For
a WORD file of these minutes - click the disc 
2000-2001
FACULTY COUNCIL
MINUTES
2000-2001 Meeting #12, Tuesday, November 14, 2000
Present:
McKeever (chair), Smelser (vice-chair),
Bitterwolf, Brunsfeld, Chun, Coonts, Fritz, Glen, Goble, Guilfoyle,
Haggart (w/o vote), Hong, Kraut, McClure, Nelson, Nielsen, Olson, Trivedi Absent:
Finnie, Foltz, Goodwin, McCaffrey, Meier, Pitcher, Thompson Observers:
3
Call
to Order. A quorum being present, Faculty
Council Chair, Professor Kerry McKeever, called the meeting to order at
3:30 p.m. in the Idaho Commons.
Minutes.
The council, by voice vote, accepted the minutes of the November 7, 2000,
meeting as distributed.
Chair’s
Report. Chair McKeever formally welcomed two
new student members of the Faculty Council: Colin Glen, representing
the undergraduate students, and Pankaj Trivedi, representing the graduate
students.
McKeever
continued her statement concerning the good work of the Faculty Council
that was interrupted by a motion to adjourn at the end of the last
meeting. She said that the council was being complimented for its good
work this year by faculty, staff, and students.
The
chair called the council’s attention to a memorandum from the faculty
secretary. In response to a councilor’s question at the last meeting,
the secretary asked the registrar which version of the catalog was to be
considered "official" – the printed or web version. The
registrar responded that the web version is the official version of the
catalog. It represents changes approved after the publication of the
catalog. However, the council was reminded that neither version was to be
considered a binding contract between the U of Idaho and students.
McKeever
reminded the council that today is the deadline for submitting nominations
for the University Promotions Committee. Councilor Kraut said that she
had only been able to find one faculty member from her college willing to
stand for nomination to the committee. McKeever said that the one name
should be submitted and that the provost in consultation with the Faculty
Council leadership was responsible for the final make-up of the committee
and would find a way to make sure that her college was properly
represented on the committee. The chair said that the vice chair of
council is up for promotion and his place on the provost’s consultation
team would be taken by the faculty secretary.
The
chair said that she attended the legislative tour sessions and reported
that she was getting very good at talking about faculty salaries to
legislators without ever mentioning those words. She said that for "education
week" (education budget presentations to the Joint Finance and
Appropriations Committee) she was going to ask for faculty volunteers
to go to Boise and help with the educational lobbying efforts.
Expenses cannot be reimbursed for this work, but she hoped that some
people would be able to donate their time to help with this important
task. Information packets will be available to help the volunteers direct
their energies toward the important issues. She noted that the information
being gathered by the council/senate leadership in Idaho’s institutions
of higher education is proving that we are losing too many faculty and
staff members who work in areas that are crucial to the state of Idaho.
McKeever said she would have more details on this lobbying effort at the
next council meeting. She also told Dean Hatch that even though research
vacancies are being filled, there is still a need to tell the legislature
about how these temporary losses and pauses in research efforts have an
adverse effect on our educational mission in the state of Idaho.
Committee
on Committees Report. Professor Haggart told the
council that the university-level committee preference forms,
which are used by the Committee on Committees to make appointments for the
2001-2002 academic year, have been mailed to all resident faculty members.
The effective operation of faculty governance at the U of Idaho depends on
the willingness of faculty members to take an active role in
university-level committees. He urged the council to, in turn, urge
their constituent faculty members to complete and return the forms as
soon as possible. McKeever said that she believed that there had been a
request from the membership of the Faculty Affairs Committee to have a
firm meeting time set for that committee. The secretary said that he would
check the minutes from last year and inform the Committee on Committees of
any needed action.
University
Curriculum Committee Report. The University
Curriculum Committee forwarded to the council item FC-01-005 as a seconded
motion. FC-01-005 calls for the discontinuance of the B.A.
degree (offered by the College of Letters and Science) in child, family,
and consumer studies. The main degree in this academic program would
then be the B.S.F.C.S. degree in child development and family relations
offered in the College of Agriculture by the Margaret Ritchie School of
Family and Consumer Sciences. The motion was
adopted by unanimous voice vote.
