Faculty Senate Budget Review Committee
Annual Report, 2005-2006
The Committee’s purview includes the review of past all-funds budget expenditures and the discussion of future budget priorities. The nature of the accounting and budget reconciliation process is such that the review of all-funds expenditures for a given fiscal year (which runs July 1-June 30) can begin only during the following fall. In general, final budget reconciliation does not occur until the end of October, and the committee reviews the expenditures at the end of the fall semester. The committee then reports to the Faculty Senate on the prior year’s budgetary expenditures during a Faculty Senate meeting in the Spring Semester. This report therefore covers the committee’s activities during academic year 2005-06 excepting the report on the 2004-05 budget, which was presented in May 2005. A later report will include budget information for the fiscal year 2005-2006.
Principal activities for the year:
A meeting during Summer 2005
to discuss the implementation of the new budgeting process at
A meeting early in the Fall Semester to discuss a preliminary campus response to a request from then-acting Chancellor Ryan for expected critical budgetary needs. The committee reviewed the preliminary document prepared by the Vice Provost in consultation with the Vice Presidents and made some suggestions for prioritizing Binghamton’s needs to the Chancellor, including both capital expenditures and the need for greater SUNY support of graduate students, faculty positions and salaries, and risk management.
Review of 2004-05 budget expenditures, with a report to the Faculty Senate in the Spring semester.
Discussion of the funding of increased graduate stipends that was announced in December 2005, including how funds were reallocated internally.
Discussion of planned 2006-07 incremental budgetary increases. The process of soliciting budget requests for planning incremental increases for 2007-08 also was discussed; this has now gone directly to academic units, through their Deans, to provide Deans and, ultimately, the higher administration with the broadest base from which to evaluate campus needs and priorities.
Discussion of the impacts of
the SUNY budget proposals (from Board of Trustees, from Governor) and SUNY’s
latest iteration of its Budget Allocation Process (
Peter L.K. Knuepfer, Committee Chair
members: Serdar Atav, Howard Brown,
Shelly Dionne, Robert Emerson, Nancy Henry, Peter Knuepfer, Sean Massey, George
McKee, Gary Truce; Student members Michael Smyth (undergraduate); Ex-officio
members James Van Voorst (Vice President for Administration),
2005-2006 ANNUAL REPORT
BYLAWS REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE FACULTY SENATE
Some bylaws changes were sent to the faculty in the fall, but these were really the work of the committee for the previous year.
This year's committee met regularly. Its recommendations have been forwarded to the FSEC (Faculty Senate Executive Committee) and will, presumably be sent to the faculty.
David Hanson - Mathematical Sciences (Chair)
Gary James - DSON
Richard Pastore - Psychology
Dana Stewart – Romance Languages
Sarah Maximiek - Libraries
DATE: May 1, 2006
In response to the committee’s charge to allocate funds for the purpose of bringing programs to campus that enhance and support the intellectual, cultural and artistic aspects of the academic curriculum, and to focus our efforts toward as diverse a university community as possible, the Convocations Committee awarded funds to support 26 separate events, 23 of which took place during the 2005-06 academic year, and 3 which will take place during the coming year. Allocations ranged from a minimum of $100 to a maximum of $2000. Our available funds for the year, including carryover from 2004-05 and new allocations, totaled $16,223. It has been the practice of the committee over the past years to try to maintain and grow a surplus for occasional more costly events. Allocations this year totaled $14,410 leaving a balance remaining of $1813 to be carried forward into the 2006-07 academic year.
