INTRODUCTION, BUILDING NAMING

In the 1989-90 period, when state funding began a downward trend, the State Board of Higher Education encouraged institutions to become more entrepreneurial and to increase fundraising efforts to accomplish needed academic, research, and student-life projects that previously would have been supported entirely by state tax funds. In 1996, the Board again emphasized a need for increased external funding when it endorsed a provision in the capital construction program priorities whereby institutions were to focus efforts to match planned bonded Education and General projects with gifts and revenue from non-state sources.

Each institution experiences different levels of giving, depending in part on its culture, the type of university, the length of time gift giving has been practiced, and the number of potential donors among the alumni and friends of the institution. A long-standing practice at private universities and colleges is to recognize donors in special ways, particularly by naming facilities and programs after the giver. The Board has an existing policy that anticipates that facilities would not be named after living donors except under special meritorious circumstances. In more recent times, as fundraising efforts have generated more significant contributions, institutions are bringing forward requests for exceptions to the existing Board policy; typically these are cases where individuals are providing outstanding service and/or significant donations. This month's docket includes two such additional requests for this exception.

NAMING OF INDOOR PRACTICE FACILITY, UO

Summary

The University of Oregon requests an exception to Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 580-050-0025 regarding the naming of buildings after a living person. The OAR provides that an exception may be made if "the donor contributes a substantial share of the cost of construction or if other unusually meritorious reasons exist."

Staff Report to the Board

Officials at the University of Oregon have forwarded to the Office of Finance and Administration a request to name the new athletic Indoor Practice Facility the "Ed Moshofsky Sports Center" in honor of Ed Moshofsky. The Indoor Practice Facility is currently under construction and is expected to be completed in early 1998.

Mr. Moshofsky has long been associated with the University of Oregon, having graduated from the College of Business in 1943. During his college days at the UO, he was an active student, lettering in varsity football and serving as a member of the Delta Epsilon fraternity and Friars Honorary. He has been inducted into the University's Order of the Emerald.

Ed and Elaine Moshofsky are former co-owners of Moshofsky Enterprises, an umbrella corporation within the timber industry that was founded by the Moshofsky family. Mr. Moshofsky also served as chairman and CEO of Fort Hill Lumber Company as a partner of Whipple and Moshofsky Lumber Company.

The Moshofskys have committed $2 million for the construction of an indoor practice facility, approximately one-sixth of the total cost.

Staff Recommendation to the Board

Staff recommends that the new Indoor Practice Facility be named the Ed Moshofsky Sports Center in honor of Ed Moshofsky, a strong supporter of the University.

BOARD ACTION:

NAMING OF HEALTH & P.E. BUILDING, PSU

Summary

Portland State University requests an exception to Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 580-050-0025 regarding the naming of buildings after a living person. The OAR provides that an exception may be made if "the donor contributes a substantial share of the cost of construction or if other unusually meritorious reasons exist."

Staff Report to the Board

Officials at Portland State University have forwarded to the Office of Finance and Administration a request to name the existing Health and Physical Education (P.E.) building the "Peter W. Stott Center" in honor of Mr. Stott. The Health and P.E. building was constructed in 1965 and serves the University's athletic department and student recreation and provides classroom and class laboratory space.

Mr. Stott, who attended Portland State University in the late 1960s, has been a major contributor to the PSU athletic program. Mr. Stott is the Chief Executive Officer of Crown Pacific, a publicly traded limited partnership in the forest products industry headquartered in Portland.

Mr. Stott has recently made a $1 million challenge grant to PSU and will serve as co-chair for the $3 million athletic capital and scholarship campaign for Portland State University athletics. The campaign donations will be split between athletic scholarships and capital improvements. The money contributed and raised through Mr. Stott's efforts will be used to refurbish and improve the Health and P.E. building, including upgrading the gymnasium, creating a Hall of Fame, improving locker rooms, as well as to develop an athletic practice field on the PSU campus and to improve Duniway Track, which is located near the PSU campus.

Staff Recommendation to the Board

Staff recommends that the Health and Physical Education building be renamed the Peter W. Stott Center in honor of Mr. Peter W. Stott, a strong supporter of the University.

BOARD ACTION:

B.S. IN BIOCHEMISTRY, UO

Introduction

The University of Oregon (UO) requests authorization to offer a new instructional program leading to the Bachelor of Science in Biochemistry. The Board reviewed a preliminary proposal for this program on February 16, 1996. This program will be offered through the Department of Chemistry in the College of Arts and Sciences. This proposed degree would rename the biochemistry track as it exists within the current chemistry degree program, and is consistent with UO's research university identity and mission. A biochemistry program currently exists at Oregon State University. The proposed program is within the capacity of the UO to offer as it is in response to the large proportion of chemistry students who currently pursue the biochemistry option. No new resources are needed to implement the program.

Staff Analysis

1. Relationship to Mission

The proposed program is consistent with UO's mission statement, combines the UO emphases on research and undergraduate education, and would make "free-standing" the biochemistry option within the current chemistry major. The UO currently offers chemistry degrees through the Ph.D. level. This proposed program has been designed to prepare undergraduates for a research career in either an academic or industrial environment or a professional career, such as the medical profession.

2. Evidence of Need

The Chemistry Department regularly fields requests for the proposed program from current and potential students, and approximately one-half of the current chemistry majors choose the biochemistry track for their undergraduate degree. Further, having the biochemistry major specifically noted on their transcripts will assist students in seeking employment in such areas as Oregon's growing biotechnology industry.

A career as a biochemist is listed as one of the current best options and fields for advancement as described in Field's 100 Best Careers for the 21st Century (1996). Salary ranges are from $25,000 to $75,000 at the bachelor's level in biochemistry. In addition to biotechnology areas, employment opportunities exist with and in pharmaceutical companies, clinical biochemistry, hospital laboratories, neuroscience research, genetic research studies, toxicology, forensic science and crime laboratories, agricultural chemicals, food sciences, feed manufacturers, consumer product manufacturers, and environmental protection fields.

3. Quality of the Proposed Program

Because this proposed program is already being offered as the recognized "biochemistry track" of the current chemistry major, quality of the program is assured. The Chemistry Department has a research-active faculty and the department offers degrees through the Ph.D. level. The UO program is unique because of the Chemistry Department's relationship to the highly successful and interdepartmental Institute of Molecular Biology; students majoring in biochemistry have the opportunity to participate in research programs with faculty and staff of this highly respected organization. The current biochemistry program is certified by the American Chemical Society (ACS), which examines the curriculum, faculty, and other resources of the department. ACS certification of the proposed biochemistry major will be sought at the next five-year review in 1998 and, given the reputation and quality of the Chemistry Department and the UO's program in molecular biology, this proposed major should be easily certified.

The course of study for the major will consist of 156 credits of lower-division requirements in science and mathematics, 71-74 credits at the upper-division in science (chemistry, biochemistry, and biology), and three courses of advanced science electives.

The quality of the UO biochemistry program is also reflected in the success of its graduates. For example, in 1996, all nine of the chemistry/biochemistry students who applied to medical schools were accepted. (For 1997, the number is two out of three.) Medical schools to which graduates have gone include Oregon Health Sciences University, Northwestern University School of Medicine, Mayo Clinic School of Medicine, UCLA, Johns Hopkins University, and the University of Washington. Other biochemistry graduates have gone on to other graduate programs and directly into employment in industry.

