Commission examines University governance

President Kirwan has appointed a commission to review the structure of the University Senate and its effectiveness as part of an overall look at University governance.

The Presidential Commission on Faculty Governance, a 16-member panel, will combine canvassing of Ohio State colleagues with benchmarking of peer institutions before making any recommendations. A report is due to Kirwan in six months.

"This will be a very important and timely report," Kirwan told University Senate at its Jan. 8 meeting. "Great universities are characterized by strong systems of shared governance. This review gives us a chance not only to analyze our current practices but also to measure them against the practices at some of the nation's other leading universities. The timing of this study is very important because it will enable us to move forward with our Academic Plan and Diversity Plan knowing that appropriate shared governance mechanisms are in place."

The commission is chaired by Caroline Whitacre, who also is chair of the Department of Molecular Virology, Immunology and Medical Genetics.

"We have a lot to do in a fairly short time frame when you consider all of the facets of the Senate," Whitacre said. "We'll look at membership -- is faculty and student representation appropriately balanced? How should staff interests be represented? It's a University Senate, but it does not include staff in the membership."

Also slated for review are the Senate's approximately 20 committees and councils, through which most proposals move before they are brought to the Senate floor for a vote.

"It's a very complex organization," Whitacre said.

Benchmarking will involve analysis of how other U.S. universities similar to Ohio State in structure and mission govern themselves.

"We'll look at what their structures are and whether they're radically different from ours, and see if we can learn from their governance models," Whitacre said. "And if any other institutions have gone through similar reviews recently, we'll see if there are lessons we can learn from that process."

In addition to conducting the comprehensive governance review, the commission hopes to recommend ways to make the Senate more accessible to more people at Ohio State.

"We would like to see a broader involvement by the campus community," Whitacre said. "We need to get the message out that this is the main governance structure of the University. How do we get people vitally interested?"

The commission's creation follows recommendations made in 1992 in the "Managing for the Future" Task Force report and in 1998 as part of the Rhodes Report, a review of the administrative structure initiated by Kirwan.

Both reports suggested that Ohio State's governance structure was cumbersome, and recommended a review of its effectiveness and consideration of possible improvements.

The University Senate is composed of 70 faculty members, 25 administrators (including the president, provost, college deans and some vice presidents) and 41 student members (26 undergraduate, 10 graduate and five professional student members).

Created by the Board of Trustees in 1972, the University Senate, subject to the authority of trustees, has been delegated the legislative authority of the faculty over educational and academic policy.

Its powers include: establishing the educational and academic policies of the University; recommending the establishment, abolition and alteration of educational units and programs of study; recommending candidates for honorary degrees and candidates for degrees and certificates; and making recommendations concerning the rights, responsibilities and concerns of students, faculty, administrators and staff.

Several members of the commission, including Whitacre, have had considerable experience within the Senate, representing their academic units as senators and serving as chairs of Senate committees.

Presidential Commission on Faculty Governance members are: Kathleen Carberry, Council of Graduate Students; Mark Ellis, assistant dean of the Mansfield campus; Marcus Herzberg, graduate administrative assistant; Judith Koroscik, dean of the College of the Arts; Stephen Mangum, senior associate dean of the Fisher College of Business; Seth Metcalf, Undergraduate Student Government; Hazel Morrow-Jones, associate professor of city and regional planning; Robert Perry, professor of physics; Alan Randall, chair of agricultural, environmental and development economics; Kathryn Richdale, Inter-Professional Council; John Roberts, chair of African American and African Studies; Randy Smith, vice provost for curriculum and institutional relations; Richard Steckel, professor of economics; Judy Varhola, administrative associate for University Development; and Willa Young, director of Student Gender and Sexuality Services.

Panelists invite campus input on draft Diversity Action Plan

Retention,recruitment and graduation rates are among issues highlighted in the plan, first distributed in November

Ohio State is not deliberating the first diversity plan in its history, but the series of forums on the current draft Diversity Action Plan represents the first time administrators have sought substantial input from faculty, staff and students on such a proposal.

David Williams II, vice president for student and urban/community affairs and co-chair of the diversity committee that drafted the plan, said he is encouraged by the University's willingness to hear from the campus community. He also stressed that the Diversity Action Plan now on the table is still in draft form.

"We never envisioned this to be the final plan. This is not the final plan that we need to get the job done. I know this doesn't get us to the top of the mountain," Williams said at a Jan. 12 town meeting on the plan. "What I am saying to you is if you have some things you can add to this, let us have them.

"I can't guarantee you that everything that you request is something that the University can do," Williams continued. "But I can guarantee you that we will make sure that it is reviewed and considered."

