Provost King opened the first Academic Planning Council meeting of 1998-99 by welcoming new members who were present for the first time: incoming chair of UCEP-Larry Beutler and faculty-at-large member Peter Lyman.
Vice Provost Carol Tomlinson-Keasey summarized several of the parallel planning activities underway for UC Merced. Her staff are preparing the documentation required by CPEC, which must approve the campus's initial plans before the Legislature can approve funding for a long range development plan for the campus. Planners are also developing a UC Merced Professional Studies Division, an Extension program that will complement the UNEX courses already being offered in the Valley by other UC campuses. The Senate will be involved in reviewing certificate programs and other reviews associated with creating the program.
Vice Provost Tomlinson-Keasey also described some of the planning related to developing a solid and substantial research base prior to the opening of the campus. The current thinking is to focus initially on the sciences and technology, creating a revenue stream that will help prepare the campus for expansion into other areas. There is considerable interest in collaboration on the part of researchers at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), possibly on topics related to the optical engineering, lasers, and various environmental issues. In addition, several University MRUs have expressed interest in another proposed area of research, the Sierra Nevada. Water, climate, ecological issues and transportation are some of the possible areas of inquiry. The Senate's newly formed UC Merced Task Force will be instrumental in the planning effort to develop a coherent curriculum that encompasses the research opportunities under discussion.
Several APC members recommended ways that the humanities and social sciences could also be part of the research focus, noting, for example, that there are "people issues" and policy issues associated with the Sierra Nevada and the Central Valley. Members also offered advice about making the engineering program distinct from the new program at Santa Cruz and for ensuring that ties with LLL serve long-term academic interests. Vice Provost Tomlinson-Keasey noted the importance of the Academic Senate Task Force's role in addressing these issues, emphasizing that the single most important planning priority was to ensure that UC Merced be a research university on a par with the other UC campuses.
The planning goals for the coming year are to create a framework for hiring faculty, assure that an initial research framework is in place, establish an Extension program, and complete the CPEC needs analysis and approval process.
2. California Virtual University
Vice Provost Tomlinson-Keasey updated the APC on the status of the California Virtual University (CVU). This is
now an independent organization, no longer associated with the Governor's Office, headed by newly appointed CEO
Stan Chodorow. The CVU is a web portal to web-based courses offered by about 100 universities, including about
200 courses offered by six UC campuses. There are no degrees offered through the CVU and most of the courses offered
by UC are Extension courses. Provost Tomlinson-Keasey and several APC members noted ways that additional courses
could be added, if campuses were interested in expanding their offerings. For example, there could be courses for
targeted audiences, such as current UC students who want to complete an extra course for their major over the summer
or Community College students who do not have access to all the courses they need in order to transfer. There could
be courses to alleviate the problem of lower-division bottleneck courses. The CVU could also be used to provide
links to campus websites that share information about research findings (e.g., UCSF's public information on AIDs).
Whatever courses might be developed, there was agreement among members that interactions will continue to be an
essential part of successful instruction and that an electronic forum cannot replace such interactions.
APC members expressed caution that expansion beyond the original intent of offering only Extension courses through the CVU will require more thorough discussion of issues such as teaching load, intellectual property, cross-campus enrollments, financial aid, among other things. Members also noted that there are many ways of using technology to improve instruction that don't necessarily expand access; funding that is available should therefore be directed more broadly to improve the use of technology in instruction, not just to develop courses for the CVU.
3. IGETC
Academic Council Chair Aimee Dorr led a discussion about proposed changes to the Intersegmental General Education Transfer Curriculum (IGETC) agreement that would permit California Community College (CCC) students who, for good cause, are 1-2 courses shy of completing the IGETC requirement at the time they transfer to UC to complete the course(s) after transfer. This change is being made in response to legislation proposed by Senator Dede Alpert to achieve the same end. Senator Alpert agreed to withdraw the legislation with the understanding the CCC, CSU, and UC faculty would themselves make the change to IGETC regulations.
APC members noted that the IGETC arrangement has been a good one for both Community Colleges and the University.
In response to the need to make this specific modification, they agreed on several principles: that the exceptions
should be very carefully defined to encompass only circumstances beyond the student's control, such as a course
not being offered by the transferring institution; that the workload associated with reviewing transcripts and
advising students be minimized; that the policy ensure that the student has the responsibility for ensuring that
requirements for graduation have been filled; and that the options for meeting the requirements (e.g., through
concurrent enrollment) be clearly identified.
Director Carla Ferri explained more about the establishment of IGETC and expressed concern that the proposed change not be interpreted as also permitting CCC students to enter UC without having completed the required transfer eligibility courses (some of which could also satisfy IGETC requirements). Vice Chancellors of Student Affairs and Vice Provosts (and other titles) of Undergraduate Education will be contacted about the proposed change, and asked for their reactions and suggestions about how best to do it.
4. Enrollment Planning
Assistant Vice President Sandra Smith updated the APC on the current status of enrollment planning. A draft "progress report" is being sent to Chancellors and to Academic Senate committees for universitywide discussion and comment prior to a presentation to The Regents in February. The report notes that current enrollment plans may not be sufficient to meet future undergraduate demand and requests discussion of some proposed approaches to resolving this issue, including consideration of such things as increasing off-campus enrollments and expanding Long Range Development Plan (LRDP) enrollment targets. She also noted that there will be a separate advocacy document prepared to help make a more public case for the importance of graduate education.