previous sectionnext section



Trustee Eichhorn: Welcome, we are pleased that you are all here today. We also welcome Interim President Bepko.


  1. Approval is requested for the minutes of the meeting of November 1, 2002, which include the Administrative Action Reports of September 12, 2002 and October 10, 2002, and the minutes of the meeting of December 6, 2002, which include the Administrative Action Report of November 12, 2002.

    Unanimously approved on a motion duly made and seconded.


  1. Remarks by Interim President Gerald L. Bepko

    Interim President Bepko: Thank you Trustee Eichhorn. I’m honored to be here in this role, and I want to thank you and thank everyone for the warmth and friendship that’s been extended to me. Thanks to everyone for helping to continue the momentum that was built up in the Brand years. Thanks for helping to continue to build the teamwork that’s been a hallmark of IU, and so important to our future, and thanks everyone for pitching in and helping us to prepare for the recruitment of a new president. This institution, which is a great university already, will be improved, I believe, by the proposals that we are going to make here today.

  2. Introduction of the IUPUIUIPUI Chancellor - designate

    Before I address the appointment of a new chancellor for IUPUI, I’d like to take a moment to say a word about Bill Plater, who is serving as acting chancellor. He is doing a superb job, and in the last couple of weeks has bent over backward to contribute to a collegial spirit at IUPUI and establish a new era in campus administration. Prior to this, he has spent 15 years providing great leadership for the academic programs at IUPUI, and many of IUPUI’s proudest features are a result of his excellent work. It would be inappropriate to introduce the new chancellor without acknowledging all that Bill has done for IUPUI and Indiana University. Thank you Bill.

    Now I’d like to keep you in suspense for just another moment and introduce the spouse and partner of the person who we will propose for the appointment as chancellor. We were delighted to be able to recruit Sandra Petronio as a member of the faculty for Indiana University at IUPUI. She’s been on the faculty at the University of Minnesota, Arizona State University and, most recently, Wayne State. She’s a professor of communications with a special emphasis on family and health communications, and she’s going to join us as a professor of communications studies. She will spend half of her time in the Center on Bioethics in the School of Medicine at IUPUI. I’m really proud to be able to introduce Sandra to you for the first time.

    Now, we proudly recommend to you the appointment of Charles R. Bantz. Charles has been a member of the faculty at the University of Colorado, University of Minnesota, Arizona State and Wayne State University. He is a very distinguished faculty member, but in recent years he has become equally distinguished as a university executive, serving as department chair, vice provost, and most recently, senior vice president and provost of Wayne State University. Wayne State, incidentally, is one of the institutions that the trustees have approved as an IUPUI peer institution, which we use for benchmarking purposes. They always say that if you’re going to recruit a new executive, the best thing to do is go to your peer institutions and recruit the best people from them. That’s exactly what I think we’ve done, and I’m pleased to be able to introduce to you chancellor-designate for IUPUI, Charles R. Bantz.

    Trustee Eichhorn: I would entertain a motion for the election of Charles R. Bantz.

    Unanimously approved on a motion duly made and seconded.

    Trustee Eichhorn: Charles, congratulations, we are very pleased to have you with us.

  3. Update on the IU Bloomington Strategic Planning Process by Chancellor Sharon Stephens Brehm and Prof. Fred Cate

    Interim President Bepko: We have another exciting development, this time from the Bloomington campus. As you all know, there’s been a Strategic Planning Process underway now for several months. This is a planning process that we believe will lead to a new era of greatness for Indiana University Bloomington, and Chancellor Sharon Brehm and Professor Cate, the chair of the strategic planning committee, are here to give us an update.

    Chancellor Brehm: Thank you very much. The report you’re about to receive is the result of extensive discussion and extremely hard work by many people. I need to thank the deans, the BFC Long Range Planning Committee, BFC President Bob Eno, President Brand, Interim President Bepko and many, many, many other people. Initially, our conversations were very informal conversations, but over the summer they became more formal and more precise. Obviously my greatest thanks is for the Strategic Planning Committee. In your packet you will find a list of the members, and you will see that they are all very highly respected, highly credible individuals. In fact, it amazed me that they agreed to serve on the committee. They have many other things that they need to do, but they understood that this was a really important moment in the history of the institution. I would like to single out the chair. When thinking about the chair of this committee, it occurred to me we needed someone who had the patience of Job and the wisdom of Solomon. We also needed someone who had a very good sense of humor. What we got -- and we were fortunate to get him -- was Fred Cate, an outstanding legal scholar. I think he does have Job- and Solomon-like qualities, and he has a delightful sense of humor.

    Why do strategic planning? I think for three reasons. One, the most commonly cited reason, is to use your resources wisely. Just as important is the creation of a sense of community. And finally, you will see that a great sense of identity comes out of this process; a better definition, if you will, of the Bloomington campus. I think people were pleased with this, and excited to see this unfold.

