Minutes for the Utah State Board of Regents, November 13, 1998

Minutes of meeting, Utah State Board of Regents, Weber State University, Salt Lake City, Utah, November 13, 1998

MINUTES OF MEETING UTAH STATE BOARD OF REGENTS WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY OGDEN, UTAH November 13, 1998 Board Members Present Kenneth G. Anderton Pamela J. Atkinson Charles E. Johnson, Chair Aileen H. Clyde, Vice Chair David J. Grant Larzette G. Hale L. Brent Hoggan Karen H. Huntsman Evelyn B. Lee Victor L. Lund E. George Mantes Robert K. Reynard Paul S. Rogers Dale O Zabriskie Board Members Excused David J. Jordan Jay B. Taggart Office of the Commissioner Cecelia H. Foxley, Commissioner Fred R. Hunsaker, Associate Commissioner for Finance and Facilities Chalmers Gail Norris, Associate Commissioner for Student Financial Aid Michael A. Petersen, Associate Commissioner for Academic Affairs Joyce Cottrell, Executive Secretary Harden R. Eyring, Executive Assistant to the Commissioner Linda Fife, Academic Affairs Program Officer Jerry H. Fullmer, Director of Information Systems Max S. Lowe, Assistant Commissioner for Applied Technology Education Norman C. Tarbox, Assistant Commissioner for Finance and Facilities Bradley A. Winn, Assistant Commissioner for Academic Affairs INSTITUTIONAL REPRESENTATIVES University of Utah J. Bernard Machen, President David W. Pershing, Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs Paul T. Brinkman, Associate Vice President, Budget and Planning Raymond A. Haeckel, Executive Director, Government and Community Relations W. Ralph Hardy, Assistant Vice President for Budget and Resource Planning Utah State University George H. Emert, President G. Jay Gogue, Provost C. Blythe Ahlstrom, Assistant Provost Lynn E. Janes, Interim Vice President for Administrative Affairs Richard W. Jacobs, Budget Director Lee H. Burke, Assistant to the President for Government Relations Patricia S. Terrell, Vice President for Student Services Weber State University Paul H. Thompson, President David L. Eisler, Provost Anand K. Dyal-Chand, Vice President for Student Services F. Ann Millner, Vice President for University Relations Carol J. Berrey, Executive Director of Government Relations/Assistant to the President Jane Brewer, Board of Trustees Diana Cortez, Board of Trustees Carol V. Gaskill, Director of Budget and Institutional Research Craige S. Hall, Associate Vice President of Facilities Services Southern Utah University Steven D. Bennion, President Ray Reutzel, Provost Sterling R. Church, Vice President for Student Services Michael D. Richards, Vice President for Planning and Technology Gregory L. Stauffer, Vice President for Administrative/Financial Services Snow College Gerald J. Day, President Dixie College Robert C. Huddleston, President Max Rose, Academic Vice President Stanley J. Plewe, Vice President, Administration & Information Technology Thales A. "Tad" Derrick, Associate Director, Institutional Advancement College of Eastern Utah Grace S. Jones, President Don Burge, Vice President of Academic Services Karen K. Bliss, Dean of Institutional Advancement Brad King, Dean of Students, Price Campus Utah Valley State College Kerry D. Romesburg, President Gilbert E. Cook, Vice President for College Relations Ryan Thomas, Vice President for Student Services and Campus Computing Linda L. Makin, Director of Budgets Douglas E. Warner, Executive Director of Budgets and Management Studies Robby Schow, Utah Council of Student Body Presidents Salt Lake Community College Frank W. Budd, President Marjorie Carson, Vice President of Academic Services Richard M. Rhodes, Vice President of Business Services Rand A. Johnson, Assistant to the President Representatives of the Press Matt Canham, Daily Chronicle Jennifer Toomer Cook, Deseret News Hilary Groutage, Salt Lake Tribune Jennifer Gallagher, Standard Examiner Others Present Shannon Bittler, SBR/SBE Joint Liaison Committee Gary Carlston, Governor's Deputy for Education Boyd Garriott, Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst Debra Headden, Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst Paul Henderson, American Federation of Teachers Mark Huntsman Brad Mortensen, Governor's Office of Planning and Budget Kenneth E. Nye, Program Director, DFCM Kevin Walthers, Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst ral Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. He excused Regents Jordan and Taggart and welcomed Senator George Mantes, who will become a member of the Board of Regents in January. Senator Mantes said he was delighted and excited at the prospect of becoming a Regent. He is President and CEO of a full-line General Motors Auto Dealership in Tooele and is completing his eighth year in the Utah State Senate. As a Senator, he served on the Higher Education Appropriations Subcommittee and the Executive Appropriations Committee. Senator Mantes said he hoped to be able to bring a legislative perspective to his role as a Regent. He was welcomed by the group. USHE Master Planning Session Master Planning Task Force on Accountability. Regent Lund asked Associate Commissioner Petersen to give the report of this task force. Dr. Petersen referred to Agenda Tab A-2, Planning Guidelines for Technologically-Delivered Instruction, which had two attachments. The October Board meeting focused on the system's approach to technologically-delivered instruction (TDI) and raised questions which need to be answered by the Board. Attachment A to Tab A-2 was a response to the October 15 discussion. 1. Primary Purposes of Technologically-Delivered Instruction. The major objective of the Utah System of Higher Education should be providing additional access to students who are in Utah and providing additional options for our present students. Secondarily, technologically-delivered instruction can also be used to deliver programming to out-of-state and international residents. Regent Lund pointed out that the Regents were making a commitment that the USHE institutions will pursue TDI to benefit the residents of Utah, and not to be a profit-generating center. Associate Commissioner Petersen added that if an institution has a specialized, unique program which might be effectively marketed through an online institution, such as Western Governors University, that would also be appropriate. 2. Mission and Role Assignments and System-Level Collaboration. The recommendation was that TDI will be an important role assignment for all USHE institutions. Emphasis was also given to the need for system-level collaboration in order for the institutions to be successful providers. This ensures that students may successfully take courses from multiple institutions and transfer them, and receive financial aid or advisory services while taking technologically-delivered courses. The role of the Chief Academic Officers (CAOs) will be extremely important. 