The organizations and events funded by the committee at its monthly meetings are listed below:
BU Creative Writing
Diversity Proj) Pride and
CEMERS (Sticca) Conference 3/2006 720
Creative Writing (
Red Cross Club (Mahmood) Earthquake Memorial Service 12/2/2005 350
Black Student Union
Music (Borton) Crane Concert choir perf. 2/14/2006 760
Center for Writing
Africana Studies (Nzegwu) New African Diaspora 4/2006 500
Hdev (Chaudhry) Sangari lecture 4/18/2006 300
Bing Justice Proj (Santiago-Valles) C Aguirre lecture 4/21/2006 250
Grad Student Assoc (
Colleges Against Cancer (Krause) Relay for Life 500
TOTAL ALLOCATIONS 2005/06: 14410
Annual Report of the
Educational Policies and Priorities Committee
2005-2006 Academic Year
Fall 2005: Herbert Bix (History, on leave), Elizabeth Brown (Libraries), Frank Cardullo (Mechanical Engineering), Benjamin Fordham (Political Science), Hal Lewis (Systems Science, committee chair), Al Vos (English), M. Stanley Whittingham, Stephen Straight (ex-officio), Mary Ann Swain (ex-officio), 2 undergraduate student vacancies, 1 graduate student vacancy.
Spring 2006: Same as Fall,
During the Fall
2005 semester, the major item of business related to the proposal by the
Provost to form a
Other business discussed during the Fall included a review of plans proposed by the Provost for refinements in the plan for academic assessment. We felt these plans were appropriate. We also discussed the point that we were unable to move ahead with discussion of reviewing either the (existing, undergraduate) Bioengineering Program or the proposals for the (MS and PhD) Biomedical Engineering Programs until more documentation became available.
Throughout the Spring
2006 semester the Committee focused on matters related to the Bioengineering
Department within the
In March the
Committee listened to concerns that graduate students who have come to
Binghamton University to study Biomedical Engineering be kept well-informed
about the current status of the program (it has not yet been formally
approved). In an effort to reduce the
possibility that those students misunderstand the program’s status, the
Committee sent a memo to Nancy Stamp, Dean of the
During the latter part of the semester the Committee undertook a formal review of the undergraduate program in Bioengineering, drawing especially upon the reports of expert outside reviewers (Dr. Peter Katona and Dr. Raimond Winslow), who visited campus earlier in the semester. The Committee’s review was in response to the mandate of the Faculty Senate, which approved a new undergraduate program in Bioengineering on February 25, 2003, with a proviso that our Committee re-examine the new program after two years.
The Committee’s report on the Bioengineering review was formally transmitted to the Senate’s Executive Committee in July 2006.
Faculty Senate EOP Advisory Committee
Annual Report, 2005-2006 Academic Year
The Committee met four times during the academic year. We
assisted Dr. Pogue’s efforts to provide his staff with the resources they need
to serve EOP students.
Janet Hogan, Chair
Marilyn Gaddis Rose
H. Stephen Straight
Intercollegiate Athletics Committee
2005-2006 Annual Report to Faculty Senate
At the beginning of the Spring 2006 semester, a new Chair was appointed to the Faculty Senate Intercollegiate Athletic Committee (IAC). Since the new chair had no previous affiliation with the IAC, initial activities involved individual meetings between the new Chair and some members of the committee, and the Chair getting caught up on material from the IAC and the campus Intercollegiate Athletic Board (IAB). The IAC then met twice during the Spring semester. The initial IAC meeting, and part of the second meeting, was devoted to discussion of the purpose and role of the IAC, with this having been one source of past contention among IAC members. Briefly summarized, the core issues seem to reflect:
1. Some committee members feeling that the IAC duplicates some of the activities of the IAB, and that the IAB, since the IAB includes faculty nominated by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, the IAC is unnecessary.
2. Other members felt that the concerns of many faculty over the changes associated with the move to Division 1 have not been addressed effectively and do need to be addressed. If problems exist at BU that similar to those sometimes reported at other institutions, these need to be identified and understood so that steps can be taken to address them. If such problems do not exist, with concerns expressed by some faculty based upon inadequate or incorrect information, it is important that that correct information is conveyed through a body seen as representing faculty interests,
The “Self-Study Report and Plans for Improvement on NCAA Certification”
cites the IAC as being “re-established by the Faculty Senate at
It seemed clear from discussions that some issues are common to both the IAC and IAB, and that both groups would benefit from open lines of communications. Joel Thirer (Director of Athletics) and Dennis Lasser (who heads the IAB) are members of the IAC, and both suggested that Richard Pastore, the new chair of the IAC, attend meeting of the IAB, and possibly be added to the IAB membership.
