May 3, 2005
Present: Chair Daley, Secretary Weiner, Chair-Elect Allen; Provost Nielsen, Parliamentarian Corbin; Senators Batra, Baynes, Bernhard, Blair, Blank, Brownie, Bruck, Estes, Fahmy, Fauntleroy, Fikry, Hanley-Bowdoin, Hooper, Kasal, Kellner, Khosla, Krotee, Martin, Matthews, McRae, Miller, Moore, Robarge, B. Smith, R. Smith, Tetro, Warren
Excused: Senator Clark
Absent: Senators Bitting, Branson, Johnson, Middleton, Stein, Wessels, Young
Visitors: Katie Perry, Senior Vice Provost; Thomas Conway, Vice Provost EMAS; George Wilson, Vice Provost, International Affairs; Michael Bustle, International Services; Ingrid Schmidt, Director of Study Abroad Office; P J Teal, Secretary of the University; Tom Culbreth, Professor of Industrial Engineering; David Lindbo, Associate Professor of Soil Sciences; Philip Carter, Immediate Past Chair; George Wahl, Professor of Chemistry/Past Chair of the Faculty
1. Call to Order
Chair Dennis Daley called the sixteenth meeting of the fifty-first session of the North Carolina State University Faculty Senate to order at 3:00 p.m.
2. Welcome and Announcements
Chair Daley welcomed Senators and Guests.
Chair Daley welcomed the new Senators and the Holladay Medal recipients and he also thanked the retiring Senators for their services.
3. Approval of the Minutes, Meeting No. 15, April 19, 2005
The motion passed unanimously to approve the minutes.
Secretary Weiner was presented with a floral arrangement and a gift from the Chair and Chair Elect of the faculty for a job well done during her term as Secretary of the Faculty.
4. Special Presentation
Johnny Burleson from the Alumni Association presented Chair Daley with a CD of the chair he will receive in recognition of his service to the Faculty and the university.
Chair Elect Allen also presented Chair Daley with a gift.
Comments from Chair Daley
“As many of you know I sought to be chair of the faculty numerous times. I felt that there was a role for faculty governance in a great university and part of that role is in a Faculty Senate that is active in pushing forth the values and interest of the faculty. I think that may be the greatest accomplishments over my two years. While I may have started out by giving charges to the Senators you began adding things to the list, which is something that we were lacking for a couple of years. We were not active as Senators in pushing things onto the agenda whereas now we do see more of that, more activity coming from the colleges and the faculty themselves. Of course we have also built a respectful relationship with our current administration and while they may not always do what we want they do listen to us. I think that is a legacy that we can all be proud of and hope that it will continue in the future. Thank you.”
5. Remarks from Provost Nielsen
On behalf of he and Chancellor Oblinger, Provost Nielsen thanked the Senate for its services. He noted that Chancellor Oblinger could not attend the meeting today because he had to go on a previously scheduled road trip. He stated that Chancellor Oblinger would like to be here today especially to provide a note of thanks to Dennis, Suzanne, and the Senators for the tremendous work that they have done. “The last couple years have been a time when we have heard from the Faculty Senate regularly and consistently, giving good advice and raising questions that we need to pay attention to. It has been very effective when I have observed you in situations where you represent the Senate, doing it in a way that is both forceful on behalf of faculty perspectives, but also part of the team that has to be taken but what we are going to do in a larger context. Thank you very much and thank you Suzanne for a couple of years of high quality work. On behalf of Jim and all of us thank you for your service.
The Senate released its budget and the House will do its budget also. The budget that we had been working with had us estimated of having a cut of approximately $16M total. The one that the Senate published has us at a budget cut of $7.6M so fundamentally we made tremendous progress from the time that the Senate started talking about this to the time the Senate actually put out its budget. Again that reflects very strongly that the Legislature, the General Assembly of North Carolina cares deeply about education and continues to find ways despite terrible budget woes to make the impact as small as they can on higher education and education in general.
We have been interviewing some Provost candidates, two of them in the last two days when I have explained this situation to them. They were shocked that we live in an environment where despite the revenue problems for the state they have minimized ours and continue to support us with new dollars to do the things that we have to do. The one that we were working on before had us losing between 2 and 3% cut in the parts that they call management flexibility, the academic budget plus all the support budgets for personnel and operating. They have reduced that to one percent. There are a few programs that they have reduced to a half percent reduction. None of those are here at NC State so averaged out that may mean that we are slightly over one percent. This is the same budget reduction that the governor called for.
