Penn State University Home  

 

THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY

 

T H E   S E N A T E   R E C O R D

 

Volume 35-----APRIL 23, 2002-----Number 7

 

The Senate Record is the official publication of the University Faculty Senate of The Pennsylvania State University, as provided for in Article I, Section 9 of the Standing Rules of the Senate and contained in the Constitution, Bylaws, and Standing Rules of the University Faculty Senate, The Pennsylvania State University 2001-02.

 

The publication is issued by the Senate Office, 101 Kern Graduate Building, University Park, PA  16802 (Telephone 814-863-0221).  The Record is distributed to all Libraries across the Penn State system, and is posted on the Web at http://www.psu.edu/ufs under publications.  Copies are made available to faculty and other University personnel on request.

 

Except for items specified in the applicable Standing Rules, decisions on the responsibility for inclusion of matters in the publication are those of the Chair of the University Faculty Senate.

 

When existing communication channels seem inappropriate, Senators are encouraged to submit brief letters relevant to the Senate's function as a legislative, advisory and forensic body to the Chair for possible inclusion in The Senate Record. 

 

Reports which have appeared in the Agenda of the meeting are not included in The Record unless they have been changed substantially during the meeting or are considered to be of major importance.  Remarks and discussion are abbreviated in most instances.  A complete transcript and tape of the meeting is on file.  Individuals with questions may contact Dr. Susan C. Youtz, Executive Secretary, University Faculty Senate.

 

                                   TABLE OF CONTENTS

   I.  Final Agenda for April 23, 2002

       A.  Summary of Agenda Actions

       B.  Minutes and Summaries of Remarks

II.  Enumeration of Documents

A.    Documents Distributed Prior to April 23, 2002

 

Door Handout – Cahir Resolution

Senate Calendar for 2002-03

Standing Committee Assignments for 2002-03

Chairs and Vice-Chairs for 2002-03

Roster of Senators by Voting Units for 2002-03

Results of Senate Elections for 2002-03

Senators Not Returning for 2002-03

Attendance

FINAL AGENDA FOR APRIL 23, 2002

 

A.     MINUTES OF THE PRECEDING MEETING –

      Minutes of the March 26, 2002 Meeting in The Senate Record 35:6

 

B.  COMMUNICATIONS TO THE SENATE - Senate Curriculum Report

                        (Blue Sheets) of April 9, 2002

 

C.  REPORT OF SENATE COUNCIL - Meeting of April 9, 2002

 

D.  ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHAIR -

 

E.  COMMENTS BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY –

 

F.  FORENSIC BUSINESS -

 

G.  UNFINISHED BUSINESS -

 

H.  LEGISLATIVE REPORTS –

 

Undergraduate Education

 

      Revision of Senate Policy 60-00: Multiple Majors and Degrees

I.  ADVISORY/CONSULTATIVE REPORTS –

 

J.  INFORMATIONAL REPORTS –

 

Senate Council – Tuition Task Force, Rodney A. Erickson,

Executive Vice President/Provost of the University

 

Admissions, Records, Scheduling, and Student Aid

 

      Time to Graduation Report

 

Senate Council – Statement by Penn State President Graham Spanier on

 the Penn State Calendar

 

Senate Self Study Committee  – Interim Report

 

University Planning – Construction Projects – 2001-02

 

Report of Senate Elections

 

     Senate Council

     Senate Committee on Committees and Rules

     University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee

     Standing Joint Committee on Tenure

     Faculty Rights and Responsibilities

     Faculty Advisory Committee to the President

     Senate Secretary for 2002-03

     Senate Chair-Elect for 2002-03

    

Comments by Outgoing Chair Nichols

 

     Installation of Officers

 

Comments by Incoming Chair Moore

 

K.  NEW LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS -

 

L.      COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE GOOD OF THE

      UNIVERSITY -

 

M.            ADJOURNMENT -

 

 

SUMMARY OF AGENDA ACTIONS

 

The Senate passed one legislative report:

 

Undergraduate Education – “Revision of Senate Policy 60-00: Multiple Majors and Degrees.”  This legislation proposed wording changes to the Senate Policies of dual-degree, simultaneous degree, and sequential degree programs, thus, changing and clarifying the language to eliminate distinctions between multiple majors and multiple degrees.  The terms concurrent majors program and sequential majors program are proposed.  (See Record, page (s) 7-8 and Agenda Appendix “B.”)

 

The Senate heard five informational reports:

 

Tuition Task Force Report - Provost Rodney Erickson shared the conclusions and recommendations of the Tuition Task Force, appointed by President Spanier in July 2001.  Dr. Erickson’s remarks focused on comparisons with peer institutions, funding needs of the University, five-year budget projections and tuition requirements, possible tuition models and recommendations regarding Penn State’s tuition strategy for the next several years.  (See Record, page(s) 8-23 and Agenda Appendix “C.”)

 

Admissions, Records, Scheduling and Student Aid – “Time to Graduation Report.”  This report investigates the graduation patterns of undergraduate students, using a time to degree study prepared by the Office of the University Registrar for Spring 1999, 2000, and 2001 semesters.  (See Record, page(s) 23-24 and Agenda Appendix “D.”)

 

Senate Council – Statement by Penn State President Graham Spanier on the Penn State Calendar - Provost Erickson responded to questions on the final outcome of deliberations related to changes in the University calendar.  (See Record, page(s) 24-28 and Agenda Appendix “E.”)

 

Senate Self Study Committee – “Interim Reort.”  Committee chair George Franz gave an interim report on its findings and invite feedback on topics under consideration.  (See Record, page(s) 28 and Agenda Appendix “F.”)

 

University Planning – “Construction Projects, 2001-02.”  This informational report focused on projects at campus college locations.  (See Record, page(s) 29-32 and Agenda Appendix “G.”)

 

 

The University Faculty Senate met on Tuesday, April 23, 2002, at 1:30 p.m. in Room 112 Kern Graduate Building with John S. Nichols, Chair, presiding.  One hundred and sixty-eight Senators signed the roster. 

 

Chair Nichols:  It is time to begin.

 

MINUTES OF THE PRECEDING MEETING

 

Moving to the minutes of the preceding meeting, The Senate Record, providing a full transcription of the proceedings of the March 26, 2002 meeting, was sent to all University Libraries, and is posted on the University Faculty Senate's web page.  Are there any corrections or additions to this document?  All those in favor of accepting the minutes, please signify by saying, "aye."

 

Senators:  Aye.

 

Chair Nichols:  Opposed?  The minutes are accepted.  Thank you.

 

COMMUNICATIONS TO THE SENATE

 

You have received the Senate Curriculum Report for April 9, 2002.  This document is posted on the University Faculty Senate's web page.

 

REPORT OF SENATE COUNCIL

 

Also, you should have received the Report of Senate Council for the meeting of April 9, 2002.  This is an attachment in The Senate Agenda for today's meeting. 

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE CHAIR

 

Chair Nichols:  There are several.  First of all if you have not glanced at the Senate Council minutes you might want to do so.  There are a number of announcements and remarks that will be of value to you but in the interest of time I will not repeat them.

 

This being the last Senate meeting of the year a number of Senators will be completing their term of office today.  I would like to take just a few minutes to acknowledge those departing Senators and to thank them for their service.

 

SENATORS NOT RETURNING FOR THE 2002-2003 SENATE YEAR

 

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
Hector Flores
Harvey Manbeck
Michael Saunders

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND ARCHITECTURE
Dan Brinker

PENN STATE ERIE - THE
BEHREND COLLEGE
Barbara Power
Syed Andaleeb

SMEAL COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
Terry Harrison
J. Randall Woolridge

COLLEGE OF COMMUNICATIONS
John Nichols

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
Murry Nelson

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
Ali Borhan
Sabih Hayek
Jeffrey Mayer
Jose Ventura

 

PENN STATE HARRISBURG
CAPITAL COLLEGE

Jacob De Rooy

COLLEGE OF HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
Linda Caldwell
Rebecca Corwin
Thomas Frank
Deborah Preston

COLLEGE OF THE LIBERAL ARTS
Alan Block
Richard Bord
James Brasfield
Alan Derickson
Adrian Wanner

COLLEGE OF MEDICINE
Steven Dear
Charles Hill
Joan Lakoski

EBERLY COLLEGE OF SCIENCE
Robin Ciardullo
Renee Diehl
Robert Minard
Mark Strikman

UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES
Loanne Snavely

BEAVER CAMPUS
JoAnn Chirico

DELAWARE CAMPUS
Lonnie Golden

NEW KENSINGTON CAMPUS
Theresa Balog

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION
SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY
James Thomas

EX OFFICIO SENATOR
John Cahir
Nancy Eaton

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS
Joshua Walker
Nicholas Pazdziorko
Laura Serfass
Robert Hill
Terry Shirley
Adam Schott
Dawn Noga
Jennifer Tingo
Molly Powell
Sunny Webb
Sean Limric
Anthony Wardle

GRADUATE STUDENTS
Sally Flowers
Gwenn McCollum
Mackenzie DeVos
Joseph Ferenchick

Chair Nichols:  Again, thank you for your service to the Senate and the university.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Chair Nichols:  At this time I would like to make some special presentations.  This is a newly established means by which the Senate acknowledges Senators who have participated in the governance of the university through lengthy service to the Senate and/or holding leadership positions and as a result deserve special recognition.  The first recognition goes to Jacob De Rooy.  Jake are you here?  Jake would you wind your way down here.

 

Jacob De Rooy joined the Senate in 1983 as a Penn State Harrisburg, Capital College Senator.  During Jake’s 17 years of service, he was the Senate Secretary in 1992-93 and chaired the Senate Committee on Outreach Activities for three years.  He also was elected to the Faculty Advisory Committee to the President and Faculty Rights and Responsibilities Committee.  In addition, Jake has served on the Senate Committees on Faculty Affairs, Faculty Benefits and Senate Council.  The Senate would like to present Jake with a special certificate and thanks for his service.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Louis Geschwindner has served as a College of Engineering Senator since 1982.  In 1995-96, Lou was elected Secretary of the Faculty Senate and in 1996-97 he was elected Chair-elect.  Lou has served as chair of the Senate Committee on Curricular Affairs for six years; he has also chaired and been a member of the Senate Committee on Admissions, Records, Scheduling and Student Aid and the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education.  Lou has served the Senate for 19 years.  I don’t believe Lou is here but let’s give him a round of applause anyway.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Sabih Hayek is a College of Engineering Senator with 23 years of service and has served on the Senate since 1977.  Sabih has chaired and vice-chaired the Senate Committee on Committees and Rules and has served as chair of the Senate Committee on Libraries.  He has also been vice-chair of the Senate Committee on Faculty Affairs and served on External Affairs.  Again, a round for Sabih.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Harvey Manbeck joined the Senate in 1984 as a College of Agricultural Sciences Senator.  During his 16 years of service, he has served and provided leadership for six Senate Committees including Faculty Affairs, Undergraduate Education, Research, Intercollegiate Athletics and Outreach Activities.  Harvey is currently serving on the self-study committee.  Thanks, Harvey.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Murry Nelson joined the Senate as a College of Education Senator in 1980.  In 1998-99, Murry was elected chair-elect of the Senate and served as chair and immediate past chair.  He has chaired the Senate Committee on Faculty Affairs and the Senate Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics.  Murry has served on the Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education, Senate Committee on Intra-University Relations, Senate Committee on Committees and Rules and the University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee.  Murry has served the Senate for 17 years.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Without objection, I would like to present to the Senate for its consideration the following resolution regarding a person who has had a very special relationship with the Senate for an extended period of time.  Let me read the resolution for your consideration.

 

RESOLUTION

 

John J. Cahir

Vice Provost and Dean for Undergraduate Education

Professor of Meteorology

 

WHEREAS, Dr. John J. Cahir has had a distinguished career at Penn State dating back to 1965, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir has demonstrated innovative and exemplary administrative leadership in his many contributions to the university community, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir has served on the University Faculty Senate continuously since 1973, and has been a member of Senate Council; an elected member of the Faculty Advisory Committee to the President and chaired the Faculty Affairs and Planning and Development committees; and served on Undergraduate Education and Intercollegiate Athletic committees, and led or served on numerous commissions, panels, and task forces, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir has helped shape the weather forecasting abilities of thousands of students and is nationally and internationally recognized for his research and teaching in climatology and using computer technologies to transform weather stations, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir has been a champion for excellence in teaching and learning and improving the quality of undergraduate education at Penn State and nationally, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir has been a mentor, guide, and friend to innumerable Penn State faculty, staff, and students, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir is a man of integrity, loyalty, and unflagging devotion to Penn State;

 

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the University Faculty Senate of The Pennsylvania State University, on this 23rd day of April, 2002, expresses its deepest gratitude and appreciation to Dr. John J. Cahir for his many accomplishments on behalf of the university, in support of excellence in undergraduate education.  The Senate offers affectionate and heartfelt best wishes for many more accurate weather forecasts and a full and productive retirement.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Chair Nichols:  John, why don’t you come down?  I am going to ask the Senate for a vote for affirmation on the resolution.  All those in favor of affirming the resolution, please signify by saying, "aye."

 

Senators:  Aye.

 

Chair Nichols:  Thank you.  Every year the Faculty Senate Committee on Student Life is asked to review applications for John W. White Graduate Fellowship awards, given annually to graduating seniors who plan on enrolling in a graduate degree program.  This year Bill Ellis, chair of the Senate Committee on Student Life and committee member Jeff Mayer and Executive Secretary Susan Youtz recommended four graduating seniors for receiving the White Graduate Fellowship.  We invited the winners to join us today, three of them could not be here because they are in class, but I would like to read their names and fields of study.

 

Michelle Cook, Biology, Schreyer Honors College, will attend the University of Pennsylvania in a combined veterinary science and Ph.D. program.

 

Kimberly Herrmann, Penn State Erie, Physics and Astrophysics, Schreyer Honors College and she will attend Penn State in pursuit of a Ph.D. in the Department of Physics.

 

Laura Rosenberger majors in Sociology, Psychology and Women’s Studies, with a minor in Information Systems and Statistical Analysis, Schreyer Honors College.  Laura will start a master’s degree program at American University in International Peace and Conflict Studies.

