Members and Administrative Officers Present:

Absent: Joseph Brown, Susan Ford, Mark Kittleson, Joan McDermott, Vijay Puri, and Joshua Sunderbruch.

Guests: Tony Earls, A/P representative; David Shoup, Dean, College of Agriculture, and Ratna Sinha, Graduate School.

Prof. Shrock called the meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. in the Mississippi Room of the Student Center. Dean Wilson announced the following proxies: Prof. Steve Esling for Prof. Jack Crelling; Prof. Alan Vaux for Prof. Elyse Pineau, and Mr. Jon Hageman for Mr. Keith Prufer. In addition, Mr. Brad Gangnon will permanently replace Mr. Thomas Johnson as GPSC representative to the Graduate Council.

1. Consideration of the Minutes of the October 4, 2001 Graduate Council Meeting

   Hearing no corrections to the October 4, 2001 Graduate Council Minutes, they stood approved as distributed.

   In addition, no corrections were offered to the Special September 20, 2001 Graduate Council Minutes. Therefore, they stood approved as distributed.

2. Remarks-Provost Winters

   Provost Winters reported that Chancellor Wendler had established a working group of individuals from Academic Affairs to address the tuition shortfall issue. These individuals included the Provost, Associate Vice Chancellor Kyle Perkins, and staff from the accountancy and budget areas. In addition, two faculty members, Karen Prichard (Faculty Senate Budget Chair) and David Kammler (appointed by the Graduate Council) are members of this group. At this point, the group is trying to develop a model for measuring productivity in academic areas over many dimensions. The official shortfall is $1.5 million. The Provost felt that Academic Affairs may be facing approximately $1 million from this total. Moreover, the Chancellor has stated that this reduction will not be done across the board, but rather a rational plan will be developed so that budget reductions can be justified, based on principles.

   In response to a question from Dean Scott, Provost Winters said the tuition shortfall of $1.5 million was for fall semester only and while there may be a further drop in enrollment for the spring semester, it was not expected to double. Usually there is a drop in enrollment from fall to spring semester, but that drop is projected.

   Prof. Steger remarked that in meetings he has attended at the School of Medicine, there are rumors that the IBHE is talking about a budget rescission up to 2%. The Provost responded that was very indefinite and she had heard no discussion of an actual rescission. While the budget picture is not good, the Provost was pleased that there has been discussion about a budget model instead of random decreases and increases.

   The Provost was asked to comment on the scope of productivity and what that might mean. The Provost responded that it will be multi-faceted; it will not be any one measure. The group is working through that now-it is a work in progress, but it definitely will be more than a single measure.

   The Provost was also asked by Prof. Tyrrell if it should be assumed that the model, which is based on rational arguments used for this budget cut will be used in future decisions on budgets. The Provost replied in the affirmative.

   The Provost then reported on searches for the Provost and Vice Chancellor position and the Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Dean position. She noted that the Chancellor reported in his staff meeting yesterday that search committees are being put together for both positions. Additionally, at the next Board of Trustees meeting, the Vice Chancellor for Research position will be on the agenda.

   As a final comment, Provost Winters said she had attended a series of meetings of the Educational Alliance group put together by the Jackson and Perry counties’ school districts. The Illinois Education Association’s local coordinator has been running these meetings with individuals from the school districts along with John A. Logan and SIUC and they are looking at what can be done to further teacher education. Though they are talking about K-16, the Provost felt that matters of interest may include graduate endeavors.

3. Announcements-Associate Deans Wilson, Rice, and Mead

   Dean Wilson

   Dean Wilson reported that a request for proposals is being prepared by the Graduate School focusing on enhancing student recruitment. This proposal should be finalized in the near future.

   In response to a question from Prof. Shrock, Dean Wilson provided an update on the international graduate student visa situation on campus in light of the recent terrorists attacks. He noted that while there are between 250-300 million visas (entries of internationals in the U. S), approximately 500,000 are students, on which the Administration seems to be focusing. Both the office of International Student Services and the Graduate School are sending representatives to a regional meeting of the National Association of Foreign Student Administrators early in November at which both the State Department and the Immigration Service will have representatives present to discuss the current situation.

   Prof. Shrock commented that many individuals outside the University do not understand international students and their presence at the campus. She felt that better communication was needed in this area.

