Auburn University Faculty Meeting

March 11, 2003

3:00 p.m.

 

 

The meeting was called to order at 3:00 p.m. by the chair, Barbara Struempler.

 

Barbara Struempler, Chair of the Senate:   There is one change in the agenda. I will not adjourn the meeting.  Once I pass the gavel to John Mouton, he adjourns the meeting. So I just wanted to make sure you all understand that. The minutes of the Spring 02 meeting of the University Faculty are posted on the website. Are there any corrections, changes? Hearing none, they stand as approved. Thank you, Renée, very much.  The first order of business is the State of the University message by President William Walker. [LAUGHTER] Come on up here. [LAUGHTER] I told him we were going to switch … talks, and he said, “That means I have to say farewell?” And I said, well, [LAUGHTER] what would I have to say?

 

STATE OF THE UNIVERSITY ADDRESS

William F. Walker, President, Auburn University:        I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you today about some of the important issues facing our university.  I also wish to thank all of you for taking time from your very busy schedules to be here and to participate in the governance of this institution.  Before I begin my remarks, I want to take a few moments just to acknowledge the outstanding job that Faculty Chair Barbara Struempler and Secretary Renée Middleton have done over the past year. 

As I presume everyone knows, Dr. Struempler is the first Auburn University faculty member to sit with the Auburn University Board of Trustees.  She has represented your interests and therefore the interests of Auburn University in an exemplary manner.  I can assure you that board members have always been interested in her views and pay very close attention to what she has to say.   

That faculty board seat is an extremely important position.  I believe it is essential that this seat is on the board because it enables the faculty representative to give his or her full input from the faculty perspective in the board’s decision-making process.  Barbara, it has been a great pleasure and honor to work with you over the past two years.  I thank you for your service. 

Similarly, Renée Middleton has done an exceptional job as faculty secretary.  Timid though she is.. [Laughter].  She has worked tirelessly carrying out the many details of that office.  Most would have no way of knowing that she and John Heilman spent an inordinate amount of time just  working through the process of matching volunteers to the numerous faculty committees that must be staffed annually.  Renée, thank you for your dedication and service. I appreciate it very much.  

I look forward now to working with the new faculty chair, John Mouton, and secretary, Paula Sullenger.  I am confident they will bring the same intensity and dedication to these positions as those who have preceded them.  

John and Paula, I congratulate you, and assure you that I will be willing to meet with you at any time to discuss whatever issue you deem important. 

Much of my address to the faculty a year ago  concerned matters of diversity.  I pledged then to try to establish diversity as a core value of this university. 

I believe with the leadership of interim Provost John Pritchett, the Diversity Leadership Council, and many other individuals and groups, that significant progress has indeed been made toward this goal.  However, that work is far, far from complete.  I think we can all agree that this will always be a work-in-progress here at Auburn.

I do, however, want to express my appreciation to two people who have devoted enormous time and energy to this issue over the past several months.  They are Drs. Johnny Green and Keenan Grenell.  Dr. Green is  the interim director of the new Center for Diversity and Race Relations.  I hope you have had an opportunity to drop by Foy Union and visit that center.  Dr. Grenell is interim assistant provost for multicultural affairs.  Both Dr. Grenell and Dr. Green have worked tirelessly to help move this university in the right direction and much of the progress we have made can be attributed to their efforts.  I am deeply indebted to both of them. 

The Center for Diversity and Race Relations is serving primarily as a programming unit.  Long-range goals are for it to continue its programming function in conjunction with the Office of Multicultural Affairs and to expand its scope to include elements of research and student service.  The ongoing work of the Diversity Leadership Council will serve to more clearly define the role of the center and its relationship to the Office of Multicultural Affairs. 

As you may recall, last September, Mr. John Hachtel joined our senior administrative staff as executive director for the Office of University Relations. 

I said at that time that he was being charged with coordinating university publications, communications and marketing, and with developing university-wide strategies in those areas.  That charge reflected the very real concerns I had and still have about the image, or lack thereof, that we as a university are communicating to the world. 

In order to better identify that office with the changes we are making, the name of the Office of University Relations will be changed.  Effective March 15, it will be known as the Office of Communications and Marketing.  This office will be acquiring additional staff by means of transfers from the Printing Service operation and the Development Office’s communications group.  

We are already seeing results in improvements in communications – such as the quarterly Commons newsletter from my office – the AUDaily newsfeed by email to faculty and staff, and an attractive colorful new look to the AU Report, and a general move toward a marketing approach.  I am very pleased and optimistic with where this office is headed in the future. 

When I spoke to you in March 2002, we were feeling pretty good about the state budget – primarily because it was an election year .and the economy had not yet completely crashed.   But the election is now over and the governor the Legislature and those of us who draw some sustenance from the state educational trust fund are left to pick up the pieces of a very daunting deficit.

Like most states, Alabama is suffering from a prolonged economic downturn.  Many -- if not all -- of those states will eventually see a turnaround when there is an economic recovery.  But I suggest to you that our state is in a different situation.  Under our present tax structure and outdated constitution, I doubt that Alabama will ever see a true economic recovery.  At least not the kind we expect to see in other states that are able to invest heavily in education – all the way from kindergarten to graduate school.  That is because of our antiquated state constitution and highly regressive tax system. 

Under our tax structure, we put much of the burden on the working poor of Alabama.  The threshold income for imposing the state income tax is deplorably low.  Property taxes, on the other hand, are virtually nonexistent.  They could be more than doubled and Alabama would still have the lowest ad valorem tax rate in the nation.  It is not just political rhetoric when we say that large out-of-state timber companies pay very little in property tax on tens of thousands of acres they own in some of the poorest counties in the nation in Alabama’s Black Belt. 

We have, indeed, reached a crossroads in this state.   Let me give you my view of what is going on in Montgomery and what I hope will happen.

In the current fiscal year it appears we will make it to the end of the year without any proration of the education budget – but only because of the one-time "Rainy Day" fund created by the Legislature and approved by voters last year. When that fund is exhausted there are NO reserves for shortfalls in the education trust fund. 

Current projections are that there will be at least a 6 percent across-the-board cut in education funding for the fiscal year that begins next October 1st.  A war with Iraq, the continuing war on terrorism, our slumping economy and rising national debt could all contribute to an increase in that percentage. That’s because, unfortunately, revenue into the  education trust fund derives only from income and sales taxes, both of which are tied closely to the whims of the economy. 

If the Legislature – and the voters of this state – fail to address this very fundamental issue of education funding and tax reform, we are going to be witnesses to a disaster.  Elementary and secondary schools across this state will close or be consolidated. Thousands of school teachers and workers will be laid off.  Some are being laid off already, and some colleges in Alabama could even be forced to close.  

Other than a proposed $500 million cut in state funding and un-earmarking of funds, Governor Riley did not spell out any real solutions to Alabama’s problems in his address to the Legislature last week.   But that was not really surprising.  He has had precious little time to put together a comprehensive package to get us out of this mess that has kept our state in financial trouble for more than a century. 

I do predict with some degree of certainty that the Legislature will not go along with the governor’s plan to un-earmark funds . . . and cuts, alone, simply will not solve our state’s problems.  Band-Aid solutions just will no longer work.  There really is no magic in all this and there really is also no more money.  The only way for more dollars to appear in the state treasury is to tax the citizens of this state in a fashion comparable to what residents are taxed in other Southeastern states.  In my opinion . . . we are absolutely going to have to do something about the ad valorem and state income taxes, but primarily we must focus on the ad valorem taxes.  If the Governor actually would be willing to talk about tax reform . . . I think we in the education community could help convince the Legislature to start talking seriously about tax reform as well. 

