The fifth meeting of the University Senate for 1998-99 was convened in 25 Law Building, Minneapolis campus, on Thursday, May 20, 1999, at 2:36 p.m. Coordinate campuses were linked by telephone. Checking or signing the roll as present were 105 voting faculty/academic professional members, 18 voting student members, 1 ex officio member, and 3 nonmembers. President Mark Yudof presided.

A. Amendment to the Uniform Grading and Transcript Policy
(http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/policies/gradingpolicy.html)

B. Nepotism and Consensual Relationships Policy
(http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/policies/consensualcp.html)

C. Sexual Harassment Policy
(http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/policies/sexualharassmentcp.html)

D. Amendment to the University Senate Constitution

E. Amendment to the Semester Conversion Standards
(http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/policies/semestercon.html)

F. Resolution Regarding Paratransit Services

G. Resolution Regarding Research Data

H. Animal Care and Usage Policy
(http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/policies/animalcarecp.html)

I. Amendments to the Protocol for Senate Committee Involvement in Central Administrator Searches
(http://www1.umn.edu/usenate/policies/adminsearchprotocol.html)

J. Policies on Syllabi and Collection of Grading Data

K. Education in the Responsible Conduct of Sponsored Research and Grants
Management Policy

L. Principal Investigator Eligibility on Sponsored Projects Policy

M. Amendment to the Semester Conversion Standards

N. Amendments to the University Senate Constitution

The Senate minutes are available on the Web at the following URL:

APPROVED

Roberta Humphreys was elected vice chair of the Senate.

MOTION:

To approve the following policy:

Preamble

Because the structure and organization of the University's academic units can have a profound effect on the financing and delivery of educational programs, the Senate adopts the following policy with respect to reorganization of academic units. In general, both the Senate and its committees should be involved in any organizational or structural decision affecting an academic unit made at the level of the campus or college or across colleges. The provisions of this policy calling for reporting information are also intended to provide the Senate a broad overview of the changes in academic programs that are occurring in the various colleges and campuses.

It is the position of the Senate that program changes within colleges should be subject to appropriate consultation with faculty and students from the beginning of planning for such changes. The primary focus of consultation should be the impact that the changes will have on the delivery of education to students. If actions leading to change are conducted in a reasonable manner, with consultation, the Senate has no interest in second-guessing academic decisions made by the colleges.

For the purposes of this policy, "academic unit" is defined as any unit which offers programs leading to a degree.

I. Reorganization of Campuses and Collegiate Units

1. The establishment of new collegiate units, the merger or elimination of existing collegiate units, or the addition to an existing campus of a major new mission with institutional, campus-wide, or intercollegiate impact or ramifications, shall be subject to review and discussion by the Senate through its appropriate committee.

2. The campus assembly of an affected campus shall review, and may make recommendations on, any proposal that is covered by section I (1) of this policy. Recommendations from a campus assembly shall be forwarded to the Committee on Educational Policy, which shall conduct its own review, taking into account the recommendations, if any, from the campus assembly, and shall make recommendations to the administration and the Senate.

3. To ensure that this procedure does not delay significantly the implementation of proposed changes, it is understood that any such item received by the campus assembly and Senate committees no less than 60 days prior to a regularly scheduled meeting of the Senate will be referred to the Senate at that meeting.

II. Reorganization Within and Across Colleges and Campuses

1. Proposals to establish, eliminate, split, or merge collegiate academic departments shall be reported by colleges and campuses to the Committee on Educational Policy for information when they are formally reported to the appropriate senior campus academic officer. The Committee shall be provided no less than three weeks to consider the change before action is taken by the administration. With respect to these proposals, the Committee is intended to serve as a sounding board on behalf of the Senate, and may offer advice to the administration on intra-campus and intra-college reorganization proposals.

2. Changes within colleges shall be reviewed by the appropriate internal faculty governance process and reported to the Committee on Educational Policy for information.

3. Intercollegiate transfer of departments shall be reviewed by the Committee on Educational Policy before any decision is made by the administration or Board of Regents in order that the Committee may offer a recommendation to the administration about the proposed transfer. The Committee shall report its recommendations to the Senate.

4. All proposals for the addition or deletion of undergraduate majors or degree programs shall be reported for information to the Committee on Educational Policy as part of decisions made by the administration or Board of Regents. Such proposals must incorporate an analysis of policy and budget implications. Changes within colleges and campuses shall be reviewed by the appropriate internal faculty governance process.

5. The Committee on Educational Policy shall report annually to the Senate, at the first meeting of the academic year, on the changes it reviewed under Section II (1) of this policy.