3. Exceptions to Institutional Service Area Policy. This reaffirmed that geographic service areas would not apply to technologically-delivered instruction. 4. Tuition. Associate Commissioner Petersen said the issue of tuition had been raised, but the proposal was for a careful evaluation, after which it would be reconsidered. Chair Johnson asked Associate Commissioner Petersen what the trend was on technically-delivered programs offered by out-of-state institutions. Dr. Petersen referred to Item 9 on page 10 of the briefing paper (Attachment B to Tab A-2) and replied that one option for the system would be to collect information on satisfaction with TDI courses, to essentially perform a "better business bureau" function . Many faculty believe the system has an additional obligation to ensure that the course work being offered is an appropriate quality to protect our citizens. Commissioner Foxley asked how online courses could be policed. Students do not go through state agencies in order to enroll in Internet courses. The providing institutions do not notify us and get our approval to offer their courses to Utah students. Regent Lund agreed that there was no realistic way to police the Internet. The role of the Regents is in granting credit. The CAOs are to come back with a recommendation for controlling and implementing the quality of courses offered in Utah within our institutions. The Regents can only deal with the classes offered through USHE institutions. Regent Lund asked that the CAOs' recommendations include one on the funding issue as well. We are using our most expensive assets (our faculty) to develop, produce and get their best programs on line. The state needs to develop a way to provide funding for institutions to help faculty develop these courses more efficiently. Regent Zabriskie asked for an update on the Utah Electronic Community College (UECC). Associate Commissioner Petersen said the fall term had very limited activity. He had discussed this with Marilyn Mansfield, who was receiving several inquiries daily from students who want to register and participate. Last year there were over 6000 students enrolled in technologically-delivered classes through Utah community colleges. There is already a high level of activity in this area. The UECC provides a higher level of collaboration among the five community colleges. Regent Lund moved approval of the first three policies on Attachment A to Tab A-2. Regent Zabriskie seconded the motion. President Romesburg requested that the wording on the first guideline be changed from "(2) . . . students who find it necessary to enroll. . ." to ". . . students who wish to enroll. . ." The motion was so amended and carried unanimously. Master Planning Task Force on Missions/Roles and System Configuration. Regent Clyde said the task force had intended to discuss thoroughly the criteria for changing missions or delivery of four-year degrees within the system, as well as funding for some institutions. Because of the importance of the university centers funding issue, this one item was the focus of discussion in the task force meeting the preceding day. Regent Clyde said she was pleased that so many Regents and Presidents had been able to attend the meeting. The task force will meet again on November 24 to review criteria. Several action items were discussed and suggested by the task force: (1) Conduct an analysis of the effectiveness of university centers in the Utah System of Higher Education. Such an analysis has not been done. (2) Review the implications of the proposed changes of policy R138. (3) Resolve concerns about accreditation issues related to the proposed changes to policy R138. (4) Ensure that incentives are balanced between delivering and host institutions. (5) Conclude an analysis and adopt a position on university center funding before the 1999 legislative session. Chair Johnson responded from the viewpoint of the Funding Mechanisms Task Force, which includes Marty Stephens, the new Speaker of the House, and Lyle Hillyard, Majority Leader of the Senate. A proposal was made in the last Legislative Session to move funding from the delivering institutions to the host institutions. The Regents asked for time to deal with the issue and make a recommendation. That recommendation must be made by the end of the year. The Funding Mechanisms Task Force recommended a business module, to balance interest in two ways - who would have the funds and what the contractual arrangements would be. Their recommendation was that the host institutions control the funds. The task force felt having the funding with the host institution would be a better balance of interests. The value of university centers as a whole has yet to be decided by the Regents. The Funding Mechanisms Task Force discussed funding as a separate part of this issue. Regent Clyde referred to Revised Tab A-3 which was in the Regents' folders. She invited Associate Commissioner Petersen to note some of the policy issues discussed in conjunction with the action issues at the task force meeting. Dr. Petersen referred to Policy Issues on page 2 of the Commissioner's cover letter to Revised Tab A-3. Does this change represent such a major change that it will expand the roles of the community colleges? Although funding would be in the university center line item for community colleges, they could not offer bachelor's degrees but would enter into contracts with delivering universities. Community colleges have funding for administrative support for university centers. The proposed changes would also give them programmatic funds to negotiate contracts. President Budd referred to §3.1 of policy R138 and asked whether the institutions should not have the authority to place their programs where they are best located, rather than coming to the Board for approval for each institutional campus. Chair Johnson asked the Board's approval to delete the underlined sentence at the end of §3.1 to R138. Everyone agreed. Associate Commissioner Petersen pointed out that §3.5 makes it clear that the delivering institution would have the responsibility to determine courses and programs for baccalaureate degrees. President Romesburg suggested adding a clause to §3.5. Associate Commissioner Petersen agreed to modify the language in §3.5 to include "The delivering university and its academic department shall have the responsibility to offer programs which lead to the baccalaureate degree." President Day pointed out that accreditation standards require the delivering institution to follow all students through to the completion of the program. Chair Johnson suggesteda three-year termination period to allow students time to finish their courses. Commissioner Foxley referred to §3.7.2 which addresses this issue. Regent Lee said the Board had