Faculty Senate
Vol. 37, No. 6
November 7, 2002


I.  Roll Call.

Present:  Barmore, Barnd, Beck, Brooks, Cravins, Dixon, Gendreau, Gibson, Hoar, Hollenback, Kelly, Kernozek, Krajewski, L. Nelson, Ragan, Senger, Taylor, Tyser, Wingate

Excused:  Majak, Poulton, Vandenberg-Daves, Zellmer.

Absent:  A. Nelson

Chair Senger announced that the meeting is being taped for the convenience of Provost Hitch who is attending the Board of Regents meeting in Madison.

II.  Approval of Minutes.

The minutes of the October 24 meeting were distributed.

 III.  Reports.

Chair Senger reported that the SEC is working with the UCC to improve the publication and announcement of proposals pending before committee.  Check the Faculty Senate website for current links to minutes and agendas.

Assistant Chancellor, Ron Lostetter, distributed a document entitled Potential Campus Cuts Based on Systemwide 95% Budget Exercise, which is also being shared system-wide by the BOR.  Lostetter explained that this is an exercise that System is asked to do almost every biennium.  He stressed that the exercise is not a plan.  System Administration is discussing other possibilities, including a larger cut.  In the 95% budget exercise, UWL’s combined reduction totals over $2M with potential cuts of 41 faculty/staff and 350 students.  It is a huge responsibility to inform people who will be impacted of what a cut of this magnitude will do.  He urged everyone to engage Legislators as to how reductions in UWS will impact UWL, the La Crosse community, and the region.

Q.& A.  How many employees at UWL?  About 1100.  Is this a one-year cut?  No, permanent base budget cuts for FY4.  How will potential reductions be made?  Work with those in decision-making process (legislators, governors office, people who will be impacted) to identify high priorities departments.  Could possibly reduce or eliminate others.  Last reduction UWS took a greater base reduction than any other State agency.  Would cuts be made proportionally? It would be filtered much more than this.  Tenured faculty lay-offs?  Will need to face it at the time.  Lostetter indicated that we will have a much better feel for where this whole thing is going after the new Governor takes office and the Secretary of DOA  is appointed.

Comments:  Admissions are up at every institution in Wisconsin.  Would suggest budget and planning start considering how to address issues.  CAPS as well with possible reductions.  Been careful with hirings over the last two years.  Increasing in tuition a possibility – tuition flexibility is extremely important for UWS to gain.  Perhaps a lottery for admissions should be considered.

Faculty Representative’s Report.  Senator Cravins distributed the following summary of the 11-1-02 meeting:  1) The Wisconsin State budget is the biggest current concern of the UW-System.  2) An immediate related concern is the impact of the recent election on the UW-System.  3) There was a general consensus among Reps and System staff (including K. Lyall) that the UW-System as a whole ought to more actively lobby the legislature.  Teams led by faculty and staff should make visits to Madison for the purpose of lobbying legislators on the budget.  Moreover, there seems to be a consensus that lobbying teams should always include parents and students.  4) A new group has been formed to lobby the State legislature on behalf of higher education – Citizens for Higher Education.  5) President Lyall has been told by members of the legislature to expect deep cuts in the UW-System budget.  At one recent meeting, she was told to expect a minimum of $100M in cuts.  The same legislative committee indicated that cuts could be as high as $300M.  6) According to UWSA, a $40M cut would have a major impact on program quality and accessibility.  Such cuts would mean a reduction of approximately 1000 faculty and staff, as well as a reduction in enrollment of approximately 7800 students.  7) All major candidates for governor promised not to increase taxes.  This means that increasing tuition is the only option for maintaining the UW-System budget.  8) An 8.5% increase in tuition would be required to offset $50M in cuts.  9) Current UW-System priorities include identifying programs that promote Wisconsin’s economic development; and supporting new initiatives such as DPI’s requirements for K-12 programs, teachers and students.

IV.  Nominations to the Search & Screen Committee for the Dean of Health, Physical Education, Recreation & Teacher Education.