6. For each campus, it is expected that discussion of curricular issues (including conflict and duplication of courses) will be carried out in the appropriate campus governance committee(s), and that recommendations made to campus academic officers will also be reported to the Committee on Educational Policy.

7. Addition and deletion of programs in the Graduate School will be reported annually for information to the Committee on Educational Policy.

III. Administrative Reorganization

1. The organization and selection of officers is appropriately at the discretion of the appointing authority. The president should have considerable discretion in setting the structure of the central administration of the University and to select and direct the officers who report to him or her; other senior academic officers (e.g., vice presidents, provosts, chancellors, deans) should have similar discretion.

2. When the president contemplates (a) the establishment or elimination of senior administrative position(s) of high rank (e.g., vice president, provost, chancellor), or (b) a major reorganization of the central administration, he or she shall present a proposal to the Senate Consultative Committee (or separately to the Faculty Consultative Committee and Student Consultative Committee) for information and discussion. Approval of the committee(s) for such proposals is not required.

When a campus executive officer (chancellor or provost) contemplates the establishment or elimination of senior administrative positions for a campus, the provost or chancellor shall present a proposal to the appropriate consultative body (assembly executive committee or its faculty-student equivalent) for information and discussion. Approval of that consultative body for the proposals is not required.

COMMENT:

The Senate Committee on Educational Policy has been reviewing existing policies for the last several years; this proposal represents one more presentation of a consolidated and clarified policy, this one relating to the reorganization of the University at various levels. This particular policy has been under review for almost two years, has been circulated to the deans for their comment, and has also been endorsed by the Senate Committee on Finance and Planning. It replaces all existing policies.

The following are EXISTING policies on reorganization (with dates of adoption in parentheses):

1) That SCEP will study proposals for transfer of programs from one unit to another, and report its findings to the Senate for recommendations to be made. (1956)

2) That the Senate may specify the educational impact of inter-college transfers in recommendations to the President; that the administration (and college administrations) will scrutinize proposed course or staff additions in light of total University functions. (1956)

3) Proposals for new college units must be made to SCEP, and if approved, also approved by the Senate, by the State Higher Ed Board, and by the Regents. (1970)

4) All matters of collegiate reorganization, including addition/deletion of majors, must be reported to SCEP for discussion; SCEP will forward it recommendation to the Senate; then on to the Regents (this was repealing the existing procedure of reporting such things through the Senior VP to the HECC prior to the Regents). Proposals would now go to SCEP and HECC simultaneously.

Creation of new colleges, and the addition/deletion of missions on existing campuses, must be recommended by the affected campus Assembly, and reported for information/discussion to the Senate through SCEP and SCRP.

SCC should be consulted about proposals for new campuses, and direct issues to appropriate other committees for discussion. (1971)

JUDITH MARTIN, Chair
EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Judith Martin, chair of the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP), said that this policy has been written to clean up all the existing policies adopted over the past 25 years. The policy was rewritten to insert faculty discussion into the reorganization process and to take into account the administrative reorganizations which have occurred. For reorganizations within and across colleges and campuses, this policy simply underscores the current practice. For administrative reorganization, this policy does not intend to insert faculty governance into collegiate administrative decisions, but simply make certain that there is an established procedure in place when there are larger scale administrative decisions that have an influence on educational policy.

The floor was then opened for questions. With no discussion, a vote was taken and the motion was approved unanimously.

APPROVED

FOR INFORMATION:

INTRODUCTION

International activities and academic mobility occur without formal linkages and exchanges, and they are encouraged wherever those relationships fulfill the University's mission of teaching, research and service. In most instances, such activities are undertaken as a regular part of University activity, and individuals participating in them are guided by the normal standards of academic behavior.

There are many ways in which cooperation between individuals and units of the University of Minnesota and foreign academic institutions can take place. One form of cooperation is the exchange agreement, under which both formal, university-to-university agreements comprising faculty, student and research collaboration as well as less formal departmental or collegiate activities are proposed.

A university-wide exchange agreement is an enabling document providing for mutual benefits and reciprocal obligations, but it is not tied to specification of the involvement of particular numbers of persons or resources. Individual members of the University community and units of the University are free to enter into exchange agreements, provided that the individuals or units involved explicitly indicate that they are not representing a wider university community. No agreement precludes a similar arrangement with any other institution.

Most successful faculty exchanges are driven by common academic interests between one department or college and a counterpart at a foreign university. University-wide exchanges entail an institution-wide commitment and should not be undertaken without assessment of the need, scope and funding for such an agreement. The Office of International Programs (OIP) acts as a clearinghouse and registry for exchange agreements, and can advise regarding existing agreements and strategies for developing relationships.

