Meeting Minutes - February 2000

Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia
Held At 270 Washington St., S.W., Atlanta, Georgia
February 8 and 9, 2000

CALL TO ORDER

The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met on Tuesday, February 8 and Wednesday, February 9, 2000 in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Chair of the Board, Regent Kenneth W. Cannestra, called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 8. Present on Tuesday, in addition to Chair Cannestra, were Vice Chair J. Tom Coleman, Jr. and Regents Thomas F. Allgood, Sr., Juanita P. Baranco, Connie Cater,, George M. D. (John) Hunt III, Edgar L. Jenkins, Charles H. Jones, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Martin W. NeSmith, Joel O. Wooten, Glenn S. White, and James D. Yancey.

After calling the meeting to order, Chair Cannestra noted that Regents Allgood and Yancey had been reappointed by Governor Barnes.

ATTENDANCE REPORT

The attendance report was read on Tuesday, February 8, 2000 by Secretary Gail S. Weber, who announced that Regents Joe Frank Harris and Hilton H. Howell, Jr. had asked for and been given permission to be absent on that day.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Motion properly made and duly seconded, the minutes of the Board of Regents meeting held on January 11 and 12, 2000 were unanimously approved as distributed.

[ return to top ]

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND BUSINESS OPERATIONS, "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE"

Chair Cannestra convened the meeting of the Committee on Finance and Business Operations as a Committee of the Whole to discuss a walk-on agenda item regarding a student fees policy proposal. He then turned the chairmanship of the meeting over to Regent White.

Chair White explained that in order for this item to be added to the agenda of the Committee on Finance and Business Operations, the Regents would have to unanimously consent for its addition to the agenda. He asked for a vote, and the Regents unanimously voted in favor of the addition of the item to the agenda. He then asked Chancellor Portch to begin the presentation.

The Chancellor thanked Chair White and explained that the agenda item addressed student involvement in mandatory student fees. Given that student fees had garnered media attention in the preceding week, he thought it important to discuss a bit of history on the issue. Chancellor Portch explained that the Board has expressed its concerns related to mandatory student fees for several years. Starting three years ago, there were numerous questions from the Regents about differences in fees from institution to institution. At that time, the Board contracted with Coopers & Lybrand LLP to do a study researching the rationale behind the student fees to provide a better understanding of the issue. Two years ago, as a result of that study, Senior Vice Chancellor for Capital Resources Lindsay Desrochers and her staff instituted a much more rigorous final review of each institution's fee request. All along, the Regents have been concerned about fees, in particular their potential impact on the HOPE Scholarship Program ("HOPE"). Chancellor Portch noted that the majority of University System students are not on HOPE Scholarships and are instead paying those fees out of their own pockets. As a result of the renewed attention on the matter and directions the staff received from the Regents, the rigor of the fee review process significantly increased.

Chancellor Portch noted that in each Regent's folder was a chart that depicted how the student fees had been substantially restrained in fiscal year 2000. In fiscal year 2000, 19 institutions received no fee increases, nine others received 3% or less, two others received 5%, and one received 10%. The Chancellor noted that the institution that received a 10% increase still had a relatively small increase, despite the seemingly large percentage. The most significant increase was at Kennesaw State University ("KSU"), and that involved a parking deck mandatory fee issue. Attached to the chart in the Regents' folders were footnoted significant fee increases. Some press accounts tend to focus solely on the amount that a fee has increased without understanding the specific reason for the increase. These footnotes addressed the rationale behind some of the larger student fee increases. Also, a considerable number of the fee requests from institutions have been turned down for either insufficient information or justification, and only those the staff felt were fully justified were brought forward to the Board. The Chancellor said that this is an issue that has gotten increasing Board attention over the last three years, and some significant changes have occurred as a result of that.

There are also a few related issues that are significant, Chancellor Portch explained. One has to do with the relationship between student fees and specific facilities. Additionally, there are six pilot programs that the Board granted in technology. The Chancellor explained that the Board went into the Clayton College & State University ("CCSU") and Floyd College ("FC") experiment recognizing that it was an experiment that had a cost associated with it and that it would likely have some successes and some failures. The great advantage of having an entire university system is that pilots like the laptop computer lease can be tested at one or two institutions before every institution participates. From those pilots, the System has learned some important lessons. The pilot programs were tremendously successful academically. One did not work as well financially, however (FC). It could not be anticipated three years ago that the cost of laptop computers would drop dramatically. Nonetheless, the experiments were well worthwhile despite the costs associated with them, remarked Chancellor Portch. The other four technology pilots were initiated at one of each of the four types of institutions: Georgia Perimeter College, KSU, Georgia Southern University, and Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT"). Again, the System learned some very important lessons from those pilots. In particular, student involvement was important in approving those pilots as was the students' understanding of how the funding was spent. For example, some of the pilot campuses have computers bearing stickers that read "bought with student fee money." So, the technology fee pilot taught the System a number of lessons and those lessons have benefitted all of the institutions. One of the positive things resulting from the pilots has been widespread student support for technology fees. The current process requires student involvement in the setting of the student activity fee, which is one of several mandatory fees. Chancellor Portch reminded the Regents that Student Advisory Council ("SAC") Chair John M. Fuchko III brought a resolution to the Board on behalf of the students that supported expanding that process to other student mandatory fees. The Board of Regents staff established a joint work group to examine the issue, and the work group had already concluded its work before this issue became a popular media topic. So, the work group accelerated bringing the results of its work before the Board. The co-chairs of the work group, President Nathaniel Hansford of North Georgia College & State University and Mr. Fuchko, were present at this meeting to share with the Board the work group's proposal for strengthening student involvement in the setting and management of mandatory fees, which the Chancellor endorsed. Chancellor Portch then turned the floor over to President Hansford.

President Hansford thanked Chancellor Portch and greeted the Board. He explained that the work group was established by the Board this past summer upon the recommendation of SAC. The group represents a variety of different constituencies. It consists of five student representatives, a representative from the Board of Regents Central Office, two vice presidents for business and finance, and President Hansford. After considering the student fees matter in the fall, at this meeting, the work group would make its recommendation, which was in the Regents' folders. The recommendation is presented as Item 1 on the agenda of the Committee on Finance and Business Operations. (See page 10.) President Hansford would be focusing on the mandatory student fees matter, which consists of two proposals. The first proposal is that new mandatory student increases by an institution to the Board of Regents shall first be presented for advice and counsel to a committee at that institution composed of at least 50% students. Those students will be appointed by the student government association ("SGA") at that institution. The second proposal is that all mandatory student fees collected by an institution shall be budgeted and administered by the president using proper administrative procedures which shall include the advice and counsel of an advisory committee composed of at least 50% students. Again, these students will be appointed by the institution's SGA. Of course, all payments for funds supported by students shall be made according to Board-approved business procedures and appropriate business practices of the institution. President Hansford then called upon Mr. Fuchko to continue the presentation.

Mr. Fuchko thanked President Hansford and greeted the Regents. He reiterated that this was a proposal passed by SAC in summer 1999. This proposal has broad-based support from not only SGAs, but also the student bodies at the institutions around the State. He emphasized that the presidents of the institutions ultimately bring student fee recommendations to the Board, but this proposal will open up the student fee process to more student participation and will further strengthen the process already in place at the Central Office level to review the fees and to create a buy-in by students for the uses of fees. Mr. Fuchko asserted that if a student knows how his fees are being used and has input into the process, he will make greater use of the activities supported by fees. Technology fees are a good example. As a student at KSU, Mr. Fuchko knows where some of the technology fee money goes because of his involvement as SGA President. Therefore, he is better able to take advantage of the technology. The SGA tries to make the student body aware of how the technology fees are being used so that the students can also take advantage of the technology. This process will further strengthen that. Mr. Fuchko then asked whether the Regents had any questions or comments.

Regent Cannestra remarked that he is bothered by the definition of what comprises the mandatory student fee base. He stated that the Board should determine what is appropriate to be included in the fee. He remarked that the Board may have made a mistake by having CCSU put the laptop pilot program into a mandatory student fee rather than into the tuition because it appears that the laptops were as much a necessity as books. This distorted CCSU's student fees in relationship to those at other institutions. GIT urges students to have computers, but they are not included in the student fees. So, he said, it seems there should be a way of determining which items should be covered by the mandatory student fees and which should be included in tuition. Regent Cannestra said that he would rather see institutions determining what kind of computers students should have but letting the students be responsible for providing their own equipment. He stated that, nevertheless, as more technology comes on board, putting it into the mandatory student fees distorts the whole concept of what should be in the fees.

Chancellor Portch remarked that this is a debate that has occurred around the nation over the last five years. Some states include technology in tuition, and a number of other states have a separate technology fee. It is certainly something the Board should examine. Technology comes closest of all the fees to being a cost of doing educational business. The Board would probably have to rethink tuition, which would vary more from school to school if technology such as the laptop program was built in. One of the reasons the present formula badly understates the cost of technology for education today because it was designed in the 1980s, when technology meant using a slide projector. So, this is a piece of the puzzle.

Regent Cannestra interjected that this would not be a piece of the puzzle if the students had to provide their own computers. There is a tradeoff, because then the students have to buy computers themselves. However, if the University System is going to bring students into the twenty-first century, then students need to be computer literate.

Chancellor Portch agreed that this is something the Board needs to examine. He advised that the Regents be mindful of the traditional budget breakdown of 75% State funding and 25% tuition. This is also a very legitimate concern.

Regent Jenkins stated that a problem with HOPE is whether or not mandatory student fees should be covered. He asserted that there would have to be some coordination with the State on this matter if technology were to be made part of tuition.

The Chancellor agreed that this would have to be done in partnership with State government.

Regent Leebern asked whether Dr. Desrochers and Associate Vice Chancellor for Fiscal Affairs William R. Bowes could identify the comparators in the market. He suggested that it might be useful to see how other states handle their mandatory student fees and what elements go into those fees.

Chair White stated that this was a good suggestion and this is how private industry would look at the matter.

Regent Baranco added that it would be important to discern what percentage of the existing student population enters the University System already owning a computer. She asserted that the figure would likely be very high.

Chair White asked whether the Chancellor or his staff had any figures on that.

Chancellor Portch responded that they did not, but he thought that the figures would likely vary considerably from institution to institution.

Regent Cannestra remarked that this is not just a matter of having a computer. Rather, each institution is going to have to agree to one operating system so that the students are compatible with the technology on campus.

Chancellor Portch noted GIT requires that students bring whatever computers they would like to buy, but the computers must be compatible with GIT's systems. He reminded the Board that the reason the University System launched several technology pilot programs was because there are different student populations across the System. At the time, a fee at CCSU and FC was probably a better option for the students than to require them to buy computers outright, because there were more students with fewer means at those institutions at that time. It now turns out that is probably not as true because the prices on laptops have come down considerably. So, there will be variance across the System, but as Regent Cannestra had stressed, the System cannot afford to have that variance any more given the expectations of the modern workplace.