I am an enthusiastic proponent of constitutional reform.  I believe we should acknowledge the inadequacy of the 1901 constitution and make the needed improvements, but I would frankly be surprised if that happens.  Over the years governors and legislators have come and gone.  They have catered to special interest groups that have kept the state from progressing and generally presided over decades of political cowardice, backroom dealings and fiscal corruption. 

I believe it is time for profound changes in this state and I hope this new administration understands that.  I also sense, however, that many people in leadership positions around this state – both in the public and private sector -- believe that now is the time to rally in support of public education in Alabama.  And I want to be very clear when I speak about public education.  We are talking about ALL of education, K-PhD.  The days of pitting K-12 against higher education hopefully are over.  As far as I am concerned we are all in this together. 

As you may have heard or read over the past few weeks . . . a coalition of education groups . . . including K-12, the two-year colleges and the four-year colleges and universities . . . has been working together on a tax reform and funding plan for education. Dr. Paul Hubbert of the Alabama Education Association and State School Superintendent Ed Richardson are two key players in this group which is known as the Alabama Public Education Unified Coalition.   A new report generated by this coalition is entitled: Alabama Public Education – Standing at the Crossroads. 

It is my hope that this report ,which demonstrates just how poorly funded education is in this state, will spark the kind of debate in Montgomery – and among Alabamians -- that will lead to meaningful reforms.   Ladies and gentlemen, it should be an embarrassment to anyone who cares about education, that Alabama appropriates less than $5,000 per full-time college student which ranks our state near the bottom among 15 Southern states. If Alabama spent as much as Mississippi then higher education in this state would receive another $40 million per year.  So you can’t any longer say, “Thank God for Mississippi.”  If Alabama spent at Georgia’s level then an additional $160 million would be spread among our colleges and universities. 

In its recent submission to the Legislature’s Joint Budget Committee, the Alabama Commission On Higher Education (ACHE) asked for a modest 4 percent increase in funding for the fiscal year beginning October 1st.  That’s about $40 million, or an amount that would bring us to the level of funding of Mississippi. 

But what we in higher education would really like to see the Legislature approve and Governor Riley support is a $300 million increase in operations for state colleges and universities plus a $1 billion bond issue for capital improvements.  And that would amount to only about half of what higher education really needs.  Of course for that to happen, the Legislature – with support from the governor – would have to undertake significant and overdue tax reform.  The people, of course, would have the final say through a referendum.  

The group calling itself Campaign Alabama is an organization established by some of the state’s business and industry leaders to address the funding of education.  They have already raised money to lobby the Legislature for additional funding and they claim they will raise more money should it be needed in a referendum campaign.  The research universities are generally supportive of this group and we are attempting to work with them in order to outline our specific needs and requirements.

However, both the governor and Campaign Alabama leaders have said that higher education is aiming much too high in asking for a $300 million increase and a $1 billion bond issue.  They have also said that whatever new money is generated for higher education, we must be able to demonstrate how it will benefit the state’s economy.  That is, new funding for higher education must be tied to economic development.  This is a sentiment that is gaining popularity across the nation.  And it has far reaching implications. 

I suggest therefore that faculty members at Auburn and at institutions around this state need to become involved in a very critical discussion. The question that needs to be answered is: What is the extent to which the business model applies to a university? 

As many of you know, business people have for some time advocated applying established business practices to university management.  And while I agree in general that it may be appropriate to consider things such as cutting costs, I am convinced there is a very real limit to the extent to which a business model is applicable to an educational institution.  We do not exist to be a business.  We are not here to make a profit.  We exist to create knowledge, to deliver knowledge, to expand the intellectual horizons of the community, the state, the nation, and the world.  

Those are fairly intangible things and so, I think, the debate that needs to be held is to determine the extent of that business model.  This debate will affect all of higher education and I want to encourage you as Auburn faculty to participate actively in it.  It seems to me that the momentum is building for the philosophy that higher education is just another business.  Well, it is not just another business, although some business principles may be useful. 

So Campaign for Alabama is saying that whatever new money is put into higher education ought to show up as economic development.  It seems to me that currently, the most significant economic impact of Auburn is by the graduates of the institution.  The biggest economic impact we could make is to make life more attractive in Alabama so that these graduates do not leave the state for better jobs and better schools for their children in Florida and Georgia. 

Many people – including Governor Riley and many legislators – have asked whether colleges and universities have done enough to trim fat and waste. As you well know, Auburn has led the way in this area.  All colleges and universities in Alabama have participated in ACHE’s initiative to eliminate programs that produce too few graduates. And budget cuts under previous administrations in Montgomery – as you are aware – have already forced most schools to cut waste.

Auburn has done that.  We were the first to do it. We became a lean and I think a fairly efficient institution, but that does not mean we have finished.  We will always be searching for ways to save money without endangering the quality of our programs.  For example, this semester we closed our internal printing service after deciding we could save by outsourcing our work.  We have also done this in student health care, food service and some maintenance areas. 

Over the past few years, it has been tough going at Auburn from a financial standpoint and I think that will continue in the foreseeable future.  I believe the Board of Trustees will continue to want to see this university operated as economically as possible.  But I also see more and more of the burden being shifted to the students, to our ability to raise private funds, and to our development of new revenue streams. 

What the Legislature will do in the regular session for education and the rest of critical state services is anyone’s guess.  My view is that little will be accomplished in the regular session and that a special session – possibly more than one --will be necessary to resolve most of the pressing problems.  I believe the day is past for excuses in this state, and especially in Montgomery.  We have a new governor, a new lieutenant governor and new Legislature.   I think the time for change is now and I hope that you will help me carry that message to our governor and our legislators. 

I want to thank you again for allowing me to speak to you.   Thank you for your dedicated service to this great university.  Thank you. [APPLAUSE]

Struempler:     Are there any questions? Conner?

Conner Bailey, Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology:  Dr. Walker, thank you very much for that eloquent and I think largely accurate analysis of the problems facing Alabama and funding for higher education.  [Inaudible]  We’re clearly going to need a lot of friends to carry forward this agenda that you have laid out. I understand also that we have a campaign, the Capital Campaign soon to be launched, which will help to some extent with our funding needs. We’ll also need all of our friends at that point.  I am wondering, then, in the context of this need for friends, why it is that it seems to be an effort underway to question the way in which the alumni office is being run and I would like for you to comment on recent news articles suggesting that there is a political vendetta associated with the Alumni Association, was having... the workings of the Alumni Association audit.

Dr. Walker:  I have absolutely no knowledge about that – about that audit. The first we heard of it was three or four months ago when Don got a phone call from the state agency saying they were going to come over.  In fact, I think they asked Don – Don, I think they asked you some questions.

