The meeting of the University Senate, Twin Cities Campus Assembly, and Faculty Senate was convened in 25 Mondale Hall, Minneapolis campus, on Thursday, April 28, 2005, at 2:35 p.m., as a joint meeting of the three bodies. Coordinate campuses were linked by telephone. Checking or signing the roll as present were 139 voting faculty/academic professional members and 30 voting student members. President Bruininks presided.

1. The University Senate strongly endorses the goal of systematically reviewing and improving the University and the necessity for strategic planning. The increasingly rapid change in the structure of knowledge and the pressures on the University arising from decreasing state funding and resulting increases in tuition all mandate an ongoing effort to ensure congruence between the University’s structure and its goals.

2. The University Senate calls on the President to increase University community participation as the strategic planning process continues. Whatever recommendations the President and the Regents endorse, the implementation will only be effective with faculty leadership and participation as well as active involvement by staff members and students. Because of the importance of faculty in implementing academic change, a majority of each task force should be faculty members, and the task forces should be chaired or co-chaired by a faculty member. The task force members should be chosen from both inside and outside the specific affected areas based on their relevant knowledge, skill, and commitment to the process. Deans and chairs should not control the selection. Task force members should be expected to bring their special expertise to the planning process, but should represent the interests of the University, not those of any particular college, department, dean or chair.

3. The University Senate asks the President and Provost to continue to meet and consult with concerned individuals and groups on and off campus regarding the Strategic Planning process, goals, and implementation. Achievement of the strategic planning goals requires that the administration understand and respond to the concerns of those most directly affected.

4. The University Senate suggests that future strategic planning should consider even more ambitious plans than those that have been presented so far and that current and future efforts should address resource and budget factors. The Senate is concerned that the steps outlined in the Academic Task Force Report may not be sufficient to achieve the University’s goals. Moreover, the University’s achievements are currently limited by a lack of money, reflected in problems such as low ranking on faculty compensation, small numbers of faculty in key departments, and uneven distribution of resources to support research and creative activity. These problems must be addressed if the University is to achieve its goal of being among the top three public research universities in the world, as it will be difficult to compete successfully with institutions whose resources are much greater than those available to us.

5. The University Senate recognizes that reconfiguration of academic units may be necessary to achieve the University's strategic goals. In the process of such reconfiguration:

-- The University Senate strongly supports a continued emphasis on the University's commitment to access and diversity and to its land-grant mission. The Senate believes that these principles underlie the University as a whole, and like academic freedom, they are the responsibilities of every member of the University community. The Senate intends, by careful monitoring, to help ensure the commitment to access and diversity is fulfilled, whatever recommendations are adopted.

-- The University Senate re-emphasizes the importance of participation of all faculty, in the units to be reconfigured, in the development of mission, goals, and organization of the reconfigured units. Structural change will succeed only if affected faculty are active contributors to the implementation process and if the values and objectives of each affected unit are reflected in the final outcomes.

-- All proposed task forces should give special priority to planning that incorporates these commitments.

6. The University Senate supports the recommendations to create an honors college and design of a baccalaureate writing initiative. The Senate emphasizes that in the implementation of those proposals, there must be consultation with those currently involved with honors programs and writing programs across the University, and the implementation must ensure the examination and sharing of existing best practices in University programs and in similar programs at peer universities. The Senate expects that additional resources will be necessary to achieve these goals.

7. The University Senate welcomes establishment of a task force to determine the appropriate configuration of the pure and applied sciences and recommends that the basic science units of the Academic Health Center be considered as part of the study.

8. The University Senate is concerned that:
-- Strategic planning for the Academic Health Center does not appear to be as fully developed as planning in other areas, or to be integrated with that planning.

-- Strategic planning for the coordinate campuses does not appear to be as fully developed as the Twin Cities campus planning, or to be integrated with that planning into an overall vision for the University system.

-- Strategic planning does not sufficiently emphasize the research mission of the University or the support and development of the research infrastructure.

-- Strategic planning does not sufficiently emphasize the teaching mission of the University or the support and development of the teaching and learning infrastructure.

-- There is a perception that units have not been treated equally in the recommendations, with some units given more latitude in planning their futures while others are constrained by mandated choices.

9. The University Senate recommends:
-- More coordination between the proposed academic and administrative task forces and the development of the new budget model. Good planning requires a better understanding of financial factors than has been achieved so far.

-- The task forces gather additional data regarding various alternatives in support of the academic planning recommendations.

-- The task forces gather comparative data regarding practices at other "top" universities and discuss what can be learned by observing what has been done elsewhere.

-- Resources be allocated to permit faculty on 9-month appointments to participate in the strategic planning implementation task forces, and that steps be taken to ensure students can participate effectively despite the summer schedule for the launch of the task forces.
 
10. The University Senate believes that many valuable suggestions have been made in the course of the consideration of the recommendations of the academic task force. The Senate urges the President, in his formulation of a recommendation to the Board of Regents, to take seriously the views of members of the University community that have been expressed. It is not sufficient merely to provide concerned individuals the opportunity to comment.

11. The University Senate instructs Senate committees to continue to review detailed plans as they evolve and make recommendations to the Senate for appropriate action.

DISCUSSION:

President Bruininks began by relinquishing the chair to Professor Martin, Vice Chair of the University Senate, so he could listen to the discussion. She then called on Professor Marshak, Chair of the Senate Consultative Committee (SCC), to introduce the resolution.

Professor Marshak began by noting that the resolution had been unanimously approved by the Faculty Consultative Committee (FCC). This motion and today’s discussion mark another step in a process that began last summer. The first stage of that process, which itself included more than 35 town meetings and open discussions, resulted in a report published on the Web near the end of Fall semester. Since then, a second committee has worked on recommendations to President Bruininks, which were published on March 30. In addition to other meetings and discussions during the past few weeks, the FCC held open forums on the West Bank, East Bank, St. Paul and Morris with electronic connections across the University system. The FCC has reported the ideas presented at those forums to the President and the Provost, and also published them, along with comments received by email, on the Senate website. Following this meeting, the FCC will tomorrow send to the President a summary letter, outlining recommendations and concerns with respect to Strategic Planning.

The Committee on Business and Rules adopted special rules for consideration of this matter by the Senate, in order to assure a useful and orderly discussion. In accordance with those rules, proposed amendments to the FCC’s motion were due at the Senate office on Monday. Five amendments were received.

Amendment #1 was submitted and subsequently modified by Professor Brothen. The FCC believes that Professor Brothen’s amendment usefully strengthens the FCC’s motion with respect to diversity and accepts the amendment as friendly. Professor Brothen’s amendment as modified is thus incorporated into the text of the motion.

Amendment #2 was submitted by Professor McCormick. The FCC opposes adoption of Professor McCormick’s amendment because it weakens support for the honors college and the baccalaureate writing initiative and because it prematurely allocates membership on a task force to specific interests. The Senate should therefore consider Amendment #2 as submitted.

Amendment #3 was submitted by David Nelson, a student senator from the Morris campus. The FCC opposes adoption of Mr. Nelson’s amendment because it deletes support for the honors college and the baccalaureate writing initiative. The Senate should therefore consider Amendment #3 as submitted.

Amendment #4 was submitted by Laurie Stone, a student senator from the Twin Cities campus. The FCC believes that Ms. Stone’s amendment usefully strengthens the FCC’s motion with respect to student participation on the task forces and accepts the amendment as friendly. Ms. Stone’s amendment is thus incorporated into the text of the motion.

Amendment #5 was submitted and subsequently modified by Nathan Wanderman, a student senator from the Twin Cities campus and Chair of the Student Senate Consultative Committee. The FCC believes that Mr. Wanderman’s amendment, as modified, usefully incorporates issues concerning extracurricular student life into the planning process and accepts Mr. Wanderman’s amendment as friendly. Mr. Wanderman’s amendment is thus incorporated into the text of the motion.