Chair White asked Dr. Desrochers how long it would take to research the information about comparator states and their tuition and fees breakdowns.

Dr. Desrochers responded that there are some available resources for finding the tuitions and student fees by state. However, it would take some time to create a breakdown of the kinds of fees. So, it could take more or less time, depending on how deeply the Regents want to get into the subject.

Chancellor Portch said that given where the Board is in the budget cycle, with mandatory student fee requests coming to the Board at its April 2000 meeting, the staff should bring back what it can in March 2000 in the aggregate and maybe one or two states where the staff actually do a little deeper research. He thought it would be best to have some information before student fees were before the Board as an action item.

Regent Jones asked what types of things are traditionally included as part of mandatory student fees. He remarked that he just recently learned that parking is sometimes included in the fees.

Chancellor Portch called upon Mr. Fuchko to answer this question.

Mr. Fuchko responded that student fees vary by institution. At most institutions, there is a mandatory student activities fee. Some will have a mandatory parking fee, while others have an optional parking fee. Some have health fees, technology fees, and athletic fees. What those fees pay for varies by institution. Some institutions' student activities fees pay some salaries of student activities personnel. They are usually there to bring in speakers and to support the student newspaper and SGA. The athletic fees pay scholarships, coaches' salaries, equipment, etc. Parking fees go toward parking lot maintenance and the like.

Chancellor Portch stressed that Mr. Fuchko had described only mandatory student fees. There are also nonmandatory fees, such as residence hall and cafeteria fees.

Regent Leebern reiterated that it would be valuable if Dr. Desrochers and her staff would look closely at the fees of a few other systems and break them down. The chart in the Regents' folders broke down the mandatory student fees in the University System. He reminded the Board that at its April 1998 meeting, President Joe Ben Welch of Middle Georgia College ("MGC") came before the Board to request an increase in MGC's athletic fee. Regent Leebern noted that there was an understanding that the students had input into that decision, but how much input he did not know. This also happened at Columbus State University, and the institution was asked whether the fee increase had student support. He stressed that it has always been a concern of the Regents that the students have input into the mandatory student fees process.

Mr. Fuchko remarked that 20 to 30 years ago, there was a different culture at colleges and universities where student fees were concerned. Institutions now understand the importance of involving students in how fees are spent.

Regent Jones noted that the System paid for a parking deck at the University of Georgia ("UGA") that cost about $12 million. He asked whether student fees would be contributed to that facility or whether students would have to pay to park in that facility.

Chancellor Portch again deferred to Mr. Fuchko, because KSU is the institution that had the largest fee increase this year because of a new parking deck.

Mr. Fuchko stated that parking decks are generally paid for by State bonds, and the students pay that back via mandatory student fees. The Board approved the fee at KSU, but the parking deck project is still before the legislature.

The Chancellor added that most of these projects tend to be funded by a combination of State and student funds based on their anticipated usage. He stated that the appropriateness of fees for such facilities is something the Board needs to consider. The System has been put in this situation in part because of constraints on being able to issue revenue bonds for payback projects, he explained. The facilities issue raises significant questions. Chancellor Portch remarked that the original concept of HOPE was not intended to build facilities.

Mr. Fuchko added that Governor Zell Miller in his original proposal on HOPE included facility fees as one of the three kinds of fees that would not be covered. He agreed that this is an issue to be more closely examined.

Regent Jenkins also agreed. He stated that it is unfair for one institution to have a parking deck paid for and another institution's students have to pay a monthly fee for parking. Furthermore, if an institution is building a payback project, the student body four years down the road may not want to pay the fee. What input then does the new student body have on an existing parking fee?

Mr. Fuchko stated that this is one of the difficulties with student fees. He explained that his wife also went to KSU. She started in 1992 paying a facility fee for the new student center, and after she graduated six years later, the student center was finally finished.

Chancellor Portch stressed that the proposed process is good because it requires the institutions to provide students with information with which they can help make decisions. However, there are consequences to fees always remaining level. For example, the activity director at an institution is probably paid for by the student activity fees. She is going to get a raise each year if she is doing a good job. The only way not to increase the fee then is to cut back on programming. So, this is not a very simple issue. The Chancellor stated that SGAs are going to recognize that and be able to give the Board some informed advice. There are many factors that go into the student fees, and the president ultimately has the fiduciary responsibility at the institutions. There are instances around the country where one student group is particularly unhappy with another group. Often, the SGA and the student newspaper are in disagreement. So, there must be some balancing in the policy. He said the policy is well-crafted for sufficient student input, and the staff will look at that input before bringing anything to the Board while balancing the long-term fiduciary responsibility as well.

Regent Cater asked whether all institutions have athletic fees or whether some have activities fees without athletics.

Chancellor Portch replied that not every institution has an athletic fee, but some of those that do not have one are angling for it. The majority of institutions have an athletic fee. He noted that athletic fees are lower at institutions where there is revenue potential than at institutions that do not have revenue potential. That was part of what the Coopers & Lybrand LLP study helped the Board to understand.

Regent NeSmith remarked that several Regents had recently visited UGA, and one of the facilities they toured was the student center, which is being funded by the mandatory student fees. He understood that the students had voted for this. He then asked whether a process like that would fall under the oversight of the work group.

The Chancellor responded that it would.

Regent Leebern suggested that if students are paying a fee to park in their institution's deck, then visitors to the institution who are not students nor faculty members should pay a higher fee to park in that same deck determined by the market.

Chair White asked whether there were any further questions or comments, and seeing that there were none, he asked the Chancellor whether he had any further comments.

Chancellor Portch thanked the student fees work group for their hard work. He noted that this was President Hansford's first Systemwide project. He remarked that the group achieved a consensus with widespread involvement consistent with the spirit in which the proposal was brought to the Board.

Chair White thanked President Hansford and Mr. Fuchko for their time and effort in working on this issue. He then asked for a motion to approve the change in policy to require greater student involvement in review of mandatory fees and in approval of budgets supported by mandatory fees. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved the Item 1 of the agenda of the Committee on Finance and Business Operations. In closing, Chair White asked Dr. Desrochers to follow up with the fee breakdown information to the Regents.

Dr. Desrochers responded that she would get that information to the Regents.

Regent Cannestra asked for a motion to recess the meeting of the Committee of the Whole. With motion properly made, variously seconded, and unanimously adopted, the meeting of the Committee on Finance and Business Operations as a Committee of the Whole was adjourned, and the Regents adjourned for their regular Committee meetings. Following Committee meetings, the Board adjourned until 9 a.m. Wednesday, February 9, 2000.

CALL TO ORDER

The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met again on Wednesday, February 9, 2000 in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Chair of the Board, Regent Kenneth W. Cannestra, called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. Present on Wednesday, in addition to Chair Cannestra, were Vice Chair J. Tom Coleman, Jr. and Regents Thomas F. Allgood, Sr., Juanita P. Baranco, Connie Cater, Joe Frank Harris, Hilton H. Howell, Jr., George M. D. (John) Hunt III, Edgar L. Jenkins, Charles H. Jones, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Martin W. NeSmith, Joel O. Wooten, Glenn S. White, and James D. Yancey.

INVOCATION

The invocation was given on Wednesday, February 9 by Regent Charles H. Jones.

ATTENDANCE REPORT

The attendance report was read on Wednesday, February 9 by Secretary Gail S. Weber, who announced that all Regents were present on that day.

[ return to top ]

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND BUSINESS OPERATIONS

The Committee on Finance and Business Operations met on Tuesday, February 8, 2000 at approximately 1:50 p.m. in the Board Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Glenn S. White and Regents Connie Cater, J. Tom Coleman, Jr., George M. D. (John) Hunt III, Charles H. Jones, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., and James D. Yancey. Chair White reported to the Board on Wednesday that the Committee had reviewed four items, one of which required action. He noted that a mandatory fee schedule had been placed in each Regent's folder in response to requests made during the meeting of the Committee of the Whole the preceding day. He suggested they review the schedule before the March 2000 meeting. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:

1. Approval of Change to Board Policy Manual to Expand Student Involvement in the Mandatory Student Fee and Budget Approval Process

Approved: The Board approved a change in policy to require greater student involvement in review of mandatory fees and approval of budgets supported by mandatory student fees.

This item was a walk-on item which was discussed in full by the Committee on Finance and Business Operations as a Committee of the Whole. (See pages 2 to 8.) The Committee of the Whole requested the staff research mandatory student fees in other southeastern states' institutions and report their findings to the Board in April 2000 or the earliest possible date.

Background: In response to a resolution presented to the Board of Regents by the Student Advisory Council ("SAC"), a student fees work group was established to discuss and recommend policy changes affecting student involvement in the approval of mandatory student fees. The group, co-chaired by President Nathaniel Hansford, North Georgia College & State University, and SAC Chair John M. Fuchko III, met and agreed to recommend amending Section 705.5 of the Board of Regents Policy Manual. This amendment is supported by Governor Barnes as a positive step in allowing student participation in the process and overall cost containment for mandatory student fees.

Replace current Section 705.5 on student activity funds with:

Mandatory Student Fees: Proposals to increase mandatory student fees and proposals to create new mandatory student fees, submitted by an institution, shall first be presented for advice and counsel to a committee at each institution composed of at least 50% students. Students shall be appointed by the institution's student government association.

All mandatory student fees collected by an institution shall be budgeted and administered by the president, using proper administrative procedures, which shall include the advice and counsel of an advisory committee composed of at least 50% students. Students shall be appointed by the institution's student government association. All payments from funds supported by student mandatory fees shall be made according to Board of Regents approved business procedures and the appropriate business practices of the institution.

2. Information Item: PeopleSoft/GeorgiaFirst Project Report

The GeorgiaFirst project is entering its second phase: the implementation of PeopleSoft financial systems (general ledger, accounts payable, purchasing, accounts receivable, and asset management). Georgia State University President Carl V. Patton reported to the Committee on the implementation of the PeopleSoft financial system software at Georgia State University ("GSU") and the benefits GSU has gained as a result. Associate Vice Chancellor for Fiscal Affairs William R. Bowes reported on the status of the implementation effort and its importance to meeting new Government Accounting Standards Board financial reporting requirements. Finally, Mr. Bowes provided an update on the continuing implementation of the PeopleSoft human resources and payroll systems. State Auditor Russell W. Hinton represented the Department of Audits and Accounts during this discussion.

3. Information Item: Report on the University System of Georgia's Year 2000 Contingency Plans

Effective planning by all University System of Georgia institutions resulted in a smooth transition into the year 2000. Interim Vice Chancellor for Information/Instructional Technology Randall A. Thursby gave his final report on the outcome of the University System of Georgia's contingency planning for the year 2000.

4. Information Item: Update on Employee Health Insurance Issues

Senior Vice Chancellor for Capital Resources Lindsay Desrochers provided a report to the Committee on various issues relating to the employee health insurance plans. The Committee will hear more on this item at its March 2000 meeting.

[ return to top ]

COMMITTEE ON REAL ESTATE AND FACILITIES

The Committee on Real Estate and Facilities met on Tuesday, February 8, 2000 at approximately 2:40 p.m. in the Board Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Charles H. Jones, Vice Chair Donald M. Leebern, Jr., and Regents Connie Cater, J. Tom Coleman, Jr., George M. D. (John) Hunt III, Glenn S. White, and James D. Yancey. Chair Jones reported to the Board on Wednesday that the Committee had reviewed six items, three of which required action. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:

1. Authorization of Project, "Swimming Pool Facility," Columbus State University

Approved: The Board authorized project "Swimming Pool Facility," Columbus State University with a total project budget of $1,554,000 funded by the Columbus State University Foundation to be constructed in two phases.

This item was modified by the Committee to stipulate that staff are to review with the institution the maintenance costs associated with the facility and to determine plans for revenue sources to cover those costs.

The facility will be located on campus adjacent to the physical education facility currently under construction. The facilities master plan identified the need for this type of space in this location.

The first phase of instruction will include an outdoor Olympic-sized pool with locker rooms, offices, a concession area, an entry lobby, two outdoor volleyball courts, and parking for 35 cars. Phase 2 will include the landscaped entry plaza. The construction cost for phases 1 and 2 is approximately $1,332,000.

The total project cost for phases 1 and 2 is $1,554,000.

Since the project was approved, the university, in conjunction with the Office of Facilities, will proceed with the selection of an architectural consultant.

2. Authorization of Project BR-10-0004 "Restoration - Building 'H' (Family Housing)," the University of Georgia

Approved: The Board authorized Project BR-10-0004 "Restoration - Building 'H' (Family Housing)," the University of Georgia, with a total project budget of $1,600,000, using $350,000 State self-insurance funds and $1,250,000 auxiliary reserve funds.

The project will restore and renovate approximately 25,874 square feet and includes restoration of 12 units damaged by fire, reconstruction of 50% of the roof, and complete renovation of 12 additional units, including full accessibility for at least one unit.

The construction cost of the project is $1,091,200 ($42.18 per square foot).

Funding for the project is $350,000 from State self-insurance funds and $1,250,000 auxiliary reserve funds. These funds have been budgeted in accordance with the requirements of the Office of Capital Resources. This request is consistent with the university's housing plan.

3. Appointment of Architect, University System of Georgia

Approved: The Board appointed each first-named architectural firm listed below for the identified major and minor capital outlay projects and authorized the execution of an architectural contract with each identified firm at the stated cost limitation shown for each project. Should it not be possible to execute a contract with the top-ranked firm, the staff would then attempt to execute a contract with the other listed firms in rank order.

Following current practice for the selection of architect, the following recommendations were made:

Project No. I-43, "Physical Education Building"
Darton College

Project Description: 90,000-gross-square-foot facility that will include renovation of 15,000 gross square feet in the existing facility and an addition of 75,000 gross square feet, which will provide space for a swimming pool, gymnasium, classrooms, and administrative and ancillary support services.

Total Project Cost $12,000,000

Construction Cost (Stated Cost Limitation) $10,351,700

A/E (fixed) Fee $713,100

Number of A/E firms that applied for this commission: 31
Recommended A/E design firms in rank order:

Flynn-Finderup Architects, Atlanta

JRA Architects, Inc., Columbus

Harper Partners, Inc., Atlanta

4. Information Item: Physical Master Plan, Waycross College

Waycross College and the Office of Facilities proposed a physical master plan for future development of the campus. The consultant; Mr. Rob Evans, Principal of the Valdosta architectural firm of IPG; and President Barbara Losty, presented the plan to the Committee. The consultants reviewed five-year enrollment targets, the college's mission statement, strategic plan, academic and support programs, and other variables. They met with the administration, faculty, senate, students, and community leaders to receive input and then presented five-year, ten-year, and long-term options for facilities, parking/traffic patterns, student/pedestrian circulation patterns, and campus beautification. Based on the consultants' findings, Waycross College's master plan recommendations included the following:

Create appropriate future facilities for community outreach and continuing education needs
Consider additions to existing buildings to accommodate future growth
Modernize several areas within existing campus buildings as they become available for more appropriate functions and in order to improve adjacencies
Improve campus image and entry
Continue to preserve and enhance campus landscaping

5. Executive Session

There was an Executive Session on the Committee agenda in order that the Committee might discuss potential litigation concerning Georgia State University Village. The following Committee members voted to go into Executive Session: Chair Charles H. Jones, Vice Chair Donald M. Leebern, Jr., and Regents Connie Cater, J. Tom Coleman, Jr., George M. D. (John) Hunt III, Glenn S. White, and James D. Yancey. Senior Vice Chancellor for Capital Resources Lindsay Desrochers, Vice Chancellor for Facilities William K. Chatham, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Legal Affairs (Contracts) Corlis Cummings, and Assistant Attorney General George S. Zier also attended the Executive Session. When the Committee returned to its regular session, Chair Jones reported that no action was taken in Executive Session. In accordance with H.B. 278, Section 3 (Amending O.C.G.A. § 50-14-4), an affidavit regarding this Executive Session is on file with the Chancellor's Office.

6. Information Item: Easement, City of Atlanta

The City of Atlanta is planning to replace the existing Orme Street sewer with a new parallel line under Techwood Drive. The city has requested certain easements for the period of construction to permit well-point monitoring and construction access. The city has agreed to provide a copy of all data collected from this monitoring to the Board of Regents. The Committee agreed to extend the easement with certain conditions.

[ return to top ]

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION, RESEARCH, AND EXTENSION

The Committee on Education, Research, and Extension met on Tuesday, February 8, 2000 at approximately 1:50 p.m. in room 6041, the Training Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Juanita P. Baranco, Vice Chair Elridge W. McMillan, and Regents Thomas F. Allgood, Sr., Edgar L. Jenkins, Martin W. NeSmith, and Joel O. Wooten. Vice Chair McMillan reported to the Board that the Committee had reviewed nine items, six of which required action. Additionally, 145 regular faculty appointments were reviewed and recommended for approval. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:

1. Establishment of an Education Specialist Degree in Teacher Leadership, North Georgia College & State University

Approved: The Board approved the request of President Nathaniel Hansford that North Georgia College & State University be authorized to establish an education specialist degree ("Ed.S.") program in teacher leadership, effective February 9, 2000.

Abstract: The Department of Teacher Education within the School of Education proposed to establish an education specialist degree program in teacher leadership to prepare teachers to function as instructional lead teachers, department chairs, mentors to interns and to new teachers, and curriculum supervisors or directors. While the program is designed for teachers who wish to remain in the classroom and who seek to develop the knowledge and skills they need to be more effective instructional leaders, through taking additional courses, a candidate could also meet certification requirements for school administration. Programs in teacher leadership are emerging nationally to provide the knowledge and skills teachers need to participate more fully as instructional leaders in the school, as mentor teachers, and as active partners with parents in furthering the educational attainment of the children in the classroom.

In addition to focusing on teacher leadership more broadly, graduates of this program will be prepared for national board certification in their teaching field and for state certification in instructional leadership and teacher support services. The program consists of 30 semester hours of post-master's level work. Prerequisites for admission include a master's degree with strong emphasis in a teaching field and three years of successful teaching experience.

The program is fully consistent with the Regents' 1998 policy on the preparation of educators for the schools.

Need: Surveys were sent to teachers in 66 schools in 18 Northeast Georgia school districts to sample the level of interest in the program (sample size was less than half of the teacher population in the region). Close to 200 of the teachers surveyed in the sample indicated an interest in the program. There are only three national board-certified teachers in the North Georgia region. This program should help to increase significantly the number of national board-certified teachers in North Georgia. According to the 1997-1998 Georgia Report Card , 7 of the 20 school systems in the State showing the largest percentage of student growth are in North Georgia. Greater numbers of teacher leaders and school administrators will be needed to help the growing student population in this region achieve at desired levels. Currently, 8.5% of the teachers in North Georgia hold an Ed.S. (10% statewide).

Outcomes: The program seeks to give teachers the knowledge and skills they need to remain in their classrooms and assume leadership roles in the schools and in the school community. Graduates of the program will be able to assess and account for student performance based on national standards, develop and provide systematic feedback to the school community about student progress, initiate and sustain school improvement efforts, demonstrate use of technology to enhance instructional effectiveness and student learning in the classroom, and personally meet the standards for national board certification.

Curriculum: The program consists of 30 semester hours beyond the master's degree, featuring the following themes: applying systematic learning frameworks to increase student achievement in schools, building leadership capacity in schools and communities, school improvement, and using assessment data for increasing student achievement in schools. All courses are new. Each degree candidate must complete a portfolio composed of work by their students, artifacts of their own teaching, and evidence of their leadership skills organized in the format required by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.

Students will go through the program as a cohort, with one new cohort admitted each May. Students will be expected to enroll full-time during summer terms and part-time during the academic year.

Projected Enrollment: It is anticipated that for the first three years of the program, new student enrollment will be 50, 50, and 50.

Funding: The institution will redirect funds for this program.

Assessment: The Office of Academic Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the proposed program. In 2004, this program will be evaluated by the institution and the Central Office to determine the success of the program's implementation and achievement of the enrollment, quality, centrality, viability, and cost-effectiveness, as indicated in the proposal.

2. Establishment of the Master of Science Degree With a Major in Geography, the University of Georgia

Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael F. Adams to establish the master of science ("M.S.") degree with a major in geography, effective February 9, 2000.

Abstract: The master of science degree with a major in geography will provide students with a coherent, coordinated degree program emphasizing basic science and geographic techniques. The coursework for such a degree program has existed for some time, but there has been no mechanism for formal recognition of the increased emphasis on scientific and technical studies. The M.S. degree will benefit students in their search for employment by making their qualifications competitive with students from other M.S. degree programs. This includes not only students in physical geography, but also those interested in human geography, the training in techniques, and the science of planning and census work.

Need: The Geography Department at the University of Georgia offers a master of arts ("M.A.") degree in three areas: physical geography, human geography, and techniques of geography. The existing M.A. with a major in geography is intended for work in the humanities and social sciences. Nationally, however, many universities also offer an M.S. degree with an emphasis on basic sciences and/or geographic techniques such as remote sensing, geographic information systems ("GIS"), spatial analysis, and computer cartography. The University of Georgia sought to offer an M.S. degree to enable its students to compete with other graduates from comparable institutions and to follow national trends. An M.S. degree program emphasizing basic and geographic techniques provides a better means of presenting a student's capabilities to potential employers. This will enhance student employment after graduation while also enhancing the reputation of the university as both a regional and national leader in the areas of physical and human geography. A need for graduates trained in GIS, remote sensing, computer cartography, and basic sciences is evident from the growth of high-tech industries and international business. Geographers are needed to analyze distributions of physical and cultural phenomena on local, regional, continental, and global scales. The M.S. degree program may focus on the physical geographer who studies variations in climates, vegetation, soil, and land forms and their implications for human activity. A shift in emphasis in geography has occurred in the last 10 to 15 years (i.e., GIS, remote sensing, basic sciences) which is better described by the M.S. degree.

Objectives: The purpose of the proposal was to establish a master of science degree to recognize students whose degree programs reflect a basic curriculum in one of the three main areas of geography (physical, human, and techniques) with a significant portion (at least 18 semester hours) of that work devoted to the basic sciences or geographic techniques.

Curriculum: Both the master of science and the existing master of arts degree programs will require a minimum of 31 semester credit hours. Choice of the appropriate degree, M.A. or M.S., will involve the thesis area and supporting coursework. All students whose coursework includes a minimum of 18 semester hours in physical geography and/or geographic techniques, however, will be eligible for the M.S. degree. Only one degree, M.A. or M.S., will be awarded per student. No new courses are intended for the M.S. degree program.

Projected Enrollment: It is anticipated that for the first three years of the new program, student enrollment in the major will be 24, 16, and 18.

Funding: The initiation and maintenance of the M.S. in geography degree can be accomplished without any additional cost to the university. All tenured and tenure-track full-time faculty members in the Department of Geography will be expected to participate in the proposed M.S. degree program. No new faculty positions will be required. No new facilities or equipment will be required for the degree.

3. Establishment of the Distinguished Chair in Oncologic Pathology, Medical College of Georgia

Approved: The Board approved the request of President Francis J. Tedesco that the Medical College of Georgia be authorized to establish the Distinguished Chair in Oncologic Pathology, effective February 9, 2000.

Funding and Support: The Medical College of Georgia has on deposit $1,000,000 in an endowment for this chair. The funding for this chair was contributed as follows: 1) a contribution of $600,000 from the Physician's Practice Group Foundation and 2) $400,000 from the Medical College of Georgia Foundation institutional support fund, which has come from the donations by corporations and banks. The endowment will provide financial resources to the Medical College of Georgia to recruit, support, and maintain an outstanding faculty member in the area of oncologic pathology within the Department of Pathology.

4. Termination of Majors and Restructuring of the Master of Health Education, Medical College of Georgia

Approved: The Board approved the request of President Francis J. Tedesco that the Medical College of Georgia be authorized to terminate select majors and restructure the master of health education ("M.H.E.") degree, effective February 9, 2000.

The Medical College of Georgia requested that the Board of Regents approve a restructuring of the M.H.E. degree. Currently, the degree has five majors: dental hygiene, medical technology, occupational therapy, physical therapy, and health information management. The Medical College of Georgia requested that the program be restructured and consolidated into a stand-alone degree and that the five separate majors be terminated. The consolidation of the majors will allow the institution to have a more interdisciplinary approach with concentrations in any of the allied health areas. The resultant stand-alone program's revised structure would be similar to the existing master of science in allied health degree.

The restructuring of the majors has no impact on the existing five participating departments and their graduate students. The consolidation of the majors does not change organizational reporting lines. It will enhance the graduate education opportunities for three other departments which have not been involved in the master of health education program and have not been able to have health professionals from their disciplines apply to this program.

Applications to the M.H.E. degree program are centrally managed by the School of Graduate Studies and, graduate students are admitted to the School of Graduate Studies, not to departments. The present M.H.E. graduate students' advisory committees are made up of graduate faculty from a number of disciplines, not from faculty within one department.

The restructuring plan could be implemented immediately upon approval. All necessary curriculum changes were completed during the semester conversion process. No new courses were proposed as part of the plan, and no additional resources will be required.

5. Termination of Specific Education Majors and Other Degree Programs, Augusta State University

Approved: The Board approved the request of President William Bloodworth Jr. that Augusta State University be authorized to terminate specific education majors and other degree programs, effective February 9, 2000.

Augusta State University requested approval to terminate the following degree programs:

Education specialist degree ("Ed.S.") with a major in special education
Ed.S. with a major in specific learning disabilities
Ed.S. with a major in education of the mentally handicapped
Ed.S. with a major in counseling and guidance
Master of education degree ("M.Ed.") with a major in elementary education
M.Ed. with a major in secondary education
Ed.S. with a major in secondary education
M.Ed. with a major in health services education
Bachelor of arts ("B.A.") degree with a major in elementary education
Bachelor of science degree with a major in medical technology
Associate of applied science degree ("A.A.S.") with a major in health
A.A.S. with a major in business
A.A.S. with a major in services
A.A.S. with a major in technology

The university requested that these programs be terminated due to decreased enrollments and degrees conferred in these programs. In addition, all of the B.A. in education programs have been changed to bachelor of science in education ("B.S.Ed.") programs. The A.A.S. degree programs were offered in cooperation with Augusta Technical Institute. Augusta Technical Institute currently has sole responsibility for the programs. Students and faculty will not be adversely impacted by these requested changes.

[ return to top ]

6. Administrative and Academic Appointments and Personnel Actions, Various System Institutions

The following administrative and academic appointments were reviewed by Education Committee Chair Juanita P. Baranco and were approved by the Board. All full-time appointments are on file with the Office of Academic Affairs.

Summary of Full-Time Faculty Appointments

Institutions by Type:	Totals:
Georgia Institute of Technology	13
Georgia State University	15
Medical College of Georgia	6
University of Georgia	27
Total Research Universities Appointments	61
Georgia Southern University	5
Valdosta State University	2
Total Regional Universities Appointments	7
Albany State University	0
Armstrong Atlantic State University	5
Augusta State University	2
Clayton College & State University	0
Columbus State University	1
Fort Valley State University	4
Georgia College & State University	2
Georgia Southwestern State University	1
Kennesaw State University	3
North Georgia College & State Univ.	0
Savannah State University	0
Southern Polytechnic State University	1
State University of West Georgia	2
Total State Universities Appointments	21
Dalton State College	1
Macon State College	0
Total State Colleges Appointments	1
Abraham Baldwin Agric. College	2
Atlanta Metropolitan College	1
Bainbridge College	0
Coastal Georgia Community College	0
Darton College	0
East Georgia College	0
Floyd College	2
Gainesville College	1
Georgia Perimeter College	5
Gordon College	0
Middle Georgia College	0
South Georgia College	0
Waycross College	0
Total Two-Year Colleges Appointments	11

TOTAL FULL-TIME FACULTY APPOINTMENTS 101

GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
	
EMERITUS APPOINTMENTS:
		
HALE, RUTH C.:  ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITA, LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CENTER,
EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 10, 2000.

ROPER, FRANK E., JR.:  REGISTRAR AND ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITUS, REGISTRAR, 
EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 10, 2000

LEAVE OF ABSENCE APPROVALS:
		
HUTCHINS, RONALD:  DIRECTOR/SENIOR RESEARCH SCIENTIST, OFFICE OF INFORMATION 
TECHNOLOGY, LEAVE FROM FEBRUARY 10, 2000 THROUGH AUGUST 9, 2000, WITH PAY.

ASHWIN, RAM:  ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, COLLEGE OF COMPUTING, LEAVE FROM 
JANUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH JANUARY 1, 2001, WITH PAY

ROSS, CATHERINE:  PROFESSOR, COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE, LEAVE FORM 
OCTOBER 25, 1999 THROUGH OCTOBER 24, 2000, WITHOUT PAY.

SAVELBERGH, MATHIEU W.P.:  ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL AND
SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, LEAVE FROM JANUARY 1, 2000 THROUGH JANUARY 1, 2001, WITH
 PAY.

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
BERTRAND, J. AARON JR.:  PROFESSOR, AEROSPACE ENGINEERING, AS NEEDED FOR
PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 9, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

FLOWERS, CAITLIN:  PRINCIPAL RESEARCH ENGINEER, GTRI-ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS, AS
 NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 11, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

SMITH, C. VIRGIL JR.:  ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, AEROSPACE ENGINEERING, AS NEEDED
FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING MAY 17, 2000.


GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
BLUMENTHAL, CAROLINE:  ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR/LIBRARIAN, PULLEN LIBRARY, AS
NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

JOHNSON, REGINA, ACADEMIC PROFESSIONAL, EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION, AS NEEDED
FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

PILCHER, LORENE:  PROFESSOR, EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD 
BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

RUMBAUGH, DUANE:  REGENTS PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY, AS NEEDED
 FOR PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

	
MEDICAL COLLEGE OF GEORGIA

TENURE STATUS CHANGE APPROVALS:
		
PRUITT, J. NED, II:  ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, FROM
TENURE TRACK TO NON-TENURE TRACK, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 13, 2000.

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:

LUTCHER, C. LAWRENCE:  PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF MEDICINE, AS NEEDED FOR
PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 13, 2000 AND ENDING JANUARY 12, 2001.

		
UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA

EMERITUS APPOINTMENTS:

BERDANIER, CAROLYN D.:  PROFESSOR EMERITA OF FOODS AND NUTRITION, COLLEGE OF
FAMILY AND CONSUMER SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2000.

EBERHARD, WALLACE B.:  PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF JOURNALISM, COLLEGE OF
JOURNALISM AND MASS COMMUNICATION, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 14, 2000.

FLATT, WILLIAM P.:  PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF FOODS AND NUTRITION, COLLEFE OF
FAMILY AND CONSUMER SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2000.

GUTHRIE, LARRY D.:  PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF ANIMAL SCIENCE, COLLEGE OF
AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1, 2000.

LOWERY, ROBERT S.:  PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF ANIMAL SCIENCES, COLLEGE OF
 AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2000.

WASHBURN, KENNETH W.:  PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF POULTRY SCIENCE, COLLEGE OF 
AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2000.

WENTHE, LELIA SKIDMORE:  ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR EMERITA OF ADVERTISING, COLLEGE
 OF JOURNALISM AND MASS COMMUNICATION, EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1, 2000.

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
ALLISON, JAMES M.:  PROFESSOR, BIOLOGICAL AND AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING, AS
NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING OCTOBER 4, 1999 AND ENDING JANUARY 31, 2000.

