MINUTES

ARIZONA BOARD OF REGENTS

MINUTES OF A RETREAT MEETING

June 25, 1998

A Retreat Meeting of the Arizona Board of Regents was held at the Arboretum, South Woody Mountain Road, Flagstaff, Arizona, on July 25, 1998. President Campbell called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.

PRESENT:    Regent George H. Amos, III
                    Regent Rudy Campbell
                    Regent Judith A. Gignac
                    Regent Chris Herstam
                    Regent Jack Jewett
                    Regent Kay McKay
                    Regent John Munger
                    Regent John Platt
                    Regent Donald Ulrich

ABSENT:      Regent Jane Dee Hull
                    Regent Lisa Graham Keegan

Also present were: President Clara Lovett, Northern Arizona University; President Lattie Coor, Arizona State University; President Peter Likins, University of Arizona; Ms. Jennifer Reichelt, Student Regent Designee; Executive Director Frank Besnette and Ms. Judy Garza, Secretary to the Board, and Mr. David L. Griffis, Consultant.

Mr. Griffis said he hoped the meeting would assist the Regents in continuing to improve their processes--how they accomplish their work and when the work gets done. He suggested the session be devoted to identifying the most important issues the Board should focus its energies on over the next few years. He encouraged everyone to express their views with complete candor.

The Regents, the members of the Council of Presidents, and Ms. Reichelt explained why they became involved in education as a career or as a volunteer. There was a discussion concerning who the Regents serve. Students, taxpayers, the public good, individual communities, the institutions, faculty and staff, the legislature, the private sector, civilization, and other educational entities were identified. It was determined the Regents operate in an environment of multiple constituencies or stakeholders, but at the center is the necessity to preserve and improve the health of the Arizona university system within realistic constraints. Most participants agreed they need to do a better job of explaining what they do to the legislature and other outside constituencies.

The meeting recessed at 10:17 a.m. and reconvened at 10:30 a.m. There was discussion of the opportunities and challenges that might present themselves in the next three or four years. Adequate funding, enrollment growth, access, especially for the changing student profile,

preparation of students and teachers, public support, new and emerging technology and changing methods of educating students, competition and marketing, research and technology transfer, the tuition setting process, a balance between undergraduate and graduate education, quality, public

awareness, and legislative support were all considered. The universities' service role in the community, such as helping with research and data concerning the problems of children, was addressed. It was suggested the Board does not have a clear strategy for handling challenges and problems, especially recurring problems, and it should become more proactive.

An attempt was made to list areas of concern that should be given priority over the next two years. Learner Centered Change, Demographics, Globalization, Economics of Higher Education, Governance, Higher Education System Transformation, Elementary and Secondary Education, and Partnerships were the broad categories established. The Regents need to develop a better understanding of each of these categories, but acknowledged there are some areas where they will have a greater role and influence than others. The need to help the universities remain flexible during today's fast-paced changes was also discussed. Also, it was recognized issues may surface which will need attention even though they are not on the priority list. And, even though some issues--such as the 120-hour requirement and the ability to get the classes needed--have been largely resolved, there are continuing issues such as articulation with the community colleges and resolving the issue of community colleges awarding baccalaureate degrees. With the pace of change so great, there needs to be a way to adjust for the internal impact of new demands when they are added to what is already under consideration.

There was discussion of how everything is connected. When decisions must be made, the Regents need to consider the intended as well as the unintended consequences of that decision. When the Board has dealt with an issue, there needs to be an established procedure for monitoring the progress on the issue without causing a complete reworking of the issue. It was suggested the Hurwitz Measures are an example of a good way to address and monitor issues, but it may be wise to periodically consolidate measures into fewer reports instead of adding a new report for every issue. Regents were asked to let Executive Director Besnette know what changes to the Board book they would favor and how the changes would be helpful to them.

The meeting recessed at 11:55 a.m. and reconvened at 12:55 p.m.

The Regents focused on how they do their work. A need for monitoring those critical areas that are not currently a priority and a method for surfacing and managing issues was discussed. Utilization of the Consent Agenda whenever appropriate was endorsed by all. Formal presentations at the meeting which repeat information provided in the Board book were criticized and discouraged for the future.

It was suggested that presentations be given only on major issues and that Regents alert universities or central office staff before the meeting if they have concerns with a particular item or issue. Another suggestion was for the chairs of the committees to take responsibility to contact the Executive Director or the universities if there was a problem with an agenda item, and for Regents to contact the committee chair if they have questions or concerns. Several Regents noted they do not always have time to read the meeting material far enough in advance to make all their concerns known prior to the meeting. It was suggested all the Board meeting material be put on the Web so everyone would have access to all the information.

It was agreed that courtesy and civility should be the rule during the meetings and in all interactions of the Board. It was suggested the Regents bring up suggestions for additional issues they wish added to future agendas during the last item on the Agenda, Inquiries, Requests, Reports and Comments From Regents and Members of the Council of Presidents. Also, there was discussion as to whether a single Regent could add an item to the Agenda, thus causing work to be done on an issue other Regents may not care to address. One suggestion was for Regents to present their ideas to the Board President or appropriate committee chair for consideration as an agenda item for the future.

The meeting recessed at 2:30 p.m. and reconvened at 3:46 p.m.

The time and staffing requirements for putting the entire Board book on the Web were discussed and it was determined to be impractical at this time. One Regent suggested colored paper be used to highlight the executive summary of each agenda item in the Board books; Regents could then read the backup material only when they elect to do so.

When formal presentations are judged to be needed, they should be crisp and short and not repetitive of the material provided in the board book. Time should be allowed for questions and discussions. If a question is asked the staff present can't answer, a telephone call can be placed to someone at the university who can provide the needed information or answer. In order to make this approach a success, Regents committed to be well read and prepared for meetings.

Tuition and financial aid were identified as important issues that deserve extensive discussion. Most Regents expressed a desire to find a more orderly, logical way to set tuition and financial aid policy. It was suggested it might take six months to do so, but it would be worth the effort.

There was a discussion as to how the issues defined during this retreat relate to current strategic plans. It was suggested the Annual Regents' Action Plan may need to be modified. Questions were also raised as to how to make other constituencies part of the discussions and engage them in identifying solutions.

The Council of Presidents was directed to develop the issues identified and discussed and suggest a framework and schedule for future discussion of the issues.

Mr. Griffis agreed to prepare a summary attempting to capture the flow of the day's discussion. The meeting participants each summarized what they believed they would take with them from this meeting. The meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m.

 

SUBMITTED BY:

______________________________

Judy E. Garza
Secretary to the Board

APPROVED BY:

______________________________

Rudy E. Campbell
President

 

ATTEST:

__________________________

Donald Ulrich
Assistant Secretary