1. Library Planning and Action Initiative
Special Assistant for Library Planning Richard Lucier provided the Academic Planning Council with some provocative
thoughts related to library planning. He emphasized themes described in a paper by Brian Hawkins, "The Unsustainability
of the Traditional Library" (presented in October 1996 at the Stanford Forum for Higher Education Futures),
particularly that there is a need, given technology and its current and future potential, to rethink how scholarly
information is communicated. The rising price of scientific journals has already created a crisis; there is also
a developing crisis in the humanities given the increasing difficulty of publishing scholarly monographs through
the traditional university press. Library planning is grappling with these fundamental structural issues, as publishers,
university presses and academic societies themselves begin to abandon former roles and take on new ones. Libraries
may develop new roles themselves in publishing, archiving, and in the sale of services, and will most certainly
become more collaborative on a national, if not international scale.
The planning activities of the University's Library Planning and Action Initiative (directed by Lucier) are focused
on addressing the common set of problems faced by libraries throughout the system. The Initiative's Advisory Task
Force has recommended the immediate implementation of a "co-library," (a separate organizational entity,
equal in status to the nine campus libraries, charged with licensing and acquisition of electronic core content),
starting with a proposed science, technology and industry collection. They have also recommended the investigation
of new ways of sharing library resources across campuses, and to continued work with CSU. (Task forces are already
drafting agreements for UC-CSU cooperation in purchasing and sharing collections, and for expanding MELVYL access
to CSU).
The APC reiterated its interest in and concerns about the subject of library planning issues: how proposals fit
with planning for the University's 10th campus and Fresno operations, how students will be affected, particularly
if access costs create "information haves and have-nots," and how the new budget initiative in its emphasis
on decentralization may discourage intercampus cooperation. The APC will continue to discuss these issues and is
very interested in the Initiative's progress.
2. Expanding Delivery of Academic Programs
APC members discussed the proposal for a consolidated UC Educational Center in Fresno which would, among other
things, expand educational services provided to Central Valley residents. Distance learning, part-time professional
master's programs, and university extension courses all come under the umbrella of this proposal. Once such a center
is established, it will be headed by an administrative director whose role will be to catalyze and coordinate the
academic activities developed by the campuses.
UC Santa Barbara Professor Elliot Brownlee described the status of University planning for "UCDC," a
popular and successful collection of academic experiences for both undergraduate and graduate students offered
by five UC campuses in Washington, D.C. within a united UC framework. In addition to being a valuable academic
experience for students and faculty, it is a practical experiment in intercampus collaboration. Because of negotiated
exceptions to Academic Senate regulations, it currently provides the only opportunity for UC students to enroll
simultaneously at more than one campus, allowing them to take a broader range of courses offerings while they are
in Washington. Current planning focuses on the acquisition of a site and construction of a suitable academic/residential
facility that can also house the University's Office of Federal Relations. Simultaneous academic planning, necessary
for informing the capital planning, is focusing on including all general campuses in the programs, and on developing
initiatives in the areas of graduate instruction and faculty research.
3. Faculty Recruitment and Retention
The APC members discussed reports they had been provided for the purpose of answering two questions: with whom
does UC compete for recruitment and retention of faculty, and how does this competition relate to our salary scale
issues? Most notable were the findings that (a) two- thirds of our new faculty come from faculty (or post-doc)
positions at other institutions, rather than directly from graduate school; (b) three times as many faculty were
recruited from the four private universities in the "comparison eight" between 1990-91 and 1994-95 than
from the four public universities; and (c) if all sources are considered, 58 percent come from public universities.
UC has successfully recruited 83-91 percent of its first choice hires since 1984-85 (90 percent in 1994-95). In
1982-83, before faculty salaries were improved, only 72 percent of first choices were appointed.
Academic Advancement staff will provide answers to specific questions raised: even though 90 percent of first choices
are successfully recruited, are campuses having to provide more incentives than they did in previous years? Are
men or women leaving in disproportionate numbers, or are some disciplines disproportionately affected?
Academic Council Chair Duncan Mellichamp noted that representatives of the Committee on Academic Personnel and
the Council of Vice Chancellors will be meeting jointly to discuss current issues and concerns about faculty salary
scales.
4. Long-Range Enrollment Planning
The APC raised issues that may affect longer-range enrollment planning in light of two recent documents: the Planning
Group's annual Enrollment Monitoring Update and President Atkinson's February 10 letter to the Chancellors regarding
enrollment distribution among campuses for the purposes of the next round of budgeting. Members stressed that it
is essential to remember to begin looking beyond 2005-06.
The next meeting of the APC will be April 22. One agenda item will be a presentation on the status of academic
planning for the 10th campus.