The second meeting of the IAC also began to address some issues of concern:
1. Special Talent Admissions. In campus documents to the NCAA, it is reported that nearly all student athletes are classified as “special talent” (AT=1). A concern expressed by some is that academically unqualified students are being admitted, and being given scholarships, to bolster athletics. Discussion focused on two issues. The number of “special talent” classifications was reported in NCAA response documents to be an artifact of the existing classification system that did not differentiate the academic qualifications of students with special talents (talents in music, theater, athletics, etc.). The classification system has been modified, with the new system being used for the first time this year. In addition, the initial set of athletes admitted as Division 1 applicants are only now finishing their education. Thus, data that will be available this fall should provide the first complete and accurate picture of the academic qualification and success of student athletes. The IAC will return to this issue in the fall when the needed data become available.
2. Student Behavior at Athletic Events.
Joel Thirer brought up the concern
over student behavior at the America East tournament held at the
One wants our students to be enthusiastic. Students were exhibiting behavior that is acceptable in their dormitories and among their peers. Also, what passes for acceptable language at professional sports events (e.g., baseball, hockey) is, in the eyes of many students, is not that different than what students exhibited at our basketball events.
The University wants to have community support, but parents do not want their children, and maybe themselves, to be exposed to the language and behavior that was exhibited.
Although the home coach is supposed to be responsible for crowd control, these are practical limits on what a coach can do. The referees could have, and maybe should have, called a technical, but that might have only made matters worse.
Although there are officers of the student organization, it is not clear that these individual would be able to accomplish much with a large group of casually organized students.
Action by the University Police
has to be carefully thought through.
Rushing in and removing or arresting a few students has the potential of
exacerbating a problem. At the America
East Tournament, there were some major problems with football players from
The IAC will return to this, and other, issues when it reconvenes in the fall.
3. Other Questions and Issues to Address:
Having addressed the issue of whether the IAC should exist, the IAC still needs to spell out the questions to be address, then develop effective strategies to achieve meaningful answers in a constructive manner.
Frank Cardullo - Mech Eng 1 male undergraduate student
Frank Newman - English (Fall 2005) 1 female undergraduate student
1 faculty vacancy (Spring 2006) 1 graduate student teaching assistant
Richard Pastore - Psychology (Chair, Spring 2006)
Jim Stark - Art
Rob Van Buskirk - Biological Sciences
The Committee met in the fall and spring terms to review library matters.
“2006 Milestones” of the Binghamton University Libraries include:
a) 24 x 5 (Sunday-Thursday) access to Bartle Library.
b) Staffing of the Library Annex@Conklin to support researchers on site.
c) Wireless laptop computers for in-building use at Science & Bartle Libraries.
d) March 20th opening of the “Information Commons” on the first floor area in the Bartle Library. In response to user requests, there has been the addition of over 20 more computers, more chairs for collaboration, and larger waste baskets. To maximize assistance, the information desk is co-staffed by people with Libraries’ backgrounds and by other people with Computer-Center backgrounds. In the Fall of 2006, the Science Library Information Commons” will open. Software will be installed so that off-and-in-libraries users can easily see where free computers are available. These “Information Commons” are located near check-out-desk and self-service-check-out-machines, and near Libraries’ Reserves so as to maximize “one-stop Libraries’ services”.
On February 24, BU’s Alumni Association partnered with
the Libraries to host an evening with Molly Peacock (Harpur ’69) during one of
her performances at the Urban Stages Theater in
g) Link to current and past issues of the Binghamton University Libraries’
newsletter, “LibraryLinks” is http://library.lib.binghamton.edu/librarylinks/index.html.
