UWM College of Letters and Science

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
College of Letters and Science

1997-98
Academic Planning Committee

Minutes No. 5
Friday, January 15, 1999


Present:     Marc Ethridge, Mark Harris, Erl Olfe (ex officio), Julio Rodriguez-Luis, Ron Ross, Craig Sandgren, Mark Schwartz
Excused: Alice Gillam, Pat Mellencamp, Leonard Parker
Absent: Patricia Kissinger (ex officio)
Guests: Marshall Goodman, Connie Jo


The Chair, Mark Schwartz, called the meeting to order at 11:05 a.m. in Holton 241.

  1. Procedural Matters - None

  2. Automatic Consent - Minutes #4 were not available and will be considered at the next meeting.

  3. Old Business - Review of PAR Recommendations (delayed until later in the meeting)

  4. New Business - The Dean, Marshall Goodman, requested this meeting to discuss three issues.

    1. The Strategic Plan. The Dean did a brief presentation on the College's strategic plan. He noted that the hiring plan for 2000-2001 was not yet included. We don't know what our revenues will be so we cannot set hiring goals. For items to be included in the strategic plan, they had to fit the following objectives growing out of The Milwaukee Idea:

      1. student centered (e.g. Edison Initiative, BAGS, BAOA, Peer Mentoring)
      2. research centered (e.g. start-up funds especially for the natural sciences)
      3. globally focused (e.g. international DIN, BAGS)
      4. urban influenced (e.g. director hired by L&S/Bus Ad for Corporate University Program)
      5. collaborative (e.g. BAGS, BAOA, COVIS, science van, programs with MPS)
      6. economically viable (made $60,000 on UwinteriM, $60,000 in telemarketing; will be put into start-up)

      The top two priorities for the College are #1 start-up money in the natural sciences and #2 BAGS. The entire plan is available on the web.

    2. Sabbatical Requests Review Process. The Dean noted that he and the Associate Deans had reviewed the requests in prior years. They were prioritized, and the top requests were forwarded to the Provost based on what the College could afford to support. In those years, all requests forwarded were approved. This process was criticized by a number of faculty member who felt it might be biased. This past year, the Dean asked that the APC, CCC, and GPC each appoint two members to a review committee for sabbatical requests. These members worked with the Associate Deans in committees of three. They prioritized the requests, but recommended to the Dean that all be forwarded to the Provost. The Dean accepted this recommendation, but the Provost did not approve all of the requests. Faculty members also criticized the new process and requested the names of the review committee members. (These names were not released because members had not been told ahead of time that their membership would be made public.) The Dean requested the assistance of the Academic Planning Committee in designing a review process for the coming years. One APC member suggested clarifying the criteria. Connie Jo will obtain and circulate copies of the criteria used this past year for the Committee's future discussions of this issue.

    3. Review of Centers and Institutes. There are 20-25 centers in the College. The directors have requested that they be established as a permanent committee. The centers have not been subject to any review by College faculty. The Dean does a review of the directors when merit increase exercises take place. Some submit an annual report to the L&S faculty; others do not. When vacancies occur in staff positions in the centers, there is no faculty review of recommendations to hire replacements. The Dean requested that the APC consider the following:

      1. do we have too many centers/can we support all of them?
      2. how much of each center's funding is from external/internal sources?
      3. can we merge any centers?
      4. should we have a regular review schedule for centers, perhaps every three years?
      5. should each center have an advisory committee/submit an annual report?
      6. what mechanism(s) should be put into place to review centers and to develop their strategic plans?

      Connie Jo was asked to secure the following information for the Committee:
      1. list of Centers and Directors;
      2. any recent annual reports for Centers;
      3. sabbatical guidelines for the past year;
      4. any faculty legislation dealing with sabbaticals;
      5. mission statement of the College;
      6. email address of the strategic plan.

  5. Old Business - The Committee returned to a discussion of the PAR Recommendations Review. Members reviewed a draft of a letter to department chairs requesting preliminary planning ideas prior to submission of position requests. After brief debate concerning how this information would be used, the draft was approved.

  6. The meeting was adjourned at 12:15 p.m.


Respectfully submitted,


Connie Jo
Special Assistant to the Dean and
Distinguished Advisor
Secretary to the L&S Faculty

Distribution: Committee Members
L&S Deans
L&S Committee Chairs
Secretary of the University


· L&S Committees Home Page ·


Send your questions and comments to Connie Horstman.
© 1998 UWM - College of Letters and Science
Last Updated: July 23, 1999
www.uwm.edu/letsci/committees/apc/apc011599m.html		 UWM Logo