 

Suzanne Bisceglia.  Thank you for standing up.  Let me tell you a little bit about Suzanne.  Suzanne is a Biology major with a concentration in Vertebrate Physiology, and a minor in World Literature.  She said during the interviews that general education courses opened her eyes to world cultures and literature.  Suzanne, a Schreyer Honors College student with an Honors Thesis in Nutrition has been admitted to the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.  Suzanne has served as a teaching assistant in the biology department and a volunteer in the Women’s Health Clinic at University Health Services and is a Healthworks Peer Educator and a Blue Belt in Karate.  If we let her get back to class, she expects to graduate with a 4.0 grade point average.  Congratulations.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Chair Nichols:  We are going to go back in the script a little bit and surprise Sabih Hayek who just walked in the room.  Sabih come on down.  While you were absent we passed out certificates of those who had lengthy service and leadership positions in the Faculty Senate and we said all sorts of nice things about you but we won’t repeat them now, but congratulations.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

COMMENTS BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY

 

Chair Nichols:  Agenda Item E, Comments By The President Of The University.  President Spanier is not in attendance today, however, we will hear from Provost Erickson in a few minutes. 

 

FORENSIC BUSINESS

 

None

 

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

 

None

 

LEGISLATIVE REPORTS

 

Chair Nichols:  As we begin our discussion of reports, I will remind you to please stand and identify yourself and the unit you represent before addressing the Senate.  I also remind our guests that the Senate floor is open only to Senators or others in the university community that have received previous permission for access to the floor.  Agenda Item H, Legislative Reports, Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education, Revision of Senate Policy 60-00:  Multiple Majors and Degrees.  This is Appendix “B” in your Agenda and Laura Pauley the committee chair is here to present.

 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION

Revision of Senate Policy 60-00:  Multiple Majors and Degrees

Laura L. Pauley, Chair, Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education

 

Laura L. Pauley, College of Engineering:  Last spring the Faculty Senate voted to award two separate diplomas to students who completed the multiple major program.  When we did that, we now give diplomas to both simultaneous degrees and multiple majors and are blurring the distinction between these.  The Senate Committee on Undergraduate Education looked at this policy and decided to merge those two descriptions of multiple majors and call it a concurrent major and have one policy guideline.

 

Chair Nichols:  Questions or comments for Laura?  Seeing none we are ready for a vote.  This is a legislative item.  Your vote would be to approve the revisions in Senate Policy 60-00.  All those in favor of the motion, please signify by saying, "aye."

 

Senators:  Aye.

 

Chair Nichols:  Any opposed, "nay?"  The aye’s have it.  The motion carries and the policy is adopted.  Thank you, Laura.

 

ADVISORY/CONSULTATIVE REPORTS

 

None

 

INFORMATIONAL REPORTS

 

Chair Nichols:  Agenda Item J, Informational Reports.  Senate Council is sponsoring the Tuition Task Force Report and Rodney Erickson, Executive Vice President and Provost will present the report and that is Appendix “C.”  As Provost Erickson is making his way to the podium I would like to make three quick points.  First of all, on behalf of my faculty colleagues I would like to applaud Provost Erickson and his really great team of vice provosts on their extraordinarily strong and effective academic leadership of the university.  And to say how much I personally enjoyed working with him and his great leadership team this year and to thank him for his support for the Senate and the principle of shared governance.

 

Second, regarding the Tuition Task Force Report it is important for you to know that a great deal of the heavy lifting in this important report was done by Richard Althouse, the University Budget Officer and Steve Curley, the Financial Officer in the Provost’s Office.  Dick, as most of you know is a Senator, but because he is a shy type, I did not note his presence at the last meeting and therefore failed to acknowledge that he was this year’s winner of the Administrative Excellence Award.  Congratulations, Dick.

 

Third, the full report of the Tuition Task Force is being put up on the web as we speak so you don’t have to feverishly scribble down data in the provost’s presentation this afternoon.  The web site is www.budget.psu.edu/tuition and it will also be linked to the Senate home page so you could have quick access to it.  Provost Erickson, thank you.

 

SENATE COUNCIL

Tuition Task Force

 

Rodney A. Erickson, Provost:  Thank you, Chair Nichols.  Let me reciprocate by thanking you in your role as chair this year and the outstanding job that you have done.  We have enjoyed, very much working with you.

 

I believe next year we are going to have to find funds in the budget to put a light here at the podium.  As I advance in age, this is becoming more and more challenging all the time to work without a light.

 

As Chair Nichols indicated, I have been chairing a task force that has been looking into budget issues and forecasting future tuition needs at the university.  There are a lot of difficult choices that we have to make and these are complex issues.  It is critically important that we understand as best as we can the road that is before us.  My report this afternoon is going to summarize the findings and recommendations of our study.  I am very appreciative of this opportunity to come before the Faculty Senate to share this important report with you.  There is much information that needs to be covered and I am going to stick rather closely to my formal remarks in the interest of making this presentation as clear and efficient as possible.

 

Dr. Spanier appointed the Tuition Task Force because he recognized that the university’s teaching, research, and service missions depend on adequate and consistent funding.  To meet Penn State’s strategic goals, the Tuition Task Force was asked to consider realistic projections of a large range of tuition options that may be necessary over the next five years to support the continued competitiveness of the university as a premier institution.

 

I will not go into great detail about the university’s under-funding (and I emphasize serious under-funding) in relation to peer institutions because this topic is discussed in considerable detail in the report, and I have already presented much of the information to this group in my annual budget reports.  However, I will provide you with some background that frames the context in which the university must consider its decisions with respect to tuition.

 

The commonwealth’s appropriations have made up a progressively smaller share of Penn State’s budget for several decades.  Commonwealth appropriations now make up a mere 14 percent of Penn State’s total budget.  I have told you in previous reports that our appropriation per full-time equivalent (FTE) student is the lowest among Big Ten public universities and, on the other side of the coin, our tuition is the highest.  No other university among our peer group, has such a large gap between the high quality and reputation of its programs, on the one hand, and the low level of resources for faculty and other needs that are available, on the other. 

 

At the same time as revenues have lagged, the university has faced significant cost increases in terms of salaries and benefits, capital improvements and maintenance, information technology, library resources, and regulatory compliance.

 

Penn State has cut costs through a decade and more of budget recycling, but it has still been necessary to raise tuition in order to maintain academic quality.

 

Looking ahead, we recognize that the university will continue to face significant cost increases.

 

Additional funds are needed for full-time, tenure-track faculty to reduce class sizes and to improve the student/faculty ratio.  We need more modern classroom and lab facilities and funds for our growing deferred maintenance backlog.  We need to fund critical academic and administrative support programs and interdisciplinary initiatives, develop library resources and technology improvements, enhance student life and learning experiences, and improve our outreach and technology transfer services to citizens of the commonwealth.

 

Several principles guided the Tuition Task Force deliberations.  In keeping with Penn State’s land-grant mission, we believe that tuition should be held to the lowest level possible, consistent with enhancing the academic quality of the university and achieving its strategic goals.

 

We must continue to seek new ways to operate efficiently.  We should be sensitive to the economic climate, but also take a principled and long-term approach to tuition strategy.

 

Tuition policies should be set in the context of market factors, the policies of our peer institutions, and the competitive regional environments of our Penn State campuses.

 

We must maintain many points of student access through our multi-campus system.

 

And, we need to preserve affordability by maximizing the amount of student financial aid that is available.

 

An important element in any discussion of tuition policy is student interest in the university.  We are fortunate that student interest in a Penn State education is extremely strong.  Applications for admission have been at record levels of 75,000 to 78,000 over the past three years.  The yield rate for freshmen baccalaureate offers remains steady, and total enrollment of about 82,000 students is on target with the university’s enrollment management plan. 

 

Here is a thirty-year look at tuition increases on a percentage basis.  There have been times that Penn State has had to face significant tuition increases.  In fact, in 11 of the 30 years, we have had to increase tuition nine percent or more.

 

The conditions that led to these increases varied over the years.  In the late 1970's and 1980's, inflation was a factor.  We are facing similar circumstances now, in that costs are increasing in the categories of salaries, benefits, equipment, maintenance, and technology.

 

During the 1980's, tuition increases averaged nearly ten percent.  Over the past ten years, the increases have been more modest.

 

This slide represents Penn State’s tuition, and Educational and General Appropriation per full-time-equivalent student in constant dollars.  The E&G appropriation is that line item in Penn State’s appropriation that represents the bulk of the commonwealth’s contribution to our basic instructional mission.  Dollar values have been adjusted to a constant base year of 1970 using the Higher Education Price Index.  In 1970, appropriation represented about two-thirds of the total expenditure per FTE student, while tuition represented about one-third.  Today, the pattern is reversed with tuition representing two-thirds and appropriation one-third.

 

Overall, the funds available to the university per FTE student from these two sources, when adjusted for inflation, are not much higher now than in 1970.  In other words, the university’s purchasing power per student is virtually the same as it was 30 years ago.  This is a remarkable fact, given the increased demands that have occurred over the past 30 years, such as teaching and learning improvements, environmental and other regulatory compliance, more student services, major maintenance expenditures, technology improvements, and higher expectations from students and parents. 

 

Since 1995-96, Penn State’s tuition increases have averaged 5.2 percent per year, but we are seeing an increasing trend over the past three years. 

 

This chart shows Penn State’s actual appropriations from the commonwealth from 1995-96 to the current year.  It also shows the $10.1 million budget rescission that occurred this year and the governor’s proposed budget for Penn State for 2002-03. 

 

The proposed budget cuts of $16.7 million for 2002-03 would return Penn State to about the level of funding it received three years ago in 1999-2000.

 

The line with the red diamonds on this chart shows what the appropriation amounts would have looked like if Penn State had received annual increases over the 1995-96 appropriation that were equal to the inflationary increases in the Higher Education Price Index.  The line with the yellow squares shows the actual appropriation.  When inflationary increases are factored in, the governor’s proposed budget, if enacted for next year, would set Penn State back $35 million in purchasing power from 1995-96.

 

To project Penn State’s budget requirements for the next five years, the Tuition Task Force developed multiple budget scenarios based on projections for each of several budget variables such as salaries, benefits, and program needs.

 

Salaries make up the largest portion of Penn State’s budget, 69 percent when benefits are included.  Comparisons with our peer institutions show that Penn State’s average faculty salaries have slipped substantially in ranking since 1995-96.  Competitive salaries are important to maintaining a quality faculty.  Recovering our lost ground in salaries will require a multi-year initiative.

 

As you can see from this table, among Big Ten public institutions, Penn State’s rank for average salaries dropped from second to fifth at the professor level, from second to sixth at the associate professor level, and we moved from eighth to seventh at the assistant professor level from 1995-1996 to 2000-2001.

 

The same comparison is made between Penn State and 22 public institutions participating in the Association of American Universities Data Exchange (AAUDE).  For the same five year period, Penn State’s rank for average salaries dropped from second to eighth at the professor level, from second to tenth for associate professors, and we continue to be ranked twelfth for assistant professor salaries. 

 

Nationally, faculty salaries at private universities, on average, exceed faculty salaries at public universities, and the gap is growing.  Here is some data published in 2001 in Academe for professor-rank faculty.  The salary gap for private versus public university faculty was 12 percent in 1989-90 and had increased to 22.4 percent in 2001-2002.  I should add that we were just about even in 1980.

 

With the growing national reputation of Penn State’s faculty, the relationship between our faculty salaries and those at the elite private universities is becoming increasingly important.

 

We analyzed faculty salary data for the private universities in the Association of American Universities (AAU) and compared them to Penn State faculty salaries.  We found that Penn State faculty salaries are considerably below those of AAU private universities, and the gap is growing.  At each level--assistant, associate, and professor--the salary gap increased between 1995 and 2001.

 

We are feeling the effects of this salary gap at Penn State.  We have been losing excellent faculty to some of the AAU private universities, such as Cornell, Harvard, Chicago, Tulane, and the list goes on.

 

We also looked extensively at a number of other major factors in our budget planning assumptions.

 

Employee benefit costs are projected to increase for the coming years for the university’s educational and general operations.  Nationally, health care costs are expected to increase 15 to 20 percent per year over the next several years.  Penn State has projected an increase in health care costs from 14 to 16 percent per year over the five-year planning period.

 

Our budget plans also include providing health care benefits for graduate students that correspond with benefits provided to faculty and staff.

 

In line with national trends, we are expecting significant increases in property and liability insurances.

 

We continue to allocate funds to deferred maintenance, and we included funds for new and newly renovated facilities scheduled to come on line during the next five years.

 

In terms of program needs, we included funds to complete the funding commitments over the next three years for our academic initiatives in the Life Sciences, Materials Science, Environmental Studies, and Children, Youth and Families.

 

Program investment funds of $6 million per year have been included for such things as new faculty positions, start-up packages for replacement positions, competitive graduate assistant stipends, and selected expansion of baccalaureate programs at some campus locations.

 

The budget scenarios include $1 million per year to complete the funding for the School of Information Sciences and Technology, although we certainly hope that the commonwealth will provide additional funds for this important venture, which they have previously supported through a $5.3 million base budget allocation.

 

The Information Resources and Technology fee will provide $2 million per year for library information resources and student computing and telecommunications needs.

 

One and half million dollars per year has been included for other priority needs, such as the President’s Opportunity Fund, instructional workload funding, and the parking and transportation improvement programs.

 

The equivalent of one percent per year in departmental operating funds will be reallocated within each unit as part of the next cycle of strategic planning.  Over the last ten years, we recycled over $87 million, which represents approximately twelve percent of our departmental operating budgets.

 

We are also planning to increase funding for student aid by an average of $1.2 million each year to mitigate the effects of tuition increases on our neediest students.

 

To project Penn State’s expenditures over the next five years, we made multiple projections with different levels of state appropriation and personnel costs.  We projected state appropriation changes of minus five, minus three, zero, plus two, and plus four percent.  We also projected personnel cost increases at three different levels--an increase below the peer group average which we know would cause further slippage in Penn State’s salary rankings, a level which would match the peer group average increase, and an increase of one percent over the peer group average which would start to improve our salary rankings.  To place this in context, we believe that an increase of three percent in the basic merit pool plus one percent each in the President’s Excellence Fund and the Faculty/Staff Excellence Fund will be necessary just to stay at the peer group average next year.