been looking at university centers for several years. This concern has often revolved around the idea of mission. She moved that the Purpose (§R138-1) be amended to add the phrase ". . . without altering the role and mission of the community college" to the end of the sentence. The motion was seconded by Regent Atkinson and approved unanimously. Discussion then turned to the various kinds of funding associated with university centers and the specific funding issue at the SUU University Center at Dixie College. Chair Johnson clarified that Dixie College is currently the only institution which does not receive funding through the university center program. The funding mechanism should be consistent and uniform throughout the system. President Bennion said one of the most pressing issues was that SUU had hired faculty to teach courses through the University Center in St George. SUU has a contractual, legal and moral obligation to those faculty who are tenured or on tenure track. He expressed his desire that students already in the programs could be served and the faculty contracts honored. Regent Lund said the real issue for the Regents is to understand what funding commitments had been made by the institutions, and what commitments had been made to the students. Regent Atkinson said she was concerned that the Commissioner's staff had a limited time to prepare these documents. She asked that they be given adequate time to prepare information on policy issues and what is best for the system, so every Regent could have the same information as the others. Senator Mantes said if the Regents could solve this funding problem and come up with a recommendation, it would prevent this issue from becoming a legislative war which we could only lose. He suggested that the Board come out with a strong policy statement that the university center issue will be studied and a recommendation made to the Legislature. Chair Johnson said policy R138 and the SUU-Dixie situation interrelate. He suggested that the Board come back in December with a request for a vote on the university center funding issue. Regent Zabriskie suggested that until then, the Regents and Presidents tell media representatives that this issue is still being studied by the Board of Regents and a recommendation will be made in December. The meeting recessed at 10:45 a.m. Regent Rogers announced the birth of his first grandchild, a grandson born the previous day. Joint Meeting with the State Board of Education State Board of Education Katharine B. Garff, Chair John L. Watson, Vice Chair Linnea S. Barney Neola Brown Janet A. Cannon Cheryl Ferrin Susan Henshaw Jill G. Kennedy Joyce W. Richards Marilyn Shields Waynette Steel State Office of Education Scott W. Bean, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Laurie A. Chivers, Deputy Superintendent Steven O. Laing, Associate Superintendent for Planning and Project Services Jerry P. Peterson, Associate Superintendent for Instructional Services Robert O Brems, Associate Superintendent for Applied Technology Education Services Twila B. Affleck, Secretary to the Board Eileen Rencher, Public Relations Director Business Representatives Al Egbert, The Boeing Company Marlon O. Snow, MST Trucking The meeting resumed at 11:00 a.m. in a joint meeting with the State Board of Regents and State Board of Education. Chair Johnson asked members of both boards seated around the table to introduce themselves. He expressed his pleasure at this precedent-setting occasion. Joint Liaison Committee All issues of mutual interest to the State Board of Education and State Board of Regents are discussed in the Joint Liaison Committee (JLC). Chair Johnson referred to the handouts and briefly reviewed the purpose and function of the JLC, which was formed by statute and comprised of members of both boards as well as the business community. He expressed his admiration for the Joint Liaison Committee, for their willingness to get into the issues and resolve any problems which arise. The goal of the JLC is to stay in front of issues. The key to this is that issues be referred to the Committee for discussion and resolution. The State Board of Regents has passed resolutions with this intent. Chair Johnson and Katharine Garff, Chair of the State Board of Education, have committed to make this process work. Chair Garff stated that this was the first time the two boards had met to discuss issues without the attendance of the Interim Education Committee of the Legislature. Chair Garff has been involved with the State Board of Education for seven years, but the most exciting articulation has taken place in the last two years in the Joint Liaison Committee. She thanked the Regents for inviting the State Board of Education to meet with them. She expressed her appreciation for the close interaction between the Superintendent, the Commissioner, and the two chairs. Chair Garff said the Legislative Strategic Planning Committee had requested the purpose and function of the Joint Liaison Committee. She briefly reviewed them and said the handout would be taken to the Legislature so they could know what the JLC was actually doing. Commissioner Foxley called attention to the report to the Legislative Education Interim Committee which had been prepared by Shannon Bittler, who serves as staff to the Joint Liaison Committee and works closely with the staff of both boards. The Commissioner said this report would be presented to the Legislative Education Interim Committee the following week. Superintendent Bean went through some planning ideas to improve the quality of public education. His four goals are: (1) Improve or increase the standards for K-12 students. (2) Look at teacher preparation to see if it could be improved. (3) Provide more professional development opportunities relating to student achievement. This is more important than the reduction of class sizes. (4) Make applied technology education (ATE) available to as many Utah citizens as possible. Superintendent Bean distributed "A Concept Paper for the Restructuring of the Preparation of Professional Educators in Utah," which was developed to strengthen teacher preparation and certification. These changes will strengthen the academic preparation of all new teachers and expand the candidate pool for those who wish to enter the teaching profession. Twelve certificates are currently offered, largely exclusive of each other. Additional preparation and qualification is necessary for another license. There are currently 72 endorsements. A new endorsement has recently been added for middle level educators, which was piloted by Utah State University. Three additional endorsements have been added which will apply to special education certificates. A major change proposed in the concept paper would be a common license for all educators. This would require an