    Fred Cate: Thank you very much. Mr. President, Trustees, you have before you the strategic plan, the first of three reports that we have been asked to do as part of the strategic planning process. You and the campus saw this report in draft form in December. In response to that draft, we received many comments from the campus. We hosted a public forum to provide an opportunity for an open discussion of the plan, and we have certainly considered all of the comments we received; in fact, the documents you have now reflects many of those.

    Let me outline what we set out to do, and what the document in front of you covers. I would note that you have a copy of the plan, along with several sheets that highlight the key points.

    The committee first met September 30, and 13 times since then. It saw itself as trying to fulfill four tasks, one of which was to draft a mission and value statement for the campus. In that statement we wanted to not merely mimic the language of many other mission statements, but rather to really define what made this campus distinct both within the IU system and among other universities. I won’t read the entire statement now, but I would like to go over the first two sentences: "As the premier residential campus of a public research university, Indiana University Bloomington advances knowledge and learning to serve the changing needs of society. Indiana University Bloomington is responsible to the public for stewardship of all of our resources and for using those resources for the public good."

    We then articulate the values that we believe characterize this campus in trying to fulfill that mission. The mission-statement process actually took much longer than we expected. I think we thought we might complete that very quickly, but the process of identifying what made the campus noteworthy and distinctive was an effort which really took the entire fall semester and ran through many of our activities.

    The second task we undertook was one we had not specifically been charged with. It rapidly became clear to us that before focusing on academic priorities we needed first to articulate some general broad themes, which we thought worthy of note even though they were not focused enough or strategic enough to be academic priorities. We thought of these themes as not only important in future determinations about which proposals within those academic priorities would be funded, but also in all of the campuses activities. These are themes which we believe run through really virtually everything the campus does. Again, I won’t read the entire list to you, but let me give you several examples.

    One is enhancing undergraduate education. That’s not something we could capture in any single academic priority, but is something that runs through all of the priorities. If each of the parties does not serve that purpose they’re not appropriate priorities in our view. Other themes are building diversity and ensuring accountability to make certain that the investment of these Commitment to Excellence funds are measured as to whether they achieve their desired purpose. The Commitment to Excellence has caused much comment, and prompted thinking big and taking risks. The notion of moving beyond small incremental steps to really bold initiatives struck us an opportunity to do something that would make a difference in the life of the campus.

    Third, when we turned to the academic priorities, they occupied much of the past four months. I might say just a word about the process by which we used to identify these priorities. Our goal was not to simply identify financial need and try to meet it. We found so much financial need in the presentations that were made to the committee, and in our discussions and in the reports and documents that we reviewed, that it quickly became clear that the Commitment to Excellence funds would be nothing but a drop in the bucket if we tried to use them solely to meet important needs. Instead we focused on places where those funds could be invested to make a strategic difference in the life of the campus; to build on excellence that already exists in a way that would affect the life of the campus not just to build silos of excellence but to expand the quality of the campus as a whole.

    There were many ways in which this might be achieved. One, of course, had to do with leveraging funds. If investment in an area would make it possible to then obtain additional funds, that investment might be thought of as strategic. We also thought in terms of not just the research life of the campus or even just the undergraduate educational life, but also the community as a whole. As just one example, we focus on the priority on the arts, on the music school, something which is not merely distinguished and itself has a reputation of international stature, but which improves the quality of life for everyone, even people who are not part of the university.

    At the end of our deliberations we identified five areas of academic priority: life sciences; applied sciences and information technology; interdisciplinary initiatives involving the liberal arts; the arts; and finally, international programs and curricula.

    Finally, we looked at the review process by which we will recommend to the chancellor that the Commitment to Excellence funds be distributed. We were not asked, and we were grateful for that, to make any specific recommendations about where the money itself goes, but rather to identify a process by which others to come after us could make those decisions, to evaluate proposals, to make recommendations to the chancellor and to the Trustees. That review process is laid out in detail; I will not belabor it with you now, other than to say that one of our major goals in that process was to make sure that the proposal generating and review process was closely integrated with the academic life of the campus, with the deans, with the systems and processes that already exist, rather than as something separate that might be seen as competing with other initiatives on the campus.

    Let me conclude by noting just two things. One, we have greatly benefited from the support of the campus administration and the many comments we have received, particularly the response from students, which we have found enormously helpful in that it gave us a different perspective. And finally I would conclude by noting that the committee itself has worked enormously hard, a real commitment not just of energy but of real dedication, of talent. When the chancellor asked me to chair this committee I thought of every reason I could possibly decline. She wouldn’t accept any of those so I came up with what I thought was the certain one to work, which is I said I thought the committee was too big, and I thought the time frame too little. I thought if I went right for the jugular she would go elsewhere. She said she disagreed with me, and I think that time has proved that she was right. This committee has come together remarkably, for 25 people from such diverse backgrounds, and given a very short timeframe, we have seen more of each other in some months than we have seen of our families. I appreciate very much your interest in this process, and if I can answer questions now or at any time in the future I hope you’ll share them with us.

    Trustee Backer: Not only was I pleased with the entire document, but I was very pleased to see that you put something about K-12 in here. It’s very important and I’m glad to see that you put that in.

