Minutes & Agendas
University of Hawaii at Manoa Faculty Congress, April 26, 2000
33 Senators were present:
Belinda Aquino, Barry Baker, Horst Brandes, Robert Cooney, John Cox, Thomas Craven, MarilynDunlap, Agnes Fok, Patricia Fryer, Carolyn Gotay, John Haig, Emily Hawkins, Manfred Henningsen, Dianne Ishida, Casey Jarman, Karl Kim, Joy Marsella, Matthew McGranaghan, Chris Measures, Ralph Moberly, Joseph O'Mealy, Robert Paull, Karen Peacock, Teresita Ramos, Thomas Schroeder, Martha Staff, Virginia Tanji, Mary Tiles, Jane Tribble, Robert Valliant, Richard Varley, David Yount, Ming-Bao Yue.
18 Senators were excused:
Iqbal Ahmed, James Dator, Ernestine Enomoto, Donna Fukuda, Robert Joseph, Peter Kim, Takeo Kudo, William Lampe, Linda Menton, Susan Miyasaka, Jane Moulin, John Mount, Mary Pateman, John Rieder, Frank Walton, Charles Weems, Joel Weiner, Sylvia Yuen.
18 Senators were absent:
Robert Bart, Andrea Feeser, David Flynn, William Haning, Joel Hanna, Lenard Huff, Nanette Judd, Irvin King, Laurence Kolonel, Edward Laws, Bruce Liebert, Glenn Man, John Melish, Charles Mueller, Stanley Saiki, Brent Sipes, Janice Uchida, John Wendell.
8 Administrators were present:
Dean Smith, Thomas Bopp, Judith Inazu, Ken Tokuno, Jack Suyderhoud, David Lassner, Pat Cooper, Dick Dubanoski.
7 others signed in:
Jim Cowen, Peggy Hunt, Betsy Fisher, Gerard Fryer, Jim Tiles, Peggy Adams, Emanuel Drechsel
Chair Mary Tiles opened the meeting at 3:09
1. The minutes of the Faculty Congress meeting held March 22nd, 2000 were approved unanimously by voice vote, after a short debate.
2. Karl Kim, co-chair of CAB presented the proposed changes to the charter and by-laws of the Faculty Senate. Kim pointed out that these changes had been presented to the FS twice and were now being presented to the Faculty Congress prior to being sent out to all Congress members for approval via written ballot. He explained that the kinds of changes that were being sought fell into three categories. The first were essentially housekeeping matters that were designed to make FS by-law language consistent with that in BOR policies. The second change was to give the FS more authority by designating that the FS could act as well as speak for the Faculty. The third change was to develop a new mechanism that would improve the process of appointment of Faculty to committees. Tom Bopp, Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs, asked if the definition of Faculty was being changed in the proposed new by-laws, Kim replied that it was not.
3. Chair Tiles then introduced the members of a panel that would address the State of Manoa. She explained that each panellist would make some introductory remarks and afterwards questions would be taken from the floor.
The first panellist, Dean Smith, Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs and Executive Vice- Chancellor, explained that his main responsibilities at Manoa were in the areas of budget and academic affairs. He explained that in the two and one half years since he had been in this job the main issue had been eroding State support for the University and that this led to the need to restructure the base support of Manoa and reallocate funds. He explained that general funds distribution had been realigned to more accurately reflect workload trends. He further explained that as part of the restructuring, incentive components were being added by returning 67% of all tuition and fees to the Colleges, he noted that the 1/3rd that was kept by the administraton was to pay for infrastructure and running costs such as electricity etc. Smith explained that the professional schools were increasing the fees that they charged their students and that the excess money that they raised in this manner was being returned to them to give them financial flexibility. He explained that prior to the institution of these new budget plans, initial budget cuts to the University had been met by an emergency hiring freeze. This had resulted in some departments being cut below their teaching needs, in addition there had been no investment in equipment. Something had to be done and this was being achieved through internal reallocation. The 4/4/4 plan had taken across the board cuts of 4% per year from all units and reallocated this money to units according to programmatic needs. This year the committee that was recommending reallocations was composed of FS members as well as Deans and Directors. The 4/4/4 process recouped about $5M/yr. of which about 80% was being spent on infrastructure; for example to the library whose ranking had dropped dramatically as a result of initial budget cuts, into equipment to modernise laboratories and classrooms, into information technology, into repairs and maintenance the budget for which was also well below needs. He explained that while the effects of the cuts were immediate, there was a lag before seeing the effects of the reinvestment, though these were now starting to show up.