Report
on U of Idaho Athletics. Mike Bohn, Director of
Athletics at the U of Idaho, gave the council his annual report on the
status of the athletic program. Bohn began his presentation to the council
by providing details concerning the construction of the Vandal Athletic
Center. The first phase (a new storage facility) has begun on this $13
million ($7.3 million has been raised to date) project.
The
completed building and renovation project proposes to have 7,000
square feet of weight room space, 4,200 square feet dedicated to sports
medicine, and 2,300 square feet committed to an academic center. All of
these areas will then be on a par with what schools have in the Sun Belt
and Western Athletic Conferences. It has been eighteen years since any
major changes have been made in the athletic operation’s physical space.
Bohn said that all of these additions will make the U of Idaho more
attractive to prospective student-athletes. The plan also calls for the
incorporation of a computer lab that would be available to the entire
campus community.
Bohn
also noted that there will be an immediate improvement for basketball
games in the Kibbie Dome with the phasing in of a "spectrum"
atmosphere for the fans. Black curtains will surround the bleacher seating
areas, a new lighting grid will be hung immediately above the playing
surface, and a new score board will be incorporated into the center court
lighting grid.
Bohn
then provided the council with the actual athletic budget figures
from last year and the working budget for this year. He pointed out the
"cap" that has been placed on all Idaho institutions of higher
education by the SBOE/Regents in connection with state support for
intercollegiate athletics. Bohn said that he would like to see the U of
Idaho’s athletic programs mirror the stature and standing of its
academic programs. Significant progress has been made, but he felt that
they were still not at an equal level. New staff positions added to the
program this year include a female trainer and an additional position in
academic support. He said that the athletic budget has been running
"in the black" for the last two years – mainly because of the
ample income coming from away game guarantees.
He
asked the council to give him feedback on how the Athletic Department can attract
more fans and general support from the faculty and staff. What will it
take to get more faculty and staff to attend games? It was suggested by
members of the council that the department might want to find ways to
accentuate the "student" part of the student-athlete – the
fact that they are being successful in the classroom and have a high
graduation rate – as a way to attract the positive attention of faculty
members to the athletic teams and programs. Bohn said that academics could
be given better visibility at games. Chair McKeever asked council members
to email her with suggestions.
The
council had several questions concerning the budget figures. In
particular:
1.
Why is less money being allocated in appropriated funds for "gender
equity?" That lower figure represents our
ability to offset some of the gender equity requirements with other
funds. Actually, this is an area that will continue to grow – perhaps
with the addition of more women’s sports – swimming and softball are
two options being studied at this time. Our women’s participation rate
in intercollegiate athletics is now over 40% – a new high in the
history of the U of Idaho. However, we are still lacking in appropriate
funding for recruiting, operating budgets, and salaries in the women’s
programs.
2.
Why are the budget expectations for ticket sales considerably lower this
year? The main reason is the elimination of the
"12th Man Campaign" that was used to help meet our
attendance requirements for our upgraded division status last year.
Ticket sales were counted – whether or not the people ever occupied a
seat. People did not see the need this year. Also, our win-loss record
is reflected in ticket sales. Weather can also be a factor in ticket
sales. All of those things add up to a lower projection.
3.
How does the revenue from last week’s game in the Kibbie Dome compare
with that of playing a game in Martin Stadium at WSU? Our last game
had the best attendance in a very long time. We had excellent faculty
and student support. The WSU game in Martin Stadium brought in more
revenue, but last week’s game came in second. The challenge issued
by the ASUI to the faculty and staff had a negative ring to it and
caused many faculty members to not attend that game. Unfortunately,
some people don’t understand that many faculty and staff regularly
attend games. I appreciate the feedback and we certainly don’t need
that negative feeling.
4.
What is "auxiliary support?" Auxiliary
support is that support that comes from auxiliary enterprises like the
bookstore, residence halls, dining facilities, and the golf course.
5.