   Dean Shoup commented that international postdoc students may be affected by the tightening of J visa regulations. Dean Wilson noted that several inquiries had been received from H-1 visa holders who have either been laid off or think they will be laid off. Many of these individuals are highly trained in the sciences and technical fields. These individuals are looking for graduate schools because H-1 has been the easiest visa to switch to a student visa without returning to the home country. But from what Dean Wilson understood, the FBI is discussing additional security checks on students applying for visas, which may take a long time. This situation will create problems for all international students, and may impact enrollment of international students, particularly in the sciences.

   Dean Rice

   Dean Rice reported on current grants and contracts activity. She noted that totals vary on a monthly basis over the year; some months are higher, some are lower. For example, this October, the University was down compared to October 2000. However, the totals were up when comparing September of this year to September of last year. Moreover, the University is up $2 million when compared on a year-to-date basis to last year. Dean Rice added that she has specific data available on request regarding kinds of grants and on sources of grants.

   Dean Rice related that, for many years, campus researchers have been frustrated by the amount of time it took to get accounts set up. ORDA has been working with the Director of General Accounting, Jerry Smith, and Associate Vice Chancellor for Administration, Pam Brandt, and developed a streamlined checklist to respond to this concern. This checklist will now be used instead of two separate sets of signatures-one at the time of submitting a proposal and then another at the time of receipt of an award in order to set up accounts. Two checksheets, the former goldenrod sheet and the former green sheet, have been combined into a single two-page checklist, allowing accounts to be set up far more quickly. These forms are now available on the ORDA’s website and Dean Rice urged individuals to begin using them immediately. Dean Rice also noted that a new form for travel requests has been developed which may also be found on the web.

   Dean Mead

   Dean Mead reported that, earlier this month, there was an open house for the new GIS laboratory in Environmental Resources and Policy. The laboratory is located on the second floor of Parkinson Hall. Dean Mead urged individuals who have not seen this facility to stop by and meet Dean Vestal who is running the laboratory, or contact Dean Mead to arrange a visit. The lab is a good resource available for a variety of research and service needs.

4. Announcements-Prof. Shrock

   Prof. Shrock reported that there will be a special meeting of the Graduate Council on November 13 for Molly D’Esposito, Chair of the Board of Trustees, who will be on campus to visit with campus constituency groups. There has been some difficulty in scheduling a room for the meeting, but Prof. Shrock will e-mail the Council members as soon as the date, time, and place are confirmed. The tentative time, at this point, is 11:00 a.m. Prof. Shrock encouraged individuals to attend the meeting. She noted that Molly D’Esposito is genuinely interested in research and creative activity at the University. She added that the reason the Chair was invited to speak to the campus constituency groups was so that the Board of Trustees would be better informed about shared governance on the campus.

   Discussion then turned to how the special meeting would proceed since it is not a regularly scheduled meeting and the BOT Chair would not actually see the Council doing business as usual. Suggestions were made that the standing committee chairs explain the types of issues they consider and why they are important. For example, perhaps the Program Review Committee could talk about the new guidelines that were approved by the Council. Also, it was suggested that input from the graduate student representatives regarding their involvement with the Graduate Council would be well received.

   Turning to another issue, Prof. Shrock said that the Chair of the Research Committee, Prof. Steger, had informed her that Dr. Ray Lenzi tentatively has agreed to come to the February 7 meeting of the Council to talk about the Research Park. Rather than present an overview of the Research Park, he will focus on issues such as faculty involvement and governance structures.

   As a final comment, Prof. Shrock said that the Expanded Executive Committee was very active in choosing nominees to serve on the screening committees for the Provost and Vice Chancellor position and the Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Dean position. (The names of the Graduate Council nominees would be announced by Prof. Tyrrell later in the meeting.) She noted that the request for the names came as a request for four nominees for each committee from which Chancellor Wendler would choose one for each. The deadlines for submission of the names were very tight and the Committee did not have much time to put them together. Even so, much thought was put into selecting names of individuals to serve on these search committees, and one of the primary intents was to balance the names across colleges. Also taken into account were the Faculty Senate’s nominees. At this time, Prof. Shrock has not heard anything further in terms of selections from among those names.