Professor Mary Jo Kane spoke next as vice-chair of FCC and as a faculty member in the College of Education and Human Development. She stood in favor of this resolution for three reasons:

One, because of the process of consultation that occurred to produce this document. Two, because of the depth and breadth of the content of this resolution, particularly around issues that are vital to the success of strategic planning, such as faculty involvement and an unwavering commitment to access and diversity. And three, because, in her view, it is critically important that the University stands together as a community, even in disagreement. Approving this resolution would go a long way toward achieving that goal.

In terms of process, as was noted by Professor Marshak, the FCC hosted a number of forums in response to the Academic Task Force report as a way to gather input from the faculty. In addition, the FCC gathered responses from faculty on a Senate website. And finally, since last July, FCC has met with the President and Provost on a regular basis to exchange views about strategic planning. She assured senators that the concerns and critiques that were expressed throughout this consultation process are at the heart of our resolution.

In terms of content, she personally supports the view that the University needs to systematically review and reassess its goals and structures. The very first sentence of the resolution strongly endorses this proposition.

In addition, throughout the entire resolution, FCC calls on the President to continue to meet and consult with, as well as respond to, various stakeholder groups inside and outside the University community.

FCC would also argue that faculty involvement be at the center of the process as the University moves forward. This is particularly true with respect to setting up the various task forces that will implement the President’s recommendations.

Finally, in terms of content, this resolution strongly supports the University’s commitment to access and diversity, and urges the President and Regents to be especially mindful of this commitment, whatever recommendations eventually become adopted.

In terms of standing together as a community, Professor Kane came here in 1989 and has witnessed a number of attempts at reshaping the University. Many of those attempts, especially those that were initiated by central administration, have crashed and burned. From her perspective, this has done great damage to us as a community.

It is therefore vital that we are successful in this venture. A resolution of support from the Senate, especially one that calls on the President and Regents to take seriously the valuable suggestions put forth by members of the University community, would send an important message that the University shares a common goal of working together to reshape and re-imagine the institution.

Finally, the success of this initiative depends a great deal on leadership. In this area, she has some personal knowledge and experience. For 15 years she has been a faculty member in the College of Education and Human Development, and for the last few years, a member of FCC. In those capacities, she has worked closely with President Bruininks and has seen first-hand how he puts into practice many of the goals and desires that have been written into this resolution.

Though it may seem counter-intuitive from the perspective of a faculty member, the President can become one of the strongest advocates for advancing our concerns. Supporting this resolution not only strengthens his hand, but will greatly influence his deliberations about the Senate’s recommendations before he makes his own to the Regents. She therefore urged senators to support this resolution.

Professor McCormick was then given the floor to present his amendment. While he agrees with the majority of the resolution, he has an issue with point six. Improving honors and writing education are important goals for the University, as is recruiting top students. While a central honors college and writing program might be good ways of achieving these goals, he cautioned against committing to these particular solutions at this stage of the process.

First, the University needs to look carefully at what already exists at this campus and peer institutions. The University should pursue a strategy that enhances what is already in place instead of undermining or duplicating these efforts. For details, he referred senators to the light brown handout, which he presented to the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP).

On the subject of honors, there has been honors housing for 10 years and the University already recruits students with test scores and high school ranks specified in the recommendation. The programs currently enrolls more than 300 students, so the options are to acceptfewer high-ability students or create a more elite honors programs for less than half and relegate the rest to college honors programs, which would appear to be second class.

Is creating an elite college on top of what already exists the correct strategy? Or should the University aspire to bring in more high-ability students and to make honors-style courses available to a larger portion of the undergraduate population? Furthermore, how good of a recruitment tool would an honors college be? Students are more interested in scholarship dollars, and the University ranks at the bottom of the Big Ten for this figure.

A senator then spoke in favor of the resolution as a whole and the proposed amendment, after consultation with faculty in his department. The amendment captures the spirit of the rest of the document by calling for faculty participation in making these initiatives a reality. There is no honors college, so the amendment cannot weaken a current structure. In closing, he appreciated the committee minutes on these subjects which have shown that faculty are asking tough questions of the administration.

Another senator then spoke against the amendment, noting that FCC was not in support largely because the amendment constrained the task force membership and privileged particular groups. Tension always exists between people with expertise and providing a fresh look. While the amendment is a good starting point, the administration should be flexible in writing task force charges and taking advantage of personnel expertise. There is evidence that this could become a powerful recruiting tool.

Another senator then spoke in favor of the resolution with particular reference to the writing initiative. A University-wide conversation is needed and she believes that experts in the field should be consulted. She objected to the original language as it was anchored to a particular outcome. She then referred senators to a letter from a University-wide writing group that has been in place for two years.

A senator then spoke against the amendment. An honors college across the University is a wonderful opportunity to expose top students to all the University has to offer. Currently, the University requires students to choose a major when they apply. The honors college would allow top students to be exposed to numerous areas before deciding. The writing initiative offers an opportunity to improve undergraduate education and better prepare them for their careers. He opposed earmarking positions on the task force prior to their assemblage.

Another senator noted that while the Liberal Arts honors program is broad and exposes students to different subjects, the Technology program has a narrow focus.

Professor McCormick asked if the motion would be considered friendly if the language relating to task force composition was stripped. The revised item six would read, ‘The University Senate supports initiatives to improve and enhance honors education and writing education at the University of Minnesota, and the Senate supports the creation of task forces to consider and evaluate a range of recommendations on how best to achieve these goals, including the proposals to create an honors college and a baccalaureate writing initiative. The Senate emphasizes that in the implementation of those proposals, there must be consultation with those currently involved with honors programs and writing programs across the University, and the implementation must ensure the examination and sharing of existing best practices in University programs and in similar programs at peer universities. The Senate expects that additional resources will be necessary to achieve these goals.’

Professor Marshak said that FCC would accept the revised amendment as friendly.

Amendment #3 was withdrawn from consideration. Professor Martin then opened the discussion to the overall motion as amended.

A senator then spoke about the reconfiguration of General College (GC). He questioned whether it was honorable to make decisions that greatly impact the student body, but with minimal student involvement. Is it honorable to deny under-privileged students the right to an education in order to generate more revenue? The University would not exist without students and education is the key to a bright future. The elite should have no advantage in this opportunity and the University should recruit all who are willing to better themselves.

In a land that says that all men and women are created equally, the University needs to take a close look at those in the dark corners of society which the University would rather forget. The University must collaborate in order to reach an acceptable solution. Student input should be accepted and encouraged, and it is not too late to incorporate these views. The decisions made today directly affect the lives people lead tomorrow.

Another senator then said that the Senate is here today to advise the President on the next stage of the strategic positioning. The University needs to respond to the world of tomorrow, not yesterday. The state demographics and the needs for science will change radically in the next two decades. To survive, any organization must position itself for change.

The actions being taken today are not on the recommendations, but to give advice to the bodies making decisions. The resolution emphasizes the concerns expressed at the fora, the need for diversity in a new structure, the need for faculty and student involvement, and a system-wide focus on all parts of the University. He urged approval of the resolution.

A senator then spoke in favor of the resolution because it calls for a systematic review with all parts of the University community with a focus on broad issues, not unit-based, including resources. Values from the original units are still to be present in the final product. She urged the President to take seriously the views that have been expressed in this resolution.

Another senator expressed concern in regards to items 5 and 9 as they relate to equal opportunity. Item 5 refers to access to the University as a whole and item 9 discusses standards of admission. Both items list specific items, but the list of items in each does not match. There are also other elements that should be listed, such as religion and creed, veteran status, marital status, public assistance status, and political persuasion. If these cannot be all be listed, then all specifics should be removed and the items should refer to the University’s Equal Opportunity statement instead.