4. Adequacy of Resources to Offer the Program

Faculty. No new funds for faculty are required to implement this proposed program. Chemistry faculty are complemented by strong biochemically oriented faculty in the Biology and Physics Departments. With the long-time existence of the biochemistry option within the chemistry major, the current course offerings in the Chemistry Department are entirely sufficient to support the proposed program.

Library, Facilities, and Equipment. Library resources at the UO are sufficient to support Ph.D. programs in chemistry/biochemistry and are, therefore, sufficient to support the demands of this proposed undergraduate major. Similarly, classroom space and laboratory facilities currently support the biochemistry track of the chemistry degree and are sufficient for the proposed major.

Program Review

The proposed program has been reviewed positively by all appropriate institutional committees as well as the Academic Council.

Staff Recommendation to the Board

Staff recommends that the Board authorize the University of Oregon to establish a program leading to the B.S. in Biochemistry effective fall term 1997. A follow-up review of the program will be conducted by the State System Office of Academic Affairs in the 2002-03 academic year.

BOARD ACTION:

B.S. IN MATHEMATICS & COMPUTER SCIENCE (JOINT MAJOR), UO

Introduction

The University of Oregon (UO) requests authorization to offer a new instructional program leading to the Bachelor of Science in Mathematics and Computer Science (Joint Major). The Board reviewed a preliminary proposal for this program on February 16, 1996. This program will be offered through the Departments of Mathematics and Computer and Information Science in the College of Arts and Sciences. The program is designed to develop team players in Oregon's information-based economic future and is most appropriate for students who would, at the present time, pursue a major in either computer science or mathematics. This proposed degree is a combination of two current degrees, both of which are consistent with UO's mission and the University's productivity plan. There are similar programs at Western Oregon University (recently approved by the Board at its April 18, 1997, meeting) and Southern Oregon University. The proposed program is within the capacity of the University to offer, is in response to growing needs in the high-tech sector of Oregon's economy, and provides a course of study that would enable graduates to directly enter industrial positions or pursue advanced programs of study in either discipline. No new resources are needed to implement the program.

Staff Analysis

1. Relationship to Mission

This proposed program combining existing majors is consistent with UO's mission by uniting its research and undergraduate education agendas. The UO currently offers degrees in both disciplines through the Ph.D. level. The proposed undergraduate degree program would (1) offer students substantial amounts of two complementary disciplines and combine them in a single degree program; (2) enable graduates of the program to proceed directly into appropriate industrial positions that require both computer science skills and mathematical problem-solving ability; and/or (3) prepare graduates to enter graduate study in either discipline (or in applied areas such as biological computational science).

The proposed program is also consistent with the University's 1994 academic productivity plan, which emphasizes the importance of offering realistic four-year degree programs. Students who are likely to enroll in this proposed program are those currently interested in a major in mathematics, computer science, or a double major. This flexible degree program will emphasize basic principles in the two disciplines; will provide students with a well-rounded background in both areas; is at least as suitable and marketable than more specialized programs; and features a realistic expectation for completion in four years.

2. Evidence of Need

This program responds directly to identified market needs in the region as students will be well-prepared to enter Oregon's expanding computer technologies industries. UO students have expressed considerable interest in pursuing a joint degree such as is proposed here, with as many as 10 to 20 percent of students now enrolled as mathematics or computer science majors as likely candidates. Ten to 20 graduates per year are anticipated.

Typically, students who major in mathematics or in math-computer science tend to be talented, hard-working students with highly developed analytical skills and, as a result, tend to be highly employable. This is especially true in today's economy. National need for graduates of this program is indicated by the 1996-97 edition of the Occupational Outlook Handbook, which lists "computer scientists and systems analysts" to be the fastest-growing field (in terms of number of projected openings) during the years 1994 to 2005. Further, the Oregon Occupational Projections Handbook (for the years 1996 to 2005) indicates that employment in the categories of computer systems analysis, computer science, and computer science teachers will remain high in the state, with an accelerating ten-year job growth rate. Based on a projected growth rate of up to 8 percent, as many as 440 positions in the state's software industry alone may be created annually. When the needs of other high-tech industries are considered, as well as the demand for high-tech employees in commercial businesses and government offices, as many as 800 to 1,200 positions in this field may be needed. In all OSSHE institutions last year, 167 students graduated with baccalaureates in computer science and 103 in mathematics. Given the projected trends in the industry, therefore, it is anticipated that the employment picture for UO's mathematics and computer science degree holders will be excellent.

3. Quality of the Proposed Program

The strength of the curriculum and the quality of the faculty all point to this proposed program as one of high quality.

Curriculum. The two disciplines that comprise this joint major are long-standing programs at UO, and the integrating theme of this degree will be mathematical and scientific rigor in the field of computer science. Much of present-day computer science evolved out of mathematics and these fields have always been connected. Faculty and student interests range along a continuum from pure mathematics to quite non-mathematical areas of computer science, with this joint major lying somewhere in the middle of that continuum. This proposed program consists of a coordinated blend of courses from the two fields.

Additionally, students in this program have the opportunity to participate in internships as part of their educational experience. A student intern receives credit or pay for work performed for an industry client under joint supervision of an industry mentor and a faculty member. Recent examples of local internship sites are Hyundai, Software Science, Dynamix, and Spectra Physics; summer internships have taken place at industries such as Intel, Tektronix, Sequent, Hewlett-Packard, and Silicon Graphics. Internships are generally seen as highly successful experiences for both the student and the industry client and often lead to permanent employment.

Faculty. The faculty of the Mathematics Department and the Computer and Information Science Department are nationally recognized experts in their respective fields. According to the classification system of mathematics departments by the American Mathematical Society, the UO department fits comfortably into "Group 1" (i.e., into the top tier of [the 40 best] math departments in the country). Faculty members have received a number of prestigious professional awards and fellowships and include two past presidents of the Mathematical Association of America.

The computer and information science faculty are similarly recognized. The department consists of an IEEE Fellow (the highest award conferred by the Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers); a recipient of the Fulkerson Prize in Discrete Mathematics (from the Mathematical Programming Society and the American Mathematical Society); three award winners of the National Young Investigators Award/Career Award (from the National Science Foundation); and a recipient of the Faculty Award for Women (from the National Science Foundation). Department faculty have also been awarded a grant from the National Science Foundation in curriculum development in order to teach computer science in a holistic context, integrating cooperation and communication skills with scientific and technical education.

4. Adequacy of Resources to Offer the Program

Faculty. No new funds for faculty are required to implement this proposed program. The current course offerings in mathematics and computer science are entirely sufficient to support the proposed program.

Library, Facilities, and Equipment. Library resources at the UO are sufficient to support Ph.D. programs in each of the disciplinary areas and are therefore sufficient to support the demands of this proposed joint undergraduate major. Current computing facilities and equipment are sufficient to implement the program and include Macintosh laboratories administered by the computing center, the computer laboratory in the mathematics department, and the Unix workstation lab administered by the computer and information science department. Further, plans are underway to develop new undergraduate laboratories in cooperation with Intel and Microsoft.

Program Review

The proposed program has been reviewed positively by all appropriate institutional committees as well as the Academic Council.