BOOTH, BRENDA S.:  ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT,  COLLEGE OF VETERINARY MEDICINE,
AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING MAY 1, 2000 AN ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

BOWEN, JEAN S.:  PROGRAM SPECIALIST, COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, AS NEEDED FOR
PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

CRUMMEY, CHARLES:  SKILLED TRADES WORKER, AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL 
SCIENCES, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 11, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30,
2000.

CLIFTON, PATRICIA D.:  PROGRAM COORDINATOR, AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL 
SCIENCES, AS NEEDED FOR PEIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 14, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30,
2000.

CULLIFER, WALTER TERRY:  PROJECT DIRECTOR, SCHOOL LEADERSHIP AND LIFELONG 
LEARNING, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 3, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30,
2000.

DAVIS, JOYCE:  SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY, SCHOOL OF PROFESSIONAL
STUDIES, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30,
2000.

DAVENPORT, FRED:  CUSTODIAL SUPERVISOR, GEORGIA CENTER FOR CONTINUING
EDUCATION, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING DECEMBER 9, 1999 AND ENDING JUNE 30,
2000.

EBERHARD, WALLACE B.:  PROFESSOR, GEORGIA CENTER FOR CONTINUING EDUCATION,
AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.  AND
PROFESSOR, COLLEGE OF JOURNALISM AND MASS COMMUNICATION, AS NEEDED FOR
PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING MAY 9, 2000.

HARWELL, KENNETH R.:  AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH ASSITANT II, CROP AND SOIL
SCIENCES, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 11, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30,
2000.

HORAN, PATRICK MICHAEL:  PROFESSOR, INSTITUTION FOR BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH, AS
NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

MCKILLIP, WILLIAM DAVID:  PROFESSOR, MATHEMATICS EDUCATION, AS NEEDED FOR
PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 7, 2000 AND ENDING MAY 9, 2000.

LOWERY, ROBERT S. JR.: PROFESSOR, BIOLOGICAL AND AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING, AS 
NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 11, 2000 AND ENDING MAY 9, 2000.

PHILLIPS, LOUIS E.:  CONSULTANT, GEORGIA CENTER FOR CONTINUING EDUCATION, AS
NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 17, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

STRICKLAND, VIRGINIA:  ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT, OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL
SCIENCES-EDUCATION, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING FEBRUARY 11, 2000 AND 
JUNE 30, 2000.

WATTS, VIRGINIA B.:  PROGRAM SPEIALIST, VETERINARY MEDICINE, AS NEEDED FOR
PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 13, 2000 AND ENDING MARCH 25, 2000.

WOODRUFF, JOHN M.:  PROFESSOR, AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, AS
NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING MARCH 1, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.


GEORGIA SOUTHERN UNIVERSITY

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
WOODRUM, ARTHUR:  CHAIR EMERITUS/PROFESSOR EMERITUS, AEP COLLEGE OF SCIENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JULY 1, 1999 AND ENDING JUNE 30,
2000.


VALDOSTA STATE UNIVERSITY

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
WOODWARD, CALVIN:  PART-TIME INSTRUCTOR, DEPARTMENT OF POLITCAL SCIENCE
KING1S BAY CAMPUS, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING
MAY 30, 2000.


COLUMBUS STATE UNIVERSITY

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
CHAI, NEMIA M.:  PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE, AS NEEDED
FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 7, 2000 AND ENDING MAY 31, 2000.


KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY

EMERITUS APPOINTMENTS:
		
GALLIANO, GRACE:  PROFESSOR EMERITA OF PSYCHOLOGY, DEPARTMENT OF
PSYCHOLOGY, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 2, 2000.


NORTH GEORGIA COLLEGE AND STATE UNIVERSITY

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
SOROHAN, LAWRENCE:  PROFESSOR EMERITUS, DEPARTMENT OF TEACHER EDUCAITON,
AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING MAY 31, 2000.

TRUE, JUDITH N.:  PROFESSOR EMERITA, DEPARTMENT OF TEACHER EDUCATION, AS
NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2000 AND ENDING MAY 31, 2000.


STATE UNIVERSITY OF WEST GEORGIA

EMERITUS APPOINTMENTS:
		
BENNETT, PRISCILLA:  PROFESSOR EMERITA OF MEDIA AND INSTRUCTIONAL
TECHNOLOGY, COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 15, 2000.

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
POINDEXTER, EUGENE:  PART-TIME INSTRUCTOR, COLLEGE OF BUSINESS, AS NEEDED FOR
PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 5, 2000 AND ENDING MAY 10, 2000.


MACON STATE COLLEGE

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
WILSON, MARY:  PART-TIME INSTRUCTOR OF MATHEMATICS, NATURAL SCIENCES
DIVISION, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 11, 2000 AND ENDING MAY 15,
2000.

ROBERTSON, JIMMIE:  INSTRUCTOR OF MATHEMATICS, NATURAL SCIENCES DIVISION, AS
NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 11, 2000 AND ENDING MAY 15, 2000.


ABRAHAM BALDWIN AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
SUMNER, JOANN:  ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF NURSING, DEPARTMENT OF NURSING, AS
NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING NOVEMBER 18, 1999 AND ENDING DECEMBER 9, 1999.


COASTAL GEORGIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
DENT, JULIA C.:  INSTRUCTOR, DEPARTMENT OF ALLIED HEALTH, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD 
BEGINNING JANUARY 18, 2000 AND ENDING APRIL 14, 2000.


FLOYD COLLEGE

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
ESTEP, SADIE P.:  PART-TIME INSTRUCTOR OF MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE  MATH AND
PHYSICAL EDUCATION, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 10, 2000 AND ENDING
MAY 19, 2000.


GAINESVILLE COLLEGE

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
BROCK, DOROTHY L.:  PROFESSOR OF BIOLOGY, NATURAL SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND
PHYSICAL EDUCATION DIVISION, AS NEEDED FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2000 AND
ENDING MAY 30, 2000.
	

GEORGIA PERIMETER COLLEGE

EMERITUS APPOINTMENTS:
	
FISHER, JAMES:  PROFESSOR EMERITUS OF HISTORY, DEPARTMENT OF SCOCIAL
SCIENCES, EFFECTIVE MARCH 1, 2000.

TENURE STATUS CHANGE APPROVALS:

NICHOLS, HARRIET:  ASSISTANT PROFESSOR, INTERNATIONAL CENTER, FROM TENURE
TRACK TO NON-TENURE TRACK, EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2000.

PART-TIME APPOINTMENTS OF SYSTEM RETIREES:
		
DISMER, ROSE:  PART-TIME PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH, AS NEEDED FOR
PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 10, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

KUNIANSKY, HARRY:  PART-TIME INSTRUCTOR, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS, AS NEEDED
FOR PERIOD BEGINNING JANUARY 10, 2000 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2000.

7. Information Item: Georgia State University – Briefing on the Status of Visiting Professorships and Part-time Faculty

At the request of Vice Chair McMillan, a summary on the status of visiting professorships and part-time faculty was presented to the Committee on Education, Research, and Extension. From Georgia State University, Dr. Ronald J. Henry, Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, and Dr. Ahmed Abdelal, Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, were the presenters.

It was explained that the number of part-time faculty increased dramatically between fiscal years 1993 and 2000 to deal with rapid increases in enrollment (24%) and credit hours (28%). The vast majority of part-time faculty were in the introductory core curriculum courses. The part-time faculty challenge is three-fold:

The part-time faculty model is less effective. Many part-time faculty teach at multiple institutions and have difficulties being available to work with students outside the classroom; they have fewer opportunities for continued professional development; and professionals who are academically well-trained are not available in certain disciplines.
Recruitment, scheduling, and monitoring of part-time faculty is a significant administrative challenge.
The part-time workforce has justifiable concerns: lack of fringe benefits, offices, and computer support.

It is important to distinguish between the traditional part-time faculty and full-time professionals who are interested in teaching and who enrich course offerings in the major (adjunct part-time faculty).

The urgency of correcting the heavy reliance on part-time faculty necessitated the hiring of visiting faculty. The goal for departments with significant general education teaching responsibilities is to have most faculty in tenure-track positions with less than 10% in non tenure-track lecturer and visiting positions. However, due to the implementation of the new core curriculum, it is not possible at this time to predict precisely the demand in various general education courses. Furthermore, budgetary constraints limit the rate of addition of tenure-track faculty, whose higher credentials and additional roles in research and service command higher salaries in the national market. Non-tenure-track positions are not intended as an alternative to tenure-track faculty. The tenure-track faculty are hired only after national searches that yield 100 to 400 applicants per position. Furthermore, at GSU, implementation of post-tenure evaluation has achieved the necessary balance between ensuring creativity and academic freedom on one hand and rigorous accountability on the other.

At GSU, 700 courses previously staffed by part-time faculty are now staffed by visiting instructors and lecturers. Part-time faculty staffed only eight courses this fall semester. Two hundred-fifty courses are staffed by adjunct professors who have full-time positions in public agencies, business, and industry. These professionals enrich the learning of students, and the college plans to maintain their participation. Visiting faculty are provided with computers and Internet connectivity, and each two share an office. Funds are provided in each department for professional development. The number of visiting positions will be determined each April, and successful candidates will be selected by faculty committees through annual competitions, which are normally locally advertised. Visiting faculty are evaluated primarily on the basis of their teaching effectiveness. Visiting faculty can compete for new non-tenure-track lecturer positions and for tenure-track positions, both of which are nationally advertised.

The good news is that student complaints and grade appeals decreased dramatically in departments that previously relied heavily on part-time faculty. Department chairs are convinced that learning has indeed improved, and the morale of the faculty is significantly increased. The conversion of part-time faculty into visiting positions was very well received nationally. It was also recognized as congruent with an integrated set of policies on faculty workload that were developed at GSU.

In the future, GSU plans to reduce the number of visiting faculty in departments with general education teaching responsibilities such that non-tenure-track positions are less than 10% of the total full-time faculty appointments. The projected faculty composition for fiscal year 2001 is 400 tenured and tenure-track faculty, 40 continuing lecturers, and 45 visiting faculty. The reduction will be accomplished by replacement of visiting positions with tenure-track positions, and where appropriate, with continuing lecturer positions.