A motion was made and seconded to suspend the rules to allow for amendments to be made on the floor. A vote was taken and the motion failed.

A senator said that faculty in the Academic Health Center fully support the resolution and will demonstrate their commitment by fully participating on the task forces that will be created.

Another senator said that this type of process has been tried before, and always had problems because it was perceived as a top-down process. He urged senators not to miss an opportunity to have faculty, staff, and students participate in the process of change. He asked that there be congruence between the outcomes of the administrative and academic task forces. Interdisciplinary teaching and research should be watched since it has both a financial and academic implication. The University wants to be considered a top-three institution, but more rankings are being done globally. The task forces need to consider the experiential component of the student, faculty, and staff.

A senator said that while they support the resolution, they are saddened that it had to be made since it appears to have come from a feeling that the faculty were being marginalized in the process. The administration needs to fully embrace the faculty view and set the tone that everyone is in this together.

Another senator said that she has never been prouder to be a faculty member and a part of the University. This resolution is a culmination of many different points of view and is very respectful. Spirit, pride, and professionalism is a large part of this resolution.

A senator urged support for the resolution as amended. The resolution states a series of important points. It supports the strategic plan and the need for change with flexibility in implementation and consideration. It stresses the importance of faculty involvement and student input in the future processes. It emphasizes the importance of diversity and access, including support for a task force to monitor these areas. The resolution also identifies system-wide concerns that need attention as the University moves forward. It suggests attention to research, teaching, learning infrastructures, and student life outside the class.

Another senator noted that item 8 is bothersome because it contains five negative statements and wondered why it was stated in this manner. If the University must knock another institution from a top three spot, he would like to know which institution will be chosen and how. Lastly, the University’s international role in education is not what it should be.

A senator then suggested that access and diversity be better defined in the resolution.

Another senator said that staff should be referred to throughout the document in a consistent manner.

With no further discussion, a vote was taken and the motion was approved with 120 in favor, 3 opposed, and 6 abstentions.

It was noted that the University Senate meeting will continue with its remaining business on May 5 at 2:30 p.m. in this room.

4. TRIBUTE TO DECEASED MEMBERS OF THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY

FACULTY/ACADEMIC PROFESSIONALS/STAFF

Huai Chang Chiang
Professor
Entomology
1915 – 2005

Charles J. Glotzbach
Professor
Educational Psychology
1920 – 2005

Cyril M. Milbrath
Professor
Education – Duluth
1918 – 2005

Roger A. Potish
Professor
Therapeutic Radiology
1947 – 2005


5. CLERK OF THE SENATE/ASSEMBLY REPORT
Assembly Steering/Senate Consultative Committee Election Results
Information for the Faculty Senate

FOR INFORMATION:

In the recent election to fill vacancies on the Assembly Steering/Senate Consultative Committee, Professors Gary Balas, Megan Gunnar, and Jennifer Windsor were elected to three-year terms (July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2008). The members of the Faculty Consultative Committee for 2005-06 will be:

Gary Balas, Institute of Technology
Jean Bauer, College of Human Ecology
Carol Chomsky, Law School
Dan Feeney, College of Veterinary Medicine
Megan Gunnar, College of Education and Human Development
Scott Lanyon, College of Biological Sciences
John L. Sullivan, College of Liberal Arts
Jennifer Windsor, College of Liberal Arts

FOR INFORMATION:

In the recent election to fill vacancies on the Nominating Committee, Professors Catherine French and Leslie Schiff were elected to three-year terms (July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2008).

Concerning: A Regents Policy on Student Involvement in Decision Making

Whereas, Students are invaluable stakeholders in the University community; and

Whereas Student involvement in policy discussions protects students’ interests while increasing the quality of the finished policy; and

Whereas Students have made valuable contributions when invited to participate in policy discussions, as has been the case on the Morris Campus; and

Whereas Students have been left out of several key policy discussions, including the strategic planning work groups; and

Whereas Despite the best interests of the University of Minnesota administration, students will continue to be omitted from policy discussions unless action is taken by the University of Minnesota Board of Regents; and

Whereas The University of Wisconsin has been required to involve students in pertinent policy discussions by Wisconsin Statute 36.09(5), which states: “The students...shall be active participants in the immediate governance of and policy development for [the University of Wisconsin]. As such students shall have primary responsibility for the formulation and review of policies concerning students life, services and interests.”; and

Whereas Both students and administrators at the University of Wisconsin support the provisions of Wisconsin Statute 36.09(5) on the grounds that it leads to better policy; and

Whereas The University of Minnesota would stand to benefit from a similar requirement; therefore be it

Resolved That the Student Senate recommends to the President of the University of Minnesota and the University of Minnesota Board of Regents that the University of Minnesota Board of Regents adopts a Regents Policy codifying the spirit of Wisconsin Statute 36.09(5).

Approved by the Student Senate, April 7, 2005.

On February 18, 1999, in adopting a policy on "Collection and Reporting of Grade Data and Syllabus Requirements," the Senate Committee on Educational Policy was required to provide to the Senate "data on the mean grade point average by designator and course level, on the percentage of As awarded by course level, and overall collegiate grade point averages . . . for grades awarded each Fall Semester." The policy also provides that "data should be reported for all undergraduate students."

COMMENT:

These data will be distributed at the meeting.

MOTION:

To approve the University Senate, Faculty Senate, and Twin Cities Campus Assembly minutes, which are available on the Web at the following URL. A simple majority is required for approval.

http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/usen/050407sen.html

DISCUSSION:

With no discussion, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

COMMENT:

As an amendment to the University Senate Bylaws, a motion requires either a majority of all voting members of the University Senate (123) at one regular or special meeting, or a majority of all members of the University Senate present and voting at each of two meetings.

MOTION:

To amend the University Senate Bylaws, Article II, Section 5 as follows (language to be added is underlined; language to be deleted is struck out):

A packet with the proposed committee charges will be available at the meeting on the web prior to the meeting at: http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/usen/usencharges.html

DISCUSSION:

Q: Why will the committees not function if this motion is not approved?

A: As of July 1, the University Senate will be operating under a new constitution, bylaws, and rules. There are no approved committee charges in the new bylaws, so the committees cannot function without approved charges.

Q: Why is the Committee on Committees’ membership struck in this document?

A: The designated membership was deleted from the Senate Committee on Committees charge and added into the charge for the Faculty Committee on Committees and the Student Committees on Committees, so that each body can amend their representative numbers as needed.

Q: There is language struck in the charge of the Disabilities Issues committee. Why was this done?

A: All committees were asked to review their committee charges and propose any changes. The deleted language was proposed by the committee itself.

With no further discussion, a vote was taken and the motion was approved with 127 in favor, none opposed, and 1 abstention.

COMMENT:

As an amendment to the Faculty Senate Bylaws, a motion requires either a majority of all voting members of the Faculty Senate (99) at one regular or special meeting, or a majority of all members of the Faculty Senate present and voting at each of two meetings.

MOTION:

To amend the Faculty Senate Bylaws, Article IV, Section 5 as follows (language to be added is underlined; language to be deleted is struck out):

A packet with the proposed committee charges will be available at the meeting on the web prior to the meeting at: http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/usen/facsencharges.html

DISCUSSION:

With no discussion, a vote was taken and the motion was approved with 120 in favor and none opposed.

MOTION:

To approve the following resolution.

The Senate Library Committee has reviewed the data on the status of the University Libraries. The Committee has grave concerns about the continuing erosion of the Libraries’ resources. Funding decreases have led to a significant drop in the University Libraries’ North American ranking from its previously stable position of 14^th to 19^th in the last five years alone, and to only sixth among Big Ten Universities* We endorse the following urgent resolutions:

The University’s strategic goals cannot be realized without increased funding for Library collections, technology and human capital. The University’s excellence is linked to the Libraries.

