University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee College of Letters and Science 2002-2003 Academic Planning Committee Meeting: Monday, March 10, 2003, 3:00 p.m. Holton Hall 241 Minutes No. 5 Present:   Swarnjit Arora, Margaret Atherton, Thomas Holme, Pat Kissinger (ex officio), Erl Olfe (ex officio), Stacey Oliker, Jeanne Schueller, Gabrielle Verdier Absent: Gerald Bergtrom, Douglas Cherkauer, Christopher De Sousa Guests: Connie Jo, Richard Meadows, Caterina Sukup Call to Order - Professor Stacey Oliker, Chair of the Committee, called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. in Holton 241. Automatic Consent Minutes #5 (February 7, 2003) were approved as submitted. Procedural Matters - none Old Business Budget - Dean Richard Meadows distributed to Committee members information from the Governor's budget document. He said that the Governor's budget does not really cut the size of the University; rather, it envisions changes in the revenue sources. It also calls for cutting 600 positions. Richard indicated that he thought tuition increases, to a large extent, may balance the cuts. Unfortunately, the Regents, at their recent meeting, did not endorse the tuition increase proposed by the Governor. They plan to hold a series of "listening sessions" at a number of UW campuses. The closest to UWM will be in Waukesha. Richard said that Kathryn Lyall supports the full tuition increase. He estimates that, with the full increase, the College would have a bill of about $2,000,000. We may get a directive that cuts cannot come out of instruction. That would help the College since a large part of its budget goes into instruction. The Provost's best guess is that we will see a 5% cut. Richard reviewed the College Administration's plan for cuts of $4,400,000 over the next two years. He noted that the University overall has 4.6% of its instruction on 189 (program revenue) funds; L&S has only 2.3%. Therefore, the College may be able to shift instruction of evening courses from 101 to 189. A copy of the draft plan is attached to the minutes. Stacey Oliker asked what had become of the request to move World Affairs to L&S. Richard said that the original allocation to World Affairs was $135,000. In the plan to move the Center, $50,000 of that would be put toward retiring the WA debt for four years. The Center for International Education would have to find a way to operate World Affairs on $85,000 a year. But Susan Kelly reported that she already had shifted $50,000 to another unit in the School of Continuing Education. In addition, $20,000 in salary monies will be given up when Bill Vocke leaves World Affairs. The redistribution of these funds does not leave enough money to pay off the deficit. Therefore, Richard indicated, he said no to the move. Stacey asked what units in L&S would have reviews of their budgets conducted. Richard stated that all units could be reviewed, but he affirmed his commitment to BAGS and to the Center for Twenty-First Century Studies since it is the only real research center for the humanities at UWM. Richard mentioned that he has discussed the efficiency of current foreign language course offerings with chairs of the foreign language departments. He has made suggestions regarding ways to decrease spending, perhaps by rotating the offering of foreign language courses and planning for years in advance so that students could anticipate when the courses they wanted would be available. Richard also questioned the efficiency of the Language Resource Center and said that a review of its functioning should be undertaken. Tom Holme asked if the Milwaukee Idea has panned out with the projected increase in Federal dollars. Richard responded that UWM is doing reasonably well in this regard, though the amount of increase in Federal money for the entire System is very modest. Tom Holme noted that an effort to cut the budget by shifting the salaries of researchers to grants might not be viewed positively by granting agencies. Stacey asked Richard what kind of feedback from the Committee he would like to have. He said all kinds of feedback were welcome. Is his plan on the right or wrong track? Does the Committee have other suggestions for cuts? Do members need more information about any of the proposals? He noted that L&S Administration would be meeting with the Provost on March 13 to review the plan. On March 25, the Provost will present his plan for the campus to the Deans' Council. That plan will be distributed to the campus governance bodies on March 28. There will be a town hall meeting on April 4, and another later. Stacey asked if there would be any opportunities for faculty to influence the proposal outside the College. Erl Olfe said that the two town hall meetings could provide that forum. Stacey asked if the APBC would review the plan. Richard said that it would. Margaret Atherton asked if alternatives to Freshman Seminar are being considered to enhance the freshman experience. Richard noted that the number of seminars for fall has been cut nearly in half, and the enrollment caps have been raised. He emphasized the need to provide more access with the same or fewer resources. We are anticipating a sizeable increase in enrollments. We also would like to find ways to increase retention between the freshman and sophomore years. Richard also mentioned that the Course and Curriculum Committee will survey faculty members regarding the degree requirements, providing an opportunity for faculty members to comment on the requirements and how they are implemented. Jeanne Schueller asked what are the issues relating to the Language Resource Center. Richard responded that there are no particular concerns, but he feels the Center should undergo a thorough review. Stacey asked what pressures would be put on the College from outside. Richard indicated that the current enrollment funding formula alleviates outside pressure to a large extent, assuming the anticipated enrollments materialize. The formula provides incentives to generate more credits. Richard noted that this is easier for the College than for the professional schools; L&S provides a large part of the education of professional school students. At this point, Richard left the meeting. Several committee members also had to leave. Members who remained spent some time expressing concerns about the budget process and proposals. If classes are shifted to 189 funds, will the shift be permanent? How hard is it to shift them back? Because of the funding formula, will we see increased efforts by the professional schools to offer their own general education courses? Will the position cuts being offered eventually be restored? Members agreed that Stacey should send the budget plan to the members who could not make the meeting and ask for their feedback. The Committee will not take a specific position on the proposal, but Stacey will communicate members' concerns to the Dean and indicate that members want to stay involved in the process. New Business - none Adjournment - The meeting was adjourned at 4:59 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Connie Jo Special Assistant to the Dean Secretary to the L&S Faculty Distribution: Dean G. Richard Meadows Associate Deans Harris, Miller, O'Bryan, Schuster Assistant Deans Horstman, Kissinger, Olfe L&S Chairs (via web) Secretary of the University D:Comm/apc/minutes #5.apc.doc