    Prof. Cate: I appreciate that and I would certainly credit the fact that we have the dean of the School of Education on the committee who helped keep our eyes firmly focused on that goal.

    Trustee Shoulders: Wonderfully done. I congratulate you on your work.

    Trustee Ferguson: I especially appreciate how difficult it is to set priorities across the campus. I think you’ve laid a great foundation here.

    Trustee Talbot: I concur with everything that’s been said, and I am very pleased to see this document. The most difficult part of a document like this is putting it into implementation and reviewing it systematically, and we look forward to being as supportive as we can possibly be as you go through that process, both implementation and review.

    Prof. Cate: Thank you very much. Let me say that the committee welcomes that input. We often become overly focused on something; it’s very helpful when people from different perspectives, and particularly from the Trustees, help raise issues or perspectives that we may not have thought of. So at anytime throughout this process -- we sit for another 11 months -- there will be many opportunities for that input.

    Trustee Eichhorn: How often will you meet? Or have you decided yet?

    Fred Cate: Up until this point we have averaged a meeting just about every ten days. I think that will slow down just a little bit now. When this report was approved by the committee on Monday night, five days before the chancellor’s deadline, I would point out, the committee felt an enormous sigh of relief and a sense of we’re done now and I pointed out that we are going to take a week off without a meeting but we would be meeting of course the second week of February again so I think we will be meeting twice monthly.

    Trustee Eichhorn: It’s an impressive work product and thank you both for being here and presenting it.

    Fred Cate: Thank you very much.

    Chancellor Brehm: Again, thanks to all of the members of the committee, this is an extraordinary committee.

    Trustee Eichhorn: Very good.

    Interim President Bepko: I agree with President Eichhorn. It’s an excellent project and it gives everyone extraordinary hope for the future and thank you very much.

    Fred Cate: Thank you and frankly I should have added because one of the things that we have appreciated is that President Bepko came into a process that he somewhat inherited and has been enormously helpful and supportive in assuring us that the change in Presidency was not going to influence the outcome of this. So we are very grateful for his as well as the chancellor’s support throughout this. Thank you.

    Trustee Eichhorn: Thank you.

  4. Remarks from Robert Eno, University Faculty Council

    Bob Eno: Good afternoon. The University Faculty Council has not met since the last time I appeared before you. A number of matters are pending, however, and I’d like to brief you on those. Seeing that I’m following on Fred Cate and on Sharon Brehm’s presentation, I think I’d like to make a comment on that.

    This committee really is quite extraordinary. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a committee burdened with such a task, complicated by the fact that they were going to have to exclude a great many of the activities on campus in order to identify strategic priorities. They not only fulfilled their task, but they did so in such a way that when we had an open forum and invited the campus to comment, at the close of that forum the people in that room all stood up and applauded the committee for what they had done -- even the people who felt that their area hadn’t quite appeared, who were hoping for more personally or professionally, they were already thinking of how they were going to move themselves towards the priorities that have been delineated. Really, it is quite extraordinary, and if you read this document over a number of times I think you will appreciate the depth of intellectual texture that goes into it. It is a truly fine academic document. That is could be produced so fast by a group of people who have not previously met as a committee astonishes me.

    In other matters, we’ve formed a subcommittee of the UFC Agenda Committee to address the issue of reviews of university administrators and academic administrators, in connection with the goal of retiring the retirement policy and devising a review system for chancellors, vice chancellors and academic officers. Our goal is to create a system of such integrity and promise that the trustees, faculty and administrators will be comfortable eliminating mandatory retirement. That subcommittee has met, and we had already established some foundations. We set up a clearer agenda of how we want to proceed, and we’re going to be talking further with our UFC Agenda Committee. When the UFC meets on February 11, we’re going to begin to get the entire council more involved in these discussions to alert them this is coming up. We hope to be able to complete a substantial amount of this work during this term. That’s our goal, and it’s much shorter than the original five-year window that we discussed last spring when we turned to this issue in connection with the retirement policy.

    The other issue that I’d like to mention is the issue concerned with the ongoing PeopleSoft project. The faculty has been very involved on a number of campuses, particularly the two large campuses, dealing with the implications of the conversion to PeopleSoft on the student’s records. As you all know, PeopleSoft has enormous potential but does not have maximum flexibility in the areas that we traditionally have highlighted in our legacy systems. Certainly on our larger campuses we’ve become quite well-known for our student records. We have had outstanding registrar’s offices that devised wonderful systems that we’ve all become accustomed to. One of the things we’ve had to wake up to, and it hasn’t been a very pleasant awakening, is that some things that we thought were simply baseline, turn out to be unique to Indiana because of the talent of our registrar’s office. Now we no longer have those things. The faculty have been charged with advising the student enrollment systems and the SIS project team on its view concerning the cost benefit of retaining certain policies and adapting the PeopleSoft system to fit the policies as opposed to deciding that the policies can be adapted in light of the costs that would be involved with investing further and tinkering with PeopleSoft. It’s a complex and divisive process because faculty are very attached to these sorts of policies, such as forms of transcripts, grade forgiveness policies, enrollment patterns and so forth.

