spoke about working to enhance student input into teaching in the Schools of Nursing, Architecture and Urban Planning and Business. Institution-wide activities include the development of a Student Success Center which will provide an on-line student information and advising website.
-
Report of Education Committee Works and Accomplishments
Reviewing the committee’s works and accomplishments for the year, Ms. Marrett noted two proposals made a year ago: 1) a partnership between the Office of the Senior Vice President and the Board of Regents, in particular the Education Committee; and 2) a study of quality – its meaning and its measure. The committee worked in the areas of program planning and review, integration of technology into teaching and learning, and efforts to infuse multicultural teaching and learning into the curriculum.
-
Associate Vice Presidents Ron Singer and Frank Goldberg reported on defining quality. Reviewing a quality matrix, they determined that the complexity of defining quality was linked to different stakeholders who hold the UW System as accountable in different ways and who have different ideas about what quality is.
In preliminary findings of data compiled from focus groups around the state, Dr. Flynn-Saulnier stated that although the study was not intended to be a scientific study, certain areas of quality emerged from the study such as mission, access, faculty, teaching, climate, and diversity. Dr. Flynn-Saulnier recommended the following ways to improve quality:
· Home institution-specific missions;
· Improve the balance of faculty contribution among teaching, research and service;
· Make more dramatic inroads towards increasing diversity;
· Provide supportive environments in and out of the classroom; and
· Attend to class size in relation to quality instruction.
Citing the importance of potential leading indicators, Dr. Goldberg pointed out that it is critical in identifying quality measures that the importance of quality as process and as input be considered. The following leading indicators were identified: Student-faculty contact; support services for students; campus environment; and access. In conclusion, Dr. Goldberg emphasized that these measures have to be tied to the strategic objectives set by the UW System and the Board of Regents.
-
Implementation of the Excess Credit Policy
Dr. Marrett updated the committee on the implementation of the Excess Credit Policy which was approved in December, 2002. Guidelines will be distributed for implementation in Fall 2004.
-
VP Goldberg reported that a relatively small number of students admitted to the UW require additional coursework in English and Math which can be attributed to the quality of K-12 education in Wisconsin. Only 6% of new freshman (half of the national average for 4-year institutions) enroll in remedial English courses. And the number of freshman enrolling in remedial math courses is below that of peers across the country. There has also been a relatively stable and high second-year retention rate for students requiring English and/or Math remediation.
-
Report on Promotions, Tenure Designations, and Related Academic Approval Items.
The UW System compiles data on tenure designations and new tenured appointments at each institution on a yearly basis.
-
PK-16 Partnerships and Initiatives
A report on the PK-16 partnerships and initiatives in operation throughout the state was presented by Regent Burmaster. Through PI-34 (Wisconsin Quality Educator Initiative), the following areas for continuing study and discussion include: educating, recruiting, retaining and professionally developing teachers, alternative teacher certification programs, and closing the achievement gap, among other items.
Dr. Francine Tompkins, Director of PK-16 Initiatives in the Office of Academic and Student Services, and Dr. Penny Garcia, Assistant Professor of Education at UW-Oshkosh detailed other partnerships that are ongoing in the areas of shared, institution-wide responsibility for teacher education and grant initiatives.
-
Regent Mohs presented the following resolutions to the Board of Regents as consent agenda items and the motion was seconded by Regent Axtell.
2003-04 Tenure Designations and New Tenured Appointments
Resolution 8698: That, upon recommendation of the respective Chancellors and the President of the University of Wisconsin System, the 2003-04 tenure designations and new tenured appointments, reported in the attached materials by institution, be approved.
UW-Milwaukee: Center for Charter Schools Contract with the Woodlands School, Inc.
Resolution 8699: That, upon recommendation of the Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and the President of the University of Wisconsin System, the Board of Regents approves the charter school contract with Woodlands School, Inc.
Resolution 8699 was removed from the consent agenda at the request of Regent Salas. Resolution 8698 was adopted unanimously. Resolution 8699 was adopted with Regent Salas voting against it.
In discussion, Regent Olivieri noted several quality accountability indicators such as graduation rates, retention rates, and performance on post-graduate testing. In terms of quality, he emphasized the need to focus on outcome oriented accountability indicators rather than process oriented indicators.