academic major and minor with a pedagogical core. Emphases would be added as desired. Superintendent Bean said the challenge would be to define that common core. With a pedagogical core, there would also be the potential for field experiences to begin early in a teacher preparation program. Educators should have academic preparation in the form of minors and majors in the subject area of their choice. Commissioner Foxley asked Associate Commissioner Petersen, who meets regularly with the Education Deans, to comment. Dr. Petersen indicated that he and Associate Superintendent Steve Laing had discussed this proposal with the Education Deans of the USHE institutions. Associate Commissioner Petersen said this proposal would represent a substantial change in the way teachers are prepared at colleges and universities, so there would be significant implications for the USHE institutions. The proposal would require a change in curriculum in the colleges of education, and even at the lower division level and in other academic departments. The Joint Liaison Committee established a Teacher Preparation/Teacher Development Task Force, which is chaired by Superintendent Danny Talbot of the Wasatch School District. In addition, the State Advisory Committee for Teacher Education (SACTE) has good representation from higher education. It provides a good structure to allow review and planning to incorporate changes as they occur and to provide support in colleges and universities. Chair Johnson asked if Utah's supply of new teachers was adequate to allow public education to get the very best, and what happens when someone is sent out of state to teach. Associate Superintendent Laing said in some cases, there are still not enough candidates. There is generally an increased demand in special education (especially with the severely handicapped), foreign language and mathematics. Certifications awarded in Utah are honored through agreements with other states through the Interstate Compact for Teacher Education Certification. Vice Chair Watson asked if these new proposals would cost more than the present certification requirements. Dr. Laing said the cost had not yet been developed. The first step was developing the concept paper and sharing it with the deans of education. The next step will be to calculate the costs for both public and higher education. Budget requests would then be proposed to the Governor and Legislature. Vice Chair Clyde asked how the Deans of Education had responded. Dr. Laing said there is general overall interest and a desire to be actively involved in evaluating the proposal. Regent Hale pointed out that this would require a tremendous effort for university faculty. In calculating costs, she urged that consideration be given to the additional effort for the universities to fashion a curriculum to accomplish these changes. Associate Commissioner Petersen said that the Colleges of Education would be involved in determining what the costs will be. Ms. Barney asked if the issue of preparing teachers to deal with handicapped children would be addressed. Associate Superintendent Laing said that was a key element of the proposed pedagogical core. Teachers must learn to deal with diversity in the classroom - including cultural, economic, and physical. Regent Atkinson raised a number of questions: How will this affect teachers who have been in the system for a number of years? What about parental involvement? Will there be pilot studies? What is the deadline? Has the PTA been involved? Dr. Laing said this concept paper would be shared with many groups which will have an opportunity to be involved. In-service training of current teachers would be an important element of the changes being proposed. Chair Garff noted that the proposals which have been made have been exciting to the higher education community. She said she had received comments from college deans who expressed hope that these changes will revitalize their departments. Mrs. Garff said she had not heard any negative remarks about the impact of this on the education industry. She asked, if this were to be approved, how long it would take before higher education was ready so that teachers could be hired from within the system. Regent Hale responded that would depend on how well it was funded by the Legislature. Superintendent Bean said he had asked Deputy Superintendent Laurie Chivers to make some calculations on tax reductions for the past few years which would have gone to education. Taking the current tax rate and going back six years, we would have had an additional $242 million from property tax and $40 million from income tax annually. Utah has had the lowest expenditure per student for the past 15 years, and state funding is consistently being lowered. Planning Issues - Higher Education and Public Education Commissioner Foxley said summaries of the four USHE Master Planning Task Forces had been shared with the Joint Liaison Committee. Copies were provided at the table for the members of the State Board of Education. Regents had copies in Tab A-1 of their agenda. Regent Aileen Clyde chairs the Master Planning Task Force on Missions/Roles and System Configuration. A Subcommittee on Applied Technology Education is chaired by Regent Pamela Atkinson. Rob Brems, John Watson, Darrel White, Mike Bennett, and Mike Bouwhuis represent public education on the subcommittee and serve an active role, along with higher education representatives. Dr. Foxley asked Regent Atkinson to give an overview of the work of the subcommittee. Regent Atkinson said the ATE Subcommittee was an exciting committee to chair. She read the committee's charge, which was to provide recommendations to the Missions/Roles Task Force on the current status of adult ATE, provide recommendations on the long-range future needs for adult ATE, and strengthen the cooperation of higher education and public education through the Joint Liaison Committee in providing applied technology education. The subcommittee's first challenge was to ensure good representation from higher education and public education. The second was to avoid duplication with what is happening in the Joint Liaison Committee, but to enhance that effort. Members were to be open and honest with each other and to consider what is best for the citizens of Utah. The subcommittee's goal was to eliminate the pyramid of education and look at a continuum of education, starting with pre-school and going through postsecondary education. The subcommittee discovered that there was little duplication between public education and higher education offerings. The existing duplication is necessary. The group is looking at the needs and gaps which have not been filled. Each region has unique needs and the capabilities to meet those needs, but there is a need for additional resources. The present funding