*According to comparative 2003 data compiled by the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) examining numbers of journals and books, staff and overall expenditures.

Approved by the Library Committee, April 13, 2005

DISCUSSION:

Professor Gatewood, Chair of the Library Committee, said that the Committee has worked with the University Librarian this year to examine library expenses, functions, and changes in relation to the digital future and the yearly compact process. Because of cuts in the library budget and a decrease in the University’s ranking for libraries, the Library Committee has approved this resolution.

A senator proposed that this resolution be attached to the Resolution on Strategic Planning that will be debated later. This was accepted as a friendly amendment.

With no further discussion, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

MOTION:

To approve the following resolution.

The Social Concerns Committee is extremely concerned about recent well-publicized events concerning academic freedom that threaten faculty, including academic administration, with loss of position or tenure for making unpopular comments about sensitive issues of national importance. The role of the University is to provide a venue for the exchange and transmission of ideas. That the communication of these ideas engages, provokes, or angers a segment or even a majority of the population emphasizes its importance. As educators and members of a free and democratic society, we have a responsibility to provide a safe atmosphere for debate and discussion. A diversity of views and interpretations enhances an understanding and deeper knowledge of the world, making us all better citizens. Recent events, such as public opinion makers calling for legislation to limit academic freedom, or the dismissal of faculty or academic administrators for making unpopular observations or defending those who make such observations, may illustrate a weakening of the trust between faculty and institutions of higher learning. This seems to be particularly true in the politically delicate national atmosphere of post-9/11 or in addressing the cause of the under-representation of certain groups such as women in the sciences. The academic community must not engage in the overt or covert silencing of divergent or unpopular voices in response to public pressure and must uphold its responsibility to the greater good in the long term, despite immediate pressures and unpopularity.

The Social Concerns Committee supports the institutional defense of the free and open exchange of ideas and knowledge, and of expressions of diverse views in a civil manner by faculty, students, and staff both within and outside of the academy.

The Social Concerns Committee therefore urges the University Senate and the President on behalf of the Regents to formally reaffirm the support of academic freedom and to condemn the silencing of diverse opinions and views on nationally sensitive issues.

COMMENT:

Although the University of Minnesota is on record as supporting academic freedom, such fundamental principles must be strongly reaffirmed periodically. This is especially true when the national climate seems to be shifting to be less tolerant of unpopular opinions or even research that challenges deeply held ideas. For this reason, the Social Concerns Committee urges the Senate to reaffirm its support for Academic Freedom and to request a strong reaffirmation from the Regents.

This statement has been spurred by events such as the furor over comments made by Larry Summers, President of Harvard, in which he speculated that a reason for the under-representation of women in the mathematics and “hard” science fields might be inherent biological differences, as well as Ward Churchill’s statements concerning the culpability of the U.S. in the 9/11 attacks. Churchill has been removed from his position as chair of Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado and termination of his tenured position has been called for by Colorado politicians and some media personalities. Summers has been severely chastised and his repeated apologies may, in part, keep him from being dismissed. These are two examples that have captured the attention of the media and the public. For a number of reasons, they are perhaps not the easiest examples to submit in defense of academic freedom, yet the strength of our commitment is measured by our defense of those making controversial statements with which we do not agree. More chilling examples include faculty being suspected of links to terrorism or of being activists for the “wrong” political cause, as illustrated by the University of South Florida’s dismissal of tenured professor Sami al-Arian for statements made on the O’Reilly show in early 2002 and the State Department’s recent decision to deny Dora Maria Tellez admission to the U.S. to take an appointment at Harvard as a result of her involvement in the Nicaraguan Sandinista movement.

We are also greatly concerned about attempts to coerce the academic community into conformity with current norms. Granting agencies such as the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation have added new anti-terrorism language which top research universities believe will stifle research and impinge on academic freedom. They argue that the language of the grant requirements is overly broad and may mean that any statement made on their campuses could be interpreted as pro-terrorist. Several states, including Minnesota, are considering legislation to limit free speech in college classrooms and on college campuses. This will have a chilling effect on the educational process that takes place through the civil expression of diverse stances, interpretations and viewpoints.

Approved by the Social Concerns Committee April 4, 2005

DISCUSSION:

With no discussion, a vote was taken and the motion was approved.

MOTION:

To amend the student release questions for use on forms for the student evaluations of teaching as follows (language to be added is underlined; language to be deleted is struck out):

Current Questions

1.The instructor provided (mark one)
o A minimally structured learning environment
o A moderately structured learning environment
o A highly structured learning environment

2. The instructor emphasized (mark one)
o Covering fewer course topics in depth
o Balancing breadth and depth in course topics covered
o Covering many course topics rather than a few

3. The Course Guide and course syllabus accurately described the learning activities that occurred during the term. Yes/No

4. Instructor stimulated me to think critically about the course material. Yes/No

5. Instructor set high expectations for student performance in the course. Yes/No

6. Instructor used a variety of teaching and learning strategies in the course. Yes/No

7. In-class learning activities contributed to my learning. Yes/No

8. Instructor provided me with timely and helpful feedback about my performance. Yes/No

9. I attended almost all of the class sessions during the term. Yes/No

10. I would take another course with this instructor. Yes/No

Proposed Questions

COMMENT:

These student release questions were initially drafted by the Student Senate Consultative Committee (SSCC) fall semester. Since then, a large number of groups have revised and approved them, including the student campus assemblies, the Student Affairs Committee, the Student Senate, and the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP). During the course of this revision, the questions have been fine-tuned to be as clear and helpful to students as possible.

Approved by the Student Senate, April 7, 2005.

DISCUSSION:

Nathan Wanderman, Student Senate Chair, said that revising the student evaluation questions has been a long process involving much consultation. The questions have been refined to best reflect what students have requested. He then thanked Professor Hoover, Chair of the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP) for her help in the process.

Professor Hoover then suggested several amendments, which she hoped would be considered friendly. The first amendment is to question #1. The proposed wording change is to ‘In my experience, this course was.’ The second amendment was to question #4, to change ‘preparation’ in ‘a’ and ‘b’ to ‘for me.’ The third amendment is to question #5, to change the question to ‘The syllabus for this course.’

These three amendments were accepted as friendly.

Q: The proposed questions are an improvement, but why was the current question #4, about thinking critically, removed since faculty like this question?

A: The questions were drafted by students to reflect what students want. It might be better to move that question to the faculty part of the evaluation so faculty can see the results. What was developed was a concise, student-friendly list.

Q: Can ‘labs’ be added as an option in question #2?

A: It will be another option included in the fourth response.

Q: Can the option ‘think critically’ be added as option ‘H’ to questions #8?

A: This was accepted as a friendly amendment.

Q: Can a new question #8 be added to ask, ‘In this course’ and use the options, ‘learned more than anticipated’, ‘learned about the same as anticipated’, and ‘less than anticipated?’

A: This was accepted as a friendly amendment.

A senator suggested that question #9 be reworded to include ‘if I were able to’ to account for students who are graduating and will not be taken additional classes.

Another senator commented that question #5a is too confusing since it has too many items.

A senator then suggested that these questions should be piloted to collect data which would help any further revisions.

Another senator then suggested that question #9 be removed or changed since the question is vague and gives a mixed message.

A senator said that many responses require written feedback, which might be more valuable for students. It was suggested that the motion be postponed until next fall.

Another senator discouraged senators from postponing the motion until next fall since most of the student senators will be new. The questions are not perfect, but they are better than those presently used. These changes were proposed by students to help students. He urged senators to vote on this issue today.

With no further discussion, a motion was made and seconded to table the questions until professional advice has been sought and reformatting can be done. A vote was taken and the motion was not approved.

A motion was then made and seconded to have SCEP approve the final version of the questions. A vote was taken and the motion was approved.

