• He felt that the November BOV meeting was successful and Virginia Tech is moving in a positive direction.
• The Graduate Education Initiative is focused on (1) providing health insurance for graduate students who are offered an assistantship. Sponsored research budgets will be reevaluated in order to cover some of the cost of the insurance; (2) adding an additional 900 Ph.D. students by 2010; and (3) making DBHCC a graduate life center and administrative home for the graduate school. Single room space will be available for graduate students and much of the rest of the space will be available for graduate student programs in order to create a sense of community.
• Charter University: Minnis Ridenhour is spearheading the effort for VT to become a charter university. A number of forums have been held. Thus far the charter-related efforts have turned out to be helpful in identifying other problems. The University of Virginia, The College of William and Mary and Virginia Tech examined what has happened in the commonwealth over the past few years, how we can grow, improve programs, and projections for state funding. When we look ahead, despite the commitment of the state, additional funding is necessary. We don’t see an easy road to procure significant amounts of funding from the state to move the university forward. Rather than wait to see what happens and to be totally dependent on tuition, it would be better to have more control over funding. The charter provides more freedom to operate. Currently, all the revenues except private funds flow through the state treasury and then back to VT resulting in no flexibility for VT. The state also has a lot of layers of control. For example, because of control more money is spent and we could save money in order to invest in academic programs.
• VT would abide by state standards and guidelines including BOV authority to set tuition and fees without being second-guessed by the legislature.
• VT would still be a public, land grant university and under the control of SCHEV.
• Classified staff under the charter would be employees of VT not the state and the BOV would decide on their salary increases.
• VT is proposing that the state continue to fund VT at current level. We will still be 40 million dollars short of what we need to run the university. Under charter legislation we will take reduced amount of base funding for the freedom the charter would provide. Extension funding stream will not be affected by charter legislation.
• The state still establishes the cost of education at VT and it is met by state funding and tuition.
• For VT to grow faculty salaries need to be competitive. It will take salary increases of 5.5% each year over the next 4 years to get to where we need to go. This year the state budgeted 3.5% for faculty raises and VT added 2%. The state will continue to fund faculty salary increases and tuition increases will help make up any difference.
• We are low with respect to tuition across the country but on the higher end within the state. VT is more expensive to operate than most other Virginia universities and this weighs into tuition costs We will benchmark tuition and fees against peers and we’d like to be around the mean or slightly above.
• Any university is eligible to negotiate their own deal with the state so technically any Virginia university could be involved in the charter initiative.
• Governor Warner’s response to proposal is mixed. He feels that it is still the responsibility of the state to fund higher education and if they did there would be no need for a charter. He is keeping an open mind.
• FSVA has concerns related to the charter creating greater inequities resulting in a two tier system. There is nothing in the charter that will change with respect to VT in terms of land grant mission. One-third of faculty are directly involved in the land grant mission. Looks like two-tiered system but is not. No two universities are alike.

