Council of University System Faculty

CUSF Executive Committee Meeting of September 7, 2005

CUSF Executive Committee Meeting
September 7, 2005
USM Office

Present: Martha Siegel (Chair), E.W. Chapin (Vice Chair), John Collins (Secretary), Vincent Brannigan (At-Large) and John McMullin (At-Large)

Excused: Lee Richardson (past Chair)

Guests: Irv Goldstein, Nancy Shapiro, Patricia Alt

The meeting started at 12:05pm

After a brief discussion it was agreed that the CUSF Executive Committee should continue to have monthly meetings at the System Office, even though USM is short-handed due to budget cuts.

Changes in health care benefits for retirees were discussed. It was noted that benefits for everybody got worse after July 1, 2005.

Discussion of changes in health care benefits for retirees. Benefits for everybody got worse July

VCAA’s report (Irv Goldstein):

USM has adopted a new, four-year budget planning process. The campus presidents met with Vice Chancellors Goldstein and Vivona, and later with the Chancellor, over the summer to discuss campus needs. These discussions were very good and illuminating. They included all sorts of issues regarding what the campuses will need to achieve their goals during the next few years. The four-year budget planning process arose directly from these discussions. The plan has been approved by the Regents and will soon go to the legislature and governor for review and approval. The process will probably continue year-to-year, always looking ahead four years.

It is time for the campuses to submit their new five-year mission statements. To eliminate unnecessary work, each campus has been asked whether they plan to change its current mission statement. UMUC’s and UB’s mission statements will definitely change, but UMCP’s may not. Dr. Goldstein asked whether campus people (faculty, senates, etc.) should be involved in this process.

MHEC has two kinds of committees in the process of reviewing OCR statements. Committee 1 deals with academic areas, and helps to prepare a final report to MHEC on what has been achieved in the past five to eight years. Committee 1 also has a staff work group to help them. Committee 2 deals with financial issues, such as enhancing the HBCUs. Do the HBCUs now feel viable and competitive with other institutions? There will be a hearing on the HBCU mission statements. The process will be completed by January, and a final report summarizing

the five years will be given to OCR, who will then site visit USM.

Dashboard indicators: The provosts have all seen them, and now Dr. Goldstein will work on them with CUSF. There's nothing new. They were prepared by each campus. They're used to compare each campus with its peers, not to compete against one another within USM. Dr. Siegel noted that most campuses have not seen their dashboard indicators. She also asked who the peers are.

To conclude his report, Dr. Goldstein noted that USM is in the final stages of choosing a new Associate VCAA. This person will deal with diversity issues, workshops for senior administrators, legal issues, audits, contracts and grants, and many other difficult problems.

Dr. Shapiro reported on K-16 activities. The Chancellor is chairing the forum this year. He has chosen dual enrollment in high school and college as the primary issue. Maryland has no dual enrollment policy. Most state policies deal with funding, not quality. Another issue is when students are eligible for financial aid, e.g. can they get college scholarships or tuition remission while still in high school? There is a subcommittee working on this that includes a representative from CUSF. A new workgroup on leadership will be formed soon. Another important issue is professional development courses. All teachers are required to take these courses, but they are relatively expensive. USM is asking for more money to cover the costs of teaching these students. There used to be soft money for professional development students (PDS, seeking qualification to become teachers), but now it's expired and new funding will be needed to sustain the program. Dr. Shapiro wants to collect data on how many PDS students actually become teachers in Maryland.

Dr. Shapiro and Dr. Goldstein left the meeting at 1:15pm.

The executive committee member discussed several CUSF issues:

The need to organize CUSF committees and their charges at the September 21 meeting.

Dr. Siegel needs backups to go to some of the external meetings that she attends.

Should CUSF invite guests, e.g. Joe Vivona, Board members?

Joyce Tenney will take charge of the next Student Research Day.

Should there be a CUSF newsletter, similar to the one CUSS has?

An agenda for the September 21 CUSF meeting was

Dr. Alt reported on a new draft of a proposed substance abuse policy. A spirited discussion ensued.

Dr. Siegel reported that she and Dr. Chapin had met and proposed a few changes in the policy violation review procedure. The document will be presented to CUSF for approval/comment before sending it back to JoAnne Goedert for further action.

Dr. Brannigan brought up the issue of teaching "intelligent design" along with evolution. He claimed that policy makers are mandating and interfering with teaching content. This issue had previously been brought up in email messages from Dr. Richardson.

There was a discussion of what CUSF could do to help the victims of Hurricane Katrina? For example, some teachers are not being paid because their schools are closed.

The meeting adjourned at approximately 2:00pm.