FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES

JANUARY 8, 2004

3:30 – 5:30 Faculty Club

 

 

Attachments:     Postretirement Health Care Strategies, Nov. 25, 2003

                        Faculty and Staff WorkLife Studies Fact Sheet

Executive Summary of Faculty Work Environment and Work/Life Quality Report

                        December 23, 2003 Leadership Agenda

                        Resolutions concerning H.B. 290 and 227

 

Attendees:        David Adams, Loren Babcock, George Billman, Robert T. Boyd, Sheila Brocki, Mark Bullimore, Ann Christy, Bunny Clark, Daniel Collins for Steven Fink, John Current, T. K. Daniel, Susan Fisher, Allen Firestone, Ralph Gardner, Richard Gunther, Leta Hendricks, Philip Huneke, Douglas Kniss, Stanley Laughlin, Thomas Lemberger, David Lincove, Delwin Lindsey, Douglas Macbeth, William Masters, Brian McEnnis, Dennis McKay, Jeffrey McKee, Berl Oakley, Lynne Olson, John Parson, Stephen Pinsky, Jack Rall, Joyce Roberts, Andrej Rotter, Sally Rudmann, Burkhard Schaffrin, Mark Shanda, Anne Smith, David Stetson, Stephen Summerhill, Joseph Tebben, Michael Trudeau, Julia Watson, Sharon West

 

Chair Grady Chism welcomed members, referred them to the Leadership Agenda, and turned the meeting over to President Holbrook.

 

1.   Discussion of Leadership Agenda with the President:  Dr. Holbrook reviewed how the Leadership Agenda came about last summer during a retreat of Senior Administration.  It was decided that there should be one focus point from items in the Academic Plan , and that was “How can Ohio State become distinctive as a research University?”  The two important words are “distinctive” and “research”.  Dr. Holbrook asked the audience to think of one word that would describe Ohio State, and then of a word to describe how they would like Ohio State to be in five or ten years.  There is an internal impression as well as an external impression of what Ohio State is today and what it could/should be in years to come.  While many people think of the word “athletics” to describe Ohio State now, the word “prestige” is a good word to think of for the five to ten year goal. 

 

An ongoing issue on campus has been the alcohol and post-game issue.  This has been picked up by the NCAA and by the Big Ten Universities.  It is a serious issue for every university, and Ohio State is out ahead on it.   Another issue is the development of a retirement community and how it fits into the Academic Plan is important to think about.  Communication within the University and  communication outward is an ongoing issue.  Campus housing and partnerships, such as a partnership with Battelle and with Columbus public schools K-12 are other issues.   The Governor’s Commission on Higher Education and Economy has been meeting, and the 42 policy options are now down to 11 policy options that will point out how Higher Education fits into the economy of Ohio.  There are partnerships that could be developed between Ohio State and the downtown development corporations.  MUCIA offers other international opportunities for Ohio State.   One of the activities in process now is a plan for Fisher College of Business in Dubai  with the United Arab emirate.

 

Regarding fiscal matters, Dr. Holbrook noted that there is the possibility of a tax repeal by the voters in November, to go in effect December 31, which would mean a loss to Ohio State of about $20 million.  How will Ohio State fill in this $20 million loss or what can it do to make sure there is no repeal?  The budget is balanced and based on a 12.9% tuition increase, which is a large increase.  Ohio State nationwide is beginning to rank among the higher-costing public universities.

 

 

Faculty Council

January 8, 2004

Page 2

 

Dr. Holbrook opened the floor to questions from faculty members.  The first question concerned Homeland Security, and what Ohio State is doing regarding Homeland Security.  Dr. Holbrook said there is a group known as NACHS, the National Academic Consortium for Homeland Security, headed by Todd Steward, Director of the Program for International Security in the Office of Research.  There is a website for NACHS, which is trying to coordinate all of the activities going on nationwide into one database.  There are enormous opportunities regarding Homeland Security.   One partner is this area is Battelle.  Dr. Holbrook also has talked with other University Presidents in Ohio to see how funding might be obtained from Washington in this area, and she mentioned how Ohio State is working to develop an agenda for Government funding. 

 

Dr. Current mentioned that a proposal had been developed for a Center of Excellence in Homeland Security.  Ohio State was one of the competitors that made it through the first round but did not win in the end.  This was the first of about four proposals that will come forward.   Dr. Rudmann reviewed the background of the grant that the Ohio State Medical Center has already received regarding Homeland Security.  It will appropriate train people to identify bioterrorist events and respond accordingly.  It is an $800,000 grant.