International activities also occur in ways that do not involve exchange agreements. Such activities could include contracts with agencies or universities or contracts or agreements that sponsor foreign students to study at the University of Minnesota. These activities are not considered to be exchange agreements although they promote international exchange at large.

PRINCIPLES GOVERNING EXCHANGE AGREEMENTS

General University policies and rules of conduct apply to all students, faculty, and staff while participating in a University exchange program. Both institutions involved should subscribe to the principle of academic freedom.
While all exchanges are begun with the expectation that there will be continuing interest on the part of both institutions, all agreements should include a provision for review, for continuation or closure, every three to five years.

Many exchanges operate under a principle of reciprocity. For faculty exchanges, this means that small, informal exchanges need not require external funding. Although there may be no cash outlay other than travel support, the in-kind contributions of five space and administrative support should be considered. For some student exchanges, the reciprocity principle involves each student paying the tuition of the home university. This tuition is "banked" to pay the tuition of the incoming international student. Because of the financial implications of an imbalance created by lack of student demand, there should be a clear and continuing need for any bilateral exchange program.

TYPES AND DEFINITIONS OF EXCHANGES

There are many kinds of projects, linkages and relationships that define the international character of the University. Although the term "exchange" is used to define a variety of international connections, the University of Minnesota identifies three types of exchanges: comprehensive university-wide exchanges, faculty exchanges, and student exchanges. (Student exchanges are a subset of a larger study abroad program at the University of Minnesota. Most students going abroad select an organized program rather than a reciprocal exchange.)

PROCEDURES

Comprehensive All-University Exchanges

All-University exchange agreements should be proposed only when the purposes of the agreement cannot be satisfactorily carried out under the purview of a particular college or unit. Several historical relationships are currently maintained, and from time to time, new agreements are signed to meet larger institutional goals. For example, the president may sign a general, comprehensive agreement that includes faculty, students, research and information exchange. Such agreements allow for individuals and departments to connect with counterparts abroad, but do not force participation of an individual, department or college. These types of agreements are usually drafted as general establishing documents that permit interested units to develop detailed academic collaborations and projects.

Faculty Exchanges (not part of all-university agreements)

Faculty exchanges should be made at the level of the responsible University unit. There should be a legitimate area of common academic and scholarly concern, and the agreement should be demonstrated to be mutually beneficial. The agreement cannot obligate individual participation, and University resources committed under the agreement should be limited to those approved by the units involved in the agreement. At the department level, exchanges may include participation of faculty, research collaboration or information exchange. In addition, they may include informal participation of both undergraduate and graduate students.

Initially it is important to address academic benefits to the University of Minnesota and identify the home and partner institution's strengths relative to the proposed exchange. T he linkage should fit within the mission of the University and offer a comparative advantage in relationship to any existing exchange programs.

Planning and matching interests with the foreign institution, or unit of such an institution, is the most important step in establishing a relationship. Exchanges should match at the appropriate institutional level; that is, departments and colleges should assess participant expectations in both institutions to ensure that the University of Minnesota's interest in a particular academic department or unit, is matched appropriately by the foreign institution.

Developing and maintaining an institutional relationship beyond individual academic interests and connections requires planning and commitment by the department or college initiating the exchange. Meeting the expectations of both exchange institutions requires an ongoing commitment of financial and human resources. If the proposed exchange is intended at the department or college level, the chair or dean should be the final approving authority for any resources committed or agreements made on behalf of the department or college. The Office of International Programs can provide sample agreements to serve as guides. OIP Staff is also available to review draft agreements.

In some cases, to meet legal requirements or leverage funds, the foreign institution may request a presidential signature from University of Minnesota, even though the exchange is based within a department or college. This is an appropriate request and OIP can facilitate a presidential signature.

Once finalized or signed, all agreements should be registered with OIP for inclusion in the University's international exchange database. Small ad hoc agreements and exchanges need not be elaborately documented on paper. However, the use of tested guidelines for planning exchanges are useful for even the smallest continuing collaboration.

Reciprocal Student Exchanges

All-University student exchanges. Although each campus of the University of Minnesota may establish its own exchange agreements, student exchanges open to all University students are administered by The Global Campus, a unit of OIP. The Global Campus negotiates agreements, organizes programs, and provides advising and academic services for students who wish to earn credit on an exchange program. Because of the large number of sites already available for reciprocal student exchanges and other study abroad opportunities, The Global Campus is not actively seeking to establish new university-wide student exchange agreements.

