Minutes

FALL MEETING OF THE

AUBURN UNIVERSITY FACULTY

14 October 1997

Broun Hall Auditorium

University Faculty Senate Chair Gary Swanson called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m. Minutes of the April 8, 1997, University Faculty meeting were approved as distributed.

University Faculty Senate: Gary Swanson

Chair Swanson announced that there would be a special meeting entitled "Behind Closed Doors", sponsored by AAUP on October 23, 1997. He also mentioned the Fall Reception, scheduled for October 28, 1997.

Chair Swanson also announced that faculty members would be receiving letters for appointments to University committees in the very near future. The Senate committees had already been established by the time of this meeting.

President's address to the Faculty: William V. Muse

President Muse urged the faculty to support the current United Way campaign. The University is the largest employer in this community, and therefore (our) response has a major impact on the success of the campaign. Muse realized that "these are not the best of times financially", but there are many people in the community who are worse off than (we) are.

STATE OF THE UNIVERSITY ADDRESS

OCTOBER 14, 1997

I'm pleased to have the opportunity to speak to you this afternoon.

Before beginning my report to you on the University, I want to urge each of you to support the United Way campaign that is presently underway. The University is the largest employer in this community and, therefore, our response has a major impact on the total campaign. I realize that these are not the best times for you financially, but I also know that there are many people in this community who are worse off than are we. Your contribution -- at whatever level you can afford -- will be appreciated.

Over the past five years in my annual State of The University Address, I have warned of dark clouds on the horizon. Those dark clouds descended upon us and have produced stormy weather over the past three years. In some ways, we did not heed the warning signs that were obvious and have not prepared adequately for the conditions we are facing. But, in other ways, we have coped as well as an institution as badly underfunded as Auburn is could be expected to do. While I want to talk about further steps that need to be taken, it is important that we pause and recognize some of the silver linings that are in the clouds.

Many good things have happened over the past year and those achievements should not be overlooked. Auburn is fortunate to have many dedicated faculty and staff who have persevered under trying conditions. Let me cite a few examples of what has been accomplished:

1. About three years ago, the College of Architecture, Design, and Construction initiated a "rural studio" in Greensboro to complement the urban studio that it has operated for many years in Birmingham. Both studios are designed to give our students hands-on experience with designing projects in a real environment. In the rural studio, the emphasis is upon designing low-cost housing for poor people with the creative use of building materials. Starting with a seed grant from the Alabama Power Foundation, the rural studio, lead by Professors Samual Mockbee and D. K. Ruth, has attained national prominence over the past year. It won a national award from the New York Association of Architects and has been featured in the New York Times, Parade Magazine, Architectural Digest, and many other publications. There was a feature report on CNN as well. Recently, the rural studio received a $600,000 grant from the Kellogg Foundation to continue its work.

2. Graduates of our School of Nursing have achieved a 97% passage rate on the National Council Licensing Exam, compared to a state average of 88%. A collaborative master of science in nursing degree with UAB boasts a 100% passing rate on the National Certification Exams.

3. The Department of Psychology has attracted over $2,000,000 in federal funding over the past three years to support its research on substance abuse treatment.

4. Through collaborative efforts in Engineering and Human Sciences, the University has received $3.5M through the National Textile Center to sustain our groundbreaking research work in textile and apparel areas.

5. The School of Human Sciences has developed a video-based distance education format for its M.S. degree in Nutrition and Food Science with an emphasis on Hotel and Restaurant Management, the only distance education program with such a focus in the nation.

6. The School of Forestry has developed a Professional Logging Managers course that has been endorsed by the American Forest and Paper Association, leading to its presentation at 37 locations to over 1,200 logging contractors.