 

Conversation followed concerning the importance of internal communication.  Sometimes information is slow to filter down to the faculty.  It was noted that venues such as Faculty Council meetings are very helpful in the communication process.  Dr. Holbrook welcomed the opportunity to have more informal conversations with Faculty Council.  (Brenda, send FC meeting times to President’s Office.)

 

A question was raised about what the result will be regarding the Governor’s Commission on Higher Education and the Economy.   Dr. Holbrook reviewed that some goals of the Commission are to improve efficiency, effectiveness, and take advantage of technology.  There are about 36 people on the Commission representing higher education (four-year and two year institutions, public and private), business, and government.  One thing that has come out of the Commission is that there are different cultures among these groups.  Business wants to design the curriculum so that universities will be relevant and efficient.  This points out the lack of understanding of what universities are all about.  It has been pointed out in the Commission that the only parts of the university that build the economy are science and engineering and perhaps a little bit of mathematics.  More time has been spent trying to argue that the other areas in the university are critical in preparing future citizens of the world and to build the economy.   The Commission also feels that research is to be transferred out and taken hold of by business and used.

 

The Commission feels that there is duplication of programs across the Universities, and the Board of Regents needs to look at the graduate programs and have the authority to take the money away and delete the duplicate programs.  In the last such exercise about ten years ago, the duplicate programs stayed on the books even though the money was taken away.  A Leadership Council on Higher Education and Economy will be put into place to monitor access and regularly report on the performance of Ohio colleges and schools as an economic growth engine.  The Board of Regents is already doing this.  The section on improving academic preparation is a good one which Dr. Holbrook would support.  Many of our students now are not prepared well enough to go into a college setting.  The idea is to have a default curriculum that is a college-prep curriculum. 

 


Faculty Council

January 8, 2004

Page 3

 

The Commission would reduce financial barriers for higher education.  They are proposing to put in place “Learn to Earn” scholars. The question is where will Ohio get the money to send every child, who earns points as a K-12 student to qualify them to get a free scholarship to go any Ohio school will be interesting in an environment that right now is not even supporting education.  Georgia used money from the lottery for a similar program. 

 

There is a push on the two-year schools that they should be teaching freshmen and sophomores, and the four-year schools should be teaching upper divisions.  Dr. Holbrook and other four-year institutions feel this is not a good idea.  The rationale is that the two-year schools have the capacity, and the four-year schools no longer have capacity.

 

Dr. Pinsky noted that he had read earlier versions of the Commission’s report and thought its viewpoints were “scary”.  Dr. Holbrook responded that the report has an economic emphasis rather than an education emphasis.  She noted that Ohio State already carries out much of what the Commission has suggested.  Dr. Pinsky added that one needs to give faculty flexibility to “think outside the box.”

 

It was noted that the general public has no idea of all that professors do.  It is a difficult message to get out to the public.  Dr. Holbrook asked faculty to send some ideas to her about this.   It seems that no matter how Ohio State tries to get the message out, the response is not very enthusiastic.  People want a professor in class five to six hours a day, teaching students in the same old way without trying to engage the students.  Dr. Pinsky said one experiment would be to send out a memo by e-mail at 10:00 p.m. and see how many answers you get by 10:05 p.m. or midnight or 1:00 a.m.  One will find out quickly the hours that professors are working. 

 

Someone noted that he was hearing a political message in this discussion and asked if this was coming down from the Governor as a way of garnering votes.  Dr. Holbrook responded that while the conversations at the meetings of the Commission are very good, the documents that come out of the meetings do not have any resemblance to what was discussed.  The report of the Commission will not be vetted publicly but will go straight to the Governor.   It is interesting to note that the same thing is happening elsewhere, an example being in South Carolina, which has a document that is almost exactly like the Commission report.

 

Dr. MacBeth asked about faculty compensation, which was of high importance in the Academic Plan.  Dr. Holbrook said this is the first priority for the Board of Trustees.  This year there was an across-the-board 3.5% raise, which was higher than at other universities.  It is planned to have a similar raise in 2005. 

 

Conversation followed concerning investments in the various areas around the University, with Dr. Holbrook noting that in the Interdisciplinary Research Centers, funds are made available across all areas and not just in the sciences.  She pointed out that Dr. Huntington, Dean of the Graduate School, has directed funds for faculty to develop interdisciplinary minors in an effort to help people think more broadly. 