• BOV Finance and Audit: Linda Woodard reported on a review of current and emerging practices at other Universities (SCHEV peers, top 30 peers, and VA schools). This included a survey of 97 colleges and universities, web search and personal contact. Additionally, articles from the Chronicle of Higher Education, ACADEME, and others were gathered. Based on this study, it was concluded that Virginia Tech’s current approach is similar to 35 of 51 universities with criminal conviction check policies. Based on the current policy, the recent decision to expand the number of sensitive positions, and the scope of checks, current personnel application statements regarding conviction history, the report to the Finance and Audit Committee was that VT is addressing policy requirements, meets a high level of audit compliance, is cost efficient and balances legal and risk factors in a manner that exceeds the standard practice. The committee accepted the report and essentially concurred with the recommendation. The committee asked that the question on both faculty and staff applications regarding any prior criminal convictions be consistent. It will ask about any prior criminal conviction, not just felony convictions, except for traffic violations or other minor violations. A status report was requested for the March meeting of the committee. In a follow up conversation, Linda Woodard, was asked about the procedure regarding an applicant that indicates they have a prior conviction. The application would be reviewed in the context of the specific conviction and how it relates or doesn’t to the specific job.
• BOV Student Affairs: A portion of the meeting was attended. A statement that Mr. Shawn Braxton, President of the Student Chapter of the NAACP, regarding the recent hate crimes was made. On behalf of the NAACP he asked the Board to address diversity issues to make the campus more welcoming for all students. Mr. Anzilotti thanked Mr. Braxton for attending and sharing these concerns, and stressed that the Board and administration share their concerns and will continue to address diversity at Virginia Tech. Dr. Woody Farrar, faculty advisor to the NAACP chapter and Faculty Senator from History, thanked Mr. Braxton for handling the situation in a positive manner and thanked the University for the positive response. Sam concurred with Dr. Farrar’s comments regarding the positive, professional way in which Mr. Braxton delivered his message to the Academic Affairs Committee.
• Business Standards Certification: The senior administration is reviewing the material prepared that I’ve mentioned in the past. The course of action regarding this item isn’t clear. More information should known by next month’s meeting.
• Graduate Education Work Group: A meeting with Dean DePauw is scheduled for November 10th. Senators attending the meeting can plan to report back at our next meeting.
• Future meetings: In December, Executive Vice President Jim Hyatt will make a presentation on the financial issues/impact of the Charter Initiative and Graduate Education Initiative. Also at the December meeting, Vice President Betsy Flanagan will make a presentation on the Capital Campaign. Ben Davenport, Rector of the BOV and Sandra Lowe, Chair of the BOV Academic Affairs Committee have been invited to attend a future Faculty Senate meeting.
• Senate Cabinet: Plan to meet the first week after Thanksgiving with student government leaders in order to improve and expand our dialogue with them.
• Legislative Affairs Committee: Susan Anderson is working on scheduling meetings with Legislators in our region during late November or early December. Faculty input (questions and concerns) are welcome. Send questions and concerns to Sam. Higher Education Advocacy Day is January 13th. Several faculty members will be going. A large turnout is needed and Senators were encouraged to make the trip.

• Academic Affairs Committee (BOV) was very positive meeting. The Academic Affairs Committee was more responsive than ever before and displayed an active interest in VT. Marcus Lee (graduate student representative to the BOV) works extremely hard to convey graduate student concerns and needs. There was also a presentation by the Advance VT project regarding issues affecting women faculty members. Mark McNamee made a presentation on diversity. Interaction and interest on the part of BOV members was keen.
• CFA: Computer privacy policy was approved at CFA and forwarded to University Council on November 15th. The document was changed based on feedback from Senate. Friday, CFA will hear a presentation by Tim Mack on electronic faculty reporting system, a massive undertaking and a new way of collecting data. For every discipline it is a complicated issue.

Commission on Research (Jim Weaver): Dean Hitchingham and Dean DePauw discussed resource needs of the library. The Commission will look into it. Vice President for Research Brad Fenwick reported on function of University Institutes.

Building on Grounds Committee (Diane Zahm): Preliminary presentations regarding VT building and grounds over the next 10 years focused on expansion in existing core area (drill field) and life sciences cluster. The 20 year plan includes a new convocation center.

Note: The following unedited Commission/Committee Reports were not presented at the meeting but submitted electronically for inclusion in the minutes.