system encourages competition rather than collaboration and cooperation. There must be more collaboration for a better system and a better education for Utah citizens. There is excellent collaboration is some of the regions, and Regent Atkinson commended those efforts. Where facilities, programs and equipment are shared, the students and taxpayers benefit. The subcommittee will prepare some strong recommendations to the Joint Liaison Committee for increased collaboration. There are some instances where adult students will be served through public education because of the lack of higher education facilities. Regent Atkinson thanked everyone involved for their participation and input. The committee wants to emphasize ATE and make sure parents understand that there is value and status in ATE. Sometimes it is better to get applied technology education than a four-year baccalaureate degree. Regent Clyde stated the Missions/Roles Task Force's recommendations included very important recommendations for increased collaboration between public education and higher education. Associate Superintendent Brems recognized Regent Atkinson as a hero for ATE. Part of the State Board of Education's planning efforts addressed the needs of applied technology education across the state. This has been a similar concern for USHE Master Planning Task Forces. The schools constantly hear of the need for more skilled workers in Utah. ATE provides a great solution to that problem. The State Office of Education looked at high school programs and ATCs, especially in areas of the state with exceptional needs. Dr. Brems distributed a handout showing ATC expansion needs. The charts reflected students in grades 9-12 in the regions which have ATE planning. The regions with ATCs have served a higher percentage of students than ATC Service Regions (ATCSRs). The State Office of Education is focusing on regions where the population is higher and service is lower. The joint use of facilities between public education and higher education is being discussed. Dr. Brems supported the concept of collaboration and cooperation between the two educational systems. He expressed the Board of Education's appreciation of higher education in meeting the needs of applied technology education. Regent Atkinson said one of the items approved by the Missions/Roles Task Force was that future ATC facilities be shared by public education and higher education and that funding for adult ATE programs should generally flow through higher education institutions. Chair Johnson asked if the enrollment numbers on the handout included concurrent enrollment. Dr. Brems said they had not been included. Concurrent enrollment can include ATE as well as academic subjects. It also did not include students served by school districts or higher education institutions which are not ATCSR-related. Regent Hale asked to see a compilation which included that component. Such a compilation would show the extent to which higher education and the school districts were making a contribution. Assistant Commissioner Lowe explained that ATCs and ATCSRs are joint ventures between public education and higher education. They are jointly funded and jointly developed. The handout distributed by Dr. Brems showed the secondary students only. Secondary vocational programs are very extensive. Much adult education is going on as well. Regent Atkinson expressed her appreciation for Dr. Lowe's and Dr. Brems' involvement on the ATE Subcommittee. The group is looking at the cost of instruction in public education and higher education with delivery of applied technology education, but it is very complicated. The issue of credit classes vs. non-credit classes in higher education is also complicated. Regent Lee said the Joint Liaison Committee continues to try to look at the entire picture of ATE throughout the state, supported by both public education and higher education. Until that picture is clearly in the minds of the Legislators, we will not be able to obtain the necessary funding for training. Chair Johnson asked Mr. Egbert and Mr. Snow to provide an industry perspective. Mr. Egbert said Boeing had been satisfied with the employee training offered by Salt Lake Community College, Weber State University and the Ogden-Weber ATC, especially in custom fit applications. Changes occur quickly in industry. The system is not set up to retrain employees. This is a problem for the employer as well as the school system. The schools have a hard time keeping up with industry's changing requirements because the rate of change continues to accelerate. Part of the serviceability of a school system is to recognize the changing needs of the business community. Regent Lee noted that the Joint Liaison Committee hears budgetary needs each year from the ATCs, ATCSRs and higher education institutions. Requests this year were overwhelming. It is not in the best interests of Utah in the future not to fund these programs. Mr. Snow reflected that sometimes we forget how slowly the education community moves to make transitions. Things move much more quickly in industry. There is more cooperation in Utah than in most states. He commended the public education and higher education community for sitting down together to determine the best use of the state dollars spent for education. Most equipment in schools is not current, up-to-date equipment. Industry needs people to be trained on up-to-date equipment. We still need to reach out to rural Utah for applied technology education. Chair Johnson observed that increasingly private providers are coming to the schools for specialized training. He asked, if we have state support, how can private providers supply more current equipment and accomplish our goals without a state-supported system? Mr. Egbert responded that when Boeing trains pilots, they train them at first on simulators of the highest quality rather than on real airplanes. Assistant Commissioner Lowe pointed out that student tuition was dramatically different at private schools, where the total cost of education is borne by the students. Quality is not that different at private schools, but flexibility is. ATE is a large undertaking. We spent $110 to $120 million on adult applied technology training programs in public education and higher education this year. Higher education is working with 60,000 to 65,000 students this year. The ATCs and high schools would add many more. Regent Hale said this was the kind of information we can use to show the Legislature how the two systems are cooperating. Mr. Snow agreed, saying the best kept secret in the state is what we are doing in vocational education. He supported the idea of the schools working with business and industry on custom fit programs and meeting the needs of business and industry. Chair Johnson thanked everyone for their