Staff Recommendation to the Board

Staff recommends that the Board authorize the University of Oregon to establish a program leading to the B.S. in Mathematics and Computer Science effective fall term 1997. A follow-up review of the program will be conducted by the State System Office of Academic Affairs in the 2002-03 academic year.

BOARD ACTION:

B.S. IN MANAGEMENT, OIT

Introduction

Oregon Institute of Technology (OIT) requests authorization to offer the Bachelor of Science Degree in Management. OIT has a long history of offering management technology programs. An accounting emphasis dates back to the beginning of OIT in 1947, a marketing emphasis dates back to the late 1970s, and an entrepreneurship and small business management emphasis has been developing over the past several years. In 1994, OIT focused its B.S. in Industrial Management to comply with the Related Accreditation Council of the Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology (RAC/ABET). This resulted in OIT's losing the flexibility to offer emphasis areas that were previously available. The proposed degree program would provide a home for those -- and other -- emphasis areas. This is essentially a splitting up of the existing Industrial Management degree, half of which becomes a newly titled Production and Operations Management Program accredited by RAC/ABET; the proposed program in Management becomes the other half. The proposed program is fully in line with OIT's Strategic Plan for 1994-1999. All courses in the new core program are offered in the present Industrial Management core. The faculty needed to develop and deliver seven new or significantly revised courses are on staff and qualified for this set of responsibilities. No new resources are needed to implement the program.

Staff Analysis

2. Relationship to Mission

The proposed program is directly related to OIT's mission, which includes providing degree programs in the applied technologies such as "business technologies." The mission of the Department of Management is to prepare leaders to manage organizations in the high technology environments of the 21st century. This program falls within this mission.

3. Evidence of Need

The OIT program offered through the Department of Management within the School of Engineering and Industrial Technologies responds to regional needs. Klamath County employment is characterized by small businesses. There are expected to be increasing opportunities and demand for managers trained in small business management. Marketing, both at the level of the small business as well as industry and county levels, will become increasingly important. The emerging tourism industry will require skilled marketing specialists if it is to achieve its potential in southern Oregon. Klamath County's desire to increase production and marketing of processed agricultural products will also provide opportunities for managers knowledgeable in marketing.

An additional growing market is to serve the Klamath Tribes, where emphasis areas in accounting, marketing, and small business management are needed to facilitate several small businesses that have been started by members of the Klamath Tribes. As the Klamath Community College service district develops, an additional number of students are expected to move to Klamath Community College with an intention to participate in 2+2-type programs, requiring expanded demand for baccalaureate educational opportunities.

4. Quality of the Proposed Program

The program builds on a long tradition of OIT's offering Management Technology programs. The accounting emphasis dates back to the beginning of OIT in 1947. The marketing emphasis dates back to the late 1970s. The entrepreneurship and small business management emphasis has been developing over the past several years. With a focusing of the Industrial Management degree to comply with accreditation requirements in 1994, OIT lost flexibility to continue to offer these and other emphasis areas. The proposed program would enable OIT to split the existing Industrial Management degree so that half becomes a newly titled Production and Operations Management program accredited by RAC/ABET, and this becomes an additional program in the Department of Management, with emphases in accounting, marketing, and entrepreneurship and small business management.

The program is targeted for implementation in fall 1997. The majority of students in the program are expected to come from the local geographic area. This program provides opportunities for degree completion for people presently employed, as well as bringing groups into higher education not well represented at present, particularly those who will enter OIT via the Klamath Community College route.

All of the courses in the Management Technology core are present in the Industrial Management core program at OIT. In the three emphasis areas, OIT will offer a total of 27 courses; 20 have already been developed and delivered at OIT. Eleven faculty are available to participate in the program and qualified to develop and deliver the seven new or significantly revised courses.

The proposed program will be designed to bring students to a sophisticated level of competence in microcomputer applications. Application of technologies, especially in computer hardware and software, is a core competency in the course of instruction.

All students will complete senior projects. In each of the emphases, students will be required to work with an actual client in the business community to develop an original solution to a real-world problem. Each senior project requires a 200-hour commitment of time from the student, who must use tools and techniques drawn from at least five disciplines within the curriculum. In addition to the senior projects, students have the opportunity to participate in co-op experiences and/or internships.

While the Association of Collegiate Business Schools and Programs (ACBSP) is the closest specialized accrediting body with standards relevant to this program, the regional universities' business programs are not presently accredited by ASBSP. OIT does not plan accreditation with ACBSP. A significant segment of the program that is already accredited by RAC/ABET will be maintained.

5. Adequacy of Resources to Offer the Program

All requisite resources to successfully offer this program are in place. Faculty currently involved in the Industrial Management program will be responsible for the proposed B.S. in Management. Library resources to support the proposed program are adequate. Facilities, equipment, and technology are adequately equipped to support the proposed program, which essentially is a spin-off from the existing Industrial Management program.

Program Review

The proposed program has been reviewed positively by appropriate institutional committees and the OSSHE Academic Council.

Staff Recommendation to the Board

Staff recommends that the Board authorize Oregon Institute of Technology to establish a program leading to the Bachelor of Science in Management with emphases in Accounting, Marketing, and Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management, effective fall term 1997, with a follow-up review of the program to be conducted by the State System Office of Academic Affairs in the 2002-03 academic year.

BOARD ACTION:

GRIEVANCE OF DR. ALAN REX MITCHELL, OSU

Executive Summary

The Board's administrative rule, OAR 580-021-0055, provides for the Board or its designee to review the president's decision in certain faculty grievances. Dr. Alan Mitchell is an assistant professor in the Department of Crop and Soil Science of the College of Agricultural Sciences at Oregon State University (OSU). He appeals President Risser's decision not to award him tenure and promote him to Associate Professor. Board President Aschkenasy appointed a subcommittee to review the matter in detail prior to Board action.

Staff Report to the Board

Dr. Mitchell is an assistant professor in the Department of Crop and Soil Science of the College of Agricultural Sciences at OSU. In December 1996, he filed a grievance alleging that the Crop Science Department and College of Agricultural Sciences failed to follow the University promotion and tenure guidelines in five areas related to input from outside individuals, or "clients," and acceptance of "oral evaluations and undocumented input of an undisclosed source." The Faculty Grievance Committee conducted a hearing on the matter over the course of two days. The committee found there was insufficient evidence to support any of Dr. Mitchell's allegations. However, three of the five committee members believed that other unintentional shortcomings in the process supported extending the review process for an additional year. The other two members concluded that, because the promotion and tenure guidelines were followed, no remedy was appropriate. President Risser reviewed the matter and concluded that, although there were parts of the process that could be improved, there was no violation of the guidelines and no indication of unfairness. Therefore, he denied Dr. Mitchell's request for a re-evaluation of his application for promotion and tenure with stipulations suggested by Dr. Mitchell and extension of Dr. Mitchell's employment.

Dr. Mitchell sought Board review, asking the Board to implement the recommendation of the three committee members who supported an extension of Dr. Mitchell's employment. Dr. Mitchell made the following arguments in support of his appeal:

  1. OSU violated fair procedure in allowing the Dean's decision to be based in part on "undisclosed personal observations."
2. "OSU violated fair procedure by not telling the external reviewers they should ignore all pre-OSU research."

3. "OSU violated fair procedure in not telling Dr. Mitchell that his pre-OSU research was irrelevant."

4. "OSU violated fair procedure by not reflecting Dr. Mitchell's annual reviews in the promotion and tenure process."