What is meant by and included in the category of "game
guarantees?" When a school comes to the U
of Idaho to play a game we have to guarantee a certain amount of money
to that team and likewise, when we go to play an away game we are
guaranteed a certain payment. This year, the guarantees total over $1.2
million. We are putting our football team under tremendous pressure by
playing Washington, Oregon, West Virginia, and Washington State –
games that have a large financial return for the program. We cannot
generate enough ticket sale money in this market area. Boise State
University generates $2 million more than we do in home game ticket
sales because of their large stadium and population base.
6.
What does it cost us to use the facilities at WSU? Is there a potential
of Idaho being "pushed around" by WSU? The
cost is $25,000 per game, plus the expense of buses, clean-up, security,
etc. all add to the final cost. Playing in a larger stadium offsets
these costs because of increased ticket sales. The NCAA says that we
must play over half of our games in a stadium that seats more than
30,000 people. So next year we will play three games at WSU and 2 games
in the Kibbie Dome. We come out ahead financially by playing games at
Martin Stadium. They pay us $200,000 to play them whether we call it a
home game or an away game and, we pay them $25,000 to play someone else
in their stadium. They have been very supportive overall.
7.
What are the long range plans for playing fields for minor sports? The
soccer teams are playing on the site of a former dump. When it rains the
field is very unsuitable for play. We need to locate new areas to
develop into playing fields.
8.
What does being in the Sun Belt Conference do to your travel budget? The
travel budget will certainly be different in this conference, with three
new teams in the south-central part of the country. However, we have
decided to bus our team to most of the area games with WSU, Boise State,
Washington, and Montana. Oregon or Oregon State would only be short,
inexpensive air charters. These economies will offset the higher cost of
playing three conference away games in Tennessee, Louisiana, Arkansas,
and/or Texas. The big plus factor with the Sun Belt Conference is a bowl
game at the Super Dome in New Orleans.
Athletic
Director Bohn then presented the council with information concerning
the academic progress and standing of the student-athletes at the U of
Idaho. In the spring semester (1999) 47% of all student-athletes
achieved a 3.0 GPA or higher and 19 student-athletes had a 4.0 GPA. The
overall GPA average for all team athletes was 2.85, which is just slightly
higher than the average for all U of Idaho students. He also said that the
graduation rate for student-athletes who complete their eligibility is an
impressive 89%. He also noted that the U of Idaho women’s basketball
team has a team grade point average of 3.216. Bohn reminded the council
that there are now clauses in the contracts of coaches that make them
accountable for their team members’ grades and graduation rates and
becomes a part of their performance evaluations. He said that the football
coach has a "three strikes" policy that includes academic
infractions and can result in the player being kicked off the team and
losing his scholarship.
Report
on the U of Idaho’s Research Plan. Charles
Hatch, the interim Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies,
provided the council with an update on reactions to the recently published
"Enhancing and Sustaining Scholarly Activity
at the University of Idaho: A Plan of Action."
Hatch
said that the committee working on this plan had received about 40
responses, which included both individual contacts and responses from
several forums and group presentations. The committee will begin the
process of reviewing the responses and making adjustments to the research
plan next week. He identified several structural issues/problems
that had come to the committee’s attention:
concern
about inappropriate biases created by having a plan that is so heavily
focused on the recovery of indirect costs
concern
that the plan offers no guidelines concerning the relationships between
the U of Idaho centers, institutes, and colleges with respect to the
distribution of recovered indirect costs; especially with the upcoming
implementation of responsibility center management
concern
about the proposed decentralized responsibility center financial
management model vs. the centralized model presented in the research
plan
concern
about the very strong science and technology bias of the committee
members, which the critics of the plan feel drives too many aspects of
the research plan
concern
that the plan focuses on actions, but says very little about the
implementation of action plans
Comments
and Questions. Councilor Goble raised the issue
of the necessity for having an improved National Science Foundation (NSF)
ranking as a top priority. He said that the goal of becoming one of the
top 100 NSF research universities in the country, while being a good idea
in and of itself, speaks mainly to science and technology research. The
successful and respected research institutions have highly regarded
research in the humanities and social sciences, as well as excellent
research programs in the sciences. People should think about this in terms
of a total program – not just a program that wants to improve its NSF
ranking. Professor Goble said that the research plan becomes
"irrelevant" in terms of the kind of scholarship that he
produces. The title should be changed because it does not speak to areas
outside of the "hard sciences." He also called the council’s
attention to the fact that the goal of tripling the expenditures for the
library by having a 700% increase in the number of periodicals and
increasing three-fold the expenditures for subscriptions within the next 5
years did not seem a very realistic goal.