 

In each scenario presented, we used a mid-range figure of $6 million per year for program investment funds.

 

Here are the results.  Varying appropriation changes at five levels and personnel cost increases at three levels results in 15 different scenarios for tuition and fees increases ranging from 7.8 percent to 14.7 percent.  You can see the devastating effect that a five percent budget cut will have on the tuition rate that we would need just to maintain our current relative standing.

 

We analyzed the pros and cons of four possible tuition models that could generate enough income to meet the university’s projected five-year financial needs.  The models are:

 

1.                  Incremental increases, adjusted each year to meet economic conditions and university needs.

 

2.                  One-time, significant increases for all students, followed by more modest increases, in order to provide significant catch-up funding.

 

3.                  Significant increases for incoming freshmen, with more modest annual increases for continuing students.

 

4.                  Expanded differential tuition by student level and by campus location.

 

Incremental increases would allow tuition levels to be adjusted each year to meet economic conditions and university needs.  No students would receive significantly larger increases than other students.  This does not constitute a significant departure from our current practice.

 

However, the incremental increases will need to be higher than inflation, and this option still may not provide the necessary income to meet the university’s needs.  Over time, we would also predict problems for campus college locations that are competing with local and regional institutions. 

 

The second model, implementing one-time, significant increases for all students, followed by more modest annual increases, would provide an immediate inflow of income to meet the university’s needs, and it would accomplish the change in the tuition structure quickly.

 

However, this option impacts current students much more than the other options, and it has the greatest potential impact on access.  Student aid would become an even more critical issue.

 

This option would also have a serious impact on our campus locations, and may price them out of some markets in comparison to their local competitors.

 

We believe that a better solution to meeting the university’s fiscal needs is through gradual increments over a period of time.

 

The next model is significant tuition increases for freshmen, with more modest increases for continuing students, similar to those they have experienced in the past.  The income would be spread out over a four-year period, providing more effective use of the funds.  Freshmen students would be advised of the increases before making their decision to come to Penn State.

 

On the downside, this model would have an impact on accessibility for new freshmen and student aid would continue to be a critical issue.  It could again cause a problem for the fiscal competitiveness of our campus locations.

 

The last model involves expanding differential tuition by student level and by campus location.  Expanding the tuition differentials between University Park and other campuses, for example, would be the best solution to the price competitiveness issues facing the campus locations.  Further differentials by student level would better reflect the costs of upper-division and graduate education.  Differentiation by student level and location could be implemented in conjunction with any of the other three models.

 

Some cautions to consider--tuition differentials might inhibit movement within the Penn State system.  For example, a sophomore at a campus location moving to the junior level at University Park would face a substantial tuition increase.

 

Another disadvantage is that the differences in cost among Penn State locations might be misunderstood as representing differences in educational quality.

 

The next part of my report sets forth the Tuition Task Force’s observations and recommendations after evaluation of the four tuition models.

 

The Tuition Task Force made two primary observations.

 

First, the strong student interest in Penn State and the significant tuition rate increases planned by peer institutions suggest that enrollments can be maintained in the face of higher tuition, particularly at University Park.

 

Second, the flexibility to increase tuition is more limited at some other campuses due to local economic conditions, student demand, and the pricing policies of competing regional institutions.

 

Accordingly, we have endorsed the following two recommendations--first, that the most promising alternative to meet the university’s budget requirements is a combination of increased tuition differentials by campus location and by student level, and incremental increases as needed.

 

Second, we have concluded that higher tuition should be phased in beginning with incoming freshmen, rather than for all students.  Freshmen would be advised of the increases before making their decision to come to Penn State.

 

For the next academic year, 2002-2003, we are proposing that all students receive the same percentage tuition increase.

 

Beginning in 2003-2004, we are proposing to increase tuition differentials by location and by student level.  Incoming freshmen would receive a higher tuition increase in 2003-2004 and again as sophomores in 2004-05.  Two consecutive years of the freshmen bump would become the new higher tuition base that works its way progressively through the student body year-by-year.  The existing tuition differential for upper-division and graduate students would be increased over two years, and University Park students would receive higher tuition increases than students at other campus locations.

 

Here is some more detail about the planned increase for incoming freshmen in 2003-2004 and 2004-2005.  At University Park, freshmen would receive a basic tuition increase plus an extra increase in the range of $400 to $600 per year.

 

At other locations, freshmen would receive a basic tuition increase for their location plus an extra increase in the range of $50 to $100 per year.

 

As I indicated, the increases for freshmen would be announced well in advance so that students could consider the cost of tuition in their enrollment decision.

 

Larger differentials for upper-division students would also be implemented in 2003-04 and 2004-05.  For upper-division students at University Park, we project a basic tuition increase plus an extra increase of $180 per year.

 

For other locations, upper-division students would receive a basic tuition increase for their location plus the upper-division increase of $180 in 2003-04 and again in 2004-05.

 

In any discussion of tuition increases, we must consider need-based student aid and its importance to financially needy students.

 

During the 2000-01 academic year, Penn State students received a total of $482 million in student aid from federal and state grants, loans, and institutional and private sources.

 

These bar charts show the percentage of full-time degree-seeking undergraduate and graduate students who received grant and/or scholarship assistance that covered at least some of their tuition in the fall semester 2001.  These data do not include loans.

 

Fifty-three percent of full-time undergraduate students receive some tuition reduction from grants or scholarships, 27 percent of full-time undergraduate students receive the equivalent of 60 percent or more of full tuition, and 12 percent receive amounts equal to their full tuition charges or more.

 

Seventy-one percent of full-time graduate students receive some tuition reduction from grants, scholarships, or fellowships, and 96 percent of these students receive full tuition awards.

 

We have carefully studied the amount of student aid received and the unmet financial need for full-time undergraduate students.  In this analysis, unmet need is defined as the balance of direct costs of tuition, room, and board after considering grants, scholarships, federal loans, and the expected family contribution.

 

As we might expect, the unmet need was greatest for families with incomes under $65,000, but there were other significant differences, as shown here.  The unmet need for commuting students averaged $170 per year.  Thus, campuses other than University Park will continue to be important points of access, especially for commuting students. 

 

The unmet need for Pennsylvania resident students living on campus averaged $1,200 per year, and the unmet need for nonresident students living on campus averaged $6,450 per year.

 

In 1999-2000, the median debt for Penn State students who have debt upon completion of their baccalaureate degree was $17,125.  National survey data indicated that the median undergraduate debt at public institutions was $15,375 and at private institutions was $17,250.

 

Of the $1.3 billion dollar overall goal of the Grand Destiny Campaign, $545 million is targeted for support of ongoing programs and $755 million is targeted for support of four featured objectives--Undergraduate Students, Graduate Students, Faculty, and Programs.  Undergraduate and graduate support make up $393 million, or 52 percent, of the $755 million for featured objectives. 

 

Penn State’s Campaign goal for Undergraduate Support is $320 million and the goal for Graduate Support is $73 million.

 

As of February 2002, we have raised $270 million or 84 percent of the Undergraduate Support goal.  A majority of the funds in this category support undergraduate scholarships.

 

As of February, we have raised $53 million or 72 percent of the Graduate Support goal.  Graduate support helps fund graduate fellowships which are a critical need in recruiting students for all of Penn State’s academic colleges.

 

Private fund raising is increasingly important as a source of student aid funds.  In 1996, endowed scholarships and annual giving funds provided 3,268 awards totaling $6.1 million.  By 2000, these figures had increased to 4,632 awards totaling $12.1 million, thanks to substantial gifts from the Grand Destiny Campaign.

 

We are projecting that awards totaling $16.2 million will be available in 2006, as additional gifts from the Grand Destiny Campaign are received and activated. 

 

Philanthropic support is critically important in helping Penn State compete for the most talented students.  Through the efforts of the Grand Destiny Campaign, we are providing assistance to needy students with tremendous potential.

 

With the help of federal and state based student aid, loans, institutional funds and private philanthropy by Penn State alumni and friends, our goal is to ensure that all prospective students in the commonwealth who want to attend this university can continue to do so.

 

The next few slides will summarize the main points of the Tuition Task Force’s report.

 

Comparative rankings show that Penn State is seriously (and I underline seriously) under-funded in relation to our peers, both nationally and within the commonwealth.  This under-funding shows in virtually all comparisons of university activities.

 

We are a very efficient university and we rank highly in productivity and administrative efficiency.

 

Years of budget reallocations and recycling have contributed to this productivity, but have left us with limited flexibility to generate internal funds.

 

The Grand Destiny Campaign has been very successful, but it is not designed to provide funds for basic operating costs.  No one has ever given us a gift to pay the electric bill.  It does help to provide funds for a margin of excellence in academic programs and critical financial support for students.

 

Because of state budget constraints, commonwealth appropriations now account for less than one-third of Penn State’s general funds budget and only 14 percent of our total budget.  It is highly unlikely that the state appropriation will increase enough to meet the university’s needs.

 

The demand for a Penn State education should continue to be robust, and it should be possible to sustain enrollments with the tuition increases in most of the ranges considered in our report.

 

The planned tuition strategy will enhance Penn State’s academic quality and reputation.  Peer public institutions are planning significant increases in their tuition rates over the next few years.  Limiting tuition increases below the mid-range scenarios in this report would almost certainly result in erosion of academic quality and reputation of the university.

 

We are recommending larger increases for entering students over a two-year period and relatively lower increases than might otherwise be the case for our current students.

 

Our analysis supports greater differentials among campuses, programs, and student levels, based on the actual costs of educational programming.  Differential tuition would permit Penn State to compete effectively in regional markets while permitting University Park to secure the financial resources necessary to support its mission.  The campus colleges would take on an even greater role in providing access to higher education in the Penn State system.

 

Penn State will continue its strategy of cost containment and continuous quality improvement.  As President Spanier indicated at the last Senate meeting, a small task force has been created to look at the overall university budget and find new places to reduce costs.  Gary Shultz and I are co-chairing the task force and we want to make sure that every stone is turned over to see if we can find additional cost savings that will not adversely affect our academic mission. 

 

The university will need to place even greater emphasis on private fund raising for student financial aid.

 

Even with significantly higher tuition rates, a Penn State education remains an excellent investment for students.  While no one likes to raise tuition, there appears to be no reasonable alternative to provide the financial resources that will be required to support the university’s continued competitiveness and its development as a premier academic institution.  Penn State’s potential and goals are high, and we owe our students the highest quality education.

 

I would encourage all of you to take time to review the full Tuition Task Force report at the web site address noted here.

 

Again I want to thank the Senate for the opportunity to come and present the results and recommendations of our report that we will share with the Board of Trustees on May 10, 2002 and this will in turn provide information and context for them as they consider tuition increases for next year and concepts for the following year when they meet in July at the Dickinson School of Law.

 

Finally, I would like to extend special thanks to Dick Althouse, University Budget Officer and Steve Curley, Financial Officer in the president’s office and Assistant to the Executive Vice President and Provost.  They and the staff of the budget office have spent a lot of long, long days into the night working on different kinds of budget scenarios, tuition scenarios and concepts and they have been invaluable in putting together this kind of analysis.  We believe that this is a set of realistic projections.  It is a roadmap for the future of where we have to go.  It will be in many ways a bitter pill to swallow in terms of tuition, but as I said before there really is no alternative to maintain and indeed, enhance the academic quality of this university.  If the chair permits, I will stand for questions.

 

W. Travis DeCastro, College of Arts and Architecture:  The bad news on state appropriations has been a subject that the Senate Chair brought up in February and last week in the Executive Council of the College of Arts and Architecture.  So my question to the dean was, “okay we can’t lobby by ourselves.”  What can we do as individuals in the College of Arts and Architecture?  His suggestion was that we write our Congressman and ask why.  So my question to you is, in terms of state appropriations, what can the Faculty Senate do in terms of asking the very same question to the appropriations committee--why is Penn State not getting the funding it needs to continue?  If the only answer is because we are at the size we are now and that is the reason that we are not getting the state funding?

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  First of all, the kinds of things that the faculty as individuals can do and what students can do is continue to communicate the message to their local elected representatives.  I still believe that is the best strategy.  Lawmakers tend to respond to their local constituents more than they do to various other kinds of bodies.  I want to assure you that we are doing everything that we possibly can to increase the appropriation that we get from the commonwealth.  We have not given up, nor will we give up at any time in the future.  But I also want this body to be very cognizant of the financial situation that the state finds itself in.  If you have been reading the newspapers, you know that minimally we are expecting a billion dollar deficit this year.  It could go to a billion and a quarter.  That deficit is going to wipe out most, if not all of the Rainy Day Fund in the commonwealth and whomever takes control of the legislature and the governor’s office in January is going to face a situation that we have not faced for many years, with really rock bottom depleted revenues, and still no end in sight in terms of the recession turning around.

 

In addition to that, the various tax relief measures that have been passed will make it even more difficult to generate higher levels of revenue in the state.  We have seen over the past decade the state choosing to invest larger relative amounts of money in PHEEA in the form of state aid, rather than providing the increases to base operating funds for Penn State and other public institutions that would put us into the realm of our peer institutions outside of Pennsylvania with whom we compete.

 

So I think the message is, to continue to do everything that you are doing and more in terms of contacting local representatives to make the case.  Not only about the general level of under-funding of the university, but also the basic inequities on a per student basis that exist.  I think that most of you are aware that Penn State’s appropriation for full time equivalent students is $3,460 per year.  For the state system of higher education schools it is $4,960.  For the University of Pittsburgh it is $5,030.  For Temple University it is $6,230 and for Lincoln University it is $6,900.  So we are very much at the bottom of the heap.  Far below any of the other state supported institutions in the amount of per student appropriation that we receive.  I think the more that case can be made, the better.  We will continue to work hard in Harrisburg.  I urge you and members of the student body to continue to work hard, but the financial situation of the commonwealth is such that I don’t believe that we can wait in the sidelines and expect to have the public provide the resources that we need to keep this university a premier institution.

 

Peter D. Georgopulos, Delaware County Campus:  What case can we make for the differential tuition for the University Park versus Non-University Park sites when the perception out there will be lesser quality at the Non-University Park sites?