5. Report from the Chancellor’s Planning and Budget Council-Provost Winters

   In Dean Koropchak's absence, Provost Winters provided an update on the Chancellor's Planning and Budget Council. She noted that the Council has been reconfigured. The Chancellor decided it would be more productive if the whole group met once a semester rather than monthly, with a previously established agenda and mailing of background information on items for which he is seeking advice. At the same time, the Chancellor decided to create various subcommittees each convened by a Vice Chancellor. Provost Winters is forming an Education Enhancement subcommittee. Another, on students, is headed up by Vice Chancellor Larry Dietz; also the other two vice chancellors are in charge of subcommittees, one on external relations (VC McCurry) and the other on technology and related issues (VC Poshard). These groups will be meeting as often as there is work for them under the leadership of the vice chancellors and then will report back to the Chancellor and the larger advisory group. Also, there will be interaction among the various groups. For example, for the Education Enhancement group, the Provost will ask Vice Chancellor Dietz or his designee to represent Student Affairs because there is much overlap in some areas. Everyone is working on their own subcommittee now and will be meeting as a full Council early in the Spring semester.

   Dean Rice said she was present at the last meeting of the Chancellor’s Planning and Budget Council for Dean Koropchak and noted that the name of the group has been changed from the Chancellor's Planning and Budget Council to the Chancellor's Advisory Team (CAT).

   At this point, Prof. Tyrrell named the Graduate Council nominees to the upcoming Provost and Vice Chancellor for Research screening committees:

   Provost and Vice Chancellor Screening Committee
   Constantine Hatziadoniu, Electrical Engineering
   William Muhlach, Zoology
   Alan Vaux, Psychology
   Trudi Volk, Curriculum and Instruction

   Vice Chancellor for Research and Graduate Dean Screening Committee
   Shirshak Dhali, Electrical Engineering
   Thomas Johnson, Journalism
   Michael Madigan, Microbiology
   Todd Winters, Animal Science/Food and Nutrition

   Prof. Tyrrell added that Prof. David Kammler has been appointed to represent the Graduate Council on the working group that is studying the tuition shortfall issue.

   Regarding the search committees, Prof. Vaux asked if there was any significance to the number of names forwarded to the Chancellor. He noted that the Council had previously worked hard to get additional faculty on search committees. Prof. Shrock responded that these particular two search committees looked quite different to her from the outset. In other words, for the previous Chancellor’s search committee, the Graduate Council was originally slated for one representative but were able to secure a second representative. The Faculty Senate had at least three representatives on that particular committee, but this time, they too were only asked to submit four names, one of which will be selected. Apparently, these two committees will be smaller. Prof. Shrock said she and others were concerned about the composition of the search committees and noted that one of the reasons the Council wanted an additional member on the earlier Chancellor’s search committee was to have majority faculty representation.

6. Report of the Educational Policies Committee-Prof. Johnson

   Prof. Johnson introduced the following Announcement of Resolution:

   RATIONALE: The three-year Morris Fellowship was created to attract some of the top graduate students in the country to SIUC by paying competitive stipends. However, the Morris Fellowship has become less attractive in recent years as a recruiting tool because other institutions are offering a five-year package rather than a three. The Morris Fellowship could be expanded to a five-year program if departments who nominate Morris Fellows agree to provide 24 months of funding at the Morris Fellow level (currently $1,250 a month, $15,000 a year.)

   RESOLUTION: The Morris Fellowship be expanded beginning in Fall 2003 to up to five years of support with participating programs agreeing in writing to provide 24 months of funding at the Morris Fellowship level so that recipients would receive up to three years from the University and up to two years from the participating department.

   Discussion

   In response to a question by Prof. Parker, Dean Wilson said that if a department could not provide the assistantship funding as noted in the resolution, it could not participate in the Morris Fellowship program. In response to another question, Dean Wilson noted that if the department did provide the funding, it would be considered a guarantee of an assistantship but at the Morris stipend rate, not at the assistantship rate. This would benefit the students because they could then get teaching experience while being paid at the higher Morris rate, rather than the assistantship rate. The Morris Fellowship program would also be more competitive because it can be offered as an “up-to five year” package. Dean Wilson also noted that Dean Koropchak has committed, at least for this coming year, an additional $1,000 book and travel allowance for Morris fellows.

   Another concern raised was how funding would be dispersed; i.e., alternating years between the department and the Graduate School, or the Graduate School funding the first three years and the department the second two years. It would be important to know if the department’s obligation would be to come up with the first two years of funding or the fourth or fifth or alternate years.

   In response to a question from Prof. Moe, Dean Wilson said that the Morris fellowship program is state funded; it does not come from an endowment. He added that it is hoped that as part of the upcoming capital campaign, a considerable commitment of funds raised would go toward fellowship programs. The University’s fellowships have declined over the years because the only way to increase them is to cannibalize positions and put the money into increasing stipends. That issue could be addressed by the addition of a work assignment, but that has tax consequences for the students.