7. We are more than two years into the unique national experiment that created a single Extension System from the formerly distinct Auburn University Cooperative Extension Service and the Alabama A & M University Cooperative Extension Program. The Federal Court-Decreed Alabama Cooperative Extension System is effectively serving the people of Alabama, even as we work through the wrinkles of unification. Dr. Stephen B. Jones became the System's first permanent Director this past January, coming to Auburn from The Pennsylvania State University. In addition to learning Alabama, the two universities, and the System, Dr. Jones has focused on communication (internal and external), and unification. He is also considering a comprehensive organizational restructuring and sweeping recommitment to county program delivery.

8. Auburn's students gave the University high marks in the recently conducted Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory. Above average ratings were noted for instructional effectiveness (a credit to our faculty), campus pride, campus life, financial aid, student centeredness, support services, and recruitment. These high ratings, and the increase in the scores from 1996 to 1997, are a result of the efforts to restructure Student Affairs and make it more responsive to student needs. The one area in which the University has rated below average was parking, but there are efforts underway to address these long-standing problems.

9. The new transit system that was initiated has been successful beyond our expectations. Currently, ridership on the Tiger Transit is exceeding 4,000 students per day, well beyond what was projected. While this new service will not solve all of our parking problems and our plans to build additional parking will be pursued as proposed, the transit system is providing

some welcome relief to a frustrating problem for many individuals. The schematic drawings for our parking improvement plan are scheduled to be presented to the Board of Trustees in November.

10. In its first year as a private clinic, the Auburn University Medical Center finished in the black and upgraded services to students, with refurbished facilities and a staff of board-certified physicians.

11. AU's Athletic Department finished the year in the Top 20 among NCAA institutions in the Sears Director's Cup that evaluates competition in all sports, both men and women. We won our first outright national NCAA championship, in men's swimming, and several other sports finished in the Top 10. The Athletics Department contributed money to the General Fund for academic scholarships.

12. Building on our recent designation as one of the most "wired" campuses in the nation, the completion of the AU ResNet project will connect all campus residence hall rooms to the campus-wide high speed data network. In addition, the new AU Passport on-line service will allow students to shop for courses and register on-line through their personal computers. Four major lecture halls (two in Haley Center, one in Spidle Hall, and one in Comer Hall) have been equipped with the modern instructional technology to assist faculty in their teaching efforts.

13. In another major technological advancement, the addition of a linear accelerator at the College of Veterinary Medicine allows it to offer the nation's most advanced program in veterinary oncology.

14. In addition to the successful completion of our capital campaign, our Office of Alumni and Development continues to attract major private support. Through "Enhancement Plans" approved by the Auburn University Foundation and the Auburn Alumni Association, we are going to be able to expand our staff in both areas, enabling us to attract even more dollars to support scholarships, professorships, and other important needs.

15. Skillful management of our health insurance program, including the transfer of retirees to the PEEHIP system, has resulted in a significant reduction in the rate at which our health care costs have been growing. As a result, we did not have to increase health insurance premiums this year for the first time in a while. I am hopeful that we can continue to provide these services to our employees at a reasonable cost.

16. In spite of three years of no increased funding from the State of Alabama, we have managed to provide our employees with a 5% increase in compensation (3% in 1996-97 and 2% to become effective on January 1, 1998). We could not find an example in the last 20 years where we had given a salary increase when there had been no increase in our appropriation from the State. But we feel that adequate compensation is of sufficient importance that we should address this issue as best we can, utilizing funds from tuition revenue and from cost savings. I should point out that, in addition to the across-the-board increases, further adjustments will be permitted, where funds were available, to address issues of salary inequities. And employees will receive a one-time $500 salary supplement in December to help make the Christmas holidays a little brighter.

These accomplishments are even more remarkable when taken in the context of the resource constraints within which we have had to work. I have great admiration for Auburn as an institution and for you individually for the achievements you have made.