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  It is really quite simple, Peter.  It is the cost of education.  The cost of education is significantly higher for upper-division and particularly for graduate education than it is for lower-division, which still represents the largest share of our students at most of the campuses with the exception of Harrisburg and Great Valley.  So that is a theme that we are going to have to make sure is understood by the public.  This is based on cost considerations of delivering the educational program and not an indication of differences in quality.

 

Michael J. Cardamone, Penn State Schuylkill:  Provost Erickson do you have for purposes of comparison, figures for the cost per student or the support per student at places such as the Universities of Michigan or Wisconsin?

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  Yes, definitely.  We have done a lot of comparison about the amount of resources that are available to spend in the course of educating a student.  Let me give you the two extremes.  We are the extreme at $3,460 per FTE student.  Let me take a little different tack there and back up a bit.  In terms of the total amount that we spend, let us start with that.  We spend, in rough terms about $12,500 per student in terms of the cost of educating the average Penn State student.  The University of Michigan spends over $27,000.  It is almost two and a half times more on a per student basis than we do and the rest of the Big Ten schools are at a rate in between.  If you compare the amount of FTE appropriation per student and you just take the main campus comparison here, because the other Big Ten schools only provide data on that basis, the University of Wisconsin receives over $11,000 a year from the legislature per student.  You compare that to ours--Madison versus the University Park Campus—it is about two and a half times the amount of state appropriation per FTE student.  Irrespective of whatever measure you look at in terms of the amount that we spend per student or the amount of our appropriation per student we are at the bottom of the Big Ten.

 

Laura L. Pauley:  If you look at the last ten years or so the main reason for the difference in appropriation per student at Penn State, Temple and Pitt is because we have decided to grow our student enrollment while those other schools have decided to decrease their student enrollment.  I am wondering if there is a message from the legislature that we should not be trying to expand or if Penn State might be looking at that as an alternative?

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  Well our enrollment plan, Laura is not to expand.  As I think everyone is well aware, we want to stay within a very small annual increase.  University Park Campus for example, hasn’t increased for a number of years now nor do we really want it to move out of that 40,000 to 42,000 range.  Hopefully, staying around 41,000 in that area.  The modest growth that has taken place in our enrollment in the last several years has virtually all been at the campus college locations, and even that has been relatively modest.  We continue to take a smaller and smaller share of the new freshmen from the commonwealth that are coming in every year.  Much of the growth really occurred in the earlier days of the 30-year period or so, in which this greater inequity has been evolving.

 

What you suggest is certainly true.  The commonwealth, in a kind of a lock step fashion has given all the institutions very close to the same percentage increase for the last 30 years.  While Temple now still has fewer students than they had years ago, Pitt has climbed back up to about where they were some years ago, we have experienced about a 30 percent increase.  So there really has been no recognition of the increase in the number of students that we are educating at Penn State.  Certainly, in hindsight looking back over 30 years there is little that can be done about it now in terms of rolling back what took place over that 30-year period.  But it certainly makes it more difficult for us in terms of the amount of aid that we get, no question about it and no, we don’t intend to grow in terms of enrollments in any significant way.

 

Ravinder Koul, Penn State Great Valley:  In our market we are much more competitive in management and engineering programs compared with education programs.  Will this differential tuition vary with each program as it will with the location?

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  As you are well aware, Great Valley has always had a slightly different tuition schedule than the rest of the graduate programming in the university and we will continue to have that kind of flexibility for Great Valley.  Obviously, the Dickinson School of Law and the College of Medicine are not directly part of our report here in the sense that we include and we focus mainly on undergraduate and graduate education.  But obviously, for the College of Medicine, for the Dickinson School of Law and for Great Valley the same kinds of concepts certainly apply in that our costs are going to increase.  We know that well, and we are going to have to have higher tuition in those schools and colleges as well, in order to maintain the quality and stay competitive as an institution.

 

Rajen Mookerjee, Beaver Campus:  Under your plan will it be possible for a location to contemplate lowering tuition?

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  I think that it would be unlikely that the faculty would want to have lower salaries and the other costs certainly aren’t going to go down.  The prospect of lowering tuition is just totally unrealistic, while costs are going up.  Certainly there would come a point where, on the cost center basis there is only so much you could subsidize.  So no, tuition reductions are not something that we would contemplate.  There are a few smaller private universities that have tried such tuition reduction schemes with not a very good result.  They have dug deeper and deeper holes for themselves than they might not ordinarily have had, so no, that is not part of our strategy unfortunately.

 

Chair Nichols:  Other comments or questions?  Thank you Provost Erickson.  Continuing on Agenda Item J, Informational Reports, the next informational report is the Senate Committee on Admissions, Records, Scheduling and Student Aid, Time to Graduation Report and that is Appendix “D” in your Agenda.  JoAnn Chirico, the chair will present the report.

 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON ADMISSIONS, RECORDS, SCHEDULING AND STUDENT AID

 

Time To Graduation Report

 

JoAnn Chirico, Chair, Senate Committee on Admissions, Records, Scheduling and Student Aid

 

JoAnn Chirico, Beaver Campus:  Good afternoon.  Senate Committee on Admissions, Records, Scheduling and Student Aid was asked to prepare this report for Faculty Senate and before we open it for questions I would just like to call your attention to the methodology section, so that you understand how these cohorts were determined.  In figuring time to graduation what the Registrar’s Office did was look at three cohorts determined by spring graduations.  And we looked at spring graduations for three years.  What you have is a summary of those results.  So in determining for instance, a four-year graduation we looked at spring semester 2000 and counted back eight semesters to determine a four-year graduation rate.  So that if someone had started in the summer they would actually, for all intensive purposes get included as a five-year graduation.  There was no consideration given for stoppages, for instance, when a student studied abroad or for the co-op experiences.  For the most part, those students would also end up in the five-year because of that.  So understanding how the spring cohorts were determined is important to understanding the report.  With that said, are there any questions?

 

Chair Nichols:  Any questions or comments.  Thank you, JoAnn.  The third informational report is from Senate Council, the Statement by Penn State President Graham Spanier On The Penn State Calendar.  Appendix “E” in your Agenda is the president’s statement on the calendar.  His decision will be implemented in fall 2003.  Provost Erickson will make comments and has agreed to stand for any questions you might have on the calendar.

 

SENATE COUNCIL

 

Statement by Penn State President Graham Spanier On The Penn State Calendar

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  Thank you, Chair Nichols.  I won’t make a very long statement here and would rather use the time to respond to any questions or concerns you might have.  I would like to extend my thanks to the Joint Committee to Review the University Calendar, and for the recommendations that the Senate put together.  In fact, most of those recommendations, with the exception of the Fall Break being a week long at Thanksgiving and some issue with respect to asymmetry, most of the other recommendations, in fact, all of the other recommendations were accepted.

 

This has been a very tough issue.  I guess if it were not tough we would have solved it a long time ago.  But there is one thing that I found as I have been out on the campuses over the last year and around this campus as well.  There is one thing that has been absolutely unanimous on the part of everyone.  Everyone wants to start after Labor Day, wants to have a four-day Fall Break, a full week at Thanksgiving, Commencement by December 15, with five full days of finals and the 15-weeks of instruction.  Everyone has agreed on that.  It is the details that have been difficult.  I think you have all had a chance, hopefully, to read that information that the president provided to the Senate and I believe came out as part of your Senate package and I would be happy to respond to any questions that you might have.

 

Jamie M. Myers, College of Education:  Just a quick clarification.  Is the spring semester going to be the same length of time as the fall?  Or is it going…

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  No, we have done nothing with the spring semester.  That will continue to be as it is now.

 

Dennis S. Gouran, College of the Liberal Arts:  This is not a question.  I guess it is more in the way of a comment.  It is increasingly difficult to get members of the faculty to run for Senate and to some extent, I think that reluctance is a reflection of a level of cynicism about how seriously this body is taken.  Now, I can understand why key conditions of the advisory/consultative report that this body approved might have been turned down if we had seized the initiative and put together our own report.  And I can also see why that would have been overlooked under circumstances in which there were substantive deficiencies in the said recommendations that went forward.  But I don’t see that this report and the document we received really gets at any significant substantive deficiencies in what was presented.  And I think that casts a bad light on the perceptions of shared governance at this institution and I hope it will not go unnoticed.

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  Well, a couple of responses to that.  As I indicated just a few minutes ago, really the only things that we didn’t accept were the full week at Thanksgiving as well as some language about the relative asymmetry of the spring and the fall.  We did hear, I can assure you from many, many students.  I certainly have heard from far more students than I am sure the Senate has, and so has the president, about wanting to have some time in the middle of the semester.

 

The other thing that concerned us was that we really need to change the faculty and student culture at the university about the days before and after various kinds of breaks.  We need to make sure that classes that are scheduled are offered as scheduled, and that students come to expect that there will be serious substantive work that is done on those days.  Frankly, the long week of Thanksgiving Break--we heard from virtually every student that this was simply coming too late in the semester to really be of value to them.  They much preferred to have something more in the middle.  As I said, we listened to a lot of different voices on this.  There is no unanimity except for what I provided previously to you and certainly it was a compromise, as we knew that it would be, between the faculty and student perspective.  But I certainly would not in any way want to see anyone suggest that this was not shared governance at work.

 

Shared governance does not mean that the president who is charged with implementing the calendar has to accept one particular perspective in all instances.  He considered several different perspectives, took most of what was offered by the Senate, accommodated student interests and that is what we ended up with.

 

In many ways I think it was shared governance at its best.  We had a joint committee that worked on this problem from the get go.  That to me is shared governance and the whole trail that followed, I think, is an excellent example of how the faculty and the administration can work together to compromise a solution that is not perfect, but we believe it is a positive step forward.

 

Lonnie M. Golden, Delaware County Campus:  Since the spring semester is not addressed directly, I was wondering, and the Senate Committee on Intra-University Relations was wondering, if it could be considered part of the modest departures if a different location wanted to delay the start of the spring semester?  Or maybe delay the week of Spring Break?  The former in light of the later fall end dates and the later      trying to improve the chance of overlapping with some of the spring holidays?

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  As I think the president used the term “modest departures from the schedule with the approval of the provost.”  Personally, I do not find moving a week to be a modest departure.  We are an institution at not just 24 campuses, but literally about 100 different locations around the commonwealth and we need to have a public that understands when we are going to be open and what is going to be happening with some semblance of regularity and parallel from one location to the next.  Now that said, there may be other instances where campuses will want to have some particular latitude.  Great Valley is an example, where for many years they have run two seven-week sessions with graduate education and they run on a slightly different schedule than the rest of the university.  Obviously, the College of Medicine runs on a slightly different schedule as well.  But for those units that are involved primarily in undergraduate or mixed undergraduate and graduate education, I think we would be ill-advised to have too many different variations of the calendar out there.

 

Peter D. Georgopulos:  What kind of examples on the undergraduate level, can you give us?

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  Well, I haven’t had too many inquires yet.  So I don’t know what can be dreamed up, but to give you an example, classes that are offered in the evening.  We have said that the first Tuesday will be treated as a Friday in order to have some symmetry in the days.  We have already had a request as to whether classes that are on a Monday/Wednesday rather than a Monday/Wednesday/Friday schedule would meet.  They can certainly meet as a Tuesday on that first meeting.  I can see a good bit of that happening in the evening classes, for example, that typically are not scheduled on a Friday.  So that is the sort of thing that I am talking about “modest departures.”  We are not going to try to put everybody in a straight jacket that causes them to do things that do not make sense for their setting.  But as I say, we want conformity over the long haul as to breaks and start dates and things like that.

 

Peter D. Georgopulos:  Would you consider for instance, as last semester, considering the Wednesday class before Thanksgiving where it does not affect campuses like University Park?  Where we can have instruction on that day.  I am not saying that this would be passed by our local campus but…

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  We certainly look at things on a case-by-case basis.

 

Andrew K. Masters, Student Senator, College of Health and Human Development:  I actually have two questions.  The first is this schedule with spring and fall, I do not see as asymmetrical--we are 42 and 45 as it is now.  I see it more as lopsided.  We actually have a full week difference between the two semesters making the fall semester more difficult for students and for faculty to try to fit 15 weeks of class into 14 weeks.  Trying to compress that material down, putting pressure on the faculty to teach it and get it through the students in less time, and the students to understand it all and take it all in, in a weeks less time.  Also, totally unrelated is there going to be some sort of central implementation committee for this, because it is going to affect athletics, residence life, parking, transportation and almost every facet.  Who will be on this committee?  Could there possibly be student opinion so that we can have our voices heard on how this should be put into effect?

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  As to the first part of your question, obviously if we had 15 weeks in the fall it would be nice to have 15 weeks of instruction.  But the alternative is to go back to where we are now, which would be a start date well into August and that was one of the other things that was virtually uniform in terms of the comments that we got.  The August start date was just simply too early.  Students told us in many cases they were losing $1,000 and sometimes significant bonuses by not being able to stay into late August at least, or in some cases through Labor Day, because of the hospitality industry and so on.   With tuition going up, I think it is even more critical that students have an opportunity to earn that extra week or ten days or even two weeks of income that they might not ordinarily be able to do.  So again, we are faced with compromises, however, we look at the calendar in the fall and we have made the compromises that we thought would best meet the needs of the faculty and students across all of the Penn State campuses. 

 

As far as implementation is concerned, yes we will have a group that works on that.  You are certainly right that there are many aspects—residence halls, move in times, how that will intersect with athletics.  We will certainly have more opportunities now to do more things in the area of orientation that we have not been able to do before.  So we will be looking at that and how we will arrange that schedule.  There will certainly be a group of individuals that is pulled together to do that.  How we will have input from the various constituencies we have not yet worked through, whether it will be through Academic Assembly or some other body.  Certainly, we will be very happy to entertain student input as we have been on the whole calendar issue.

 

Andrew K. Masters:  Is there any way you could maybe chop a week off the end of the spring semester?  That would again, make the calendar symmetrical.  Students would be able to work for two more weeks.

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  I think the faculty will be able to provide you with plenty of things to do.  I have yet to run into a faculty member who didn’t want more time in a semester to cover, to enrich or whatever the case might be.  We still start back at a reasonable time in January.  Of course, this year our classes are soon to end in early May, so it still gives students a good jump out there on getting out to the summer job market, taking six week or intersession summer courses or whatever the case might be.  You will enjoy that extra week.

