approved September 15, 2014
a. Discussion of integrated tenure case. UC awaiting feedback from divisional committee before deciding whether to send to senate.
b. Update on budget committee proceedings from Meyerand. Agreement on basic concepts. Committee only considering 101 and 150 funding from Bascom to schools and colleges and working on what percentage of that will be exposed to new model and how long rollout will take. There will eventually be a shared governance committee created.
c. Minutes of the meeting of September 3, 2014, approved.
d. Announcement of shared governance event (Oct. 7).
Major issues from summer that will continue into fall:
i. Governance and new, detailed compliance requirements from Big Ten.
ii. Exception granted to “Big 5” conferences by NCAA: increased costs will precede additional revenue.
iii. O’Bannon case and media revenue.
a. Draft action plan distributed to committee. Fourteen of the 30 recommendations identified to act on right away. Working committees being formed; particularly interested in nominations with expertise. Need recommendations from UC for these groups as soon as possible. CDCC responsible for remaining 16 recommendations.
b. Question on amendment to diversity framework: What is expectation on the revised language? Understanding that amendment will be brought forward at next Senate meeting.
a. Chancellor called for topics for “state of university” on Oct 6. Current plan: new leadership, VCR, D2P & entrepreneurship, MOOCs, state communications plan, budgets (biennium and new model), and diversity.
b. Currently in “quiet” phase of fundraising campaign.
c. UC asked whether ad hoc committee on training and research (based on PNAS article) should move forward this year. Chancellor favors proactivity rather than waiting and playing catch up, but recognizes competing demands on same constituencies this year with VCR and DGS searches.
d. Discussion of increasing and deepening contacts with alumni (beyond fundraising).
Discussion of change in fall competition model, other grants, and WARF funding structures.
a. Discussion of funding and sharp decline of UW in relation to peer institutions. Proposal from University Library Committee will emphasize need to return to full funding and budget for annual increase.
b. Campus-wide discussion on open access is needed.
c. Library system structure a reflection of the past and must be rethought.
d. Library should be more integrated with capital campaign, dean’s council, and other cross-campus discussion fora.
e. Symposium at WID on October 30th to discuss these issues.
a. 360 review: Petty and Broman will come up with suggested committee and charge/
b. Parental leave: Wendt working on charge for existing committee
c. IRB: Farrar-Edwards and Meyerand to define issues