The president's council meeting following the board meeting on the 21st will host the Governor. He is expected to talk about the financial aid commission and he apparently wants to help private institutions somehow as a part of his concept of seamless higher education including all Oregon institutions of higher education. It wasn't clear whether he would actually discuss PEBB and higher ed. He is likely to go no further than supporting higher ed. carving out a program within PEBB according to the discussion.
The February full board meeting has the Admission Policies for 2001-02 on its agenda (freshman and transfer). This will include discussion of the impact of enrollment growth. There is some talk of folding the CAM into the CIM (or does it work the other way around?) to simplify the system. That would make it easier to relate PASS to the high school graduation. They should also deal with program option policy packages: technology programs and engineering seem to be on the list.
There is an ad going into the Chronicle of Higher Education seeking a replacement for Bill Anslow as chief financial officer/Vice Chancellor for Finance and Administration.
The Office of Degree Authorization guidelines came up again. When a program is offered at a new location, it is subject to the ODA review. If more than 50% of the credit hours are offered at one location, it is deemed to be offered there. Bruce Shepard (EOU) said, "50% of what" because there are so many things that might be done as in field experience. Is that at the institution or elsewhere. Also, ODA has apparently planned to grandfather in the location issue back to 1996 so OUS can be challenged for programs from that time. Distance education or individually structured programs are at diverse locations that change as students enroll and complete. OHSU nursing is scattered over the state with distance components often used. Where is the program actually located? Note: Oregon is the only state with such a law allowing privates to charge the state system with competition.
Grattan Kerans gave the legislative update. The system has to do something about an official recognition of the name change to Oregon University System. Some of the bureaucrats in Salem won't recognize the new name. The legislators and the governor have agreed to return to a unified budget next session instead of governor's, senate's and house's budgets. The Oregon Enterprise Network committee will have a meeting on 22 February. OUS is trying to round up agencies that have not signed on yet to present a united front in urging changes. As it stands, it will cost more, do less than OUS needs and be the same package whether in Portland or La Grande, making it much too ponderous for the smaller locations (increasing costs to them substantially).
The developing budget strategy seems to be moving to ask for full and fair pricing for each student in the system. OUS hopes to avoid underfunding, taking in more students than the state is paying for. Enrollments have risen and are expected to go higher so funds to support those students are essential. Again, the strategy is to include some areas for special emphasis. Shirley Clark noted that Bioscience is likely to be one area of emphasis. [Note: what happens to the fundamentals of higher education? Are the specialties going to be supported but nothing for general education? Are there the equivalent of 3Rs in higher ed. that are going down the drain because no funds are available? Simonds' thoughts]
OUS 2001 Legislative concepts submitted by campuses Lease of Mineral Rights to allow OUS institutions to use its own procedures for lease of mineral and geothermal rights (OSU College of Forestry) Parking Tax Exemption (extends present exemption) (PSU) To statutorily recognize unique state responsibilities at PSU (PSU) Protection from disclosure of donor's name (UO) Permit campuses to commission 1 or more University Police Officers with authority to carry weapons (OUS Public Safety Directors and PSU) Liability coverage for students on internships and capstone programs (PSU)(negative response from Chancellor's office but not likely to be knocked off the list) OUS right to self-insure (allow for full separation from PEBB) OSBHE Retention of Interest Income (invest and mandate system cash in line with new budget model and SB271 entrepreneurial objectives. Student Building Fee Increase ($25-$35 2001-03; to $45 2003-05) Health Insurance for Graduate Students (not just employees)(aim is to enhance recruitment of top graduate students) Decoupling of rate for OUS Optional Retirement Plan from PERS retirement plan: (allow OUS to maintain employer rates in spite of PERS changes in the future)
Webber-Davis presented an update on the Office of Civil Rights sanction of OUS because of a complaint filed in 1990. A preliminary report of compliance attempts (not handed out or discussed in detail) has been submitted to OCR and they are waiting for a response. Since 1990 the criteria have changed and OUS needs to know how to relate the issue to the present criteria. Webber-Davis also handed out a multicultural newsletter with a calendar of diversity events from January to June 2000. She solicits commentary that could be published in future issues.
EOU program proposal for B.A. and B.S. degrees in Business Administration were quickly reviewed. EOU provost Bruce Shepard had held it back until it was totally restructured and quality improved. Every course was redesigned. OSU Dean of Business gives his support. Goes to the board next.