But the storms we have been encountering have not gone away, nor does it appear that sunny days are in the immediate forecast. We have to deal with reality, recognizing what we have and what we can reasonably expect to obtain. My opinions, completely unvarnished and, therefore perhaps a little raw, are as follows:

1. Auburn University is significantly underfunded for the number of students that we have and for the number of programs we are attempting to offer. The analysis that we did for the Board of Trustees last summer clearly indicated that Auburn has fewer dollars per student to work with than the universities with whom we compete for faculty and for students.

2. Support from the State of Alabama has been and will continue to be inadequate. At no time during the last 15 years and likely for no time many years before that has the State appropriation to Auburn on a per-student basis been anywhere close to the average for major state universities and land-grant colleges in the southeast. And our competitive standing has gotten worse over the past three years of negative funding. Our best shot at a reversal of that trend will be next year because it is an election year. We should do everything we can to capitalize on that situation. We need to have our alumni, faculty, staff, and students working toward the same goal. But whatever support is generated next year can not and will not be sustained without either tax increases or a major restructuring of the Alabama System of Higher Education, neither of which is likely to occur under Alabama's political system.

3. We must, and I believe we are, beginning to take greater control of our own destiny. We need to continue to work for increased support from the State. But we cannot be dependent upon that for the solution to our problems. The plan that we presented to the Board of Trustees in July, in my opinion, has the best probability of addressing the problems that we face in a meaningful way, if we are willing to accept the basic premises of the plan and work toward its goals.

4. I believe that Auburn's greatest asset is its reputation, its reputation for quality in the kinds of students it attracts, the kinds of graduates it produces, the quality of research it conducts, and the quality of service it provides. That is a reputation that has been hard earned and is well deserved. It is heavily dependent, however, on our ability to attract and to retain outstanding faculty and staff. It is dependent on our ability to attract and to retain outstanding students and to provide them with the kind of supporting services they need. It is dependent on having the kind of facilities we need to educate our students, conduct our research and deliver the services that are desired. If we let the quality of our programs and services decline, our reputation will surely suffer and our ability to attract outstanding faculty and students will be diminished.

5. The two biggest problems that we have are increasingly non- competitive faculty compensation and old and inappropriate facilities. The plan that we presented to the Trustees will attempt to address both of those needs in a meaningful way over a multi-year basis. The strategy for generating the resources needed to address these issues include both (1) revenue enhancement and; (2) cost reduction. We must increase the revenue that we are receiving from approximately the same number of students we are educating. That will be done by increasing our tuition each year until we bring it up to the average for our peer institutions in the southeast. And by assuring that at least 25% of our students are paying out-of-state tuition. The combination of these two factors will produce a significant number of increased dollars for our use.

But revenue enhancement alone will not solve our problems. We must look at all ways in which we can reduce our costs while serving the same number of students. We can and have made major cost reductions on the administration side. But, we also can and must look at a reduction in the number of academic programs that we offer as another source for obtaining the resources that are needed.

6. The review of programs that do not meet viability standards in terms of the number of graduates per year is an appropriate and necessary step. All of our programs need to be evaluated not only in terms of productivity but also in terms of cost, quality, and centrality to our mission. The bottom line is that in order to be able to bring our salaries up to the levels desired and to address the many problems that we are encountering in our facilities, we are going to have to reduce the scope of our activities and put our resources into those areas where we can do the best job, and where the demand for our services is the greatest.

That is a difficult job. I don't like to do it, you don't want to do it, but it has to be done if we want to maintain Auburn's reputation for quality. Of course we have the alternative of doing nothing and allowing our programs to continue to deteriorate across the board. We can survive a long time if we are content with mediocrity. But that is not the strategy I recommend and that is not the strategy I plan to pursue.

The only way we can begin to move our resources from areas of low priority to those of high priority is to have some system for reallocation. Everybody wants more money but no one wants to give it up. That's human nature, but operating on that philosophy produces little change. The approach that we plan to take in which each unit deposits 1% of its budget into a fund for reallocation each year, with the monies reallocated to the highest priorities that have been identified, is a sensible, well-used method for doing so. I believe that we can make it work here with a little, albeit grudging, cooperation. The process and criteria for reallocation have to be carefully worked out, but I am confident that can be done.

