I. Call to Order
President Jim Tolhuizen called the meeting to order at 1:02 p.m..
II. Minutes of the January 19, 2001 meeting
A motion to approve the minutes of the January 19, 2001 Faculty Organization meeting was made, seconded, and approved unanimously.
III. Chancellor's Business
Chancellor Bruce Bergland began his remarks by commenting on the resolution to be discussed later in this meeting. He welcomed the resolution because it reflects the fact that all of us are committed to IUN and that we care about this campus. All of the Senior Staff present today are here to listen. The chancellor went on to say that he was saddened that no one came to him or the vice chancellors before today. He will work on being more accessible and approachable.
IUN has an open and participatory budget process which welcomes involvement. The Faculty Budget Committee is fully engaged in our budget process.
Chancellor Bergland concluded his remarks by stating that he is adamant about pursuing our Vision-he wants to be absolutely clear on that subject. Last year, between 800-900 persons participated in the Vision discussions. At present, over 140 people are active on various task forces. The Vision will continue to move forward, and today's discussions will help that process.
IV. Executive Vice Chancellor's Business
Vice Chancellor Bill May reported on several developments:
. The resolution on the Trustee's Teaching Award, passed at the last Faculty Organization meeting, has been forwarded to the deans. They will determine the deadlines within their units. The Trustees want the awards given this academic year.
. The search for the director of admissions post is moving forward. Bert Scott and Clyde Wiles are co-chairing the search committee.
. The guidelines for the Academic Awards for Scholarship and Creativity and Service were distributed via campus email. Applications are due in the Academic Affairs office by March 23. The Faculty Organization's Grants Committee will be evaluating the applications and making recommendations. Since we do not have a comparable committee to evaluate the Service applications, Bill has asked past recipients to form an ad hoc committee to do so.
. We are still investigating the NCA/AQIP option for our accreditation.
. There will be a meeting on retention. It will be held at IUPUI. Please let Bill know if you want to attend.
. Bill mentioned that Professor Bob Lovely is doing well as he recovers from surgery.
V. President's Business
President Tolhuizen reported on the following:
. Trustee's Teaching Award-Our resolution called for inclusion of non-tenure track faculty. At the last UFC Agenda Committee meeting, President Tolhuizen informed President Brand of our actions to include non-tenured faculty in the Award. A strong debate ensued within the Agenda Committee. The IUB faculty, in particular, want to exclude non-tenure track faculty, since the Award was designed to reward tenured faculty for teaching. Jim tried to explain that the needs of the Northwest campus differ somewhat from that of the IUB campus, but he was unsure if anyone was convinced.
. Faculty Organization elections will be held in March. A number of offices will be up for election. Nomination forms will come out soon.
. Business Software Alliance (BSA)-Don Steward sent out a campus email this morning about the BSA. The BSA investigates the licensing of software on college campuses. We must be certain that we have purchased the software on our computers. VC Steward said that UW-Madison was recently fined for software violations. We are liable both individually and as a campus.
VI. UFC Report
Professor Vinodgopal reported on the following points from the UFC meetings:
. The university's budget is before the legislature. Prospects look dim for higher education, due to the economic downturn.
. The Vice Chancellor for Continuing Studies for the IU system talked about distance education. He would like to know the courses we teach via distance education and compile a listing of all such courses throughout the system. Implications include whether an IUB faculty member could teach an IUN course via online, satellite or other means.
. Status of lecturers-The UFC and Trustees agree that lecturers who have been with IU for several years deserve some job security. Two proposals have been made on this issue. The IUB faculty have put forth a two-tiered system, i.e. Lecturer and Senior Lecturer. IUPUI faculty have proposed a three-tiered system of Assistant lecturer/Associate lecturer/Lecturer. The UFC wants input from the regional campuses on which proposal is preferable, so any IUN lecturers can contact Professor Vinodgopal with their opinions.
. Inter-campus transfer of credits-We need to specify the course content for our courses, so that courses with identical numbers on the various campuses use the same content for seamless transfer among IU campuses. A committee will be formed to handle this issue. Also, see UFC Circular U6-2001 for more information at www.indiana.edu/~ufc/circulars/00-01/U6-2001.htm.