In the earlier proposed budget that we were looking at they had it categorized down to so much for vacant positions, so much for filled positions, etc., but all of these categories reduce our flexibility to take the cuts where we think its best to take the cuts. In the Senate Budget it is just one cut of dollars and that cut to our program will be approximately $2.8M and that is the part that we really have some control over. There is an item in the budget called inflationary adjustments and equipment replacement that has not changed from the Senate’s earlier proposed budget. We will take about a $3.9M cut in that and that deals with inflation for utility budget. There is a cut in building reserves minimum hiring rate. Fundamentally that is the operating budget to fund the maintenance and management of new buildings as they come on line and that reduction is about six hundred thousand dollars. Of course it hurts but it is a fairly small one and it impacts us because it means we hire custodians and electricians at the minimum scale instead of at the mid scale. We are not going to hire people at the minimum scale. We will hire them around the medium scale but there will be fewer of them that we will be able to hire.
The Senate is fully funding enrollment growth which they were before so about $5.3M will come to us for enrollment growth.
The Senate has funded the Biotechnology Training and Education Center for the full amount.
We had asked for $2.5 of operating funds on a permanent basis for the William and Ida Friday Institute for Education Innovation. They had earlier put in one million dollars for that but when the budget came out they had funded it for the entire amount.
We have one hundred and fifty thousand dollars of one-time funds for the manufacturing extension partnership and we have a seventy-five thousand dollars recurring increase for the North Carolina Space Grant Contortion. They also put an item in to provide approximately $6.0M for the Renaissance Computing Institute, which is the replacement and expansion of dollars that were formally in the budget for super computing and the network of computing systems that goes across the state system. We will get a share of that money which is shared between Chapel Hill and NC State.
We had asked for money to provide salary equity for our field extension agents and the Senate provided $2.0M of recurring money to help increase those salaries.
There are some differences in the lottery budget between the Senate and what the house passed earlier so there may be problems trying to get the House to vote again on changes.“
Chair Daley: Can you clarify what was in the previous budget about vacant lines and filled lines?
Provost Nielsen stated that in the previous budget we had been asked to supply numbers for vacant lines/filled lines for SPA, EPA, Non teaching and faculty, instructional operations for administrative operations, non instructional operations and several other categories where we had to indicate a specific number that would go into the budget and the initial thing that the Senate was talking about had cuts across each of those categories. Now they have taken that out and combined them all into one management flexibility cut so as I understand it there is no specification coming out of the Senate that we are supposed to take in these categories which means that we can adjust how we do things to our best purposes.
Senator: How about the salary equity for field faculty. Is that just county based you are talking about?
Provost Nielsen stated that he believes that to be the case. We asked for $7.0M and the Senate has provided us $2.0M. The House may be more receptive of that however because the House representatives are more county-based than Senators are.
Senator Hanley-Bowdoin stated that she was wondering if all F&A money came back.
Provost Nielsen stated that interestingly F&A money has not been a discussion at all in this budget. It has not been on any cut list that they have seen so far and he feels that is a great relief because often the Legislature thinks they own some of that money.
Senator Bruck: You mentioned the Centennial School that they gave a million dollars to Friday, who owns that?
Provost Nielsen stated that the Wake County School System built on a long-term lease owns the Middle School. The Friday Institute however is a university building that will house educational innovation, research, and application center for our College of Education. The Friday Institute is our building funded all by private gifts.
Senator Bruck: So the State is going to kick in money for actual operation of the building?
Provost Nielsen responded yes and for the operation of the programs.
Senator McRae stated that one concern that there has been about the lottery is that it will simply be used to replace funds, which have been given to the schools and according to the N&O that process has started before the bill has even been passed.
Provost Nielsen stated that if you talk to people around the country in states where they created lotteries that were going to benefit education by increasing the amount of money available for education and not touching the other pools of money available they will pretty much laugh at you because it is not the way it works. As you well know the legislature is very good at that. One of the legislative agenda items for this year was a very strong item in their overall approach to the budget was a reduction of the corporate income tax. We have the highest or the second highest corporate income tax in the Southeastern US and business has been after the legislature for some time to get that down so they are projected to do that this time.