In the area of Academic Affairs, his responsibility had been to finish the strategic plan for Manoa started by his predecessor the late Carol Eastman. He explained that as he was given only 9 months to complete this task he was compelled to use a top-down rather than a bottom- up system to complete it in time. The report had been put out for comment and adopted by the BOR in May 1998. The WASC accreditation team had thought the plan credible but had noted that there was not a general engagement of the Faculty in its preparation, which was true. Smith said that one of the tasks was to re-address this plan prior to the WASC re-visit in 2002. He explained that while Manoa had received re-accreditation for 3 years rather than 10 years, this was not unusual since between 1/3 and 1/2 of all schools were revisited in less than 10 years.
Smith said that the WASC accreditation report had expressed concern in 4 major areas.
One was the issue of campus leadership which was now being addressed by various proposals that would set up a University of Hawaii Chancellorship. Another issue was the recognition of the primacy of the Faculty in curriculum matters. More Faculty buy-in to the budget and planning process was also needed. Undergraduate education, its quality (a Faculty issue), and enrolment were also issues. On the latter point Smith noted that an Enrolment Management task force had produced a report as had a task force investigating the mechanisms by which a Dean or similar person could be put in charge of undergraduate education. The reports of these committees would be the basis for action that he hoped to start implementing this summer. Another WASC issue, perhaps the most important, and one that he wanted the Faculty to take the lead on, was the need to establish a campus-wide system to permit the assessment of student's educational outcomes. Finally he noted that WASC had highlighted the need to "communicate, communicate, communicate" between all parts of the University Community.
Dick Dubanoski, Dean of Social Sciences then gave his view of the State of Manoa.
He explained that while budgetary matters were serious, morale problems and lack of vision were the root problems. Across the country all institutions of higher education are facing serious questions, there was more than one factor responsible for these, and there is a need for positive change and new directions. Dubanoski felt that we need to commit to academic values, clarify values with a goal to rebuild from a perspective of collegiality and excellence. He said that senior administration must seek change by actively involving Faculty, Staff and Students; we must rise above cynicism and distrust. Changes, he said, must arise out of the application of core values applied to decision making rather than by the use of rules. There must be a climate of unity and trust as mistrust in governance led to disengagement. He explained that value- driven organisations link action e.g. budget decisions, to core values: there must be a shared vision. He explained that core academic elements must guide planning. Many universities lose focus and need new statements. These mission statements, though, must not be public relations documents as this would lead to scepticism and suspicion, we needed a concise and thoughtful mission statement.
Jack Suyderhoud, Associate Dean for Academic and International affairs in the College of Business Administration, and a member of the Deans and Director's Budget Committee then presented his views on the State of Manoa.
He explained that value governance required fiscal reality and that there were six factors involved.
It is not possible to run a Research 1 University without a large and efficiently taught undergraduate education system.
Tuition return was not enough to cover operational costs; the 67% of tuition returned only covered ~ 25% of costs. Even if all the tuition were returned it would still not cover operational expenses, thus we were dependant on G funds to cover costs.
G-fund support was diminishing; UH-M needs to become more self-reliant. He does not expect any big increases in support in the future as there is no ground swell of support for UH.
The rest of the world has been passing us by during the last 8 years of the economic slump. Faculty salaries are lagging behind those of mainland institutions and in the future we will have difficulty recruiting new Faculty and students as there will be more competition for them.
We will need to be more self-reliant in the future.
Decision-making will be revenue driven. This will have an effect on workload that will increasingly be defined by student-semester hours not the number of sections taught. We should be prepared to deal with the impacts of this new revenue-driven system.