Don Large, Executive Vice President: Yeah, let me just fill you in on...In October of this past year, we received a phone call followed up with a formal letter from the State Examiner’s asking certain questions about the Alumni Association and the University’s relationship with the Association. The Association, of course, is a separate 501(C)3 entity. It is not Auburn University.  It has a separate board, it doesn’t have employees, and in effect they buy our employees’ time.  We were also asked some other questions. They wanted to be sure that certain expenses were properly documented and covered by the appropriate entities. So, when I got that I worked with, of course, the President – I worked with the President of the Alumni Association – actually, the President and President-Elect, Bob Kloeti, the President at the time, and Owen Brown, the President-Elect – responded to the letter. I’m also the Treasurer of the Alumni Association, as well as the University so I had to respond to both of those – worked with that group and, of course, the attorneys to make my response to the state examiner’s – and we did so after everybody agreed on what was said, sent it back to the state examiner’s and heard nothing else about that.  The O-A News was at the Alumni Board meeting when we were discussing this in the fall and asked for more information so I sent them a copy of the letter from the state and my response.  And that is all we have heard. So, I’m assuming that the response that was sent was adequate to address their concerns. The O-A News inquired a couple of times between October and last week whether there was any more activity –and the answer was no. I’m assuming it’s behind us. Why then it was covered in the O-A News last week, two days before the Alumni Board meeting, I don’t know. That would be a good question to the O-A News – but nothing had happened since that response that I made to that October inquiry back in either late October or November. So, how the inquiry occurred, I do not know – the state examiners would not say –my job was to respond. I did so and I thought it was the end of the story and how it surfaced back as a story, I just don’t know, but [Inaudible] that’s the background.

Struempler:     Any more questions?  

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Barb Struempler, University Senate Chair:      I have no announcements on behalf of the Senate Chair. Are there any other announcements from the audience? Very quickly -- just go to a microphone on the floor. In fact, for all speakers today, just use one of the three microphones. Quickly, please.

Nancy Joseph, President of the Graduate Student Council:    I just wanted to let everybody know that we are going to be hosting our annual research forum next Thursday at the AU Hotel and Dixon Conference Center. So, I invite all of you to come out and support our students. Also, we need judges from the College of Engineering, and the Colleges of Liberal Arts, Human Sciences, and Education. So, if you are from any of those four colleges, we need judges.  One other thing is that we had a lot of departments that contributed money to our forum, and I just wanted to thank all of you. That money is being used for cash prizes for the best presentations. Thank you very much.

Barbara Struempler:  Thank you. Other announcements? Paula?

Paula Sullenger, Secretary-elect of the Senate:   I just wanted to remind the faculty that we’ve had a call for volunteers for Senate and University committees last week. I will send out a reminder soon, but we have over 100 positions to fill – so we really need lots of volunteers this year.

Barbara Struempler:  Okay, the next order of business is the election of senate officers…perhaps as I read your name, why don’t you just stand. Candidates—there’s two for Chair-Elect. We have Willie Larkin—Willie is in the back row. Thank you, Willie. For Chair-elect—James Saunders—Jim. Secretary-elect—Debra Cobia; and sitting next to her, Chair [Secretary]-elect, Richard Penaskovic. Renee’ is handing out the ballots. Any member of the University Faculty can vote. You need to vote for one for the Chair-elect, and one for the Secretary-elect. The announcements will be at the end of this meeting when they assume their new duties.  Cindy, if you will be making your way up to your place — we’ll give you another couple of seconds to complete your voting. Cindy Brunner is going to provide you an update with the online system for voting. As you know, we have tried on-line voting for some budgetary priorities and will probably be voting on this at some point — maybe at the Fall Faculty meeting and in order to give you a “head’s up,” we provide you with this information now. Thank you, Cindy. [Inaudible]

Cindy Brunner: There’s some irony in the fact that I am doing this – even as you’re voting, because if this proposal passes, this will be the last election that we will be holding in this manner at a University Faculty meeting.

In November of 2001, then President, I’m sorry, Senate-Chair Jim Bradley, proposed establishment of a Senate ad hoc committee on university-wide voting. I was asked to chair that committee.  The charge for our committee is on the overhead.  He told us that he wanted us to deal with all aspects of university wide voting as we saw fit, including establishing criteria to determine which issues should be voted on in this manner – determining a means to ensure that voters had an opportunity to hear the issues – and finally, to establish a mechanism whereby the voting could be conducted given the usual safeguards and security issues.

I’ve got a timeline to show you what has been happening and to tell you the truth – it hasn’t been very much. We’ve made lots of progress with very little effort. The committee was established in November of 2001.  In April of the next year, we learned that the SGA was already working on an electronic voting scheme which they then implemented in Fall 2002 – that is last fall, they elected the Homecoming Queen, uh, Miss Homecoming, with an electronic web-based ballot.  That same month, representatives of the Office of Information Technology gave the officers and myself a presentation on opportunities for electronic voting – what types of ballots are available -- and, then finally in February of this year, the senate officers conducted a sample balloting whereby they asked the faculty to rank budgetary priorities. The one purpose of that process was to see if the voting system worked.

Our goal – the goal of an electronic voting system – of course, would be to increase access to faculty members who don’t regularly participate in university governance – those being the eighteen hundred or so who don’t show up at university faculty meetings. I think the common sense requirements of that system -- should it be established, would be that there be an authentication process to ascertain that the voters are credentialed – there needs to be ballot secrecy and ballot integrity.  We also have to have accurate vote tabulation and we need to prevent multiple votes from being cast by individuals. All of those criteria have been met by the system developed by OIT.

The final criterion, which we all appreciate – having had our own little interactions with computers, is that the system needs to be user-friendly. Unfortunately, it is my belief, that the system we have is not quite user-friendly enough, based on comments we received from the ballot in February and again from our committee sign-up system. So, I think we need to work on that with OIT to convince them that we really are dumber than they think we are and we need to make this process extremely simple.

The advantages of web-based balloting are numerous and again intuitive. It is far more versatile – we can allow for links to names showing the pictures of individuals running for office and their platforms. We can include other issues on the ballot that are unrelated to the election of candidates – we can cast votes anywhere that access is available – even off-campus. We can have a flexible voting period. The students have a two-day voting period for their homecoming elections and now more recently for SGA office. The tabulation of votes is clearly much more accurate and much faster than our hand system that will be underway in just a couple more minutes.  We don’t have any more parking problems because the 1800 or so people who don’t vote, won’t have to worry about coming over here and finding a place to park – and for those of us that are not located on main campus – that’s no small feat.  I’m over at the far side of the Lowder parking lot – so, but I did find a spot. And finally, we’d hope that this process would increase participation in university governance by people who don’t ordinarily get involved – and possibly don’t enjoy coming to our meetings and listening to us talk.

There are some clear drawbacks to the process – there are, even now, log-in problems – of the 1900 or so authorized voters for the election to determine budget priorities – about 500 of them were unable to vote because they did not have what we commonly call Mallard IDs, so we need to deal with access problems.  We need to be sure that all faculty can easily get to the ballots.  There is a minimal chance of voter fraud, in that if somebody knows your password, they can vote in your place.  Not a real risk for us, I think. There are possibilities of computer glitches.  On the other hand, I remember one fall semester faculty meeting that hurricane Opal hit, so all sorts of things can arise that could interfere with the process.  We do lose the interactive aspect to an election.  We do lose the option to educate the voters at a meeting at which the vote is being taken and that there is a possibility that there would be less commitment to the governance process if we would allow people to vote at their desks rather than actually getting off of their butts and coming to the meeting.

The proposal that we have is two-fold.  I would suggest that these two issues be dealt with as separate amendments to the University Faculty Constitution.  A vote on these amendments would require a two-thirds majority of people attending the meeting and I suggest that we have this election next fall at next falls faculty meeting, in order that we can implement this for the following faculty election, if it is approved.

The first amendment would be to article 3 section 2, which deals with election of faculty officers.  We would need to restate that so that we stipulate that the election occurs through an electronic ballot.  I am specifying Web-based ballot, because it is clear that, that is much more secure than an E-mail ballot, which it is possible to trace the source of the E-mail. The second issue deals with non-officered elections, where we are voting on a referendum or voting on a motion of substance.  Ordinarily those motions would be offered in conjunction with agenda items.  They would actually be listed on the agenda.  The proposal is that those motions for referendum be discussed at the university faculty meeting and then be voted on by electronic ballot in the weeks following that meeting.  The length of time can be specified quite easily, again with the flexibility. 