At the April 7 meeting, there was a SPARC information session presented by Beth Brown of the Libraries “Scholarly Communications Committee.” SPARC stands for the “Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition”. It focuses on enhancing broad and cost-effective access to peer-reviewed scholarship. It encourages authors to retain rights of copyright.
Members of Faculty Senate Library Committee, Fall 2005-Spring 2006:
Peter Gerhardstein, Psychology
Jennifer Gordon, SEHD Division of Education
Gerald Kadish, History
Michael Lewis, Computer
Sara Maximiek, Libraries
Chris Motley, Std. Assoc. Representative
Seokyung Han , Grad. Std. Org. Representative
Michael McGoff, Vice Provost, Academic Affairs
John Meador, Director of Libraries
Charles Nelson, Physics, Library Committee Chair
Date: 7 September, 2006
To: Faculty Senate
From: Sandra D. Michael
Chair, Professional Standards Committee
Subject: 05/06 Annual Report
No cases were referred to the Professional Standards Committee during the 05/06 academic year.
CC Committee Members:
Professors Miguel Arcones (Mathematics), Masha Britten (Nursing), David Cingranelli (Political Sciences), Arieh Ullmann (Management)
Report of the University
Undergraduate Curriculum Committee, 2005-2006
During the 2005-06 academic year the UUCC continued its normal work of certifying courses that meet the Binghamton University General Education requirements.
In addition the Committee accomplished the following:
1. Proposed a revision to the General Education Mathematics/Reasoning requirement to the Faculty Senate. The proposal, which was passed by the Senate, eliminated the “math proficiency” aspect of the requirement and allows the requirement to be fulfilled by any designated “M” course. Students who are not prepared to take a designated “M” course are expected to self-identify and take any lower-level courses necessary to enable them to succeed in a designated “M” course. This change was made retroactive so that it applies to all students subject to the M requirement from catalog year 2000 onwards who have not yet satisfied the M requirement. (See the text of the requirement at http://gened.binghamton.edu/faq.html#math)
2. Held a discussion session on the Global Interdependencies requirement with faculty members from various departments, including History, Anthropology, Africana Studies, Art History, English, Geography, and GREAL. This meeting provided for frank and open discussion of the “G” requirement and allowed both the UUCC and faculty from interested departments to refine our understanding of what we mean by “global interdependencies.”
The Committee would like to express its gratitude to Liz Abate, the university's Coordinator of General Education and Assistant for Undergraduate Education, for the essential assistance she constantly provided to the committee over the course of the entire year.
The 2005-06 Report on University-Wide (UNIV) Course Offerings, required by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee, is attached to this report.
2005-06 UUCC Committee Members:
Richard R. Eckert, Chair
H. Stephen Straight
Report on University-Wide (UNIV) Course Offerings
2005-2006 Academic Year
A total of 15 courses were offered under the University-wide (UNIV) rubric during the 2005-2006 academic year.
Discovering the Scholar Within
79 total in 3 sections
Leadership and Achieving Goals
M. Chester, Judicial Affairs
53 total in 4 sections
Energy and You
Great Ideas in Physics (also listed as PHYS 115)
R. Pompi, Physics
Modern Satire (also listed as ENG 380V)
Scholars III: Worlds of Experience
Leadership and Achieving Goals
M. Chester, Judicial Affairs
57 total in 4 sections
Wolves: Science, Myth, Ethics, Nature
Great Ideas of Physics (also listed as PHYS 115)
R. Pompi, Physics
Ethics (also listed as
Scholars III: Worlds of Experience
No courses offered.