Dick Markwood reported again on the Central Oregon Regional Advisory Board (which would like to be the directors of the Central Oregon University Center). Members of CORAB will meet with all the OUS presidents. They have already met with Frohnmayer and Risser. They are sounding out the campuses on their stand on the present and future of Bend offerings. The OSBHE has not given Bend a green light to go ahead with a full institution and this has surprised CORAB. There has been some talk of going to the E-board for funds to continue gathering enrollment projections and other data to examine several models for Central Oregon's future. The Chancellor's Office will probably do without E-board funds. There will probably be some effort to involve the two private institutions (presently providing courses) in the planning.
Dave McDonald presented the Fall 1999 OUS High School Visitation Program report. 253 high schools, 33,021 student contacts. They all want it to continue. However, too many of the OUS people doing the visiting are undertrained and cannot do much more than present the canned material, they don't have answers to the questions asked by students. The slide show seems like a 50s presentation, not what one expects from "cutting edge" institutions. Finally, there is no data on followup. They don't know how effective the contacts are in getting new freshmen from Oregon high schools. Nancy Goldschmidt provided the OUS Bachelor's Graduates of 1988-1993 survey report. In the past it provided individual campus figures but this one combines the data by programs across the system, avoiding direct comparisons between OUS institutions. Each campus has copies of their own data. What the individual data shows, for example, is that graduates from OIT have the highest income 10 years later and UO graduates have the lowest. That may not be true 20 years out. The report is extensive and a copy will be available at the February meeting. They did not discuss it page by page.
Nancy also discussed the financial aid situation. 100,000 apply for financial aid and 16,000 are offered aid based on need. What happens to the rest? We don't know and we don't know what the unmet need is. There is no money allocated for surveys to find out the answers.
They discussed the Joint Boards Articulation Agreement on Off-Campus Distance Education Offerings. OUS campuses are developing more than just upper division courses and the community colleges basically want us out of lower division but are not making a fuss about it. They realize OUS will have some lower division distance ed courses. The question raised was whether the agreement dividing the areas of responsibility should be modified. Bruce Shepard opined that if we raise the issue they may get their backs up over it. It is better to just leave the situation as it is. It is likely that shortly the whole issue will be moot because state lines are no longer limits of educational opportunities and OUS and CCs are not just competing with each other, they are in a national market in distance education. Shirley Clark asked why we even need such an agreement any more. Much that is being developed in OUS for distance ed. is degree completion courses and doesn't violate the agreement anyway.
The WUE (Western Undergraduate Exchange?) program is growing and the Oregon/Washington Reciprocity agreement is being phased out as WUE does the same thing. Students in the reciprocity program will be seen through, particularly PSU, OIT Portland campus. It has worked to the advantage of Washington students more than Oregon as they have been getting Oregon resident status and many come from southern Washington. Far fewer Oregon students go to the Washington schools.
They finally got to the staff fee privileges. The proposal is that "Employees may "transfer" this benefit to one family member per term in accordance with the following conditions." Following is the rule (I am not including the fee calculation section.) "On approval of the president or designee of the teaching institution, the staff fee is available to a qualified family member or domestic partner of employees appointed at half-time or more (not including temporary classified employees. Employee qualification will be verified through Human Resource System records. To qualify for this fee, the family member or domestic partner must meet the criteria no later than the first day of classes of the term of enrollment. For purposes of this policy the term "family" includes spouse and dependent children in accordance with IRS code and "domestic partner" is defined as per Section One of the Public Employees Benefit Board Affidavit of Domestic Partnership. The employee will verify the qualification of the family member or domestic partner. The maximum number of credits to which the staff fee may apply is 16 credits per quarter or semester. See exception for retired employees and staff members on leave. (Section d OAR 580-022-0030). Only one staff member, family member or domestic partner within a family may use the provisions of this policy per term. The provision may not be subdivided during a term." Some questions were raised: Is it only the individual institutions faculty/staff that can participate at that institution or is it to be across OUS? How much independence of individual campuses is there? The presidents are to endorse it 21 January. Notice for public hearings will go out. Board will hear it at the February meeting and plans to adopt it at the April meeting.
Finally, the PEBB update. Most likely is a carving out within PEBB for OUS. John Moseley and George Bernsteiner are to work with the PEBB board on a carve out. There has been an initial meeting and the next is 24 January. The other option is a total pullout and 3 vendors are already to bid on contracts but they are worried about the time line and whether they will have an opportunity for long term participation because of the swiftness of the action necessary and that the future is not entirely clear just now.
Paul E. Simonds, Academic Council Representative