Monitoring Report Update : University
The following items, related to strategic planning and hence the NCA
Monitoring Report, are selected from University Council minutes, with
the most recent minutes first.
29, 2001, Excerpt, University Council Minutes
- Flow Chart: Flow chart was formatted by Martin Tadlock. Vice President
Larkin distributed the draft copy of a flow chart. Discussion ensued.
Specific placement of bargaining units was discussed. The committee
made further suggestions for the logical flow of ideas and/or initiatives.
The question of signatures or "sign offs" was raised. A new, simplified
concept for initiatives/ideas was proposed. The group also proposed
that minutes of the various groups reflect the action on any specific
initiative/idea as proposals are sent along the process.
- David Kingsbury moved that the proposed flow chart model be brought
to each of the six committees. Pat Welle seconded. Discussion followed.
Chris Brown requested information regarding the protocol for reporting
this initiative to bargaining units. Various suggestions were made.
Question was called. Motion passed unanimously.
- Proposal for New Members on University Council: The question is: What
is the procedure for placing new members on the University Council?
- Are these meetings open? Dave Larkin has been asked. By consensus,
Vice President Larkin will inform those interested that the meetings
15, 2001, Excerpt, University Council Minutes
- Motion to approve minutes of 5/7/01 (Gendreau and second by Erickson).
Discussion: Item #3 should read: "Laurie Desiderato reported that the
Academic Affairs Planning Committee continues to work on the request
to add to the catalog information for students about assessment based
on dimensions on student learning." Item #8: Delete: "Proposal Web Standards"
Item #4: Discussion re "proposal" and "The UC is the next step for the
approval process." Minutes are approved.
- The University Council will meet each Monday from 9:00-9:55 a.m.
- Committee Recommendations:
Academic Affairs Committee ‹ Nancy Erickson
Computing, Technology and Learning Resource Committee ‹ Ranae Womack
Outreach and Partnerships Committee ‹ David Kingsbury
Question re the location of their proposal. Discussion followed.
Pat Welle referred to Initiative Approval Process (8 Step Initiative
Approval Process drafted by Barbara Schuldt).
Co-chairs want to publicly thank Barbara Schuldt for drafting the
8 Step Initiative Approval Process.
Martin Tadlock read from NCA Report Experimental Planning Initiative,
page 15 re University Council.
Recruitment and Retrenchment Committee ‹ Richard Gendreau
- Handouts were distributed.
- Feedback and discussion; the University Council has looked at this
proposal; has given favorable consideration, but not approved yet; to
be disseminated to other committees; return proposal to University Council
in three weeks.
- Martin Tadlock referred to yellow handout, Committee Recommendations
to the University Council, third page, last item - Redraft of committee
charge ‹ Add: "Recommended " .
- Martin Tadlock mentioned that saved monies might be put back for
recruitment and retention.
7, 2001, Excerpt, University Council Minutes
- Laurie Desiderato passed out ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW GUIDELINES and
discussed same. This is the second reading of this proposal. Has been
presented to faculty senate. Motion to adopt these guidelines (Erickson
and second by Drexel) ‹ Motion passed.
- Laurie Desiderato reported that the Academic Affairs Planning Committee
continues to work on the request to add to add to the catalog information
for students about assessment based on dimensions on student learning.
Draft dated 3/28/01 was distributed.
- o Endorsement for First-Year Experience (Kevin Drexel) has received
an endorsement for this proposal from the student senate. This activity
is slated for F 2002. The UC is the next step for the approval process.
Co-hort learning clusters that are academically theme based with an
opt-in block for transfer students (optional). Paid through (ultimately)
through retention savings. Kevin indicated a goal of freshman to sophomore
retention rate of 80%. Initial costs will be covered via student fees.
Erickson moved approval/endorsement of Kevin ‘ s proposal. Second Welle.
- Outreach and Partnership Committee report ‹ Kringen and Kingsbury.
What do we mean when we use the term "outreach and partnership?" A booklet
called "Telling Our Story" was provided. More faculty input will be
sought during Fall Semester of 2002 and the information contained in
this booklet and from next fall's research will be put in a web site.
Shows that faculty members are doing many things.
- Related matter is the receipt of a 3,000 dollar grant from Blandin
to study how our grant process works. This will impact Outreach and
- General perception seemed to be that "Telling Our Story" is valuable
information and that it is needed so that we can communicate all of
the things being done at BSU.
