Auburn University
College of Sciences and Mathematics  Telephone: 334-844-5737
Extension Cottage FAX: 334-844-5748
Auburn University, AL 36849-5319  E Mail: schnest@mail.auburn.edu

 

MEMORANDUM

TO:              Dr. William F. Walker
                     Interim Provost

FROM:       Dr. Stewart W. Schneller
                     Dean

SUBJECT: 10% Program Decision

DATE:        October 8, 1998

This memorandum is in response to President Muse's charge that all units on campus identify non-priority programs that could be phased out over the next five years to make available 10% of their 1998 fiscal year budget for University reallocation. For the College of Sciences and Mathematics (COSAM) this amount for Division 1 is $1,395,324.

To move towards a recommendation for COSAM, on August 24, I solicited suggestions from the College faculty on how we could meet this obligation. Realizing that this was not the best time for faculty availability, I gave two weeks for responses but, in fact, remained open to suggestions until now. Three responses were received.

To begin the process, I considered those responses and referred to the mission statement of the College:

The College of Sciences and Mathematics at Auburn University is to be continually aware of the centrality of the College to the University and to strive for excellence in teaching, research and outreach in preparation of students for the 21st century and in service to the citizens of the State of Alabama.
A key feature in that statement is the centrality of the College to the University. Thus, I chose to use centrality as the criterion for determining a program that would fall into the "non-priority" category.

For guidance on centrality, I referred to President Muse's statement in his July 13 memo to the University Priorities Committee on the Process for Establishing Priorities.

Centrality would be a measure of how central or important a program is to the mission of the University.
Elaborating on this is the University's mission statement (21st Century Commission Report) that says (1) the University's top priority should be its undergraduate program and (2) the core curriculum is central to the strength of the undergraduate program.

Further guidance on centrality can be found in the 1984 report entitled "A Proposed Resource Management Procedure for Auburn University" submitted to Interim President Bailey. That report concluded that centrality can be defined by

1. The extent to which the program is fundamental to a sound liberal (general) undergraduate education.

2. The uniqueness of the program in the state or region or its close relation to a special mission of the University.

3. The degree of service rendered to other programs in the University, the state, the region and the nation.

 With all of this in mind, I set-out to review each department in the College on its contribution to centrality. For that purpose, I considered core course offerings, service to non-departmental curricula (beyond the core) and student interest (number of majors). The results of that analysis are in the Table below.
 
Some Measures of Departmental Centrality

College of Sciences and Mathematics
Department
Are Core Courses Offered?
Number of Curricula Outside of the Department That Require Departmental Courses (excluding core)
Student Interest (Number of Majors, Spring Term 1998)
Botany/
Microbiology
yes
50
148
Chemistry
yes
68
54
Discrete/Statistical Sciences
no
27
11
Geology
yes
10
40
Mathematics
yes
79
47
Physics
yes
60
21
Zoology/Wildlife Science
yes
48
427

This information suggested to me that the Department of Geology and the Department of Discrete and Statistical Sciences should be given more thought in the process. That led me to rule out any further consideration of the Department of Geology for several reasons: (1) their two core courses, (2) their likely merger with the Department of Geography and, with it, an increase in the number of student majors, core course offerings and service to other curricula requirements, and (3) the basic tenet of the Morrill Act that includes "mining and related disciplines" in the land grant mission.

I then concluded that the Department of Discrete and Statistical Sciences (DSS) is the least contributing department to the College's centrality mission. However, before reaching a final recommendation, I reviewed their particular obligations further, beyond their 11 majors, and found that they do provide approximately one-fourth of the instructional support (as GTAs) to the 100 level course offerings in the Department of Mathematics, including the core. The Department also is responsible for providing instruction in statistics for some curricula (included in the 27 of the Table) but, as it relates to College centrality, this is limited by the small number of faculty available in the department for this purpose. (A university-wide study of statistics is underway that is intended to address how the University should coordinate its statistics courses and faculty, which are distributed in several colleges and the study includes DSS.)

While the discrete mathematics component of DSS is certainly unique, this has not manifested itself into a large number of majors.

After considering the information in the Table and the analyses just described, I have concluded that the Department of Discrete and Statistical Sciences does not contribute as significantly to the centrality mission of the College as do the other units. Thus, I am designating the Department of Discrete and Statistical Sciences as a non-priority unit for the College of Sciences and Mathematics and, as a consequence, to be phased out over the 5 year period proposed by President Muse. With that recommendation, however, I do not intend to ignore the resource needs for pre-core and core mathematics (see later).

The Department of Discrete and Statistical Sciences’ fiscal 1999 Division 1 budget is $1,341,598, which is $53,726 less than needed. The additional $53,726 will come from restructuring the COSAM central administrative office (that is, the Dean's office).

An important concern in the plan is the elimination of 20 permanent GTA positions ($247,449 with benefits) that DSS now provides the Department of Mathematics for instruction in the core and pre-core curriculum. Since this represents a centrality priority for the College and University, funds would have to be found to fulfill that responsibility. This would be approached in the following way:

• The University would be requested to strictly adhere to a reasonable freshman enrollment management plan (with a cap) so that a stability can be established for the math pre-core and core course offerings.

• Once the decision has been made regarding a cap on freshman enrollment, a definite annual number of GTAs will be known and, in turn, the budget needed. Assuming, though, for this document that $247,449 will still be required, two sources are foreseen to provide these dollars:

• As part of the efficiency efforts in the College, merger of the Department of Botany and Microbiology and the Department of Zoology and Wildlife Science (as proposed by Dr. Muse) could provide approximately $100,000.

and/or


• All faculty positions (all departments) that become available in the College during the 5-year period of the plan would revert to a $37,000/year salary for a new hire. The remaining salary funds, with benefits, would then go into the needed GTA pool. This plan would be discontinued once the necessary GTA replacement funds are recovered.

 Before closing, it is important that I have a clear picture of what this recommendation means. In that direction, after reviewing my plan, I understand you will forward it to President Muse, who will study all plans he has received. Once he has determined which ones are acceptable, he will present them (November 6) to the Commission along with high priority areas that will have been determined by a Provost's committee from proposals submitted by campus units. The Commission will then meet on November 11 to hear public comment on President Muse's recommendations. On November 19, the Commission will convene to determine the recommendations it will make to the Board of Trustees on November 20 when that group will meet to act on the recommendations. Any plans that are approved at that time will be effective with the Fall term 1999.

This has been a very difficult decision for me because of the commitment faculty, students and staff have given to DSS. As a consequence, I trust the policies in place by the University will function as designed to protect the best interests of the affected students, faculty and staff.

One final note: I may be accused of developing this recommendation as a result of influence by some person or people associated with the Department of Mathematics or by the COSAM Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. This did not occur in any form! I have acted alone using the rationale described herein.

cc: Faculty and Staff, Department of Discrete and Statistical Sciences