Committees report to Senate on academic plan

The Academic Planning Committee, which attempted to summarize the various concerns and comments surrounding the planning document, has concluded that a reorganization of the arts and sciences must be undertaken before any other alterations to the university's operating structure can be carried out, committee Chair Dennis Malone, SUNY Distinguished Service Professor in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, told senators.

"The major issue facing the institution at the moment, if it is accepted that the goals of the proposed changes (as stated in the planning document) are correct, is that many of these alterations in operational structures cannot be adequately carried out, or even properly analyzed, until the general question of the Faculty structures is determined. In other words, what about the arts and science faculty, or the alternatives proposed for consideration?" he asked.

Malone said that while some faculty feel Headrick is moving too fast in suggesting changes to the present three-unit structure for the arts and sciences, there is a long history of discussion on the topic. And although many feel the present structure is fine, "in view of the difficulties extant with the programs, it seems that the present structure is not fine at all," he said.

He noted that Headrick will set up a panel to study the reorganization of the arts and letters, with resolution of the issue expected by the fall.

"Until that is done-the Faculty structure is basically outlined-there is little sense in attempting to analyze the details of the proposal," he said.

Some of the proposed changes in the planning document are innovative, some are relatively minor, Malone said.

"Whatever the results prove to be, it is clear that the planning document has rocked the cradle of our complacency, and that is perhaps long overdue," he added.

The Budget Priorities Committee has divided its work into three parts, said John Naylor, professor of history and a member of the committee who was presenting the panel's report in place of Chair Peter Nickerson, who was out of town. Naylor stressed that he was reporting on the committee's work-in-progress.

He said that three subcommittees have been established to examine responsibility-centered management and at what level this concept will operate; to look at the methodology and the numbers associated with the planning document, which will focus on the National Research Council quartile ratings and the validity of the rankings as they apply to UB, and to assess the resources needed to support the plan.

Naylor expanded on work of the resource assessment subcommittee because, he said, he was a member of that panel and was more familiar with its work. That panel will concentrate on three issues "that are really the core of what would constitute the increased funds that are needed in the provost's judgment to accomplish his particular desire to do things differently," he said.

The first issue is the assumption that there will be a constant base of state tax support for operating funds. That "assumption," Naylor said, was viewed with some "skepticism" within the subcommittee because "we've seen nothing like that over the past several years.

The second issue is increased tuition revenue for UB, either state-set or differential, he said, noting that Headrick assumes that tuition will increase over the first four years of the plan. This issue is viewed by the committee as "a kind of minefield to negotiate," he said, given the fact that state tax support and tuition seem to be linked. If there is movement in one direction, there is likely to be no movement in the other, he said.

The third issue, which Naylor called the "turnover pool," deals with the 1-to-1 faculty replacement rate for most departments. Senior faculty members with advanced salaries would be replaced, upon their retirement, with junior faculty hired at much lower salaries, he said. "The department would have the replacement; the Provost's Office would have the differential," he said, noting that the differential would be used by Headrick to fund those items that he has identified as priorities.

The Budget Priorities Committee as a whole will raise two additional issues with the provost, Naylor said. These are the cost and benefits of shifting the emphasis from marginal doctoral programs to investing in master's programs, and if there are any discernible savings in either of the two options proposed in the plan to reorganize the arts and sciences.

The University Governance Committee is focusing on the centers and institutes that have been proposed in the planning document, said committee Chair Boris Albini, professor of microbiology. "We feel that the governance structure has to be thought through and in place before centers and institutes are created," Albini said. This governance structure must take into account the relationship of the centers and institutes to the departments, especially in terms of promotion, the granting of degrees and financing, he said.

Albini said the committee also will deal with such topics as mergers of departments and schools, including the structure that is to be followed and ensuring faculty input; the rationale that is being made to back up particular recommendations in the plan; outside reviews of UB programs, how they are made and whether they reflect reality or are just perception, and the university's mission statement, which, he said, seems to address only the perception of UB, rather that the achievements of the university.

The committees are expected to submit final reports to the Senate before the end of the semester.