5. "OSU violated fair procedure in criticizing Dr. Mitchell for shortcomings in client relations when the promotion and tenure committee filed its negative recommendation without information from clients."

6. "OSU violated fair procedure by relying on information from clients when the clients were not provided any materials summarizing what the candidate had done."

7. "OSU violated fair procedure because 'the annual review, mentoring, and feedback mechanisms currently in place seem to have been flawed' for 'personnel at off-campus stations' (quoting the faculty grievance committee report)."

8. "President Risser rejected the recommendations of the faculty grievance committee without ever addressing the procedural flaws in the promotion and tenure process."

The Board's rule does not allow the Board to reverse a decision of a president unless:

(a) Procedural error was committed by the institution during the grievance procedure and the error resulted in prejudice to the grievant;

(b) The decision of the president is not supported by substantial evidence; or

(c) The decision is in conflict with applicable rules or law.

Staff Recommendation to the Board

Because the Board is reviewing this grievance directly, staff has not prepared a recommendation.

BOARD ACTION:

B.S. IN HEALTH SCIENCES, OIT

Introduction

Oregon Institute of Technology (OIT) requests authorization to offer the B.S. in Health Sciences. The Board reviewed a preproposal for this program at its February 16, 1996, meeting. This proposed health sciences program will (1) provide a basic science curriculum for students seeking entry-level positions in biomedical and biotechnology laboratories; (2) strengthen the quality of programs currently offered by OIT in the allied health sciences; (3) support the development of several related programs in the allied health sciences; and (4) provide a preparatory course of study for medical school and health-related professional and graduate programs. Although other OSSHE institutions offer programs generally described as "pre-medical," no other program fits the profile of this proposed program, which will prepare students for health-related careers through a unique sequence of courses, seminars, and a senior capstone experience. Current resources at OIT are sufficient to begin implementing this program.

Staff Analysis

1. Relationship to Mission

As the only public institute of technology in Oregon, OIT has historically been instrumental in providing degree programs in technical areas, including health technologies and nursing. In addition, OIT is recognized as a national leader in medical imaging technology and dental hygiene, has the only baccalaureate program in the nation in vascular imaging technology, and offers one of the few diagnostic sonography degrees in the country. In operating these programs, OIT manages a clinical externship program involving more that 65 hospitals and clinical sites in 19 states. The proposed health sciences degree program would extend OIT's mission to include preparation at the undergraduate level for entry into a number of other medical career paths.

2. Evidence of Need

The need for this proposed program is evident by identifying institutional needs as well as student opportunities. With the implementation of this proposed program, OIT seeks to broaden its upper division offerings in chemistry, microbiology, and anatomy and physiology, all of which are necessary to prepare students for health careers. OIT would, thus, have the ability to retain students who would otherwise be seeking to transfer to another institution to complete their preparation for post-baccalaureate health career programs. Additionally, OIT could retain other students who leave OIT's dental hygiene or medical imaging programs (and who may otherwise choose to leave campus programs) by offering them other health-related alternatives.

While the primary outcomes anticipated for graduates of the proposed health sciences program are entry into appropriate graduate and professional schools for health careers requiring advanced degrees, opportunities also exist for students who choose to seek employment at the B.S. degree level. For example, with the proliferation of biotechnology firms located in California and the Pacific Northwest, it is likely that opportunities in these companies would exist. According to industry representatives, the curriculum of the proposed program would provide suitable training for entry-level positions in their companies, and the training would be superior to that of most bachelor's degree graduates (biology or chemistry majors) competing for similar positions.

Further, data presented in the Occupational Outlook Handbook (1996/WWW version) suggest that individuals trained at the bachelor's degree level in this field are likely to find jobs as health technologists and technicians. One example of a position in this category is "medical record technician"; job prospects for individuals in this field should be very good, with employment demand growing much faster than average through the year 2005. This is due to the large rise in the number of medical tests, treatments, and procedures, and because medical records will be increasingly scrutinized by third-party payers, courts, and consumers.

3. Quality of the Proposed Program

The proposed program will be of high quality. All of the OIT faculty have experience teaching health science-related subjects, including anatomy and physiology, microbiology, biochemistry, laboratory technology, and immunology. Additional adjunct medical faculty are available from the Merle West Medical Center, several of whom currently teach for OIT. Thus, the high-quality programs offered by OIT in the allied health sciences will extend to this proposed program. Current OIT faculty are well regarded in their respective discipline. For example, the institution has a national reputation in areas related to medical imaging technology. Further, the placement rate for OIT graduates has typically been exceptional, with students highly trained in their technical area as well as in the verbal and written communication skills expected by employers.

Academic rigor is assured within the proposed curriculum. For example, the math and science prerequisites for the program meet or exceed the published entry requirements of allied health programs for entrance to medical and dental schools, and into related graduate programs. Students exiting the program will be qualified to enter health programs in a variety of disciplines and to apply for graduate and professional school programs. Oregon Health Sciences University (OHSU) has been consulted in the process of developing the proposed program's curriculum.

OIT academic programs feature practica, projects, and other "hands-on" experiences to supplement the theoretical aspects of the discipline learned in the classroom -- and this proposed program is no exception. Seminars will include interaction with practitioners from a variety of medical fields. All students enrolled in the proposed program will complete a capstone experience in their senior year; examples of possible senior projects include the following:

Study of rural community health needs, working with the Area Health Education Center (AHEC) and OHSU.

Study of nursing education in relation to nursing practice, working with the statewide nursing program.

Comparison of several medical imaging modalities in the effective diagnosis and management of diseases.

4. Adequacy of Resources to Offer the Program

No new state resources are needed to offer the proposed program. Funding for the program will take place through a combination of internal reallocations and fundraising through external sources. Current OIT faculty and adjunct instructors are at a level sufficient to begin program implementation; no new faculty would be required for the first two years. In academic year 1999-2000 (the third year of implementation), two FTE faculty at the assistant professor level would be required additions to the program. One of these faculty members would teach courses related to public health and epidemiology; the other would teach in the areas of health psychology and growth and development. It is anticipated that these positions can be funded with internal reallocations made possible by faculty retirements as well as revenue generated from the first two years of the program's existence. External funding will be sought in support of this proposed and related programs in the Klamath Falls community.

With regard to reference sources, many of the basic materials are already available on campus. However, additional videotapes, CD-ROMs, books, and journals will be needed in public health and medical administration topics. Expenditures in the medical areas will be increased approximately ten percent above current levels; the acquisition of needed materials will be accomplished with an internal reallocation of funds. Additional equipment and supplies are needed for organic chemistry and the upper division course in microbiology. The funds for these materials will be also be provided for through an internal reallocation.

Program Review

The proposed program has been reviewed positively by all appropriate institutional committees and the Academic Council.

Staff Recommendation to the Board

Staff recommended that the Board authorize Oregon Institute of Technology to establish a program leading to the B.S. in Health Sciences effective fall term 1997, with a follow-up review of the program to be conducted by the State System Office of Academic Affairs in the 2002-03 academic year.

Board Discussion and Action (May 16, 1997)

OIT Provost Dow reviewed the program proposal. Chancellor Cox emphasized that OIT is working to meet some regional needs, particularly for those 400 to 500 students who are not degree seeking or would have to leave because OIT's offerings have not been comprehensive enough. This is not an alteration of OIT's mission, but it is providing OIT with a little broader base. Dr. Dow added that it also enhances OIT's existing programs in health technology and the collaborative nursing program.