M/S/P to approve the SEC nominees to the Search/Screen Committee for the Dean of the College of HPERTE.  (voice vote)   Mandi Anderson, Mark Gibson, Delores Heiden, R. Mark Kelley, Steve Simpson

V.  UW-La Crosse FY03 GPR Additional Budget Reductions.
Last month, the Joint Planning & Budget Committee was presented with a budget package cutting an additional $120,900.  This amount was the final amount required for the FY03 GPR reductions.  This addition brings the UW-L campus budget reduction to $1,360,415 for the 01-02 Biennium…  The Joint Planning & Budget Committee unanimously approved the request.

M/S/P to approve the additional budget reductions (Personnel: $94,875; Non-Personnel: $26,025) as presented.  (voice vote)

VI.  Continued Discussion of the Strategic Planning Document.
Chair Senger asked for comments on vision statement.

  • Perhaps a modification will be curriculum/scholarship in place of academics.
  • Eliminate culturally competent.  What does culturally relevant mean?
  • Would like graduate education to be emphasized.
  • Primary mission is undergraduate institution – appropriate recognition to grad programs.
  • Traditional disciplines should be emphasized.
  • Remark directed to PVC – address research and role of research - strike a balance.
  • Style of document creates problems.  A sense that a number of different people wrote – use of terminology – a lot of absolutes – the word all shows up far too much.

M/S/P that the revised document include statements referencing the Select Mission, related to traditional liberal arts and sciences, majors/minors, and graduate programs.  (voice vote)

Doesn’t seem to be an organized strategic planning document.

Doing all this when we are looking at reduced budgets for years to come.

M/S/P the UWL Strategic Plan reflect an appropriate balance between our primary mission as an undergraduate institution as well and as a provider of graduate programs.  (voice vote)

Is there a way to value faculty, i.e. recruitment? If we are going to include strengths then faculty would be one of the strengths included in the document.

The senate looked at the remaining 5 sections as a group.

Senator Hollenback distributed the following suggestions for a revised strategic planning document:

(1)   Open with a revised schematization that emphasizes the primacy of academic in the Strategic Plan.  (see attached yellow sheet)

(2)   Then, immediately afterward, in the very front of the document, there needs to be the Mission Statement (e.g., take the one hidden in Appendix B and move it to the front).  This mission statement clarifies what it means when we say that we are a “regional comprehensive public university.”

(3)   The mission statement should then be immediately followed by our statement of what we want a liberally educated UW-L graduate to look like.  The statement below is offered as a sample of how such a statement might be written:

The Goals of a Liberal Education

The University of Wisconsin – La Crosse is committed to developing an intellectually exciting, rigorous, and coherent Liberal Education/General Education Program that creates students

·         Who possess a keen awareness of and appreciation of the splendors of nature and the wondrous achievements of the human intelligence and imagination.

·         Who possess a respectful awareness of both human cultural diversity and interdependence together with an understanding how those human cultures developed their distinctive characteristics.

·         Who think critically and logically and communicate clearly and persuasively both in writing and in speech.

·         Who possess a keen historical and developmental awareness, i.e., they have a deep understanding of how dynamic and complex systems such as human cultures, economies, biological organisms, and ecosystems sustain themselves, change through time, and respond to transformations in the contexts or environments that nourish them.

·         Who possess the wisdom to use scientific knowledge, technology, and a respectful awareness of cultural diversity to create a just and humane social order in harmony with both our natural surroundings and the diverse human and biotic communities with whom we share this planet.

·         Who understand that the highest keenness and vigor of mind and spirit is inseparable from developing a healthy lifestyle and a healthy body and who possess the knowledge and motivation to develop that healthy body and healthy lifestyle.

·         Who, by their example, will lead others in creating a vibrant and meaningful sense of community wherever they live.

·         Who are imbued with a passion for life-long learning.

(4)   The Strategic Plan document needs to be rephrased in such a way as to acknowledge the solid accomplishments of our predecessors.  Too much of the document conveys the impression that our past efforts were insignificant or seriously deficient.  That is not fair to our previous efforts and to the hard work of our predecessors.

(5)   Eliminate jargon and vague or meaningless phrases.  The term “culturally competent” should be gently but firmly euthanized.