    We have been preparing for this sometime, but I’d really like to highlight is this message. Throughout this period of time in which the SIS team has been analyzing the PeopleSoft project, determining how they can invent workarounds that will, at very low cost, allow us to do the things that PeopleSoft itself can’t do, and costing out all the options for modifying PeopleSoft in order to accommodate policy, they’ve been able to solve problems far beyond any of the predicted levels. They’ve been responsive to faculty’s initial response to their own questions about cost benefits, and where faculty really thought things were important. As we come into the decision-making process, which begins in February, we find that almost all of the decisions have already been removed from the table by the work of the SIS project team. They have been absolutely spectacular, both in the degree to which they have been attentive to academic issues, they themselves have focused primarily on technical issues and the talent with which they’ve solved these problems. I think we’re going to wind up with exactly one problem area of very small magnitude that we have to deal with. We’re all geared up to deal with these issues, but our SIS team has been spectacular in whipping the things off the table just as we sit down to have a fight. So I’d like to commend them and say that it’s exhausting to do this, they’re exhausted working with us, and we’re a little exhausted working with them, but I personally am filled with admiration at what they’ve been able to accomplish so far.

    Interim President Bepko: I think the appropriate person, maybe Chancellor Brehm could do this, is to get a list of the wonderful SIS people Bob referred to, and circulate that list to the Board of Trustees.

  5. Remarks from William Gray, President IU Student Assn.

    Interim President Bepko: Next, we have the President of the IU Student Association, William Gray.

    William Gray: Good afternoon. As the semester begins, we’re looking at what we did last semester, and at what worked, what didn’t work. We did a very large pilot program with The New York Times, which was quite successful, so we think we’re going to continue that. We’d also like to commend Dean McKaig for his new work on the alcohol-abuse policy. We do feel that it is not the goal of the university to punish people but to educate them, and by kicking somebody out who has an alcohol problem, we’re not helping them. Through this new procedure, called the Smart Plan, we really think that a lot of kids can be helped. I have about 10 weeks left of my presidency, and we may have one or two more surprises.

    Trustee Talbot: Bill, I’m continually amazed at the commitment of many of the students like yourself, who spend a great deal of time on governance issues and leadership. During break, I saw a lot of student leaders on campus, and it didn’t seem like anybody else was around. I know that you all put in a lot of time and we are very appreciative of everything you do on behalf of the students.

    William Gray: Thank you very much.

    Trustee Shoulders: How was your voter registration and turn out?

    William Gray: We are very happy with how it turned out. We got a lot of response from different people in the state legislature asking when they could come down to talk to the students. So if nothing else we’ve got their attention. They know what we want, and know how we’re going to vote.

  6. Good News

    Interim President Bepko: Mr. President we have lots of good news, including record enrollments again this spring term. But I’d like to approach it in a thematic sense, especially in view of the fact that we’ve just celebrated Martin Luther King’s birthday and are looking forward to February which is Black History Month. We thought we should talk about the good news in relationship to Indiana University’s long-standing commitment to social justice and diversity. Vice President Charlie Nelms is here to introduce those topics. Charlie?

    Vice President Nelms: Thank you President Bepko, good afternoon to each of you. I’m delighted, there is indeed good news. You know there’s talk of war, the sagging economy and all of that, and it’s easy to get depressed if you’re not very careful, but I’m an optimist, and so are all the people that I have an opportunity to work with, so we have a good new story to share with you.

    Over the past five years we have worked very hard to improve the climate on all of our campuses. As an example, there is the FACET project, where we are trying to infuse diversity into the curriculum. We believe that diversity and excellence are part of the same fabric, and if we are going to be an excellent university we must be a diverse university. When our students leave here, they should know how to live more effectively and lead more effectively in an increasingly multicultural environment. So you are going to be hearing two major presentations today. The first is from Interim Chancellor Bill Plater at IUPUI, talking about a project that has enormous implications, not only for Indiana University but for higher education as an enterprise.

    Interim Chancellor Plater: Thank you Vice President Nelms. First of all let me thank President Bepko for his very kind and gracious remarks, and to all of you for your acknowledgement. If I have accomplished anything at IUPUI in the years that I have been there it’s because Chancellor Bepko has established such an effective team of people who work very well together. Our vice chancellors, our deans, our faculty leadership, are a team that is eagerly anticipating the arrival of Charles Bantz, and a team that knows it has a very solid foundation on which to build in the future. Indeed, one of most important parts of this foundation is work that began under Chancellor Bepko’s leadership, two elements of which I’d like to mention today.

    One is a commitment to IUPUI’s accountability for the things that it does, and for the things it says it will do. This is taking the form of the development of a series of performance indicators that can be easily understood by both the public and our own internal community. We’ve referred to these key indicators as "dashboard indicators" to suggest that there are a few items, and that if we look at them very carefully they will give us in a snapshot of how we are doing, and how we are meeting the goals that we have set for ourselves through the planning process.