MOTION:

That the Twin Cities Campus Faculty Assembly approve the following slate of nominees to fill three 2005-08 Twin Cities faculty vacancies on the Committee on Committees. A simple majority is required for approval. Once the slate is approved, a ballot will be distributed for voting.

FIRST PAIR (INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY):
WILLIAM DURFEE: Professor of Mechanical Engineering, Institute of Technology. University Senate member: None. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): Disabilities Issues, 1998-2003 (Chair, 2001-03); Tenure, 2003-06.

PERRY LEO: Professor of Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics, Institute of Technology. University Senate member: 1995-98, 2003-06. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): Advisory Committee on Athletics, 2003-05; Faculty Academic Oversight Committee on Athletics, 2001-07 (Chair, 2003-05).

SECOND PAIR (COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL, FOOD, AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES):

KENT OLSON: Professor of Applied Economics, College of Agricultural, Food, and Environmental Sciences. University Senate member: 2002-05. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): None.

CARL ROSEN: Professor of Soil, Water, and Climate, College of Agricultural, Food, and Environmental Sciences. University Senate member: 1997-2000. Senate/Assembly Committee participation (past and present): None.

INFORMATION:

The Twin Cities Campus Assembly Bylaws specify that the Assembly shall elect by written ballot at its spring semester meeting faculty and academic professional members to fill vacancies on the Assembly Committee on Committees from a slate of candidates provided by the Nominating Committee. Other candidates may be nominated by petition of 12 members of the Assembly. Petitions to nominate candidates not on the slate must be in the hands of the Clerk of the Assembly on the day before the meeting at which the election is to be conducted. The elected Twin Cities faculty/academic professional members of the committee whose term continue at least through 2005-06 are:

Carl Adams, Carlson School of Management
Subir Banerjee, Institute of Technology
David Born, School of Dentistry
Anna Clark, College of Liberal Arts
Randy Croce, Carlson School of Management
Megan Gunnar, College of Education and Human Development
Kathryn Hanna, College of Biological Sciences
Gordon Hirsch. College of Liberal Arts
Jeffrey Kahn, School of Public Health
Nan Kalke, College of Human Ecology
Mary Jo Kreitzer, School of Nursing
Lynne Schuman, HHH Institute of Public Affairs
Kyla Wahlstrom, College of Education and Human Development
Cheryl Zimmerman, College of Pharmacy

DISCUSSION:

With no discussion a vote was taken and the motion was approved. Ballots were then distributed and Professors Perry Leo and Carl Rosen were elected to the Committee on Committees.

Professor Marshak had no report.

Professor Sampson, Faculty Legislative Liaison, said that figures from the different groups are starting to become clearer. The House has proposed $87 million, the Governor $102 million, and the Senate $121 million. A conference committee will met to determine the final figure. Senators are urged to contact their representatives, especially if they serve on the conference committee.

The Governor also sent a letter to the Speaker, noting that the $15 million genomics project should be moved to another committee and out of higher education funding. The University was not in support of this project being a part of its base budget allocation.

President Bruininks thanked the senators for the debate that took place today regarding the strategic planning resolution. He is meeting with many groups and gathering their response to the report. He will present his recommendations to the Regents next week, there will be a hearing on May 16^th, and the final vote will take place in June.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:36 p.m.

APPENDIX A
MEMORIAL STATEMENTS


Adolph Beich

Adolph Beich, 75, of Crookston, MN died in his home early Sunday morning, January 9, 2005. In 1966 Adolph became a charter faculty member of the new University of Minnesota Technical College, Crookston, in the Business Division.  Adolph organized the Secretarial Program and was the chairperson and instructor in that department for 28 years. He retired from UMC in 1994.

Huai C. Chiang

Family, friends, and colleagues worldwide mourn the passing of Huai C. Chiang, Professor Emeritus, Department of Entomology, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, on March 30, 2005, in Ithaca, NY. Huai is survived by Zoe, his wife of 59 years, and their children: Jeannie, Oakland, CA; Katherine, Ithaca, NY; and Robert, Ithaca, NY.

Huai was born February 15, 1915 in Sunjiang County, Jiansu Province, China. He graduated from the Huei-wen Middle School in Peking (Beijing) and entered Tsinghua University in that city in 1934. The following year he was hired as a summer helper by Dr. C.L. Liu, head of the University’s Division of Entomology. That exposure to the “world of insects” launched Huai on his lifelong vocation.

But, incredible hurdles lay ahead. The Marco Polo Bridge incident (July 7, 1937) marked the beginning of the Sino-Japanese War (1937-1945). Avoiding the occupying forces, Huai made his way to the Temporary University in Changsha, Hunan, leaving his father, sister and a city he would not see again for 30 years. Huai completed the first semester of his senior year in Changsha, but with the Japanese army moving ever closer, the government relocated the University to Kunming, Yunnan, renaming it Southwest Associated University. Huai and 250 of his classmates made an incredible 68-day over-land trek (including a one day, 53 km hike), and arrived in Kunming in late April, 1938.

In 1938, the Agricultural Research Institute of Tsinghua University moved from Peking to Kunming and Huai, having graduated in June of that year, was invited by former mentor C.L. Liu to join the Institute. Huai also joined a choral group, and there he met a young woman chemist, Zoe-ing Shen, who was to become his life partner.

During World War II, Kunming was the terminus of the Allied air supply route from India and an American army anti-malaria unit headed by Lieutenant Sam Billings was based there. Huai’s interactions with the Americans enhanced his English language skills and also tweaked his interest in possible graduate study in the U.S. When Huai became eligible for sabbatical leave from the Institute, Dr. Liu encouraged him to contact the eminent insect ecologist Royal N. Chapman, then a faculty member at the University of Minnesota. When U.S. Army Captain Al Buzicky, a recent Minnesota entomology M.S. graduate, visited the Kunming base he also offered his support. With strong recommendations from these respected individuals Huai was accepted at Minnesota. At the same time, Zoe was accepted at Smith College in Northampton, MA. Zoe would later join Huai in Minnesota; they married in 1946.

Huai’s journey to Minnesota, via Bombay and Sydney (mostly courtesy of U.S. military transport) took two months. When he arrived in St. Paul, on January 6, 1945, Huai learned that Dr. Chapman had died and that he would be working with Dr. A.C. Hodson. Huai’s master’s thesis was on the biology of fall cankerworm. However, populations collapsed after 1946, making the continuation of the study impractical. So, Dr. Hodson set Huai working on aspects of the population dynamics of the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, using controlled environment chambers.

With the dedication and proficiency that were to be the hallmarks of his professional career, Huai completed his graduate training in just under 3 ¹/₂ years. In 1948, Dr. Hodson was assigned to lead a project on the European corn borer, a potentially devastating new pest. With the political situation in China highly unstable and the European corn borer project presenting a fascinating opportunity for additional research experience, Drs. Hodson and C.E. Mickel, then Department Head, were able to convince Huai to accept what was then intended to be a temporary position in the department. The day following his Ph.D. defense, Hodson drove Huai to the southern Minnesota community of Waseca, where he was to spend 12 of his next 13 summers.

An unanticipated resignation in the Department of Biology at the University of Minnesota, Duluth in the spring of 1953, led to Huai being offered a quarter-time appointment to teach general entomology. Huai had no previous experience teaching, but his efforts were so well received that the following spring he was offered a tenure track position at UMD. Huai remained at UMD until 1961. In 1960, he was promoted to Professor and in 1961 he received a much treasured Teacher of the Year Award from the UMD Student Council. Each summer, except for a 1956-57 sabbatical in the laboratory of the famed aphidologist J.S. Kennedy at Cambridge University, Huai and his family returned to Waseca where he continued his European corn borer research. In 1960, Dr. Hodson became head of the Department of Entomology at the University of Minnesota, and offered Huai the insect ecology position he was to hold until his retirement January 1, 1984.