 

Amy E. Locke, Student Senator, College of Education:  Relating to Andy’s question.  Why wouldn’t it be beneficial to have that extra week chopped off therefore, giving student’s a break between summer session and their last final?  I foresee problems with people trying to schedule their harder classes in the spring semester because they will have that extra week to learn the material instead of having it jammed into 14 weeks.  I can see people wanting to schedule the easy classes in the fall semester and the harder classes with more work in the spring and that is kind of already done with professors, so I see that being more of a problem for scheduling classes.

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  Actually, the problem if anything served to balance it out because our enrollments are always lower in the spring semester.  So if it did shift some of the enrollment to spring that would be a good thing as far as class loads and rooms and so forth.  What was the other question?

 

Amy E. Locke:  Just referring to a break between the final week and the summer session.  So that they would not have to take, even if you had a conflict, take that conflict on Friday and then Monday start with intersession and stuff like that.

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  Are you talking about intersession?  I know at some of the campuses, Altoona for example, the first six-week summer session starts the Monday after spring or something like that.  I am not familiar with all of the various start dates of summer and that is a case where we have had some differences in the summer programs in terms of the scheduling, but perhaps there should be a week that is created before they move into the summer session, then chopping a week off of the spring semester.

 

Wilson J. Moses, College of the Liberal Arts:  Among those institutions with which we like to compare ourselves, are there still any that have final examinations for the first semester during the month of January?

 

Rodney A. Erickson:  Not that I am aware of.  Is there anybody else that was on the committee that looked at that extensively?  Not that I am aware of.  We still have a couple of universities that are on the quarter system—Minnesota and I believe Ohio State.  Minnesota starts very late in September, runs until mid-December and picks up immediately after the first of the year, and then finishes off sometime in late May early June timeframe.  I am not aware of any that have the semester that spills over into the January time frame.

 

Chair Nichols:  Thank you very much, Provost Erickson.  Just to quickly point out that President Spanier did in fact, present his preliminary plan to the Faculty Advisory Committee to the President and as a result of the committees comments he did make significant meaningful changes in his final proposal.  So he was indeed, responsive to faculty input. 

 

SENATE SELF STUDY COMMITTEE

 

Interim Report

 

George W. Franz, Chair, Senate Self Study Committee

 

Chair Nichols:  The next informational report is from the Senate Self Study Committee and Appendix “F” is the Interim Report.  George Franz is prepared to stand for questions if you have any questions on his interim report that is in the Agenda.  Seeing none, the next informational report is sponsored by the Senate Committee on University Planning, Construction Projects--2001-02.  This is Appendix “G” in your Agenda and William Anderson is here to present the report.

 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON UNIVERSITY PLANNING

 

Construction Projects – 2001-02

 

Anthony J. Baratta, Chair, Senate Committee on University Planning

 

William A. Rowe, College of Medicine:  William Anderson our Assistant Vice President for Physical Plant will be presenting this report.  The construction projects being performed on Non-University Park Campuses. This is one of the mandated reports for the Senate.

 

William J. Anderson, Assistant Vice President for Physical Plant:  Thank you and good afternoon.  I am going to introduce Mark Bodenschatz who is the director of commonwealth services, one of our organizations in the Office of Physical Plant that manages projects outside of University Park.  We give reports to the Senate twice a year and we have agreed with the Senate that the spring report will be on construction projects away from University Park and the fall report will be for University Park projects.  So I am going to turn it over to Mark.  Mark is a Penn State graduate, bachelor’s and master’s in Architectural Engineering from Penn State and he leads our effort to manage our projects outside of University Park.

 

Mark A. Bodenschatz, Director, Commonwealth Services:  Good afternoon.  It is my pleasure to take you on a tour of Pennsylvania today in 12 minutes or less.  We are going to start at the Erie Campus where we will review the Junker Center, the Smith Interfaith Chapel and various other projects and a new REDC Building that will be presented at the Board of Trustees later this month.  We will go to the Beaver Administration Building on the Beaver Campus.  McKeesport Student Union, The Fayette Eberly Building renovation, an addition to the Science and Technology Center in New Kensington, a new classroom building which again, is being presented to the Board of Trustees this month.  In York, a new library and auditorium.  A couple of projects including Harrisburg housing at the Capital College.  At Berks we have an addition to the Perkins Center, an addition to the Thun Library and the information commons as well as addition to Franco Building.  Great Valley, the new Safeguard Scientifics Building and at Abington an addition to Lares Building.  Now some of these projects are almost a year old and others are just under design.

 

I will first take you to Erie, Behrend College.  We have three projects shown—the Multipurpose Building which is now the Junker Center, the Interfaith Chapel and the REDC Building.  The red line is Jordan Road and these projects are all on the east side of Jordan Road.  There is an extension shown in blue to the existing walkway.  I will start with the Junker Center.  This project has been completed almost a year now.  It includes athletic facilities, swimming, indoor track and the upper right photograph is what is called an extension to main street, which cuts through the entire building and it is an extension to that walkway.

 

We will go to the Smith Chapel and Bell Carillon.  This is located on that same blue walkway.  I will give you an example of some of the outside architecture.  The bell tower will actually be an active 48 Bell Carillon.  It is anticipated to be installed later this spring.  A few other shots and an interior view.  There will also be a pipe organ that will be installed later this year.  Other projects that are somewhat important, Behrend is geographically challenged.  There are a lot of hills and dales.  There is a pedestrian bridge that crosses from core campus to athletic fields on the other side of a gorge.  We also have a large stair tower that we provided an elevator addition to and then a new baseball and softball field complex.

 

Now the REDC Building, we will only show you a site plan at this meeting but the REDC Building is approximately 150,000 square foot facility that will house the schools of engineering, engineering technology, and business.  The building is essentially a three story building, and if you notice part of the building is oriented in line with the library and the campus on the west side of Jordan Road, and the other half of the building is oriented toward the right side of Jordan Road.  The building will accommodate two elevation differences.  So you can enter the building down at the low section of the building and follow it up through the building.  It is called a gateway building to the research park which is actually located south of the graphic.

 

I will take you to Beaver Administration Building.  The existing administration building is 1920’s circa.  It used to be a sanitarium and actually will be demolished when this building is built.  We proposed a new site that is adjacent to the Study Learning Center.  The entrance and plaza up in the top area and the entrance and communication between the two buildings is down low.  Now this building has recently been bid.  It came in over budget and we are in the process of value engineering some elements to bring it back within budget.

 

We will go to McKeesport Campus.  We have an existing Student Union, the old Buck Union Building has recently been demolished and the new Student Union will take its place located in the same location.  Here is a graphic of what that building will be.  That building is under construction now and will be completed in the spring of 2003.

 

We will go to New Kensington.  The DGS project which was an addition to both classrooms and offices in the Science and Technology Building.  A few graphics of that facility.

 

Now to Eberly in Fayette Campus.  The Eberly Building was a building built in the 1960’s and in desperate need of renovation.  The Eberly family and Eberly Foundation provided funds for an interior renovation as well as exterior.  It includes many high technology labs as well as a child-care center.  And this is a corridor that leads down to the Corporate Center.  This is a photograph of the Corporate Center.  There is a very stunning graphic on the back.  It is a mural that hung for a long time in a bank in downtown Uniontown and was preserved and restored for this project.  That painting was originally commissioned by Orvill Eberly many years ago.  I have had the opportunity to speak in this space on three occasions and it is very inspiring to speak in this place.

 

We move to Altoona.  This building is again one that will be reviewed by the Board of Trustees at the next meeting.  The building provides much needed office space for faculty and will replace classroom space that is currently used in trailer type facilities.  Up in the upper left corner of the photograph is actually a reflecting pond.  Many of the offices in the office wing, will look over the reflecting pond.

 

We move down to York Campus and the new Library Auditorium project.  I will give you an orientation of the site plan.  This building will be located adjacent to Main Building.  Again, it will provide parking and a new entrance way and loading dock to the auditorium.  The blue line represents the slope down the hill.  This is a very impressive site that has a wonderful view over the City of York and that is a graphic of the proposed building.  The library is on the left hand side of the large stair tower and the auditorium is on the right hand side.

 

We will go down to Capital College in Harrisburg Campus, a new student housing project.  We are in the first phase of housing there.  We are providing almost 300 beds.  All single housing.  I will take you to a couple of other projects.  This is called the Right Hand Road project.  This may not be of interest to you but allows two-way circulation around the campus.  We have a new back entrance to Olmstead Building, which is an accessible entrance.  This is oriented to where the majority of the students park and actually provides a very welcoming entrance to the back, which many people consider the front.  This building is a renovation to the heat plant.

 

Move to Berks Campus.  Three projects to review.  The Thun Library renovation, Perkins Student Center, as well as the Franco Building.  The Information Commons was an addition to the library and included a museum area for the Wyomissing Polytechnical School which is what Berks Campus was before it was Penn State.  Also circulation desks, study rooms and that oval area in the front of the building is what is called the Cyber Café.

 

Perkins Student Center is essentially a seamless addition.  The right hand side is the addition and the left hand is the original building.  It provides student lounge spaces, as well as health care facilities for the students.

 

Franco Building addition.  Franco is one of the first buildings that you see when you enter Berks Campus and this addition will provide a new front face to that façade which is very important.  It also provides some quality outdoor spaces and a patio and walkway plaza.  That building is currently under construction and anticipated to be done in December.

 

Safeguard Scientifics at the Great Valley Campus.  This building provides both a building, and what is called the Campus Green, to make what essentially is a corporate center a little bit more of a campus setting.  Here is a photograph shortly after construction was complete and a photograph of the waterfall that was installed.  This building too, has a very well wired auditorium on the lower left corner, capable and comfortable for a lot of corporate gatherings.

 

We move to Abington Campus and Lares Building.  We had additions in two faces on two sides of Lares Building.  Here is a graphic of the finished product over the pond in Abington as well as a few interior views.

 

That concludes the presentation across the state.  William Anderson wants to give a little bit of a look ahead to next year.

 

William J. Anderson:  Thanks, Mark.  This is just kind of a preview when I come back in the fall, these would be the projects that I will review with you.  The West Campus Housing, the Information Sciences and Technology construction, the Nittany Deck addition, Pasquirella Spiritual Center, Chemistry and Life Sciences Buildings, Career Services Building, Eastview Terrace Housing and our east sub-campus which includes three academic buildings—Business, Food Sciences and School of Forest Resources Building.  As well as an 1,100 car parking garage and a central chilled water plant for air conditioning the campus and we will be back in the fall.

 

Chair Nichols:  Thanks a lot, Bill.  The last informational report is the Report of the Senate Elections.  The Secretary of the Senate, Deidre Jago is also the chair of the Senate Elections Commission, which means she is responsible for conducting the election and she will deliver the report.

 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES AND RULES

 

Report of Senate Elections

 

Deidre E. Jago, Chair, Elections Commission

 

Deidre E. Jago, Hazleton Campus:  Thank you, John.  I have a number of election results to report but before I do, I would like to thank very much the members of the Senate Staff and the members of the election committee who helped with the recent elections.

 

The first is the election for Senate Council.  Connie Baggett, College of Agricultural Sciences; Travis De Castro, College of Arts and Architecture; John Spychalski, Smeal College of Business Administration; Alan Scaroni, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences; Dorothy Evensen, College of Education; Robert Burgess, College of Health and Human Development; Dennis Gouran, College of the Liberal Arts; Peter Jurs, Eberly College of Science; Jacqueline Esposito, University Libraries, Combined Departments of Military Science, College of Communications, School of Information Sciences and Technology, Dickinson School of Law and Penn State Great Valley Graduate Center; Brian Tormey, Altoona College; Stephen Stace, Abington College; Ronald McCarty, Penn State Erie, The Behrend College; Winston Richards, Penn State Harrisburg, The Capital College; Salvatore Marsico, The Commonwealth College; and Louis Milakofsky, Berks-Lehigh Valley College.  The College of Engineering and the College of Medicine have not yet elected Senate Council representatives for next year.  That will be the Senate Council for the 2002-03 Senate year.

 

Next is the Committee on Committees and Rules:  Deborah Atwater, Lynn Carpenter, Pamela Hufnagel, Daniel Marshall and Andrew Romberger are the five members elected to serve a two-year term.  Peter Deines and Stephen Smith were elected to serve a one-year term.

 

The University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee:  Phyllis Cole, Liberal Arts, Penn State Delaware; Renee Diehl, Eberly College of Science, UP; and Mary Katherine Howett, College of Medicine, will be the new members of this committee.

 

The new members of the Standing Joint Committee on Tenure:  Judith Ozment Payne, Abington College, Member; Gabriella Varga, College of Agricultural Sciences, UP, Alternate; and Cara-Lynne Schengrund, College of Medicine, Alternate.

 

For the Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities we have three categories:  Faculty from University Park:  Dianne Brannon, College of Health and Human Development, Member; Robert Melton, College of Engineering, Alternate; and Loanne Snavely, University Libraries, Alternate.

 

Faculty Other than University Park:  Sandra Smith, Penn State Fayette, Member; and Annette Caruso, Abington College, Alternate.

 

Deans:  Daniel Larson, Eberly College of Science, University Park, Member; and Madlyn Hanes, Penn State Harrisburg, The Capital College, Alternate.

 

Elected member of the Faculty Advisory Committee to the President:  Wayne R. Curtis, College of Engineering, University Park.

 

For the office of Secretary of the Senate:  Melvin Blumberg, Penn State Harrisburg, The Capital College.

 

For Chair-Elect of the Senate:  Christopher J. Bise, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, University Park.

 

Thank you.  Congratulations to all of them.

 

COMMENTS BY OUTGOING CHAIR NICHOLS

 

First and foremost, thank you for the honor of chairing the University Faculty Senate and the faculty it represents and the university at large.  I have tried very hard—and I hope successfully—to represent the Penn State faculty for what it is—a pretty darned spectacular group of scholars.  Thanks to you too, for being academic good citizens and accepting the leadership positions in university governance.  Your willingness and that of others, to subsume your individual professional agendas in order to contribute to the good of the order—to help find collective solutions to common problems is not only commendable, but probably essential to the continuing well-being of the university and the educational mission.