(6)   Many of Dave Riley’s specific suggestions are very useful and should be incorporated into the revised Strategic Plan.

M/S/P the rewriters consider the Hollenback document (yellow sheet) as a possible organizational framework including the comments describing the goals of a liberal education.  (voice vote)

M/S/P that the strategic plan include a similar statement describing faculty characteristics and central role that faculty play in delivering curriculum and instruction.  (voice vote)

Someone should describe what holistic student development is?  Too much for institution to achieve.  4 of 7 items could be in diversity section – strongly suggest that this section be cut and moved to another section where they would easily fit.  Pg 1, who are we, what do we value, where do we want to go (pg 1).  There are things expressed here that we do not agree on and some things that we do agree on are left out.  The strategic planning committee needs a great deal more input about what is in the document and a great deal more thought about what constitutes a strategic plan.

Are there significant revisions from other groups across campus?  Yes a few.

Not much in here that is useful – not much should survive.

Sounds like future search was a valuable process – but too closely related to the strategic plan.   SEC believes it can be brought together – PVC will take a leadership role in drafting document.

Barmore’s concern is that the document is not a strategic plan – we are not revising it, we are generating a first draft of a strategic plan.  Make comments – information should be taken from many other places – next step is a different document will be constructed.

Move initiatives to the appendix. 

Academic visions – strategies.

Appalled at number of items delegated to department chairs.  Many items focused on general education – almost no items focused on programs, major/minors; it is an emphasis problem.  When discussion is on academics it focuses on general education – serious oversight.  Flat-out contradictions: 4-a. deal with the reality of the context, which we find ourselves.

Overall theme of document is change; processes mostly for general education.  The emphasis on general education should be reduced.

Senator Beck pointed out that technology support for the Library is not mentioned.  The Library Department has a changing workload.

We need to be sure that a copy is in every faculty member’s box instead of one copy per department.  Next semester a day should be set aside for each department to look at document for analysis, criticism – need comments.

People who put together the plan provided us with a lot of stimulation – we need to continue to be involved – don’t give administration carte blanch for rewriting document.  Would like to have faculty committees to review initiatives, building blocks with areas of their responsibilities.

M/S/P that the Senate Chair ask faculty committees to review initiatives and building blocks with their areas of their responsibility and forward suggestions to the PVC by the end of the semester.  (voice vote)

The Senate Executive Committee offered the following motions for consideration: 

1)      M/S/P the Senate recommends that a Strategic Plan clearly articulate the purpose of the university as offering high-quality undergraduate degree programs and select graduate programs as stated in the Select Mission statement.  In addition, the priorities and goals of the plan should be directly related to the mission statement.  (voice vote)

2)      M/S/P the Senate recommends that a Strategic Plan contain a “strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats” analysis and that this analysis be used to support he priorities and goals.  This analysis should include a consideration of the impact of state budget reductions to the UW-System. (voice vote)

3)      M/S/P the Senate recommends that the Strategic Planning Initiatives section not be a formal part of a revised draft.  Rather these initiatives should arise through the normal governance process as well-defined proposals for implementing the strategic plan.  (voice vote)

4)      M/S  the Senate recommends to the Chancellor that the Provost take a lead role, together with the Strategic Plan Writing Committee, in producing a revised draft.

 M/S/F to amend the last clause to say “by producing an initial draft of the strategic plan.” (voice vote)

M/S/P to amend by adding a last sentence to read:  The revised draft should clearly reflect the input of the Faculty Senate deliberations and appropriate faculty committees.  (voice vote)

M/S/P to amend further that the Provost join with the strategic planning committee in producing a revised draft.  (voice vote)

M/S/P recommendation (4) as amended.  The Senate recommends to the Chancellor that the Provost join with the Strategic Planning Committee in producing a revised draft.  The revised draft should clearly reflect the input of the Faculty Senate deliberations and appropriate faculty committees.

On behalf of the Faculty Senate, Chair Senger expressed appreciation for the time, effort and diligence that members of the strategic planning committee put into bringing the document before the university community. 

VII.  Old Business.

VIII.  New Business.

IX.  Adjournment.

The meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m.


Submitted by
Robert Hoar, Secretary