    A second element that has developed under former Chancellor Bepko’s leadership is a willingness to talk publicly about important issues, and to be very candid about them. Over the years we’ve celebrated Martin Luther King Day with a dinner; in fact, I think we have one of the oldest celebrations in the country. We had our 33rd dinner this year. At this event, the chancellor has traditionally made remarks. Initially, those comments were somewhat informal, but three years ago, the chancellor established a State of Diversity message to be delivered on this occasion for both the Indianapolis community and the university community about what we were doing in matters related to diversity.

    I had the great good fortune this year to have a convergence of a these two elements into the State of Diversity message that I think you have before you. I certainly hope that as time permits you will read the text of this message.

    I invite your attention to Page 5 of the brochure that has the performance indicators that are related to diversity. We have some 30 overall performance indicators, but eight of these have significance as it relates to diversity at IUPUI. In keeping with the notion of being dashboard indicators, we have adopted a way of reflecting our progress by using traffic signals, a green light to indicate that things are progressing, a yellow light to suggest caution and a red light to indicate things are not going as well as we would like and certainly as well as we should be expected to do. Of the eight indicators that you will see reflected there, we have one red light, one green light, and the rest are yellow. I think that this is a record that is certainly understandable, but a record that clearly needs improvement. I think that the important point that I want to make about what we have put in place at IUPUI is a willingness to talk about what we are doing and to continue to improve. The record here sets forth to us things that we need to pay attention to. We don’t want to let a green light turn to yellow or certainly not to red. We are committed to turning those yellow lights to green lights, and right now we’re concentrating on the red light which is a reflection of our lack of success in retaining and graduating minority students and a proportion to the numbers of which they are of our student body. As a result of the assessment here and the commitment we have made through the State of Diversity message, we have initiated now a series of actions designed over the next three to five years to turn that red light initially into a yellow light. We believe this will be very hard work and we have no illusions of how difficult it will be to make real change, but the good news part of this message to you is that we have a strong interest and commitment of deans and faculty to work especially on this area of the retention and graduation of minority students. We hope that the indicators we’re developing at IUPUI will indeed have an influence on others. We know from our North Central Accreditation review that was concluded in November that North Central believes that the indicators we’ve developed are very interesting. The review team has taken back a message to North Central suggesting that others may wish to look at the indicators in the broad realm and, we hope, especially as it relates to diversity.

    Trustee Willsey: I have a question. When we talk about diversity, do we talk about racial diversity and the female population? You touched upon this earlier. Do we ever think about the members of the GLBT community as part of the diverse group that we need to advance so pay special attention to?

    Vice President Nelms: Absolutely.

    Trustee Willsey: How do you do that?

    Vice President Nelms: Well we do it first of all by making sure that we have people in a position to advocate on behalf of those populations, and we have our coordinator who’s a part of the Dean of Students staff, Doug Bauder. He does an extremely good job helping us to stay focused there. But that’s not to say that is Doug’s job alone; that’s a job all of us must do, so we try to work collaboratively, and I think we do it well. That applies not only to GLBT students, but also to women, ethnic minorities, international students -- the whole range.

    Trustee Willsey: Is that the same on the IUPUI campus?

    Interim Chancellor Plater: Yes it is. In the State of Diversity message, you will find our vision for diversity at IUPUI; a statement that has been endorsed by our dean, by our faculty council. You will see major commitment there for us to create an environment for all students. (END OF TAPE).

    Trustee Ferguson: I’d heard some expression of concern by members of the legislature as we increase the standards, and we refer students under your program to Ivy Tech, where you give them joint admission; in fact that might hurt our efforts in some of our diversity of the student body. When I look at the numbers that we got today, it looks like that there was in fact a continued improvement. Am I looking at those numbers right, and am I on safe ground to tell them that their concerns are not well founded?

    Interim Chancellor Plater: Yes, you are, but I would just add one note that there was a brief decrease in the representiveness of the class as first-year beginning students. That’s an issue that we’ve taken very seriously and, in fact, we started a middle school program that’s designed to encourage young people -- especially those in the IPS school district -- to prepare themselves for college by informing both the students and their parents of what’s expected in high school so that they will be admitted to and succeed in college. So it’s an issue that we are taking very seriously.

    One of the reasons that you see the number that you do is that in our referral of students to Ivy Tech we have worked very closely with Ivy Tech to make a pathway back to IUPUI, and we now have increasingly large numbers of students transferring to IUPUI after beginning at Ivy Tech. Those students are coming in exactly the same percentage as they have been admitted to Ivy Tech. In the case of the Indianapolis campus, that’s roughly a 20% to 25% African-American student body, and that’s about the same ratio of students that are coming, some of them transfer students. So I think the program that we’ve developed in cooperation with Ivy Tech is serving the interest of the community well, and also insuring that we provide students access and have a diverse student body at IUPUI.