A suggestion was made that IUN needs a standing committee on distance education. President Tolhuizen replied that the Executive Committee has begun to examine the Faculty Organization committee structure and will discuss this distance education committee idea. Vice Chancellor May suggested that the Faculty Organization draft a distance education policy by June 30.
VII. Old Business
There was no old business.
VIII. New Business
President Tolhuizen recognized Professor Shanks-Meile. Professor Shanks-Meile stated that a feeling exists among some faculty that things at IUN are deteriorating. Because these faculty care deeply about IUN and about the students, a resolution was drafted last week for presentation to this body. In addition, a flyer with "Discussion Points" has been circulated around campus and distributed at this meeting (see Appendix I below). These documents and actions are not meant to be an "attack;" rather, they are a call for unity to make the campus economically viable and serve the region well.
Professor Shanks-Meile moved the resolution, which was seconded. She read the resolution into the record:
Resolution Proposed by the Student-Centered Faculty
Of Indiana University Northwest
Whereas there have already been some significant cuts in sections (i.e., 50 sections in the
Division of Arts and Sciences), and
Whereas there is no evidence that if a particular section is cut, the same students who would have taken that section will pick up the same number of hours among other courses, and
Whereas the strategy of decreasing the number of sections to increase the number of students per section has not worked, and
Whereas there have already been substantial cuts in academic programs which have made
fewer choices available to students, and
Whereas the cuts were not made systematically with regard to maintaining other programs that are dependent upon the cancelled sections to service their majors (i.e., access to fulfilling the general education requirements for Education and nursing majors if affected by cuts in Arts and Sciences), and
Whereas those cuts may be contributing to the overall decline in numbers,
Therefore be it resolved that before there are further cuts in sections and in faculty summer teaching and pay in 2001 and thereafter, there must be cuts in administrative positions and/or pay proportional to the cut in sections and faculty that have already taken place.
President Tolhuizen opened the floor for discussion on the resolution. The discussion included a number of comments on a variety of subjects. A representative sample of those comments follows:
. We should market aggressively our current strengths, rather than cutting sections to rollback to 1988 levels.
. It seems we have an "Administrator of the Month".
. We need an aggressive marketing campaign, and we need it now.
. Summer school is proposed for cuts, yet summer school is a growth area for us.
. Faculty members will "sweat blood", IF they see others are willing to do the same.
. We need equivalent cuts in administration to match the cuts by the faculty and cuts in sections.
. What do these 12-month academic appointees do?
. We are perceived as "chaotic" by more and more students.
. By cutting sections, we are cutting our "muscle."
. We have disproportionately large administrative costs when compared with other IU campuses.
. There is a disconnection between the Vision and our day-to-day responsibilities.
. This is an equity issue, not a marketing issue.
. This is indeed a marketing issue.
. Faculty have some responsibility, too, for example, to teach at different times and go out to the satellite campuses.
. We need to offer students more sections.
. Don't limit this to administrators-there are other places to look, too.
. We need to remember that we are a liberal arts college.
Professor Johnston called the question. President Tolhuizen called for a vote on the resolution. The resolution passed, with forty-five for the resolution and seven against it.
President Tolhuizen called on Chancellor Bergland. The chancellor invited participation in the budget process and hopes that a group from this meeting will get involved over the next several weeks as budget meetings are held. He has listened to today's comments and appreciates them, and believes many of them are right on target. The resolution has passed---he will work with it.
President Tolhuizen recognized Professor Moon. Dr. Moon announced that Professor Cheryl Oprisko has been awarded a $1.5 million federal grant.
There being no further business, the Faculty Organization meeting adjourned at 2:58 p.m..
Stephen G. McShane
DISCUSSION POINTS FROM THE STUDENT-CENTERED FACULTY
"Students are ends, not means. "
In the fall of 1994, student enrollments on the IUN campus approached 6000 students. And then, for reasons not completely understood, student enrollment went into steady decline. During the next six years, a loss of nearly 1200 students occurred, a decrease exacerbated by significant problems with accreditation in both Business and Education. Nursing numbers also went soft as shortages in the field apparently began to disappear. The number of majors in the other divisions and departments also tended to drop. As a result, a major budgetary crisis ensued that still plagues our campus today.