Senator Tetro stated that she is confused about what fully funded for enrollment growth is how is that defined? If that money doesn’t apply to the current year it applies to next year?
Provost Nielsen stated that we have projected enrollment growth out to 2015, which is pretty meaningless. That is just a projection. Officially we project forward for two years at a time at the beginning of the budget biennium what our enrollment is going to be for the next two years and that is what is called the budget enrollment and then enrollment growth is based on those budgeted targets and the amount for next year. In fact, July 1 will match our budgeted enrollment plan for 05-06. So we will get money starting July 1 that handles the enrollment growth we plan to get for the coming year so it is not one year behind, it is right in place.
Provost Nielsen stated that this is the last meeting for this academic year so my term as Interim Provost, I hope will be over by the time you come back to start again in the fall. I want to say that it has been a pleasure to work with you, listen to you, and learn from you over the past six or eight months. Thank you.
6. Remarks by Thomas Conway, Vice Provost for Enrollment Management
Vice Provost Conway updated the faculty on admissions and graduation.
“What we are seeing is that our applications are going up allowing us to be a bit more selective in terms of students that we take but the size of our classes is growing also. We are still an access institution and are admitting students based on variables other than just the traditional SATS, high school GPAs and class ranks. The numbers of students that are coming to the institution that are being recommended in by the colleges is at least the same or maybe even larger than it was one year ago. We believe this is going to be something important that is important for us to continue but we are in a position as an institution overall to be much more selective than we have been in the past. Our GPAs are continuing to rise. We are also seeing an increase in our SAT scores. The quality measures are going into the directions that we want them to go. When we look at the class ranks of students that we are bringing in more and more of the students are actually measuring in the top 20% of their graduating high school classes so I drift toward the upper end of the class. In addition to that if you look at that upward drift the fastest growth in that is among students that are in the top 10% of their high school graduating classes so relative to the quality of high school education that is going on in North Carolina there has been an increase in the level of overall education particularly in the Raleigh-Wake areas which is one of our prime recruitment areas. We know that we are attracting and enrolling those students.
Relative to graduation rates we are at a thirty-year high. The graduation rates are up. If you look at our rates and look back over the last twenty years you come to the opinion that although they are very much like peer institutions that are like us and whereas if you look at us nationally across all institutions like us you would see that we are right in the middle of the pack. What we believe we can do and where we want to go we were not there. We were looking at four-year graduation rates and the twenty-four to twenty-six percent range we are looking at five-year graduation rates that jumped up into the forty -five or fifty percent range and the six-year rate that went up into about the sixty-six percent. Now we are looking at four-year graduation rates at the thirty-five to thirty-six percent ranges. We are looking at six year graduations that also seem to be expanding above the four year rates and if you break apart our graduation rates by semester of enrollment most of the students that don’t graduate in four years end up graduating in four and a half rather than five years. So the distance between our four-year graduation rate and our six-year rates are primarily accounted for by the five year rates.
When you look at the four and five-year graduation rates across the colleges it is not one or two colleges that are accounting for this rate there is an increase in the graduation rate across almost all of the colleges. In some colleges there are pretty dramatic graduation rates which has caused us some reason for both elation and some concern in that if we are graduating students faster than we are bringing them in we have to be a bit concerned about managing those numbers so that at the census date report our enrollment is matching up with what we have told the Office of the President and Legislature. They do review those numbers and if we are constantly coming in below the bar they come back and say that we are over estimating and under producing so that is an area that we are going to be looking at very carefully.
I want to report on the items that I think are affecting graduation rates. We are getting students coming to college that have better pre college preparation than we were getting.
The rising cost of attending college is causing students and their parents to focus on getting in and getting out as opposed to getting in and using college as a career. I believe that the conversation around progress toward degree has made a difference. We are still in the process of implementing progress toward degree. I think there has been an increased attention to the quality of advising that is taking place. We have a lot of work to do in that area but I believe we have made significant progress. I think there has been significant attention to the quality of teaching and the support for teaching faculty and the relationship of teaching to the learning process and interaction of students around that. I think the last item that I list is that there has been a qualitative increase, although there has been a lot of concern about workload, about faculty getting work more and more I think at a very important level the quality of a relationship between faculty and student has started to improve which has changed the climate at the university. I’m sure that there are other things that I did not identify but we are in the process of looking at the reasons and we are searching out the evidence. The goal here is having reached this thirty year high not to relax and let it dip back. We are moving in the right direction.