Huai was a pioneer and internationally recognized leader in what we now call Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Crop Loss Assessment. He served as major advisor to 37 Ph.D. and M.S. students, many of whom have gone on to distinguished careers in industry, academia, and government service. In addition, he served as reader or examiner on committees for another 125 students. He served his university and various professional societies in many capacities, including as President in 1975-76 of the North Central Branch of the Entomological Society of America. He organized at least 10 programs for national and international scientific meetings. Huai’s research focused on four major subject areas, European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilias (1948-1983), corn rootworms, Diabrotica spp. (1964-1981), biological control (1938-1983), and swarming behavior of the midge Anarete prichardi (1958-1982). He authored approximately 250 scientific publications in peer reviewed journals, books, and conference proceedings. Included in that list of publications were two Annual Review of Entomology articles. After retirement, Huai wrote over 40 articles in Chinese for the Taiwan Entomological Society Newsletter.

Huai made extensive and major contributions to the development of numerous U.S. and international scientific, technical assistance, and policy programs. From 1976 to 1983, he served as an advisor to the USDA Cooperative State Research Service (now CSREES) on biological control. In 1969, Huai organized the International Working Group on Ostrinia (IWGO), one of the oldest Working Groups within what is now the Global-IOBC Working Group of the Organization on Biological Control. Huai served as President of IWGO until 1982. In 1969, he was invited to serve on the United Nations, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Committee on Crop Loss Assessment and in that capacity led development of a practical manual for use in developing countries. Later he served on the FAO Panel of Experts on IPM (1973-1981). From 1969 to 1988, Huai made many trips abroad, visiting more than two dozen countries on various assignments for FAO. Especially noteworthy was his service as Project Advisor on IPM in Thailand (1985-88), for which he was presented a Distinguished Service Award by the Royal Thai Government and his work in Liberia (1972) where he organized an entomology curriculum at the College of Agriculture, Morovia. Among his other awards for service were: the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS) Distinguished Scientist Award (1979); Honorary Doctor of Science Degree from Bowling Green State University (1979); Honorary Memberships from AIBS (1979), the Entomological Society of America (1982), and the Hungarian Entomological Society (1994); Phi Kappa Phi National Scholar Award (1983) and the Hodson Alumni Award, Department of Entomology, University of Minnesota (1999).

In 1975, Huai received an invitation from the Committee for Scholarly Communication with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) of the U.S. National Academy of Science (NAS) to join a delegation of distinguished American entomologists on a visit to China. This visit occurred during the final days of the Cultural Revolution, but before the death in 1976 of Chairman Mao Zedong and purge of the “Notorious Gang of Four.” Huai was invited to China to lecture in 1978 and on that occasion Zoe and their three children were able to accompany him. For the children, this was their first visit in China. Huai was to return many times. In 1979, Huai and the Department of Entomology were hosts to the first visiting Chinese scholar from mainland China to Minnesota since 1949. From 1980 until his retirement, Huai coordinated China Program activities for the University of Minnesota, College of Agriculture. He continued to be active in China programs on and off campus through the mid-1990s.

In June 2001, Huai and Zoe moved to Ithaca, NY, to be closer to two of their children. We have missed them greatly. We thank Zoe, for her support of Huai throughout his brilliant career and for sharing him with us. He and you have made the world a better place.

For details of Dr. Chiang’s life and accomplishments the author, Dr. Ted Radcliffe relied heavily on an article written by Dr. Chiang; "I am happy to be an entomologist," Chinese Journal of Entomology 13:275-292 (1993).

Ernst Eckert

Ernst Eckert, Regents’ Professor Emeritus of Mechanical Engineering, one of the giants of twentieth century engineering science, passed away on 8 July 2004, just two months before the planned celebration of his hundredth birthday on 13 September.

Eckert, in his career, which spanned over seventy-five years, was truly a great innovator and leader. Called the father of scientific heat transfer, his works including monographs, textbooks and over five hundred and fifty publications are widely used to this day.

Born in Prague, he received his degrees, through the doctorate, from the German Institute of Technology there, moving on then to study in Danzig and Braunschweig. During World War II he was a section chief in the Aeronautical Research Institute in Braunschweig Germany.

Coming to the U.S. in 1945 he started at Wright Patterson Air Force Base then went to what is now the NASA Glenn Laboratory in Cleveland, coming to Minnesota as a Professor in 1951. Here he was selected in the first cohort of five Regents’ Professors in 1966. He served in this position until his retirement in 1973.

Over his professional life, he transformed the field of heat transfer from an empirical subject to an engineering science. Beyond his technical writings he is known for his great influence through his teaching. His former students and students of students on to the fifth and sixth generation are among the major leaders in engineering education and research throughout the world.

He had a major impact around the globe, playing a leading role in the formation of the most renowned international journal and the two key international societies in his field. He had a direct impact on bringing together scholars on both sides of the Iron Curtain during the Cold War. Courteous, caring, and rarely if ever angered, he was a role model many tried to follow. His curiosity and drive, and his strong interest in students were clear.

Well into his nineties, he was eager to meet with graduate students who in turn were delighted with the real help and insight he provided as well as with his old world charm and kindness. Until perhaps a year before his death he still came into the University occasionally to meet with students.

Winner of many awards including Membership in the National Academy of Engineering, NSF Founders Award, Max Jakob Award, and a host of others; chairman of a number of editorial advisory boards, and member of several presidential commissions, he is sorely missed as a great colleague, mentor, and friend to the Mechanical Engineering Department and the University.

Paul J. Ellis

The School of Physics and Astronomy suffered a sudden and unexpected loss of a friend and colleague when Professor Paul J. Ellis died from a heart attack at home on Sunday, February 20, 2005.

Paul was born on May 25, 1941 in Northampton, England. He earned his Ph.D. in physics at the University of Manchester in 1966. After postdoctoral fellowships at the University of Michigan, Rutgers University, and Oxford University, he joined the faculty at the University of Minnesota in 1973. He was promoted to Associate Professor in 1977 and Professor in 1982.

Paul was much respected and beloved teacher. He was honored with the Outstanding Teacher Award in the Institute of Technology during 1980-81. He was once presented with a certificate by some students, which said that the three greatest British imports were The Beatles, Monty Python, and Paul Ellis. During his career Paul advised and mentored seven students to the completion of their Ph.D. and numerous others for the M.S. and senior honor theses.

Paul contributed significantly to our understanding of the microscopic structure of nuclei which form the core of atoms. He also deepened our knowledge of exploding stars and the remnants they leave behind called neutron stars. He published over 100 original research articles in refereed scientific journals. In 1998 he was elected a Fellow of the American Physical Society “for his diverse contributions to the study of light nuclei using nuclear shell model methods; and to the study of pion-nucleon scattering.”

Paul enjoyed many activities with his family, especially walking, boating, swimming, golfing, and traveling. He had a very strong belief in human rights and in freedom of democracy. He and his wife took great pride in participating in state and national political activities and campaigns. Paul was also a strong advocate for the safe and humane treatment of animals.

Paul is survived by his wife Alicja, son Aleksander Ellis who is an Assistant Professor of Management and Policy at the University of Arizona in Tucson, daughter-in-law Yaara, and grandson Kye.

Ellen T. Fahy

Ellen T. Fahy, EdD, RN, Dean of the School of Nursing from 1980 to 1990 died on Sunday, October 31, 2004 at the age of 79. She is survived by her husband, Paul Lett.

Dr. Fahy was born in Massachusetts, attended Peter Bent Brigham Hospital and received her BSN at Columbia University, and MA and EdD at Teachers College, Columbia University. She was a Fulbright Scholar at the University of Oslo, Norway, a cultural exchange student at the University of Moscow, and a World Health Organization Traveling Fellow.