In response to a question on PK-16 reporting , Regent Burmaster replied that there was a high degree of collaboration among the UW System institutions, independent colleges and universities, and the Technical Colleges. She stated that this is an ongoing effort that has shown considerable growth and momentum.
Regent Davis urged the committee to set targets for improvement regarding the issue of climate for faculty, staff and students and its relationship to diversity. She emphasized that this is a critical issue from an attraction and retention standpoint.
- - -
REPORT OF THE PHYSICAL PLANNING AND FUNDING COMMITTEE
The report of the Physical Planning and Funding Committee was presented by Regent Gracz, Chair.
Report of the Assistant Vice President
Assistant VP Ives reported that the Building Commission agreed to use a Construction Manager-At-Risk for the $160 million Interdisciplinary Research Center at UW-Madison. This will help facilitate completing the project on time and within budget.
The Joint Finance Committee approved the Capital Budget as recommended by the Building Commission, but reduced all agency funds for maintenance. They also approved enumeration of $80M PR Bonding for participation in the cogeneration project at UW-Madison and approved using $7.5M GPR bonding for the Phoenix Sports Center.
UW-Milwaukee Facilities Planning Director, Claude Schuttey provided an update on opportunities to purchase the Columbia Hospital property. The campus will begin a study to see how it best suits their needs. Bob Greenstreet, Dean of Architecture and Urban Planning reviewed the final proposals regarding the re-development of the Kenilworth building which would provide a combination of retail housing and academic space.
The following resolution was passed by the Physical Planning and Funding Committee and presented as a consent agenda item. Regent Gracz moved adoption by the Board of Regents; it was seconded by Regent Randall and passed unanimously.
UW-River Falls: Authority to Increase the Scope and Budget of the Child Care Center Project
Resolution 8700: That, upon the recommendation of the UW-River Falls Chancellor and the President of the University of Wisconsin System, authority be granted to increase the scope and budget of the Child Care Center project by $476,000 Program Revenue Supported Borrowing for a revised total project cost of $1,076,000 Program Revenue Supported Borrowing.
- - -
REPORT OF THE BUSINESS AND FINANCE COMMITTEE
Regent Olivieri, Chair, presented the report of the Business and Finance Committee.
-
2003-05 Unclassified Pay Plan Recommendation
Regent Olivieri noted that the following resolution informs the Department of Employment Relations that a recommendation for a pay plan for unclassified staff will be forthcoming before October of this year. A specific number recommendation will not be made at this time due to the uncertainty of the budget. He noted that the resolution reflects significant challenges and concerns in terms of the benefit package and potential contributions employees may be required to make, particularly in the health care plans. The modified resolution requests that faculty and academic staff be represented in any discussion in regard to employee health insurance. The words “but not limited to” were added so if other issues related to the health care plan are discussed, faculty and academic staff would have a role in that discussion.
Regent Olivieri made a motion to the Board of Regents to approve the modified Resolution 8701. The motion was seconded by Regent Walsh and it passed unanimously.
2003-05 Unclassified Pay Plan Recommendation (Modified)
Resolution 8701: That upon the recommendation of the UW System President, the Board of Regents directs the UW System President to notify the Department of Employment Relations Secretary that:
A formal recommendation of the Board of Regents pursuant to s. 230.12(3)(e) Wis. Stats., will be transmitted on or before October 10, 2003;
The Board of Regents asks that the UW System faculty and academic staff be represented in any discussions pertaining to employee health insurance including, but not limited to: changes to the premium contribution structure to a “tiered” approach; establishing criteria for formulating a risk adjustment model to ensure the efficiency of plan providers; changing existing prescription drug benefits and evaluating the prospect of engaging a pharmacy benefits manager; excluding dental benefits from participating plans and creation of a stand alone dental plan; and, converting the standard plans to a preferred provider option.
Regent Olivieri reiterated the difficulty of this situation and requested that a great deal of time and energy be spent on resolving the issue.
-
Vice President Durcan reported on the review of UW System’s auditing processes by the Legislative Audit Bureau.
-
LAB Administrative Audit Update
The Legislative Audit Bureau is continuing their audit on administrative costs. They are meeting with campus business officers and closely looking at collaborations between the campuses.
-
The following resolutions were presented by Regent Olivieri to the Board of Regents as consent agenda items. They were seconded by Regent Walsh and approved unanimously.