One other thing that I have been paying close attention to is the numbers and careers of part time students at NC State. When I say part time students I do not consider it a problem that we have part time students. I do consider it a problem that we have part time students and we don’t know what they are doing because we don’t have a significant understanding of why they are part time. I looked at the figures on the University Planning and Analysis website for part time students relative to our peers. When I looked at them what I saw in terms of the number and percentage of part time students is that we massively outstripped all of our peers. Texas A&M, for instance, which is an institution that at the undergraduate level is almost twice our size we had almost one thousand more undergraduate part time students than they did. When I first saw this figure because I was aware of the findings from the task force on undergraduate retention and graduation that Gail O’Brien chaired and I knew that there was this impact that students who go part time even one semester changes their graduation prognosis I was really alarmed. We need to do something to understand what is causing this and to impact it. Digging a little deeper, I found out that the students who are entering the university as new freshmen indicate to us that they intend to be full time students all the way through to graduation. When students do that they have a much more significant graduation rate. That four-year rate that I talked about having floated at about 24 to 26% for that group of students during comparable years jumps from twenty six percent to over fifty percent in four years from around fifty percent in five years to up in the eighty five to ninety percent in five years into close to one hundred percent in six years if they stay in school full time each semester. Incidentally a lot of our peers have requirements for students to be full time and that is one of the reasons that our progress toward degree regulation emphasizes that as an important factor, but when I went back and looked at who these part time students were based on the data we did have what I saw was that that the traditional college age student that is coming in and electing at some point to become part time is a decreasing trend. I think that the fact that it is gone down has something to do with the advising that is happening and the fact that our graduation rate is going up. The students that are causing us to outstrip our peers in terms of part time are students are enrolling as Lifelong Education students. Here I see a very different picture. Here I see the opportunity for expanded markets if we can create a way to deliver to this market that allows us to also manage the seats and section issues that we have on campus and manage multiple delivery methods. I see both a reason to mitigate against my concern that we have this huge number of part time students because the number I was really worried about going down and the potential for a new market that we can move toward.
When I went to the Academic Policy Committee and shared this same presentation I ended with what I thought they could do to help us out and I want to share those recommendations with this body.
There were two things that I asked the Academic Policy Committee to do and it will be my goal to continue to work actively with this committee throughout the next several years to monitor the kinds of issues that I reported to you today so that there is a conduit back to this body so that you know that your peers are watching us.
The first one was to make explicit statements of support for existing academic regulations that if fully implemented can enhance retention and graduation. I was bold enough on that day to identify some policies that I thought about and the Academic Policy Committee members pointed out some issues with those. I want to go back and continue to talk about those policies. The policies were policies like the drop/add policy that we need to take a look at. We do have an attendance policy and there are some issues relative to the attendance policy that we need to look at very carefully. There are other kinds of policies in that regard including the progress toward the degree and its full implementation that we need to take a look at.
The second one was to commit to a process of reviewing and recommending changes to existing academic regulations that will support greater retention and graduation. I think this is an ongoing dialog that we need to have. We need to institutionalize it and work throughout the year to get to where we need to be on that.
Senator Fahmy wanted to know the role of the Admissions Office once a student has been admitted.
Conway stated that they are getting close to more than fourteen applications per year and they are seeing that number rise. “There are some students who apply and they are what any admissions office would identify as no brainers. Before we start the admissions process each cycle, because the numbers are now set and negotiated in the enrollment planning process we then sit down with every academic dean who is designated to do so and talk about the kinds of students that are likely to apply, what their yield rates have been and what they can expect in the next cycle. In that application pool there are going to be students that we would consider no brainers in terms of admitting. There are going to be students that we have already agreed with the administration of the colleges that those students come in with this profile and primarily they are going to be in the top 15% or so. The traditional variables are going to be there and they are going to have some of the other kinds of enhancing factors that we talked about. Those students are going to be admitted very quickly. There is going to be another group of students that are going to apply that from the process of experience the admissions office pretty much knows that these students are not going to be admitted. There is a larger number in the middle who will require more handling. What we do first, based on the conversations that we have had with the colleges is subject those applications to a second reading and sometimes a third reading within the Office of Admissions. In that process some of those students are admitted. Then there is a group of students that as we are going through because the Admissions Office has agreed with the academic administration of the college that there is going to be a group that we are not going to make a decision on until they weigh in on it so each college has its on reading process where it may be the academic associate dean or someone else. The college comes in and actually makes a recommendation on that final set of students. Those students are then admitted through the Admissions Office and only the students hear whether they have been admitted or not.