    Trustee Ferguson: So our first-time full-time student beginners are, in fact, the numbers are maintaining?

    Interim Chancellor Plater: We had a slight dip, and they are now coming back because of the efforts we are making to recruit and inform students about opportunities at IUPUI. Overall they continue to go up every year, largely because of the increase in the transfer students. But I think you would be safe in saying that we are making progress for both beginning students and with the transfer students, both categories of students are increasing the number of minority students.

    Trustee Ferguson: How much of a dip did we see?

    Interim Chancellor Plater: It was relatively small, probably on the order of 100 students in a one- to three-semester period. Many of them apparently have gone to Ivy Tech and will eventually come back to IUPUI.

    Trustee Breckenridge: Chancellor Plater, I want to thank you for the kind invitation to the Martin Luther King dinner program. It was a wonderful occasion, and I want to commend you and IUPUI and President Bepko because this has been an ongoing event for the past 33 years, and is a wonderful event for the entire community, the faculty, the staff, the students.

    Interim Chancellor Plater: We were very delighted to have you. Our speaker this year was the vice chair of the NAACP national board of which Trustee Breckenridge is a member, so we were happy to provide an occasion for a reunion.

    Vice President Nelms: It is now my pleasure to call upon Mark Bryson, our diversity educator on the Bloomington campus, and Barry McGee, who is with the office of residential programs and services, to tell you about a very special program. We all seem to be very uncomfortable talking about race, and what we are trying to do is to help people talk about the issue in a comfortable kind of way and move out of their comfort zone.

    Barry McGee: Thank you. We’re excited to be here today to share a little good news about a program that we’ve been working on for the past three years at IU Bloomington. This program grew out of a series of study circles that were being held in our community. At that time, there was some unrest on campus because of an event that had happened with one of our Greek fraternities, and because of the untimely death of Won Joon Yoon. Many of us also realized that while we have lots of opportunities for some superficial contact between people of different racial backgrounds, there wasn’t a lot of opportunity for honest in-depth dialogue. Finally, we realized that for some students, racism was simply invisible, and for others there was a misunderstanding of how it is perpetuated and what one might do in their own lives as well as at the institutional level to combat it.

    Thus was born Conversations on Race. The success that we’ve had over the past three years is due in part to the kind of structure that we created, which provides a very safe environment and allows participants to open up and to ask some questions very honestly. We have also provided balance and diversity within each of the groups, and we spend a lot of time selecting co- facilitators and trainers. The array of people who have taken the opportunity to work with us as co-facilitators has been marvelous -- everyone from IUPD officers to faculty to deans and community members as well as students. These are students who are willing to give up not only some of their time for training, but then 10 hours of their time to participate in each one of these little groups. We also invite faculty and staff to come in to look at our curriculum each year, and to give us feedback.

    I want to thank the three organizations that really have been the home base and also provided the funding for this program: The Office of Multi-Cultural Affairs, Residential Programs and Services, and the Commission on Multi-Cultural Understanding.

    Mark Bryson: Barry has shared with you why we got started and how it’s structured. I’d like to give you a few more details. There is the five-week core course, Conversations on Race, which Barry just described. We have also developed an eight-week course in the School of Education, and we have a six-week course through the College that’s offered to the Groups program because we feel this is an outstanding opportunity for them to develop cross-cultural cross-racial communications skills.

    Conversations on Race is still in its infancy. We now have pilot programs going on in the Greek organizations, in the School of Business and in the University Division. We’ve invited three students, Juhi Verma, Nicholas Tatum and Jaret Fishman , to talk briefly about what they’ve gotten out of the program.

    Nicholas Tatum: I’m a junior and a general studies major. Prior to attending the university, I had been curious about the program after hearing about it from my father, who participates as a co-facilitator. Several other students also recommended it highly. I really had hoped to participate, and learn about people from other cultures and backgrounds. I wanted to know how they would relate to my life and what I’ve been through, and I have been able to do that. Last year I participated as a volunteer in the smaller groups, and this semester I’m in the eight-week course. I personally get a lot out of it. I don’t consider myself a judgmental person, but I can be from time to time, and I think that this program has really helped me overcome that.

    Jaret Fishman: This program has been one of the most influential aspects of my college education. I’ve been involved with Conversation on Race since it’s inception in my freshman year. I’m a senior now, and all four years I’ve taken part in the Conversation on Race. What have I learned? Essentially, I learned about myself. I learned how to feel comfortable talking about personal and sensitive materials related to race and my identity. I was empowered to take action against prejudice and discrimination, and to feel that there is a safe haven to discuss race. I think that this kind of experience is essential in an academic environment, that we have an opportunity to discuss the topics that are essential to the core of who we are as people. And what is really important is that we all recognize that dialogue can change individuals and our society at large.