   At the conclusion of the discussion, it appeared that generally, Council members were in favor of the proposal overall, but would like additional clarification of certain points. Therefore, it was decided to return the proposal to the Committee to provide additional details.

7. Report of the Programs Committee-Prof. Muhlach

   Prof. Muhlach said there were four announcements of resolution from the Committee:

   ANNOUNCEMENT OF RESOLUTIONS

   RATIONALE: The Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures has proposed the addition of two new concentrations to its Master of Arts Program. With the cooperation of the Department of Linguistics they propose a concentration in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) and with the cooperation of the Department of Curriculum and Instruction they propose a concentration in Applied Technology. The TESOL option basically formalizes ad hoc practices utilizing a double major and the Applied Technology option reestablishes a historical link between the participating departments.

   RESOLUTION: Be it resolved that the Graduate Council approve the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures proposal to add Teaching English to Speakers of Other Language and Applied Technology concentrations to their Master of Arts Degree.

   In the discussion that followed, a question was raised by Prof. Tadisina about the meaning of the term “applied technology.” Since the proposal involves the Department of Curriculum and Instruction (C&I), Prof. Shrock commented that historically a number of students have come from the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures to C&I with an interest in instructional technology and its interface with language instruction. This proposal attempts to formalize a core of study in instructional technology for students who are studying foreign language. Prof. Shrock said in her field, the term is “instructional technology,” but perhaps in the area of foreign languages, it is referred to as “applied technology.” Prof. Muhlach said he would obtain a clarification of the term between now and the next meeting, and if a friendly amendment was required, that would be no problem.

   Dean Scott added that this proposal has been in process for quite some time; it has been recommended by the program’s reviewers, and she would like to see it move along.

   The next announcement of resolution was introduced:

   RATIONALE: This proposal simply changes the name of the current Non-Thesis Master of Science Degree in Geology to the Non-Thesis Master of Arts Degree in Earth Science. This change avoids confusion, by students, alumni, and employers, between the Non-Thesis option and the Geology Department's long-standing Master of Science Degree requiring the traditional thesis.

   RESOLUTION: Be it resolved that the Graduate Council approve the Department of Geology proposal for a Non-Thesis Master of Arts in Earth Science.

   Prof. Muhlach said this proposal was approved by the Graduate Council last year and for technical reasons, it had to be listed under the Master of Science degree program. Dean Wilson clarified that when the Council approved the proposal previously, it was approved for a Master of Arts degree that did not exist.

   RATIONALE: The College of Agriculture has submitted a Reasonable and Moderate Extension Proposal to change its name to the College of Agricultural Sciences. The new name will better reflect the full width of the college scope and mission and will help position SIUC into a stronger leadership role among National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges (NASULGC) institutions.

   RESOLUTION: Be it resolved that the Graduate Council approve the proposal from the College of Agriculture to change its name to the College of Agricultural Sciences.

   There was no discussion on this resolution.

   The next resolution follows:

   RATIONALE: The Department of Physics has submitted a New Program Request to establish a Ph.D. in Applied Physics. This program will focus on the application of concepts and methods of physics to various areas, including materials, computational physics, laser optics, biomedical physics, and the application of physics to industrial processes and products. This program will provide highly trained manpower to meet the needs of industry, government and academia. A doctoral program in Applied Physics will enhance the research efforts of existing centers at SIUC, such as the Materials Technology Center, the Coal Research Center, and the Center of Advanced Friction Studies.

   RESOLUTION: Be it resolved that the Graduate Council approve the proposal from the Department of Physics to establish a Ph.D. in Applied Physics. This approval is contingent upon the acquisition of $478,300 per year of new state funding to support the new program.

   Discussion ensued. Ms. Morrissey said she had served on the program review committee for the Department of Physics last year and, at that time, one of the graduate students remarked that, especially for students overseas, it would be helpful for the department to have a Ph.D. program. It is difficult for a student to come from overseas for a master’s program and then have to look elsewhere for a Ph.D. program.

   Dean Scott asked if there were viability studies on domestic students who would be applying for this program as opposed to the number of international students. She noted that Physics programs nationally have few national students and the number of international students is becoming smaller. Moreover, the proposal has been discussed at Deans’ Council with much concern.