There are some related proposals that I won’t go into because of lack of time.  Those deal with issues like the discontinuing of the nominating committees, which is an ad hoc committee appointed by the University Faculty Executive Committee and replacement of that committee with what we might call an Elections Committee, that actually deals with the election process and not just coming up with a slate of candidates.  And other tinkering with the Handbook that would accommodate these changes. 

Okay, so that is the proposal.  I would like you to contact me at brunncj@auburn.edu or my phone is 844-2664, if you have any comments or questions. I am out at the department of Pathobiology at the Vet School.  We will be proposing this at the next university faculty meeting for a vote at that time, by a two-thirds majority.  We are short of time, so I guess that I can’t take any questions, but feel free to come up after the meeting if you want to comment on it.

Barbara Struempler: Our next three speakers are Vice Presidents at Auburn University.  The executive committee thought that the faculty would be interested to hear just a quick snapshot of what they are doing in their offices….so my preamble to the three speakers was, that it needed to be short – like five minutes or less and it needed to be items that they thought that the faculty would be interested in.  So it looks like it is a long agenda, but we are going to move it through very, very quickly.  The first speaker is Vice President for Research – Mike Moriarty.

Mike Moriarty, Vice President for Research: I am going to take Barb very seriously, five minutes or less. When she first asked me to make some comments on issues that relate to the faculty, I sat down and jotted about four down.  They should take a minute each.

One is the Research and Scholarship Incentive Plan that Bill Gale presented to you on several occasions, as recently as this last Senate meeting.  That team, as you know, the proposal touches on  [Inaudible] Senate in the fall and the Senate has asked that the committee chaired by Bill to flush out the contents that we propose and make it adaptable and appropriate and useful to the university.  They have done a great job and I really want to commend Bill Gale.  He has done a yeoman’s job.  He also has probably the best audiovisual presentation that I have ever seen.

Another issue that would be of interest to a number of you relates to the Patent Policy of Auburn University.  The current policy that we are operating under was developed in 1976 – 27 years ago.   Dr. Walker used the phrase “antiquated” and that applies to this policy as well.  Now, about two years ago, the Senate appointed a committee to look into this and modernize it.  There’s a lot of the federal laws and regulations that have changed since that time, a lot of faculty interests have changed since that time; there is more interest in technology transfer and start up companies, etc., etc.  So that committee has done an enormous amount of work in looking at benchmarks around the country.  They have come back to me with a well thought out proposal, we have worked out any questions that we had differences on.  There is now in agreement between the committee and myself.  It is now at the Patent and Disclosure Committee for their input, at that point it will come before the Senate. I am anticipating, based on the conversations that we have had with John Mouton and Paula that this will come as an information item at the April meeting and possibly as an action item at the following meeting.

Another issue that we are pursuing, that I think that many of the faculty will find of interest is the proposed Research Park that we have heard about and read about.  The Consultants are on campus this week for their second visit.  They have been working through the issues that they have accumulated during their first visit and information that we have provided them along the way.  We hope to have some focus into the prospect for the Research Park later on in this... the first half of this year.

Finally, there is an education effort that we have launched with every unit that reports to the Research office and that is to get some accurate information out there to the faculty.   No one is beating on our door saying, I want to read more policies.  Maybe one of you has that objective, but so far it has been silent. But there is a need to get out information.  We are doing this in a tiered way, with general information and if you go down to more detailed information as it might pertain to your needs and interests.  We are doing this with everything from the Sponsored Programs to the Tech Transfer Office to Human Subjects and on and on and on.   We have had a couple of issues that have particularly galvanized our effort here.  We had one faculty [Inaudible] new faculty is that we lay out these issues in a clear, coherent and easily understood way, then they can begin their careers at Auburn University knowing what the guidelines and the rules and regulations are.  Did I do it?

Speaker #2: You did it.

 

Barbara Struempler: The next Vice President is Vice President for Student Affairs, Dr. Wes Williams.

 

Wes Williams, Vice President for Student Affairs: Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to give you a brief overview of what is going on in Student Affairs.  I could go on for much longer than my allotted five minutes, but I will keep my remarks pretty brief.  Oftentimes universities can be very divided organizations: As you know, there are numerous areas such as Academic Affairs, Student Affairs, Financial Affairs, Facilities, Research, Outreach and so on.  Universities can feel disjointed at times.  I believe however Auburn University is fortunate to have a seamless structure, where lines are actually nicely blended.  In Student Affairs, we have the opportunity to work closely with our academic colleagues, sharing information and providing the most beneficial opportunities for our students.  I would like to talk to you about three areas, which have a direct impact on you, our faculty: Enrollment management for the 2003-2004 year, Scholarships, and our Diversity Initiatives. 

 

At this time, admission of freshmen for Fall 2003 is nearing completion.  Following last year’s record freshmen enrollment of 4,184 the University Enrollment Management Committee, the Provost, and the President recommended a freshmen class enrollment of low 3,700s for Fall 2003.  Auburn University finds itself in a unique position: As other state universities are struggling to meet enrollment goals, we are exceeding them.  It is our challenge now to maintain the level of interest in Auburn and to increase the interest of those students who are under-represented and those students who are best-prepared for success are the ones that we would like to continue in higher education.  As of the first week in March, we have 11,247 applications, of which 9,282 were admitted.  We have another 1,820 students, who are on our “wait list.”  These are students who have met our admissions requirements but because of space limitations, we were not able to admit them for the Fall 2003.  The entering class for this upcoming academic year so far has presented the best credentials in the history of the University with an average of 24.64 on the ACT, a high school grade point average of 3.54, and average SAT scores of 1143 for students who have already paid their deposits.  In addition, I want to let you know that deposits for minority students are up approximately 20% over this same time last year.

 

I would like to now share some good news about our University Scholarship program, which is evolving to recruit best-prepared students.  We redesigned the Freshman Academic Scholarship program to be more competitive with our peer institutions.  We sent scholarship awards out earlier than ever, and we partnered with the individual colleges and schools to maximize the amount of the award offered to students.  Additionally, the Legacy Waiver Program, which began in 1997 as a 1/3 tuition waiver for out-of-state students of Auburn graduates who were Lifetime Members of the Alumni Association is currently under review.  We are hopeful to develop this program into a Legacy Scholarship Program, with academic criteria, which will help in bringing the best and brightest students to your classrooms.

 

At the request of President Walker, we are also in the preliminary stages of designing a scholarship program that will target under-represented populations in specific high schools in the state of Alabama.  Dr. Walker has asked us to design a program similar to the Century Scholars Program at Texas A & M, which has experienced much success in the recruitment and retention of under-represented groups.  Initial discussions of the scholarship suggest that the scholarship will be available to 100 students and will include tuition, room, board and books.  Additionally, retention efforts will accompany the scholarship to keep these students at Auburn through graduation.

 

Our Diversity issues for this spring have gotten underway and are going forward, including our monthly student Diversity luncheons and our Habitat for Humanity House, which is currently in process.  I was there last Saturday – the location is 929 Holmes Avenue and I am sure that our students would love to have you come out and join them in building the Habitat House.  Over this last year Student Affairs has sponsored or co-sponsored many programs and activities focusing on diversity, including “The Conversation Begins” video and the “Learning for Life” sessions at Camp War Eagle; designed to start the dialogue which educates our students on the valuing our uniqueness as individuals.  The Freshman Convocation included a diversity presentation by an outside speaker, Dr. John Gray. A variety of programs for our Greek leadership development, as well as a visit to Auburn from Don McPherson, who spoke to many groups, including our student athletes with his program entitled “You Throw Like a Girl.” Upcoming events include a presentation tonight by Ms. Felicia Hall, the former Vice President of Team Operations for a WNBA team, who will speak on valuing people for who they are.