Ms. Wustenberg moved and Mr. Willis seconded the motion to approve the staff recommendation. The following voted in favor: Directors Christopher, Imeson, McAllister, Swanson, Van Patten, Whittaker, Willis, Wustenberg, Wykoff, and Aschkenasy. Those voting no: none.

BOARD ACTION:

PH.D. IN RADIATION HEALTH PHYSICS, OSU

Introduction

Oregon State University (OSU) requests authorization to offer the Ph.D. in Radiation Health Physics (also known as "radiation protection" or "health physics"). The Board reviewed a preproposal for this program at its May 17, 1996, meeting. This field of study focuses on the protection of humans and their environment from the harmful effects of radiation. Examples of areas in which health physicists are involved are: environmental monitoring; radiation and radioactive materials from nuclear facilities; radioactive material transportation; radiation detection instrumentation; emergency planning; risk assessment; and public information. The program will be administered by OSU's Department of Nuclear Engineering in the College of Engineering (which already administers the current B.S. and M.S. programs in radiation health physics). This proposed program is wholly consistent with the land-grant mission of OSU and would be the only program of its kind in the Pacific Northwest. No new resources are needed to implement the program.

Staff Analysis

1. Relationship to Mission

The proposed program is directly related to OSU's land-grant mission and the institution's emphasis on providing high-quality programs in agricultural, science, and engineering fields. The field of health physics is interdisciplinary -- spanning the areas of biology, chemistry, environmental sciences, physics, medicine, engineering, law, and sociology. The implementation of this Ph.D. degree program will improve the scope of OSU's educational offerings by building on the already strong and recognized bachelor's and master's radiation health physics degrees offered in the College of Engineering.

2. Evidence of Need

OSU's request for this program is based on capacity as well as need. With baccalaureate and master's programs of long standing, student interest in a Ph.D. program has been very strong and the core courses needed for this program are already being offered. During the past six years, there has been a steady expansion in student enrollment, research activities, and departmental faculty in the radiation health physics area. There are currently 25 students enrolled in the B.S. degree program and 12 in the M.S. program; seven of these M.S. students indicate that they are awaiting approval of the proposed Ph.D. program. Eventual enrollment in this program is anticipated to be five to ten students, with two to four graduating each year.

No Ph.D. programs in radiation health physics exist in Oregon or the Pacific Northwest. Only two of the 18 institutions granting Ph.D. degrees in this field are located west of the Mississippi River (the closest program is at Colorado State University). Regional need is high for individuals trained at the Ph.D. level given the major nuclear sites in the states of Washington, California, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, and Colorado. Many academic institutions (e.g., Colorado State University, Georgia State University, University of Washington, etc.), federal and state agencies (U.S. Air Force, Army, Navy; U.S. Department of Energy, Oregon Department of Energy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Aeronautical and Space Administration, etc.), as well as private sector employers (General Electric Co., Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Bechtel Hanford, Inc., etc.) now hire master's-level graduates. There is a demand for more Ph.D.'s in this area. Many of these employers have expressed interest in potential OSU doctoral graduates in radiation health physics. Data taken from the Health Physics Society Newsletter from the period of February 1995 to February 1997 indicate 25 known openings (16 academic, 4 in government, 5 in industry). OSU would be at a geographic advantage in recruiting top students, linking with potential employers for the program's graduates, and for involvement in research into environmental restoration, waste management, and health and safety issues.

3. Quality of the Proposed Program

The proposed program builds on a 34-year history of the baccalaureate and master's degree programs in radiation health physics at OSU and is a logical extension of the institution's activities and aspirations in this field. The master's degree was first approved by the Board in 1963 when the program was known as "radiation biology." Undergraduate coursework in the field evolved in the 1980s in OSU's Department of General Science and, in 1991, this activity was elevated to a full bachelor's degree program -- which by then was housed in the Department of Nuclear Engineering. In 1966, the general science Ph.D. program started offering an area of concentration in radiological biology (although this option was discontinued in 1983). With the exception of some 600-level course offerings, all courses for this program are already being offered. Several areas of concentration, currently offered for the master's degree, will be immediately available for Ph.D. students. These concentration areas include nuclear medicine, emergency response planning, radiation shielding, radioactive material transport, radiation detection and instrumentation, as well as several others. The nine-member Oregon State University Department of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Center Advisory Board (an external panel comprised of members from the public and private sectors) has recommended the addition of this Ph.D. program, deeming it "appropriate and necessary."

Given the above considerations, the faculty of radiation health physics in OSU's Department of Nuclear Engineering is well-equipped to now offer this program. Research interests and activity in the department are at levels sufficient to support graduate student training for the Ph.D. The external review team (see below) indicated that "the present faculty of the nuclear engineering department is outstanding." Indeed, two of the faculty members in the department (Jack F. Higginbotham and Kathryn A. Higley) have received the coveted Elda E. Anderson Award from the national Health Physics Society. This award is for outstanding research and service to the profession and OSU is the only institution in the nation to have two award winners on its faculty.

4. Adequacy of Resources to Offer the Program

All requisite resources to successfully offer this program are now in place. The faculty currently involved in the B.S. and M.S. programs will be responsible for the proposed Ph.D. program. All core courses in the proposed curriculum (with the exception of the 600-level offerings) are currently being offered. OSU's Radiation Center, with its Triga reactor and supporting laboratories, is a facility fully and appropriately equipped to support a radiation health physics Ph.D. program. This proposed new program is an efficient utilization of existing resources; no new resources are needed to establish or maintain this program.

Program Review

The proposed program has been reviewed positively by all appropriate institutional committees, the Academic Council, and by an on-site external review team. The external review was conducted on February 21, 1997, by Wesley Bolch (University of Florida), Wayne Lei (Portland General Electric Company), and Nicholas Tsoulfanidis (University of Missouri - Rolla). The positive report produced from the review stated, in part, that: the proposed program "will strengthen the quality not only of the existing nuclear engineering and health physics program but will also have beneficial synergistic effects to other programs such as chemistry, biology, environmental engineering, and others"; "the present faculty...is active in research and...capable of generating more research support"; "the Radiation Center is an excellent facility...and the faculty have the expertise, ingenuity, and drive to utilize the laboratories in such a way that the benefit for students is maximized"; and that OSU "should be given the green light to start accepting doctoral candidates."

Staff Recommendation to the Board

Staff recommended that the Board authorize Oregon State University to establish a program leading to the Ph.D. in Radiation Health Physics effective fall term 1997, with a follow-up review of the program to be conducted by the State System Office of Academic Affairs in the 2002-03 academic year.

Board Discussion and Action (May 16, 1997)

OSU Provost Arnold reviewed the proposed program. Ms. McAllister moved and Mr. Imeson seconded the motion to approve the staff recommendation. The following voted in favor: Directors Christopher, Imeson, McAllister, Swanson, Van Patten, Whittaker, Willis, Wustenberg, Wykoff, and Aschkenasy. Those voting no: none.