    Juhi Verma: The core program was a pivotal point in my college career, and I’d like to use an analogy that explains why. If I compare my experience at IU to a walk through the forest, I’d say that my impression depends on the path I take. And when I arrive at the other side of the forest, and meet everyone else who took different paths, and share their experiences and their reactions, it gives me a better idea of the forest as a whole, as opposed to the particular path I took. That’s really what Conversations on Race is. It’s a wonderful opportunity for students to come together all over campus and have honest and open dialogue about what it is to be at IU, depending on your background and your experiences, and to share your opinions. What makes core such an asset to IU is that sometimes you don’t have these conversations with your friends, and to have them with complete strangers continuously and to build upon them really opens up your abilities to communicate with people about issues that are very personal to you.

    Vice President Nelms: Thank you very much and thank you very much for giving us this opportunity. I would be remiss if I did not say to you that this program has been made possible through the Office of Affirmative Action, Dean of Student’s office, Multicultural Affairs, Residential Programs and Services and COMU. So thanks to all of those people for making it possible.

    Trustee Talbot: I would like to ask the students what you are reading, and is there any one book, selection or reading that you would recommend?

    Mr. Fishman: I would recommend Dr. Peggy McIntoshMacIntosh 's White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack.

    Trustee Eichhorn: Apropos of the subject that we’ve been discussing, I believe that now is a good time for trustees to revisit the university’s affirmative action policy. I call on Trustee Belanger for a resolution.

    Trustee Belanger: Certainly given the discussions that we’ve just had regarding advancement of diversity at IU, and as the Presidential Search moves forward. I think it is important that we reaffirm the resolution regarding Indiana University’s commitment to equal opportunity and affirmative action that was adopted by the Board of Trustees on December 4, 1992 and was reaffirmed on October 28, 1995.


    WHEREAS, acting upon the recommendation of the Presidential Task Force on "Minority Enhancement," The Trustees of Indiana University and all University administrators desire to reaffirm our "Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Policy."

    THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, The Trustees of Indiana University reaffirms the "Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Policy of Indiana University" adopted by this Board on December 4, 1992 and incorporated into the Indiana University Academic Handbook, the Indiana University Student Code of Ethics, and the Indiana University Personnel Policies.

    In reaffirming this policy, which has served us well, we must advocate and perpetuate performance which reflect this commitment. We must and will hold ourselves accountable for our decisions and actions.

    Indiana University
    Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Policy

    Indiana University pledges itself to continue its commitment to the achievement of equal opportunity within the University and throughout American society as a whole. In this regard, Indiana University will recruit, hire, promote, educate, and provide services to persons based upon their individual qualifications. Indiana University prohibits discrimination based on arbitrary considerations of such characteristics as age, color, disability, ethnicity, gender, marital status, national origin, race, religion, sexual orientation, or veteran status. Indiana University shall take affirmative action, positive and extraordinary, to overcome the discriminatory effects of traditional policies and procedures with regard to the disabled, minorities, women, and Vietnam-era veterans.

    Unanimously approved on a motion duly made and seconded.

C. TRUSTEE BUSINESS (delayed from the start of the meeting)



1. Project Approvals

2. Design Approval

3.4. Real Estate Matters for Approval


1. Report from Trustee Backer


1. Report from Trustee Breckenridge

Trustee Breckenridge: Thank you President Eichhorn. Our committee met this morning with Jamie Belanger, Sue Talbot, and myself in attendance. Vice President Charlie Nelms is our academic liaison.

We started our meeting with Lynn Coyne giving us an update on the campus bus program. The program has been wonderfully successful. Among other things, access is now available late at night, thanks to the Midnight Special. Bus ridership is widely accepted, with more than 1.1 million riders. The next step is universal access. One of the students reported that there was a need for more park and ride locations, but it’s a great program.

Our student representatives included Kenny Awoiksa from IU Northwest, Jeff Martin from IU East, Michael Sandy from IU Kokomo and Aebeer Mallick from IU Southeast. All gave very good reports about various student activities on their campuses, including involvement with Hoosiers for Higher Education. IU Southeast is very pleased that money has been approved for their new library. Josh Runyan from IUPUI reported that some of the campus food service had been closed, and Vice Chancellor Karen Whitney said the problem should be resolved shortly.

The committee also heard from Dean McKaig on IU Bloomington’s alcohol-abuse program, called SMART, and from the leaders of the Union Board and IU Student Foundation. We also heard reports from the presidents of the Pan-Hellenic and Inter-Fraternity Councils. Efforts are under way to get house advisers in the fraternities, which we think is going to help with many of the problems.

Finally our meeting concluded with the President of the Black Faculty Council, David Hummons giving a report on the need for continued diversity here at IU Bloomington.


1. Report from Trustee Shoulders

Trustee Shoulders: We met this morning. We first heard an update from Prof. Ted Miller on low-enrollment courses for the fall semester 2002-03. I’m happy to report that only approximately 150 courses, or 3% of our total 5,000 section offerings, met the criteria of low enrollment. About half of those are at the graduate level, some are in the School of Music, where one would expect some small courses. The bottom line here is we were very encouraged by this report and find no problem in terms of the maintenance of a significant number of low-enrollment courses.

