4. Student-Faculty Relations: Tidwell said Gary Kelly's Student Government appointment as a representative to the Faculty Senate was for the entire year, according to Katie Cox, Student Body President. Benedict will e-mail Kelly.

8. Board of Trustees Meeting- Tidwell reviewed several highlights of the meeting on Monday, January 22, 2001. The President has proposed a revision to Board Regulations such that administrative positions may no longer hold tenure. "Granting faculty rank shall not result in tenure, and does not guarantee the existence of an approved position." This is the first reading, and will not be approved until the next meeting. Tidwell was concerned whether this change would have an effect on the current searches. He looked at recent Chronicle ads, and five of fifteen specifically mentioned that people selected could have tenure. Canivez: Who would come here knowing that at any moment you could be terminated? Best: There may be some reasons to make distinctions among the vice presidents, since the VPAA is the chief academic officer and represents the faculty. There could be a cost to us of making this decision. Let's not be hasty about this. Zahlan: This would affect qualifications. It would be a "de facto" privileging of internal candidates. Fraker: Isn't there an issue about which department they are going to be tenured in? Tidwell: True, that is always the case. Fewell: That's part of the reason some institutions had more than 100 percent of their tenured faculty in a department, such as Illinois State's Department of Educational Administration with 180% tenured faculty. The extra administrators attached to the department raised the percentage. Tidwell: The policy right now is to do it on a case-by-case basis. Wall: The departments do approve, but typically after the hire. Eberly: My understanding was for an administrator to be an adjunct or on tenure, the negotiations had to be done before the contract was signed. Fischer: Isn't this a drastic response for one person? I do not know what is done at other universities, but if you ask the faculty if it is OK, should not that be enough? I find it hard to believe that the VPAA wouldn't have the qualifications to be tenured in any department on this campus. Eberly: One of the reasons vice presidents get paid more than faculty is that faculty members have tenure and VPs do not. Addison: The current policy seems more practical, and I like the flexibility in that policy. Best: If our points have some validity, the Board will take it up. They will read our minutes. We have not yet discussed this in our search committee. Tidwell: Some presidents get tenure. Benedict: But it has to be on a case-by-case basis. Tidwell: This policy would not be open to negotiation. Zahlan: We could ask that people serving on committees take special attention to the tenure eligibility of candidates. Tidwell: Let's come back to this and determine if you want me to say something to the President. Toosi: The existing policy is pretty flexible. What is her logic on this change? If you are hiring from inside, then the person can return to their old position. If someone comes from the outside, and they do not work out, then they are gone.

Tidwell: On another first reading, right now any purchase over $100,000 must be approved by the Board. The change is to go to more than $250,000. This is consistent with what is being done at other universities.

On the public comment resolution, the Board was going to have the final reading but there is still some question about what the Legislature has actually mandated, so they tabled that until the next session.

The BOT approved a three-year contract for Rich McDuffie as Athletic director. They also approved new room rates for university apartments and university court, an increase of about 3%. They are still looking at the residence hall and Greek court rates. The BOT approved 3.4 million for the food court construction, with the completion date October 15, 2001. The Food Court should be a boost for student recruiting.

Betsy Mitchell, EIU Lobbyist, mentioned that she thought the legislature and governor might cut the IBHE requests.

9. CUPB Meeting, Friday, January 19, 2001: Tidwell: Kim Furumo gave a very nice summary of the planning cycle for the FY 2003 budget, and distributed a nice chart of the planning process. It was interesting that in the capital improvement projects of the IBHE for FY2002, there is $773,000 for remodeling McAfee.

10. CAA Taskforce: TEDE: Tidwell: We had a two hour meeting today. Tidwell gave figures on the grant applications received: 40 grant applications for professional development, 24 for technology enhanced courses, 23 for expansion of existing technology enhanced courses, 24 for technology delivered courses, and 10 for technology delivered programs. The dollar amounts totaled $956,000, but we have about $300,000 to distribute. Fewell: That shows the need, and the people who put those applications out should be applauded. Tidwell listed the number of grant proposals in each of the five categories and estimated the percentage of money to be awarded. Benedict: We need to have feedback to know why people did not get their grants. Tidwell: We have five people on each grant review team, and we will have to review about 75 grants in each team. Determinations will be made within the next couple of weeks. Fraker: Were some of the grants multi-year, so it would not require all of the money in one year? Tidwell: Yes. Best: The chances of getting some of the grants is higher than in other areas. It is not a criticism, but a reflection of how the committee went about its work. Fraker: Is the February 5 date still viable? Tidwell: We do the review by February 2, and on February 6, we meet to finalize grants to be announced the week of February 12, 2001. Toosi: What are the two categories that got the highest percentage? Tidwell: New courses, 27%, and programs, 33%. These grants are for individual faculty members, and the other $200,000 is for the new staff members that will be hired to help faculty, along with equipment for the new unit. Toosi: A year ago we did not have this money. I suspect the priority will go to new courses rather than supporting current courses. Fischer: I thought we were starting from the beginning and working our way there. Now we are putting more courses on-line without changing our infrastructure, and we are missing that intermediate step. That can certainly be interpreted as pushing forward to becoming a virtual university. Toosi: Professional development proposals should be approved at this stage, rather than creation of new courses. Tidwell: Many professional development proposals will be approved in this process. I haven't looked at the applications yet to know exactly what has been submitted. Zahlan: Are all the courses you are talking about in fact web delivered courses? Is that the 27%. Tidwell: Yes, that is right. Benedict: Do you have a rough idea of the proposals that will be funded given that level of support? Tidwell: I will be able to give you a better idea next week. Zahlan: Can you tell us what the criteria for selection will be? Dilworth: It was in the proposal. Zahlan: Will you necessarily privilege courses that fit into the new programs? Tidwell: This is the first time we have done this, and we have to figure out what to do. We do not want to discourage people. Benedict: It is important to provide feedback to those who do not receive grants since this is a small campus. Canivez: There may be faculty out there waiting to see how the intellectual property rights issue filters out. I am doing so. We may end up having many more faculty members writing these grants in upcoming years.

Tidwell: The committee does have three models for the new unit. One keeps things the way they are, one forms a new unit under an assistant vice president for technology, and the third is a hybrid of the other two. There is at least one proposal to convert Blair Hall room 108 to house the new unit. That is very tentative right now.

11. Electronic Grade Book Committee- French Fraker: The first meeting is scheduled on Friday, January 26. I have reported four concerns: (1) user friendliness of whatever site, (2) about security, (3) verification of grades, and (4) concern about this becoming mandatory, and that there would probably be resistance to that. The e-mail I received back indicated that the system they are now proposing would not have the advising process password included. It sounded like they might be setting up their own website.

Tidwell: Is PAWS working out well? Fewell: the only comment I have heard from students is about printing it out. They must cut and paste.