Skip to main content


(to be considered for approval at 1/22/02 Faculty Senate meeting)


December 11, 2001

3 p.m. Student Government Chamber

Millennium Student Center 

Dr. Lawrence Barton, Faculty Senate Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m.


Minutes from the previous meeting (held November 13, 2001) were approved as submitted.


Report from the Chairperson – Dr. Lawrence Barton

The Chair reported on activities at the November 29 Board of Curators’ meeting, which he described as the most interesting one he has attended.  He was moved by the ceremonies that named a Center after Lloyd Gaines and Marian Oldham, who were denied admission to the UMC School of Law based on race. 

The Chair reported that, at the preceding Board meeting, there were rumors that some Curators were angry because in his funding equity testimony, he had alluded to some campus support for our leaving the UM System.  There was a perception among the Curators and others that Chancellor Touhill had orchestrated all the various presentations on our behalf to the Hearing Committee on Equity Funding, in addition to two student newspaper editorials.  Toward the end of the Board meeting there was a presentation on resource allocation by Vice President Cofer, who handed out data showing the changes in the University’s budget since 1985.  Our portion of the budget, the data showed, has increased by .6 percent.  UMC has dropped by .9 percent.  During the question and answer period after Dr. Cofer’s presentation, there were some very interesting questions posed by Curators Horne, Silverstein, and Ream.  In the Chair’s humble opinion, he (Cofer) sidestepped them all.  Cofer pointed out that nowhere in the U.S. has a System reallocated funding among its constituent campuses.  The Chair said he found the discussion very encouraging.  Curator Silverstein asked if discussion on this topic will be continued.  Cofer said it would.  The Chair commented that he plans to send some information to the Curators and to the Post-Dispatch.

The only Board member who seemed displeased by the perception that we are underfunded was Curator Mathes, who is the next President of the Board.  In his comments concerning his agenda over the coming year, Curator Mathes said he is interested in learning about space utilization on the campuses. 




Other activities at the Board meeting included a report by the Student Fee Task Force, which proposed that Kansas and Illinois students in certain contiguous counties pay reduced (metropolitan) fees at UMSL and UMKC.  There was also a presentation by Dr. Cofer on a “balanced scorecard,” which involved the long-range plan and the various objectives of the campuses and how these might be measured. 

Later in the Faculty Senate meeting, the Chair said, the Chancellor will comment on planning and how we are now supposed to propose new programs. 

Turning to other things, the Chair noted that on December 4, the Steering Committee held a hearing on tenure and promotion procedures.  The deadline for submitting amendments is December 15.  After that time, the Chair will work with the Committee to draft a version that will be voted on by all faculty in a mail vote following a Faculty Meeting to be called in January or February. 

The Chair reported that he attended the first meeting of the Budget and Planning Committee.  He noted that there will be a 20-page form used for annual evaluations this year. 

Dr. Nancy Shields is the new Chair of the Administrator Evaluation Committee, replacing Dr. William Long, who found it necessary to resign as chairperson.

Chair Barton noted that a question has arisen concerning censorship of the student websites.  If there is to be any censorship, he remarked, this might become an issue that faculty should become involved in.

In closing, the Chair congratulated Dr. David Robertson, who was honored for his teaching at the Governor’s Conference on Higher Education last week.


Report from the Chancellor – Chancellor Blanche Touhill

The Chancellor began by talking about the resource allocation process, a explanation of which was presented at the November Board meeting by Vice President Cofer.  In essence, what was presented to the Curators were budgets for all four campuses and Continuing Education and the System, starting in 1986, and it reflected where all the money has gone by category.  At the close of Cofer’s report, one of the Curators inquired about the formula and received a response.  Vice President Cofer said he is unaware of any Board of Regents in the U.S. that has ever changed the formula, but he conceded that the decision is the Curators’ to make.  President Pacheco feels that there are two campuses that are underfunded, namely, UMC and UMSL.  Dr. Cofer’s position was that once you open that discussion, you will have the other campuses fighting any change in the




formula.  Curator Silverstein made it clear that she will continue to raise this issue at future Board meetings. 