BOARD ACTION:

ACCELERATED BACCALAUREATE DEGREE PLANNING, SOU

Overview

There are a number of models for accelerating progress toward the baccalaureate degree in place nationwide. Southern Oregon University (SOU) has been exploring such models over the last several years and is implementing an innovative, experimental accelerated program beginning fall 1997. The program is designed for highly motivated, goal-oriented students to accelerate progress toward a baccalaureate degree by assessing proficiencies and reducing the number of required general education credits, resulting in a minimum of 135 and maximum of 150 credit hours. (The requirement for four-year students is 180 credits in the quarter system.) This would mean a reduction of 9 to 24 credits from general education, and in all cases 21 reduced elective credits. Students would complete a traditional college major of 39 to 54 credit hours and a range of 30 to 60 remaining elective credits toward the completion of the baccalaureate degree. Specific credits reduced will be identified by the student's advisor and the Accelerated Baccalaureate Committee. Credits can be reduced in the major and in general education courses using a variety of proficiency measures. Seven departments are participating at the current time. SOU expects to admit an 11-student cohort for 1997-98.

A more complete description of the SOU accelerated baccalaureate program model is provided in the supplementary section of the Board's docket.

Background: National and State Issues

The Issue. Increasingly, policymakers, legislators, and others are looking at the cost of educating students as the public's investment in students, from early childhood through baccalaureate programs. The aim is for students to achieve a specified level of educational attainment with the greatest cost efficiency to the state, regardless of the time it takes to meet this standard, i.e., 16 or fewer years.

Time to Degree. National data indicate that about one-third of U.S. baccalaureate recipients graduate within four years (36.1 percent), about one-third (31.1 percent) between four to five years, and about one-third (32.8 percent) between five and seven years (NCES, 1993). OSSHE's time to graduation is similar to national rates. While these statistics are linked to factors such as the role of academic preparation on college retention rates, demographic variables (gender, race/ethnic group, residency), reasons for students selecting the institution, and transfer status (Astin, 1993; Porter, 1989), there is widespread consensus that institutions must work hard to reduce attrition and time to degree.

K-12 School Reform. Many states are engaged in K-12 school reform aimed at enabling students to reach higher standards of achievement. The goal is to reduce student attrition and increase readiness for entry into the workforce and postsecondary programs. With expectations of higher standards in high schools, there is growing pressure to increase the use of acceleration mechanisms and determine "college readiness" through proficiency-based assessments for college admissions. States such as Oregon, Wisconsin, Florida, Georgia, and Colorado are leaders in such K-12 reforms.

Oregon is the leading state addressing the development and implementation of proficiency-based college admissions. OSSHE's Proficiency-based Admission Standards System (PASS) aligns with the Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century (adopted by the 1991 Oregon Legislature) to reform K-12 to move toward world-class standards. The Act calls for implementation of new Certificates of Initial Mastery (CIM) for students at about grade 10 and Certificates of Advanced Mastery (CAM) for students at about grade 12, and calls for a new "seamlessness" between high school and college. Implicit in the Act is a move toward proficiency-based demonstrations of learning and away from grade- and course-based college admissions. These changes are expected to be important components of time-shortened baccalaureate degrees as more high school students move out of "lockstep" to begin college programs as they are ready.

Acceleration Strategies. Multiple strategies have been proposed for shortening time to baccalaureate degrees. Blanco for SHEEO (1994) compiled the following list of 17:

Early college admissions programs have long been an acceleration mechanism. The Advanced Placement (AP) and College Level Examination (CLEP) programs were established by the College Board in the 1950s. AP allowed students to take college-level foundation courses while still in high school; they received advanced standing once they matriculated to a postsecondary institution. CLEP examinations enabled students to test out of beginning-level courses at postsecondary institutions (Robertson-Smith, 1990).

There has long been wide acknowledgment of the benefits of providing high school seniors with early college-level opportunities (NASSP, 1982). During the past 20 years, many states have implemented "early college" programs, typically through AP, "college-high," international baccalaureate (IB), etc. States such as Colorado, Minnesota, and Washington have pursued postsecondary options programs for large numbers of students to attend college while still in high school, or move fully into college when ready. A significant barrier to expansion of these programs is financial. Do the dollars available to educate a 12th grader who takes college-level work flow to the college or stay with the high school? Also, many hold the perception that the instructional/social setting of secondary schools is more conducive to the teaching-learning process for adolescents than the college setting (NASSP, 1982).

Most "college-high" programs are emphasizing college-level curriculum that is available on-site in the high school. Students are typically required to pass tests at the end of courses, for which a fee is charged, and once students move into college, they may not necessarily receive credits for this work. In some cases, the number of credits required for college graduation is not reduced by students entering with AP credits. In addition, there are many questions about whether the college-level courses offered in high school are, in fact, college level. The national pass rates for students taking CLEP, AP, and IB programs suggest that many students are not yet doing college-level work. The fault may not lie with the students. Courses to develop students' knowledge and skills may be inadequately taught and/or students may not be adequately advised about preparation for these tests or what constitutes college-level work.

Many colleges provide courses directly to high schools with the rationale that this provides greater assurance of college-level instruction (and credit) than would be provided in AP courses (Smith, 1979). The literature depicts numerous liabilities when courses are provided at high school sites: difficulty maintaining a suitably serious academic atmosphere in a high school environment, excessive workload for the high school teacher selected to teach the university-level course, teacher-dominated class discussions, and territorial jealousy displayed by high school teachers of "regular" classes. The use of college courses at high schools is also more expensive than using AP courses (Smith 1979).

Concurrent enrollment options are prevalent in colleges. A representative sample of American higher education institutions in 1982 found that 87 percent of institutions were admitting at least a small number of qualified high school students prior to high school graduation (Fluit and Strickland, 1982). The benefits of concurrent enrollment programs include: acceleration of progress for students, reduced tuition costs, reassurance for parents concerning their children's ability to handle college-level academic responsibilities, relief of high school senior ennui, productive interaction between high schools and colleges, improved high school faculty status, enhanced high school standing, facilitated student recruitment, grant opportunities, school-college faculty interaction, enhanced college-community relations, and social equity (Greenberg, 1989). Concurrent enrollment programs have been generally more successful (i.e., more students participating) when the student tuition costs are covered (Wilbur, 1982). For example, Florida's Postsecondary Education Planning Commission reports that enrollments in AP courses increased dramatically after its funding incentive program was implemented (Blanco, 1995).

OSSHE has a number of acceleration mechanisms in place to assist high school students in moving through their college programs more expeditiously. Key mechanisms have included use of AP courses and tests offered by the College Board to determine the awarding of credit to students entering OSSHE institutions, College-High (negotiated college-level courses taught in high schools by approved high school teachers), IB, and concurrent enrollment programs.

OSSHE has been tracking student participation in AP for a number of years. Data indicate that while Oregon high school seniors taking AP exams make up only about 6 percent of the year's graduating class, they do make up 17 percent of those enrolling in a four-year college the fall following graduation. In 1994, 4,605 AP exams were taken by 3,481 students. It is important to note that only about two-thirds (68 percent) achieved a score high enough to earn college credit, and students taking the exams represent only two-thirds or less of all students taking AP exams.

Despite a substantial number of AP, college-high, and IB courses taken in Oregon schools, there are many problems associated with any future reliance on the use of these options. With the introduction of K-12 school reforms, many high schools have had to reallocate resources away from their most talented high school students to more broad-scale reforms. Higher education has been notified that some high schools are reducing their AP and college-high course offerings, and many high schools that continue to offer them are experiencing large enrollment courses (35+), which may seriously compromise the expectations that these are, in fact, college-level classes. Increasingly, there is a call for students who are ready for college-level work to move into college, and not tie up high school resources for this purpose.