I believe that we have a plan in place that will work and that can be fairly administered. We need the cooperation of everyone to be truly successful. I believe that many of you will be cooperative. Perhaps some of you will not. But I urge you to work with, and not against, our efforts to deal with the difficult problems we face.

I welcome the faculty's involvement in this process. Anyone who has observed how I have operated since coming to Auburn could hardly conclude that faculty involvement has been precluded or discouraged. Just as one example, the Budget Advisory Committee, which did not exist six years ago, now plays a central role in our financial planning and allocation process each year.

I regret that the time frame for presentation of a plan to the Board of Trustees last July did not permit extensive input from the faculty. We had approximately one month to respond to a specific mandate from the Board to provide a list of programs that were to be cut. I believe that a thoughtful and insightful presentation resulted and the Board was given an alternative that was more reasonable and acceptable. It was discussed with the President's Cabinet and the Council of Deans but time did not permit broader involvement.

But the work has just begun. Your input will be needed in the evaluation of programs and in the reallocation of resources. I am committed to making decisions on as objective a basis as possible. Anyone who has better ideas as to how to solve the problems we're facing is encouraged to submit them for consideration.

I spend many of my days completely immersed in the dark clouds that engulf us. I guess that's why I am so thrilled to discover the silver linings I cited. Thanks to all of you for producing them.

The problems we face are difficult but not impossible. I think we have a reasonable chance to succeed if we work together.

B. Burkhart asked how much Muse expected the University would save by closing or reducing low-priority programs. Muse did not know that any numerical goal had been established. That the approach was to gain some flexibility and opportunities within the system for movement of funds from lower to higher priorities. The analysis that was conducted for the Board of Trustees showed that new revenue alone would not be sufficient to bring the University "where we wanted to be". (We) will need to move some of (our) monies from lower to higher priority uses to attain the modest goal of bringing faculty salaries to 95% of the regional averages. The process of looking at areas of very low enrollment is a way to "flag" areas where there could be cost savings over time; these savings could then be reinvested in other programs in those same areas where demands are higher and needs are greater.

C. Bailey asked Muse to give details on what processes are in place for examining expenditures outside of the academic units. Muse said this has been an ongoing process, with the most extensive example being Student Affairs. Every program in that division has been completely re-examined, restructured, and there has been a significant reduction in positions. (We) are looking at the same possibility throughout the University, and (we) are not focusing solely on the academic programs. The presentation given during the July Board meeting was an attempt to respond to a specific request from the Board that asked for programs that could be cut. Muse did not want to do that, and did not feel that was an appropriate response. An alternative had also been provided that would allow for the careful examination of academic programs with low enrollment or graduation rates.

G. Howze asked how much money the Athletic Department contributed to academic scholarship funds; Muse said that the contributions totaled $250,000. In regard to potential program cuts, Howze said he did not notice non-academic units going through the same process that the academic units are. Howze said that over the last ten years, enrollment has increased rapidly while the faculty has remained fairly constant. Howze felt (we) are doing a poor job of teaching students because the student-to-faculty ratio is high. He also felt that cutting back on programs sounds like cutting back on faculty. He emphasized that the same effort toward identifying academic programs to cut should be applied to non-academic programs. Muse again cited the example of Student Affairs. In response to Howze's comments on rising enrollment, Muse said that for the last six years, enrollment has been "almost exactly flat". (We) are interested in ensuring that (our) resources are used as wisely as possible. Muse has encouraged all areas in the University to look for ways to reduce costs as well as enhance revenues.

