Press release from Di Saunders; Cell: 503-807-5539; Office: 503-725-5714
PORTLAND, June 3 - The State Board of Higher Education (the "Board'') met today at the Chemeketa Eola Northwest Viticulture Center in Salem, and deferred approval of tuition rates for 2005-06 academic year, and reviewed the status of campus policies on sexual harassment, among other action and report items.
2005-06 Tuition Rates George Pernsteiner, acting chancellor of the Oregon University System, noted that the tuition rates under consideration in the docket are those proposed in the Governor's Recommended Budget (GRB) for 2005-2007, which are defined as an average increase of 7% in 2005-06 and 5% in 2006-07. Currently, both the House and Senate budget plans have in their proposals a partial tuition freeze (replacing tuition amounts with state appropriations) and lower tuition increases than in the GRB for 2005-2007. While it is likely that tuition will be limited in some manner by the legislature, staff brought the provisional rates to the Board to meet a commitment to students that tuition and fee rates would be addressed by the Board during the regular academic year versus in the summer as it has been traditionally.
Based on the likelihood that final tuition rates would be lower than the provisional rates in the 2005-06 Fee Book, the Board unanimously approved deferring the discussion on tuition and fee increases until the July 2005 State Board of Higher Education meeting.
Sexual Harassment Policies Ben Rawlins, general counsel of the OUS, summarized the reports from the OUS campuses outlining current and proposed policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment and consensual relations. Earlier this year, acting chancellor George Pernsteiner and Governor Ted Kulongoski has asked campuses to examine their policies that work to ensure harassment-free working and learning environments, and identify areas where policies can and will be improved. He noted that all campuses provide protections from sexual harassment for students, faculty and staff. Issues identified by the campuses as needing further attention will improve upon policies. Since 1999, there have been an average of five sexual harassment cases per year on OUS campuses among 80,000 students and 12,000 faculty and staff.
Some of the areas identified for improvement at one or more campuses in the reports included: there are varying degrees of access to and dissemination of sexual harassment policies; some campuses need to improve awareness of how to access the complaint process; additional or enhanced training needs to be completed with faculty, staff and students; the number and network of places eligible to receive complaints and trained to offer support should be expanded; and there is a need to increase the education of students to both the responsibilities and potential consequences of sexual harassment. A particular area in need of further attention is that of providing additional resources to assist interested persons in understanding and accessing the formal complaint process. Analysis by campuses also identified the perception that the official process of reporting sexual harassment was intimidating and confusing.
Rawlins reviewed the issue of consensual relations policies on campuses, noting that these are there to address the actions of people with the legal capacity to consent. There is a recognition on campuses that such consent may be affected when one party has a greater institutional power differential (such as a faculty member to a student). There are varying levels of corrective action taken on the campuses regarding consensual relations. The Chancellor's Office recommended that the Board may want to set a minimum standard for campuses regarding consensual relations.
After a Board discussion of the reports, Board president Henry Lorenzen assigned two Board members, Dr. Geri Richmond and Ms. Kirby Dyess, to lead an effort to develop a uniform minimum standard that applies to all campuses and addresses consensual relationships and sexual harassment. Part of this would be looking carefully at a program for disseminating information to the campus community about the process of reporting harassment, campus-wide training, regular evaluation of how effective these processes are working on campus, necessary corrective action, as well as examination of campus perceptions and attitudes in these areas.
In other action and discussion at today's meeting, the Board and/or the Finance and Administration Committee: