Meeting Minutes - November 2005
Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Regents of the University
System of Georgia
Held at 270 Washington St., S.W.
Atlanta, Georgia
November 15 and 16, 2005
CALL TO ORDER
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met on Tuesday, November 15, and Wednesday, November 16, 2005, in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Chair of the Board, Regent J. Timothy Shelnut, called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 15, 2005. Present on Tuesday, in addition to Chair Shelnut, were Vice Chair Patrick S. Pittard and Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., Connie Cater, William H. Cleveland, Joe Frank Harris, Julie Ewing Hunt, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., James R. Jolly, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Richard L. Tucker, Allan Vigil, and Joel O. Wooten, Jr.
ATTENDANCE REPORT
The attendance report was read on Tuesday, November 15, 2005, by Secretary Gail S. Weber, who announced that Regents Michael J. Coles and Martin W. NeSmith 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 October 11 and 12, 2005, were unanimously approved as distributed.
STRATEGIC PLANNING COMMITTEE, "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE"
Chair Shelnut next convened the Strategic Planning Committee as a Committee of the Whole and turned the Chairmanship of the meeting over to Regent Leebern, the Chair of the Committee.
Chair Leebern introduced the Interim Senior Vice Chancellor for Support Services, Elizabeth E. Neely, who updated the Board on its 1995 initiative on conflict resolution.
Ten years ago, the University System was experiencing a troublesome trend in the number and expense of lawsuits filed against the Board, explained Ms. Neely. In addition, the Regents were hearing appeals from the institutions not only in employment matters, but also related to residency status for tuition, grade appeals, and even parking tickets. The Board of Regents, believing that there was a way better than litigation in which to resolve the inevitable disputes that will arise in a complex agency, wisely adopted an initiative and policy direction in the area of conflict management.
Not only was the Board determined to have a more collegial system, it was striving to become an exemplar in the nation for the way it handled complex disputes, explained Ms. Neely. This initiative is now ten years old, and she wanted to provide a progress report of which the Regents can be proud. The System's campus cultures have changed. With 35 institutions, a quarter of a million students, 37,000 employees, 9,000 faculty members, and a scope of operations exceeding $5 billion dollars, the University System of Georgia is extremely complex. Nevertheless, the Board of Regents has changed the course of litigation and grievances. Because of the wisdom of this Board, the System has achieved more satisfactory and more efficient resolutions of disputes and conflicts.
Ms. Neely then introduced the primary architect of the Board initiative on conflict resolution, Professor Douglas H. Yarn. Dr. Yarn has been a litigator, mediator, and trainer of mediators, arbitrators, and judges. He is Director of the Consortium on Negotiation and Conflict Management (the "Consortium") at Georgia State University ("GSU"), the management arm of this initiative. Ms. Neely noted that Dr. Yarn's biographical information had been provided to the Regents for their information.
Dr. Yarn said that Ms. Neely deserved credit for initially starting this initiative. He noted that Interim Chancellor Cummings has also been very supportive of the initiative. In July 1995, Dr. Yarn had presented to the Board of Regents the alternative conflict resolution plan, and he was pleased to report today what had been accomplished in the last ten years as well as to speculate on the future of this initiative. In 1995, the University System's conflict resolution system was such that complaints and perceived injuries automatically became formal grievances and litigation. The Board of Regents established a Blue Ribbon Committee to address this problem because the cost of litigation was extraordinary. He noted that there were not only economic costs, but also costs in terms of upper-level administrative time, recurring conflicts that were never resolved, and the emotional and psychological costs that undermine a collaborative enterprise such as a college or university. At that point in time, the Board's only approach to conflict resolution was adversarial.
In November 1994, the Board of Regents established a Blue Ribbon Committee to develop a Systemwide conflict resolution program that was less reliant on adversarial processes, such as formal grievances and litigation, and use instead alternative dispute resolution and more collaborative ways of resolving disputes. The goal was to resolve conflict at the lowest possible level and to empower people in the System institutions in their own departments to be able to resolve their own disputes rather than these disputes making their way to the Board of Regents. This initiative also aimed to improve the institutional environment by making it more collegial and to lead the development of alternative dispute resolutions in institutions of higher education.
Dr. Yarn said that the Blue Ribbon Committee worked with the Consortium at GSU to help individual institutions develop their own conflict management systems. The president of each institution appointed a liaison who in turn formed a committee of stakeholders at the institution who were trained by the Consortium in conflict management techniques and theory. The stakeholders performed an assessment of what was going on at their respective institutions and made design recommendations for different ways to improve the way in which conflicts were handled at the institutions. They were in charge of then implementing their conflict management plans and the continuous evaluation and improvement of those plans. The Consortium monitored the process closely and developed in-depth Systemwide reports for the periods 1996-1998, 1998-2001, and 2001-2004. The Consortium also did individual case studies early in the initiative at three institutions.
As a result, the initiative immediately began building capacity at the institutional level in order to decrease reliance on adversarial processes. Each institution developed its own conflict management program using 34 liaisons and campus committees. Policies and procedures were changed at many institutions in order to handle conflicts more effectively, efficiently, and fairly at the institutional level. Five institutions developed omsbuds offices to handle general complaints. The institutions also developed their own training programs with the support of the Consortium and the University System Office. Between 1996 and 2004, 185 official training programs were conducted on System campuses. Approximately 3,700 University System personnel were trained in ways to better handle disputes. At the System level, a mediation program was established for the really difficult cases that could not be handled at the institutional level. The Consortium developed a number of different educational initiatives at the System level. There is now an annual liaison workshop for all the institutional liaisons for professional development and training. There is also a summer institute that comprises a full week of various training programs for System personnel. Over the course of 46 training programs, 1,042 System staff members have been trained, including 417 System-level mediators. So, the initiative built capacity to handle conflicts at the lowest possible level as well as at the System level. Dr. Yarn said that there is an effort underway to understand the number of informal unassisted resolutions at the institutions. The average annual number of disputes handled through the campus omsbuds offices and through formal on-campus mediations is 635. At the System level, in the last ten years, there were approximately 77 mediations and large-group interventions.
Dr. Yarn said that the System now has more tools to address conflict resolution than it did in 1995. At the first level, the institutions have informal and unassisted resolutions. At the second level, the institutions have omsbuds offices and formal mediations. At the System level, there is an 86% settlement rate for grievances that come to the Board of Regents.
Another goal of the conflict resolution initiative was to make the University System of Georgia an exemplar in conflict resolution in higher education. Dr. Yarn reported that several innovations have emerged out of this initiative. First, a Systemwide initiative of this sort was completely new and different. Many other university systems have been interested in this process. The Consortium has consulted with the University of Hawaii System to develop its own model. The large group interventions are innovative. Dr. Yarn remarked that the academic dishonesty program developed at the University of Georgia is a great example of how the System has changed the entire culture of disputes at the campus level. Before 1995, there was an academic dishonesty grade appeal case that took two committees, a prosecuting attorney, a defense attorney, and eight months to resolve. Those kinds of cases can now be resolved in a matter of weeks among a few people at the institutional level. Kennesaw State University has even established a Master of Science in Conflict Management.
Dr. Yarn noted that the Consortium's Director of Conflict Resolution Education and Training, Lin Inlow, was in attendance at this meeting. Along with Dr. Yarn and Ms. Inlow, the Director of the Consortium, Carolyn Benne, have made presentations all over the world in both academic and professional meetings. They have also consulted with many other universities and university systems, including the University of Maine, Auburn University, the University of Melbourne in Australia, Tennessee State University, Emory University, Clark-Atlanta University, and many others.
Dr. Yarn said that the institutional conflict management programs are in place and evolving. There is now reduced reliance on adversarial processes. There is also lots of evidence that these programs have improved the collegiality of the System institutions; 20 institutions have reported improvements such as better leadership and communications as a result of the initiative. Dr. Yarn reported that the University System of Georgia leads the nation in conflict management and is gaining a good bit of attention for this initiative.
The future of the initiative is continuous improvement, said Dr. Yarn. One area of such improvement is reaching the students better. The Consortium is also working to disseminate knowledge about the System's conflict resolution initiative. He noted that the Regents had been provided a DVD about the initiative that has been distributed around the System and the world. The Consortium is also developing other marketing tools, such as publications about the initiative. The Consortium staff have been developing an international network of institutions of higher education that are interested in conflict resolution. They had a meeting at the United Nations in August 2005 and a follow-up meeting in Columbus, Ohio, with representatives from all over the world.
Finally, but perhaps most importantly, Dr. Yarn noted the role of the university as a change agent in civil society. The System should graduate students who know how to be team players, how to collaborate, how to bridge differences, and how to participate constructively and tolerably in the workplace and fully as citizens in a participatory democracy. He said that the skills needed to resolve conflict efficiently and responsibly are the same skills needed to make communities strong and to make democracy and capitalism work. Since 1995, the University System of Georgia is doing much better in terms of conflict management and will continue to improve with the Board's support.
Regent Shelnut asked whether there is one area of conflict that the System sees most.
Mr. Yarn responded that the System sees extremely varied types of conflicts because it is a complex social organization, but of course, many disputes are employment related. The cost of attorney's fees alone in an average employment lawsuit in private industry is approximately $200,000 to $250,000. So, resolving such conflicts before they reach the point of lawsuit saves quite a lot of expense to the System.
Seeing that there were no further questions, Chair Leebern then adjourned the meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee as a Committee of the Whole and turned the chairmanship of the meeting back to Regent Shelnut.
Interim Chancellor Cummings thanked Dr. Yarn, Ms. Inlow, and Ms. Neely for the leadership they have shown in the conflict resolution initiative. She remarked that this is one of the Board of Regents' hidden jewels. To have members of the United Nations take note of these individuals' leadership speaks very highly of them and of the Board's foresight to establish this initiative more than ten years ago.
COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC AFFAIRS, "COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE"
Chair Shelnut next convened the Committee on Academic Affairs as a Committee of the Whole and turned the Chairmanship of the meeting over to Regent Cleveland, the Chair of the Committee.
Chair Cleveland said that Interim Chancellor Cummings would first provide information on enrollment. Then, the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academics and Fiscal Affairs, Daniel S. Papp, and the Interim Chancellor would present five approval items to the Committee of the Whole. Chair Cleveland said that all of these items will be of interest to the full Board, not just the Committee on Academic Affairs.
Interim Chancellor Cummings said that she was very pleased to present the University System of Georgia's 2005 enrollment report. She thanked the Associate Vice Chancellor for Planning and Policy Analysis, Cathie Mayes Hudson, and her staff for their hard work in finalizing this information. For the University System as a whole, this latest enrollment reports the seventh consecutive year in which enrollment has grown. From fall 2004 to fall 2005, System enrollment has grown by almost 3,000 students, or 1.2%. That constitutes an all-time high of 253,552 students. Since fall 1998, System enrollment has grown by over 53,000 students, an increase of 26.7%. The fall 2005 growth marks the second year that the System enrollment growth has been at a more modest rate. Interim Chancellor Cummings said that this begins the pattern of a more stable and slow growth rate. While some of the record enrollment growth has slowed, more Georgians are going to pursue higher education because today's economy requires an increasing level of postsecondary education. The Board of Regents is appreciative of the Governor and legislature's strong budget support in funding the System's formula budget request. Those funds allow the System to better serve the numbers of students who have recently enrolled to ensure that they have access to high-quality education.
Interim Chancellor Cummings noted a few brief highlights from the 2005 enrollment report. The state college sector posted the largest enrollment increase of 4% from fall 2004 to fall 2005. She noted that the state college mission is to provide two-year programs and selected bachelor's degrees. Currently, Dalton State College, Macon State College, and Gainesville State College function as state colleges. However, there will likely be another significant enrollment increase when Georgia Gwinnett College comes online. Also posting significant enrollment gains in the last year were the regional university sector (2.4%), state universities (1.3%), and two-year colleges (2.6%). By sector, the fall 2005 enrollments were as follows: research universities - over 79,000; regional universities - more than 27,000; state universities - more than 81,000; state colleges - approximately 16,400; and two-year institutions - over 49,600. The University System of Georgia has seen a significant increase in African-American enrollment (1.9%), particularly Black male enrollment (3.1%). Hispanic enrollment has jumped by 10.3% for a total of 7,088 students. Bucking national trends, the University System of Georgia's total male enrollment has actually outpaced female enrollment in the last year. She noted that the enrollment report contains a wealth of information that is used as a key tool in the budgeting process. In closing, Interim Chancellor Cummings said this was just a brief summary but that she would be happy to provide the Regents with copies of the actual report.
Next, Dr. Papp said that there were five approval items to be presented to the Committee of the Whole. He would present the first three items, and then the Interim Chancellor would present the fourth and fifth items. The first approval item was the establishment of seven baccalaureate degree programs at Georgia Gwinnett College ("GGC"). The seven programs requested for authorization were as follows: Bachelor of Science ("B.S.") with a major in Biology, B.S. with a major in Psychology, Bachelor of Science in Education with a major in Early Childhood Education (including eligibility for certification in Special Education), Bachelor of Applied Science with a major in Technology Management, Bachelor of Business Administration with a major in General Business, Bachelor of Science in Radiologic Technology, and Bachelor of Science in Nursing. (See pages 26 to 31.) Dr. Papp explained that these seven programs were identified as the most critical degree programs for the new college by a combination of needs assessment studies by consultants; discussions with business, education, medical, and civic leaders in Gwinnett County; and an analysis of student and business demand in the region. This array of degree programs will allow GGC to move forward with accreditation as soon as possible. The curriculum for each of these degree programs will be developed over the coming months as faculty members in each major are hired. After the curricula are finalized, they will be submitted to the Chancellor and the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academics and Fiscal Affairs for final approval. Most of these degree programs will enroll students for fall semester 2006. President Daniel J. Kaufman of GGC was present to answer any questions the Regents may have.
Chair Cleveland asked whether there were any questions about the proposed programs. Seeing that there were none, he called for a vote. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved all seven programs at GGC.
Dr. Papp said that the second approval item was the establishment of engineering programs in three specialty areas at the University of Georgia ("UGA"). UGA was requesting approval of a B.S. with a major in Biochemical Engineering, a B.S. with a major in Computer Systems Engineering, a B.S. with a major in Environmental Engineering, a Master of Science ("M.S.") with a major in Biochemical Engineering, and an M.S. with a major in Environmental Engineering. (See pages 31 to 37.) All five of these proposed programs are in areas of strength and recognized expertise at UGA. With notable strengths in UGA's biology and chemistry departments as well as its College of Pharmacy, Biochemical Engineering is a sound programmatic and mission fit for the university, said Dr. Papp. Given UGA's capabilities in computer sciences, bioinformatics, and other relevant disciplines, Computer Systems Engineering is also a logical field for the institution. With UGA being one of the founders of and leasers in environmental sciences and ecology and having nationally recognized programs in forestry, soil conservation and management, and agriculture, the programs in Environmental Engineering round out a suite of logical engineering programs for the university. All programs have been developed and proposed in the context of cordial discussions between UGA and the Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT"). UGA will pursue accreditation of these programs at the earliest possible date with the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology ("ABET"). These programs will be offered through a combination of existing and new courses.
Dr. Papp noted that President Michael F. Adams had reverified that funding is available for these programs, and Provost Arnett C. Mace was in attendance at the meeting to answer any questions.
Chair Cleveland asked whether there were any questions about the proposed programs. Seeing that there were none, he called for a vote. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved all five programs at UGA.
Dr. Papp said that the third approval item was the approval of a consortial external Doctor of Physical Therapy degree offered by the Medical College of Georgia ("MCG") on the campuses of MCG as well as North Georgia College " State University ("NGCSU") and Armstrong Atlantic State University ("AASU"). (See pages 37 to 40.) This consortial arrangement is necessary because the physical therapy profession, and especially its accrediting body, the American Physical Therapy Association, is increasingly moving toward the doctorate as the terminal degree for physical therapy practitioners. Thus, MCG, NGCSU, and AASU have developed an arrangement outlined in a recently signed memorandum of understanding ("MOU") between the three institutions under which students will be able to pursue an MCG Doctor of Physical Therapy degree at all three institutions. The MOU describes the local arrangements, supervising authorities, fiscal agents, academic administration, clinical preceptorships, student accountability and services, faculty services, and general operation of the proposed external degree programs. Presidents Daniel W. Rahn, David L. Potter, and Thomas Z. Jones have reverified that funding will be available for this collaborative program. Provost Barry D. Goldstein at MCG was present at the meeting to answer any questions.
Chair Cleveland asked whether there were any questions about the proposed collaborative programs Seeing that there were none, he called for a vote. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved the external Doctor of Physical Therapy degree.
Next, Interim Chancellor Cummings said that it was her distinct pleasure to ask the board to grant emerita status to two former history-making presidents. The first was Dr. Portia Holmes Shields, who was the first female president of Albany State University ("ALSU"). (See pages 40 to 41.) Dr. Shields has a very long and distinguished career. She oversaw the devastating flood recovery after the Flint River flooded about a decade ago. She was also very effective in procuring outside funding. The late Ray Charles donated more than $3 million to the institution. Recently, Dr. Shields was honored by the Thurgood Marshall Scholarship Fund in New York for some of her achievements. Interim Chancellor Cummings remarked that Dr. Shields is highly deserving of receiving emerita status from the Board of Regents.
Chair Cleveland asked whether there were any questions concerning this recommendation. Seeing that there were none, he called for a vote. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved the establishment of emerita status for Dr. Shields.
Interim Chancellor Cummings stated that the second candidate for emerita status was Dr. Jacquelyn M. Belcher, former President of Georgia Perimeter College ("GPC"). (See pages 41-42.) She was the first minority president that this System hired at a nonminority institution. Over her ten years as President of GPC, the enrollment at the institution grew from approximately 16,000 to over 21,000, and the institution serves international students from more than 147 countries. Under President Belcher's leadership, GPC became nationally recognized as a leader amongst two-year colleges. She is well known for securing several million dollars in external funding. Interim Chancellor Cummings noted that Dr. Belcher's husband, Lew, was in attendance at this meeting. She then asked for a motion to approve the emerita status of former President Belcher.
Chair Cleveland asked whether there were any questions concerning this recommendation. Seeing that there were none, he called for a vote. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved the establishment of emerita status for Dr. Belcher.
Seeing that there was no further business, Chair Cleveland adjourned the meeting of the Committee on Academic Affairs as a Committee of the Whole and turned the chairmanship of the meeting back to Regent Shelnut.
At approximately 1:55 p.m., Chair Shelnut adjourned the Regents into their regular Committee meetings.
CALL TO ORDER
The Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia met again on Wednesday, November 16, 2005, in the Board Room, room 7007, 270 Washington St., S.W., seventh floor. The Chair of the Board, Regent J. Timothy Shelnut, called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. Present on Wednesday, in addition to Chair Wooten, were Vice Chair Patrick S. Pittard and Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., Connie Cater, William H. Cleveland, Joe Frank Harris, Julie Ewing Hunt, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., James R. Jolly, Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Martin W. NeSmith, Doreen Stiles Poitevint, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Richard L. Tucker, Allan Vigil, and Joel O. Wooten, Jr.
INVOCATION
The invocation was given on Wednesday, November 16, 2005, by Regent Wanda Yancey Rodwell.
ATTENDANCE REPORT
The attendance report was read on Wednesday, November 16, 2005, by Secretary Gail S. Weber, who announced that Regent Michael J. Coles had asked for and been given permission to be absent on that day.
SPECIAL PRESENTATION ON KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
Chair Shelnut called upon President Betty L. Siegel of Kennesaw State University ("KSU") to make a special presentation on the university. He noted that this was a new addition to the Board of Regents agenda. Each month, one of the System presidents would discuss the exemplary achievements at the institution. He invited President Siegel to approach the Board.
President Siegel greeted the Regents and said she was pleased to discuss a special initiative at KSU of which she is especially proud. She noted that the institution has gone through a series of extraordinary changes, most of which were predicated by growth. When President Siegel came to KSU, there were 3,700 students at the institution. Today, there are close to 20,000 students. In 1986, KSU was the subject of a chapter in the book called Searching for Academic Excellence: Twenty Colleges and Universities on the Move and Their Academic Leaders. KSU continued to grow in sophistication, selectivity, and specialization. Five years later, KSU was named a rising star by U.S. News and World Report. In 2001, KSU adopted the theme, "From success to significance," which was adopted from the Peter F. Drucker Foundation. Parker J. Palmer spoke at KSU's October 2001 convocation, just after September 11. He recounted a story from The New York Times. He said that when the first World Trade Center tower fell down, a man emerged from the tower covered in debris. He was approached by a policeman who said, "May I help you? You are in shock." The man stood tall and said, "I am not in shock. I am fully cognizant for the first time in my life about what is really important." President Siegel said that everyone at the convocation understood that. After that speech, KSU worked with Mr. Palmer on a series of conversations on what it important at a university.
President Siegel noted that KSU had been very successful, but the institution wanted to be significant. The university aspired to be a university of meaning. KSU wanted to determine what would be the leadership abilities of people who are fully cognizant, what they would know about diversity and global leadership. What would be the values of civic life, engagement, and service? What would be ethical leadership? What would be a position of social change? What would it take to make a university a place of meaning? All over campus, people met in small faculty, students, and community groups in courageous conversations about what a university of meaning would be. From that, KSU developed a program on ethical leadership. KSU has moved "from success to significance." Now, every leadership program at KSU must have a component on ethical leadership and social change. KSU has since established the Institute for Leadership, Ethics, and Character ("ILEC").
President Siegel approached the RTM Restaurant Group ("RTM"), whose theme is "results through motivation," and asked the company to give KSU a baseball field. RTM's Chief Executive Officer, Russ Umphenour, said that RTM was not interested in donating a baseball field. So, President Siegel told him about the new ILEC. Within 15 minutes, Mr. Umphenour gave KSU $1 million. Later, RTM gave KSU another $500,000 with a promise for another $500,000 for a chair in ethical leadership. Now, there is an ethical leadership component to every leadership program at KSU. There are now funded fellowships in the ILEC. There is now a student leadership program in which students from all over the region come to take a course in leadership.
President Siegel said that extraordinary opportunities for research activities have arisen out of KSU's emphasis on ethical leadership. Every year, the ILEC has a conclave of leaders from all over the country discuss ethical leadership. The ILEC is currently developing a doctorate in ethical leadership and social change, which will be the first of its kind and will be a program for people in education, the health sciences, and the nonprofits to come together. A component of the program will be a requirement to spend significant time abroad in a socially conscious program. She remarked that this is an exciting way to use a curriculum that will have meaning for academic, business, and nonprofit leaders.
In closing, President Siegel said that the ILEC is her proudest accomplishment at KSU. This is the program that touches all aspects of the university: its people, place, programs, policies, and processes. She invited University System presidents to join her at the Oxford Conclave on Global Ethics and the Changing University Presidency at Balliol College of Oxford University from September 12 to 15, 2005. To her knowledge, this was the first time that college presidents brought teams of people - vice presidents, deans, faculty, and students - to a place like Oxford University to talk about how to transform universities into places of meaning. Discussions focusing on ethical leadership were led by distinguished thinkers such as Dr. Lawrence Carter, Dean of the Martin Luther King Jr. International Chapel at Morehouse College; Ms. Frances Hesselbein, Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Leader to Leader Institute; Dr. Howard Gardner, the John H. and Elisabeth A Hobbs Professor of Cognition and Education at the Harvard Graduate School of Education; and Sir Timothy Lankester, President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford University. Mr. John Hume, 1998 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, was unable to attend due to illness; but in recognition of his inspiration to the conclave, the meeting and future programs were dedicated to him. President Lankester said to the attendees, "We must all as leaders be about moral imagination." From that meeting, President Siegel went to Hong Kong for a meeting of 2,000 Chinese teachers who are using an ethical leadership model developed under the auspices of ILEC. She then met with the Governor's groups on ethical awareness. All of this is part of a university involved in outreach, leadership, and community service. This was the message she wanted to share with the Board of Regents at this meeting.
Chair Shelnut thanked President Siegel for her presentation.
Regent NeSmith commended President Siegel on the ILEC. He encouraged institutions to teach ethics at the undergraduate level.
President Siegel responded that ethics are taught across the curriculum at KSU.
Chair Shelnut thanked President Siegel again and remarked that the Regents look forward to hearing about other innovative programs at other institutions in the coming months.
INTRODUCTION OF SPEAKER GLENN RICHARDSON
Chair Shelnut next introduced Speaker Glenn Richardson of the Georgia House of Representatives. He said that Speaker Richardson is a special friend of the University System of Georgia with an exemplary legislative career. He has served as floor leader for Governor Sonny Purdue and minority leader for the House of Representative. He is one of the youngest Speakers in the nation. In 1981, Speaker Richardson earned a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from Georgia State University ("GSU") and was a member of GSU's first law school class, earning his Juris Doctorate in 1984. Speaker Richardson and his wife, Susan, are the proud parents of three children: Maggie, Will, and Bryn, who attends the University of Georgia ("UGA"). Chair Shelnut welcomed the Speaker and thanked him for his active support of the Board's legislative and budgetary needs. He said the Regents are thankful for Speaker Richardson's partnership with the University System of Georgia and in particular for his vote for House Bill 340 in the past session. He asked Speaker Richardson to speak.
Speaker Richardson greeted the Regents and thanked them for the invitation to come to this meeting. He noted that his son, Bryn, sometimes complains that it is hard to graduate from college in four years. Speaker Richardson graduated from college in three years because he did not take off summers. He said that is how he takes on life, too. When he is given a job, he is ready to get started and get finished. There are times when people tell him to stop and smell the roses, but he has a tough time doing that. When he ran for minority leader, he told his partners that he would do it for one to three years, but he did not want to be minority leader for too long because he wanted to be speaker. He thanked the Regents for the job they do and welcomed them to contact him at any time.
Chair Shelnut thanked Speaker Richardson and his Chief of Staff, Jay Walker, for visiting the Regents.
REPORTS FROM BOARD'S TASK FORCES
Chair Shelnut called upon the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academics and Fiscal Affairs, Daniel S. Papp, to begin the monthly updates on the Board's task forces.
Dr. Papp said that his monthly update on the Regents' task force on retention, progression, and graduation ("RPG") rates had an added twist at this meeting. He would be presenting some data collected by the Associate Vice Chancellor for Planning and Policy Analysis, Cathie Mayes Hudson. First, he reviewed the RPG initiative goals, which were as follows: to understand why the System's RPG rates are not better than they are, to expand and initiate programs that will increase the System's RPG rates, to improve overall educational quality even as RPG rates increase, to bring the institution-specific graduation rate at least to the national average by 2010, and to become a national leader in graduation rates in the longer-term future.
Dr. Papp reported that institution RPG targets and plans were due on this date. In coming weeks, staff will work with the institutions to move these targets and plans forward. The RPG liaison group is comprised of presidential appointees to identify institutional RPG issues and share best RPG practices. This group had a Systemwide workshop regarding RPG issues and best-practices on October 20, 2005. The financial impacts committee combined chief business officers, vice presidents for academic and student affairs, and legal representatives to develop financial ideas and recommendations to improve RPG. This committee met on October 14, and its ideas and recommendations will be forthcoming. The expanded general education committee is comprised of faculty and academic administrators and was tasked to review the System's general education curriculum, including assessment of impact of general education on RPG. This committee met on October 27 and 28, and its work is underway. President James A. Burran of Dalton State College was chair of that committee, but the chair is being transitioned to President Dorothy Leland of Georgia College " State University. They are going to expand this committee by adding more faculty in order to improve and update the curriculum. Dr. Hudson was finalizing the appointment of the student engagement committee, which will assess National Survey of Student Engagement ("NSSE") and the Community College Survey of Student Engagement ("CCSSE") results, yielding recommendations on improving RPG. Finally, the RPG data mining initiative will examine data available to the System and its institutions to better inform RPG decisions. Dr. Papp called upon Dr. Hudson to present some of the very preliminary, but fascinating, data from this initiative.
Dr. Hudson said that at this meeting, she would provide a brief overview of research findings from the RPG initiative. She started the project by analyzing factors that have been shown nationally to affect RPG rates. Then, she is examining these factors systematically using Georgia data and University System data to see how those factors might differ in Georgia. Over the next few weeks, she will develop a research agenda that will be used by the data mining committee as it seeks to further the Board's understanding of RPG rates in the University System of Georgia. The purpose is to identify groups of students who are in at-risk situations and to use those findings to determine what kinds of program interventions would best work to improve RPG rates.
Dr. Hudson said that at this meeting, she would focus on student characteristics that affect RPG rates. Some of those factors, such as family or personal income or parents' education levels, cannot be changed by the student or the institution, but understanding these factors better may help develop programs to improve PRG rates. One of the most important factors is the timing of entering college. Students who enter college as traditional freshman in the fall following spring graduation from high school graduate at a rate that is almost twice that of students who delay entry to college for one to five years or more. This information may be hiding a much more complex story. Perhaps those who delay entry into college are those who are working to save money to go to college or perhaps they are not as prepared academically.
Next, Dr. Hudson showed the Regents a slide that demonstrated the effects of academic preparation on graduation rates. As high school grade point average ("GPA") rates increase, graduation rates increase as well. Similarly, as SAT scores increase, graduation rates increase. The next slide depicted financial need as measured by receiving a Pell Grant, financial aid as either having a Pell Grant or a HOPE Scholarship ("HOPE"), and academic preparation as measured by having a HOPE, which is based on a 3.0 high school GPA. The data show that students who have HOPE but no Pell Grant graduate at the highest rate. Students who have a Pell Grant and HOPE are retained at the second highest rate. Students who do not have HOPE are retained at the lowest levels. Dr. Hudson noted that even a small difference in retention rate translates into a much more significant difference in graduation rates.
Dr. Hudson also examined the effects of family income on RPG rates using System data and data provided by The College Board Student Descriptive Questionnaire data for fall 1998. This is the first time the System has examined this data. In general, the data show that as family income increases, graduation rates increase. It may be that these students simply have more money to attend college, said Dr. Hudson.
Next, Dr. Hudson discussed the effects of education itself. Students from families where neither parent has a bachelor's degree graduate at a lower rate than students from families where one parent has a bachelor's degree, while students from families where one parent has a bachelor's degree graduate at a lower rate than students from families where both parents have at least a bachelor's degree. So, as the education level of the family increases, so do graduation rates.
Chair Shelnut asked Dr. Hudson to repeat the information on income.
Dr. Hudson explained that there is a positive relationship between level of income and graduation rates. It is probably that lower-income students get the Pell Grant.
Chair Shelnut said that there are probably many messages in this information.
Dr. Hudson reiterated that as family education level increases, so do graduation rates. This probably also represents many different factors and has significant implications for how the System designs programs and applies funding. Dr. Hudson noted that 43% of System students are from families where neither parent has a bachelor's degree. So, clearly, this is significant in RPG rates in the System. She noted that this was the first time the data had been analyzed in this way.
Vice Chair Pittard said that economics seemed to be important in a number of these factors affecting RPG rates. He asked whether the data are leading to conclusions yet.
Dr. Hudson replied that staff are still analyzing the data. They want the committee to look at the data more broadly and bring institutional data to the table as well. The staff also want the Regents' input into how the research agenda should develop.
Vice Chair Pittard asked whether the analysis was also examining the freshman-to-sophomore retention rates.
Dr. Hudson responded that it is.
Chair Shelnut asked whether the data will ultimately illuminate who is not graduating, and Dr. Hudson replied that it will. He asked when that information might be available.
Dr. Hudson responded that the staff will be presenting the next step in this project in January, which is the analysis of NSSE and CCSSE data.
Vice Chair Pittard said that it seemed obvious that first-generation college students do not have the same graduation rate as students whose parents went to college. He said it seemed there is a counseling issue in that these students need to be mentored by the college counselors to a greater extent, particularly early on. There are so many unanswered questions they may have that students whose parents went to college do not have.
Chair Shelnut said that if it is the case that first-time college students are not getting enough counseling, he wondered whether there should be an initiative to reach out to those students while they are in high school.
Regent McMillan noted that the Board has such a program called the Postsecondary Readiness Enrichment Program ("PREP"), but there are few of these programs remaining in the System. He remarked that data are necessary and helpful, but each person is an individual. There are many first-generation college students who negotiate the college experience successfully. In many instances, it is because there once were support networks that are no longer there. Unfortunately, such programs are the ones that get cut in tight budget times. He said that the Board should be mindful of programs such as PREP that were successful and should be revived again.
Referring to one of Dr. Hudson's charts, Regent Poitevint asked why students from families with less than $10,000 income performed better than students from families whose income was $10,000 to $15,000.
Dr. Hudson responded that it could be any number of factors, including the amount of need-based financial aid awarded to those students, motivation, etc.
Regent Cleveland asked whether Dr. Hudson would be separating out the parents' educational attainment levels and the family income, and she responded that she would.
Chair Shelnut called upon the Associate Vice Chancellor for Media and Publications, Arlethia Perry-Johnson, to update the Board on the communications task force.
Ms. Perry-Johnson stated that she is a first-generation college graduate, so she could certainly appreciate Regent McMillan's remarks. The overarching charge of this initiative is to expand communication of the System's successes and speak to various audiences about the various niches of national preeminence that exist in the System. The Office of Media and Publications had a very successful planning retreat hosted by President Betty L. Siegel at the Jolley Lodge on the campus of Kennesaw State University. Regent Rodwell joined the staff to give insight into corporate communications strategies. The staff are working with the public relations directors at the institutions. They are moving forward with the understanding that there is high interest in creating new communications vehicles for us to tell the System's story to wider audiences, preferably unfiltered direct communication. The staff intend to fully engage the 35 institutions in the expanded communications endeavors, because their success is the System's success. They intend to expand the use of technology in their outreach efforts, in order to reach a broader audience with relatively low costs. The main deliverable of this initiative will be a strategic communications plan that will drive communications efforts for the next 18 months to three years.
The System's audiences are quite diverse, explained Ms. Perry-Johnson. Therefore, the staff will reach them in different ways. These key audiences include the executive branch of state government; members of the legislature; faculty, staff, and administrators at the 35 System institutions; current and potential students; business and civic leaders; employers of System graduates; statewide and national media; and the national higher education community. The goal is to make sure the System takes full advantage of each and every opportunity for these audiences to regularly and continuously receive information regarding its achievements.
Ms. Perry-Johnson stated that the staff are assessing all of the System's current communications vehicles to determine whether they will continue to exist within the new strategic goals, while they are simultaneously shaping new collaterals. Varied forms of communications strategies are being recommended and considered, including assessing the System's current communications position to identify gaps; developing new and optimizing existing publications; increasing targeted media relations and publicity, particularly at the national level; fostering support for enhanced marketing and advertising; expanded use of the Internet; video and other broadcast collaterals; and optimizing special events.
At this meeting, Ms. Perry-Johnson gave the Regents a preview of one new collateral that the staff have been working on for electronic dissemination. She reminded the Regents about the new e-mail "blast" publication titled "USG Linkages." This totally electronic publication is being designed for distribution via email to as many of the System's key stakeholders for whom there are secure, active, and current email addresses. The publication will contain information about current issues throughout the University System and will allow the reader to "click onto" live websites where they can get additional information about the topics that interest them the most.
Ms. Perry-Johnson showed the Regents a mock-up of the first issue. She noted that it will include a monthly message from the Chair of the Board, lively news updates, and mini features about exciting projects going on in the University System, such as the Best Practices Awards program and the African-American Male Initiative, etc. Most importantly, because this publication does not involve being sent out to a printer for costly and time-sensitive production, it will allow the staff to quickly and efficiently communicate with key stakeholders about important issues in a direct and unfiltered manner. In closing, Ms. Perry-Johnson noted that this was a preliminary draft, but she hoped to have the first issue ready for dissemination in January. She invited the Regents to provide her with feedback and asked whether they had any questions.
Regent Rodwell said that she was immensely impressed with the amount of work that the Office of Media and Publications produces on a daily basis. She asked how often the new e-mail publication would be distributed.
Ms. Perry-Johnson responded that it could easily be distributed on a monthly basis. She noted that The System Supplement is the System's current monthly publication, but it is distributed to many people for whom there may not be current email addresses, such as higher education associations and older alumni. Vice Chair Pittard noted that the Office of Media and Publications has a very small staff. So, the e-mail publication may supplant The System Supplement, but consideration is also being given as to whether this publication can be printed and mailed to those who do not have email. He commended Ms. Perry-Johnson and her staff for their hard work on this draft publication.
Regent Leebern asked what is the "hook" that would encourage people to read this publication when they may receive many emails about their own institutions.
Ms. Perry-Johnson said that she had asked the institutional public relations officers to identify their respective institutions' niches of excellence. Those will be the areas in which the publication will profile their successes. She agreed that there are many e-publications, so it is important to send this e-publication to those who have a genuine interest in the University System. The substance of the e-publication itself must also pique their interest. That is why the Board must consider how frequently to disseminate this e-publication so that people do not get over-saturated with information that is not relevant. Instead, it should be sent just often enough that people are waiting to receive it.
Regent Rodwell agreed that the timeliness and relevance of articles are important. She said that the e-publication must be about matters that people care about and must show that the University System is moving forward. Moreover, it must address the issues and not just highlight good news so that people consider it a serious publication.
Chair Shelnut agreed. Seeing that there were no further questions or comments, he called upon the Assistant Vice Chancellor for Economic Development, Joy Hymel, to update the Regents on the total impact task force. She noted that she was representing President G. Wayne Clough of the Georgia Institute of Technology at this meeting. The other members of the task force are the presidents of the other three System research institutions, the Georgia Research Alliance ("GRA"), Atlanta Regional Council For Higher Education ("ARCHE"), and the commissioner of the Georgia Department Of Economic Development. The task force was charged by Chair Shelnut to perform a comprehensive assessment of the total impact of the University System on the State of Georgia.
The total system task force collected data, which four economists from Georgia State University ("GSU") and the University of Georgia ("UGA") are interpreting. The task force is preparing the report and presentation for the January 11, 2006, Board of Regents meeting. Ms. Hymel said that this process is revealing many wonderful programs at System institutions that make an important difference in the lives of Georgians. At this meeting, she would discuss four of them.
First, Ms. Hymel reported that UGA has originated 88 companies since 1974; 50 of the active start-up companies are currently based in Georgia, and most of those firms continue to have ties to UGA. Annual sales of the companies are approximately $20 million, and Georgia companies have returned more than $11 million in the form of research funding and licensing revenue to UGA. UGA-generated companies now employ approximately 500 highly trained workers in new knowledge-based jobs.
At the Medical College of Georgia ("MCG"), another program began as a desire on the part of Dr. Virgil C. McKie, Professor Emeritus of Pediatrics, who wanted to help his young sickle cell patients who were having strokes. His research has revolutionized the care of these at-risk children. Dr. McKie and colleague Dr. Robert J. Adams, Regents Professor of Neurology and Pediatrics, led a study in 1995 that followed 130 at-risk children ages 2 to 16 at 14 sites in the United States and Canada. The study found that regular blood transfusions resulted in a 90% reduction in strokes, prompting the National Institutes of Health to halt the $12.1 million study 16 months early so that doctors and consumers could get the news. In July 2004, California researchers reported the incidence of first stroke in children with sickle cell disease in their state had taken a nose-dive since 1998, and the likely reason is the program MCG developed to identify and treat kids who are at risk. California researchers found a better than 80% reduction in first strokes.
In 1999, GSU bought the first Bio Bus, a 30-foot-long mobile laboratory that can accommodate 15 students at a time. GSU students, under the direction of a GSU biology professor, visit schools and organizations across Georgia to teach on topics ranging from animal diversity for the younger grades to the biotechnology of forensics and criminology for high school students. Recently, a National Science Foundation ("NSF") grant provided the funding for a second Bio Bus and a van to expand GSU's effort to bring relevant and fun science presentations in which Georgia's students can participant. Thanks to support from GSU and the NSF, the Bio Bus programs are offered free to Georgia schools and organizations. Since 1999, GSU's Bio Bus has served more than 70,000 students in 24 Georgia counties.
The last example of the impact of the System on the state that Ms. Hymel discussed was the Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") Busbee Center for Global Economic Development and Innovation (the "Busbee Center"). Located in Technology Square, the Busbee Center is an innovative partnership of Georgia's economic development agencies, intellectual resources, and training facilities. The Busbee Center brings together a cluster of resources from all of Georgia's leading economic developers. The synergy of the economic development cluster was a key in recent economic development decisions. The telecom division of the Pirelli Group has chosen Technology Square for its North American research and development operation. Samsung will also locate its North American research and development operations at Technology Square.
Ms. Hymel said that she would present the final update of the total impact task force at the January 2006 Board meeting. She asked whether the Regents had any questions or comments.
Regent Poitevint asked which counties the Bio Bus program serves, and Ms. Hymel said that she would get that information.
Seeing there were no further questions, Chair Shelnut thanked Ms. Hymel for this update and said that he looked forward to her final report in January. He then called upon the Vice Chancellor for Facilities, Linda M. Daniels, to give her update on accelerating access to new facilities.
Ms. Daniels reported that at this meeting, she would brief the Regents on the many dialogues she has had since the October Board meeting. She said that she had spoken to all of the System presidents and most of the Regents and that there were several consistent themes in these discussions. Everyone recognized the need for change and improvement. However, it was important to note, she said, that on a 10-point scale, with 10 being a perfect score, the current capital process averaged 7.5, when System presidents compared the University System of Georgia's process to what they had experienced in other systems and states. So, although this process is not perfect, it is also not starting at ground zero, she said. Many recognized that the introduction of very large projects, ones that eclipse the System's core instruction mission and meet multiple state strategic needs, has impacted the System's capital process. That has at least "skewed" the effectiveness of the System's priority list to meet basic instruction needs around the state. Presidents at large and small institutions alike would like the Board to address this issue. Finally, the overarching concern of presidents was the lack of funding and the time span between the identification of needs and meeting those needs.
The facilities staff have committed to broad-based and local research on capital funding models. Unfortunately, the research has not revealed any "silver bullets" to solve the System's funding concerns. However, across the country, the staff have noted some consistent approaches. First, there is the "big bang" approach (North Carolina $2.5 billion - Connecticut $2 billion). That is, major funding infusions typically requiring a voter bond referendum and significant up-front investment in more formal study identifying specific projects. The "big bang" approach sounds good, but there are some issues. Connecticut has had a significant amount of publicity regarding serious concerns related to its execution of the surge in construction volume, while North Carolina, on the other hand, spread its bond sales over a six-year period.
A second approach is the sustained approach. Several states, such as Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Minnesota, have taken this approach, which is closest to Georgia's model. It does not require a voter referendum and historically has provided more consistent funding overtime. Annual funding levels are more modest but consistent. These states typically pay the debt service on General Obligation ("G.O.") bonds like Georgia, but they also have often given institutions the authority to issue revenue bonds, a big difference compared to Georgia. There are unusual cases, like Texas, which has a legacy major capital endowment from oil money for its research universities. Texas has initiated the development of an endowment to be built up over time for its other university system institutions. Ms. Daniels remarked that although the idea of an endowment is good public policy, it would only exacerbate the problem in the University System of Georgia right now.
A third approach Ms. Daniels labeled the "hunker down" approach. That is, accept the facts; take what you get; do not make waves; and protect the status quo. This approach focuses energy on improving efficiency and addressing accountability. A fourth approach is to retreat; that is, to scale down mission to match current funding. Ms. Daniels said that this is not an option.
It is a complex challenge for the Board to evaluate and prioritize needs among 35 System institutions and numerous instructional sites. The Regents must prioritize between the elements of the System's threefold mission: instruction, research, and service. This challenge is compounded by the complexity of analyzing the users and purposes of needed facilities. The most fundamental consideration, instruction, is the largest element of the System's mission in terms of scope and cost. Even within the instructional realm though, there are a vast array of academic disciplines with varying degrees of strategic importance. Space in facilities is organized by the program classification of the primary user group. Although instructional space is the highest priority in the Board's current principles for capital resource allocation, each program class, with the possible exception of sponsored research, is needed directly or indirectly to fulfill the System's core instructional mission. To better address this challenge of prioritization is the reason the staff are taking a new look at the Board's principles for capital resource allocation.
The other, more difficult task, is to fund funding and quickly construct these priority needs, said Ms. Daniels. Staff are developing a University System of Georgia capital program funding model to help both evaluate needs and most effectively match the System's capital needs to funding methods. The Board's traditional G.O. bond funding is limited as a function of state revenue. As Ms. Daniels had mentioned before, the Georgia constitution allows up to 10% of the previous year's receipts to be committed to G.O. bond debt. The University System and its foundations have responded with public-private ventures through local development authorities, but the application of that technique is also limited. Projects require a clear revenue stream; each project must stand on its individual financial legs; and of course, there are the costs of financing which must be born by each individual project.
Ms. Daniels reported that the staff are looking at other ways to finance projects and minimize the cost.
Chair Shelnut asked Ms. Daniels to elaborate on public-private ventures.
Ms. Daniels said that the public-private ventures coming forward these days are harder and harder to make work. The Executive Director of Real Estate Ventures, Marty Nance, is finding more creative ways to make this work, but there are limited opportunities where these kinds of revenue streams work on an individual project basis. She said that the staff are still moving ahead with the public-private ventures program.
Ms. Daniels reported that the staff are also developing a new state construction manual in partnership with the Georgia State Finance and Investment Commission ("GSFIC") and the private sector under the auspices of the Commission for a New Georgia. This will codify the System's access to fast-track construction methods to implement the capital program through expedited construction techniques.
Ms. Daniels said that the first step toward a solution to accelerating facilities was to reassess the System's capital needs. The staff did an updated analysis of the "$7 billion dollar story" she outlined two years ago. The System needs new space in the amount of $3.1 billion, renovations in the amount of $2.4 billion (includes programmatic updates of space and major repairs and renovation ["MRR"]), and infrastructure in the amount of $1 billion. Ms. Daniels noted that campus infrastructure in this sense is not directly related to individual capital projects but relates to the fact that campuses are much bigger symbiotic communities. There are also special needs. The projected needs methodology does not quantify special needs; for example, sponsored research oriented initiatives like the GIT nanotechnology project. These kinds of opportunity projects that meet multiple state strategic needs (e.g., economic development, public health, etc.) will be an important part of higher education's mission and expectations in the future, but there are no traditional guidelines for benchmarking or projecting what those needs might be. This critical issue will require discussions with state leaders and especially key partners in economic development, like the Georgia Research Alliance.
"So, how do we stack up to meet this approximately $650 million a year need?" asked Ms. Daniels. If the Board looks at its past track record, the gap to get there is apparent and even more difficult and complicated than it seems. Ms. Daniels showed the Regents a chart depicting the amount of complementary funding, over time, for public-private ventures projects and G.O. bond funding. With the exception of 2005, the Board of Regents has received a healthy (average 25%) share of the state's total bond sales. Last year, which was the first year Georgia sold over $1 billion in bonds, the Department of Transportation ("DOT") received enhanced funding as part of the Governor's "Fast Forward" program. This was possible because DOT was able to pay its own debt service on that enhanced portion of funding from motor fuel tax monies. The Georgia Constitution recognizes motor fuel tax as a legitimate source to pay bond debt service. Ms. Daniels asserted that the System needs to find its own "motor fuel tax" to "fast forward" higher education in Georgia.
Ms. Daniels said that she had also promised a look at some projections of what the Board can expect from these and other potential funding pipelines compared to the System's funding needs over time. After comparing the project types on the System's list of needs and funding methods, both existing and proposed, the staff do not have a final picture. They do not have the solution yet, but they are making progress. State G.O. bonds are a limited resource. It is critical that the Board protect this legacy funding for core academic facilities that lack other revenue streams. With regard to public-private ventures, the bad news is, based upon needed project types, the System cannot sustain the current level of public-private ventures funding over ten plus years. Ms. Daniels noted that the System is currently doing over $400 million a year in public-private ventures. The good news is that public-private ventures funding may be the System's best bet in the future for meeting the undefined needs of special projects or, if not meeting, at least leveraging state or other economic development funds to that end.
With regard to proposed state revenue bonds, staff are working to open up this potential opportunity. The Board will need legislation to accomplish this. Staff are working with the Governor's chief financial officer and the Office of the Attorney General to draft this needed legislation. Ms. Daniels said she could not stress enough the complexity and importance of analyzing and matching projects and the most appropriate funding methods. As the staff sort out this puzzle, the Board of Regents will need to take a disciplined leadership role in steering projects to the appropriate funding method. She then asked whether the Regents had any questions or comments.
Vice Chair Pittard asked whether a bonding company would support a model in which projects are grouped rather than individually funded.
Ms. Daniels responded that kind of activity is going on. In fact, there may be grouped initiatives, such as a group of housing projects or a group of research facilities. There may be a way to move to programmatic groupings rather than project-specific funding.
Regent NeSmith said that the current model has worked well. The problem is the funding is limited. He noted that the System has fallen behind in MRR funding and that he hoped this could be caught up so that existing facilities do not deteriorate. He thanked Ms. Daniels and her staff for their hard work.
Chair Shelnut asked whether the Board can approve student fees to finance academic facilities.
Ms. Daniels responded that this is a very slippery slope, which is why the staff are working with the Office of the Attorney General to stay in line with Georgia's Constitution. While this is not unprecedented, it is a very tricky issue in terms of not obligating future sessions of the legislature. That is why the staff are looking to develop legislation that would allow the Board to finance entire groups of projects instead of individual projects. She said that fees may be the "motor fuel tax" that the System is lacking, but it is a very delicate issue.
Chair Shelnut said that since students are allowed to vote on matters like fees to build parking decks, he wondered whether they should not be allowed to vote on fees to build academic facilities.
Vice Chair Pittard said that he had been having a similar conversation with the Vice Chancellor for Fiscal Affairs, William R. Bowes. He suggested a "one best idea" approach derived out of the research. Then, the Board of Regents should meet with the funding partners to propose this idea. He said that the problem is that there are too many pieces of solutions and not one single best idea. The Board has no alternative but to address this problem or there will be accreditation issues and students will leave the state. He said it is critical to develop one best idea and get the support of the Office of the Attorney General and the legislature.
Regent Leebern suggested there must be some mechanism to create a "fuel tax" for the System, especially considering the projected enrollment growth of 66,000 new students in the next ten years.
Regent NeSmith said there is much discussion these days about doing away with income taxes and having a sales tax instead. He wondered whether something like that could include a percent of tax as a revenue stream for the University System of Georgia.
Regent Jennings suggested that there could be fees associated with courses that require special facilities, such as laboratories.
Regent Pittard said that differential tuition is a direction the University System of Georgia must take. The most expensive degrees should have the most expensive tuition, he said.
In closing, Ms. Daniels reiterated that the System must come up with a new revenue stream, some kind of "fuel tax" for facilities construction.
Chair Shelnut called for a break at approximately 10:45 a.m. At approximately 11:00 a.m., he reconvened the meeting and called for the Committee reports.
COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC AFFAIRS
The Committee on Academic Affairs met as a Committee of the Whole during the full Board meeting on Tuesday, November 15, 2005. Committee members in attendance were Chair William H. Cleveland, Vice Chair Doreen Stiles Poitevint, and Regents Connie Cater, Joe Frank Harris, and James R. Jolly. Also in attendance were Interim Chancellor Corlis Cummings, Board Chair J. Timothy Shelnut, and Regents Hugh A. Carter, Jr., Julie Ewing Hunt, W. Mansfield Jennings, Jr., Donald M. Leebern, Jr., Elridge W. McMillan, Patrick S. Pittard, Wanda Yancey Rodwell, Richard L. Tucker, Allan Vigil, and Joel O. Wooten, Jr. The Committee met in its regular session on Tuesday, November 16, 2005, at approximately 2:00 p.m. in the Board Room. Committee members in attendance were Chair William H. Cleveland, Vice Chair Doreen Stiles Poitevint, and Regents Connie Cater, Joe Frank Harris, and James R. Jolly. Chair Cleveland reported to the Board that the Committee had reviewed 16 items, 15 of which required action. Additionally, 177 regular faculty appointments were reviewed and recommended for approval. With motion properly made, seconded, and unanimously adopted, the Board approved and authorized the following:
- Establishment of Seven Baccalaureate Academic Degree Programs at Georgia Gwinnett College: Bachelor of Science with a Major in Biology, Bachelor of Science with a Major in Psychology, Bachelor of Science in Education with a Major in Early Childhood Education and Special Education, Bachelor of Applied Science with a Major in Technology Management, Bachelor of Business Administration with a Major in General Business, Bachelor of Science in Radiologic Technology, and Bachelor of Science in Nursing
Approved: The Board authorize the request of President Daniel J. Kaufman of Georgia Gwinnett College ("GGC"), subject to the provisions herein, to offer seven baccalaureate degree programs listed and described below, effective July 1, 2006.
Corrected: The title of this item was corrected to reflect the correct name of the Bachelor of Science in Education with a major in Early Childhood Education and Special Education. The corrected language is italicized.
This item was addressed by the Committee on Academic Affairs as a Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, November 15, 2005. (See page 7.)
Background: The seven programs requested for authorization are as follows: Bachelor of Science ("B.S.") with a major in Biology, B.S. with a major in Psychology, Bachelor of Science in Education ("B.S.Ed.") with a major in Early Childhood Education (including eligibility for certification in Special Education), Bachelor of Applied Science ("B.A.S.") with a major in Technology Management, Bachelor of Business Administration ("B.B.A.") with a major in General Business, Bachelor of Science in Radiologic Technology ("B.S.R.T."), and Bachelor of Science in Nursing ("B.S.N."). Associate degree programmatic offerings will be proposed in the future.
By previous Board of Regents action and legislative resolution, GGC has been established as a state college in Gwinnett County, Georgia, at the existing facility formerly known as the Gwinnett University Center ("GUC"). According to its first strategic plan, reviewed by the Board of Regents in June 2005, GGC will accept juniors during fall semester 2006. For the most part, these students will be classified as transfer students primarily, but not exclusively, from existing Georgia Perimeter College ("GPC") two-year programs at GUC.
Beginning fall 2006, the University of Georgia ("UGA") will no longer accept juniors in its baccalaureate degree programs at GUC. UGA will "teach-out" students currently matriculating in its baccalaureate degree programs.
To meet the expectations of the students who plan to enter GGC in fall 2006, while at the same time continuing to address many of those community needs currently served by UGA's baccalaureate degree programs and GPC's two-year programs, President Kaufman recommends that the "doors of the college" be opened with a comparable, but not identical, array of degree programs.
Building upon previous needs' assessments such as the report, 21st Century Baccalaureate Programs for Gwinnett University Center, interaction with community leaders, and the success of UGA's programs, the new degree programs requested for approval represent a sufficient balance of resource requirements, institutional mission as a state college, community needs, and student demand. Additional programs may be requested as emergent needs are identified.
Need and Demand: Gwinnett County has experienced an increased growth trajectory that includes an increase in ethnic minority residents. Gwinnett County has posted from years 1990 to 2000 higher high school attainment rates than the Atlanta region and the state. According to the report, 21st Century Baccalaureate Programs for Gwinnett University Center, "Gwinnett's inviting business climate boasts 930 manufacturing companies, over 981 high-tech companies, and 235 international companies." Strong business leadership, a growing job market, affordable housing, and an attractive quality of life have combined to increase the population in Gwinnett County during the past 20 years.
Based upon labor profiles of Gwinnett County developed by the Georgia Department of Labor, the area experienced a 19.1% change in population between years 2000 and 2004 and is projected to experience a 39.5% increase by year 2010. The industry mix includes manufacturing, construction, finance and insurance, professional and scientific services, healthcare and social services, educational services, management in companies and enterprises, arts and recreation, government services, and agriculture. Some of the largest employers in the area that could benefit from the proposed array of academic programs include the Fulton-DeKalb Hospital Authority, IBM Corporation, The Coca-Cola Company, Cox Enterprises, Inc., Delta Air Lines, Inc., and Gwinnett Health System. Projected demand for the programs may become evident from the 22,134 high school students enrolled in the Gwinnett area alone. Based upon U.S. Census Bureau data from year 2000, the Gwinnett area employs at least 1,278,254 persons 16 years of age or older who could benefit from a diverse program array at a nearby institution.
Implementation Criteria: Recognizing that further due diligence is necessary, the actual implementation timetable of each program will be determined by President Kaufman in accordance with community need, student demand, resource availability, facilities adequacy, and the development of a faculty of sufficient size and necessary academic preparation to ensure program quality and a positive institutional accreditation evaluation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools ("SACS").
In addition, programs requiring specialized accreditation for professional practice (i.e., programs for the preparation of teachers, nurses, and radiologic technologists) will receive special attention as they are implemented.
Where appropriate, programs for teacher preparation at the secondary level (e.g. B.S. in Biology) provide the institution with the capability of adding teacher certification with the approval of the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academics and Fiscal Affairs. According to Board of Regents policy, all programs leading to teacher certification must be accredited by the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education ("NCATE") and must also receive approval from the Georgia Professional Standards Commission ("PSC"). Furthermore, all education programs leading to certification must meet the Regents' Principles for the Preparation of Educators for the Schools.
Each of the programs listed above is to be implemented only after review by the Senior Vice Chancellor for Academics and Fiscal Affairs and final approval by the Chancellor. Prior to approval by the Chancellor, the institution will be expected to submit an implementation plan to the Senior Vice Chancellor using degree proposal requirements found in Section 2.03.02, New Academic Programs, of the Academic Affairs Handbook.
Curriculum/Program Descriptions:
Brief descriptions of the seven new programs requested for approval are described below:
The B.S. with a major in Biology will follow a similar program offered by UGA at GUC. This degree will be directed toward urban environmental issues, including health issues, and will offer service courses for teacher education as well as business. The program will incorporate modern biotechnology skills and other modern technologies in order to prepare graduates for graduate studies, positions in environmental professions, the biotechnology industry, and preprofessional studies (e.g., medicine, pharmacy, veterinary medicine, etc.).
The B.S. with a major in Psychology will prepare students for graduate school, service in entry-level positions of the social services sector, and a variety of careers that rely on the analytical skills developed through an education in psychology. This program will have a strong quantitative base. Psychology is one of the majors most sought by students.
The B.S.Ed. with a major in Early Childhood Education will be the first teacher preparation program to be offered by GGC. The program will lead to dual certification in Early Childhood Education and Special Education. The Gwinnett County Public Schools expressed a preference for a dual teacher certification program in Early Childhood Education and Special Education as its highest priority program. The program will be unique in that its design originates from the field of special education, which emphasizes diagnosis of learning needs and tailors instruction toward those needs. This design will be applied to the preparation of early childhood teachers, which will position the new teachers to reach the diverse learners in Georgia's childhood schools. Because the program design is based in special education, program completers will earn dual teacher certification in early childhood education and in special education.
The B.A.S. with a major in Technology Management provides the graduate of an associate of applied science or an associate of applied technology program the opportunity to earn a bachelor's degree and advance her/his career in management in the technical area where the associate degree was earned. Through a combination of technical and business courses, the baccalaureate graduate will develop the skills and competencies needed to succeed in managerial positions. The B.A.S. degree is specially suited to graduates of associate degree programs offered by the colleges of the Department of Technical and Adult Education that are accredited by the Commission on Colleges ("COC") under SACS.
The B.B.A. with a major in General Business is the most robust of the baccalaureate programs currently offered by UGA at GUC. The proposed degree at GGC will provide a broad background in business administration that allows for the development of additional depth with courses in fields such as law, economics, finance, marketing, management, and environmental management. Students will be prepared for entry-level positions of responsibility in business, manufacturing, and corporate sectors.
The B.S.R.T. prepares graduates for the high-tech, high-touch field of radiography. The radiographer uses radiation, magnetism, and computers in the production of medical images. The program will prepare all graduates for entry-level positions in hospitals, doctors' offices, nursing homes, and a variety of other healthcare settings. With advanced knowledge gained through upper-division courses, graduates will be prepared to move into leadership positions in the healthcare industry. Graduates will be eligible to sit for the national certification examination of the American Registry of Radiologic Technologists.
The B.S.N. is designed to prepare graduates with entry-level nursing practice, knowledge, and skills upon which professional careers and additional study can be built. Grounded in a strong base of liberal arts and sciences, the baccalaureate nursing program emphasizes professional nursing practice, team participation and leadership skills. Graduates will be prepared to achieve licensure as registered nurses by passing the National Council Licensure Examination ("NCLEX").
Funding: The programs were developed with the assistance of consultants. The programs require the development of new courses, institutional infrastructure to house the programs, administrative support and oversight, and the development of funding streams for the operation of the institution. President Kaufman will continue to work with the University System Office, GPC, and UGA to meet the target timeline for faculty and staff searches, the academic transition, and accreditation of the institution as whole as well as specific academic degrees. As approved by the Board in April 2005, start-up funds of $1.3 million were provided for fiscal year 2006. President Kaufman will continue to work with the Chancellor and University System Office staff to follow the budget transition timeline and facilities master plan. Some funds will also be transferred from GPC as it begins to phase out its operations, and additional funds will be sought from the state legislature.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the programs. The programs will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews. In addition, a brief review of the programs will be conducted three years after implementation.
- Establishment of Five Engineering Programs in Three Specialty Areas at the University of Georgia: Bachelor of Science with a Major in Biochemical Engineering, Bachelor of Science with a Major in Computer Systems Engineering, Bachelor of Science with a Major in Environmental Engineering, Master of Science with a Major in Biochemical Engineering, and Master of Science with a Major in Environmental Engineering
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael F. Adams that the University of Georgia ("UGA") be authorized to establish five engineering programs in three specialty areas, effective November 16, 2005.
This item was addressed by the Committee on Academic Affairs as a Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, November 15, 2005. (See pages 7 to 8.)
Background: President Adams asked that the Board of Regents approve UGA's request to offer five new engineering programs in three specialty areas in which UGA has extensive expertise at both the baccalaureate and master's degree levels. The programs are the Bachelor of Science ("B.S.") with a major in Biochemical Engineering, B.S. with a major in Computer Systems Engineering, B.S. with a major in Environmental Engineering, Master of Science ("M.S.") with a major in Biochemical Engineering, and M.S. with a major in Environmental Engineering. These programs are proposed to enable UGA to produce graduates for growing areas of emerging engineering disciplines, to access niche areas of research funding not previously available, and to ensure that UGA can compete among the elite of the United States' and the world's research universities.
UGA and the Georgia Institute of Technology ("GIT") have engaged in an extended discussion about these programs, and both universities appreciate and agree that to retain and improve upon their positions as institutions that rank among the leading research universities in the United States and the world, both need to develop and offer degree programs outside their traditional emphases but related to their areas of recognized expertise. Such action will enable the two institutions to better compete with top tier U.S. and global research universities. These degree programs help UGA accomplish that objective. UGA and GIT have agreed to build upon each other's strengths to leverage their collective resources and research expertise.
The programs proposed by UGA complement areas of strength and national expertise and prominence that already exist at UGA. With notable strengths in its College of Pharmacy and its biology and chemistry programs, the Biochemical Engineering programs are a sound programmatic and mission fit for UGA. Given the university's capabilities in computer science, bioinformatics, and other relevant disciplines, the Computer Systems Engineering program is also a logical degree for UGA. With UGA being one of the founders of and leaders in environmental sciences and ecology and having nationally recognized programs in forestry, soil conservation and management, and agriculture, the programs in Environmental Engineering round out a suite of logical and useful engineering programs for UGA.
In addition, UGA is the only state flagship institution in the United States with neither a broadly based engineering program nor a medical school. (UGA currently offers both baccalaureate and masters' level degrees in both Agricultural Engineering and Biological Engineering.) The approval of the aforementioned degree programs will enable UGA to approach and to access sources of external research funding not now available to the institution, thereby strengthening the university's overall research enterprise.
The programs have been reviewed by an internal team and external consultant to ensure that they meet quality standards. UGA will pursue specialized accreditation from the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology ("ABET") for these programs as soon as permissible under ABET rules. ABET is the recognized U.S. accreditor of college and university programs in applied science, computing, engineering, and technology.
Abstract: UGA proposed the establishment of five engineering programs in three areas of concentration: biochemical (B.S. and M.S.), computer systems (B.S.), and environmental (B.S. and M.S.). The programs will be housed in the Faculty of Engineering, a campuswide organizational structure that has responsibility for engineering teaching, research, and outreach. The structure of the Faculty of Engineering will enable the programs to draw on the expertise of faculty members from around the university and will permit them to contribute to the programs without weakening the departments and degree programs with which faculty members are currently involved.
Need: The proposals take into account areas of demand from business and industry. The need for the five degree programs based upon disciplinary area is as follows:
Biochemical Engineering: The bio-based products and pharmaceutical industries are two of the fastest growing industries in the United States. Federal Executive Order 13134, Developing and Promoting Biobased Products and Bioenergy, calls for a tripling of U.S. use of biobased products by 2010, and the Federal Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000 promotes research and development leading to the production of biobased industrial products. Economic development objectives in the State of Georgia include the provision to add incentives to attract diverse pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. These economic objectives coupled with an investment in degree programs can generate an engineering workforce to support companies needing such talent.
Computer Systems Engineering involves the design and integration of computer hardware and software systems to solve engineering problems. Growth in the application of computer-related technologies has led to a need in industry for professionals who have knowledge of and the ability to integrate computer systems and their components with each other at both the system and subsystem levels. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, computer software and systems engineers are projected to be one of the fastest growing occupations from 2002 to 2012. Rapid employment growth in the computer systems design and related services industries is projected to result in highly favorable opportunities for graduates.
Environmental Engineering involves creating solutions that preserve and enhance ecosystems associated with population increases, economic growth, and new technologies. The U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics projects a 21 to 35% increase in the employment of environmental engineers between years 2000 and 2010. Additionally, employment of environmental engineers is expected to increase faster than the average for all occupations through 2012. Projected growth in this field is due to the emergence of the need to comply with environmental regulations and to develop methods of cleaning up existing hazards. Shifts toward preventing problems rather than controlling those that already exist, as well as increasing public health concerns, will serve to increase the need for such graduates.
Objectives: The objectives of the degree programs according to disciplinary area are described below:
Biochemical Engineering (B.S. and M.S.): With faculty from chemistry, biology, the School of Pharmacy, and biological and agricultural engineering, Biochemical Engineering programs will concentrate on educating students who can serve the needs of the bio-based products and pharmaceutical industries. By concentrating on these areas in an interdisciplinary manner, the Biological Engineering programs will be distinctive and will produce graduates that will be in demand in at least two critical high-growth industrial areas.
Computer Systems Engineering (B.S.): The objective of the Computer Systems Engineering program is to provide students with engineering education in complementary engineering and computer sciences in order for them to develop as experts and entrepreneurs capable of researching, processing, and implementing new ideas and technologies for advancing computer systems prevalent in all electronic-based devices.
Graduates of this program will be in demand in a host of different industrial areas in computing, communications, and data manipulation and analysis.
Environmental Engineering (B.S. and M.S.): The objectives of the Environmental Engineering programs are to educate environmental engineers in an academic setting that provides engineering education within a liberal arts background and whose graduates have the ability to integrate knowledge from several disciplines and skills to analyze and design systems relevant for solving problems. The graduates of this program will have a strong background in designing systems that integrate the environment with technology. These engineering students will also be equipped with the knowledge and skills to address the requirements of maintaining and enhancing the diverse ecological systems of the state's highlands, coastal, and marine areas. Students pursuing degrees in this field will develop concentrations of study in air, water, or solid waste environmental engineering.
Curricula: Curriculum descriptions for each program are provided below. The Office of Academic Affairs approved waivers to degree credit hour length for engineering programs in September 1997. Such waivers included a 130-semester-credit-hour cap for undergraduate engineering programs. The undergraduate programs listed below include such requests.
The B.S. with a major in Biochemical Engineering requires the completion of 130 semester credit hours of formal course work. The program places a high value on proficiency in mathematics, engineering sciences, and biological sciences. Major requirements for this program of study include heat transfer, fluid mechanics, biochemical reactors, modeling and design, biochemical processes, and computer engineering methods. Elective courses will be offered in pharmaceutical engineering, biopolymer science and engineering, and biobased production processes.
The M.S. with a major in Biochemical Engineering requires 36 semester credit hours of formal course work. The Faculty of Engineering places a high value on proficiency in statistics, biochemistry, and knowledge of research methods. Required courses as part of the curriculum include, but are not limited to, advanced transport phenomena, design of biochemical separations processes, metabolic engineering, and pharmaceutical processing of biologicals.
The B.S. with a major in Computer Systems Engineering requires 130 semester credit hours of formal course work. UGA currently offers a Bachelor of Science in Computer Science and an area of emphasis in electrical and electronic systems. Courses germane to the program of study include microcontrollers, sensors and transducers, linear systems, feedback controls, embedded systems, intelligent decision systems, and digital signal processing.
The B.S. with a major in Environmental Engineering requires 130 hours of formal course work for completion. Requirements for the major include courses in applied microbiology, thermodynamics and kinetics, mass transport and rate processes, heat transfer, engineering circuits, and the strength of materials. Courses consistent with a declaration of interest in air, water, or solid waste specialization include water management, atmospheric dynamics, soil contaminants, waste containment, soil physics, pedology, aqueous environmental geochemistry, and quantitative hydrology.
The M.S. with a major in Environmental Engineering requires 36 semester credit hours of formal course work and requires satisfactory completion of a master's thesis. In addition to required courses in computational methods and research methods, students will be required to select courses in instrumentation of environmental quality, air quality engineering, bioengineering systems, physiochemical processes in environmental engineering, industrial ecology, environmental risk assessment, advanced solid waste engineering, and urban and environmental planning.
Projected Enrollments: The institution anticipates enrollments as follows in each of the proposed programs during the first three years of their operation:
Degree Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Bachelor of Science in Biochemical Engineering 15 20 25 Bachelor of Science in Computer Systems Engineering 10 15 20 Bachelor of Science in Environmental Engineering 10 20 30 Master of Science in Biochemical Engineering 4 8 12 Master of Science in Environmental Engineering 4 8 12 Funding: The programs have been developed through a combination of existing courses that are already in place in a number of disciplinary areas across the Faculty of Engineering. Additional courses will be developed at both the undergraduate and graduate levels in each area, as appropriate and needed. President Adams has reverified that funding for the programs is available at the institution. Funding will be provided through such combined resources as reallocation, student fees, grants, indirect cost funds, and outside dollars.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the programs. The programs will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews.
- Establishment of a Consortial External Doctor of Physical Therapy Degree Offered on the Campuses of North Georgia College " State University and Armstrong Atlantic State University, Medical College of Georgia
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Daniel W. Rahn that the Medical College of Georgia ("MCG") be authorized to offer as an external degree the Doctor of Physical Therapy on the campuses of North Georgia College " State University ("NGCSU") and Armstrong Atlantic State University ("AASU"), effective November 16, 2005. This program will be offered through a formal consortium governed by a detailed memorandum of understanding ("MOU") that defines the role of each of the three institutions. The presidents of each of the three institutions have signed this MOU.
This item was addressed by the Committee on Academic Affairs as a Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, November 15, 2005. (See page 8.)
Abstract and Purpose of the External Consortial Arrangement: As a result of changes in the profession, the American Physical Therapy Association is increasingly moving toward the doctoral degree as the terminal degree for physical therapy practitioners. Currently, students may obtain licensure at both the master's and doctoral levels, but professional requirements for the discipline are changing. According to a report by the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education ("CAPTE") and the American Physical Therapy Association's Department of Accreditation, the number of accredited physical therapist education programs that offer a Doctor of Physical Therapy degree had risen to 94 as of March 2004. In addition, data from the 2002 Biennial Accreditation Report indicates that another 81 programs have the stated intention to convert to offering the Doctor of Physical Therapy within the next five years. Should all of the programs cited convert from the current master's level, at least 86.1% (209) of current accredited and developing programs could be accredited to offer the Doctor of Physical Therapy in the next five to seven years.
Because of these changes in the physical therapy profession, MCG, in conjunction with NGCSU and AASU, seeks to offer MCG's existing Doctor of Physical Therapy program as an external degree on the campuses of NGCSU and AASU. The external MCG program will require the use of faculty and facilities on both campuses for pedagogical and clinical instruction while MCG retains degree-granting privileges to the students matriculating through the program. Faculty members at both NGCSU and AASU will have the opportunity for joint appointments through MCG's School of Allied Health Sciences. Although students will apply to MCG for admission, fees associated with instruction, delivery, admission, and progression through the program will be divided among the institutions according to a specific formula mix that delineates responsibilities associated with both costs and revenues. The MOU on file describes the local arrangements, supervising authorities, fiscal agents, academic administration, clinical preceptorships, student accountability and services, faculty services, and general operation of the external degree program.
In addition, MCG has indicated that expanding its existing Doctor of Physical Therapy degree will not have an adverse impact on the program as it is currently offered on its home campus. In order to focus resources and curriculum on the doctorate, AASU and NGCSU will "teach out" existing students in their Master of Physical Therapy programs, but no new students will be accepted into these master's programs.
NGCSU and AASU have agreed to deactivate their existing Master of Physical Therapy degree programs and will encourage students to apply directly to MCG's Doctor of Physical Therapy program. After two years of program deactivation, each institution is expected to request program termination of the Board of Regents.
Administration and Funding of the Program: The consortium will allow all three institutional participants to offer all of the doctoral course work leading to the degree by using their existing faculty and facilities although some courses may be offered through distance learning technologies. The curricula will be aligned among all three participating institutions. Because MCG will be the degree-granting authority, it will be responsible for the academic integrity of the program as well as its accreditation by CAPTE.
MCG will serve as the administrative and fiscal agent for the Doctor of Physical Therapy consortial agreement. The consortium will function such that the vice presidents for academic affairs at NGCSU and AASU will work in concert with the provost at MCG to provide oversight for the program. A specific organizational structure that, by policy, does not require Board of Regents approval has been defined in the MOU.
After an initial transition period of two years, MCG will begin to reimburse AASU and NGCSU for the direct costs of offering the program on each campus. As the applicable formula funds generated by the student credit hours become part of MCG's base budget, MCG will reimburse each of the other two institutions an overhead fee. Initially, that fee has been established per student per semester and is contained in the MOU. During the transition period and prior to full formula funding to MCG, a funding model will be developed to ensure fair, equitable, and efficient application of resources.
Presidents Daniel W. Rahn, David L. Potter, and Thomas Z. Jones have reverified that the administration of the program and funding agreements for the consortial arrangement are in the best interests of their respective institutions.
Need: According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, employment in the physical therapy field is expected to increase faster than the average of allied health occupations as growth in the number of individuals with disabilities or limited function spurs demand for therapy services. After graduating from an accredited physical therapy program, graduates must pass a licensure exam before they can practice. Physical therapists held approximately 137,000 jobs in year 2002.