It should be noted that because most of the UNIV courses at this point are Binghamton Scholars courses, the UUCC asked that the Scholars Program seek its own rubric for use beginning with the 2006-2007 academic year. This has been done, and beginning with Fall 2006, the SCHL rubric will be used for these courses. Based on precedent established by the Faculty Senate for the UUCC's oversight of GSIC courses (see below), the UUCC has adopted the following procedures for the use of the SCHL rubric:
Courses offered under the GLST rubric
In February, 2003, the Faculty Senate approved an amendment to the guidelines for University-wide policies to allow the use of additional rubrics for University-wide courses. Under this policy, the Global Studies Integrated Curriculum (GSIC) is allowed to use the rubric "GLST" to identify its cross-listed courses that have a home in an existing school or department. Any courses in the GSIC program taught as standalone courses will be submitted to the UUCC for approval as UNIV courses, subject to the provisions for approval of such courses. No GLST courses were offered during the 2005-2006 academic year.
Annual Report for AY 2005-6
Academic Computing & Educational Technology (ACET) Committee
During academic year 2005-6, the ACET committee organized itself into three working subcommittees to target planning for future services of value to faculty and students. The subcommittees were:
The committee looked at the potential technological “futures” from three perspectives:
The Futures subcommittee issued an “Interim Report” which is attached (Attachment I), and agreed to continue to meet through the summer. It is apparent from the report that many new technologies are already taking hold at the University; the question for the ACET is whether there are certain technologies we should push or whether a better strategy is to let them all develop as they will.
The Toys committee ended its investigation by adopting a recommendation brought to the committee by the undergraduate student representative: that the University work with the Student Association to develop a campus “portal”. The SA presented the subcommittee with a design concept for the project. The portal is envisioned as a software tool that helps students, faculty and staff manage their access to the internet and to campus technology resources, allowing single-sign-on, customization of the desktop, and rapid access to relevant resources. This recommendation was adopted by the whole ACET and forwarded to the Administrative Information Systems Resources Committee (AISRC), which sets administrative computing priorities for the campus.
The Communications subcommittee seeks to solve a problem
that has been identified many times before:
resources abound on campus, but many faculty and students don’t hear
about them or don’t know how to access them.
The subcommittee began by compiling a list of common, needed resources,
and then worked to provide descriptions and FAQs (frequently asked questions)
about how to access them. .
report of the subcommittee
(Attachment II) .It
Other Initiatives of the ACET
While the subcommittee activities constituted the main work of the ACET for the year, the ACET dealt with, reviewed, and sponsored several other initiatives during the year to the benefit of faculty, students and staff. These are listed below.
Futures Subcommittee Interim Report to ACET
Below are three reviews of emerging or needed technologies applicable to education and research that we might consider for the University.
Review I: From
the audio presentation "The Future of Teaching and Learning
We discussed some of the things we'd heard and agreed that some of the major topics we need to consider are:
Review II: The "New Horizons Report", a joint production of the New Media Consortium and EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative seeks to identify each year the six emerging technologies that will have the greatest impact on "teaching, learning or creative expression with higher education". The
2006 report is freely distributable, and is located at <http://www.nmc.org/horizon/index.shtml>. Below is a summary; everything below is either quoted or paraphrased:
The "Executive Summary" identifies four major "trends affecting the practice of teaching, learning and creativity": They are:
The six technologies identified in this year's report are:
--with an adoption horizon within the next year:
--with an adoption horizon of 2-3 years:
--with an adoption horizon of 4-5 years:
Review III: Speculation
There are several developing technologies we can see
being used or experimented with at
--mobile, handheld devices: (Note: The rollout of full wireless across the campus should be complete in the residence halls by late summer, and on the rest of the campus by this time next year.)
--IP phones: many of the devices above are cell phones; some have
options for IP phone use
--Video Conferencing: From the brainstorming sessions over the years, the most-named service people envision in the future is videoconferencing, though there have been few requests for videoconferencing services already available on campus:
--Classroom support services:
--Security & Acceptable Use on campus
--Linux and the virtualization of machine resources
Other technologies of interest:
We’ve had some discussion that we put ourselves in good technological position if we can use collaborative and “socializing” tools, which include wikis and blogs, RSS feeds, podcasting, and personal broadcasting, and deliver them to and from mobile devices, which capitalize on wireless networking, mobile devices, and information retrieval tools. Enabling such devices also forces us to deal with issues of security and authentication. This general approach allows us to take advantage of many emerging technologies. How we organize ourselves to do that, and which projects are most effective at putting us there, of course, topics for discussion.
