UMM Consultative Committee 2002-2003             consultative@morris.umn.edu

Minutes of Meeting #4
10/22/02 4:00-5:35 Sci. 3500

Members Present					
 
STUDENT
       Lee A Korby,
       Ryan P Brux,
       Amanda C Johnson,
       Christopher H Pifer,
STAFF
       Brenda A. Boever,
       Dee L. Schultz,
       Heather Aagesen,
       Rebecca L. Webb,
FACULTY/P&A
       Bart D. Finzel, Chair
       Michelle Page,
       Engin A. Sungur,
       David Wuolu,
X-O       
Jeffrey Ratliff-Crain

 

Guest(s)					
John Schwaller

Agenda					
I.	Meeting with the John Schwaller, Vica Chancellor of Academic Affairs and Dean

Materials Distributed					
·	UMM's Administrative organization 
·	Minutes of meeting #2

Meeting					
·	John Schwaller provided a response to the following questions:
1)  In light of the changes made to the administration of recruiting and admissions last year, we would appreciate a brief report on the progress in these areas.  On a related matter, what progress has the Retention Task Force made since your last report in April?

 2)  Questions have been raised concerning the implicit reallocation of work study funds across priority areas following the reduction of state support. A particular area of concern is adequate staffing and resources for academic support services.   With retention as an important theme, it's critical that services that support the students and faculty are strengthened.  It appears that just the opposite is happening:  lost work-study positions and departments are doing more with no increases to cover expenses, institutional taxes have also risen.  Departments have now been told to expect a 2.5-10% cut in funds next year to provide a pool for re-allocation.  What steps are being taken to reverse this trend? What is UMM doing to help ensure passage of the emergency bill to restore work study funds slated to be brought to the legislature?

3)  Questions have also been raised concerning the procedural change of moving some decisions on personnel (e.g.. terminal retirement) to the Division Chairs.  How far is this trend likely to go?  Salaries?  Set-up funds?  Has any thought been given to the consequences of removing one step in decision-making (and, therefore, one step of potential appeal) on potentially aggrieved employees?  Should the procedural change be accompanied by an independent oversight mechanism?  An ombudsman or active grievance committee?

Some of points made by the Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs and the Dean;
1.	John Schwaller asked from the committee to nominate members for the Blake Visiting Professorship
2.	Information on admission has been provided. Dean pointed out that the "rolling admission" strategy that has been followed last year will not be used this year. He added that lower numbers from the last year might be an outcome of this change. 
3.	He reported that 1/3 of the work study money has been disappeared. Cuts are made at mostly nonacademic areas.
4.	He pointed out that there is a change in division chairs' responsibilities. He added that Divisions should have control rather than the Dean.

The committee will meet with the John Schwaller at a later day to receive answers to the following questions:

4)  FIRST YEAR ASSESSMENT;

It is a fact that the most difficult year in any new job is the first year. Learning
o Policies (both system-wide and campus specific)
o Traditions (written and unwritten)
o Administration-Faculty, Administration-Staff, Administration-Student relations and traditional expectations of these contacts
o Leadership expectations of students/staff/faculty from administrators
o Anticipated level of communication
o Anticipated role of Dean
o Expectations on personal contacts
are challenging and have the potential of creating disagreements or misunderstandings or barriers to otherwise worthwhile initiatives.

a)What are the main differences between UMM and the other institutions where you have worked in these areas?

b)Would you comment on your successes and the challenges that you have faced in your first year?  What type of information channels do you access to determine the existence of these potential challenges?  Would you also tell us the type of actions that you have taken to avoid such challenges?

Of course, one never expects a complete adaptation to an institution without questioning. Seeing possible challenges arising from the existing structure and proposing new directions are the most important contributions that one can do for the future of UMM.

c)Would you tell us those parts of the existing structure that you believe needs attention and change?


The committee adjourned at 5:35.