- (Computing, Technology, Learning and Resources) - recommendation
to go ahead with some form of assessment. Recommendation to implement
pilot study in F 2002. The recommendation is that assessment be undertaken
(as concept) and that consultation be completed to determine the format
and specific assessment to be initiated. Motion to support this proposal
made by Womack pending the recommendation of the faculty senate. Second
by Kringen. Passed.
- Proposal to adopt the BSU web site design standards recommended by
the Committee for Computing Technology, Learning and Resources. Offered
by Womack as a "first step" in this process. Carl Baer has called for
more discussion on this topic. Who, for example, is eligible to have
a link. Asking for approval to send this on to the Executive Council.
Womack moved to adopt the CTRL recommendations related to web-based
standards. Erickson seconds. Motion passed.
2, 2001, Excerpt, University Council Minutes
The Academic Affairs Committee proposed a 5-year review checklist for
Deans and Academic VP to help monitor departments. Also proposed having
this checklist on the Web. Barb Schuldt brought up the issue of archiving
and how consistently this information would be updated. The response was
that the information would be gathered at the end of the academic year,
assembled during the summer, and then be checked out through the Academic
The Budget Committee submitted a re-draft of their charge as well as
a draft of strategies, initiatives, and outcomes. The charge change reflects
the committee's desire to move away from a review and report function
to a fostering and participating function.
The University Calendar was discussed and planning committees submitted
their vote tallies on the issue. Recruitment and Retention voted for a
post-Labor Day start by 1 vote with 2 members abstaining. Academic Affairs
voted for a pre-Labor Day start. The CTRL Committee voted to table the
issue. Mr. Carl Baer suggested that each committee submit recommendations
like this based on their charges, with accompanying justifications.
19, 2001, Excerpt, University Council Minutes
|Service to the Region:
Distance Ed ‹ Access
Entertainment & the Arts
Some questions to consider:
What is BSU's story?
What story do we tell and to whom?
Why are we different and what difference will it make for students who
come to BSU verses elsewhere? 4
(Note- 65-70% of new students do not have a career direction. What should
be the role of academic and career advising (career development)?
- Sue Kringen presented an Outreach and Partnership proposal for committee
review and consideration at the next meeting.
19, 2001, Excerpt, University Council Minutes
- Council 6 requests Veterans' Day off
- Mixed messages from student body
- MnSCU institutions of the North all indicatea before Labor Day
- Concern about NW Tech startup
- Discuss calendar with Planning Committees
- How late start affects sportsĄ$30,000 lost
- ResortsĄstudent employment is not seen to be much of an issue
- Budget (Tom Faecke)
- Allocation model down $300,000 for BSU ‹ Governor's budget not
allocation model, 22% tuition increase, $300 per semester, makes
more students eligible for Pell and SUG
- Many universities are adopting Tom's formula that first distributes
base and inflation, then reallocation formula for high and medium
need students (Carl Baer)
- Need $70 billion to have no tuition increase ‹ this will not happen
- Encourages smaller meetings to encourage information and participation
coordination by Budget and Resource Allocation Committee
- Funding Proposal for First-Year Experience
- Anticipate Fall 2002 implementation
- Retention savingsĄconservative estimates
- Correction on figures (Tom Faecke)
Reduce advertising load
Provide framework for other faculty retention
Academic performance learning information should be gathered from
measures incorporated into the first year experience (Laurie Desiderato)
Adequate fees will need to be instituted to cover much, if not all,
of the proposed costs (Tom Faecke)
19, 2000, Excerpt, University Council Minutes
- Committee members were asked by Glen Richgels to consider the proposal
on the new campus network as this proposal was developed by the Committee
on Computing, Technology, Learning and Resources (CTLR). Glen reported
that the Faculty Senate unanimously approved a motion to purchase and
install a network system upgrade. Glen spoke to the details of this
proposal and explained what events have led to this point in time.
- Jon Blessing spoke to the increased need for student involvement
- Several people indicated that this issue has been discussed in student
senate. Tom Fauchald offered his opinion that if the need for a quick
decision means a streamlined or different process, then the perceived
need for quick decisions may become more frequent. Several people asked
reiterated their request that the minutes from all committees be posted
on web and indicated that they are not there at this time.