Unit-specific student exchanges. The Global Campus can offer guidelines, services and cost comparisons to departments and colleges that want to encourage study abroad experiences by promoting participation in international programs. Many existing opportunities can be tailored to the specific academic interests of departments. Developing a new exchange program should only be considered after reviewing currently available options, including other sorts of study abroad programs, with The Global Campus.

Graduate-student exchanges. Graduate student exchanges have no central administrative home, but may be organized by individual departments or colleges. The Office of International Programs can assist departments in developing such relationships.

THE OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS

The Office of International Programs acts as a registry and clearinghouse for exchange agreements and provides assistance to faculty, departments and colleges in developing exchange relationships and agreements.

On an annual basis, the Office of International Programs will report to the Senate Committee on Educational Policy regarding international activities of the University. The report will include information on new exchange agreements, study abroad participation, as well as international priorities and strategies of the University. The report will be used to surface issues of concern and policy matters relevant to faculty involvement in the University's international programs. The Office of International Programs will also respond to specific SCEP requests for information.

COMMENT:

The Committee on Educational Policy solicits the comments of the members of the Senate about this statement, which would replace existing Senate policy concerning international education and exchanges. (Current policy requires that the Senate approve all institutional exchange agreements. The Committee does not believe this is necessary.)

JUDITH MARTIN, Chair
EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Judith Martin, chair of the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP), said that one of SCEP's tasks this year has been to look at all the proposals, policies, plans, and agreements with respect to international exchanges of students and faculty. A subcommittee was formed, which worked with C. Eugene Allen, Director of the Office of International Programs.

This document has been worked out between SCEP and Dr. Allen to establish a set of principles to govern exchange agreements. It is being presented for discussion today to receive feedback from Senate members. Once Dr. Allen's office has finished refining the policy, it will be brought back for action.

The floor was then opened for questions.

Q: Why does this policy require Senate approval?

A: There is no known reason for Senate approval of this policy. Many exchanges have been conducted on an ad hoc basis, and this policy is an attempt to bring rationale to the process from a centralized body.

MOTION:

To approve the following policy:

I. Horace T. Morse-Minnesota Alumni Association Award for Outstanding Contributions to Undergraduate Education

The Horace T. Morse-Minnesota Alumni Association Awards for Outstanding Contributions to Undergraduate Education are granted annually to faculty members nominated by the colleges. The honor is awarded to exceptional candidates and reflects the University's emphasis on the importance of high quality undergraduate education. It also contributes to the improvement of undergraduate education at the University by publicizing the work of the award-winners to serve as a resource for the whole faculty.

II. Award for Outstanding Contributions to Graduate and Professional Education

The Award for Outstanding Contributions to Post-Baccalaureate Graduate and Professional Education are granted annually to faculty members nominated by the colleges. This award recognizes faculty who engage post-baccalaureate, graduate, and professional students in a community of intellectual inquiry, who are significant mentors and role models for graduate and professional students, and who develop and promote activities which help students understand the larger context of their intended professions. The honor is awarded to exceptional candidates in recognition of outstanding performance in post-baccalaureate, graduate, and professional education in the following areas: excellence in instruction; involvement of students in research, scholarship and professional development; development of graduate or professional instructional programs; and advising and mentoring.

III. Policy

1. The Committee on Educational Policy shall annually appoint two nominating committees: one shall review nominees for the Morse-Alumni award and recommend to the Committee on Educational Policy those individuals whom should receive the award, and the other shall review nominees for the Graduate/Professional award and recommend to the Committee on Educational Policy those individuals who should receive the award. In both instances, the number of recipients will be dependent on the funding available.

2. No individual may receive the Graduate/Professional award and the Horace T. Morse-Alumni Association award in the same year.

3. Each recipient of each award shall receive a continuous augmentation in their salary, the amount to be recommended by the Committee on Educational Policy and approved by the President.

4. The department of each recipient of either award shall be provided funding for three years for the use of the award recipient for the development of teaching materials and training in order to promote excellence in teaching among all of the faculty.

5. The winners of each award shall, for a period of five years beginning the academic year after they received the award, serve as members of the Academy of Distinguished Teachers.

6. The Committee on Educational Policy shall have the authority to establish operational details associated with the granting of the Morse-Alumni awards and shall report annually on those details to the Senate for information.

FOR INFORMATION:

Operational Guidelines

1. The salary of each award winner shall be increased by a continuous augmentation of $3,000.

2. The annual award ceremony shall be a large public event to which the students and colleagues of the winners will be invited. This event would be in addition to a smaller event with the President and the Alumni.