 

It was noted that most, if not all critics of higher education are college-educated people.  It would seem that Ohio State needs to make sure its graduates understand the research, teaching, and outreach/service enterprise of the University. 

 

Dr. Holbrook ended the discussion by saying she would like to see every student graduate with some kind of a research experience so that they understand the process in whatever discipline they are excited about.


Faculty Council

January 8, 2004

Page 4

 

 

2.                   Discussion with Larry Lewellen,, Associate Vice President, Human Resources:  Mr. Lewellen updated Faculty Council on issues concerning retirement.  Dr. Ken Lee handed out resolutions prepared by the Senate Committee on Legislative Affairs, which will be on the Senate agenda of January 15.  Mr. Lewellan said that there has been such opposition to House Bill 227 that a substitute bill is being introduced to the Ohio Legislature that hopefully will take out the objectionable language.  He and Dr. Lee noted that having Senate resolutions from Ohio State will help convince the Ohio Legislature that the pension fund process ought not be politicized. 

 

Mr. Lewellen moved on to a discussion of retiree health care in general, covering three items.  One is the current relationship with STRS and the Legislature on the direction of retiree healthcare itself; secondly, the consultant that was hired by the group of IUC institutions to do an analysis of where we are headed; and third, where the healthcare advocates, a consortium across the universities and community colleges co-chaired by Mr. Lewellen, is headed with retiree healthcare.

 

The healthcare advocates group has become the advisor group to the State Teacher’s Retirement System Board about where they should be headed with retiree health care.  It was a matter of concern that pension benefits would be reduced to help pay for retiree health care.  A coalition across all five retirement systems of all public employers was put together.  This coalition represents about one and a half million people across Ohio.  The group of IUC institutions approved funding to hire a national healthcare consultant to examine the direction of the healthcare plan.  Mr. Lewellen briefly summarized the November 25, 2003 handout,  Postretirement Health Care Strategies”.  He said that the advocates are shaping policy recommendations, and STRS had a good turnaround in 2003 and is healthier.

 

A question was raised about years of service necessary to be come vested in the system.  It has gone from five years to fifteen years.  Mr. Lewellen said it is hoped to reduce the service years to ten years.  

 

There is a group of Faculty Senate leaders with whom Mr. Lewellen is working who will take stock of the issues and whether there is a need to recommend any sort of retirement incentive that would have return on investment to the University.  This will not be like the Early Retirement Incentives that took place in the past.  These are considered to be too expensive.  The last one cost $40 million.

 

3.         Presentation by Shari Mickey Boggs, Director of Work/Life:   Mr. Lewellen said that Ms. Boggs would share the results of the faculty study that was done concerning Work/Life and what action steps are being contemplated as a result of the study.  Another group was put together this Autumn that would take a look at this study, the Commission on Faculty Development and Careers report, and the Staff Study, and make a global recommendation for a work/life and development agenda for leadership of the University, to be looked at by Winter Quarter. 

 

Ms. Boggs reviewed the results of the Faculty survey regarding work/life with members.  She noted that in the Academic and Diversity Plans, this issue is addressed as a need in order to attract and retain quality faculty.  WFD Consulting helped conduct the assessment, which is noted on the Fact Sheet that was handed out. (See attached.)  Ms. Boggs spent several minutes reviewing the results of the survey as shown in the Selected Findings handout dated September 2003.  (See attached.) 

 


Faculty Council

January 8, 2004

Page 5

 

 

Ms. Boggs noted that she was amazed at the number of professors who do not take their professional leaves or SRAs.   She pointed out that the highest rated professional development resource was the role of the department chair or director in helping faculty ensure success of work.  She and Eunice Hornsby, Assistant Director of Organization and Human Resources Development,  have developed for chairs a workshop on the Work/Life study as well as ways to enhance work/life within the colleges. 

 

Ms. Boggs noted that she would be happy to share information/statistics with units or colleges.  Information is available on the Senate website.  Ms. Boggs next listed what the follow up actions will be and how best practices can be shared among the various units of the University.  She noted how other universities are expressing interest in this Ohio State study. 

 

Members gave suggestions as to how Ms. Boggs might get the word out concerning the findings of this study, i.e., communicating with Department Chairs.  Mr. Lewellan pointed out that the study is very provocative in the results, especially in the numbers of faculty that plan to leave the University and the degree of burnout that exists among faculty.  

 

The Faculty Council meeting ended at 5:05 p.m.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Brenda A. Wright

Recording Secretary

University Senate