8. Information Item: Applied Learning Experiences/Clinical Training

Pursuant to authority granted by the Board at its meeting on February 7 and 8, 1984, the presidents of the listed institutions have executed the indicated number of memoranda of understanding respecting affiliation of students for applied learning experiences/clinical training in the programs indicated:

Georgia State University
Cardiopulmonary Care Sci.	1
Hospital Association	2
Nursing	3
Medical College of Georgia
Allied Health Sciences	5, 4R
Hospitals and Clinics	2, 4R
Medicine	4, 1R
Nursing	4, 4R
Research Institute	1, 2R
University of Georgia
Child & Family Development	5, 1R
Comm. Science & Disorders	2R
Counseling & Human Svcs.	1
Pharmacy	1, 2R
Recreation & Leisure Studies	1
Georgia Southern University
Health & Kinesiology	1
Nursing	4

Armstrong Atlantic State Univ.
Nursing	1
Physical Therapy	2
Columbus State University
Nursing	1, 14R
Georgia College & State University
Health Sciences	11
Kennesaw State University
Nursing	4, 1R
North Georgia Coll. & State Univ.
Nursing	5, 2R
Physical Therapy	6R
Savannah State University
Social Work	4
Abraham Baldwin Agricul. Coll.
Nursing	1
Total	107 R = Renewal

9. Information Item: Service Agreements

Pursuant to authority granted by the Board at its meeting on February 7 and 8, 1984, the presidents of the listed institutions have executed service agreements with the indicated agencies for the purposes and periods designated, with the institutions to receive payments as indicated:

Purpose	Agency	Duration	Amount
Georgia State University
Provide executive director for Women's Health	Office of the Governor	10/1/99 - 6/30/00	$92,729
Director Georgia scrap tire management program	Dept. of Natural Resources	11/3/99 - 6/30/99	$165,200
Conduct National Geographic matching	Georgia Dept. of Education	7/1/99 - 6/30/00	$47,500
Conduct reading recovery program	" " "	7/1/99 - 6/30/00	$237,500
University of Georgia
Provide general operating support	Georgia Council for the Arts	7/1/99 - 6/30/00	$81,799
Provide codes for program income	Georgia Dept. of Community Affairs	10-6-99 ongoing	$12,430
Provide use of training center	Georgia Dept. of Education	7/1/99 - 6/30/00	$3,950
Conduct nutrition training workshops	Georgia Dept. of Human Resources	12/31/99 - 9/30/00	$146,970
Assess Satilla River's water quality and productivity	Georgia Dept. of Natural Resources	10/1/99 - 9/30/00	$25,250
Provide energy education	Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority	10/1/99 - 9/30/00	$75,000
Conduct FMT 200	Georgia Office of Planning and Budget	10/6/99 ongoing	$31,115
Darton College
Conduct ROPES Challenge course	Pelham Middle School	36532	$2,195
" " "	Seminole Co. Board of Health	36497	$4,960
" " "	Albany Housing Authority	36510	$1,575
Conduct computer classes	Harambee CDC	1/1/00 - 4/30/00	$5,720
Conduct computer courses	City of Albany	11/99 - 11/00	$14,750
Floyd College
Provide computer training	City of Rome	12/7/99 - 12/14/99	$1,500

Total Amount - February	$ 950,143
Total Amount FY 2000 To Date	$22,289,280
Total Amount FY 99 - to February	$24,127,199
Total Amount FY 99	$31,358,479

[ return to top ]

COMMITTEE ON ORGANIZATION AND LAW

The Committee on Organization and Law met on Tuesday, February 8, 2000 at approximately 3:00 p.m. in the room 7019, the Chancellor's Conference Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair Elridge W. McMillan and Regents Juanita P. Baranco, Edgar L. Jenkins, Martin W. NeSmith, and Joel O. Wooten. Chair McMillan reported to the Board on Wednesday that the Committee had nine applications for review. Six were denied, one was granted, and two were continued for further information. The Committee discussed the process by which appeals are investigated and presented to the Committee. Chair McMillan requested that Senior Vice Chancellor for Human and External Resources Arthur N. Dunning provide to all the Regents the document about that process, which had been provided to the Committee members. The Committee also heard two information items. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:

1. Applications for Review

In accordance with H.B. 278, Section 3 (Amending O.C.G.A. § 50-14-4), an affidavit regarding this Executive Session is on file with the Chancellor's Office.

In the matter of Dr. Robert Becker at Georgia Perimeter College, concerning termination of his employment as Vice President for Academic Affairs, the application for review was denied.
In the matter of James K. L. Wang at Gordon College, concerning termination of his employment, the application for review was denied.
In the matter of Leon Prickett at the State University of West Georgia, concerning his suspension, the application for review was denied.
In the matter of Mark Putnam at Georgia Southern University, concerning termination of his employment, the application for review was denied.
In the matter of John W. Weldon at the University of Georgia, concerning having Spanish 103 waived, the application for review was denied.
In the matter of Bharat P. Singh at Fort Valley State University, concerning his appeal of the post-tenure review procedures, the application for review was continued.
In the matter of Kehe Hou at the Georgia Institute of Technology, concerning student disciplinary action, the application for review was continued.
In the matter of Tracey McKinney-Simpson at the State University of West Georgia, concerning an additional course for qualification for the National Certification Exam, the application for review was granted.
In the matter of Eugene Penson at Georgia State University, concerning academic exclusion, the application for review was denied.

2. Information Item: Changes in State Law Related to Expense Reimbursement for Regents

Associate Vice Chancellor for Legal Affairs Elizabeth E. Neely made this presentation to the Committee. She explained that last year's General Assembly reduced the daily rate of Regents' reimbursement for Wednesday's Board meeting from $119 to $75. Effective January 2000, reimbursement will be made at the $75 rate, plus transportation expenses for Wednesday only. Tuesday's rate will remain at $36, plus actual expenses.

Director of Business Services Usha Ramachandran has also been advised by the Office of the Attorney General that taxes will have to be withheld on all per diem payments.

3. Information Item: Amendment to Open Records Act Requiring Affidavits for Executive Sessions

Assistant Vice Chancellor for Legal Affairs (Prevention) J. Burns Newsome made this presentation to the Committee. He explained that the 1999 General Assembly amended Georgia's Open Records Act to require that:

[w]hen any meeting of an agency is closed to the public pursuant to subsection (a) of this Code section, the chairperson or other person presiding over such meeting shall execute and file with the official minutes of the meeting a notarized affidavit stating under oath that the subject matter of the meeting or the closed portion thereof was devoted to matters within the exceptions provided by law and identifying the specific relevant exception. H.B. 278 § 3(b) (1999).
In response to this amendment, the Board of Regents' legal staff proposed that the Board bylaws be amended to accommodate the new requirement that an affidavit be executed whenever a Committee goes into Executive Session. This bylaw amendment will be on the table for 30 days before it is voted on at the March 2000 meeting.

[ return to top ]

CHANCELLOR'S REPORT TO THE BOARD

After the Committee meeting reports, Chancellor Portch gave his report to the Board, which was as follows:

Thank you Mr. Chairman. This is always an interesting month. It begins with the drama of the budget presentation to the Appropriations Committee. I am most appreciative of the assists I had from Chairman Cannestra and [Student Advisory Council Chair John M. Fuchko III] and for the tremendous turnout from Regents. It really helps and is definitely noticed and commented on by legislators.

I appreciate also the help from all the staff to get me ready and to present movie clips and the like! While we received a number a number of questions, nearly all of them began with an expression of support for, and an appreciation of, the work of the Board of Regents.

The rest of the month has been dominated, of course, by the Governor's education bill. And this is why I thought it appropriate and timely to have the Board hear more details about that bill later this morning.

We do expect the supplemental budget to work its way through the House in the next few days and move on to the Senate. To date, we have received very positive responses to your original request. Once the supplemental budget goes to the Senate, then we go to work on the main budget in the house. We sometimes meet ourselves coming and going, but it's a fun time!

Of special note is the support of the House and the Senate for the $33 million needed for our health insurance reserve. [Commissioner Russ Toal of the Department of Community Health] did a superb job making the case, fully including our needs. He also assured the legislature of the changes coming to both the state program and the Regents program, most notably the addition of a PPO (preferred provider organization) option. We were also helped considerably by the Legislative Budget Office Director Robert Hobbs. Finally on this topic, our presidents have now communicated with all employees about the seriousness of the health insurance issue and some of the likely changes.

So, it has been a good month across the street, but we are only at day 16. And, as I like to say, not all days are created equal in the Georgia legislature! I am particularly grateful to a number of Regents who have been in the Capitol assisting us and hope we can call on you as the session proceeds.

Meanwhile, we also continue to move the System forward. I was delighted with the outcome of the selection of the consultants for the management review and benchmarking. A joint steering committee of the Governor's staff and ours reviewed the proposals. This team from Pappas Consulting Group, Inc., Arthur Andersen LLP, and MGT of America, Inc. is perhaps the best I've ever seen. Additionally, it turns out that they view this as the first of its kind in the industry and are smart enough to know that a job well done will lead to a lot of national exposure. They will join us at next month's Board meeting for an extended conversation with you.

And the System only moves forward when the institutions thrive and succeed. They continue to bring us success. For example, the National Science Foundation has awarded a five-year, $6 million grant (one of six grants awarded nationally) to the Southeastern Rural Systemic Initiative of Valdosta State University ("VSU"). The purpose of the grant is to improve student achievement in math and science in rural schools. I want to make special note of this. As many of you know, VSU moved ahead and raised its admission standards, reaching over 1,000 SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test) for the first time and significantly increasing retention rates. Consistent with your philosophy of raising standards but reaching out to help people meet them, this is a very important grant for Southwest Georgia. Many plaudits are due President [Hugh C.] Bailey, [Dr. Floyd D. Toth, Dean of the College of Education] and others.

An M.B.A. (master of business administration degree) from the University of Georgia's Terry College of Business was ranked eleventh in the nation in return on investment to its students by Forbes magazine. And Georgia State University's J. Mack Robinson College of Business was featured several times in U. S. News & World Report's annual rankings of the nation's best colleges and universities. Georgia State's insurance program ranked second in the nation, and the management program was ranked twenty-first by the magazine. Business Week magazine ranked the college's executive M.B.A. as one of the 20 best in the nation.

A team of six Georgia Southern University ("GSOU") building construction and contracting students recently earned first place honors in the National Residential Construction Competition, sponsored by the National Association of Home Builders. And also at GSOU, the student-run and designed magazine of the arts, has been awarded All-American status by the Associated Collegiate Press for its 1999 edition. The award represents the highest possible accolade given to a student media organization and Miscellany was awarded five out of five possible marks for distinction for concept, content, writing/editing, photography/art/ graphics, and layout.

Dr. Benjamin Lawson of the Department of English and Modern Languages at Albany State University has been selected as the recipient of the Walt Whitman Chair of American Literature at the University of Utrecht from January-May, 2001.

American Airlines will feature a brief public relations piece on Columbus State University ("CSU") and the University System of Georgia relating to CSU's web based [master of science] degree in applied computer science. American Airlines has 1100 flights per day worldwide. All flights will feature this PR piece during the months of February and March.

We're flying high indeed! And, with your help, I hope that we'll fly high throughout the legislative session.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[ return to top ]

NEW BUSINESS

Because the presenters for the Strategic Planning Committee were running late, Chair Cannestra next called upon Senior Vice Chancellor for Human and External Resources Arthur N. Dunning to present to the Board three honorary degree nominations.