Based on the structure that we have there really isn’t any obligation. If we don’t dialog and manage the process the experience that our students are having then we will create a negative recruiting situation.”
Senator Robarge: Is there anything in your numbers that would indicate the impact or is there an impact from the increase in fees and tuition that has been happening or are you able to project an impact in the future at what level we might see fees and tuition go where it would begin to impact your numbers.
Conway stated that there is nothing in the data that would allow us to separate the fees from the tuition numbers right now. “We keep an eye on what is happening in the markets we are recruiting in and what we look like relative to the institutions that we are crossing applications with. We are seeing that although we moved from the bottom half to the top half of institutions that are like us in terms of what we cost we are starting to see is that there is a significant slow down in our out of state takers because now the differential that use to exist use to be cheaper for students in some states to go to school in North Carolina than it was for them to attend an institution in their home state and that is no longer true, plus with the Georgia, Virginia, South Carolina lotteries and them offering programs to support the better students in those states we are seeing that it is much more difficult to attract those students to come here. As the cost increases and we don’t have the funds to pump into scholarship programs I know there is an affect but I can’t say exactly its degree at this point. “
Senator Bruck: When I read your numbers I say we don’t have a problem. Am I correct in making that comment?
Conway stated that we have some conversations that we need to have prior to making that statement because 1) we know that those students will do what they say they are going to do and the more we support them to do that they do graduate so the more students we have that follow that pattern our numbers are going to continue to rise. 2) The way we count students in our cohort is such that any student that enters in any fall semester that is enrolled on census date is counted as part of our retention cohort. We have had a very conservative approach to managing our numbers.
7. Remarks on International Strategic Plan
Vice Provost Wilson stated that he appreciates the opportunity to be here today to share what is referred to as second draft and even as we speak we are in the final stages of preparing the final draft.
Vice Provost Wilson introduced Michael Bustle, as the Associate Vice Provost for International Affairs and Director of the Office of International Services and Ingrid Schmidt as the Associate Vice Provost for International Affairs and Director of Study Abroad.
David Dickson is a graduate student, a candidate for a Master of International Studies and he has chosen to go to Ireland this fall to do his research.
Vice Provost Wilson stated that they are looking for help to provide some information about some International Programs, and International activities that they don’t already know about.
“When we talk about globalize it has to be about partnerships and our strategic plan has to be related to our compact plan initiative. I also passed out a document called the white paper which was generated a little more than one year ago by a dean task force on International Studies which kind of set the stage for what we would do when we got the International Operations Council named and when we started into this strategic plan. You will see a lot of elements of the dean’s white paper in the strategic plan. Basically we are talking about a quality education and nobody in this room would argue that that is what we are after and that is what it is all about and we must promote internationalization as the core value of NC State.
In the strategic plan, which, we delivered to all of the deans back on March 14, we included all of the elements. It ended with nine priorities. It had the deans’ white paper in it and then the current status of each of the colleges, the current status of internationalization at NC State and we are still finding more information on that all the time. The University Standing Committee on International Programs which is really the Institutional memory and the group that has kept internationalization activities alive through various Provosts and leaders of International Affairs at NC State. We have presented the goals, objectives, and actions. We presented this first as a working table and that was a product of the International Operations Council Meeting and deciding what the goals were going to be, what the objectives under those goals are going to be and then what the actions would be. Right now it is too inclusive so we are trying to tighten that up. We have put it into text form as well and that is what I have shared with you. Straight from our compact planning for the next couple of years is a global training initiative. You will notice that we did not have any real numbers in there because this is still in draft form and we have not gotten all the funding approved for that yet.
NC State needs to have an International Center. You don’t just get that because you want it. You have to earn it. You have to work up to it. Well the other three goals precede that but will all tie in together.
- All graduates will be internationally competent and that is based on the faculty and staff being internationally engaged.
- To internationalize the wider community.
Some of you have joined international organizations like I have. I am on the Board of Directors of the World Trade Center in North Carolina and it opens another whole dimension. I’m also on the Board of the International Festival.