participation, saying it had been a great opportunity to meet together. He expressed his hope that this could be done more often. Chair Garff thanked the Board of Regents for their cooperation, especially through the Joint Liaison Committee. She expressed appreciation for higher education's acceptance and eagerness for Superintendent Bean's proposals to increase academic centers. She also appreciated the enthusiasm for improved teacher preparation, ongoing professional development for teachers, and the quality system of ATCs for secondary students. Chair Garff commended the Board of Regents for their master planning and ATE coordination which is being done. She was particularly appreciative for the work of the USHE Master Planning Task Forces. She agreed that the governance structure should be maintained between the existing State Board of Education, State Board of Regents and Joint Liaison Committee. She also agreed that the three entities should share facilities for ATE and that future funding of ATE for adult students should generally flow through higher education institutions with the exception of free-standing ATCs. Ms. Garff expressed her appreciation for the Board of Regents' initiative to pass this important principle and policy. She again thanked the Regents for their invitation and thanked Weber officials for their hospitality. She thanked the members of the State Board of Education for their attendance. The meeting was recessed to committee meetings at 1:05 p.m. Weber State University Presentation The Committee of the Whole reconvened at 2:15 p.m. for a WSU Online presentation. President Thompson commended his faculty and staff for their effort in this project, especially Provost David Eisler, CIO Don Gardner and Vice President for Academic Relations Ann Millner. Dr. Millner explained that there had been tremendous interest and growth in the WSU Online program. WSU Online is not just courses but a whole system providing online services such as tutoring support, administration, bookstore services, writing center, etc. Students who work need the flexibility of taking courses online. Sixty-five faculty members were involved in the development on online courses, which are consistently being revised and shared with colleagues. Faculty take what they learn in this environment back into their classrooms. It truly has become an institutional effort. Vice President Millner introduced Dr. Sally Shigley, who provided a brief demonstration of her English 2010 course which is offered through WSU Online. Dr. Shigley said she had spent an entire summer determining how she could make her class content fit an electronic medium. The biggest challenge was ensuring students' comfort and security for a productive learning experience. Online students have better grades and receive extensive one-on-one contact with their teachers. She invited the Regents to connect electronically with wsuonline.weber.edu and noted that the Writers Resource Hub is not password-protected and is open to anyone. Regent Atkinson stated the Governor and Legislators need to know the tremendous infrastructure which will be required to get online classes developed and running and improved. Chair Johnson reminded the Regents that they had agreed to sign up for an online class and suggested that this English 2010 class would be a good choice. He thanked Dr. Shigley and Vice President Millner for their presentation. Proposed Amendments to Regents Policy R203, Search Committee Appointment and Functions, and Regents' Selection of Presidents Commissioner Foxley explained that because of the changes recently approved to policy R220 and the additional involvement of trustees in presidential searches, and in keeping with the Utah Open Meeting Act, policy R203 also needed to be revised. Regent Grant moved approval of the proposed amendments to policy R203. The motion was seconded by Regent Atkinson and carried unanimously. Report of the Chair Western Governors University/Open University Joint Venture. Chair Johnson announced that Western Governors University and the UK's Open University (OU) would be joining forces in the United States for a USA component of OU. Governor Leavitt had asked Chair Johnson to assist in putting this venture together. Chair Johnson responded that he would be pleased to help as much as his schedule allows. The British Open University is already in 40 countries with 200,000 students. It is a credit-granting institution through distance education. They will locate in Salt Lake City with WGU. Regent Atkinson offered to help Chair Johnson with interpretation of the language. Funding Mechanisms Task Force Progress Report. Representative Marty Stephens is the incoming Speaker of the House and Senator Lyle Hillyard is the Senate Majority Leader. Both legislators serve on this task force. Other leadership positions are still unknown. This has slowed down the work and progress of the task force a bit. Chair Johnson said he had already received a commitment that we would get a component in our funding for our base students. In making the Regents' presentation to the Governor, key items were identified - compensation, funding mechanisms, and Y2K. David Fletcher and David Moon have visited six of the nine campuses to make an independent report on the Y2K problem. Commissioner Foxley said she and Chair Johnson had reminded Governor Leavitt of his commitment to keep higher education's proportionate share of state revenues from sliding further. Joint Meeting with State Building Board. Commissioner Foxley said the Regents would be meeting jointly with the State Building Board in December. She referred to the Building Board's priority list, which closely followed the Regents' priorities, for funding during the 1999 Legislative Session. (A report was sent to the Regents and Presidents in October.) Funding will be dependent on how the new Legislature feels about additional bonding. Chair Johnson pointed out that this year higher education dominates the capital facilities needs in the state. Commissioner Foxley said there had been ongoing dialogue between the DFCM staff, Building Board staff, and the Commissioner's staff. There is very good mutual understanding of our needs and how they would be interwoven with other state needs. Bud Scruggs is the new Chair of the State Building Board. Y2K Funding. Regent Hale asked the status of Y2K funding. Chair Johnson said higher education's needs far outweigh the needs of other state agencies. Funding will depend on the report of David Moon and David Fletcher. He promised that the Board would put its full efforts into supporting that proposal. Commissioner Foxley said regardless of the level of funding we are able to obtain, we will be able to see what will not be done. She recognized Jerry Fullmer, Director of Information Systems on her staff, who had accompanied