One administrative solution to the problem has been to cut faculty positions. As faculty retired, or
moved to other jobs, they often have not been replaced. This strategy, driven totally by random
events, has had severe consequences. By 1997, Education was missing a number of important
positions, and Business had also lost several key lines. There is no doubt those losses contributed
directly to the accreditation problems experienced by both programs. And tragically, during the past summer, the School of Business completely lost an enrollment-enhancing professional accreditation.
In similar fashion, administrative and staff 'positions were also eliminated with these job-cuts usually folding into other positions. Almost always, significant increases in pay accompanied these job consolidations, countering the impact of budgetary benefit. Other times a person might be eliminated, only to move to a "new" position, always keeping the prior salary, sometimes even receiving a pay increase. Seemingly, only the faculty were expected to do more for less as we were repeatedly told to take low-level raises until we could "get enrollments up." Sometimes faculty were even told to "go out and recruit students" despite the presence of an Admission Director with a full-time staff.
With the exception of equity adjustments for a select group, the majority of faculty have received
minimal raises from 2.5 % to 3.5% in the critical six-year period. Data in the Chronicle of Higher
Education revealed the following increases in IUN faculty salaries (averages in thousands of dollars)
during this time:
94-95 00-01 Increase
Full Professor 54.4 63.0 15.8%
Associate Professor 44.6 54.4 21.9%
Assistant Professor 35.5 43.0 21.1%
During the same period, top-level administrative costs increased rather dramatically. The following data from the IUN annual salary postings revealed the salary amounts for the following administrative positions (in thousands of dollars):
94-95 00-01 Increase
Chancellor 104.0 140.0 34.6%
VC Fiscal Affairs 78.0 110.0 41.0%
VC Academic Affairs 77.0 100.8 30.9%
Assoc VC Academic Affairs 54.5 94.7 73.7%
Assoc VC Academic Affairs ------ 88.0 (position added this spring)
These disproportionate increases have no explanation, at least none that has ever been publically
shared with a campus community suffering a major budgetary crisis and significant declining
enrollment. Lower level administrative lines (twelve months) also increased, in part due a sudden
proliferation of associate deans and other administrative extras. It is indeed fair to ask: Where did the money come from?
Now, once again, the faculty have been asked to "tighten the belt." Class sections are being slashed to the detriment of programs and to the elimination of accessible scheduling for students. Summer school stipends (and more class sections) are also being eyed for elimination, while still more administrative positions are being added. And amazingly, all this goes on as a revitalization process ("Shared Vision") is strongly promoting "student-centered planning."
There is no doubt that heavy administrative costs have contributed to the budgetary shortfall the
campus now faces. The "vision process" has also become a severe drain on valuable resources
without having any immediate impact on enrollment. Campus morale has reached a new low, as
students become more angry, particularly about the unavailability of classes and the ongoing problems with advisement and support services.
The faculty also reject the notion that we are the problem. As 832 students have revealed in the Noel-Levitz report:
ò Faculty provided timely feedback about student progress (extremely satisfied, p<.001)
ò Faculty are usually available after class (extremely satisfied, p<.001)
ò Quality of instruction in most of the classes is excellent (very satisfied, p<-01)
ò Faculty take into considerations student differences as they teach (satisfied, p<-05)
In fact, where students have major concerns are in areas actually managed by administration:
ò A good variety of courses exist on this campus (very dissatisfied, p<01)
ò Staff are concerned about students as individuals (extremely dissatisfied, p<.001)
ò Counseling staff care about students as individuals (extremely dissatisfied, p<.001)
ò Academic advisors are concerned about students (dissatisfied, p<-05)
ò New student orientation services help students adjust to college (extremely dissatisfied,
Our interpretation of the above findings suggests the following needs to happen quickly:
ò constraints on the size and growth of administration salaries and positions
ò improved accountability of administration at all levels
In closing, the Student-Centered Faculty would like to invite all faculty to join us in a discussion
of the above noted concerns at the next Faculty Organization Meeting at 1:00 on Friday (2/16/01)
We will be bringing forward a motion to confront further academic program cuts, especially
summer school. And remember... students, and students alone, are the reason there is an Indiana