The first honorary degree proposal was for Ms. Alexis M. Herman by Albany State University. Ms. Herman serves as U.S. Secretary of Labor. She is the country's twenty-third Secretary of Labor and the fourth woman to serve as Secretary in the agency's 84-year history. Ms. Herman has been widely praised for her handling of the UPS strike in the summer of 1997. She served as director of the White House Public Liaison Office from 1993 to 1996 and as deputy director of the Presidential Transition Office in 1992. Ms. Herman is founder and president of A.M. Herman & Associates.

The second honorary degree proposal was for Mr. Fred D. Bentley by Kennesaw State University ("KSU"). Mr. Bentley was born in Marietta, Georgia and attended Marietta public schools. He has been practicing law since July 1948. He is a senior member of the firm of Bentley and Dew. Mr. Bentley is a trustee emeritus and founder of the board of trustees at KSU. He is also the founder and honorary curator of the Bentley Rare Book Galleries at KSU. He served three terms in the House of Representatives between 1951 and 1957 and one term in the Senate in 1958. He serves as chairman of the board of Charter Bank and Trust Company.

The final honorary degree proposal was for Mr. Westley W. Law by Savannah State University ("SSU"). Mr. Law is an historian, community leader, and preservationist in the City of Savannah. Mr. Law was born in Savannah in 1923 and attended public schools in Savannah. He earned a bachelor's degree in biology from Georgia State College, which is now SSU. Mr. Law organized the first citywide Black Heritage Festival, which continues today. He also spearheaded the depository of the Ulysses Davis Wood Sculpture at the Beach Institute. This collection has been displayed at the High Museum of Art in Atlanta, the State Capitol, and the Smithsonian. Mr. Law has been recognized for his accomplishments throughout the State of Georgia and nationally. He has received awards from the Georgia Humanities Council and National Trust for Historic Preservation.

On behalf of Presidents Portia H. Shields, Betty L. Siegel, and Carlton E. Brown, Dr. Dunning submitted these nominations for the Board's approval. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved the honorary degrees.

Chancellor Portch recommended that the Regents visit the rare book room at KSU. He commented that it has an extraordinary collection.

PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS

Next, Chair Cannestra called upon Regent White to brief the Board on the recent Regent visit to the University of Georgia ("UGA"), the Gwinnett Center (the "Center"), and Gainesville College ("GC").

Regent White stated that the visit had very good attendance. Regents Cater, Harris, Hunt, Jones, NeSmith, Wooten, and he began the day with a conversation with President Michael F. Adams who updated them on the progress of the master plan. The Regents visited some of the research facilities, particularly in the biomedical area. From there, the Regents toured the entire campus, including the new student center. They also got to see the Gym Dogs practicing. Then, the Regents heard a presentation on some of the new information technology programs. That night, Regent Leebern and Chancellor Portch joined the other Regents for dinner and the UGA-Kentucky basketball game. The next day, the Regents visited the Gwinnett Center site. They then went to the leased facility and were very impressed with a demonstration of Internet based instruction. Next, the Regents were joined by Regent Jenkins on a visit to GC and enjoyed what President Martha Nesbitt has done with the college. In closing, Regent White thanked the Regents who attended and the colleges who hosted them. He also thanked Secretary Gail S. Weber for scheduling the visits and accompanying the Regents on the visits.

Chair Cannestra also thanked the Regents.

Chancellor Portch interjected that he wanted to recognize some special guests from the University of Georgia. One of the faculty and five doctoral students from the higher education program were in attendance at the meeting. The students were Mr. Marty Howell, Ms. Teresa Raetz, Ms. Amy Badal, Ms. Erin Chernow, and Mr. Mark Daddona.

Regent McMillan asked Senior Vice Chancellor for Human and External Resources Arthur N. Dunning to elaborate on the contributions of honorary degree recipient Mr. Westley W. Law.

Dr. Dunning stated that in the 1960s, Mr. Law was a very significant person in providing leadership that cut across all different groups and kept people together in a healing process in Savannah. Residents of Savannah often note that he is as important as a preservationist and historian as he was a leader in that community. Even today, he is recognized as a leader in Savannah.

Regent Cater noted that Mr. Law was very active in the civil rights movement.

Regent Coleman added that Mr. Law was always in the forefront of the movement, but he was always a gentleman who had the situation under control.

At approximately 9:30 a.m., Chair Cannestra recessed the meeting for a brief break.

[ return to top ]

STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE, "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE"

At approximately 9:45 a.m., Chair Cannestra convened the meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee as a Committee of the Whole and turned the chairmanship of the meeting over to Regent Leebern.

Chair Leebern thanked Chair Cannestra. He explained that at this meeting, the Strategic Planning Committee would be hearing a panel discussion of the implications of Governor Barnes' education bill. The future of the University System is tied to the success of the K-12 system, he said. He then called upon the Chancellor to introduce the panelists.

Chancellor Portch explained that the panelists were three people who had been particularly busy in the past several months. Mr. Ron Newcomb is the education advisor to Governor Barnes. He was Commission Staff Director of the Education Reform Study Commission (the "Commission"), and he knows everything about House Bill 1187, The A Plus Education Reform Act ("HB 1187"), which had just the day before grown from 150 to 175 pages. Ms. Wendy Martin chaired the Governor's Seamless Education Committee on the Commission. Ms. Martin is a member of the Lee County Board of Education and is Vice President for Economic Development at Albany Technical Institute. She has chaired the Statewide School Board Association, and she has been a key supporter of the Board of Regents' P-16 initiative. Mr. Tom Upchurch chaired the Accountability Committee of the Commission. He is a former teacher, principal, and school superintendent in Carroll County. He served 14 years in each of the latter two positions. He is now President of the Partnership for Excellence in Education (the "Partnership"), a stand-alone organization which links the business community with education. The Chancellor remarked that the Regents were very fortunate to have three leaders of the Governor's efforts to give them some perspective on the implications of the new bill. As soon as the bill begins to go through the House of Representatives, the staff will get copies of key sections to the Regents. He then turned the floor over to Mr. Newcomb.

Mr. Newcomb thanked the Chancellor and noted that he had been introduced to the Board at its January 1999 meeting when Governor Barnes first appointed him as his educational advisor. He said that for the last seven months, he had been working on the Commission. He noted that the Commission and the steering committee had borrowed the Board Room on occasion and were grateful to be able to use it. He said that the Commission also used many of the Board of Regents staff on several occasions and they had been an integral part of the staff who had developed the issue papers and had gotten the Commission to the decisions that ended up being in the bill. He said that seven of the staff were lead or support members, including Vice Chancellor for Facilities William K. Chatham, Associate Vice Chancellor for Planning and Policy Analysis Cathie Mayes Hudson, Assistant Director of System Policy Research Sue L. Sloop, and Budget Director Shelley Nickel. He asked them to stand and be recognized.

Mr. Newcomb stated that HB 1187 is the result of the Commission's work as well as a great deal of input since then. The Commission received feedback from many people, including the Chancellor, and many of the comments and suggestions are reflected in the bill. At this meeting, the panelists would concentrate on the issues in the bill that are of interest to the University System. One of the main purposes of the bill is to talk about seamlessness. Early intervention in education is a key piece to the Governor's bill. The proposed early intervention program is an outgrowth of the special instructional assistance program that was created years ago to provide funding for smaller class sizes. Children who have fallen a grade level behind will be funded at a ratio of 1 teacher to 11 students, which gives the local systems the options of having those class sizes or blended class sizes. From that point forward through K-12, the point is to pass on to the next grade level a better prepared student and ultimately to pass on a well-prepared student from high school to the post-secondary level. The teacher preparation programs play a very important role in the bill, he said but, because of the initiatives the Board of Regents has already put in place, the Commission did not know how to improve the University System. The Board has already set in motion initiatives to improve teacher preparation programs as well as the quality of students entering and exiting the System. Of course, there is a piece in the bill that addresses ensuring that the graduates of the teacher preparation programs have an understanding of technology because of its role in the classroom in terms of student information management as well as instructional purposes. In the original bill, there was a required course for this purpose, but the Commission realized that those skills should be embedded in all teacher preparation courses. There are some HOPE Scholarship Program ("HOPE") improvements in the bill. It will be possible for seniors to get HOPE if they have lost it or never had it if they get their grade point averages ("GPA") up to 3.0 by the end of the junior year. The GPA requirement for the Promise Teacher HOPE Scholarship is set at 3.2, which is still a level of excellence. The former GPA of 3.6 has become punitive to students. A student that by his or her junior year has maintained HOPE when three-quarters of his or her peers have lost HOPE is a good student. Certainly, he said, a 3.2 average should be good enough to get that extra scholarship.

Mr. Newcomb also wanted to comment on the partnership with the Department of Technical and Adult Education ("DTAE"). The bill addresses a funding component for the DTAE schools. As the Board knows, if a new student walks into a K-12 school or a System institution, it generates more funds. However, DTAE has had to ask for each new faculty member and each new program. That has led to waiting lists at a time when employers have been pushing for workforce development and expecting the post-secondary system to provide skilled graduates. So, the funding component for the DTAE schools will facilitate that. The DTAE schools upon accreditation for occupational degree-granting status will be able to call themselves technical colleges. This acknowledges that the technical schools are already in the business of the occupational diplomas. It is one further step to make that an occupational degree. In closing, Mr. Newcomb noted that the Commission had four committees: the Seamless Education Committee, the Accountability Committee, the Funding Committee, and the School Climate Committee. He then turned the floor over to Ms. Martin.