 

In Student Affairs, we are planning on introducing the National Coalition Building Institute as a model for Community building, diversity training, and sensitivity awareness.  The NCBI organization will bring people on campus to train a number of faculty and staff to be able to conduct training programs for other groups.  The program lasts three days and at the end of the three days, participants are officially certified in diversity training.  Currently over 65 universities in the U.S. use the NCBI model on their campuses.  Auburn will be the first university in the SEC to adopt this model.

 

In the Enrollment Management area we also have many exciting and progressive programs and activities going on, including the creation of a Minority Student Recruitment and Retention committee to explore how Auburn University can improve in these areas.  We are continually looking for additional avenues to enhance the minority experience at Auburn from the first contact to graduation.

 

I invite you to be a part of Student Affairs, if you have not already done so.  We are always looking for quality faculty to assist us in programming, advising, and educating outside of the classroom. Faculty can be a welcome role model to all of our student organizations, and especially our Greek organizations.  I welcome you to contact me, or a member of our staff if you are interested in becoming involved in some of the Student Affairs activities.  My e-mail address is very simple: wes@auburn.edu.  I encourage you to contact me if you have some interest.  Thank you for this opportunity to update you, and I feel very fortunate to be part of the Auburn experience.  Thank you.

 

Barbara Struempler: Dr. David Wilson, Vice President for University Outreach.

 

David Wilson, Vice President for University Outreach: Good afternoon to all. Although I have about eight or nine slides here, I promise to be quite parsimonious in my remarks.  I just want to run through this very quickly and give you a brief overview of some of our Outreach program members, both University wide, and also an overview of some of our key Outreach initiatives state wide.  We have just come through a planning process at the University, this vision statement is not yet public, but it is what a group of about 55 individuals here at Auburn, including about forty faculty members, over a period of two or three months, under the Directions Initiative by President Walker have come forward with.  In brief, we see our vision here as follows: Through Outreach and engagement, Auburn University will share discoveries of new knowledge and technologies and learning-centered pedagogies with the State of Alabama and the global community.  AU will leverage its resources to support the growth of healthy, humane, and sustainable communities, institutions, and businesses.  Partnerships and alliances with stakeholders will foster the development of Alabama as one of the most desirable places in the nation for individuals and families to live, to work and to learn.  It created an intellectual expertise of the AU faculty, staff and students, who have transformed Alabama to an economic, educational, technological, scientific and cultural center among the most vibrant in the world.  Through this process, Auburn University will become a model new American University [Inaudible] engaged with the larger community, which [Inaudible] service.  That is probably about five minutes already.  [Laughter]

 

I thought that you would be interested in some of our contracts, grants and success over the last couple of years.  As you can see here in the year 2000/2001, University wide…we have generated about $86 million dollars, of what VP Mike Moriarty is calling external support for grants and contracts.  Of that amount in 2000/2001, Outreach contributed roughly $15.7 million and in 2001/2002, university wide got about $92 million and Outreach about $15.4 million during that particular time.  So roughly about 16 to 17% of external support each year is the result of Outreach initiatives and faculty winning grants and contracts.  Our distance education has really taken off at Auburn over the last eight years.  This will just give you an example.  For year 1995, for example, we were offering 172 courses via distance learning but by the year 2002, we are up to 200.  But I guess that the impact of this is touched on both the number of course registrations, as well as the number of degrees that we are currently offering via distance learning.  In 1995, we had roughly 1,300 students enrolled in distance learning and in 2002 we have 2,000 and 235 course registrations. In 1995, we were offering roughly five degrees via distance learning at Auburn and today we are offering 21 degrees and certificates via distance learning.

 

My office provides a lot of support to faculty across the University to jump-start a number of initiatives and to enable faculty to be competitive in winning that $16 to $17 million dollars that we just saw.  In 2000/2001, for example, my office provided support in the neighborhood of $300,000 dollars for 26 initiatives supported by faculty members across the university.  In 2001/2002, that was close to half a million dollars and we supported 33 initiatives involving a number of faculty members across all colleges and schools and numerous academic departments.  One of the things that we are really, really proud of is the way that we grew Outreach scholarship at Auburn over the last seven years.  We have a number of people to thank for this, but of course, right up here is Professor Wayne Flynt, John Heilman, Robert Montjoy, and a number of others along the way.  This particular Senate passed last year, a proposal that we brought forward, that would put in place a process for evaluating outreach scholarship and we are very happy that proposal passed almost unanimously.  If anything, our charge for the University wide [Inaudible] every single academic department at Auburn, so they are aware of these new procedures and we are making a lot of headway in that regard.  Robert Montjoy has done just a superb job here.  We have visited 31 academic departments so far.  We have 18 scheduled and 20 that are tentatively scheduled.  We are on a time frame to try and get around to every academic department and explain these new Tenure and Promotion procedures by the end of the semester. 

 

Very briefly, we have a major conference initiative that is coming up on May 19th and 20th.  This particular initiative will be the conference on governmental excellence and best practices.  Each year, Governing magazine comes out with an article where they look at how states across the United States are basically running their state governments.  Alabama, I guess not surprisingly, was perennially ranked 49 or 50.  This year, an initiative led by Dr. [Inaudible] for the Center for Governmental Services.  We have identified a number of best practices across the US and we are putting these best practices on stage at Embassy Suites in Montgomery, May 19th and 20th.  This promises to be a really wonderful conference, so if you would like to participate...

 

And last, President Walker has spoken quite frankly and candidly over this last year or so about some of the tragical conditions of the Alabama Black Belt.  Auburn University of course has concentrated in this area in the Outreach arena quite sincerely over the last seven or eight years.  We basically have a number of initiatives in place.   I won’t go through all of these, but I think in earnest in 1993, with the Rural Studio located in west Alabama, that became a wonderful anchor for many of our other Outreach activities.  And consequently, as you can see here, we really have a slew of activities across that region in education K-12, what we call community economic development, cultural preservation and awareness and agricultural and natural resources.  I think at last count, somewhere in the neighborhood of 25% of faculty members were involved in these initiatives.  Our faculty are really extending their research out into the Black Belt.  I would urge you to continue to do so.  And certainly [Inaudible] in terms of continuing education.  We reported in 2000/2001, over a thousand of what we call instructional activities taking place around the university, conferences, workshops everything that Auburn University faculty has been involved in and in 2001/2002 through these programs, we have served more than 45,000 individuals.  So you can see that we take very seriously our mission and I certainly feel that within the state of Alabama, we are having an enormous impact in these areas, as well as many others.  These are just a few highlights.  We have a major economic development activity to kick off the ground in a month or so, but I am not at liberty to talk about that right now.  Thank you very much. [Applause]  

 

Barbara Struempler: Well, this is a happy moment for me.  [Laughter].  Oh, you have no idea.

 

Two years ago when I was elected Chair-elect, I immediately pondered my sanity for my decision to run for office. If you remember, the University community was just to begin an 18-month struggle that would keep Auburn University as a headline in many newspapers, even beyond the borders of our state. As I reflect upon the last couple of years, we have gained much ground and I would like to share some of my thoughts with you.