Councilor
Hong reminded the council that using the NSF standards, which only apply
to federal grants, will leave out grant success that comes from industry
and private grants. Other factors should be used in determining how the U
of Idaho ranks nationally in terms of research dollars acquired. The
intent wasn’t to say that we should achieve our goals by achieving a
certain NSF ranking. What we were trying to do was identify scholarly
activities that this campus needed and could use to enhance its scholarly
programs, actions that could help researchers who are seeking both private
and federal grants.
The
idea of the rankings was to try to put the U of Idaho in context using a
variety of measures. Councilor Goble said that
it was becoming clear to him, as the discussion progressed, that the
research plan really needs to clearly say that there are a variety of ways
to measure our standing among research universities.
Councilor
Hong also raised the issue of the university funding institutes and
centers while incoming junior faculty members in many departments cannot
find adequate funds for start-up projects in their research fields. He
called Dean Hatch’s attention to the research office web site which
lists an institute that nobody seems to know anything about and seems to
be misnamed. These sites should contain accurate information. Professor
Hong, joined by Professor McKeever, strongly suggested that it was time to
have an audit of the U of Idaho Research Office to see where funds were
actually being budgeted and spent.
Councilor
Bitterwolf asked where start-up funds really come from? There appears to
be no real institutional plans for this type of research activity. We
do need to have a source of funds for start-up research. It probably just
boils down to the process of setting priorities and making that one of our
top priorities. Perhaps better management of the university cash flow
could make funds, in the form of loans, available to researchers to get
started on projects. But eventually the loan would have to be paid back,
and the research plan is not clear on how that would happen. The recent
focus of the university has been on undergraduate education and our (the
committee’s) concern was to put issues on the table, by way of the
research plan, that were important to graduate education. Obviously,
investments need to be made in both undergraduate and graduate education.
Professor Bitterwolf also noted that matching grant programs for equipment
acquisition were also very important. Our budget
does not allow us to participate in all of the matching grant
opportunities that come along each year.
Councilor
Coonts asked about the attention paid to and funding of undergraduate
research opportunities. She said that undergraduate students need
instruction on how to secure research grants. Can we get more grants for
undergraduate research? We are going to have to
address that issue and determine how much attention we want to give to the
implementation of undergraduate research activities.
Councilor
Smelser questioned the emphasis of the plan on institutes and research
centers. Will faculty members only be successful in funding and
recognition if they band together and become institutes? How will you
control the proliferation of centers and institutes that will be
formulated to take advantage of this proposed research plan? That is
one of the action points in the research plan. We don’t have a good
mechanism in place for airing and deciding whether or not it is
appropriate to establish centers and institutes. There is a tendency to
want to establish an institute or center as a marketing tool. We need ways
to sort out which research areas the U of Idaho should emphasize, based on
the research objectives of our Strategic Plan. The research plan proposal
calls for a formal process to make those kinds of decisions. Councilor
Nelson noted that sometimes a center is created because a monetary gift
comes to the U of Idaho with the attached condition that calls for the
creation of a center. We also need a mechanism to
re-examine old centers and institutes that perhaps should be dissolved.
Chair
McKeever thanked Dean Hatch for responding to the questions and reminded
the council that they can still make comments at the web site devoted to
this subject.
Adjournment.
It was moved and seconded (Smelser, Goble) to adjourn the meeting. Chair
McKeever adjourned the meeting at 5:03 p.m.
Respectfully
submitted,
Peter
A. Haggart
Secretary
of the Faculty Council
Return
to the Faculty Council Home Page 