M. Melancon said that there are some academic programs that are, by their nature, small; in such cases, viability standards tell almost nothing about the quality or essentialness toward the goals of the University. Melancon asked Muse if he could reassure the faculty that criteria other than quantitative measures would be used to evaluate such small programs. Muse said the whole process is set up to allow other factors to be considered. The programs that had low graduation rates (less than 75% of the viability standards) were flagged for review. In that review process, each program has the requirement of responding with a decision to either phase out or retain the program, or combine it with another program. The retention of the program can be justified on a number of bases. For example, a unique program could conceivably be justified on the basis that it is the only one in the state. By no means is the quantitative analysis the only factor, but Muse has raised the question whether the number of students in a program is a significant or relevant variable. If it is not important on the low end, it should not be on the high end either. (We) are consistently being asked to provide additional resources for programs that are growing, but somehow a small number of students is of no importance. Muse said we need to be consistent in the consideration of that variable, but is will not be the only factor to consider.

Melancon welcomed Muse's focus on faculty salaries in his address, but he wanted to draw attention to what had occurred. A few months (before the current meeting), the Administration, with the help and approval of the Board, reached a decision to institute a five-year program to bring faculty salaries up to 95% of the regional average. However, in the decisions regarding this year, we will be further behind the regional average by the end of this year. There is no hard determination to make

hard decisions that will favor the faculty. Muse did not agree that faculty salaries are low because of institutional or administrative priorities. He said (we) will do everything possible to bring faculty salaries up quickly. It is extremely difficult to do that without some help from the state. At no time in the 20-year period have (we) been willing to give any salary increases when there have been no state appropriations to do so, and (we) have now done that twice through cost savings and tuition revenues.

S. Brinson said there seems to be a University commitment to increasing administrators' salaries, and finds it hard to be excited about a 2% salary increase when she hears of administrative increases of $5,000 to $10,000. Muse said he would like to see salary comparisons (see attached) published in the AU Report, and that there is no attempt to disguise administrative salaries. Administrators' salaries have not prohibited faculty salary increases, and Muse did not think that the administrators should be "held hostage".

R. Mirarchi said that part of the problem is (our) perception of it, in that (we) look to our leaders for altruism. For example, there have been suggestions that there should be a cap on administrative salaries or raise those salaries at a lower rate. Some of those savings should be deferred to faculty and staff. Many faculty members would appreciate such a gesture, more so than the actual dollar amount involved. Muse appreciated the comment and said that is something that should be considered.

B. Burkhart said that it seems we are "cannibalizing ourselves", and that there must be some meaningful and collaborative process by which we can deal with our financial situation. So far, the process has not been established as collaborative.

R. Penaskovic remarked that he is the only faculty member in a small program in Religious Studies, and asked if it is fair to apply the same quantitative measures to all programs. He said that the reallocation of money will allow the "rich to get richer". Muse understood Penaskovic's frustration. The major issue with reallocation is to prevent the deterioration of the University. The only way that any reallocation can occur is when there is something to reallocate. The process that has been described had been used by universities over the country, with reallocations greater than 1%.

M. Penzola asked if there was any possibility that a large-enrollment program of low quality would be closed at Auburn. Muse said that quality is a factor that must be considered, and up to now, (we) have not done a good job at defining "quality". Muse said he would like to see some definition for "quality", and to apply it to all programs. A program with many students but having low quality needs to be examined very carefully.

C. Bailey said that many of the faculty want to be able to work President Muse, but Muse must do so from a position of moral authority, not just legal authority. If Muse wants active collaboration on the part of the faculty, he must emphasis his moral authority. Bailey had been on the Budget Advisory Committee a few years ago, and there had been discussion about the possibility of sharing a 3% raise with just faculty and staff (the Committee did not make that recommendation). Bailey felt that this is the type of proposal Muse should consider making in the future. For example, senior (central) administrative staff would not take part in salary raises until such time as average faculty and staff salaries reach the same level as the administrative salaries (as compared to regional averages). Such action would give Muse the moral authority to speak to the faculty and staff in a way that he does not currently have. Muse felt that was a reasonable request, and appreciated that it was made.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

(Signed)

Jennie Raymond

Secretary to the General Faculty