We next took up the topic of under-utilized degree programs. The Commission on Higher Education sent us a report suggesting that seven of our degrees were questionable. We’ve talked with the chancellors. Of these seven degrees, five are to be withdrawn from inventory, with everyone’s agreement. They were never actually started up or they haven’t had any participation. Many were associates degrees, and we’re trying to move away from those types of degrees anyway.

The two that we will defend are a B.S. in Health Services Management at the Fort Wayne campus, only started in 1995 and beginning to pick up steam; and a Ph.D. in Social Work at the IUPUI campus -- the only Ph.D. in social work offered in the state of Indiana. Bill Plater spoke eloquently on its behalf, and we recommend to the full board that Sara McNabb, IU’s liaison to the commission, prepare a report defending those two degrees. We do so in the form of a motion.

Unanimously approved on a motion duly made and seconded.


1. Report from Trustee Talbot

Trustee Talbot: The entire committee was in attendance this afternoon. Don Weaver did an excellent job in filling us in on his work with the General Assembly this year. Many bills have been filed – more than 1,400 -- and he talked to us about those that would have a fiscal impact on us, or would have a direct impact on our governance or policies. We had a nice discussion, and a lot of Q & A from our chancellors in attendance and other people that were there. He also told us about the schedule for the remainder of the session and ways that each of us can be involved, and that certainly is an open invitation to anybody who has an interest in what’s happening in Indianapolis.

Our academic units will be hosting luncheons this year, and each campus usually does this also. and we’re hoping all the schools, faculty and students get involved. The HHE state house day is February 10 and we are anticipating that everybody in this room certainly will be there. The students were very enthusiastic, as Trustee Breckenridge noted earlier.

Steve Ferguson gave us a report on the annual conference of the Higher Education Commission to which the trustees were invited. Among other topics, they discussed K-16 education. Legislators also attended, everybody seems to be interested in being on the same page and making the case to the General Assembly about funding needed for the excellence in education.

Bill Stephan and Lisa Townsend then updated us on the marketing messages that are being distributed in Indiana. Many of us have seen the billboards that promote the percentage of graduates who live and work in Indiana, and the fields in which they shine, such as law, medicine, history, and education. They have received very positive feedback, and they are now engaging in new billboards, which will have the Indiana University symbol on them. The campus chancellors said they would like to have the same billboards in their areas, recognizing their local graduates. We also saw the new pocket calendar that features faculty excellence and which corresponds to the website about our outstanding faculty all over the state of Indiana.

We also received copies of the new information brochure about the Life Sciences Initiative, which is very well done and very explanatory to people that aren’t really sure what we’re talking about as we continue to pursue this topic. It was a good meeting.


INDIANA UNIVERSITY – Interim President Gerald Bepko

All unanimously approved on a motion duly made and seconded.

Interim President Bepko: I think we would all like to hear from Chancellor Bantz if he would like to address the board.

Charles Bantz: Thank you very much. I will be brief. I want to thank you for the opportunity to join Indiana University and take leadership of the campus at IUPUI. It is, frankly, daunting to follow in the footsteps of Jerry Bepko and Bill Plater and the efforts that have been going on many years in Indianapolis. The accomplishments are many. One of the reasons I was so interested in this opportunity is that IUPUI is famous for many of those innovations, some of which you heard about today. I really appreciate the opportunity, and I also appreciate the kind of support that you’ve already given me with suggestions and offers of help. I know that you will be probing us to make sure that we are even better than we have been in the past; that, I believe, is one of your obligations and one I really welcome. I also thank the search committee, some of whom are in the room here today. They drew me into this search and really make me enthusiastic. It is an opportunity I thank all of you for. I look forward to many chances to talk with you about the opportunities both for Indiana University and for the campus in Indianapolis. Thanks.

INDIANA UNIVERSITY BLOOMINGTON - Chancellor and Vice President Sharon Stephens Brehm.

Trustee Eichhorn: I think that gives Michael McRobbie the longest title in Hoosier-dom.


No Items

INDIANA UNIVERSITY EAST - Chancellor David Fulton

No Items


No items


No items


No items


No items

INDIANA UNIVERSITY SOUTHEAST – Chancellor Sandra R. Patterson-Randles

No items


Approval is requested for the award of degrees as of December 31, 2002.

Unanimously approved on a motion duly made and seconded.



Trustee Breckenridge: Mr. President, I wish to rescind the motion I made in December regarding chancellorships.

Trustee Shoulders: As I seconded the original motion I’ll second the motion to rescind.

Unanimously approved to rescind the motion from the last meeting.


Trustee Eichhorn: Once again terrific meeting, thanks to the Board staff, and all of you who work so hard to get this thing ready.

Trustee Shoulders: Congratulations to Rosa Ayers, our newest fellow American.

Trustee Eichhorn: Chancellor Brehm, thank you for hosting us and we hope you’ll have us back sometime.


February 27-28, 2003
Bloomington, IN


The meeting adjourned to meet again on the call of the Secretary on February 28, 2003, at Indiana University Bloomington.

Robin Roy Gress

previous sectionnext section