- Sue Kringen moved that the members of the University Council support
the recommendation of the Computing, Technology, Learning and Resources
Committee for the purchase and installation of a network system upgrade
and that departments Be held harmless should any additional expenses
arise (as stated in Attachment #1).
- Glen Richgels indicated that he has been asked to expedite the WWW
standards. Laurie Desiderato suggested that the staff in the Center
for Professional Development (CPD) be involved in the development of
better standards. Barb Schuldt said that she has been told that the
BSU homepage does not meet the existing standards. Jon Quistgaard said
it is also important to work with CEL and Bob Griggs.
- Sue Kringen asked if there is a move to hire a Webmaster for this
campus. Glen said there has been discussion about this
- Jon Blessing expressed concern that information from this committee
and others is not being widely distributed. Jon believes that students
have a considerable amount of curiosity about these matters and that
they experience difficulty in accessing the information and the written
records that often result in policies. He believes that we need to be
more proactive in disseminating information. Jon Quistgaard asked council
members if they believe that the Presidents Newsletter is a useful method
of disseminating information? A mixed response was received.
- January 28, 2001 is the date scheduled for the release of the first
edition of the Enrollment Management Newsletter. Kevin Drexel offered
to include committee information in this newsletter.
- Jon Blessing referred the committee's attention to the need to inform
students. He suggested that students want more information and are not
receiving it. Use of the Northern Student was discussed.
- Dave Kingsbury suggested that a draft of the committee's charge and
responsibilities be developed and disseminated. o There seems to be
a need to decide who will do what in information dissemination. The
President's Newsletter and Enrollment Management Newsletter were discussed
on several occasions.
- There is a pressing need to establish the next two-year calendar by
end of January. The Academic Affairs Committee has spent time on this
topic and has another meeting scheduled for this purpose. This topic
will be going before the Faculty Senate at next meeting. Jon Blessing
reported that there needs to be consultation with members of the Student
Senate on the calendar issue. Retention Committee desires to be a part
of the calendar discussions. Student and Administrative Services may
wish to work at it. Barb Schuldt asked who makes the final decision.
- Jon Quistgaard indicated that this decision is made by the President.
Jon Quistgaard indicated that he will take what he is given to the Student
Senate and invite the President of that body to a meeting of the University
- The implications of the academic calendar were discussed in terms
of campus services such as Food Services, Athletics, Housing, etc. Laurie
Desiderato said some of this has been done via email. Dave Kingsbury
called for more information and more feedback based on the existing
disagreement, range of opinions and lack of data.
- Calendar will be assigned to those committees that indicate an interest.
o Academic Integrity issue is becoming an increasing concern here and
most other places. Jon Q. asked for a report from that committee by
- Committee Reports were given:
Budget & Resource Allocation
Outreach & Partnership
Recruitment & Retention
- Committee minutes are to be made available at next University Council
13, 2000, Excerpt, University Council Minutes
Monitoring Report Update/Related Documents
Budget Proposal Template
Policies or initiatives with an impact of $50,000 or more on the University's
budget must complete a proposal to the Budget and Resource Allocation
Planning Committee prior to action by other committees or individuals
including the University Council, Faculty Senate or members of the administration.
This includes all policies of initiatives that include additional positions,
position elimination, unit reorganization, or major budget allocations.
Budget and Resource Planning Proposal: Outline for New Initiatives
- Description of the initiative:
- Justification for the initiative
- Description of the initiative's impact on the budget:
Project annual costs:
Projected annual revenues:
- How the proposal is to be funded (funding sources)
- People and positions directly and indirectly impacted by the proposal.
Include description of potential hidden costs or savings (e.g. additional
faculty/staff duties, enrollment impact, redirection of resources, etc.)
- Plans for assessing the effectiveness of the proposal and communicating
the results to the university community:
- Alternatives if the proposal is not approved:
Student, Academic and Administrative Affairs Director's Meeting Agenda
Thursday, November 29, 2001, Ozawindib Room, 9:00-11:00 AM
- FY 02 Budget/Allocation Update (Jerry Amble)
- Capital Projects Update (Jeff Sande)
- Occupancy Update Information (Dale Ladig)
- Computer Service Update (Fred Hartman)
- Health Insurance Window (Dec 1-Dec 14)
- Annual Reports and 5-Year Review Updates (Directors)
- Research with Faculty and Staff/Student Opinions (Ivan Weir)
- Directors' Reports