March 6, 2002
PRESENT:  Sherwood, McDermott for Engel, White, Kommers, Mast for
          Peed, Linker, Leech, Howard, Stewart, Jones, Ross, Nehrir,
          Mooney, McClure, Ashley for Locke, Lansverk, Bandyopadhyay
          for Levy, Bogar, Jelinski, McKinsey for Pratt, Lynch,
          Prawdzienski for Lynes-Hayes, Kempcke, Griffith.

ABSENT:   Young, Hatfield, Morrill, Anderson, Benham, Chem Engr,
          Lefcort, Weaver, Henson, Idzerda, Fisher, Butterfield,

The meeting was called to order by the Chair, John Sherwood, at 4:10
PM.  A quorum was present.  The minutes of the February 27, 2002,
meeting were approved as distributed.

Chair's report - John Sherwood.
     - UPBAC met yesterday.
          - This semester, MSU met student enrollment numbers, but
          there were less out-of-state students and more in-state
          students than anticipated.  The result was
          less-than-anticipated tuition received..
          - The uncollectible student accounts receivable balance will
          be paid off over three years.  The amount paid toward the
          balance this year is $500,000.
          - Because of these unanticipated shortfalls, MSU will use
          budget reserves to balance the FY 02 budget.

University Governance Council Nominating Committee report.
     - Mike Giroux, Plant Sciences and Plant Pathology, has been
     nominated for the Equipment Fee Allocation Committee.  As there
     were no further nominations, Jack Jelinski moved approval of the
     nomination.  The motion was seconded and carried.
     - Six faculty have been nominated for three positions on the
     Faculty Development Opportunities Committee.  They are Kirk
     Astroth (4-H Youth Development Specialist), Jim Doyle
     (Education), Todd Kaiser (Electrical Engineering), Jay Schmidt
     (Art), Richard Wojtowicz (Libraries), and Mike Myers (Modern
     Languages and Literatures).  By written ballot, the three faculty
     elected are: Jim Doyle, Jay Schmidt, and Mike Myers.

A Preliminary Proposal for a Teaching-Learning Center (Attached for
members absent) - Jim Robison-Cox.
     - The rationale for the Center and a proposed budget were
     presented, followed by discussion,
     - It was suggested a needs assessment be done.
          - Is some of the proposed work of the Center already
          happening?  There might still be value in having teaching
          and learning activities coordinated in one place.
          - Is the quality of teaching at MSU deficient?  MSU faculty
          give regional and national workshops on teaching and
     - It was suggested that there be some indication in the proposal
     that TLC members have national visibility in teaching and
     learning areas.
     - The relationship between the Teaching Learning Center and the
     Teaching Learning Committee has not yet been defined.
     - The spirit behind the proposal is good, because instruction can
     always be improved.  Getting prescriptive feed back from a master
     teacher is a great idea, but can it be done without adding a

Graduate Faculty Proposal - Bruce McLeod, Dean of the College of
Graduate Studies.
     - According to Dean McLeod, advantages of a graduate faculty
          - MSU needs to understand the asset it has in its graduate
               - The graduate faculty at MSU is largely unrecognized,
               and it could do a better job of raising its recognition
               level if graduate faculty acted as a group instead of
               as individuals.
          - A graduate faculty can build a better program.
               - The number of graduate student enrolled at MSU,
               particularly in the PhD program, is decreasing.
               - For a university of this size, graduate students
               normally are about 20% of the student body.  At MSU, it
               is closer to 10%.
               - Most recruiting is done at the undergraduate level.
               In comparison, little money is being spent to recruit
               graduate students
               - Advising and mentoring of graduate students can be
               improved, and a graduate faculty can support each
          - A graduate faculty can discuss and address graduate
          program needs.
     - Points of difficulty include:
          - The possibility of dividing the faculty.
               - Faculty could be part of both undergraduate and
               graduate faculty.
          - Creating another level of reviews.
          - Appointment process and removal process from the graduate
          faculty needs to be considered.
               - The department head and faculty would most likely
               appoint the graduate faculty.
     - During discussion, it was pointed out that issues affecting
     graduate recruitment and retention include lack of fee waivers
     and two-year grants which don't give enough time for a doctoral
     candidate to complete the degree and lack of assistantships to
     bridge grants.  Post docs are being used to do much of the
     research, not doctoral students.  Additional money is needed, for
     both faculty and students, to build a graduate program in many
     - How would the graduate faculty fit into the university's
     governance structure?
     - The number of graduate students appears to be declining
     nationwide, especially in certain disciplines.
     - A straw poll indicated that the largest number of Faculty
     Council members is at this time neutral to the graduate faculty
     proposal, the next largest number is against it, and the smallest
     number is in favor of the proposal.
     - There seemed to be agreement that the proposal needs to be more
     specific.  How will faculty be appointed and removed from the
     graduate faculty?  Where will resources to improve the graduate
     program come from?

As there was no further business, the meeting adjourned at 5:10.

Joann Amend, Secretary         John Sherwood, Chair