Objectives: The objectives of MCG's Doctor of Physical Therapy program are 1) to educate future graduates; 2) to evaluate movement disorders and enhance physical functional abilities; 3) to restore, maintain, and promote physical functional wellness and fitness to an optimum quality of life; and 4) to prevent the onset, symptoms, and progression of impairments, functional limitations, and disabilities that may result from diseases, disorders, preexisting conditions, or injuries.
Curriculum: Physical therapy programs start with basic science courses in biology, chemistry, and physics and then introduce specialized courses in subjects including biomechanics, neuroanatomy, human growth and development, manifestations of disease, examination techniques, and therapeutic procedures. In addition to obtaining classroom and laboratory instruction, students receive supervised clinical experience.
Projected Enrollments: Current capacities per class level of the three programs are 36 at MCG (doctoral), 24 at NGCSU (master's), and 20 at AASU (master's). No significant changes in per class enrollments are expected in the next three years. However, some adjustments among and between programs may be necessary.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the consortium institutions to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the external degree program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institutions' programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews.
- Establishment of Emerita Status for Dr. Portia Holmes Shields, Former President of Albany State University, Albany State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of Interim Chancellor Corlis Cummings to establish emeritus status for Dr. Portia Holmes Shields, former President of Albany State University ("ALSU"), effective November 16, 2005.
This item was addressed by the Committee on Academic Affairs as a Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, November 15, 2005.
Abstract: Dr. Shields provided distinguished service to ALSU and the University System from July 9, 1996, to June 30, 2005. During the course of her service, Dr. Shields provided the high caliber of leadership that contributed to not only growth in the academic programs and student body, but also the $153 million rebuilding plan of the institution following the flood of 1994.
Dr. Shields' major objectives were to strengthen academic programs, raise admission standards, and create a state-of-the-art institution of higher learning at ALSU. Under her leadership, the university expanded its community development and outreach initiatives to include special programs such as Academic Boot Camp, The Holley Institute, Postsecondary Readiness Enrichment Program ("PREP"), and the academic component to the National Youth Sports Program. Dr. Shields was instrumental in creating "Armed for Success," an early entry summer program for high-achieving students. Recognized as ALSU's ambassador, Dr. Shields was instrumental in securing an unprecedented $3 million donation from the late renowned performing artist Ray Charles and procured more than $25 million dollars in external grant funds.
Dr. Shields' commitment and dedication to the educational landscape is demonstrated through her work at national, state, and local levels in such organizations as the American Council on Education, American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, American Association of State Colleges and Universities, National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, Georgia Partnership in Excellence, Georgia Chamber of Commerce, Communities in Schools, the Albany Chamber of Commerce, Albany Tomorrow, Inc., the Albany Museum of Art, the Albany/Dougherty Community Partnership for Education, and Dougherty 2000.
- Establishment of Emerita Status for Dr. Jacquelyn M. Belcher, Former President of Georgia Perimeter College, Georgia Perimeter College
Approved: The Board approved the request of Interim Chancellor Corlis Cummings to establish emeritus status for Dr. Jacquelyn M. Belcher, former President of Georgia Perimeter College ("GPC"), effective November 16, 2005.
This item was addressed by the Committee on Academic Affairs as a Committee of the Whole on Tuesday, November 15, 2005.
Abstract: Dr. Belcher provided distinguished service to GPC and the University System from July 1, 1995, to June 30, 2005. During the course of Dr. Belcher's service, GPC transformed itself from a localized community college to an urban institution of higher education with an enrollment of more than 21,000 students while maintaining a small-campus culture.
Dr. Belcher expressed the college's objective, "placing learning first," to the Atlanta community through its educational, cultural, and economic resources. Under her leadership, the college expanded its foundation and established a grants office, increased the number of transfer students to the state's research universities, and established other sites including a new campus in Newton County, an upgraded library at the Dunwoody Campus, a location within the Georgia State University Alpharetta Center, and new classroom buildings at the Clarkston and Dunwoody Campuses. During Dr. Belcher's tenure, GPC received an outstanding accreditation report from the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools and received several awards for the implementation of distance education practices and products in the classroom, labs, and learning communities. With a focus on institutional effectiveness and the quality of educational services, Dr. Belcher actively encouraged diversity among students, faculty, and staff in order for the college to play a vital role in educational access and opportunity.
Dr. Belcher serves on various committees and boards, such as the National School-to-Work Advisory Council, the American Council on Education, the American Association of Community Colleges, the DeKalb and Atlanta Chambers of Commerce, the Metro Atlanta Boys and Girls Clubs, the Atlanta Business League, the Georgia Institute for Community Business Development, and Renewal " Change 2000, an international coalition of 25 community colleges serving urban districts.
- Establishment of an Associate of Applied Science in Paralegal Studies, Darton College
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Peter J. Sireno that Darton College ("DC") be authorized to establish an Associate of Applied Science ("A.A.S.") in Paralegal Studies, effective November 16, 2005.
Abstract: The A.A.A. in Paralegal Studies is designed to prepare graduates as competent paralegals or legal assistants. Graduates will gain a broad knowledge of various areas of the law while strengthening specific legal skills that will enhance their role as nonlawyers in the delivery of legal services. The Paralegal Studies program will train students in the practical application of legal theory and help students develop analytical, critical thinking, communication, and organization skills. In addition, DC will seek approval from the American Bar Association ("ABA") for the program. Approval by the ABA provides an additional indicator of the program's quality and integrity. The program's curriculum will be designed in a manner consistent with Darton DC's mission statement as well as ABA guidelines.
Need: According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the need for paralegals and legal assistants is projected to grow faster than average for all occupations through year 2012. Employment growth is based upon legal staffs' hiring paralegals to lower the cost and increase the availability and efficiency of legal services. Paralegals are employed by law firms, corporate legal departments, real estate and title insurance companies, estate and trust departments of large financial institutions, hospitals and healthcare organizations, and various government offices. Student demand for the program is evident from completed surveys of current students and recent graduates of Darton College's paralegal certificate program.
Objectives: Specific program objectives relevant to the A.A.S. in Paralegal Studies are 1) to provide students with a broad based of knowledge in various areas of law, 2) to train students in the practical application of legal theory, 3) to ensure students recognize the limitations of their roles as paralegals or legal assistants in that they are not permitted to provide legal services directly to the public except as authorized by law, and 4) to obtain and maintain program approval from the ABA.
Curriculum: The program has been developed to meet ABA guidelines for approval. An advisory committee will be established for the program consisting of practicing lawyers, paralegals from the public and private sectors, and individuals from the general public. Linkages will be developed between the academic program and regional and state bar associations.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 20, 20, and 25 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program has been developed with new and existing courses. Costs associated with the initial application and annual fees for ABA approval will become part of the institutional budget. President Sireno has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews.
- Establishment of a Master of Arts in Liberal Studies, Clayton State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Thomas K. Harden that Clayton State University ("CLSU") be authorized to establish a Master of Arts ("M.A.") in Liberal Studies degree, effective November 16, 2005.
Abstract: CLSU proposed the establishment of an M.A. in Liberal Studies to students who seek a graduate interdisciplinary program without specializing in one specific subject area. The program will enable students to attain a liberal studies perspective on contemporary issues and broaden their general knowledge. The subject matter of the program includes a broad spectrum of academic subjects, including concentration areas in literature, the arts, politics, music, philosophy, science, and social history. The M.A. in Liberal Studies may allow students to continue their breadth of inquiry into the liberal arts and serve as a bridge to a doctoral program in a discipline other than their undergraduate major. CLSU has worked to increase the breadth and depth of its academic degree offerings. To that end, over the last four years, the institution has hired over 50 qualified faculty members to meet the institution's strategic plan with regard to academic programming and mission effectiveness. CLSU has developed an Office of Graduate Studies as part of its institutional maturation and development of its first graduate degree program.
Need: The M.A. in Liberal Studies has become an increasingly popular degree nationwide and is currently offered in Georgia at Emory University. The proposed degree will provide a forum for adult learners to explore intellectual issues through a combination of disciplinary approaches and materials. As the population of south metropolitan Atlanta continues to grow, CLSU seeks to offer graduate degree options. Economic development and industrial attraction in the southern crescent depend increasingly on the availability of a wide range of higher education opportunities, including graduate programs.
Objectives: Specific program objectives conducive to completion of the M.A. in Liberal Studies degree are 1) to offer a graduate degree program to the citizens and businesses of the southern crescent; 2) to cultivate student intellectual, analytical, and communication skills through immersion in an integrated, interdisciplinary curriculum that focuses on the liberal arts; 3) to enable students to investigate contemporary issues and problems and then analyze the interrelatedness of their contexts; and 4) to link emerging phenomena to history, decision-making influences, and cultural artifacts.
Curriculum: The proposed 36-semester-credit-hour program will be housed within the Department of Communicative Arts and Integrative Studies. The M.A. in Liberal Studies degree is organized into three distinct areas: foundational seminars, academic concentrations, and a capstone experience. Foundational seminars provide all students with a select background in art, literature, music, philosophy, and political and historical thought. The seminars are modeled on the "great books" approach found in liberal arts colleges and universities.
The academic concentration area requires a student to select from one of four emphases in the degree program: liberal arts, English, history, or music. The capstone experience offers students an opportunity to complete the program through a thesis or nonthesis option. The nonthesis option requires that students complete nine semester hours of coursework and a comprehensive exam. CLSU will seek to become a member of the Association of Graduate Liberal Studies Programs.
Projected Enrollment: The institution anticipates enrollments of 30, 57, and 72 during the first three years of the program.
Funding: The program has been developed with new courses. President Harden has provided reverification that funding for the program is available at the institution.
Assessment: The Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs will work with the institution to measure the success and continued effectiveness of the program. The program will be reviewed in concert with the institution's programmatic schedule of comprehensive program reviews.
- Administrative and Academic Appointments and Personnel Actions, Various System Institutions
Approved: The administrative and academic appointments were reviewed by the Chair of the Committee on Academic Affairs and approved by the Board. The full list of approved appointments is on file with the Office of Faculty Affairs in the Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs.
- Revised Institutional Statutes, Georgia Southwestern State University
Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael L. Hanes that Georgia Southwestern State University ("GSSU") be authorized to revise its institutional statutes, effective November 16, 2005.
Abstract: GSSU engaged in a process to review and review its institutional statutes. The revision relates to changes in some administrative titles. The revised titles, in particular, include the Dean for Academic Services and Special Programs, the Dean of Continuing Education, and the Dean of the Library. Revised sections of the statutes were approved by the faculty of GSSU art a recent meeting.
The statutes have been reviewed by the Office of Legal Affairs and the Office of Academic Affairs. The statutes were found to be in compliance with Board of Regents policies. The revised statutes will remain on file in the Office of Academics and Fiscal Affairs.
- Nominees for Membership on the Peabody Board, University of Georgia Approved: The Board approved the request of President Michael F. A