Commission on Research (Frank Gwazdauskas) — Meeting November 10, 2004

• Dean Eileen Hitchingham gave a report on resource needs of the Library and noted that there were no funds for supplements last year. Renovations are ongoing at the library which will allow for a small cafeteria in the lower level and a new entrance on the second level. The Class of 57 has pledged $226K for one-time additions to special collections. Tech is near the bottom of peer schools in total library funding. $1M is needed for one-time cost to support research and $1M is needed for new annual cost to maintain research commonly held and needed by Virginia Tech.
• Dean Karen DePauw noted that there will be 49 new GA positions for Fall 2005 supported by the Graduate School. The University will cover 70% of health insurance for single graduate students. This amounts to about 2.5% of the stipend and will be built into grants. The DBCEC will be converted into Graduate School offices and housing for graduate students. She is working on a day care program for grad students.
• Vice-President Fenwick reported on the organization and functions of ICTAS and IBPHS and noted that we are an elite campus that must redeploy existing resources which will require a paradigm shift. Given that we are not currently making adequate progress towards reaching Top-30 status he suggested that 1) financial plans and projections be revised, including strategic relationships with other institutions; 2) indirect cost distributions be redistributed, providing the Institutes funding directly via institutional-level appropriations, thereby modifying the percentage indirect cost distributed to colleges; 3) determine the role(s) of new Institute director(s), to allow directors to serve as investing agents for strategic distribution of resources and act as brokers of resources; 4) determine the financial reporting structure of the Institutes, that would allow for a uniform rate of return comparisons; 5) increase capacity for research, by having a relatively small staff of financial administrative support personnel so that the Institutes could in part function as “incubators” for new centers; and 6) reassess the programmatic focus of the Institutes, and identify programs to mount large-scale grants and contracts with a critical mass of investigators.

Commission on Graduate Studies and Policies (Rakesh K. Kapania) — Meeting November 3, 2004

• Renovation of the library and a newly designed web-page for the library was discussed.
• Financial aid determination for graduate students: Dr. Avery reviewed the current policy of the financial aid office, which determines eligibility for continued financial aid for students based on the number of credit hours a student has taken. When a student has taken more than 150% of the “normal” credit hours required for a program they are considered to have exceeded their allocation and cannot receive financial aid. The commission voted to approve a recommendation that the Office of Financial Aid adopt the time-to-degree measurement in determining graduate student eligibility for continued financial aid.
• Dr. DePauw suggested that the graduate school collect information on how departments are incorporating the teaching of information skills into their program.

Commission on Outreach and International Affairs (Jim Pease) — Meeting October 11, 2004

Matters relevant to the Senate included:

• A presentation was made by S.K. De Datta on the University’s new International Strategic Directions Team Report, the same as reported to the Senate during its October meeting. Comments were made (by me) that a longer period of COIA review should be permitted, but the document was forwarded to the Administration the following day.
• Discussion took place with regard to 3 issues identified by Dr. Sandmann in her August presentation on the scholarship of engagement: a) How do we reward excellence in outreach? b) How do we understand or define quality indicators as it relates to scholarly activity in outreach and engagement? c) How do we define the interface between teaching, outreach and research?
• The Vice Provost outlined 3 strategies to deal with these perceived issues:
  • a) Strategy 1. Invite a faculty member to come to the next COIA meeting and briefly describe their outreach activity in context of scholarship. This invitee could be one of the winners of the University or College Outreach Awards.
  • b) Strategy 2. COIA should work with the Provost in sponsoring a dialogue in the spring semester as it relates to excellence in scholarship of engagement. As a part of this, identify a couple of key academic leaders for this symposium, i.e., the President of Penn State or the President of Purdue University. Both of these individuals are part of the Kellogg Commission.
  • c) Strategy 3. Dr. Dooley would like the P&T sub-committee of the COIA to look at step 2 of defining quality indicators and looking at transformative language as it relates to outreach and international affairs to bring to this Commission for recommendations and approval, and then forwarded to the governance system.

• In recent weeks there have been a number of incidents involving the NAACP office in Squires as well as racist graffiti. President Steger made a public statement condemning the acts and it was felt that the Faculty Senate should make a public statement as well.
• Susanna presented the following resolution: “The Faculty Senate joins President Steger, the Virginia Tech administration, the Commission on Equal Opportunity and Diversity, and the Board of Visitors in condemning the recent hate crimes perpetrated against the NAACP chapter on our campus, the racist graffiti written in McBryde, and indeed any and all such acts of intolerance, division and hatred. These incidents, and any like them, represent a direct violation of the core values of this university, and will not be tolerated.”
• Motion was made and seconded to approve the resolution. The motion carried.