3. Each award shall include, for each winner, an appropriate, well-publicized lecture, seminar, or exhibition in the individual's specialty.

4. All faculty who have been awarded Morse-Amoco or Morse-Alumni, or the Graduate/Professional, teaching awards shall be designated throughout their careers at the University of Minnesota as "Morse-Alumni Distinguished Teaching Professor of [field]" or "Graduate/Professional Distinguished Teaching Professor of [field]," as appropriate. This title can be used in correspondence, on business cards, and wherever else appropriate.

5. Any faculty member who has received either award shall be designated by an asterisk and accompanying footnote in the appropriate college catalogues and bulletins for the duration of the recipient's academic career at the University of Minnesota.

COMMENT:

This proposal is intended to consolidate the existing policies concerning all-University awards for contributions to education. There is no substantive change in the policies, except that reference to an advisory group of Morse-Alumni winners (which has never been convened) has been deleted, and notice of appointment to the Academy of Distinguished Teachers substituted. It is expected that the Academy, or subsets of its members, will serve in whatever advisory capacities may be sought by the faculty, the administration, or the Regents.

JUDITH MARTIN, Chair
EDUCATIONAL POLICY COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

Professor Judith Martin, chair of the Educational Policy Committee (SCEP), said that this policy is bringing together existing policies dealing with undergraduate education awards and graduate and professional education awards.

The floor was then opened for questions.

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

APPROVED

(As a constitutional amendment 133 affirmative votes are required at one meeting or 101 at each of two consecutive meetings. The motion received 125 affirmative votes at the April 22, 1999, meeting. 101 affirmative votes are required for approval at this meeting.)

MOTION:

To amend the University Senate Constitution, Article IX as follows (additions are underlined, deletions are struck out):

. . . .

ARTICLE VIII. AMENDING PROCEDURE

An amendment to this Constitution shall be approved either by a two-thirds majority of all voting members of the University Senate at a regular or special meeting, or by a majority of all voting members of the Senate at each of two meetings, the second of which shall be the next regular meeting; and provided the proposed amendment has been distributed, in writing, to the persons and in the manner provided in Article III, Section 7, for distribution of the Senate agenda, at least ten days prior to the date of the vote on the approval of the proposed amendment. An Amendment shall be effective following approval by the University Senate and by the Board of Regents.

ARTICLE IX. BYLAWS

The University Senate may enact or amend its Bylaws either by a majority vote of the total membership of all voting members of the University Senate at a regular or special meeting, or by a majority of all members of the Senate present and voting at each of two meetings, the second of which shall be the next regular meeting, provided the proposed change has been submitted, in writing, to each member of the Senate at least ten days prior to the date of the vote on the approval of the proposed change.

. . . .

COMMENT:

[The Senate Parliamentarian ruled, in March 1999, that in ARTICLES VIII AND IX, "all voting members" shall mean Senate seats filled and does not include vacant seats.]

At present, it can be more difficult to amend the bylaws of the Senate than it is to amend the constitution, which is the opposite of what most deliberative bodies require. As the language now reads, constitutional amendments require EITHER a two-thirds vote at one meeting or a majority vote at two consecutive meetings, the vote totals based on the number of filled seats in the body. Bylaw amendments require a majority vote, with the vote total based on the total possible number of seats in the body, irrespective of whether or not they are filled. It is frequently difficult to achieve the majority vote needed simply because there are not enough of the members of the body present. (It appears, however, that the practice--contrary to what seems to be the meaning of the language--has been to count only filled seats when calculating the majorities required for bylaw amendments. Even with that practice, it has often been impossible to adopt bylaw amendments that the overwhelming majority of the body approves.)

This amendment changes the rules so that bylaws may also be amended by EITHER a majority vote (of seats filled) at one meeting or a majority vote (of those present and voting) at two meetings.

It is common practice in virtually all deliberative bodies to have bylaw changes made by a majority vote of those present and voting. The Senate requirements now in place run contrary to both widespread practice as well as the recommendation of Robert's Rules of Order; the result is that in order to accomplish its business, the Consultative Committees and other Senate committees must resort to extra-constitutional or perverse methods to achieve what everyone agrees is desirable.

In order to retain a safeguard to protect the interests of any who believe their interests might be ignored, however, the Consultative Committee recommends that for bylaw changes, a majority vote of all filled seats be required for one vote (as is now the requirement) or that a majority of those present and voting be required at two consecutive meetings. This would allow the Senate to accomplish what it needed to do, but provides that if there were less than absolute majorities of the full membership, it would take two meetings to approve the changes.

