Minutes: December 12, 2005

Academic Staff Council

Full Council

December 12, 2005

104 Wing

 

Present: Karpinsky, Weiland, Reinert, Brunk, Jacobson, Richter, Herling, Johnson-Sage

 

Excused: VanRoosenbeek, Heyer

 

Called to order at 3:03pm.

 

Minutes

Approval of October Full Council Minutes

            Motion: Jacobson – Brunk

            APPROVED

 

Approval of November Full Council Minutes

            Motion: Richter – Johnson-Sage

            APPROVED

 

Chancellor Hastad

The System understands UW-LaCrosse’s unique position: lack of funding but still high quality.  The idea that he is bringing to the Council is that we would create our own tuition management program, which would start with pilot program running about eight years.  If we are given permission by the System we would:

            -reduce out of state tuition overtime

            -increase resident tuition overtime

            -create a financial aid pool to recruit low income students

Hopefully, this would lead to more faculty and staff and more graduates.  This is an idea – not a done deal.

Questions

What was the response from local legislators?

They gave advice on what would happen in the idea went to the Board of Regents.  The campus would have receive a greater share of revenue and would be able to manage enrollment better.  They would like to go after high quality, low income students.

 

Who has to approve the plan?

The Chancellor had assumed it would have to go through the Legislator but System has informed him that it can be included in the budget request so a statutory change would not have to be made.

 

Are there other schools that are models?

Ohio-Miami charges the same price for all and gives a subsidy to residents.  Of course, Madison and Milwaukee have a different tuition from everyone else.

 

What did System think of the idea?

Don Mash agreed that LaCrosse is uniquely positions and the System needs to do something different.  Kevin Riley said that the Board of Regents is looking at doing something different.

 

When would we like the blessing from the Legislature?

This is only in the discussion stage; nothing is for sure.  Before asking for a blessing from the Legislature we need a discussion on campus.  The Board of Regents will be discussing different ways of tuition.

 

What was the reaction from the student government?

They didn’t balk at the plan; glad that it would be worked in over time.

 

Has the Board of Regents realized it was wrong to raise out of state tuition a few years back?

It was the Legislature that raised out of state tuition.  In a meeting earlier today, Mike Huebsch admitted that it was a mistake.

 

Where will we put the growth – facilities, etc?

The new academic building will help with that.  Have been talking with local landlords about them building high quality properties which would then be managed by the University.

 

Where will academic staff go when Wilder is torn down?

They will accommodated somewhere on campus – possibly in trailers.

 

Timeline for the new academic building?

ideal: start planning this year and next with construction beginning in 2009

 

Committee Reports

Salary and Personnel – meeting tomorrow.  There will be reviewing the memo to invite Jennifer Wilson to talk about IDP early spring semester.  They will also be discussing their agenda for the spring.

 

Human Relations­ – will be sending out a survey to recent hires on what they would have liked in their orientation; will also be asking directors what they do for orientation.

 

Budget and Planning – distributed VanRoosenbeek’s report.  Discussed printing costs, conservation, approach to J-term and Summer Session.

 

Chair’s Report

We need pictures of academic staff in action for our new bulletin board. Update on search and screen.  Regent Semenas has rescheduled his visit for February 1, 2006.

General Education Listening Sessions

#1 – the design team has developed a new approach to general education.  It would reduce the number of credits by three.  They are looking for feedback and are open to changes.  Concerns: who will staff new courses, sequencing of courses.

 

#2 – the committee was assigned to look at the general education program and suggest ways to update and change it.  It was asked how this would be paid for. The committee was not charged with figuring that out.  Concerns about the sequence working for science students and also if all freshman will be able to fit into a UWL 110 in the first semester.