Many of these tools are in some use on campus, with wikis, for example, enabled within BlackBoard. But the desire to move ahead more quickly, and outside of (especially) the BlackBoard format, has been expressed, along with the desire to include a wider group of participants than has traditionally been considered the campus community.
We should also consider breaking down our future efforts into something like the above dimension of adoption horizon, i.e.:
--those with an adoption horizon within the next year,
--those with an adoption horizon of 2-3 years,
--those with an adoption horizon of 4-5 years.
There are some things that we should consider doing asap: podcasting, rss, blogs, and wikis. The technology for these is available and we should create pilots to determine the reaction of faculty, staff, and students to these technologies.
Things like single signon, virtualization, VoIP, Campus Manager are useful and make life easier for us all. We need them but we also need to go beyond them -- these will not distinguish us from other universities.
======Attachment III: SECURITY CHANGE MEMO TO ALL FACULTY AND STAFF:
Network Security Changes over the Summer
Computing Services is planning two changes this summer, on May 29th before Summer Session begins, that will require individuals to adjust some of their ways of using the network. These changes are designed to protect computers connected to the campus network from virus infection, and/or from off-campus attempts at intrusion. They have been approved by the Academic Computing & Educational Technology committee (ACET). The changes are as follows.
Campus Manager checks Windows computers to verify that both operating system and anti-virus software are current. If Campus Manager detects a problem, the user is required to update either the OS or anti-virus software (the above process is bypassed for Mac and Linux machines). The user then logs in to Campus Manager with a domain ID and password (i.e., BGM or Pods domains). Campus Manager records the unique MAC address of the machine’s network interface card and associates that address with the particular user. Once the machine has been successfully registered, it can be connected to any port on campus without further need to register.
Users can register computers well in advance of using an open port. Using the computer you want to register, connect to http://campus.verify.binghamton.edu and go through the registration process. (Windows-based computers can connect to this resource from either on- or off-campus. Other systems (Mac or Linux) will have to pre-register from an on-campus network connection.) We suggest you do this now before you forget about it and well before we implement the change. Faculty who plan to use a laptop in a classroom should register early using the link above rather than wait until the last minute and find they can’t connect!.
This change does not apply to computers connecting to the wireless network, which already authenticate for access. Off-campus library patrons, students who live off campus, conference attendees and casual visitors will need to register computers that they plan to use in these spaces. A bypass registration method will be available on an emergency basis for guest speakers or others where time may not allow for the full registration process before some critical event.
Call the Helpdesk at 7-6420 if you have trouble with the registration process.
COMMITTEE FOR THE UNIVERSITY ENVIRONMENT
ANNUAL REPORT 2005-2006
Committee held 6 meetings this year.
Active members included Herbert Bix, Don Brister, David Clark, Patrick
Madden, Tom McDonough , Ralph Miller, Julian Shepherd (Chair), John Titus,
Deanne Westerman (faculty members), James VanVoorst (Vice Chair), Juliet Berling (environmental ombudsperson),
Rene Coderre (Residential Life), Wayne Schneider (Physical Facilities), Lee
Nesslage (professional staff), Jeff Bohner (graduate student), and Dylan
Horvath (Natural Areas Steward). Invited
Our major business this year included (1) review of alternative means of transportation to, on, and from Campus, (2) review of energy usage on Campus, (3) review of BU construction activities, (4) support and participation in Natural Areas developments, (5) review of recycling and pesticide use on Campus.