 

Claudia Limbert, who until recently was our CEO at DuBois Campus, called my attention to a Mark Twain quote that reasonably accurately describes my year as chair of the Senate.  It goes something like this:  “I know a man who grabbed a cat by the tail and now knows 40 percent more about cats than a man who didn’t.”  In my case, it was not just a simple domestic cat, it was a big cat—a mountain lion—indeed a Nittany Lion.  My only quibble with Twain’s assessment is that the percentage he gave is far too low—it is easily double that.

 

One of the things I have learned about holding the cat’s tail this year is that—despite the resource shortages, external and internal pressures, and a whole host of other problems—Penn State is an excellent university.  And the reason for its excellence is—very simply—its people.  In visiting all Penn State locations and colleges over the last two years, I have had the privilege of meeting countless bright, hardworking people truly dedicated to the advancement of knowledge.  While that may seem self evident or platitudinous, it is by far the most important lesson that I have learned this year.

 

But I have also learned that the expectations for these good people—particularly our faculty—are frequently unfair and unrealistic.  There is a subtle and troubling shift in the perceived mission of this and other universities that has considerable implications for the professoryate and society at large.  I had always thought the educational mission of a university was to make available to students an opportunity to learn intellectual skills and a knowledge base that they could use to improve themselves and society around them.  But it is now increasingly common in many quarters to see the university itself as responsible for solving individual and societal problems—rather than supplying people with the means to solve those problems.  Universities are increasingly expected to save society from itself.  It is widely believed universities have the responsibility to end—or at least alleviate—incivility, debauchery, racism, intolerance, violence, environmental degradation, knee-jerk religious and political ideologies, and a whole host of other social ills.  Oh, and by the way, guarantee a high-paying job.

 

I cannot tell you the number of times in my past two years of representing the Penn State faculty in various venues that I have heard someone say, “If only the faculty,” as if there was one monolithic faculty at this or any other university—if only the faculty was on board, this, that, or another social or institutional problem would be solved.  If the problems persist, the university and its faculty must not be doing their job.  To me, that is unfair and unrealistic.

 

The late master teacher Lionel Basney was quoted in a resent issue of The American Scholar as follows, “We use up our teachers by demanding the impossible of them, and we do this because we demand something impossible from education as a whole…to redeem society from the consequences of our quite deliberate plans for it.”  Professor Basney went on to say that the abating influences of social institutions such as families, churches, and unions has an unrealistic demand on universities to produce intellectuals necessary in society “without the fabric of an intellectual and moral culture.”

 

Don’t get me wrong.  Universities—in partnership with other societal stakeholders—can and do, make a significant dent in these problems.  Teaching, research and outreach in which we engage are important—indeed noble—endeavors.  And a university education can be a transformational experience.  But a university education is not a magic bullet for all the social ills that society itself is unable and unwilling to deal with.  Universities are not the saviors for society’s failings, and the faculty cannot be expected to do the impossible.

 

You may recall that, in my opening remarks at the beginning of this year, I called on the Senate to remain focused despite inevitable distractions and external pressures, to remain focused on the core mission and value of the university—that is to advance knowledge--to make available the highest quality education possible.  I now know that is far, far easier said than done.  The demands, expectations, and pressures on the university and its faculty are increasing and are frequently unrealistic—at the very same time of decreasing financial resources and public support.  Measured against those realities, the Senate—you—did a superb job this year in advancing the university’s true mission.  Congratulations on that success and thank you for allowing me to be part of it.

 

The hour is late.  So let me take just one last moment to thank a few people.  First of all I would like to thank my fellow Senate Officers—John, Cara, and Deidre—I have the utmost personal and professional regard for them.  I would like to thank George Franz for serving as Parliamentarian.  I would like to thank the committee chairs and vice chairs and the Senate Councilors.  I would like to thank Dean Douglas Anderson for freeing me up on time so that I could do the work required of the Senate.  Very importantly, I would like to thank Susan Youtz, Executive Secretary of the Senate and the Senate Staff—part of which is in the back of the room.  You all know them Vickie, Linda, Betsy, Sherry, April and Diane.  They are really a spectacular group of people.  Until you have had an opportunity to work with them for a year, you probably do not appreciate how spectacular.  One additional thing for the Senate Staff, for those of you who don’t know Betsy, she is the staff person that is responsible for transcribing the Senate Record and wading through all of our complex and obtuse verbiage.  So in parting, I just have one word for Betsy—pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.  The longest word in the English language.  Gotcha!

 

Now it is my final responsibility as Chair of the Senate to install the new officers.  Will the new officers please take their places?

 

I also want to at this stage give a final thanks to my friend and good colleague John Moore and thank him for his hard work, his patience, and his good humor in supporting me this year and wish him all the best for this coming year.  And to help relieve the pressures and time constraints of being Senate Chair, I have got a couple of gifts for him.  One is a modest supply of Maraschino cherries and the other, and you will need this, is Cliff’s notes for Shakespeare’s Sonnets.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

COMMENTS BY INCOMING CHAIR MOORE

 

Well thank you very much.  Thanks, John.  The reason for the Maraschino cherries is that John and I have spent so many hours on the road eating at restaurants, when the waitress comes to ask for drinks, I inevitably ask for a Manhattan with two cherries and so this is John’s contribution to my happy summer, I can tell.

 

I too, have something for John.  Now, you have all had a chance to see John in action this year and you understand as I do that there is much to admire about John Nichols.  One of the things that I discovered very early on in our trips was something which is going to lead to the first gift today.  That gift is a six pack.  Manhattans for me, six pack for John.  But a six pack of what?  To my horror, my shock, my surprise, I discovered at our first dinner that John considers himself the world’s expert on New England Clam Chowder.  This was a shock because I had considered myself to be the world’s expert on clam chowder.  So what I have been doing during the year is gathering exotic cans of clam chowder for you and that is going to be the six pack.  This will be gift number one.

 

I also discovered something else.  With the departure of George Bugyi from the Senate, Nick is clearly the most dapper guy here.  I thought that maybe I could make some sort of contribution to his dapperhood.  I was going to consult Lou Geschwindner, but Lou was unavailable.  So I thought maybe I could kill two birds with one stone.  On the one hand I could get him a tie without Lou’s advice.  But on the other, I could get a tie that would somehow feed into one of his intellectual passions.

 

Now as you all know, Nick is an expert on Cuban affairs.  In his study, there is a photo of Nick and Fidel Castro indicating to his excellence in that field of study.  Outside of his office there is a framed presentation of the First Amendment indicating something else that he is dedicated to.  But something else that he is also dedicated to is constitutional theory, that is, the relationship between British constitutional theory.  And today, as you all know, is Shakespeare’s birthday, April 23, the Feast of St. George.  So at a recent trip to Washington, I visited the Folger Shakespeare Library and I got Nick a tie.  Which addresses his interest in the relationship between English Monarchy and the English Parliament that is particularly the interest between all the kings and queens of England and the British Parliament.  So Nick, let me give you this tie, which has on it each king and queen of England from the beginning to the present and I hope you will wear it every year on April 23 in memory of this occasion.  Thank you so much.

 

We have one more gift for John.  Earlier in the day awards were given out to folks who had served the Senate long and well and we have an award for Nick on this occasion.  John Nichols joined the Senate in 1989.  He served on the Senate Committee on Faculty Affairs for four years, chaired the committee during the 1999-2000 year.  From 1992 through 1995 he served on the Standing Joint Committee on Tenure and served as its chair for two years.  In the year 2000, he was elected chair-elect of the Senate and today is completing his highly successful and distinguished year as chair.  Next year he will serve as Immediate Past Chair.

 

We can all agree that Nick has done a brilliant and outstanding job of leading the Senate during this past year.  His dedication to fulfilling his responsibilities, the power of his analyses and his ability to involve so many of us in solving the challenges we faced have been remarkable.  Best of all, he guided himself by constant reference to what he thought was best for the academic goals and mission of the university as he said just a few minutes ago, “the commitment to the core values to the university.”  That commitment has given luster to all that he has achieved during the year. 

 

But one of his most remarkable achievements this year was to have been selected several weeks ago to throw out the first pitch at the Penn State/Minnesota baseball game.  An event which we have failed to capture on videotape but which we know has capped his entire year.  Nick, the president of the university and Rodney Erickson have signed this certificate which acknowledges your seven years of dedicated service to the Senate and to the university community.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Incoming Chair Moore:  Two other Senators are stepping down from leadership positions which I would like to acknowledge.  Cara-Lynne Schengrund and Deidre Jago.  Cara I will miss your good judgment, wit and, your ability to make each of the many meals and meetings we have attended these past two years both amiable and delightful.  Thank you very, very much.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Incoming Chair Moore:  Deidre, your kindness and thoughtfulness combined with your knowledge and experience of the university have made your counsel a source of strength and good sense on which all of us have been able to lean.  Thank you also very, very much.

 

Senators:  Applause.

 

Incoming Chair Moore:  Happily, both Cara and Deidre will continue to serve the Senate in other capacities next year.  Finally, I want to thank all of you for electing Chris Bise and Mel Blumberg to their positions.  They will have the responsibility next year of saving me from falling and for making sure that the Senate maintains its sensible course despite all my efforts to the contrary.  So thank you very much for electing these two great folks.

 

NEW LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS

 

None

 

COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE GOOD OF THE UNIVERSITY

 

None

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

May I have a motion to adjourn?  The April 23, 2002 meeting of the University Faculty Senate adjourned at 3:34 PM.

 

 

DOCUMENTS DISTRIBUTED PRIOR TO APRIL 23, 2002

 

Undergraduate Education – Revision of Senate Policy 60-00: Multiple Majors and Degrees (Legislative)

 

Senate Council – Tuition Task Force (Informational)

 

Admissions, Records, Scheduling, and Student Aid – Time to Graduation Report (Informational)

 

Senate Council – Statement by Penn State President Graham Spanier on the Penn State Calendar (Informational)

 

Senate Self Study Committee  – Interim Report (Informational)

 

University Planning – Construction Projects – 2001-02 (Informational)

 

 

RESOLUTION

 

 JOHN J. CAHIR

Vice Provost and Dean for Undergraduate Education

Professor of Meteorology

 

 

WHEREAS, Dr. John J. Cahir has had a distinguished career at Penn State dating back to 1965, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir has demonstrated innovative and exemplary administrative leadership in his many contributions to the University community, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir has served on the University Faculty Senate continuously since 1973, and has been a member of Senate Council; an elected member of the Faculty Advisory Committee to the President and chaired the Faculty Affairs and Planning and Development committees; and served on Undergraduate Education and Intercollegiate Athletic committees, and led or served on numerous commissions, panels, and task forces, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir has helped shape the weather forecasting abilities of thousands of students and is nationally and internationally recognized for his research and teaching in climatology and using computer technologies to transform weather stations, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir has been a champion for excellence in teaching and learning and improving the quality of undergraduate education at Penn State and nationally, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir has been a mentor, guide, and friend to innumerable Penn State faculty, staff, and students, and

 

WHEREAS, John Cahir is a man of integrity, loyalty, and unflagging devotion to Penn State;

 

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the University Faculty Senate of The Pennsylvania State University, on this 23rd day of April, 2002, expresses its deepest gratitude and appreciation to Dr. John J. Cahir for his many accomplishments on behalf of the University, in support of excellence in undergraduate education.  The Senate offers affectionate and heartfelt best wishes for many more accurate weather forecasts and a full and productive retirement.

 

 

THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY

University Faculty Senate

Senate Calendar

2002-2003

 

REPORTS DUE                            SENATE COUNCIL                         SENATE

 

August 13, 2002                                   August 27, 2002                                   September 10, 2002

 

September 24, 2002                             October 8, 2002                                  October 22, 2002

 

November 5, 2002                               November 19, 2002                             December 3, 2002

 

December 13, 2002                             January 14, 2003                                  January 28, 2003

 

January 31, 2003                                  February 11, 2003                               February 25, 2003

 

February 27, 2003                               March 4, 2003                                     March 25, 2003

 

March 28, 2003                                   April 8, 2003                                        April 22, 2003

 

Standing Committee Membership

Standing Committee Assignments for the 2002-2003 Senate Year

 

COMMITTEES AND RULES

Valerie N. Stratton, Chair  2003

Joanna Floros, Vice-Chair  2003

Deborah F. Atwater     2004

Christopher J. Bise          2005

Melvin Blumberg  2003

Lynn A. Carpenter   2004

Joseph J. Cecere  2003

Peter Deines 2003

Pamela P. Hufnagel    2004

J. Daniel Marshall  2004

John W. Moore  2004

John S. Nichols  2003

Andrew B. Romberger  2004

Stephen M. Smith  2003

 

ADMISSIONS, RECORDS,

SCHEDULING AND STUDENT AID

Mark A. Casteel, Chair             2003

Carol A. Smith, Vice-Chair  2003

Edward W. Bittner       2003

Stephen Browne  2004

Milton W. Cole  2004

Anna Griswold  2003

Geoffrey J. Harford      2003

Steven D. Koeber  2003

Luen-Chau Li 2003

Christopher J. Lynch        2004

Paul Neiheisel  2003

John J. Romano  2003

Thomas A. Seybert      2004

Richard A. Wade  2004

J. James Wager  2003

 

COMPUTING AND INFORMATION

 SYSTEMS

R. Thomas Berner, Chair 2004

Lee D. Coraor, Vice-Chair  2003

Anthony Ambrose    2004

Paul E. Barney, Jr.  2003

Hemant K. Bhargava   2004

Edward R. Bollard, Jr.  2004

David Breslin 2003

Victor W. Brunsden   2004

John T. Harwood  2003

Alan L. Horwitz  2004

Michael L. Jonson      2004

Anna S. Mattila  2004

Dawn M. Noga  2003

Joy M. Perrine  2003

Semyon (Sam) Slobounov 2003

John B. Urenko  2003

Russell S. Vaught  2003

Kay Wijekumar  2004

 