About 100 people attended the forum to discuss the plan, which calls for creating a "supportive environment that is welcoming for individuals of all races, nationalities, religions, genders and sexual orientation, and those with disabilities." It also outlines a series of strategies to improve recruiting, retention and graduation rates of minorities.

Questions have been raised about the likelihood that the University will extend the option to purchase health insurance to domestic partners of employees and students. The draft includes a statement that the administration will "extend University benefits to domestic partners."

"These are the things that we think need to be done to move this campus forward," Williams said. "We felt that if the section on domestic partner benefits was not part of this plan, this would not be a viable plan. We have gone on record as saying we think that's something that needs to be done."

Tom Lydon, systems developer/engineer in psychology, noted that the draft plan makes no reference to age and veteran status, especially Vietnam-era veterans. "When thinking of student bodies, many don't normally think of age and veteran status. But from a staff and faculty perspective, those are issues," he said.

Some expressed concern that the University climate, which has not emphasized the importance of diversity during past attempts to address the issue, may not have changed. However, President Kirwan has identified diversity as one of his four most pressing institutional priorities.

Carole Anderson, dean of the College of Nursing and co-chair of the diversity committee, noted the process used to draft the plan is evidence of the importance of the issue at Ohio State.

"I think the process that we've used for this plan is very different," she said. "It's been disseminated widely to the community, we're having forums like this asking for input, and it's a draft plan. So there's a level of visibility and accountability that I think is different.

"Also, both the president and the provost have been very vocal on many, many occasions saying this is a top priority. So that's a different level of accountability, and I think that's where the rubber will hit the road.

"It isn't just a report that was submitted somewhere that was stashed somewhere. I think there's a difference."

Officials note that once a diversity plan is approved, there is still the question of who will be responsible for ensuring progress is being made toward meeting the University's diversity goals.

In order for this or any diversity plan to be successful, it's going to take commitment from the highest levels of the University on down, said Bill Hall, assistant vice president for housing, food services and event centers.

"I hope what we don't do is what we've done in the past É hold a few offices or a few people responsible for us moving forward," Hall said. "I would hope that as we create this new model we're all held accountable. I think I need to be held accountable and responsible for moving this University forward on diversity."

Ohio State among national elite in industry-funded research

Since 1991, Ohio State has more than doubled its industry-financed research expenditures, according to new statistics from the National Science Foundation.

As a result of its success, Ohio State moved up among the nation's elite universities in this category. Ohio State ranked fifth in the nation in 1998 (the latest data available from NSF), compared to sixth in 1997. Only Duke, Penn State, MIT and Georgia Institute of Technology ranked higher.

Industrial funding fueled $40.4 million in research expenditures at the University in 1998, up $3.8 million from 1997. Industry-financed expenditures were at $15.4 million in 1991.

"I'm delighted that Ohio State continues to attract a growing share of industry research support," noted President Kirwan. "We hope to continue this positive progression while improving our performance in other funding categories."

Keith Alley, interim vice president for research, added, "Clearly, Ohio State has been incredibly successful in attracting industrial money to fund research. Our ability to work with industry to further research and develop new technology is good not only for the University, but for the state economy as well."

Alley gives particular credit to faculty in the colleges of Engineering and Medicine and Public Health for Ohio State's high ranking in industrial funding.

"Faculty in engineering and medicine have been very aggressive in finding corporate sources to help fund their research," he said. "With the strong economy, companies have had more money to invest in research and our faculty has capitalized on that."

Along with the increase in industry-financed research expenditures, the University also showed gains in overall research expenditures and expenditures from federal sources.

Total research expenditures at Ohio State increased $12.4 million in 1998 to $301.5 million, and the University held its rank as the largest research program in the state. Second-largest in the state was Case Western Reserve University, which had total research expenditures of $176.3 million.

Although total research expenditures increased, it was not enough to keep Ohio State from falling from 17th to 20th in national rankings for this category. Federal funding of research at Ohio State increased $1.6 million in 1998 to $124.2 million, ranking the University 35th in the nation, down from 31st in 1997.

While the University dropped in some comparative ranking categories in 1998, Alley said he is optimistic for the coming years. There have been many positive signs for Ohio State since the 1998 period covered by the NSF report, he said.

For example, a major $18 million grant from the National Institutes of Health, awarded last year to Ohio State faculty to study stress and wound healing, will boost the University's figures in the future.

And during 1998, Ohio State faculty significantly increased the dollar amount of funding applications made to the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.

"We're moving in the right direction, and I think the future looks very promising for research funding at Ohio State," Alley said.

next page...