SARA EVANS, Chair
SENATE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE

DISCUSSION:

With no discussion, the motion was approved with 110 in favor and 0 opposed.

APPROVED

(As a bylaw amendment, this motion requires 101 affirmative votes for approval.)

MOTION:

To amend the University Senate Bylaws, Article III, Section 1, as follows (additions are in CAPS; deletions are struck out):

1. ALL-UNIVERSITY HONORS COMMITTEE

The All-University Honors Committee solicits and reviews nominations for all-University honors.

Membership

The All-University Honors Committee shall be composed of no more than 6 8 faculty/academic professional members (INCLUDING ONE FROM EACH COORDINATE CAMPUS), 3 students, 5 alumni, and ex officio representation as specified by vote of the Senate. Faculty/academic professional and student members shall be nominated by the Committee on Committees and approved by the president. Alumni members shall be appointed by the president in consultation with the director of alumni relations.

Duties and Responsibilities

a. To solicit campuses, institutes, schools, and colleges for nominations for various University honors, naming of buildings, and nominations for outstanding achievement awards.

b. To screen such material and make recommendations to the president, who will refer such matters to the Board of Regents for final selection.

c. To keep all deliberations and votes confidential except where publication is necessary for official purposes.

d. To recommend to the Senate Consultative Committee such actions or policies as it deems appropriate.

e. To submit an annual report to the Senate.

COMMENT:

The rationale for expanding the number of faculty/academic professional representatives on the All-University Honors Committee to include coordinate campus members is that in recent years, Chancellor Kathryn Martin, Duluth, has requested that a process separate from that which relied on the All-University Honors Committee be established for designating University honors on the Duluth Campus. This request was denied in 1997. Since that time, Chancellor Martin has been invited to send a Duluth representative to the meeting, but has declined. The All-University Honors Committee believes that is important to have representation from Duluth as well as the other campuses during discussion and deliberations regarding the regular nomination process.

SALLY GREGORY KOHLSTEDT, Chair
COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES

DISCUSSION:

With no discussion, the motion was approved with 110 in favor and 0 opposed.

APPROVED

President Yudof said that he, as well as many others in Morrill Hall, were deeply offended by the cartoon in the Pioneer Press. He and Chairman Hogan registered their complaint both to the publisher and the editor. They also wrote a jointly authored editorial piece for the Sunday edition of the newspaper.

In terms of the budget, the University received increased funding, but not all that had been hoped for. The University requested $198 million, of which compensation, the AHC, and an undergraduate initiative were keys items. The University received $104 million for general operations, $16 million for an AHC endowment, as well as another $8 -10 million per year in an additional endowment. Agricultural specials were all funded, but some other outreach specials received less than requested. A student's share of financial aid was reduced, but this will have a bigger impact on private college students than on University students.

A very positive element was that progress was made in dealing with the problems of the AHC. This year, the AHC only lost $3 million, which is much less than many other health centers around the country. It is hoped that this endowment will not only meet the deficit, but also take care of issues such as community-based health care.

The legislature provided $69.3 million for compensation for faculty salaries, which is much less than the $98 million requested. The amount received will only allow a 3% raise from central administration funds. It is hoped that there will be additional compensation added at the college level. The University originally asked for a 5% increase for faculty and staff, which was cut. This lead the President to start thinking about other approaches to salary increases, since the state seems unwilling to increase salaries by the 15% needed to rank the University in the middle range of the top 30 universities. The capital campaign will put a stronger emphasis on salaries and support to supplement state salaries by private gifts, as has been the case at many other universities around the country.

As for the undergraduate initiative, the University will hire 20 - 30 new positions across campuses, with emphasis on the humanities and social sciences. This is the first step in replacing the 400 faculty positions that were lost during the 1990's.

Professor Sara Evans, chair of the Senate consultative Committee (SCC), expressed appreciation for President Yudof's commitment to increasing faculty salaries and his analysis of other possible avenues to find funds.

Shared governance is alive and well. While the faculty and administration might not always agree, they are talking before decisions are made. With the support of the administration, three workshops were successfully conducted in the AHC on the concept of shared governance. Three dinners were also held, in collaboration with the AAUP, for young, tenure-track faculty to introduce them to each other, to learn about issues of importance to them, and to acquaint them with the concept of shared governance

A model of collaboration has also been used for specific issues, such as grants management, sabbatical and leave policy, intellectual property policy, academic appointments, and the budget. Professor Evans said that she is proud of the fact that the Senate and its committees have set the agendas for these issues.

She reported that she also was extremely offended by the cartoon to which President Yudof has referred. To refer to a system in which it was illegal to teach slaves to read and write, and to compare it to the University, is not the kind of journalism to encourage.