CURRICULAR AFFAIRS

Shelley M. Stoffels, Chair  2003

Judy Ozment Payne, Vice-Chair  2004

Phyllis F. Adams  2004

Lauren M. Applegate  2003

Laurie Powers Breakey     2003

William Brockman  2003

Douglas K. Brown       2004

Barton W. Browning   2004

Garry L. Burkle  2003

Chao-Hsien Chu  2003

Robert G. Crane  2003

Roger A. Egolf  2004

Christopher J. Falzone      2004

Gary J. Fosmire  2004

George W. Franz  2003

Sally A. Heffentreyer 2003

Brandon B. Hunt  2004

Ravinder Koul  2003

Robert A. Novack  2004

Mary Beth Oliver  2004

Howard G. Sachs  2003

Summer J. Spangler    2003

Bonj Szczygiel  2004

Rodney L. Troester     2004

 

FACULTY AFFAIRS

Kim C. Steiner, Chair         2003

Sallie M. McCorkle, Vice-Chair          2003

Susan M. Abmayr     2003

Mohamad A. Ansari       2004

Kultegin Aydin  2004

Thomas W. Benson      2004

Leonard J. Berkowitz   2004

Clay Calvert 2004

Michael J. Cardamone 2004

Richard A. Carlson      2003

Debora Cheney  2004

Roy B. Clariana  2003

Elizabeth J. Corwin       2004

Robert P. Crum  2003

Dwight Davis  2004

Mary I. Frecker  2003

Margaret B. Goldman    2003

David J. Green  2003

Amir Khalilollahi  2004

Arthur C. Miller  2004

Jamie M. Myers  2004

Katherine C. Pearson     2003

Robert Secor 2003

Mila C. Su  2003

Joan S. Thomson  2003

Tramble T. Turner  2004

 

FACULTY BENEFITS

Deidre E. Jago, Chair         2004

Dennis G. Shea, Vice-Chair  2003

Keith K. Burkhart  2004

Gary L. Catchen  2004

Michael Dooris  2003

Elizabeth A. Hanley       2004

Kathleen L. Lodwick     2004

Cynthia Massie- Mara         2004

Sandra J. Savignon   2004

Cara-Lynne Schengrund 2004

Patience L. Simmonds  2003

Marley W. Watkins     2004

Billie S. Willits  2003

 

INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS

Martin T. Pietrucha, Chair           2003

Sandra R. Smith, Vice-Chair  2004

James B. Anderson   2004

William W. Asbury      2003

Timothy M. Curley       2003

Laurence M. Demers      2004

James T. Elder  2003

Robert Gray 2003

Kane M. High  2003

Janis E. Jacobs  2003

Diana Kenepp  2003

R. Scott Kretchmar  2003

Mark A. Levin  2003

Douglas McCullough 2003

Gary W. Petersen  2004

John J. Romano  2003

Stephen W. Schaeffer    2004

Susan Delaney- Scheetz      2003

Thomas C. Vary  2003

Jerry Wright 2003

Edgar P. Yoder  2004

Susan C. Youtz  2003

 

INTRA-UNIVERSITY RELATIONS

David R. Richards, Chair            2004

Dawn G. Blasko, Vice-Chair  2004

Rosann Bazirjian  2003

Robert H. Bonneau    2004

K. Robert Bridges  2003

Lance Cole 2004

Cheng Dong 2004

Fred G. Fedok  2004

E. Jay Holcomb  2003

Ali R. Hurson  2004

Zachary T. Irwin  2004

Billie Jo Jones  2004

Carl R. Lovitt, II  2003

Kidane Mengisteab 2004

Craig M. Meyers  2004

Al Mueller  2004

Victor Nistor 2004

Michael C. Ritter  2003

James F. Smith  2003

Macklin E. Stanley      2003

Robert A. Walters      2004

Mark L. Wardell  2003

Barbara A. Wiens-Tuers 2004

Nancy I. Williams  2004

Stamatis M. Zervanos   2004

 

LIBRARIES

Brian A. Curran, Chair         2003

Dagmar Sternad, Vice-Chair  2004

Richard N. Barshinger  2003

Aida M. Beaupied    2003

Charles L. Burchard    2004

Meshawn Carter  2003

Michael J. Chorney     2004

David A. Cranage  2004

Nancy L. Eaton  2003

Bonnie MacEwan  2003

Wayne K. Marshall    2003

James E. May  2004

Annette K. McGregor   2004

Elise D. Miller-Hooks       2004

Wilson J. Moses  2004

Reiko Tachibana  2004

 

OUTREACH ACTIVITIES

Thomas E. Glumac, Chair  2003

Julia C. Hewitt, Vice-Chair  2003

Theodore R. Alter  2003

David E. Barnes  2004

Ryan Fortese 2003

James W. Hilton  2004

Kenneth B. Kephart     2003

Donald E. Kunze  2004

Pablo Laguna  2004

Kevin R. Maxwell  2003

James H. Ryan  2003

Ladislaus M. Semali        2004

Keith Verner 2004

 

RESEARCH

Guy F. Barbato, Chair         2004

Paul J. Eslinger, Vice-Chair  2004

Anthony A. Atchley     2004

Paul E. Becker  2004

Leonid V. Berlyand    2004

John H. Challis  2004

Christine Clark- Evans        2003

Charles R. Fisher  2004

Joyce A. Furfaro  2003

David S. Gilmour  2003

Irene E. Harvey  2004

Leif I. Jensen 2004

Ernest W. Johnson     2003

Robert Killoren  2003

Digby D. Macdonald 2003

John M. Mason  2004

Rajen Mookerjee  2003

Carla Mulford  2003

Eva J. Pell   2003

Frank Pugh 2003

Dawn E. Rupp  2003

Evelyn A. Thomchick 2003

Gary Weber 2003

Douglas H. Werner      2004

Candice Yekel  2003

 

STUDENT LIFE

Bill Ellis, Chair  2004

Irwin Richman, Vice-Chair  2003

William W. Asbury      2003

Arthur W. Carter  2003

James M. Donovan    2004

Charles R. Enis  2004

Andrzej J. Gapinski     2004

Timothy N. Gray  2003

Wallace H. Greene       2004

Dale A. Holen  2003

Andrew K. Masters     2003

Gwenn E. McCollum  2003

Kristin Breslin Sommese    2004

Jennifer Tingo  2003

Bridget Van Osten        2003

Alexandros N. Vgontzas    2004

 

UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION

Laura L. Pauley, Chair             2003

Bob D. Ricketts, Vice-Chair  2003

Cheryl L. Achterberg 2003

Richard I. Ammon  2004

Laura M. Beck  2003

Thomas E. Boothby    2003

John J. Cahir 2003

John P. Cancro  2004

Paul F. Clark 2003

Terry Engelder  2004

Cheryl Gallagher  2003

Peter D. Georgopulos 2003

Robert S. Hill 2003

Richard R. Kennedy    2003

John H. Kramer  2004

Amy E. Locke  2003

Nancy S. Love  2004

David W. Russell  2003

Dhushy Sathianathan 2004

Dennis C. Scanlon     2003

Julia B. Simon  2004

James A. Strauss  2004

D. Joshua Troxell  2003

Eric R. White 2003

Susan C. Youtz  2003

 

UNIVERSITY PLANNING

Anthony J. Baratta, Chair 2003

William A. Rowe, Vice-Chair  2003

P. Richard Althouse    2003

William Anderson, Jr. 2003

John P. Boehmer  2003

Dan T. Brinker  2003

Eric B. Cowden  2003

Gordon F. De Jong          2003

Peter B. Everett  2003

William M. Frank  2004

Roger L. Geiger  2004

Daniel R. Hagen  2004

Christopher L. Johnstone  2004

Rodney Kirsch  2003

Karen H. Morin  2003

Robert N. Pangborn   2004

Paula J. Romano  2004

Louise E. Sandmeyer 2003

Gary C. Schultz  2003

Richard J. Simons, Jr.  2004

Timothy W. Simpson     2004

Edward C. Smith  2004

Gregory R. Ziegler                    2003

 


 

 

The University Faculty Senate

STANDING COMMITTEE OFFICERS FOR 2002-2003

 

Admissions, Records, Scheduling and Student Aid

  Chair:          Mark A. Casteel  York Campus 717-771-4028  MAC13@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Carol A. Smith  201 Human Dev. East  863-0245        CAS35@PSU.EDU

Committees and Rules

  Chair:          Valerie N. Stratton  Altoona College  949-5289        VNS@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Joanna Floros  Hershey Medical Center  717-531-6972  JXF19@PSU.EDU

Computing and Information Systems

  Chair:          R. Thomas Berner  102 Carnegie Bldg.  863-7993        BX2@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Lee D. Coraor  233 Pond Lab                                                     865-1265    CORAOR@CSE.PSU.EDU

Curricular Affairs

  Chair:          Shelley M. Stoffels  212 Sackett Building                                                             865-4622        STOFFELS@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Judy Ozment Payne  Abington College  215-881-7471  O96@PSU.EDU

Faculty Affairs

  Chair:          Kim C. Steiner  213 Ferguson Building                                                       865-9351             STEINER@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Sallie M. McCorkle  210 Patterson Building  865-9472        SMM11@PSU.EDU

Faculty Benefits

  Chair:          Deidre E. Jago  Hazleton Campus  570-450-3076  DEJ1@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Dennis G. Shea  116 Henderson Building  863-2901        DGS4@PSU.EDU

Intercollegiate Athletics

  Chair:          Martin T. Pietrucha  212 Sackett Bldg.  863-3954        MTP5@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Sandra R. Smith  Penn State Fayette  724-430-4271  SRS9@PSU.EDU

Intra-University Relations

  Chair:          David R. Richards  Hazleton Campus  570-450-3093  DRR@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Dawn G. Blasko  Penn State Erie                                           898-6081          DAWNBLASKO@PSU.EDU

Libraries

  Chair:          Brian A. Curran  229 Arts Building  865-6326        BAC18@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Dagmar Sternad  266 Recreation Building  863-7369        DXS48@PSU.EDU

Outreach Activities

  Chair:          Thomas E. Glumac  Mont Alto Campus                                                           717-749-6217   TOMGLUMAC@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Julia C. Hewitt  N352 Burrowes Building  863-2910        JCH11@PSU.EDU

Research

  Chair:          Guy F. Barbato  201 Henning Building  865-4481        GFB1@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Paul J. Eslinger  Hershey Medical Center                               717-531-8692     PESLINGER@PSU.EDU

Student Life

  Chair:          Bill Ellis  Hazleton Campus  570-450-3026  WCE2@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Irwin Richman  Penn State Harrisburg  717-948-6196  RAE3@PSU.EDU

Undergraduate Education

  Chair:          Laura L. Pauley  305 Reber Building                                                 863-4259            LPAULEY@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   Bob D. Ricketts  275 Recreation Building  865-2421        RDR3@PSU.EDU

University Planning

  Chair:          Anthony J. Baratta  236 Reber Building  865-0038        AB2@PSU.EDU

  Vice-Chair:   William A. Rowe  Hershey Medical Center                                       717-531-4874                WROWE@PSU.EDU


 

ROSTER OF SENATORS BY VOTING UNITS: 2002-2003

 

ABINGTON COLLEGE

 


SENATORS (5)

  Term Expires 2003

     Stace, Stephen W.

     Turner, Tramble T.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Smith, James F.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Payne, Judy Ozment

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Rebane, P. Peter


 

 

 

ALTOONA COLLEGE

 


SENATORS (6)

  Term Expires 2003

     Stratton, Valerie N.

     Wiens-Tuers, Barbara A.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Brown, Douglas K.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Brunsden, Victor W.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Su, Mila C.

     Tormey, Brian B.


 

 

 

BEHREND COLLEGE

 


SENATORS (10)

  Term Expires 2003

     Khalilollahi, Amir

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Barney, Paul E., Jr.

     Blasko, Dawn G.

     Burchard, Charles L.

     Troester, Rodney L.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Gray, Robert

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Becker, Paul E.

     Irwin, Zachary T.

     McCarty, Ronald L.

     Simmonds, Patience L.


 

 

 

BERKS-LEHIGH VALLEY

COLLEGE

Penn State Berks

 


SENATORS (4)

  Term Expires 2003

     Romberger, Andrew B.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Milakofsky, Louis

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Ansari, Mohamad A.

     Zervanos, Stamatis M.


 

 

Penn State Lehigh Valley

 


SENATORS (2)

  Term Expires 2003

     Lodwick, Kathleen L.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Egolf, Roger A.


 

 


 

CAPITAL COLLEGE

Penn State Harrisburg

 


SENATORS (7)

  Term Expires 2003

     Blumberg, Melvin

     Richman, Irwin

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Ammon, Richard I.

     Cecere, Joseph J.

     Sachs, Howard G.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Richards, Winston A.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Mara, Cynthia


 

 

Penn State Schuylkill

 


SENATORS (3)

  Term Expires 2003

     Cardamone, Michael J.

     Jones, Billie Jo

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Urenko, John B.


 

 

 

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES

 


SENATORS (15)

  Term Expires 2003

     Baggett, Connie D.

     Jensen, Leif I.

     Scanlon, Dennis C.

     Steiner, Kim C.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Adams, Phyllis F.

     Hagen, Daniel R.

     Smith, Stephen M.

     Thomson, Joan S.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Holcomb, E. Jay

     Kephart, Kenneth B.

     Ziegler, Gregory R.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Barbato, Guy F.

     Hilton, James W.

     Petersen, Gary W.

     Yoder, Edgar P.


 

 

 

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND ARCHITECTURE

 


SENATORS (9)

  Term Expires 2003

     Brinker, Dan T.

     McCorkle, Sallie M.

     McGregor, Annette K.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Curran, Brian A.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     DeCastro, W. Travis

     Kennedy, Richard R.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Kunze, Donald E.

     Sommese, Kristin Breslin

     Szczygiel, Bonj


 

 

 

COLLEGE OF COMMUNICATIONS

 


SENATORS (3)

  Term Expires 2004

     Calvert, Clay

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Berner, R. Thomas

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Oliver, Mary Beth


 

 


 

COLLEGE OF EARTH & MINERAL SCIENCES

 


SENATORS (8)

  Term Expires 2003

     Engelder, Terry

     Frank, William M.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Deines, Peter

     Green, David J.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Bise, Christopher J.

     Macdonald, Digby D.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Crane, Robert G.

