Senate hears final report on productivity; looks at calendar

By Craig Chamberlain

Faculty productivity, a new academic calendar and criteria for
cultural centers dominated the agenda at Monday's first regular
session of the 1994-95 Urbana-Champaign Senate.

Productivity has been an issue of concern for several years, and
especially since the start of Priorities, Quality and Productivity
(PQP) initiative of the Illinois Board of Higher Education. In
response to PQP, the Senate Council in 1992 established a Task
Force on Productivity.

After two years of work, the task force presented its final report,
"The Campus as Classroom," for approval Monday by the senate. The
report first outlines faculty responsibilities as they relate to
the UI's mission of teaching, research and public service - and to
teaching, broadly defined, both inside and outside the classroom.
It then suggests measures for improving instructional effectiveness.

Too many people equate productivity with effort - measured in hours
in the classroom, etc. - said Emanuel Donchin, representing the task
force.  "What we really need to focus on is the outcome," he said.
"It's 'What does this effort produce?' and 'To what extent is this
effort consistent with our mission?' and 'To what extent are we
executing our mission in a cost-effective fashion?' "

Every educational program must deal with three variables: the number
of students enrolled, the amount of resources available and the quality
of instruction. Part of the problem in discussing productivity with
critics outside the university, Donchin said, is that "they believe
that all three variables are free [not restricted]." In reality, only
two variables can be free, he said. Setting any two determines the third.

Academic departments should determine the quality of instruction,
Donchin said, and they can do that by specifying the teaching models
for specific programs - in other words, descriptions of how departments
can use resources to educate students. "We're proposing that by making
explicit and clear the teaching model, we're basically stating our
price tag for quality education. And that leaves to the state or the
university the freedom to choose between resources and enrollment."

Since the type of instruction varies from program to program across
campus, the report calls for individual departments to determine
appropriate teaching models, as well as criteria for measuring
instructional effectiveness. With relatively little discussion,
the report was approved by a voice vote and will be passed on to
Provost Larry R. Faulkner for implementation.

After receiving substantial input from the senate in meetings last
fall, the Committee on Academic Calendar returned for more on Monday
with a new recommendation for changing the policies governing the
academic calendar, starting with 1996-97.

The change is being considered because the on-line, direct
registration system, due to be operational by late next spring,
will remove the need for on-campus registration. In the proposal
put before the senate last fall, the committee suggested moving
the start of classes up two days, from Thursday to Tuesday, and
including a Friday off as a fall break.

As a result of objections at that meeting, however, Morgan Lynge,
chair of the committee, said on Monday that the committee was now
recommending a calendar that moves the start of fall classes back
two days, from Thursday to Monday. The new policy would start
classes on the Monday 12 weeks before Thanksgiving week - and on
Tuesday when that Monday is Labor Day.

Spring semester classes would begin three days earlier than under the
current policy, on the Monday eight weeks after Thanksgiving week.

Though concerns were raised about the adjustment required by students,
senators generally praised the policy, especially because it will
provide more full weeks of classes. The new policy will be presented
for a vote at the Oct. 3 meeting.

Also looking for input rather than a vote, the Committee on General
University Policy presented its proposal outlining criteria for the
establishment of cultural centers.

Asked to consider a request by Asian-American students for an
Asian-American cultural center, the committee found that no specific
criteria governed the establishment of existing cultural centers, said
Wesley Seitz, chair of the committee. The committee chose to work on
criteria rather than consider the specific case, he said. "What we're
saying is we should have criteria, we should not create a center on a
whim."

The main tenants of four proposed criteria:

  * The group being considered for a center should be among those
    identified as underrepresented on campus.
  * The center "should serve to enrich the campus intellectual
    environment by providing the campus community with a broader
    appreciation of the culture of the group being served."
  * The center "should lead to an improved climate among various
    groups represented in the campus community."
  * The center's programs "should be oriented toward addressing a
    demonstrated problem of retention of an underrepresented target
    student population."

Seitz acknowledged that the first and fourth criteria would not favor
establishment of an Asian-American center. The committee's thinking,
however, is that "a center need not satisfy all four criteria, but it
should address all four criteria," he said.

Discussion on the criteria ranged from arguments by students in favor
of an Asian-American center to concerns by several faculty members
about the means of funding new centers. Seitz, who was not seeking a
vote, said he would take the proposal back to his committee for
further discussion.

In comments at the start of the meeting, Chancellor Aiken quickly
identified topics of ongoing concern for the campus or academia in
general.  Among them were diversity in administrative and faculty
appointments, the status of women on campus, child care, technology
transfer, college affordability, the campus's public image, and "town
and gown" relations.

He noted that several appointments over the last year have brought
greater diversity to the Chancellor's Cabinet and some key
administrative posts. He also noted that a survey last year
comparing UI faculty to the available talent found that only about
eight of 80 departments showed a "significant departure" from what
was possible in minority representation.

For female representation, however, the problem was more severe, with
38 of 80 departments significantly out of line from what was possible.
It is an area that will need more work, Aiken said.

He also expressed optimism for the success of the university's $1
billion campaign, which will move from its quiet phase to its public
phase with an announcement in October. Through contacts with alumni,
"I am impressed with the deep reservoir of goodwill for this
university," he said.