President Yudof then thanked Professor Evans for her work this year, which was followed by a round of applause from the Senate.

Mary Carolyn (Duke) Hanley, a retired faculty member of the University of Minnesota Bio-Medical Library, died December 26, 1998, in her home in Minneapolis after a short battle with cancer. She was the widow of John T. "Jack" Hanley, who, at one time, held an academic appointment in the Institute of Technology. She is survived by her brother, Thomas Duke, her children, Judith, Joan, Barbara, John T., Jr. and Michael D., and several grand- and great-grandchildren.

Mary came to the University Libraries in 1963 after finishing her library degree at the University of Illinois in 1962. From 1963 to 1978, she served the libraries as a science cataloger and then as Head of the Catalog Division in the newly formed Bio-Medical Library. She moved into Reference and Collection Development in 1978 and remained there until her retirement in 1986. She served on numerous library committees and participated in many conferences. She was a member of several professional organizations including ASIS, the American Library Association, the Medical Library Association, and the Special Libraries Association. As a breeder of racing quarter horses, she organized racing meets and was the editor of the Minnesota Quarter Horse Racing Association Newsletter.

Gordon Heistad, retired professor of Psychiatry, died from lung cancer at the age of 74 on April 16, 1999.

Born on a farm near White Lake, Wisconsin, Heistad served during WWII as an Army medic during the liberation of the Philippines and the occupation of Japan. Having contracted tuberculosis during this period, he then spent15 months in a sanatorium. As was true for many bright young people bred during the Great Depression, it was only this military service and the GI Bill that made higher education an option. Heistad, his TB cured, enrolled at Concordia College in Moorehead, MN, graduating in 1949. He went on to earn a master's degree at Johns Hopkins University and a Ph.D. in psychology at the University of Chicago, the last in 1954. After two years as a post-doctoral fellow at Minnesota, Heistad was appointed Assistant Professor in the newly formed Research Unit of the Department of Psychiatry. He became a full professor in 1965 and later served as Director of the Research Unit until his retirement in 1990.

Although primarily a research professor, Heistad's graduate seminar, which ran for some 35 years, introduced psychiatric residents and Ph.D. students to the developing field of psychopharmacology. His former students and collaborators are now applying what they learned with him worldwide. As head of the Research Unit, he proved to be a wise and effective administrator.

Heistad was a fine a mentor and teacher, not only with his students, but also with his five loving children, Kathy, Marie, Mark, Carolyn and David. He is survived also by Ruth Heistad, his wife of 50 years, and by a brother, two sisters, and nine grandchildren. He will be missed, not only by his large family, but by his even larger academic family of former students and colleagues.

Dr. Sun Myong Kahng, Professor of Economics and Management at UMM, who was to have retired this coming June, unexpectedly passed away at his home in Morris on April 5.

Dr. Kahng was born in Korea. He earned his B.A. degree from Seoul National University in 1952. He received his M.A. in Economics and Ph.D. in Economics and Business from the Indiana University in 1957 and 1975 respectively. He joined the faculty of the University of Minnesota, Morris in 1965 after several years' teaching elsewhere.

He was a productive scholar active in the international scene, particularly in East Asian countries. His vita lists over 100 articles and conference papers. He was selected as a Fulbright scholar in 1993 and was a visiting scholar/professor at several institutions of higher learning in Asia (China, Japan, Korea, and Indonesia). While he was on a phased retirement, he made several trips across the Pacific Ocean virtually every year, organizing professional conferences and delivering papers. He was a keynote speaker for the 2nd International Convention of the Korean Economists in 1986. He promoted his economic and political ideas with his good friends who were politically influential in Korea. He served as a member of the Korea Working Group formed by the Office of President Hasselmo (1994-97). At UMM, he was the original faculty member who encouraged the students to form the Business Economics Club (the name was changed later to Economics/Management Club) as early as 1968. He took students on many field trips to business establishments. While he spent his sabbatical year in Korea, he arranged a student exchange program between the Morris campus and Yonsei University in Seoul, Korea (1994). He was also the founder of the Regional Research Center for Community Development (RRCCD) in 1969. Early on, he recognized the importance of the linkage between "town and gown." The Center promoted and assisted community development research by students, faculty, and community resource people. It has been a vital cornerstone for UMM in community service and outreach functions.

He is survived by his wife, Pat, and children, Peggy, Bob, Grace, Sam, and Diane. He will be missed.