All OSSHE institutions have some provision for concurrent enrollment for high school students. These are not particularly visible, nor for various reasons, have institutions actively recruited college-ready high school students.

In 1993, OSSHE representatives participated in a small national meeting with institutions interested in accelerated baccalaureate programs (e.g., Stanford University, SUNY, Oberlin). Subsequently, SOU participated with Black Hills State College and the University of Wisconsin System Office in a session on "Accelerated Degrees" at the January 1995 Association of American Colleges and Universities meeting. At this meeting, SOU learned of tentative interest in many states. There were widespread concerns, however, about the wisdom of accelerating programs. Issues raised at the meeting included: watering down the college curriculum, the value of a three-year degree, the reality of compressing courses, the level of student maturity, the ability of traditional students to cope with the pressure of an accelerated degree, the adequacy of high school preparation necessary for students entering the university to tackle a three-year degree, whether students need to progress through the institution at the same rate, what is the heart of a college major, can teaching/learning occur in different time frames, and can outcomes-based education and assessment really change time to degree (Hopkins-Powell, 1995).

This debate has an historical base. While four-year baccalaureate programs have been the norm in the United States, there are many exceptions as well. Hopkins-Powell reports that four-year degrees were under attack in the early 1900s. In 1906, as many as 36 percent of the class at Harvard completed in three years. At Johns Hopkins, the collegiate program was three years (motivated students could complete in two). At Columbia and many other prominent American universities, there was the professional option plan that allowed students, after two years, to enter a professional school. The University of Chicago used the model that several schools currently use -- a four-quarter plan that allows students to progress more quickly.

In 1971, the Carnegie Commission reported the "length of time spent on the way to the B.A. can be reduced by one-fourth without sacrificing educational quality." This recommendation was based on the perceived redundancy of the high school/college freshman year. The report prompted a reexamination of three-year degrees. Subsequently, SUNY, Goucher, and Northwestern developed three-year options (Hopkins-Powell, 1995). Still the popularity of the four-year degree has persisted.

An area of keen interest is compressed baccalaureate majors, although the institutions adopting these options tend to be private institutions (e.g., Oberlin, Stanford, Middlebury, Brigham Young) that attract students who come to college with a significant amount of college credit (e.g., AP) and/or those that develop special articulated programs with particular "feeder" high schools.

However, public institutions have few examples. One comes from the University of South Florida's St. Petersburg campus, working in collaboration with Pinellas County Schools and St. Petersburg Junior College. The "Fast Track B.A." offers the opportunity to obtain the bachelor's degree within three years after high school graduation. Students in the program must be enrolled in concurrent enrollment programs such as AP or dual credit, receive special counseling in high school to ensure that course choices provide appropriate options upon entering college, and select model programs from 19 different majors (e.g., literature, geography, history, psychology, business, education, special education) designed to present a preferred sequence of courses. The State of Florida has agreed to pay fees (two semesters of college work free of costs) in support of providing a challenge for motivated high school students (Three-Year Baccalaureate in Pinellas County, 1994).

Black Hills State University (BHSU) is also offering an Accelerated Degree Program in four degrees: elementary education, English, business administration, and psychology. It stresses early college admissions (CLEP, high school programs), reduced number of credits for a degree, compressed semesters (13 weeks rather than 15 to 16), moving to a tri-session structure, distance learning, and use of summer school. BHSU notes that "at this point in time, the impact on the quality or success of existing strategies for accelerated degree programs is unknown. Few states or institutions have evaluated the effectiveness of this alternative" (Usera, 1995).

Strategies by Board of Higher Education and OSSHE Institutions

All OSSHE institutions have been involved in discussions for several years about accelerated baccalaureate programs as part of the System's mandate in the early 1990s that campuses develop productivity plans, including consideration of options for time-shortened degrees. All campuses have some activities underway toward this goal; however, no campus has a significant number of approaches that have been tested and proven to significantly move students through their programs more expeditiously.

The issue of accelerated baccalaureate degrees was raised during the 1997 Legislative session, with testimony provided by Associated Oregon Industries (AOI) regarding the need for accelerated approaches. Under proposed amendments to Senate Bill 919, expected to be passed by the legislature: "The State Board of Higher Education shall: (3) Continue experimentation with and implementation of various accelerated baccalaureate degree models at state institutions of higher education in applicable programs. The models may include but need not be limited to early entry and postsecondary options and models that are jointly developed with the State Board of Education."

SOU's Background for Developing the Proposed Program

SOU's Early College Entry program, in place for a number of years, provides students a mix of college courses taken at SOU while students simultaneously take courses at the high school. A problem with this model is that students can take a variety of courses which may not result in time-shortened degrees.

In 1991, SOU decided to explore the development of an accelerated baccalaureate option. The initiative was geared to the expectations of a changed secondary school environment as K-12 prepared to put in place the provisions of the Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century. SOU saw this as a unique opportunity to calibrate entrance standards with the newly defined exit standards of Oregon public high schools in such a manner as to identify students whose intellectual background and motivation would prepare them for additional performance-based learning through a compressed baccalaureate program.

In 1993, SOU was the recipient of an OSSHE Academic Productivity and Educational Reform grant ($35,000) entitled Refocusing Undergraduate Education (Accelerated Baccalaureate Program). The project enabled SOU to continue development of an accelerated baccalaureate program by achieving a calibration among the standards for the CAM, admission to an OSSHE institution, and the performance indicators of SOU's undergraduate core curriculum. SOU worked on an accelerated baccalaureate program with the following features: a restructured general education, minor, and major subject requirements; and student mastery model of assessment. SOU consulted with Portland State University on general education curriculum development efforts. SOU also consulted with Eastern Oregon University, whose experience with prior learning assessment would be useful in evaluating student applicants for an accelerated college program.

In 1994, SOU with OSSHE submitted a federal grant proposal to the Fund for the Improvement of Post-Secondary Education (FIPSE) to serve as a campus demonstration site of key components in accelerated baccalaureate programs for replicability in Oregon public institutions. In 1995, SOU received the three-year ($186,670) FIPSE grant to develop an accelerated degree program that will allow students to complete requirements in less than the usual four years.

The SOU plan at this time represents a credit-reduction system for students in an experimental accelerated baccalaureate program.

Review Processes for Present Proposal

The SOU Accelerated Baccalaureate degree has wide support across the campus, including the President, Provost, Curriculum Committee, Core Education (General Education) Committee, Faculty Senate, and a wide ranging group of individual faculty and administrators.

The program was reviewed in May 1997 by the OSSHE Academic Council, which raised the following issues and concerns:

In light of these concerns, but in recognition of the need for an OSSHE campus to experiment significantly with acceleration approaches, the Council favored continued implementation of the experimental program at SOU. Continuation should include development of a systematic evaluation plan so that the program could be discontinued within a three-to five-year period if findings suggest that students in the experimental program are not meeting the expected outcomes of a baccalaureate program. Data should be collected on the ability of students interested in pursuing graduate and professional school options to do so successfully. Also the evaluation should take into consideration the ongoing reviews conducted by Northwest Regional Accreditation Association.

