University of Minnesota, Morris
Campus Resources and Planning Committee
April 29, 2004
Members Present: Andy Lopez, Bryan Herrmann, Mark Fohl, Maddy Maxeiner,
Ken Hodgson, Kevin Ely, LeAnn Dean, Carol McCannon, Tammy Faux,
Guests: Fritz Schwaller, Jim Mootz, Sandy Olson-Loy, Gary Strei
(In these minutes: Update on enrollment, Update on Integrated Communications Marketing Group, Report from Textbook Price Subcommittee, Budget update)
Minutes of 3/25/04, 4/1/04, 4/15/04, and 4/22/04 were approved as presented.
Jim Mootz reported that the Admissions staff is having trouble getting final commitments. He mentioned that May 1 is a target date that schools push for. As of today, there are 1298 students registered for fall, compared to 1381 last year. Students of color applications are up 33 compared to last year; transfer applications are down 3. Ken Hodgson suspects the problem is complexour lifeblood is dwindlingand this has to be one of our major concerns. He believes our image rules out many students who could do well here. On the flip side, students donıt know about us or have negative information. He believes this is a major problem that we must address before we worry about anything else. Jim Mootz said it could be a combination of many things. The population seems to be shifting to the Twin Cities area. His number concern is that UMM is not on the radar screen for young students. We need to build an image of UMM. Carol McCannon wondered why there isnıt a wave of panic? This problem should be at the top of everyoneıs list. She doesnıt see that this is a deep concern and believes the numbers wonıt change until that happens. Mootz said the message out there is that we are selective and competitive. Bryan Herrmann said he hears that we are too selective. He believes the bigger problem is that people donıt know who we are, we need to be on the radar. Fritz Schwaller added that if we were to change our profile, that significantly changes the way we do business. Everybody wants the same students that we want.
Maddy Maxeiner reported that the group has met a couple of times. They are trying to come up with some kind of statement or catch phrase that is attractive to students and the public. Tammy Faux suggested opening the discussion to students because they may creative ideas. Maxeiner asked if there was interest in creating an informal group during the summer. Carol McCannon suggested some type of electronic discussion. Ken Hodgson suggested we ask our graduating seniors why they chose UMM. Arne Kildegaard wished we could somehow embrace our location.
Arne Kildegaard distributed the following report on book prices as outlined below:
As a public liberal arts college, UMM prides itself on providing affordable and quality education. As state and federal aid fail to keep pace with increasing fees and tuition, the rising cost of textbooks is of increasing concern to many students already struggling to pay for college. In an effort to decrease the burden textbook prices place on students at UMM, we recommend the following:
UMM should be aware of and attempt to limit ³bundled² materials. Many textbooks come shrink-wrapped with additional instructional materials such as CD-ROMs and workbooks, this practice is commonly known as ³bundling². These additional materials substantially increase the cost of the textbook. Furthermore, bundling limits the possibility for students to resell the book and for the bookstore to offer used books. According to a recent CALPIRG study, ³65% of professors estimate they ³never² or ³rarely² include information from the additional bundled items in their courses, compared with only 24% who estimated they do ³always² or ³usually², and 11% use the material ³half the time².
UMM should be aware of and limit the cost increasing effect of new editions. Textbook companies consistently publish new editions with minor changes that add little or no substantive value to the class. Often the only noticeable difference in the text is in the pagination. New editions decrease resale value of textbooks and limit the bookstoreıs ability to offer used books and MCSAıs efforts to produce a student-to-student market.
Faculty, staff and students should work together to build a more vibrant used textbook market. Used books and textbooks substantially decrease the overall cost of book purchasing to students. Decreasing the amount of bundled materials and new editions would greatly aid this effort. Other institutional reforms would further the efforts of the Bookstore and student groups to offer more used books.
Faculty have the right to know how their textbook choices will financially affect students. Many of the problems associated with book prices stem from practices of book publishing companies. Reforms in the textbook industry are needed. Different areas of the campus community do all they can to bring up these issues. The following are some recommendations advocated by CALPRIG, in Ripoff 101: How the Current Practices of the Textbook Industry Drive Up the Cost of College Textbooks, that we found pertained to UMM:
1. Publishers should disclose all of the different products they sell (including both bundled and unbundled options) and list how much each of those products cost. This information should be made available to faculty and departments when they are considering which textbooks to order.
Additional suggestions for further inquiry:
Ken Hodgson thought this would be an excellent report to present at Campus Assembly. Kevin Ely made a motion to approve the report, second by Bryan Herrmann. So moved.
Gary Strei distributed the following handout as outlined below.
UMM Tuition Estimate 2004-2005
Estimated tuition collected for FY04 $10,317,968
Tuition Increase for FY05 $ 1,126,638
Phase II Tuition Estimate for FY05 (TC) $11,444,606
Enrollment decrease for FY05 (55fte) ($ 419,606)
Continuing Education Tuition Increase $ 75,000
Tuition Revenues Budgeted $11,110,000
Andy Lopez thanked the committee members for their service and work this part year.