 

My year as Chair has had two distinct phases. The first six months, we continued to concentrate our efforts on actions of the Board of Trustees. Problems with the Board tend to overwhelm the campus. When the Senate’s time is taken up with legitimately serious issues pertaining to the Board, faculty activity on any number of critical issues is frozen.  What happens is that the Senate ends up being in a reactive mode. The Board does something crazy, and the Senate responds. The Board does something else crazy, and the Senate responds again. Although the Senate ought to respond when any unit on campus is out of line, this places faculty solely in a reactive mode.

 

Then about six months into my term, we turned a corner. For whatever reasons, the Senate’s time was not committed to responding to Board actions. I have seen a noticeable change in faculty during the last six months. We have been able to move beyond the structural activities of the Board and concentrate on more traditional faculty issues. This has certainly allowed us more time to enhance the academy by creating more quality in our outreach, instruction and research missions. I might add that on a personal note, I have truly enjoyed the last six months much better than the first six months.

 

A while back, Paula Sullenger, the in-coming Senate Chair [sic], was reviewing Senate meeting minutes from 1991.  (And I never thought anybody ever read those minutes)…so I am truly impressed…Paula, you even went back twelve years ago.  Anyway, I would like to share some of the things that she highlighted. I believe parts of all of these will have a familiar ring to the last years’ activities.

 

* In 1991, a resolution was passed urging a non-voting faculty seat on the Board. The resolution was sent to President Martin, who refused to put it on the Board agenda. In contrast, this past year, then-Interim President Walker openly advocated for this long-standing request of the faculty.

 

* In 1991, a resolution was introduced to call on the Governor to dissolve the Board and establish a new one. The motion was not considered because it was not introduced with proper notice and was probably unconstitutional anyway.

 

* In 1991, there was a lot of discussion on the increased student enrollment.

 

* There was discussion of the search for a Vice President of Finance and should the University be wasting money on search firm consultants.

 

* There were numerous discussions of University governance.

 

* There were numerous discussions of the role of faculty in a presidential search.

 

* There was one main difference. In 1991, Senators were sent a list of Board members with their home addresses and telephone numbers.

 

I don’t know about you, but the list made me happy and sad. Yes, we now have faculty representation on the board, but all of the other items are still current issues today. I guess perhaps that may be the nature of the academy. I only hope that as faculty, we aren’t standing still. The more things change, the more they appear to stay the same. Personally, I would rather be going up and down on a roller coaster (and getting somewhere) than riding in a circle on a merry-go-round.

 

            I sometimes fear that we are spending too much time fixing problems, especially those that occurred a long time ago. Let me explain what I mean. My entire two-year period with the Senate has revolved around the SACS [Southern Association of Colleges and Schools] lawsuit. Don’t get me wrong, hear me well in this. I firmly believe the complaint process and the actions of the Joint Assessment Committee (JAC) were warranted. But here is what I truly hope about that process. Once a final decision is made, I hope that all parties can move on. This includes faculty and administration, as well as SACS. Both Auburn University and SACS agreed on a process to evaluate the JAC concerns. When the decision is final, let’s live with the decision, and hope there are few if any repercussions to either party. My concern for faculty is that all the other major stakeholders will be moving on but we will continue to be wrapped up in some situations that occurred more than a decade ago.

 

Because of the tremendous efforts of previous Senate Chairs, I have had the privilege of being the first Faculty Chair to participate in many administrative opportunities, two of which I feel are very important to faculty. First, as I just alluded to, faculty advisors now sit at the Board of Trustees’ table. For more than a decade, Auburn University Senate Chairs have asked for this position. The second major inclusion is that President Walker has involved the faculty advisor as a member of many major university committees, including his Monday morning Administrative Council. Similar to any team player, one is expected to add energy to the dynamics rather than being a stumbling block. I firmly believe that a faculty representative can be a watchdog without being confrontational. On the other hand, some people believe that one must be confrontational in order to be effective. It basically boils down to a difference in leadership style. Obviously, in my style, I believe that “one can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.”

 

These new opportunities created for the faculty advisor to the Board will allow us to understand how shared governance within a university all fits together as a puzzle. By virtue of the position, we now are forced to deal with the entire puzzle, instead of seeing only the faculty piece of shared governance. In reality, shared governance is a give-and-take relationship of compromises. Shared governance is a slow, evolving process where one group can’t always win. Although all stakeholders want to win for their group, I believe we more fully understand that by some degree of compromise we can all move forward. Compromise, just like shared governance, is painful, it’s uncomfortable, but it will work best in the long run for the university. It is not simply challenging the university or criticizing. It’s serving the institution and often doing things that require compromise that will be in the best interest of the university.

 

Approximately a month ago, a senior faculty member asked me what it was like to be liked by the administration. The tone of the question led me to believe that faculty and administrators are not allowed to like each other or to be on the same side of the fence. I have attended untold meetings this past year. Never once have I heard an administrator say, “Let’s stick it to the faculty.” In contrast, the phrase usually is, “Will faculty benefit from this?” University stakeholders are beginning to trust each other. I encourage faculty to continue on this course.

 

            Since we are on the topic of the administration, I have a confession to make about the president. I truly believe President Walker is doing a good job as President of Auburn University. Obviously when he came into his position, he was anointed with fire. The SACS lawsuit followed quickly on his heels, then the removal of the “interim” in his presidential title – these are only a few of our recent wars. Putting these issues aside, I have spent untold hours in his company, which has allowed me to develop a clear opinion about him.  It has been said that certain trustees run the university. I do not get that sense with President Walker.  He is leading Auburn University and setting its course for the future. It is unfortunate that Dr. Walker’s detractors have not been a part of the discussions that I have had the opportunity to participate in during this last year. Many of you know that I highly respected Dr. Muse; enough so that I let people convince me that I should run for Chair-elect so that I could work more closely with Dr. Muse. However, I have as great a respect for President Walker and I feel good about the immediate future of Auburn University under his leadership. I can’t emphasize that enough. I was actually not prepared to be so impressed by his leadership.  In fact, it caught me a little off guard.

 

            I would be remiss if I didn’t provide a comment about the Board of Trustees. Although it does not make for headline news, the Board has worked well with the faculty this year. The agenda for Board meetings is set at the cabinet meetings, which I attend and where I can have input into the issues. However, Pro Tem Jimmy Samford contacts me before every Board meeting and asks me if there are special concerns of the faculty, either on the agenda or items that did not make it to the agenda. Moreover, there have been two separate occasions when agenda items have not been discussed at the Board meetings because I expressed faculty concerns about the issues to Mr. Samford. These actions imply that trustees are trying to listen and want to respect faculty concerns. Both faculty and trustees have a commitment to communicate to ensure a more unified community. I sense a positive change among them, as well as with many of us.

 

            People often ask me how long this working relationship with the Board and administration will last? I don’t have any idea, but as faculty, we are one of the players, so we can set its course. I personally hope that this process continues, and we can use our time to move Auburn University forward academically and financially.

 

Let me comment on the faculty advisor position to the Board of Trustees, of which that is the position that I filled with the Board. Although the decision on the selection process for the faculty advisor position has not been determined, I will continue to emphasize that the individual needs to be the Chair of the University Faculty. The Chair is elected by the faculty at the General Faculty meeting and also serves as the Chair of the University Senate. I feel strongly that the faculty member on the Board needs to be this individual. The Chair commits more time than any other faculty member to the university community and acquires a comprehensive understanding of the university. To ask someone other than the Chair of the Faculty to sit on the Board would be a disservice to the faculty.