She held academic appointments at Teachers College, Division of Nursing; Cornell University New York Hospital School of Nursing and was the Founding Dean and Professor, School of Nursing, at SUNY at Stony Brook.

During her tenure as Dean, she launched the PhD program in 1983, created the School's first endowed chair (the Cora Meidl Siehl Chair in Nursing Research) and led the School into its move from Powell Hall to Weaver-Densford Hall. She was a delightful, very authentic and creative nursing leader, widely known and highly respected, who will be sincerely missed.

Charles Glotzbach

Charles Glotzbach, professor emeritus of educational psychology, died April 2. He was 84. Glotzbach joined the college in 1952. In addition to being a counselor and faculty member, he was assistant director of the Student Personnel Office for more than a decade starting in 1957. Glotzbach became associate professor in 1960, professor in 1969, and retired in 1986. He received both a B.S. and M.S. from Kansas State College, Manhattan, where he was an instructor and counselor from 1947-52. He received a Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota in 1957. He was a U.S. Army captain from 1942-45, for which he received numerous citations and honors. Glotzbach is survived by his wife, Helen; his four children, Ken (Bitzy), Jean Maciasek (Jim), Paul, and Donna; seven grandchildren; and three great-grandchildren.

Hildegard Graber

Dr. Hildegard Kellner Graber MD died peacefully at home on February 15, 2005. She is survived by her children Fern DeRubeis, Renee Graber and John Graber, and grandchildren, Wesley, Alyssa, Emma, Janelle and Martin. A service was held at Unity Church Unitarian in St Paul on March 1, 2005.

Dr. Graber was born in Gotha, Germany on May 1, 1922. She received her primary and secondary education at the Staatliche Hoehere Schule Dresden, in Johannstadt, Germany and received her BA degree in Premedical Education in 1942 from the Julius Maximilian University at Wuerzburg, Germany. She received her Medical Education at the Wien University in Austria, the Ernst Moritz Arndt University in Grievswald, Germany and at the Martin Luther University in Halle-Wittenberg, Germany. She received her Medical Licensure on April 14, 1945 and her Medical Doctorate on April 17, 1947 after completing internships in East Germany. She completed a residency in Internal Medicine in 1948 in Dresden, East Germany, followed by a residency in Neuro-Psychiatry, Psychoanalytic Education, Hypnosis, and Training Analysis in 1951 in West Berlin, Germany.

Dr. Graber immigrated to St Paul, Minnesota in February 1952 and obtained her US Citizenship in 1957. She completed an internship at the Hastings State Hospital in 1954. She served first as a Physician and then as a Psychiatrist at the Hastings State Hospital following her internship and became the Acting Medical Director of the Children’s Unit and Psychiatric Supervisor of Adult Psychiatric Services in 1960. She served as Medical Director from 1968 to 1973.

She served as a Senior Staff Physician at the Veterans Administration Hospital in Minneapolis from 1973 to 1978. She was then hired as a Staff Psychiatrist on September 16, 1978 at Boynton Health Service, University of Minnesota, where she worked until she retired on June 15, 1987.

Dr. Graber was married to Walter A. Graber in July 1956. They had three children.

Dr. Graber will be remembered as a highly intelligent and skilled psychiatrist who was dedicated to the care of our student population.

Leverett P. Hoag

Leverett Paddock Hoag, 87, of E. St. Marie St., died Tuesday, Nov. 16, 2004 in St. Luke's Hospital. He was born Nov. 17, 1916 to Stephen and Ethel Hull Hoag at Moorhead, Minn. He was a graduate of Moorhead State Teachers College High School in 1933 where he was valedictorian of his class. He graduated from Moorhead State Teachers College in 1937 with a B. Ed degree. He married Helga 'Lauga' Guttormsson on June 12, 1940. He taught meteorology and navigation to flight school candidates and also served in the US Navy during World War II.

In 1958 he was awarded his PH.D. degree in geography from the University of Minnesota and then taught geography for more than 25 years at UMD, including eight years as Department Chair. While at UMD he served on numerous committees including the Scholastic Committee, Faculty Council, and the University Senate.

He is preceded in death by his parents; his dear wife Lauga; three brothers, Veeder, Richard and Donald; and two sisters, Frances and Elizabeth. Leverett is survived by one sister, Dorothy of Minneapolis; daughter, Elin (Dan) Cadmus of Minneapolis; three sons, Stephen (Jill) of Duluth, David (Julia) of Albuquerque, N.M., and Donald (JoAnn) of Saginaw; five grandsons, Arthur Hoag, Joel Hoag, Erik and Willie Hoag and David Cadmus; two granddaughters, Stephanie Cadmus and Lucy Hoag; two great-grandchildren, Stephen and Rivers Ann Hoag; several nieces and nephews.

Vance Jewson

Mr. Vance Jewson worked in the Office of Student Financial Aid at the University of Minnesota many years. He was the coordinator of the scholarship program and worked very closely with the Evan's Scholar Program. His contributions helped many, many students fulfill their educational goals at the University of Minnesota. He will be truly missed by his colleagues in the financial aid community.

Ancel Keys

With great sadness, the School of Public Health reports the death of Ancel Keys, professor emeritus. He died at the age of 100 on Nov. 20, 2004 in the home he shared with this wife, Margaret. The School mourns his passing yet celebrates his great achievements.

Born in Colorado Springs, Colo., and raised in Berkeley, Calif., Prof. Keys enrolled at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1922, but took time off to sail to China as a crewman aboard the liner President Wilson. He returned to college, earning a bachelor’s degree in economics and political science and a master’s degree in zoology. By 1930, he has a Ph.D. in oceanography and biology from the Scripps Institute of Oceanography in La Jolla, Calif.

His career took shape when he went to Copenhagen to work with Nobel Prize winner and physiologist August Krogh. Inspired, Keys went on to earn a second Ph.D. in physiology from Cambridge University and became an instructor at Harvard University.

But it was at the University of Minnesota where Keys conducted the pioneering research that would make him internationally renowned. He came to the University in 1937 and two years later founded the Laboratory of Physical Hygiene. In the lab, located beneath Gate 27 of University Stadium, he conducted meticulous studies that combined physiology, nutrition, epidemiology, and prevention.

The lab gained national attention when Keys was asked by the War Department to design a food ration to be used by soldiers. He created the K ration (K for Keys), the ready-to-eat meal carried by U.S. troops in World War II. At that time, Keys also served as a special assistant to the secretary of war, traveling frequently by overnight train to Washington, D.C.

His concern about possible starvation in occupied territories led him to study a group of 36 conscientious objectors and army volunteers, who lived on a “semistarvation” diet in Memorial Stadium for more than a year. After tracking the health of the group, Keys released a report that helped guide relief efforts in postwar Europe. To this day, the 1,385-page "Biology of Human Starvation" remains a landmark work on the subject.

But Keys is perhaps best known for his pioneering studies on coronary disease. In 1947, he launched a first-of-its-kind study of heart disease among 283 Twin Cities businessmen. It was followed by the ambitious Seven Countries study, begun in 1958 and lasting decades, it analyzed the eating habits and health of more than 12,000 men ages 40 to 59. With these two studies, Keys was able to link saturated fats to clogged arteries and heart attacks—and in the process demonstrate the preventability of the industrialized world’s most devastating epidemic. His work landed him on the cover of Time magazine in 1961 and earned him the nickname “Mr. Cholesterol.”

He began to advocate for and popularize the Mediterranean diet. He and his chemist wife, Margaret, devised recipes and menus for the bestselling cookbook “Eat Well and Stay Well.” They followed it with “The Benevolent Bean” in 1967 and “How to Eat Well and Stay Well the Mediterranean Way” in 1975. With the book royalties, the Keys built a second home in Naples, Italy.

Though he retired from the University in 1972, Keys remained active for decades, working long hours on research projects in his homes in Italy and Minneapolis. He was a voracious gardener who liked building walls, working with stone and cement, and teaching those skills to his children.