The other priority is to double the percentage of graduates with international experience. Maybe we are not talking about experience but exposure because sometimes a very brief trip to another country is nothing more than exposure.
Another priority is internationalization of curriculum. You will be hearing a lot more about this and we want to hear from you about this.
What would be a faculty incentive that you would all like to hear about for internationalizing your program? I know this happens at the department level. I would like to see some changes there. Get credit for it rather than it being a disincentive. So this is where I ended when I talked with the deans a month ago. Your support is critical.
Next steps. We have pieces that we are putting in place for the capital campaign. The Provost came and met with the International Operations Council a few weeks ago. We really appreciated that because it was obvious that he had read the strategic plan and he had discussed with the Chancellor and he had talked with the deans about it One thing that he said was that he did endorse making a difference at the university level through International Programs.
We have partnerships with all the other fifteen UNC campuses and some of you may already know that the ACC has an international academic collaborative. The Provost assured us that the new Provost will not be hired who does not embrace the internationalization vision. The point to me is that we have strong support in Holladay Hall for internationalization. In fact, it is not just support; there is a big push.
NC State has unique strengths, which will inform internationalization decisions. While the college international programs are important, they are essential, the encouragement is to think about university level programming so that we can get to that next level of accomplishment and recognition. Please invite us back so we can talk about this as we develop.
Senator Warren: What do you know about the number of graduate students trained to come from predominantly Muslim Countries and what if anything you know about those figures and whether the Office of International Affairs has specific programs at work.
Vice Provost Wilson stated that the number of people that are actually applying has decreased but the number of admissions has been stable or even increased.
Associate Vice Provost Bustle stated that they are delighted that they have had very few Visa denials even from Muslim countries. We have not really been targeting the Middle East for recruitment. I would say that there is a perception on the part of most Middle Eastern students who hope to study abroad that the United States is monitoring them. The number of applications for US colleges decreased from that part of the world and they are flying to England, Australia and other places. Those that are applying and are admitted and have funding are getting Visas.
Senator Batra stated that you might have to build in some latitude in terms of funding it from here to have at least people from other countries come here.
Vice Provost Wilson stated that not all students that come here come here as part of an agreement or exchange.
Senator Batra stated that when he tried to do this several years ago it was understood that we would allow one student there to come in if one student from here would go. The second thing is that there are a number of international organizations which have a lot of research and outreach type of activities and programs and I think it would be appropriate for your office to identify some of those and then bring appropriate faculty and other individuals from specific colleges who can reach out to that. That would be something worth showcasing.
Vice Provost Wilson stated, that it is a part of the action plan.
Senator Martin: Comment on the resources that you have in mind for this. I did not hear anything in terms of new resources to make this kind of thing happen.
Vice Provost Wilson stated that the university has been very generous. We have a couple of people that are helping us to track down grants and proposals that we can compete for. One of those women is in the proposal development unit. Charlene Simon is partially funded through our office and the Office of African American Affairs. We also have a part time woman in our office that can help anyone of you that has some ideas on some grants to develop them too. She has done some very good things in terms of identifying and getting the ball rolling or when some proposals come along that don’t fit our office she will past it around to everyone.
Vice Provost Schmidt stated that there are scholarships available. We have a little more than $100,000 in scholarships that we give to students studying abroad. The problem is that number has remained fairly stable and the number of students has increased. Seventy percent of those applying for scholarships have received at least one award. The number for multiple awards has decreased to less than fifty percent now and the cost of programs is also rising so it is getting more difficult for students to study abroad. The question regarding how to encourage more of our students to go abroad and make sure that those exchanges are balanced, there are typically two concerns that students have; one is cost and the other is credit. If the capital campaign allows us to increase scholarships that would be key. I know that there have been donors in other UNC system schools who have been generous and who have made a world of difference in how many students have been able to go abroad. The other issue is credit and this is where all faculty members can really help in advising students.
Senator Fikry wanted to know if the off campus international students are included in the statistics and he would also like to know if they are being taken care of.
Associate Vice Provost Bustle stated that the Office of International Affairs would assist them with the admissions stage. If they came to the US and they don’t have appointment authorization we don’t count them in our statistics.
Senator Bruck stated that he thinks money is less of a barrier to most of these students as losing time. There should be direct articulate agreements that this course at New Zealand is equivalent to these nine courses at NC State. Every other college that I have ever dealt with would sit down with you in ten minutes tell you a course of study that you would get fifteen or sixteen hours with no questions asked.