1. Transportation to and on Campus. The Committee reviewed in particular plans for use of shuttles and other transportation to and from the new ITC and downtown campuses. In response to the increase in gas prices, the Committee worked on development of a website at the University to facilitate ride-sharing to and from Campus. The Committee also developed a questionnaire on transportation to be circulated to faculty and staff through Dateline and the University website.
Energy Usage on Campus.
University Construction Activity.
Areas, Earth Day, and Campus Cleanup.
The Committee reviewed several plans for research and education (many
schoolchildren as well as BU students) in the Nature Preserve and Natural
Areas. With the new Steward of the
5. Recycling Programs and Pesticide Use on Campus. CUE reviewed recycling activities on Campus. It also reviewed the annual pesticide report from the Physical Plant.
Report of the Faculty Senate Committee on Committees
The committee membership for 2005-06 was:
Beth Brown, Libraries
James carpenter, SEHD
Manas Chatterji, SOM
Pamela Stewart Fahs, DSON
Susannah Gal, Biological Sciences
Les Lander, Computer Science (chair)
The committee met in person twice, once on September 30 and
once on February 10. All further work of
the committee was done by email. Les
Lander was elected chair of the committee at the first meeting.
School of Management
Date: May 9, 2006
To: Faculty Senate
From: Subimal Chatterjee, Chair
Faculty Senate Evaluation Coordinating Committee
Subject: 05/06 Annual Report
The FSECC met three times during the year (with other meeting conducted electronically). The committee initiated and completed the evaluation of the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, Mary Ann Swain, and submitted the report to the Faculty Senate Executive Committee.
Abigail Bordeaux (Libraries)
Subimal Chatterjee (SOM)
Theresa Grabo (Decker)
Kenneth McLeod (Watson)
Erik Pedersen (Harpur)
Max Pensky (Harpur)
Jean Schmittau (SEHD)
Pamela Smart (Harpur)
Joel Thirer (HPEA)
INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETIC BOARD
2005 –2006 Annual Report
The Intercollegiate Athletic Board met three times during the 2005-2006 academic year. As is customary the athletic director and his staff kept the board abreast on the progress of the athletic teams, recruiting of athletes and coaches, on facilities management and improvements, the operating budget and team performances. The committee discussed other issues as they pertained to recommendations for the IAB that were put forward by the various subcommittees of the NCCA certification self-study report. Many of the recommendations were incorporated into revisions to the existing IAB by-laws. As to those by-laws three subcommittees were formed in the fall meeting. Reports were made in the spring. Enclosed are copies of minutes from all three meetings as well as the revised by-laws.
Matt Bassett, Associate Director of Athletics (ex officio without vote)
Kim King, Senior Woman’s Administrator (ex officio without vote)
Jen Haubrick, student female athlete (2005-2006)
Neil Rose, Alumnus (2004-2006)
President Student Association (ex officio) (2005-06)
Hasani Hampton, student male athlete (2005-2006)
Dennis Lasser, SOM, Faculty rep to the NCAA (Chair) (ex officio)
Steve Dickman, Geology (2004-06)
Leslie Haywood, English (2004-06)
Mike Lewis, Faculty (2005-2007)
Financial Vice President, Student Association (ex officio)
Norman Spear, Psychology (2004-06)
Terry Webb, Vice President of Administration (ex officio)
Joel Thirer, Director, PERA (ex officio without vote)
Sandra Michael, Biology (2004-2006)
Joseph El Chami, Student (2005-2006)
IAB Minutes 11-14-05
Present: J. Thirer, D. Lasser, K. King, H. Hampden, S. Dickman, S. Spear, T. Webb
The meeting was called to order at 9:07 A. M.