     Scaroni, Alan W.


 

 

 

 

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

 


SENATORS (7)

  Term Expires 2003

     Hunt, Brandon B.

     Myers, Jamie M.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Marshall, J. Daniel

     Watkins, Marley W.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Geiger, Roger L.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Evensen, Dorothy H.

     Semali, Ladislaus M.


 

 

 

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

 


SENATORS (26)

  Term Expires 2003

     Aydin, Kultegin

     Baratta, Anthony J.

     Dong, Cheng

     Harris, Norman

     Hurson, Ali R.

     Miller, Arthur C.

     Miller-Hooks, Elise D.

     Pytel, Jean Landa

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Carpenter, Lynn A.

     Jonson, Michael L.

     Pietrucha, Martin T.

     Sathianathan, Dhushy

 

 

 

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Boothby, Thomas E.

     Coraor, Lee D.

     Curtis, Wayne R.

     Frecker, Mary I.

     Pauley, Laura L.

     Tikalsky, Paul J.

     Werner, Douglas H.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Atchley, Anthony A.

     Catchen, Gary L.

     Mason, John M.

     Pangborn, Robert N.

     Simpson, Timothy W.

     Smith, Edward C.

     Stoffels, Shelley M.


 

 


 

 

COLLEGE OF HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

 


SENATORS (14)

  Term Expires 2003

     Shea, Dennis G.

     Smith, Carol A.

     Williams, Nancy I.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Hanley, Elizabeth A.

     Slobounov, Semyon (Sam)

     Sternad, Dagmar

 

 

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Burgess, Robert L.

     Fosmire, Gary J.

     Morin, Karen H.

     Ricketts, Bob D.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Challis, John H.

     Corwin, Elizabeth J.

     Cranage, David A.

     Mattila, Anna S.


 

 

 

COLLEGE OF MEDICINE

 


SENATORS (26)

  Term Expires 2003

     Bonneau, Robert H.

     Demers, Laurence M.

     Fedok, Fred G.

     Johnson, Ernest W.

     Leure-duPree, Alphonse

     Rowe, William A.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Ambrose, Anthony

     Bollard, Edward R., Jr.

     Goldman, Margaret B.

     Greene, Wallace H.

     High, Kane M.

     Simons, Richard J., Jr.

 

 

 

Term Expires 2005

     Boehmer, John P.

     Eslinger, Paul J.

     Marshall, Wayne K.

     Romano, Paula J.

     Vary, Thomas C.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Burkhart, Keith K.

     Chorney, Michael J.

     Davis, Dwight

     Floros, Joanna

     Lynch, Christopher J.

     Meyers, Craig M.

     Schengrund, Cara-Lynne

     Verner, Keith

     Vgontzas, Alexandros N.


 


 

 

COLLEGE OF THE LIBERAL ARTS

 


SENATORS (23)

  Term Expires 2003

     Beaupied, Aida M.

     Gouran, Dennis S.

     Hewitt, Julia C.

     Kramer, John H.

     Moore, John W.

     Savignon, Sandra J.

     Welch, Susan

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Atwater, Deborah F.

     Clark, Paul F.

     De Jong, Gordon F.

     Harvey, Irene E.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Browne, Stephen

     Browning, Barton W.

     Carlson, Richard A.

     Evans, Christine Clark-

     Johnstone, Christopher L.

     Tachibana, Reiko

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Benson, Thomas W.

     Eckhardt, Caroline D.

     Love, Nancy S.

     Mengisteab, Kidane

     Moses, Wilson J.

     Simon, Julia B.


 

 

 

COMMONWEALTH COLLEGE

Penn State Beaver

 


SENATORS (2)

  Term Expires 2004

     Mookerjee, Rajen

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Wijekumar, Kay


 

 

Penn State Delaware County

 


SENATORS (3)

  Term Expires 2003

     Franz, George W.

     Georgopulos, Peter D.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Horwitz, Alan L.


 

 

Penn State DuBois

 


SENATORS (3)

  Term Expires 2003

     Hufnagel, Pamela P.

 

 

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Breakey, Laurie Powers

 

  Term Expires 2006

     May, James E.


 

 


 

Penn State Fayette

 


SENATORS (3)

  Term Expires 2003

     Smith, Sandra R.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Maxwell, Kevin R.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Gapinski, Andrzej J.


 

 

Penn State Hazleton

 


SENATORS (3)

  Term Expires 2004

     Ellis, Bill

     Richards, David R.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Jago, Deidre E.


 

 

 

Penn State McKeesport

 


SENATORS (2)

  Term Expires 2004

     Walters, Robert A.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Bittner, Edward W.


 

 

Penn State Mont Alto

 


SENATORS (3)

  Term Expires 2003

     Donovan, James M.

 

 

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Mueller, Al

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Glumac, Thomas E.


 

 

 

Penn State New Kensington

 


SENATORS (2)

  Term Expires 2003

     Bridges, K. Robert

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Cancro, John P.


 

 

Penn State Shenango

 


SENATORS (2)

  Term Expires 2004

     Elder, James T.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Perrine, Joy M.


 

 

Penn State Wilkes-Barre

 


SENATORS (2)

  Term Expires 2004

     Marsico, Salvatore A.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Seybert, Thomas A.


 

 


Penn State Worthington Scranton

 


SENATORS (3)

  Term Expires 2003

     Barnes, David E.

     Barshinger, Richard N.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Holen, Dale A.


 

 

 

Penn State York

 


SENATORS (3)

  Term Expires 2003

     Berkowitz, Leonard J.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Russell, David W.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Casteel, Mark A.


 

 

 

EBERLY COLLEGE OF SCIENCE

 


SENATORS (15)

  Term Expires 2003

     Anderson, James B.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Fisher, Charles R.

     Gilmour, David S.

     Laguna, Pablo

     Li, Luen-Chau

     Nistor, Victor

 

 

 

 

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Abmayr, Susan M.

     Berlyand, Leonid V.

     Pugh, Frank

     Strauss, James A.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Cole, Milton W.

     Falzone, Christopher J.

     Jurs, Peter C.

     Schaeffer, Stephen W.

     Wade, Richard A.


 

 

 

MILITARY SCIENCES

 

SENATORS (1)

  Term Expires 2003

     Neiheisel, Paul

 

 

 

PENN STATE GREAT VALLEY

 


SENATORS (2)

  Term Expires 2003

     Clariana, Roy B.

 

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Koul, Ravinder


 

 

 

 

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION SCIENCES & TECHNOLOGY

 

SENATORS (1)

  Term Expires 2004

     Chu, Chao-Hsien

 

 


SMEAL COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

 


SENATORS (7)

  Term Expires 2003

     Crum, Robert P.

     Everett, Peter B.

 

  Term Expires 2004

     Enis, Charles R.

     Novack, Robert A.

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Thomchick, Evelyn A.

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Bhargava, Hemant K.

     Spychalski, John C.


 

 

 

THE DICKINSON SCHOOL OF LAW

 


SENATORS (2)

  Term Expires 2003

     Cole, Lance

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Pearson, Katherine C.


 

 

 

 

UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

 


SENATORS (3)

  Term Expires 2004

     Esposito, Jacqueline R.

 

 

 

 

 

  Term Expires 2005

     Bazirjian, Rosann

 

  Term Expires 2006

     Cheney, Debora


 

 

ROSTER OF EX OFFICIO AND

APPOINTED SENATORS: 2002-2003

 

Ex Officio Senators:  (7)

 

John J. Cahir, Vice Provost and Dean for Undergraduate Education

Rodney A. Erickson, Executive Vice President/Provost of the University

Daniel J. Larson, Chair, Academic Leadership Council

Eva J. Pell, Vice President for Research/Dean of the Graduate School

Graham B. Spanier, President of the University

J. James Wager, University Registrar

Eric R. White, Director, Division of Undergraduate Studies

 

Appointed Senators:  (15)

 

Cheryl L. Achterberg

P. Richard Althouse

Ingrid M. Blood

Arthur W. Carter

Diane M. Disney

Madlyn L. Hanes

John T. Harwood

Janis E. Jacobs

W. Terrell Jones

Thomas G. Poole

John J. Romano

Karen Wiley Sandler

Louise E. Sandmeyer

Robert Secor

Billie S. Willits

 

ROSTER OF UNDERGRADUATE

STUDENT SENATORS: 2002-2003

 

Timothy N. Gray  Abington College

Steven D. Koeber  Altoona College

Summer J. Spangler  Berks-Lehigh Valley College

David Breslin  Capital College

Eric B. Cowden  College of Agricultural Sciences

Meshawn Carter  College of Arts and Architecture

Lauren M. Applegate  College of Communications

Mark A. Levin  College of Earth & Mineral Sciences

Amy E. Locke  College of Education

Dawn M. Noga  College of Engineering

Andrew K. Masters  College of Health & Human Development

Michael C. Ritter  College of the Liberal Arts

Macklin E. Stanley  Commonwealth College

Ryan Fortese  Division of Undergraduate Studies

Dawn E. Rupp  Eberly College of Science

Laura M. Beck  School of Information Sciences & Technology

Robert S. Hill  Smeal College of Business Administration

 

ROSTER OF GRADUATE

STUDENT SENATORS: 2002-2003

 

Joyce A. Furfaro  College of Medicine

Gwenn E. McCollum  The Dickinson School of Law

 

 

 

 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES AND RULES

 

Report of Senate Elections

 

Deidre E. Jago, Chair, Elections Commission

 

Our next item on the Agenda is the “Report of Senate Elections.”  One of the duties of the Senate Secretary, Deidre Jago, is to conduct the elections and make this report to the Senate. 

 

Deidre Jago, Hazleton Campus:  I have a number of elections results to report.

 

The first is the election for Senate Council.  Connie Baggett, College of Agricultural Sciences; Travis De Castro, College of Arts and Architecture; John Spychalski, Smeal College of Business Administration; Alan Scaroni, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences; Dorothy Evensen, College of Education; Robert Burgess, College of Health and Human Development; Dennis Gouran, College of the Liberal Arts; Peter Jurs, Eberly College of Science; Jacqueline Esposito, University Libraries, Combined Departments of Military Science, College of Communications, School of Information Science and Technology, Dickinson School of Law and Penn State Great Valley Graduate Center; Brian Tormey, Altoona College; Stephen Stace, Abington College; Ronald McCarty, Penn State Erie, The Behrend College; Winston Richards, Penn State Harrisburg, The Capital College; Salvatore Marsico, The Commonwealth College; and Louis Milakofsky, Berks-Lehigh Valley College.  The College of Engineering and the College of Medicine have not yet elected Senate Council representatives for next year.  That will be the Senate Council for the 2002-03 Senate year.

 

Next is the Committee on Committees and Rules.  Deborah Atwater, Lynn Carpenter, Pamela Hufnagel, Daniel Marshall and Andrew Romberger are the five members elected to serve a two-year term.  Peter Deines and Stephen Smith were elected to serve a one-year term.

 

The University Promotion and Tenure Review Committee:  Phyllis Cole, Liberal Arts, Penn State Delaware; Renee Diehl, Eberly College of Science, UP; and Mary Katherine Howett, College of Medicine, will be the new members of this committee.

 

The new members of the Standing Joint Committee on Tenure:  Judith Ozment Payne, Abington College, Member; Gabriella Varga, College of Agricultural Sciences, UP, Alternate; and Cara-Lynne Schengrund, College of Medicine, Alternate.

 

For the Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities we have three categories:  Faculty from University Park:  Dianne Brannon, College of Health and Human Development, Member; Robert Melton, College of Engineering, Alternate; and Loanne Snavely, University Libraries, Alternate.

 

Faculty Other than University Park:  Sandra Smith, Penn State Fayette, Member; and Annette Caruso, Abington College, Alternate.

 

Deans:  Daniel Larson, Eberly College of Science, UP, Member; and Madlyn Hanes, Penn State Harrisburg, The Capital College, Alternate.

 

Elected member of the Faculty Advisory Committee to the President:  Wayne R. Curtis, College of Engineering, University Park.

 

For the office of Secretary of the Senate:  Melvin Blumberg, Penn State Harrisburg, The Capital College.

 

For Chair-Elect of the Senate:  Christopher J. Bise, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, University Park.

 

 

SENATORS NOT RETURNING FOR THE 2002-2003 SENATE YEAR

 

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES

Hector Flores

Harvey Manbeck

Michael Saunders

 

 

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND ARCHITECTURE

Dan Brinker

 

 

PENN STATE ERIE - THE BEHREND COLLEGE

Barbara Power

Syed Andaleeb

 

 

SMEAL COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Terry Harrison

J. Randall Woolridge

 

 

COLLEGE OF COMMUNICATIONS

John Nichols

 

 

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION

Murry Nelson

 

 

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

Ali Borhan

Sabih Hayek

Jeffrey Mayer

Jose Ventura

 

 

PENN STATE HARRISBURG

CAPITAL COLLEGE

Jacob De Rooy

 

 

COLLEGE OF HEALTH AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT

Linda Caldwell

Rebecca Corwin

Thomas Frank

Deborah Preston

 

 

COLLEGE OF THE LIBERAL ARTS

Alan Block

Richard Bord

James Brasfield

Alan Derickson

Adrian Wanner

 

 

COLLEGE OF MEDICINE

Steven Dear

Charles Hill

Joan Lakoski

 

 

EBERLY COLLEGE OF SCIENCE

Robin Ciardullo

Renee Diehl

Robert Minard

Mark Strikman

 

 

UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Loanne Snavely

 

 

BEAVER CAMPUS

JoAnn Chirico

 

 

DELAWARE CAMPUS

Lonnie Golden

 

 

NEW KENSINGTON CAMPUS

Theresa Balog

 

 

SCHOOL OF INFORMATION SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGY

James Thomas

 

 

EX OFFICIO SENATOR

John Cahir

Nancy Eaton

 

 

UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS

Joshua Walker

Nicholas Pazdziorko

Laura Serfass

Robert Hill

Terry Shirley

Adam Schott

Dawn Noga

Jennifer Tingo

Molly Powell

Sunny Webb

Sean Limric

Anthony Wardle

 

 

GRADUATE STUDENTS

Sally Flowers

Mackenzie DeVos

Joseph Ferenchick