UW-La Crosse: Differential Tuition for Academic Excellence Initiatives
Resolution 8702: That, upon the recommendation of the President of the University of Wisconsin System and the students and Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, the Board of Regents approves the differential tuition rates for all UW-La Crosse students beginning in the Fall Semester of 2003-04.
UW-Superior: Differential Tuition for Library Initiatives
Resolution 8703: That, upon the recommendation of the President of the University of Wisconsin System and the students and Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Superior, the Board of Regents approves the differential tuition rates for undergraduate students at UW-Superior beginning in the Fall Semester of 2003-04.
Regent Richlen inquired about differential tuition proposals and how they are handled throughout the system. She requested further discussion about what differential tuition should be used for and that it should not be used to fill in areas that have been cut by the budget.
Regent Gottschalk agreed that this should be included in our rethinking of the University System.
Chancellor Hastad introduced Luke Naegele, the incoming president of the UW-La Crosse student body, who then introduced several of his colleagues. They attended the meeting in support of the resolution on differential tuition. Mr. Naegele spoke about their year long project working with student demands for academic excellence initiatives and a policy on differential tuition to support those initiatives.
Regent Walsh remarked on a report presented by Dr. Sally Peck Lundeen, UW-Milwaukee School of Nursing, regarding the extreme shortage of nurses throughout the state. He noted that is an opportunity for the University System and Learning Innovations to provide on-line education at the undergraduate level. However, he noted, there continues to be a real problem with the lack of qualified faculty with masters and Ph.D degrees. Although this is a serious problem, it can provide a wonderful opportunity for our System.
In regard to the discussion on health care costs, Regent Rosenzweig inquired about what authority the Regents may have in the decision process. President Lyall stated that the Legislature would have the final say, but felt that unclassified employees should have an opportunity to express their views regarding any changes to health care plans.
- - -
Regent Rosenzweig presented the following resolution, which was adopted by acclamation.
Resolution of Appreciation: UW-Milwaukee
Resolution 8704: Whereas, the members of the Board of Regents are very pleased to be invited to hold our June 2003 meetings at University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee; and
Whereas, the meetings have been enriched by informative presentations on the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, the Impact of Scholarships and Financial Aid, the Black and Gold Commission, the School of Nursing on-line PhD program, current campus projects, and the Milwaukee Idea; and
Whereas, it was a particular pleasure to attend a special reception and performance of the Fine Arts Quartet in the beautiful Helene Zelazo Center for the Performing Arts; and
Whereas, the warm and gracious hospitality extended by Chancellor Zimpher and the UW-Milwaukee community is very much appreciated;
Therefore, be it resolved that the Board of Regents hereby thanks the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee for a most interesting and enjoyable visit.
Industrial Relations Research Institute, UW-Madison
Regent Salas prefaced his remarks by noting his personal experience with the institute and his knowledge of its history. As indicated at the board’s Madison listening session, UW-Madison proposed to eliminate the institute in its upcoming budget cuts. Stating his opposition to this plan, Regent Salas referred to the principles that were established for making cuts and pointed out that the institute is not a duplicative program. On the contrary, it is unique in Wisconsin and one of the best programs of its kind nationally. Established in 1948, the institute was involved in generating ideas that led to the development of social security, workmen’s compensation, unemployment compensation, the minimum wage, and collective bargaining. He felt the institute would continue to be valuable in coping with the need to compete in a global economy, as well as the current economic downturn and attendant unemployment.
For those reasons, he moved adoption of the following resolution.
UW-Madison: Industrial Relations Research Institute Exemption
Resolution: The Board of Regents directs the University of Wisconsin-Madison to exempt the Industrial Relations Research Institute from any decrease in state funding associated with the base budget reductions imposed by the 2003-05 Biennial Budget Act.
Seconding the motion for purposes of discussion, Regent Walsh inquired about the reasons for the decision.
Provost Peter Spear responded, noting that the IRRI is a venerable program that has produced many outstanding graduates in its 50 years of operation. The decision to cut the program was made by Dean Philip Certain, of the College of Letters and Science, after considering extensive input and consultation with the college’s Academic Planning Council – an elected faculty and staff committee – which approved the decision. The decision was supported by the provost and the chancellor.