William P. Martin died on February 25, 1999, at his home in Tucson, Arizona. Dr. Martin was born at American Forks, Utah, on July 15, 1912. He received his A.B. degree from Brigham Young University in 1934 and his M.S. and Ph.D. Degrees from Iowa State University in 1936 and 1937, respectively. After completing his formal education he accepted a position as instructor in soil microbiology at the University of Arizona in 1937 where he served as assistant professor and assistant microbiologist and later as assistant agricultural biochemist until 1945.

From 1940 to 1945 he was jointly employed by the University of Arizona and the Soil Conservation Service holding the title of soil chemist in the Soil Conservation Service. In 1945 he joined the staff of the U.S. Salinity Laboratory (USDA) with the title of soil microbiologist and later that year transferred to a position as Chief, Division of Forest Influences, Southwestern Forest and Range Experiment Station, for a three-year period.

From 1948 to 1954 he served as professor of agronomy (bacteriology) at the Ohio State University. From 1954 to 1982 he was Professor and Head of the Department of Soil Science at the University of Minnesota. He retired from the University in 1982.

During his 28 years as Head of the Soil Science Department he played a major role in obtaining support to build the Soil Science Building (1957) and Borlaug Hall (1985) at the University of Minnesota. During that period the University-supported faculty in Soil Science was increased from 9 positions to 30. He also encouraged the Agricultural Research Service (USDA), to establish a major soil conservation research laboratory at Morris, Minnesota, and later to establish a soil management team of 5 researchers within the department at St. Paul. Dr. Martin was an active researcher and teacher. He published over 50 scientific articles, taught a wide array of classes, and advised graduate students. He worked extensively on the microbiology ecology, nitrogen transformations in desert soils, watershed management and erosion control, pesticidal residues and organic matter transformations, and synthetic soil conditioners.

Dr. Martin served in many leadership positions in Scientific Societies as well as in government and University affairs. He was President of the American Society of Agronomy in 1975 and of the Soil Science Society of America in 1966. He served on many committees and boards of the Tri-Societies, as well as on many other boards and committees both nationally and internationally. He was a Fellow of ASA, CSSA, SSSA, and AAAS. At the University of Minnesota, Dr. Martin was President of the Minnesota Chapter of Sigma Xi, a member of the University Senate, on the Board of the Water Resources Research Center, and the Lake Itasca Biological Program. Dr. Martin was a true leader in all in which he interacted.

Memorials may be made to the William P. Martin Graduate Travel Scholarship Fund in care of the Soil, Water, and Climate Department, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota.

Etta Saloshin came to the University of Minnesota in 1949 after earning her MSW degree from Wayne State University. She and her mother and her sister, Leisl, had moved to this country in 1938 after Etta's father, who was a physician, was killed in a Nazi street demonstration. Etta had worked as a dance instructor in Vienna for ten years and briefly as a therapeutic group worker. In this country she worked as a group worker at the YWCA in Buffalo, New York, and in Chicago, and worked with the Girl Scouts in St. Louis, Missouri, and in Detroit, Michigan.

Etta was a woman who rose through the ranks at the University of Minnesota School of Social Work from instructor to one of the leading professors of social work in the country in the area of human behavior in the social environment. She was sought after by other schools but stayed in Minnesota to teach human behavior and social group work. Most notably she began to develop curriculum in the area of special services for the aged.

In 1972, Etta decided to retire from her formal position at the University of Minnesota, as she said, with "qualms and ambivalence." In a summary of her work on the faculty Director John Kidneigh wrote, "Dr. Saloshin is certainly one of the most beloved professors and one with great prominence and stature. She is a meticulous scholar, an excellent teacher and a helpful adviser, maintaining a warm relationship with staff and students. She is highly respected not only because of her powers of analysis and impeccable logic, but also because of her humility and personal warmth. Although she avoids publicity, she is never the less one of the leading social work professors in this country."

After her formal retirement, Etta went on to have almost 25 years of continued lecturing and consultation about growing old using her own experiences to show both the positives and the difficulties of aging. Her lectures were textured with rich examples of the dilemmas of aging and framed with an understanding of the frailty as well as the potential of the human condition. There is an entire generation of helping professionals that understands the qualities of aging much more clearly because of her work.

Miriam Seltzer, who retired in 1988 from the department of Home Economics, died on April 1, 1999, at the age of 76, of colon cancer. She was a founding member of the youth development faculty member program for the University of Minnesota's Center for Youth Development and Research and a former member of the State Board of Education. She also helped found and served as the first president of the Elder Hostel Learning Institute of the University, which provides noncredit course work for senior citizens.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:15 p.m.

Rebecca Hippert
Abstractor