Skip to content
  • Print

November 9 1999

University of the Pacific
Institutional Priorities Committee
November 9, 1999
Taylor Conference Room, University Library

IPC Members Present: Benedetti, Borlik, Brock, Cavanaugh, Chambers, Fletcher, Fox, Gilbertson (Chair), Gluskin, KruegerDevine, Myers, Oppenheimer, and Stein

Meeting convened by chair at 3:05 p.m. in the Taylor Conference Room.

  1. Minutes of the November 2, 1999 meeting were distributed. It was requested they be amended to reflect the discussion regarding the quality of service provided by OISR.
  2. Provost's Report: Carnegie Classifications will under go temporary changes before a major overhaul in 2005.
  3. Budget Allocations, Academic Division:
  1. Questions remain as to the most effective way to reach the goals of the Faculty Salary Plan. Should a fourth year be added? Should the percentage of the raise be increased? How will this effect additional merit increases and increases for promotion? The source for AAUP salary averages is not clear. It was requested that Tania Walden attend a meeting to answer questions in that regard.
  2. As salary increases for part time faculty are being addressed, many feel special attentions should be given to those that have served as long term part time faculty.
  3. Experiential Learning has the possibility for a unique impact at UOP. It is hoped that a commitment of at least three years will be made so the program will come to full fruition. Though the idea of assessment is included in the plan, it is not modeled. An evaluation mechanism should be in place from the very beginning.
  4. The increase in non-salary operating budgets recommended by IPC and approved by the President of the Board is restricted to academic instructional units.
  5. Many options to expand the computer lease plan on the Stockton campus were discussed. How long should the term of lease be? Desktop or laptop? Cost projections should include network upgrades, software, hardware and training.
  6. The funds to improve the tutorial program provided by the Educational Resource Center should be folded into the increases of other non-salary operating budgets.

IV. Cost Allocation Model: This model is a recommendation of the Provost to be taken under advisement by IPC. As the University seeks to narrow the "band width" of net contributions and subventions of the academic units to plus/minus .30, this model will prove a useful tool in fiscal decision making. The model was based on the ten-year enrollment projections presented to the Board by the Council of Deans.

  1. As instructional costs rise, non-instructional costs will probably rise no more than half that of instructional costs.
  2. This model should be a helpful guide in determining staffing issues.
    1. In the School of Business, it will be an essential factor in determining class size and faculty teaching loads. The strengthening of the MBA program may be crucial in this regard.
    2. The model should help SIS determine at what point the addition of a new faculty member would make sense

    The meeting was adjourned at 5:00.