Messrs. Moon, Fletcher, and Jonathan Ball (from the Legislative Fiscal Analyst's Office) as they visited the campuses. Chair Johnson said a report would be presented at the December Board meeting. Report of the Commissioner Commissioner Foxley referred to the summary of institutional salary needs in the Regents' folders, which had been prepared in the same format as the University of Utah's report at the previous meeting. This report will be used in discussions with Legislators, Governor's staff and others to build a case for a salary equity adjustment. The folders also contained a brochure regarding an art contest sponsored by the Utah Educational Savings Plan Trust. Prizes will be donated to fund UESP savings accounts. The other handout noted Utah's low default rate in student loans. BYU is especially low because of their strong management. Reports of Board Committees Finance and Facilities Committee Weber State University - Campus Master Plan (Tab K). Chair Hoggan reported that no significant changes had been made since the Campus Master Plan was last approved three years ago. He moved its approval, seconded by Regent Grant. The motion carried unanimously. Annual Report on Leased Space (Tab L). Chair Hoggan called the Regents' attention to Replacement Tab L, which was in their folders. Board policy requires institutions to obtain prior Board approval of leases funded from state appropriations that exceed $50,000 annually or that commit institutions to leases for a five-year duration or beyond. The report showed the total leased space throughout the system and required the Board's approval before it was submitted to the State Building Board for possible inclusion in its comprehensive five-year building plan. Chair Hoggan moved approval of the report. The motion was seconded by Regent Grant and carried unanimously. Proposed Amendments to Regents Policy R710, Capital Facilities (Tab M). Chair Hoggan said this item took the bulk of the committee's discussion time. This policy concerned Operation & Maintenance (O&M) funding for donated facilities. A new §4.5.5.3.1 was added, which broke capital facilities down into two classifications. One group of facilities would be clearly for academic and associated support purposes - classrooms, labs, administrative offices, libraries, etc. According to the policy revision, this group of buildings would get support from state appropriations. The second classification was facilities not specifically related to academic and associated support purposes. O&M would not be requested for those buildings from state appropriations. A third provision would give the Board of Regents authority to consider requests for facilities which would not normally meet these criteria, on a case-by-case basis. The committee discussed this policy at length and asked each of the Presidents to go to their major donors to discuss and determine their attitudes about adopting this policy. There is legislative pressure to require that any property not be acquired unless approved by the Legislature. The committee felt this policy should be adopted prior to the 1999 Legislative Session and tabled action until the December meeting. Chair Johnson asked that concerns be addressed quickly. Chair Hoggan said the committee had asked staff to review the current status of non-state-funded capital facilities to see what the impact would be on projects in process. Consent Calendar, Finance and Facilities Committee (Tab N). Upon motion by Chair Hoggan and a second by Regent Grant, the following items were approved on the committee's consent calendar: a. OCHE Monthly Investment Report b. OCHE Discretionary Funds Report c. UofU and USU Capital Facilities Delegation Reports USHE FY 1999-2000 Budget Request Update (Tab O). Chair Hoggan referred to Replacement Tab O in the Regents' folders. This updates codifies our budget request and does not require further approval from the Board. Funding of prison programs by SLCC, Snow and USU was discussed. These institutions are getting some funding for these programs in Pell grants. There is a shortfall between the available funding and what is required. Should this shortfall be subsidized from state appropriations? Chair Hoggan concluded that this would require further consideration from the committee and the Board. Chair Johnson said the Legislative Fiscal Analyst is dealing with this issue. He recommended that the Board allow that to transpire before further action is taken. Student Financial Aid - UHEAA Board of Directors Report (Tab P). Chair Hoggan said this was an information item. A Supplement to Tab P and New Addition to Tab P were included in the Regents' folders. This was a modification of policy to allow the Regents to consider funding to make up for the shortfall created by the increase in tuition. Commissioner Foxley said this had been a student initiative. Financial aid is one of the students' top priorities. She recognized Regent Reynard, who spoke to the UHEAA Board at their meeting. Regent Reynard said a considerable portion of UCOPE funding goes to work study programs. The policy recommendation is for the Regents to consider increases to financial aid when increasing tuition. Chair Hoggan moved approval of the policy recommendations in the New Addition to Tab P. The motion was seconded by Regent Hale and approved unanimously. Dixie College - Plan for Hurricane Center (Tab G). Chair Hoggan pointed out that this was an issue for both committees but that the Finance and Facilities Committee had not yet discussed it. The physical facilities required, including off-site improvements, will have to go through the regular non-state funded project process. Vice President Plewe excused President Huddleston, who had a homecoming commitment at Dixie. The proposed plan was an opportunity to expand to the eastern part of Washington County in Hurricane. In time this may be one of the most populated areas of the county. Donors have offered to purchase the land and provide funds to build the facility. The college hopes to have this center operational by Fall 1999. A request will be made for O&M funding when a site and the size of the grant have been determined. Dixie is trying to provide opportunities for that segment of the market for people to have education close to home. This would not be a major campus. Regent Lee remarked that she had abstained from voting in committee because she was not sure approval was in the purview of the Program and Planning Committee. Chair Hoggan said the Finance & Facilities Committee's discussion would focus on the facility and funding. Once that has been determined, it should be considered within the context of the other programs. Vice Chair Clyde said approval of the Program and Planning Committee would be contingent upon approval and acceptance of the Finance and Facilities Committee. Vice