Senator Smith: I have a problem getting visas and getting people into the United States. We hired a faculty member and it took him almost eighteen months to get into the country. I have a graduate student now who went home because of the death of his brother and he now cannot come back to complete his studies. Is that typical and do you see that improving in the future.
Senator Bustle stated that his office can help and noted that there are a few countries where it does take forever.
Senator Hanley-Bowdoin stated that the International Program and the Graduate School need to get together on the cost of tuition for international students with the new policy regarding tuition remission for the out of state tuition. It is making it very difficult to bring in international students and maintain their support for their full tenure period. It is now to the point where we really have a difficult time justifying that fourth or fifth year, that extra twelve/thirteen thousand dollars that we are going to have to find as a department or the investigators are going to have to find and it is making us look at our international outlookings for graduate school differently than we might really like to. This is something that really has to be addressed or our international population is going to decline because departments won’t be able to afford to bring them here.
Vice Provost Wilson stated that he does not think you are going to be able to change the attitude in general.
Senator Hanley-Bowdoin stated that the International Programs Office and the Graduate School should sit down and make sure that they are being realistic.
Senator Baynes wants to know if the International Programs Office has access to an immigrations attorney.
Associate Vice Provost Bustle stated that Human Resources recently hired an immigration attorney to help out with faculty petitions, H1B’s, TN’s, and permanent residency. The Office of International Programs does not use an immigration attorney. If there is an international student or scholar who has a significant immigration matter and we need representation, we have a list of recommended attorneys to refer them to.
Chair-Elect Allen stated, “That is a matter that will be brought up next year because we have to see how that office will function with this new person. If it doesn’t function I think we should take a good look at it.”
Senator Blank stated that every college here has someone who works as a foundation development person; talk with that person about putting this item on the agenda for foundation support. If a rich donor gives you money and you can use that money to support students, travel, and internationalization it will work and that is something that rich donors like to think about is helping undergraduate students with scholarship money. I have the ability to pay the whole cost for those students who would like to go with me this summer to Sweden to study for one month. It makes a big difference when you say all you have to do is pay for your food for a month then you can get four credits, travel, and have a wonderful experience. A rich Swede gave us a million dollars and that money is used to fund this program.
Senator Yencho stated that ES King Village generally could accommodate visiting scientists for short periods of time on a short notice.
8. Issues of Concern
Senator Bruck is concerned about students receiving financial aid not being fully funded to attend summer school.
This is an issue he would like to have addressed next fall.
Personnel Policy Committee
Senator McRae stated that the Personnel Policy Committee is dealing with a harassment regulation.
The Committee was asked to examine the policies and regulations concerning harassment as to their provisions concerning faculty. They did not find any problems with the basic harassment policy, however they believe that the harassment Regulation 04.25. 02 need considerable revision in content, and by inference, how it must then be applied in cases concerning faculty members.
The Personnel Policy Committee is in the process of arranging a meeting between the Chair/Co-Chair of the committee, OEO, and Legal Affairs in an attempt to further seek agreement.
Senator McRae stated that they believe strongly that the proposed changes are needed and seek support from the Senate in carrying forward the proposed modifications during the next Senate term.
Chair Daley announced that he needed a motion to extend the meeting for ten minutes.
The motion was made and seconded to extend the meeting for ten minutes.
Chair Daley stated that the Personnel Policy Committee has reviewed regulations 05.20.11 on scholarly external evaluations for RPT review, regulation 05.20.18 on qualifications for rank, and regulation 05.20.27 on statements of mutual expectation. They have suggested some revisions.
Senator McRae stated that in conversation with Senior Vice Provost Perry and the committee they have reached an agreement on the language as they are currently written but that does not mean the rest of the administration.
The motion passed to support revisions and non-revisions on the regulations.
Academic Policy Committee
Senator Bruck stated that the saga regarding doctoral examinations continues. Senator Bruck moved that the discussion on doctoral examinations be tabled until the fall.
The motion was seconded to table the discussion until fall.
10. Passing of the Gavel
Chair Daley passed the gavel to Chair-Elect Allen for her to adjourn the last meeting of the fifty-first session.
Chair-Elect Allen adjourned the meeting at 5:10 p.m.