 

            There is one last thought on the faculty advisor position of the Board. I believe the Chair could best serve as the faculty advisor beginning mid-way through her or his year as the Chair, which is what occurred in my situation although it was by coincidence. My rationale is very simple for these recommendations. During the first six months of the chairmanship, the Chair is extremely busy with committee assignments and getting into the routine. After the first six months, it would be entirely possible for the Chair to take on that new responsibility and perhaps be seated at the board table, at the August or the November Board meeting.  Another idea would be to have the Immediate Past-chair of the Senate be the faculty advisor; although I am not looking for another job – I just offered that as an option.

 

Most of my farewell address has centered on the administration or the Board, where most of the controversies have arisen the last year or two. By virtue of my office this year, I have seen first-hand many of their activities. Many of these encounters are the first for any Senate Chair, I felt it important to share my thoughts of them with you. However, I really hope that Board matters don’t monopolize the Senate’s time next year. During the last six months, we have been able to concentrate on academic issues rather than reacting to Board behavior. This should be our primary role as faculty.

 

            Before I finish, let me turn my attention to a glaring weakness of Auburn University, and it has been mentioned several times today: Its lack of diversity among all stake-holders from trustees to faculty and extending into the student body. Compared to 18-months ago, the University is changing its rhetoric to be more inclusive and tolerant, but real action must include more than mortar and bricks of new centers and diversity on search committees.

 

            We are about to enter an ultimate test of whether we are truly making progress at Auburn University. We have a provost and five dean searches in progress. If, at the end of the day, we have not actively sought to recruit individuals in these positions who represent minority groups, we have failed miserably.

 

In conclusion, as I end my year I feel positive about Auburn University. In comparison to two years ago, we’ve done a complete turn-around. Some of the changes have been so slight and gradual that most of us didn’t even realize that they were happening. Interestingly, most of the players are the same, but our attitudes are different and we are beginning to communicate. We have made progress. We can continue to do so, but it will take our willingness to work together, to believe the best of each other. We will need this energy to become a preeminent research-based, land-grant university in the 21st Century.  Thank you.  [Applause]

 

Barbara Struempler: The next business of order is Glenn Howze, the President of AUUP will present the Academic Freedom Award by the AAUP.

 

Glenn Howze: As president of the Auburn University Chapter of the American Association of University Professors, it is my honor to present this year’s Academic Freedom Award to Mr. Owen Brown for his outstanding contribution to the protection of Academic Freedom at our university.  As most of you know, Mr. Brown is a world-renowned businessman, who has played a pivotal role in the development of the high-technology sector of our economy.  While this is a noteworthy achievement, he is not being honored for this accomplishment today.  Mr. Brown is an alumnus and is the current president of the Auburn Alumni Association.  Although both of these achievements are admirable – he is not being honored for them today.  While we are all appreciative, .Mr. Brown has repeatedly to use his wealth and influence to benefit Auburn University.  While we are all appreciative of his largeness, we are not honoring him today for these contributions.  Rather, we are honoring him because of his contribution to the protection of Academic Freedom on our campus, by his vivid promotion of shared University governance.

 

In an Academe article two years ago, our colleague, Larry Gerber from our History Department, wrote about the important link between academic freedom and shared university governance.  He wrote, and I have a quotation right here, but I am not going to read it…but his point was that today when the business model is being applied wholesale to universities, shared governance is more important than ever and one of the things it protects is academic freedom.  Mr. Brown has demonstrated his understanding of the fact that academic freedom and quality academic programs at Auburn, are predicated on the existence of sound governmental practices which call for the proper mix of decision making by the Board of Trustees, the Administration, the Faculty, and other constituent groups.  Mr. Brown has personally recognized that there are major problems with the current practice of governance at Auburn and has worked tirelessly to promote needed reforms.

 

What contributions has Mr. Brown made to this process? I would like to mention several.  Mr. Brown played a pivotal role in the effort that resulted in the constitutional amendment mandating reform in the selection process for Board members.  Mr. Brown has played a leadership role in the Auburn Trustees Improvement Political Action Committee, ATIP, which has as its sole purpose, improvement of our government structure by seeking the appointment of trustees who are not micromanaging the university.   Mr. Brown is currently serving on the committee to nominate persons to fill three vacant positions on the Board.  This is an unpaid position and Mr. Brown has given much time and attention to this task.  Finally, I’d like to note that Mr. Brown withdrew the pledge of a major contribution to Auburn University two years ago, in protest against what he viewed, and the faculty viewed, as the bad management of our University by the Board of Trustees.  Given the looming cuts in the state appropriations, it is not easy for me to say that withholding a financial contribution was a good thing; however, in this case, I think it was.  It was a powerful statement that all is not well at Auburn.  This message has been heard far and wide.

 

 Mr. Brown attended a special meeting of the Auburn University Senate on February 21, 2001 and made a very eloquent impromptu speech that contained some strong and moving words about shared governance.  However, before I quote him, I want to refer again an article by our colleague Larry Gerber.  In the concluding paragraph of his piece, he wrote…and I won’t to read it again….but he makes a point here, that rather than the University adopting the current business model of governance for the University, many business are now adopting the shared governance model that has been a part of the great institutions throughout the country.

 

Larry Gerber’s article appeared in April/May of 2001.  It was already in press when Mr. Brown made his remarks to the University Senate.  But let’s read down and find the similarities between Mr. Brown’s comments and Larry Gerber’s comments.  Mr. Brown states that “Corporate governance is something that I happen to know a little bit about and if you want to know what the concept of shared governance is, you should probably run a company full of first year engineers making $150,000 a year and multiple job offers behind yours.  You learn quickly that a dictatorial process doesn’t work.  It doesn’t work any better in the corporate world than in the university world.  In the corporate world there are some who try to employ that, and if you look at the stocks of those companies you see they typically do not do well. They tend to see turnover in personnel. I can tell you that in the world I come from, the role of a Board is for advice; I think you will find that to be true in almost every corporate board room in the world. I don’t think that it is a bit different in the University environment than it is in the corporate world. They are there to give advice and consent and be a checkpoint for the management. The minute a Board tries to run a company, it is basically all over. The role, particularly in a University, of a Board of Trustees should be to go out and find the resources necessary to fund the University. They should be out lobbying the state government to get additional sources of property taxes in the state...”

 

Mr. Brown certainly understands the proper role of shared governance in our university.  Mr. Brown has devoted his time and resources to promotion of shared governance at Auburn.  Mr. Brown certainly deserves the respect and the gratitude of the Auburn Faculty.  Mr. Owen Brown, will you please come down.  [Applause]

 

Owen, it is my honor and privilege to present to you this plaque, denoting that you are the 2003 Academic Freedom Award recipient.  I would like to thank you for all of your efforts and what you have done for our university.  [Applause]

 

Owen Brown: I will make my comments brief.  I found this particularly interesting today to hear the discussion on the proposal on computerize the elections.  I think I was the first person who ever ran a computerized election, Spring Quarter of 1964.  The manager of elections had already graduated, and I finished my tour, so I decided to get the bright idea that we ought to be able to do this by counting punched cards instead of picking the ballots out of the box.  So we had a great easy user interface.  All anybody had to do was check a box on a card. They scanned the cards and counted them via computer.  The real problem was in doing the [inaudible] programming at the computer.  It was an old IBM something-or-other, I don’t remember.  At least I’m pleased to see we’re continuing to make progress on that move. [Laughter]

 

It is a great honor for me to be here today and to receive those kinds words and this wonderful honor. I appreciate it enormously.  As I sit and think about some of the things that have happened over the last couple of years, there are a lot of names that you could substitute for mine in terms of people who have, because of their appreciation and love for a university that has treated all of us so well, could just as easily have been named as recipients of this award today as myself.  A couple of names come to mind, Dan Broughton, Andy Hornsby, Don Logan, Earle Williams, there’s a whole raft of alumni who are deeply dedicated to helping this university get the resources that it needs for the future.  To be included in the list of people who have received this award in the past, it’s a real honor to have your name on the same list as that group who have gone before you.