Explaining reasons for the decision, Provost Spear indicated first that the program no longer has faculty support and that the departments of Economics and Sociology, which have been the primary providers of faculty for the program, are no longer willing or able to provide instructional resources and faculty to teach the courses. As a result, 75% of the courses in the program currently are taught by short-term faculty from outside of the college. In addition, it has not been possible to find a director for the program, although two searches and three offers were made over the past five years. Another reason for cutting the program is to save the $350,000 per year cost of running the institute. Other campus units, such as the LaFollette School of Public Affairs and the School of Business are not willing or able to pick up the cost and house the program at a time when they are making their own budget cuts.
In making the difficult decisions to cut programs, the provost explained, priority is given to those of highest quality, those with the greatest faculty support, and those that serve undergraduates. The IRRI offers only graduate degrees. He emphasized, however, that existing students will be allowed to complete their degrees.
Regent Salas observed that, unlike a department, an institute has no faculty of its own and must depend on other units for instructional resources. While this is a strength in providing interdisciplinary teaching and research, it also causes an institute to be vulnerable to cuts in a time of fiscal crisis, since faculty have primary loyalty to their tenure-home departments, rather than to institutes. With regard to the School of Business, he remarked that the school would have been willing to accept the institute several years ago, if the College of Letters and Science had been willing to provide the requisite faculty positions.
Regent Connolly-Keesler expressed reservations about micromanaging program cuts and telling the university that $350,000 would have to be cut from some other program.
Regent Axtell asked about the number of students in the program and for what occupations students are trained. In reply, Provost Spear indicated that there are a total of 25-30 graduate students in the masters and Ph.D. programs. They are trained in such areas as labor relations, management, and employment relations.
Regent Walsh stated reluctance to change decisions made through the established shared governance process. He asked Provost Spear for a description of the process that was followed in this case.
Dr. Spear responded that the college’s Academic Planning Committee consists of elected faculty from the disciplinary divisions, along with academic staff. The committee advises the dean in such areas as program reviews, improvements, and budget cuts. In the case of the IRRI, it was decided that the institute is not a top priority for the college and that it is one of the areas that should be cut from the budget.
Regent Davis inquired as to whether a decision was made not to have tenured faculty instruct at the IRRI or whether the lack of tenured instructors in the institute happened over time based on lack of faculty interest.
Stating that the latter was true, Provost Spear indicated that he is sensitive to the dependence of institutes on retaining faculty interest. With regard to the IRRI, faculty are no longer working in areas that are central to the institute’s mission. Two years ago, he noted, the dean had offered to create two positions and hire faculty working in those areas as an incentive to attract a director, but he still was unable to hire a person to head the institute.
Regent Davis asked if there was a common theme for turning down the three offers that had been made to potential candidates, to which Dr. Spear replied that the offers were not accepted for different reasons.
Regent Rosenzweig expressed reluctance to undercut chancellors by changing decisions they had been asked to make under very difficult circumstances. However, she was sympathetic with the points made by Regent Salas as to the need for the institutes’ programs. These types of issues should be considered, she remarked, as the board and others look to the future and the university’s role in economic revitalization of the state.
Regent Richlen asked if students were involved in the shared governance process to consider potential cuts.
In response, Dr. Spear indicated that students have not been members of the academic planning committees but, at student request, now were included in the committees’ budget cutting deliberations.
While she agreed with Regent Salas about the merits of the IRRI program, Regent Burmaster also concurred with Regent Connolly-Keesler and Regent Rosenzweig that it would be difficult to change individual budget cutting decisions that the chancellor has been asked to make.
Regent Smith pointed out that program creation and elimination is something that the university needs to do in order to stay modern and position itself for the future.
Regent Axtell agreed with Regent Burmaster and others that the board should support the chancellors’ decisions rather than making judgments about individual programs.
Regent Amato asked if it would be possible to suspend the program for a year or two and then reassess the situation once the fiscal crisis has passed. In response, Provost Spear indicated that, if a suspension did not mean admitting new students, it would be possible to do that. However, if new students were admitted during that time, the financial commitment would need to continue for the duration of their programs. He was not optimistic that funding for the program would be available in the near future.
The question was put on the resolution and it was defeated on a roll-call vote, with Regent Salas voting for it, Regents Amato, Axtell, Bradley, Burmaster, Connolly-Keesler, Davis, Gracz, Marcovich, Mohs, Randall, Rosenzweig, Smith, Walsh and Gottschalk voting against it, and Regent Richlen abstaining.