The meeting began with a review of the NCAA Certification report. The certification was described as the Athletic departments equivalence to a Middle States review. The report said that, in general, the athletic department has done an admirable job especially given its recent transition to Division I. The reviewers did point out two areas in particular that needed some attention. Firstly, it was pointed out that there is a need for more minority representation with regard to students and coaches. Joel Thirer pointed out that the department has been aware of the situation and is working hard to increase minority representation in all areas. Secondly, the reviewer pointed out that an abnormally high number of funded students have been designated as special talent admits. Furthermore, the reviewers noted that many of these admits were high quality students with SAT scores as high as 1280. It appears that the reason so many students have been labled as special talents is that coaches simply check the special talent box for all of their recruits so that the files do not get misplaced. The athletic department is in the process of working with admissions to come up with an alternative system so as to keep track of easily admissible students without having to designate them as special talent admits.
Dennis Lasser passed out the latest Academic Performance
Rating (APR) for each of the teams. None of the teams appear to be in danger of
losing any athletic scholarships. The only teams that had multiyearAPRs that
were under 92.5% were men’s tennis, women’s tennis and men’s indoor track. Joel
Thirer pointed out that men’s tennis was at 90.7% only because two players
transferred to Brown and
According to the newly revised by-laws three subcommittees were formed.
President of Student Association
Financial V.P. of Student Association
Kim King reported that there are several student welfare
projects underway. A student Advisory Committee (SAC) has been formed as on
organizing body for the projects. Kim listed several projects that the student
athletes have participated in including a letter writing campaign for
Finally, Joel Thirer gave updates on the fall and winter sport activity. Of the many successes mentioned a highlight was that the women’s volleyball team qualified for the NCAA tournament for the first time.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:05
2/23/06: Minutes of IAB meeting of 2/22/06
Present were: Matt Bassett, Steve Dickman, Tim Fenton, Jen Hanbrich, Kim King, Dennis Lasser, Sandra Michael, Neil Rose, Skip Spear, Joel Thirer,
Reported were mean GPA for each team, potential problem areas and the few team members who were made ineligible due to grades or were retention losses for other reasons. The mean GPA for all athletes was commendable, 2.96. GPA was 4.0 for eight athletes and 3.50 or greater for 89. Service provided by the Department of Athletics to facilitate academic performance by athletes was reviewed. About 2/3 of all athletes receive academic assistance of some kind. The approach is to allow all athletes to excel academically, not just to maintain acceptable performance for a few. Finally, Kim King reported that there have been a substantial number of community projects contributed by athletes over the past few months. Some of the highlights were a fundraising campaign for the cancer society and a visit by the womans basketball team to a hospitalized high school girl suffering from terminal cancer.
Tim Fenton provided an overview of his compliance office, including the large network of oversight components needed to ensure compliance and the educational initiatives employed to make the university community aware of the NCAA rules.
Joel Thirer discussed maintenance of gender equity. Funds allocated for scholarship to women’s teams are now greater than those for men, but it continues to be difficult to maintain equivalent numbers of participants due to a smaller pool of potential participants among women not supported by scholarships.
Matt Bassett verified that the NCAA Certification report was submitted, limited questions were raised by NCAA and a revision submitted. No difficulties are expected. The next report is not due for 10 years.
Joel Thirer gave an update on the fall and winter teams. As a whole the University is having a very successful season and is in the running for the Commissioners Cup an award given the University that has the best overall performance in the America East Conference.
IAB minutes 4-26-06 3:30
1~ President DeFleur expressed concern to Dennis Lasser about the lack of
sportsmanship surrounding past athletic competitions.
Joel discussed the issues surfacing at the most recent basketball games.
The group discussed getting peers involved and that Matt Bassett was heading up an
Athletic’s committee on sportsmanship.
It was recommended that some groups to get involved or continue involvement
should be: SAAC, sports leaders, BU zoo leaders, and the SA.
2~ The budget was handed out. Dr. Thirer broke down the budget by item. He answered questions about development and projected increases. Dennis asked about the budget because of potential increasing of fees in future. There was group interest in future changes and expectations with regard to budgeting for these projected increases.
3~ New business…
Certification has been delayed, does not indicate a problem because there was a delay in the entire process.
4~ Sports update
Groh first in the nation in ERA
The meeting concluded at 4:35.