 

The University has two fundamental components that, the faculty and the students in my view of the world, if you’ll allow me in this group to use the corporate paradigm, - I’m not sure it’s the healthiest thing to do given the previous comments - and the rest of us are overhead.  It doesn’t mean the rest of us are not important, it doesn’t mean we don’t make major contributions, but the people that really make it all work are the kids who come here to be educated, and the faculty who is here to educate them.  So your role in the university is vital, without you there wouldn’t be a university.  So on behalf of all the alumni of Auburn, I’d like to say thank you for this award and I want to say thank you for your contributions toward making Auburn the great university that it is.  Thank you

 

Barbara Struempler: I have the election results.  The Chair-elect is Willie Larkin and Secretary-Elect is Debra Cobia.  So congratulations. [Applause]  Renee, start making your way up here.  I knew if you knew, you wouldn’t come up here.  If fact while Renee is coming up here, lets give her a big hand.  [Applause].  We are going to talk about Renee in just a minute, but you know that there are many people that you need to thank for a year that you just kind of drop out of your profession and do this.  One are my colleagues, for all the Sondras and the Caroles, and the grad students, thank you very much.  My family…you know my daughter can recite the Board of Trustees.  Sometimes your names are slipped in there, too, but nevertheless, I do thank my family.  The members of the Senate and Rules Committee, of course John Mouton and Paula, but the most important person that you always thank….Renee… is your secretary.  You know, this is really, really a team effort.  You kind of become partners in crime -- good crime – right Renee?  But you know, Renee is wonderfully bright, she is openly outspoken and she is wonderfully caring.  She is very truthful and kind.  She has just been a neat, neat person to work with this year….so Renee, thank you so much. 

 

Renee Middleton: You are welcome.

 

Barbara Struempler: Do you have anything that you would like to say?  [Laughter]

 

Renee Middleton: I am glad that Paula is taking over.  [Laughter].

 

Barbara Struempler: Thank you Renee.  [Applause].  Then Paula and John, why don’t you come up here, because we are going to get out of here.  We have some gifts that we always have to pass on.  Paula Sullenger is the Secretary and John Mouton is the Chair of the University Faculty.  Well gang, are you ready?

 

John Mouton: Ready or not….

 

Barbara Struempler: Anyway, Jim Bradley gave me this last year.  It is a running baton, so when you do your laps and things you just keep passing the buck, and so that is the first of your gifts.  The Senate has this remarkable budget that we give all of this really good….it is kind of like Mardi Gras confetti or something.  This is a clock and it has zero time on it, but this was the most valuable piece that I carried with me wherever I went…because it is a countdown clock.  And so, I encourage you to use it because people know and they have asked me on the spot, hwo many days we have left and I could tell them the day, the minutes, the hours and the seconds.  Anyway, it is set at zero time, so you can add your own.

 

John Mouton:  May I make a comment?

 

Barbara Struempler: Sure.

 

Speaker #6: Paula wants to reorganize the calendar next year to where this meeting would actually be a week later, and it is leap year, so I think you should have to do four more days…..[Laughter]

 

Barbara Struempler:  No way. Do you see this wand.  It is for wishes to come true, your wishes…not mine. So Paula, you can get that through.  And then Paula gave John a gavel earlier today, so at the next meeting, when you see John, flinging two gavels at the same time, one comes with the Senate and one was given personally by Paula….but I wish you both so much.  You have been a great team to work with.  They have committed untold hours visiting all of the faculty, just you name it.  So I am really hopeful that the year is going to go very well.  Congratulations John and Paula. 

 

John Mouton, Incoming Chair

Looking forward… March 11, 2003

 

John Mouton, Incoming Chair: I counted as I was sitting in my seat, that I would be the ninth speaker.   In the National League, that’s the pitcher, the worst hitter of all. In the American League, it’s the designated hitter, which is the biggest of them all.  After listening to all of these speakers, I’m going steal one thing and that is the five-minute time limit.  I am going to get us out of here but I’m going to make some comments.

 

I don’t see Jim Bradley here, but I would like to thank him and a lot of other people, who caused the Board of Trustees to begin to hear us.  I would like to thank Barb in her work, who has caused the trustees to begin to listen to us.  So I have a different opportunity than the people who have come before me.  There are a couple of comments that I would like to make in that regard.

 

Paula and I have a single year in these roles; our opportunity begins today, March 11, 2003 in going forward.  We are experiencing a calm time in our university’s history.  I think that we need to be prudent and take advantage of this time to address and resolve the core issues and matters that cannot be addressed when we have turmoil, and that is part of our plan.

 

While I am concerned about the perceptions that I keep hearing regarding governance on our campus, I am more concerned about the performance of governance within our University.  I think that is where part of our focus is going to be.  Our recent and perhaps our current system of governance may be an artifact of an earlier time in the history of our institution. It has become evident to me, in the past year as chair-elect, that we do not share a concept of governance.  Establishing a good concept of governance and accountability is a worthy objective for us to pursue.

 

I believe the culture of our University will change substantially before next March.  We are going to seat a permanent Provost and, also we will potentially seat three Trustees before we meet here next March. That gives us a tremendous opportunity for things to be different than they are now.  But the real change in our culture will come from our faculty and Senate’s participation in, and contribution to the governance that we share in with the Administration and the Board of the University.  I edited my comments and now I have a little bit about...

 

Tomorrow we are going to begin a series of lunches. Paula and I are hosting lunches for all of the Senators.  We’re going to meet with about eight a day, before the Spring Break and after the Spring Break.  What we are going to do is listen to the concerns of the faculty as represented by their elected representatives. I think that we have to start a dialogue amongst ourselves.  I think that we have got to have more conversations amongst ourselves. Some of the things of interest that we talked about…Barb spoke of the academic issues….I think that there are several issues that require attention.  I listened with great interest to Dr. Walker talk about the financial crisis that is before us.  I think that it has some serious implications that we as the faculty need to lead the conversation, rather than following the conversation.

 

Let me close by saying that I would really like to thank Barb and Renee for their leadership and the education they have given me in this past year.  Most especially I would like to thank Paula for all of the effort and accomplishments that we have had thus far. 

 

I am going to be busy.  I appreciate the confidence and support.  Please contact me. I welcome your input and comments, by e-mail, by phone, in person, but most importantly, come to this hall and speak and share your thoughts with our colleagues.  We need more dialogue amongst ourselves as a university.  I heard a range of things said today and I guess the comment that I could make with you is that, as I look forward, as I go out in my automobile, I spend more time looking through the windshield than I do looking in the rearview mirror.  In the past year, I have heard a lot of things about the past.  Our future is upon us…we just have to make some choices about what we are going to do.  In the leadership role of the Senate, I think if we are looking in the rearview mirror, we are not looking through the windshield, we have a tremendous opportunity to hit the wall.  Thank you.  [Applause}

 

John Mouton

Auburn University Faculty Chair / University Senate Chair

Wilborn Chair in Building Science

College of Architecture, Design and Construction

 

The meeting is now adjourned.

 

Adjournment