   Prof. Muhlach noted that a strong point for this proposal is that the program would provide highly trained individuals for the areas of industry, academia, and government. In this respect, the issue of meeting the State's need for trained professionals is addressed by this proposal. The concern of what kind of students (e.g., domestic vs. international) would be interested in this program may be tied more to high school education and the process of preparing domestic students who have the skills and interest in pursuing a career in physics. Nevertheless, there is a demand for individuals with this type of training.

   Prof. Lightfoot commented that the Physics Department has not grown since the Ph.D. in Molecular Science was eliminated and the current proposal was not for an umbrella Ph.D. program, but rather for one focused on Applied Physics. In addition, the amount requested for this program proposal, $478,300, did not seem justified and could seriously compromise other University proposals.

   Regarding the Molecular Science program, Prof. Parker felt that while the Molecular Science program was a productive program, it was eliminated because it was housed in the Graduate School and did not have college representation.

   Dean Scott was skeptical about the demand for Physics programs and contended that the demand which does exist can probably be met with existing programs within the State.

   Prof. Muhlach addressed the funding request of the proposal. He noted that while concerns were expressed by the Programs Committee about costs, the Committee basically examines the academic quality, feasibility and demand for program proposals, not necessarily cost factors. The issue of cost is a prioritization matter for the Graduate Council as a whole, as well as for other University entities like the Dean's Council and the Chancellor's Advisory Team. This proposal has been in some form of review for parts of three academic years and was returned to the Department last year with comments about strengths and weaknesses. The committee now feels that it is time for full Council consideration.

   Another issue brought up by Prof. Tyrrell was that while there was a demand in the nation for physicists, that is not the same as the demand for new physics programs; most physics programs are underenrolled.

   Prof. Muhlach re-iterated that the significant factor about this new program proposal is that it provides information documenting the need for trained professionals in this area. He felt it was a strong program with respect to the academic aspects of graduate training and the cost and prioritization factors would need to be considered as it moves out of the Programs Committee. The Committee has recommended that last year's review of the original proposal, the Department's response to that review, and the revised proposal should be posted to the web page for council members’ consideration.

8. Program Review Committee-Prof. Vaux

   Prof. Vaux reported that the following ten units were being examined by the Committee: Biological Sciences, Center for Rural Health and Social Service Development, Clinical Center, Cooperative Wildlife Research Laboratory, Fisheries and Illinois Aquaculture Center, Molecular Biology, Microbiology and Biochemistry, Physiology, Plant Biology, Women’s Studies, and Zoology.

   Prof. Vaux noted that, to date, the Committee had not received a self-study document for the Molecular Biology, Microbiology and Biochemistry program. In addition, the site visit to the Biological Sciences is scheduled for next week. All of the other units’ site visits are complete or near complete and 4-6 reports are in various stages of completion.

   Prof. Vaux felt that, in general, the organizational effort of the process this year has been good. He added, however, that while he did not have good data , it appeared that efforts to change the nature of the self-studies and the kind of data that are provided have been not entirely successful; therefore, the Committee will examine that issue more carefully in the spring. Moreover, in terms of the linking of program review to the incoming rational system of productivity, Prof. Vaux stated that he was concerned that the program review process would not generate the kind of data that such a system would require.

9. Report of the Research Committee-Prof. Steger

   Prof. Steger reported that Dr. Ray Lenzi from the Research Park has been invited to the February 7 Graduate Council meeting. Areas that Dr. Lenzi has been asked to address include, but are not necessarily limited to, the organization of the Research Park, how the Research Park will be marketed, internal/external review, space allocation, financing, and liability. Additional questions for Dr. Lenzi may be forwarded to Prof. Steger.

   Other issues under consideration by the Research Committee were the development of a mechanism for bids for equipment prior to grant activation, and the range of graduate stipends.

10. Old Business

    Prof. Tyrrell mentioned that a draft of the strategic plan for campus academic computing has been forwarded to Chancellor Wendler for review. Related to that issue, Prof. Tyrrell distributed a draft of the document which he prepared regarding research needs. (See Appendix). He encouraged individuals to provide additional input to this document.

11. New Business

    Prof. Lightfoot noted that campus security for laboratories had been increased, but how that had been done is confidential. The University only has level 1 and 2 laboratories, none at level 3 or 4.

    There being no further business to bring before the Council, Prof. Shrock declared the meeting adjourned at 9:35 a.m.

Respectfully submitted,
Sandra L. Ballestro
Recording Secretary

Return to Minutes pages