Ms. Martin thanked Mr. Newcomb. She also thanked Regent Coleman, who served on the Seamless Education Committee with her. She recalled that when Chancellor Portch first came to Georgia, she invited him to speak before the Georgia School Board Association. The Chancellor explained that those in K-12 have said to the University System to send then better teachers, and the University System has said to K-12 to send a better prepared student for it to send back as a better teacher. Chancellor Portch pledged that both K-12 and the University System were going to stop blaming each other and work toward a seamless system that will serve more students in a better way. Ms. Martin has been committed to the idea of seamlessness ever since and has worked diligently to support it. So, she was very familiar with the term "seamless education" when she was called to serve on the committee. Others were not as familiar, so the committee began work in June 1999 by first creating a model of what a seamless education system should look like in order to offer meaningful educational opportunity and have those opportunities accessible to all students. Many involved in the overall process picked up on the Chancellor's recurring theme of more and better graduates at every level. In the Seamless Education Committee, they also latched on to the theme that to be successful in building a seamless education system, there needs to be more and better communication and more and better leadership at every level, and education must capitalize on the opportunities that technology affords it

The centerpiece of the reform issue this year is clearly accountability, stated Ms. Martin. However, the Seamless Education Committee feels that once that foundation is in place and there are tools to measure how the educational systems are doing, they will then begin to look at what they are doing and whether or not it is meaningful for the next level. She supports the philosophy that each student must be encouraged to reach his or her fullest potential, but to do that, they must be prepared and encouraged to move to the next level. When students graduate from high school and find that they have to take remediation in post-secondary education, it is time to look at what the schools are doing and some possible realignments. The Governor has said that the work of the Commission is the beginning of a process, that reform is ongoing, and that education would build on steps as things progress. So, the committee wanted to ensure that the issues that they identified and attempted to find solutions for would receive the appropriate focus and attention at the appropriate point in time. The committee recommended that an education coordinating council ("ECC") be established. She remarked that this is simply a natural and positive evolution of the existing steering committee of the P-16 initiative. The P-16 steering committee consisted of the heads of the educational agencies and a representative from business and industry. The ECC will consist of the Governor, the Chancellor, the Chair of the Board of Regents, the Commissioner of the DTAE, the DTAE board chair, the State School Superintendent, the State School Board chair, the Executive Secretary and Chair of the Professional Standards Commission, and the Director of the Office of School Readiness. The Governor will chair the quarterly meetings and will provide the opportunity for regular dialog among these educational entities. So, the ECC will have the benefit of the expertise and experience of the Governor and the board chairs, but the goal of positive communication will remain the same. It will allow the ECC to be proactive, and it will help them keep issues from falling through the cracks when there are so many things to deal with. With the past progress that has been made in the P-16 initiative and many other positive initiatives already in place, the Seamless Education Committee envisions the role of the ECC as a motivator, not another bureaucracy. It is essentially the same parties with a few additional interested parties at the table.

Ms. Martin stated that the bill calls for every State-supported post-secondary institution to be an active member of a local regional educational service agency ("RESA"). This means that the presidents of System institutions will serve on local RESA boards. This is to ensure connectivity at the regional level. The RESAs were originally designed for resource sharing and bulk purchasing, and they are able to help with repairs in smaller systems that cannot afford full-time employees to do that kind of work. Another critical role is that of staff development, and small districts will benefit from the RESAs already in place. The Seamless Education Committee had many discussions about how to make that role more meaningful and how to tie it into the overall accountability process. There was much discussion of how communication is vital if the University System is responsible for training new teachers and the RESAs are responsible for ongoing staff development. When new teachers are taught new skills, those same skills need to be included in ongoing staff development in the RESAs. On the other hand, if veteran teachers are finding that they need new training that they did not receive earlier, then it would be helpful for the System institutions to understand and incorporate that in their training.

Ms. Martin said that another area that will affect the University System will be the opportunity for representatives of the System to serve on a steering committee to create a complete, seamless, Statewide, comprehensive educational information system. Mr. Upchurch would speak more about this because it is also the framework for an accountability system. Given the opportunities that educational systems have with technology, this will help them more effectively and efficiently use the information that already exists regarding the State's students to help them make better choices so they ultimately come through the University System. In closing, Ms. Martin thanked the Regents, the Chancellor, and their staff for their support. She remarked that this was easily the most intense, fast-paced, and extensive effort that she has ever been a part of, and the committee benefitted greatly from the expertise, energy, and commitment of the Chancellor and the Board's staff. She is anxious to move on to the implementation stage so that some of the good ideas can be put to work. Again, she thanked the Regents for their ongoing support.

Mr. Upchurch thanked the Regents for the opportunity to discuss the accountability element of the bill. He and Ms. Martin had just left another meeting where they had discussed the K-12 accountability part of this bill as well as seamlessness and what that meant to that part of the educational system. At this meeting, he would discuss accountability in terms that have to do with higher education. Briefly, however, he wanted to mention the issues the Accountability Committee had discussed about K-12: high standards, a student information system that will show how schools and students are doing at every level, a measurement system that will assess that information, a system of intervention for schools and districts that are not doing well, lower pupil-teacher ratios in the first three grades, the extension of time for students who need more time to learn certain concepts, targeted assistance from the State when schools are not performing at the desired level, a system of rewards for those who meet the standards, and a system of rewards for those who are making progress toward those standards. This legislation calls for the creation of an office of educational accountability, which will be an independent office. Mr. Upchurch acknowledged that the Regents have already embraced accountability. The committee noticed that the University System was the first to volunteer for the Governor's management review process. Due to Mr. Upchurch's work at the Partnership, he is very familiar with the System's information digest and its annual accountability report, which is exactly the sort of reporting mechanism the committee wants for the office. This office will have a director who is appointed by the Governor, subject to the consent of the Senate, as with the appointment of Regents. This office will work with the Board of Regents to create a standard accountability system. University System institutions will be covered as well as K-12, and the office will do an annual report. They will use performance indicators, identified and defined by the office, to measure outcomes of the State's investment. These reports will be written in plain language that everyone can understand, not educational jargon. The reports will be in the standard written format but will also be available on the World Wide Web. The office will have until December 1, 2001 to identify, define, and develop the performance indicators and measures. Mr. Upchurch remarked that the office will be a good resource for the Board of Regents. Data becomes information which becomes knowledge that informs strategies for improvement. The first report card of the University System will be produced by the office by December 1, 2002. However, because of the University System's own benchmarking efforts, this process may be accelerated. This Board will be a full partner in working to develop and implement the assessment program of the office. After 2002, the office will audit as necessary to implement the educational accountability system. He then asked if the Regents had any questions or comments.

Regent McMillan asked how the ECC relates to the P-16 initiative.

Chancellor Portch responded that the P-16 initiative is being morphed into something else. Because the ECC will not have a bureaucracy or staff of its own, it will need some "worker bees." The P-16 councils will give the ECC recommendations and ideas. This is an improvement, he said, because the Governor will be on the ECC, which will guarantee increased participation.

Ms. Martin added that the Regents would have been pleased to hear how many times an idea would surface in the work of her committee and someone would respond that it had already been done by P-16. It was decided they needed to build on and enhance what P-16 is already doing rather than start over. She said that the wonderful things that have been started by the P-16 initiative will live on.

Regent Harris asked what was changed in the bill the previous day and what had been added in the 25 pages.
Mr. Newcomb replied that the biggest change had to do with lowering class size at the K-12 level. He noted that the State has been funding lower class sizes since Regent Harris's tenure as Governor. For example, at the kindergarten level, classes are funded at a ratio of 1 teacher to 15 students, and at the first- through third-grade levels, classes are funded at a ratio of 1 to 17. Yet, classrooms all over the State are larger than that. To give school systems some time to grow into the lower classroom sizes, the State Board of Education allowed class sizes to be higher if the class used a paraprofessional for a period of time. That period of time has grown to over a decade. So, now the Commission is trying to return to those class sizes. Mr. Newcomb explained that kindergarten classes have grown to 25 students, which translates to one and two-thirds teachers. Systems take the two-thirds of a teacher, hire a paraprofessional at one-third the price of a teacher, and the remaining dollars are spent elsewhere. So, the intent of the efforts that began over a decade ago have not yet reached the actual classrooms. The Commission's push to go back to that intent has caused local school systems who have been using that funding elsewhere to become alarmed. So, the Commission is allowing a little flexibility in the document so that schools can float between the funding size and the maximum class size, which is now down to 20 in the early years, and hire paraprofessionals, but not to be as lenient as they have been in the past. The other kinds of changes had to do with the concern that school councils would only be advisory because the constitution says that the local board of education shall have management and control over the local schools. So, clarifying language was added to stipulate that they are advisory and make recommendations, and they should be involved at the local level to help empower the community and the business community. He noted that in many features of Governor Barnes' legislation, the business community is a big stakeholder. So, the business community needs to be represented. At this time, the bill's creators are fighting off amendments that would make the councils exclusively parents or exclusively teachers or would include students instead of representing the community, including the business community. Mr. Newcomb said that another hot topic is the tenure issue. The issue is that under current code, for the first three years of teaching, a teacher does not have any tenure rights. However, the code guarantees that if a contract is not renewed after the fourth contract year, there must be a reason that corresponds to the code and there must be a hearing. So, there were revisions to the bill to clarify that anyone already under contract remains under that code section, but hires after July 1, 2000 will not be covered under that code section. Of interest to the Board might be the question of tenure at the post-secondary level, he noted. The response to that is that K-12 and the University System are like "apples and oranges." He stated that the Commission understands the reasons and rationale that tenure at the University System level is entirely different from the K-12 level, and the Commission has defended that. So, these are some of the main features that were changed. Many of the changes respond to input from Representative Charlie Smith, Jr., and some changes came from the Chancellor on behalf of the Regents.

Regent Coleman encouraged all of the Regents to endorse this proposal by the Governor's Office to help pass the bill. He commended the leadership and interest of Ms. Martin in chairing the Seamless Education Committee.

Mr. Newcomb also encouraged the Regents to support the bill.

Regent White asked whether the K-12 review process is on the same schedule as the University System's.

Mr. Upchurch responded that it is somewhat different. Part of the measurement system for the K-12 system will be in place this spring. So, some benchmarking can begin this year. However, it will be about three to four years before rewards and sanctions begin. He stressed that the Commission wants to be sure the system is fair.

Regent Jenkins asked whether all changes were included in the legislative proposal or whether there are constitutional provisions that will have to be addressed later.

Mr. Upchurch replied that this can be handled legislatively and should not require constitutional amendment.

Mr. Newcomb agreed.

Regent NeSmith asked how much of the current document is consistent with the Governor's original proposal.

Mr. Newcomb responded that it would be in the high ninetieth percentile. There has been a great deal of tweaking, but nothing of significance has been added or deleted.

Chair Leebern asked whether there were any further questions or comments. Seeing that there were none, he thanked the panelists for their informative presentation. He then asked for a motion to recess the meeting of the Committee of the Whole. With motion properly made, variously seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board was reconvened in its regular session.

Chair Cannestra also thanked the panelists for their hard work, which will certainly pay off in future generations.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

There was no unfinished business at this meeting.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

At approximately 10:30 a.m., Chair Cannestra called for an Executive Session for the purpose of discussing a personnel matter. With motion properly made, variously seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board closed its regular session. The Regents who were present voted unanimously to go into Executive Session. Those Regents were as follows: Chair Cannestra and Vice Chair J. Tom Coleman, Jr., Regents T

Total Project Cost	$12,000,000
Construction Cost (Stated Cost Limitation)	$10,351,700
A/E (fixed) Fee	$713,100

Main Navigation

Meeting Minutes - February 2000

Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia Held At 270 Washington St., S.W., Atlanta, Georgia February 8 and 9, 2000

Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia
Held At 270 Washington St., S.W., Atlanta, Georgia
February 8 and 9, 2000