Recommendations of the Student Fee Task Force were presented and approved by the Curators.  Two of the most important recommendations included (1) allowing campuses to adopt the pricing model appropriate to their student market and (2)

the establishment of a metropolitan fee rate for Kansas City and St. Louis to allow students from four contiguous counties to attend these campuses at the in-state tuition rate.

The “balanced scorecard” involved a presentation by Dr. Cofer to explain to the Board the measures to be used to assess the effectiveness of the UM Strategic Plan.  There will be 12-15 items measured.  We are uncertain about the nature of these items, but we do know that the System plans to report these as System benchmarks. 

The System presented academic planning guidelines, which outlined the planning procedures for new academic degree programs.

Once again, there is some thought being given to educational fee reduction for dependents.  The Chancellor said she has heard mixed signals as to whether or not this plan will be seriously considered.  The latest proposal allows dependents and spouses to take courses at any campus in the UM System, and the home campus has to pay the fees.  Prior to this time, the thinking was that we would have scholarship opportunities on our own campus for our own people. 

At the March meeting of the Board, it will be our turn to talk about our master plan, our strategic plan, and about our academic programs that will be coming forward in the next five years. 

We have hired Suzaki and Associates, the people who designed our master plan about 10 years ago, to update the plan.  They also will be making a space study. 

At the close of the Chancellor’s report, Chair Barton noted that the Chancellor from Kansas City pointed out during the discussion about resource allocation, that the reason that average state appropriation per full-time equivalent student in Kansas City is 6 percent above the mean for their comparator group is that their comparator group contains institutions with many fewer graduate and professional students.  The Chair said he looked them up, and the assertion is not true.  One of the schools is Wisconsin-Milwaukee, to which her point may apply, but the others are places like Temple and Wayne State, places that really do have many schools of engineering, law, medicine and a range of professional programs. 




Chair Barton suggested that we provide information to Board members, who are not in a position to question assertions made by administrators. 


Report from the Intercampus Faculty Council – Dr. Joseph Martinich

(see attached)

In response to a question from the Chancellor, Dr. Martinich reported that if salary increases are not meaningful, raises may instead take the form of benefits.


Report from the Budget and Planning Committee – Chancellor Blanche Touhill

(see attached)


Report from the Committee on Committees – Dr. Thaddeus Metz for Dr. E. Terrence Jones

Dr. Paul Roth, the sole nominee, was elected by acclamation to replace Dr. Ronald Munson on the Budget and Planning Committee through 2003.  Dr. Munson resigned from the Committee. 


Report from the Committee on Curriculum and Instruction – Dean David Ganz

All proposals presented at the meeting (see agenda) were approved by the Senate. 

Concerning course renumbering, Dean Ganz reported that most departments have complied with the late-November deadline.  Concerning general education, it was reported by C&I Committee co-chair, Dr. Nancy Gleason, that the committee has begun to certify the process.  Faculty course reporting should be completed by  January 15, at which time the General Education Steering Committee will review all reported courses.  The process should be complete by May.  Any department that has not been contacted was encouraged to call either Dr. Gleason or Dean Mark Burkholder.  In response to a question from Dean Douglas Durand, it was confirmed that UMC has voted 59-41 percent to retain their old general education model. 

Dean Ganz reminded senators that the C&I Committee will not be considering new materials while renumbering is in progress and that new courses coming forward will require both an old number and a new number. 




Report from the Committee on University Libraries –  Dr. Harold Harris

The Chair called attention to the written report, which was distributed with the agenda.

Dr. Joseph Martinich commented that he prefers a limited lending period to disallowing the circulation of journals.


Report from the Committee on Faculty Teaching and Service Awards – Dr. Eric Baumer

Dr. Baumer reported on the activities of the Committee and on the upcoming deadlines (February 15 for teaching awards, March 15 for service awards).

Vice Chancellor Jerry Durham reported that his office is working on a website that will pull together information on all awards.  The Academic Affairs home page will be functional by around the 1st of February.

Completing the business at hand, the Faculty Senate adjourned at 4:05 p.m.

                                    Respectfully submitted,

Joan M. Arban


Faculty Senate Assistant (in the absence of the Senate Secretary)