Today, Keys’ influence is still felt in the field of public health and beyond. His data is referenced in contemporary studies. An annual lecture at the meeting of the American Heart Association is named after him. And last year, in celebration of his 100 years, the University of Minnesota School of Public Health’s division of Epidemiology and Community Health launched the first international symposium on nutrition and health in his name. Researchers from throughout the world attended the conference, where Keys was presented with a medal for his lifetime of achievements.

Keys is survived by his wife, son Henry Keys, daughter Carrie D’Andrea, eight grandchildren, and six great-grandchildren. Another daughter, Martha McLain, was shot and killed by robbers while on vacation in Jamaica in 1991.

Warren Meyer

Warren Meyer, professor emeritus of distributive education at the college for 30 years, died Nov. 27, 2004, at age 94. He is survived by his daughter Karen, son Stephen, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren.

Meyer received an M.S. from New York University's School of Retailing in 1933 and a B.A. in economics from the University of Wisconsin in 1932. Prior to joining the college in 1946, Meyer was the Kansas state supervisor of distributive education for five years and taught vocational and distributive education classes for a number of years.

While at the college, Meyer received the Council for Distributive Teacher Education Award and the 21st John Robert Gregg Award in Business Education. He was instrumental in planning and developing the college's teacher education program in distributive education and contributed to its development until his retirement in 1976. He also was active in the organization of the college's Department of Vocational and Technical Education. Meyer's students knew him as "the father of modern distributive teacher education."

Cyril Milbrath

Dr. Cyril "Cy" Merton Milbrath, Ph.D., 86, emeritus faculty member from the Department of Education in the College of Education & Human Service Professions at the University of Minnesota Duluth died March 23, 2005. Cy was an Associate Professor of Education until his retirement in 1983. He was instrumental in the PHASE program, which trained secondary education teachers. He is survived by his wife and two sons. Memorials were directed to Grace Lutheran Church, the Alzheimer's Association, or the Lighthouse for the Blind.

Howard A. Morris

Howard A. Morris, emeritus professor in the Department of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Minnesota, died in St. Paul, Minnesota, on March 13, 2004 at the age of 85.

Howard received his Ph.D. in Dairy Products from the University of Minnesota in 1952 and immediately joined the University faculty as an assistant professor. He was promoted to associate professor in 1955, and to professor in 1960. Upon his retirement in 1989, he became emeritus professor and continued in that position until his death.

During his career he completed 20 masters students and 14 Ph.D. students, and advised almost 400 undergraduates. In recognition of his gift for teaching, he received numerous teaching honors, including the William V. Cruess award for excellence in teaching from the Institute of Food Technologists and the Morse Alumni Distinguished Teaching Professor award from the University of Minnesota.

Howard was internationally known for his research discoveries in cheese fermentation. He authored more than 200 scientific papers, and maintained an active research program well into his retirement.

Allen Nussbaum

Allen Nussbaum, professor emeritus of electrical and computer engineering, passed away January 5, 2005 at age 85.

Prof. Nussbaum earned a bachelor's degree in chemistry (1939) and a master's degree in physics (1940) from the University of Pennsylvania. From 1941 to 1950 served in the U.S. Air Force as a radar officer and then earned a Ph.D. in solid-state physics from the University of Pennsylvania in 1954. He was a research physicist and manager at Honeywell Research Center in Hopkins, Minnesota, from 1953 to 1961, and the Head of the Solid State Division of American Electronics Labs, 1961-1962.

In 1962 Prof. Nussbaum joined the faculty of the Electrical Engineering Department, where he specialized in the physics of heterojunctions and PN junctions, and advanced geometrical optics. His work in optics involved the behavior of lenses, mirrors, prisms, and their use in optical instruments such as microscopes, photographic lenses, bar code readers, and medical applications. He served the Department as the Director of Graduate Studies for over two decades until his retirement in 1988. Following retirement, Professor Nussbaum continued to teach a graduate course in geometrical optics, receiving student praise for his vast knowledge of, and excitement about the subject.

In addition to scientific and educational papers, Professor Nussbaum was the author of eight books, and served on the editorial boards of Solid State Electronics and IEEE Transactions on Education. He was a Life Fellow of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE), and was a Fulbright Visiting Professor at Hebrew University in Jerusalem (1971-72).

No memorial service has been scheduled for Prof. Nussbaum, however a memorial recital is being planned. Memorials are preferred to the Allen Nussbaum Scholarship Fund, University of Minnesota Foundation.

Bernard Reilly

Dr. Bernard E. Reilly, age 69, of Minneapolis, died February 14, 2005 at St. Francis Regional Medical Center in Shakopee, MN. Survived by his loving wife and best friend of 33 years, Kathleen; sister, Mariann Strain (Albert) Erie, PA and niece Kerri Matelske (David), Las Vegas, NV. He will be fondly remembered by his sister-in-law and brother-in-law, Phyllis and Neil Hill, Desert Hot Springs, CA, sister-in-law Marie Wingrove, Tustin, CA, nephew Bill Sear, niece Barbara Riley, and niece Susie Garcia, who traveled extensively with Bernie and Kathleen.

Bernie was born in Meadville, PA on June 9, 1935. Upon graduation from Brookville High School in Brookville, PA, he joined the Merchant Marines, which fostered a lifelong love of travel. He attended Westminster College, New Willington, PA, graduating with a BS degree, Magna Cum Laude. His graduate studies were at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, OH, where he received his Ph.D. in Microbiology and Genetics. He did post doctorate studies at Scripps Institute in La Jolla, CA. He joined the University of Minnesota faculty in 1969 and was a Professor of Microbiology in the School of Dentistry. He retired in 1997.

Bernie's passions were teaching and research. He was dedicated to the academic growth and well being of his students. He taught microbiology, immunology and genetics to dental students, an endeavor that earned six "Teacher of the Year" awards from his students. As a graduate student Bernie discovered a family of viruses that infect certain bacteria that live in the soil. One of these viruses became the focus of four decades of study. Bernie created numerous mutants of the virus, essentially describing every gene and its function. This genetic achievement by Bernie laid the foundation for collaborators at the U of M (Dr. Dwight Anderson and others) to determine the exact structure of all parts of the virus.

Bernie and Kathleen shared a passion for traveling the world. Bernie had a great fondness for animals and everywhere they traveled, there were always hours spent at the zoo. Bernie was a voracious reader, a stamp collector and a charming raconteur. To know him was to know a man with great wit to the very end of his life.

The family wishes to thank Dr. Paul Olson of the Allina Medical Clinic in Shakopee for his extraordinary care and attention, as well as the nursing staff at St. Francis Regional Medical Center for all that they did for Bernie during his last months of illness. In lieu of flowers, it is requested that donations are made in Bernie's memory to the St. Francis Foundation, 1459 St. Francis Ave., Shakopee, MN 55379. Private service. Cremation Society of MN . Published in the Star Tribune on 2/20/2005

Rudy Schauer

Professor Rudy Schauer was instrumental in shaping the programs of the UMD Art Department (now Art & Design) in its early days. He initiated the crafts area in the department, with its multiple courses in both jewelry and weaving. Watercolor painting was his strong personal artistic interest, and he taught and exhibited extensively in that medium.

During his tenure at UMD, he introduced design principles to many thousands of undergraduates, both art majors and those campus-wide through the art minor and liberal education courses. Professor Schauer’s students’ design notebook portfolios were legendary in their thoroughness, and his student’s held onto them for reference and inspiration well beyond their collegiate years.

Professor Schauer’s great strength was with in identifying and fostering each student’s individual creative process. He had a way of gently nurturing the most promising abilities in his students. While he allowed his advanced students considerable freedom in their work, he always emphasized to them the importance of choosing challenging courses.