President Plewe said that staff and operating funds for the Center is Dixie's top institutional budget priority. Chair Johnson asked if it would harm Dixie to delay action until the December Board meeting. Dr. Plewe said donors need to know that there is approval to move ahead. College officials are looking for the best site and availability. Regent Atkinson pointed out that O&M would be required in the second year. Regent Grant asked if the state could afford to take education to every community which is 20 minutes from a campus. That would be very expensive. Chair Johnson said the Board needed a more in-depth look at this issue to make a decision in December. Regent Hoggan said the Regents could not overlook Regent Lee's point. This must be considered in the context of the USHE master plan for Dixie College. Does this indicate a departure from that master plan? If so, what is the justification for doing so? Vice President Plewe said Dixie was charged to serve Kane County. The community would like an ATC or community college of their own. The proposed Hurricane Center would meet that need. Commissioner Foxley pointed out that Dixie College is already offering courses there. It will be a growth area for the state. Those needs must be met by a Utah institution. This is not a high-cost item. Regent Rogers asked the Regents to keep in mind the existing centers in close proximity to other USHE campuses, particularly in Salt Lake and Utah Counties This is a very common practice. Regent Anderton said he was very comfortable conceptually with a satellite center in Hurricane. The problem is lack of specific detail, which Dixie had agreed to provide at the next Board meeting. Chair Johnson thanked Chair Hoggan for his good work. Program and Planning Committee Regent Atkinson chaired the Program and Planning Committee. University of Utah - Bachelor of Science Degree in Biomedical Engineering (Tab C). Regent Atkinson said this proposal showed the national trend in research universities. Biomedical engineering has made enormous contributions to the longer life of people. She moved approval of the proposal. The motion was seconded by Regent Lee and carried unanimously. University of Utah - Ph.D. Degree in Public Health (Tab D). Regent Atkinson said this proposal had been discussed for two years. There is nothing comparable in the Intermountain West. There is a high demand from the State Department of Health and city and county health departments and tremendous support from public health entities throughout Utah. Regent Atkinson moved approval of the program, contingent upon funding from the Legislature. The motion was seconded by Regent Lee. Since approval of this proposal required a two-thirds majority, a show of hands was called. The motion passed, with no opposing votes. University of Utah - Master of Science Degree in Genetic Counseling (Tab E). Regent Atkinson said the University of Utah had an international reputation in genetics, and was looking at future needs in this field, as are adult-onset disease centers and others. Regent Atkinson moved approval of the program. It was seconded by Regent Lee. A two-thirds majority was required so vote was taken by show of hands. The motion carried unanimously. Utah State University - Ph.D. Degree in Bioveterinary Science (Tab F). Regent Atkinson said this program had been recommended three years ago in the university's external review. USU Bioveteri-nary Science faculty have received over $8 million in grants and contracts in the past five years. This program would offer an opportunity to receive more contracts. Candidates for this degree would be those individuals who had already received their DVM degree. Regent Atkinson moved approval, seconded by Regent Hoggan. Regent Grant asked about overlap between a DVM and Ph.D. program. He was told that acquiring both degrees would take a person nine years. The motion carried unanimously. Dixie College - Plan for Hurricane Center (Tab G). This item was previously discussed as part of the report of the Finance and Facilities Committee. Consent Calendar, Program and Planning Committee (Tab H). Upon motion by Regent Atkinson and second by Regent Lee, the following items were approved on the committee's consent calendar: University of Utah - Change in administrative status of Linguistics program from a Program to a Department University of Utah - Request for permanent approval of the Center for Science Education and Outreach University of Utah - Department of Modern Dance Two-Year Progress Report (Tab I). Regent Atkinson said this information item had been requested by the Board in March 1996. The committee found the report very acceptable. They were encouraged by the progress being made. Utah Valley State College - Elementary Education Program Report (Tab J). Regent Atkinson said the committee had requested an update when this program had been approved two years ago. Of the 29 graduates, 26 obtained employment in this field, and the other three decided to leave the field. The committee found the report satisfactory. President Romesburg said this program had originally been approved on a trial basis. He requested formal approval of the report to ensure continuation of the program. Regent Atkinson moved approval, seconded by Regent Anderton. The motion carried unanimously. Chair Johnson thanked Regent Atkinson for her report. General Consent Calendar On motion by Regent Hoggan and second by Regent Grant, the Board approved the following items on the General Consent Calendar (Tab R): A. Minutes 1. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Utah State Board of Regents held October 15-16, 1998, at Utah Valley State College in Orem, Utah. 2. Approval of the Minutes of the Special Meeting of the Utah State Board of Regents held October 27, 1998, via teleconference. B. Grant Proposal - Approval to submit the following proposal: Utah State University - A Biosensor for Detection of Infectious Agents, $2,150,256; Bart Weimer, Principal Investigator. C. Executive Session(s) - Approval to hold an executive session or sessions in connection with the meeting of the State Board of Regents to be held on December 11, 1998, at the University of Utah, to consider property transactions, personnel performance evaluations, litigation, and such other matters permitted by the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. Adjournment Chair Johnson thanked everyone for their participation. He thanked President Thompson and his staff for their hospitality and a wonderful day. President Thompson thanked Marriott Food Services, who provided the food and did a wonderful job. He gave special recognition to Marsha Richter for her tremendous efforts to make this a successful day. The meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m. Joyce Cottrell CPS Executive Secretary to the Board of Regents