Skip to content
  • Print

March 8 2001

Institutional Priorities Committee
March 8, 2001
Taylor Conference Room, Library

IPC Members Present: Benedetti, Brock, Cavanaugh, Fox, Gilbertson (Chair), Kirkland, KruegerDevine, Lundergan, Meer, and Stark

Meeting convened by chair at 12:10 p.m.

  1. Minutes of the March 1, 2001 meeting were corrected to reflect the presence of member Lundergan.
  2. Provost's Report:
    1. The meeting of March 15 was canceled.
    2. A memo from Dean Purnell concerning the impact of inflation on the library was distributed and discussed. Historically the library has been funded mostly by one-time funds. This makes it particularly difficult to keep current with journals and other monthly publications that are heavily effected by inflation. To date the library has done an exceptionally good job of determining which journals and publications to continue; however, it is becoming harder to keep pace with the requests of all professors.
    3. The impact of the future U. C. Merced campus on Pacific was discussed. A meeting of the Academic Leadership of the two schools could be useful for the future. However, due to their continuing site problems the need for a meeting is perhaps less imminent. The Great Valley web site projects the greatest population growth in the State for the Merced area. Perhaps an appropriate action for Pacific is to invest in recruiting more heavily in that area. Though Valley students have a lower college attendance rate, many schools are investing in reversing this trend. Caution should be exercised to balance the expectation of increased diversity with the goal of improving Pacific's academic profile.
  1. MVP Discussion
    1. Questions raised during MVP forums were discussed. Questions raised by the staff concerned salary and other compensation issues. Particularly, the inverse relationship of salary to tenure; and how funds for other compensation will be allocated in future budgets. The need to balance longevity with meritorious achievement also needs consideration. A forth-coming proposal from the University Compensation Committee may address this issue. Questions raised by faculty included methods of accessing productivity, the library, and the period for the duration of the MVP.
    2. It was decided the list of Great Pacific Distinctions should be a separate document.
    3. A question was raised about the rank order of the priorities. Does the outline format imply a priority order?
    4. Should the Vision Statement be bolder? Patterning the Dental School, some time was spent finding the "BEST" language. Best in the West. The best comprehensive University in the _______. The most distinctive comprehensive University. The best student centered University. The best University at linking liberal arts with other programs.
    5. If the word comprehensive is used, it was suggested a definition be offered.
    6. The question "so what" remains. How do these claims relate to students and parents?
    7. Some time was spent considering the linkage of the language in the Vision Statement to the coming Capitol Campaign.

The meeting was adjourned at 1:57 p.m.