Regent President Gottschalk observed that the discussion was valuable and illustrated the difficult choices entrusted to the chancellors.
Regent Bradley concurred, noting that this case provides a lesson about what happens when state support for higher education is decreased and about the very difficult time the university is facing. He did not believe that any regent would want his or her vote to be interpreted as being against the IRRI program, instead, the board voted in support of the chancellor’s decision.
- - -
election of officers of the board of regents
Regent Gottschalk was nominated for re-election as President of the Board by Regent Mohs.
Regent Marcovich was nominated by Regent Amato.
Regent President Gottschalk made the following statement:
“When I was appointed to be a regent by Governor Thompson, I felt beholden to him because by that appointment he had accorded me one of the greatest honors of my life – one that was eclipsed only when this board elected me as its president a year ago. I would like to continue to serve in that capacity for another term.
“Regent Marcovich would like to be Regent President, and his friend Governor Jim Doyle would like to help him do so. Many of you, in turn, feel beholden to Governor Doyle. I understand all of that, and if we are to elect Toby as Regent President in the next few minutes, I will hold no hard feelings or ill will toward anyone.
“Very shortly after I began my term, there was an issue that came before the board. The Governor had made his wishes known, and I thought to myself: ‘Tommy, this one’s for you’. But I resolved that thereafter I would vote my own conscience on every issue to come before the board on the sole basis of what I thought best for the university and the state.
“Tommy used to lament, with some humor, that once his appointed regents got to the top of Van Hise they ‘went native’, or became indigenous to the university culture. And that is what I urge that all of us do.
“If you feel beholden to vote for Toby then so be it, but from then on, resolve in your heart of hearts to be your own man or your own woman and put the best interests of the university and Wisconsin ahead of all other considerations – political or otherwise. I allow myself no other choice.
“Therefore, and because I will not be a party to splitting this board along partisan lines, I withdraw my nomination for re-election.”
Regent Marcovich was elected unanimously.
Regent Marcovich thanked the regents for their support and confidence, noting that he had been elected vice president last year when he was the only Democrat on the board. On behalf of the regents, he expressed appreciation to Regent Gottschalk for steering the university with a steady hand through very troubled waters and indicated that he would rely on his good counsel and assistance throughout the coming year.
In another matter, he asked the board members inform him of their preferences for committee memberships.
Regent Smith also expressed appreciation for Regent Gottschalk’s service as president, remarking that he had shown excellent leadership and had done so with great energy. Speaking as a past president of the board, Regent Smith observed that many do not understand the vast amount of time and energy required by that office. He commended Regent Gottschalk for meeting those demands willingly and well and for protecting the university through a very difficult time.
Vice President
Regent Walsh was nominated for the office of vice president by Regent Smith. There were no further nominations, and Regent Walsh was elected unanimously.
Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Trust Officer, Assistant Trust Officers
Regent Randall nominated the following officers for re-election: Judith Temby, secretary; Cheryle Goplin, assistant secretary; Deborah Durcan, trust officer; Pat Brady, assistant trust officer; and Doug Hoerr, assistant trust officer. There being no further nominations, the incumbents were re-elected unanimously.
- - -
The meeting was recessed at 12:30 p.m. and reconvened at 12:45 p.m., at which time the following resolution, moved by Regent Marcovich and seconded by Regent Randall, was adopted unanimously on a roll-call vote, with Regents Amato, Axtell, Bradley, Burmaster, Connolly-Keesler, Davis, Gracz, Marcovich, Mohs, Olivieri, Randall, Richlen, Rosenzweig, Salas, Smith, Walsh, and Gottschalk (17) voting in the affirmative.
Resolution 8705: That, the Board of Regents recess into Closed Session, to consider annual evaluations, as permitted by s.19.85(1)(c), Wis. Stats., to consider a request for board review of a UW-Extension decision, as permitted by s.19.85(1)(c)(f), Wis. Stats., and to confer with Legal Counsel, as permitted by s.19.85(1)(g), Wis. Stats.
The board arose from closed session at 2:00 p.m., having adopted the following resolution:
Request for Review of UW-Extension Decision
Resolution 8706: That the Board of Regents adopts the attached decision and order in the matter of a request for review of a UW-Extension decision.
The meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m.
___________________________________
Judith A. Temby, Secretary