Pat Cooper, Acting Associate Dean, SOEST, then gave her view of the effect of budget cuts on SOEST. She explained that the mission of SOEST involved comprehensive degree programs and certificates at the undergraduate and graduate level. The research activities of SOEST provided many opportunities for undergraduate involvement. Currently the Geology and Geophysics and the Oceanography Departments were ranked in the upper quartile of their respective fields and that the ranking of the Meteorology Department was moving into the same area as the result of initiatives with the newly created IPRC. SOEST was recognised nationally and internationally. The effects of the budget cuts though had been to reduce staffing levels many of which were invisible since they had been funded through RCUH. As G-funds had been reduced many RCUH positions had been lost as research funds were shifted to cover G-fund shortfalls. In terms of research funding SOEST in the past had been ranked 3rd and 5th nationally in its ability to obtain funds from the National Science Foundation Ocean Science programs. While only one year, this year our ranking had dropped to 7th as staff numbers had declined. Another part of the budget problem was that researchers were now being discouraged from submitting proposals for new initiatives which frequently required 30-50% matching from the proposing institution. Although the units now receive more returned overhead than in the past, those funds are covering formerly g-funded costs. New initiatives were now coming out of existing funds and the loss of teaching Faculty was leading to the loss of some academic sub-disciplines and a reduction in the number of graduate and undergraduate students that could be supported.
David Lassner, Director of Information Technology Services, presented the draft Strategic Plan for Information Technology. A summary was available for faculty to see at the meeting and a full version of the 25 page plan can be found on the web at http://www.hawaii.edu/spit2000. Lassner explained that while the plan was system-wide it allowed for different approaches on different campuses with their different needs. He explained that at this stage, the plan was concerned with the needs and recommended actions rather than the costs. The draft plan has seven strategic objectives, each of which led to specific recommendations (30 total). The question of how the plan would be funded will need to be tackled next. Possibilities include using 4/4/4 re-allocation $, charging directly for services, fundraising and/or levying a student technology fee. Comments on the draft plan are requested by May 31. He finished by pointing out that he expects that in some WASC visit in the near-future they will not only want to see an IT plan but also an indication of how the ongoing expenses of continually renewing the IT infrastructure will be obtained.
The meeting was then opened for questions from the floor to the panellists.
Tom Craven pointed out that while his unit had tried to keep classes small BOR hiring freezes had made it difficult for them to obtain the requisite number of TAs. He also pointed out that many classrooms were too small to allow class sizes to be increased. Jack Suyderhoud said that CBA had the same problems but that they could decide to use their money to either hire Faculty or TAs. Dean Smith added that units had the flexibility to reallocate. Tom Craven pointed out that his unit was now down to only 10 faculty, and that Fire Marshals had reduced the number of students that could be accommodated in some classrooms. Smith responded that they would try, through remodelling, to get more medium-sized classrooms. Joe O'Mealy asked how the new undergraduate Dean could be reconciled with using TAs to teach. Dean Smith said that while small classes were ideal this was irreconcilable with the fiscal problems. Dick Dubanoski stated that smaller classes led to better educational outcomes. Joy Marsella asked Dean Smith what had happened to the undergraduate Dean report that her committee had submitted to the Administration? Smith replied that the report had been turned over to the Office of Human Resources in order to get a personnel analysis. The Council of Deans had assessed the report and had a slightly different perspective. The Faculty Congress had also been supportive of a Dean but had concerns about adding any more administrators and how the office would be paid for. Marsella responded that most of the criticism of the committee report concerned proliferation of administration but that this was not part of her committee's charge.
Chris Measures pointed out that with a fixed budget there were two ways to deliver undergraduate education more efficiently; one is to increase class size the other to use lecturers or TAs to teach the class since they were cheaper. If we took the latter route, though, how would the education at Manoa be any different from that offered at the Community Colleges where a semester hour cost only 1/3 that at Manoa? He further stated that he thought units that mainly used lecturers and TAs to teach introductory classes were contributing directly to the decline in quality and distinctiveness of education at Manoa. Patty Fryer said that at Manoa we had the ability to provide key people from the field of research to teach incoming students at the undergraduate level. Dean Smith stressed that the strength of the University lies in have Faculty teaching undergraduates at the introductory level. Jim Tiles raised concern about the effect of larger class sizes, that teaching was more than a one-way system, larger class sizes make it more difficult to monitor performance. He noted that Writing Intensive courses were limited to an enrolment of 20 for that reason. Jack Suyderhoud responded that a small class size was neither a necessary nor sufficient reason for quality education, It is possible to run relatively large sized classes and still get quality. He said that this was a reality issue, we cannot run the university that way unless we want to triple tuition, something has to give. Jim Tiles responded that many of the students were not of the quality that can take large class sizes. Joy Marsella noted that in many High Schools teachers were responsible for 100-150 students. Dick Dubanoski expressed concern that these issues were being driven by budget concerns not by core values.
There being no further questions, Chair Tiles thanked the panel and adjourned the meeting at 4:23 p.m.