Board Action

No Board action is required for implementation of the SOU experimental program using existing majors. Staff recommends that SOU should be encouraged by the Board to continue implementation of this experimental model, and to design and implement a concomitant evaluation component to include issues raised by the OSSHE Academic Council, and components included in reviews by the Northwest Regional Accrediting Association. SOU should keep the OSSHE Academic Council informed about implementation of the experimental program and program outcomes. Staff should return to the Board on a periodic basis for status reports on the SOU model.

(No Board action required)

STUDENT RACIAL/ETHNIC DIVERSITY IN OSSHE

Overview

In most categories, the Oregon State System of Higher Education's enrollment distribution, by racial/ethnic group, is comparable to the distribution among public high school graduates and in the Oregon population overall (Table 1). The exceptions are Asian American students who are over-represented in OSSHE compared to high school graduates and the Oregon population as a whole, and Hispanic/Latino students who are underrepresented. However, the proportion of resident Hispanic/Latino first-time freshmen in fall 1996 is higher than the proportion of Hispanic/Latino undergraduates overall, and more closely matches the distribution of Hispanic/Latino high school graduates and the Oregon population.

Approximately 75 percent of the OSSHE students who entered as freshmen in fall 1995 were still enrolled in OSSHE in fall 1996 (including students transferring to another OSSHE institution after initial enrollment in OSSHE). The retention rate for minority group students overall is comparable to the rate for other groups, although the rate varies among the individual racial/ethnic groups. The retention rate is higher for Asian Americans (80 percent) and for nonresident aliens (79 percent), and lower for Native American students (63 percent).

Long-term retention and graduation rates show a similar pattern. There are higher six-year graduation rates for Asian American students (55 percent for the State System) and lower rates for Native American students (31 percent).

OSSHE Enrollment

Between fall 1981 and fall 1996, the number of minority group students in OSSHE increased by 57.7 percent, while the total number of OSSHE students decreased by 6.5 percent (Table 2). The most dramatic increase is among Hispanic/Latino students, whose number nearly tripled -- from 655 to 1,851 over the 15-year period.

The number of students in the "unknown/decline to respond" category increased by nearly 30 percent between fall 1981 and fall 1996. One likely reason may be the difficulty for students of multiple racial or ethnic origins to choose a single identifying category. The recent addition of a larger array of choices on the forms used to collect racial/ethnic data should reduce the number of "unknowns" in future reports.

In fall 1996, students of color constituted 12.6 percent of OSSHE students, ranging from 8.2 percent at Southern Oregon University to 15.7 percent at Portland State University (Table 3). Asian American students make up the largest proportion of minority group students at Portland State University (8.5 percent of the total enrollment), Oregon State University (7.1 percent), the University of Oregon (6.8 percent), and Oregon Institute of Technology (4.5 percent). Hispanic/Latino students comprise the largest proportion of minority group students at Eastern Oregon University (3.6 percent of the total enrollment), Southern Oregon University (3.2 percent), and Western Oregon University (3.2 percent).

First-Time Freshmen

The enrollment of minority group first-time freshmen has grown dramatically since 1981, especially among Oregon residents (Table 4). Minority resident first-time freshmen doubled between fall 1981 and fall 1996, from 383 to 768. In contrast, the number of European American resident first-time freshmen declined 15 percent, from 5,770 in fall 1981 to 4,887 in fall 1996.

First-year retention rates for first-time freshmen vary across institutions and minority groups (Table 5). The highest first-year retention rates are at the University of Oregon and Oregon State University (79 percent overall at each institution), with lower rates at institutions with larger nontraditional student populations (Portland State University with 65.4 percent and Southern Oregon University with 65.7 percent).

First-year retention rates for Asian American freshmen are above the institution averages except at Eastern Oregon University and Southern Oregon University. Rates for African American and Hispanic/Latino freshmen are at or above institution averages in nearly all cases. Rates for Native American freshmen are below institution averages except at Oregon Institute of Technology.

The six-year graduation rates for full-time first-time freshmen entering OSSHE in fall 1989 also vary across institutions and minority groups (Table 6). Again, the highest rates are at University of Oregon (63.7 percent) and Oregon State University (61.9 percent). Among minority groups, Asian American students show the highest graduation rates at Oregon State University and University of Oregon. African American students have the highest minority group rates at Portland State University, and Hispanic/Latino students have the highest rates at Eastern Oregon University, Oregon Institute of Technology, Southern Oregon University, and Western Oregon University. Native American students have the lowest graduation rates among minority groups at nearly all OSSHE institutions.

(Note: Tables referenced in this report are included in the supplementary materials and are on file in the Board's office.)

(No Board action required)

VALUING DIVERSITY: STUDENT PERCEPTIONS OF CAMPUS CLIMATE IN OSSHE

Executive Summary

This report presents the results of a campus climate survey conducted by the Oregon State System of Higher Education (OSSHE). Although this study explored many dimensions of campus climate, it was primarily undertaken to gauge student perceptions of issues related to race and ethnicity on OSSHE campuses as well as to guide future policy deliberations. A similar survey was conducted by OSSHE in 1994, but the continuing interest in these issues by the Board, and an upsurge of campus activism nationally, led to a decision to assess the climates of public campuses in Oregon once again.

Initially, a literature search was conducted to discover what scholars of higher education were reporting on this topic. The literature suggested that:

Students' attitudes about racial diversity vary from group to group, and even on apparently calm campuses, there is usually considerable social distance and alienation from campus life perceived by minority students on predominantly white campuses (Hurtado, 1992).

The degree of cohesiveness among racial/ethnic groups is enhanced when there are relatively small numbers of minority students on predominantly white campuses. Small groups tend to form subcultures, which create a sense of "we are different" for their members and, as the members interact and bond, they tend to move toward an "us versus them" isolation from the majority group. As a result, a tranquil and diverse student body will not happen by simply putting groups of differing heritage together. There must be a mechanism to encourage positive social interaction among the members of the various groups (Kuh, 1990, 1991).

The survey was conducted during fall term 1996. A draft version of a questionnaire was produced and reviewed by student focus groups on four OSSHE campuses before the survey form was finalized. Questionnaires were then mailed to 5,989 randomly selected students on all seven OSSHE campuses, of which 2,296 were returned in useable form for a response rate of 39.8 percent. The sample was weighted to ensure a meaningful minority-student response. Of the respondents, 57.0 percent were female and 42.4 percent were male. Single students made up 75 percent of the population and 70.2 percent were undergraduates. The distribution of racial/ethnic groups was: Native Americans (3.8 percent), Asian Americans (13.7 percent), African Americans (3.2 percent), Hispanic/Latinos (8.1 percent), and European Americans (68.3 percent). A substantial proportion of respondents (43.3 percent) said they had taken diversity-related courses and 32.4 percent indicated they had participated in diversity-oriented activities.

Among the most important of the study's findings were the following:

Financial aid was a concern for all students. Native American respondents worked the most hours per week (mean=18.3 hours per week) and received the highest percentage of public and state scholarships (44.8 percent). Asian Americans received the highest percentage of work study aid (22.6 percent) and also parental financial support (40.8 percent), but they and European Americans received the lowest percentage of state aid (16.2 percent and 16.3 percent respectively). African American students relied heavily on loans (57.5 percent) and received the lowest percentage of parental support (13.7 percent), but they also received the second highest rate of work study (19.2 percent). Hispanic/Latino students relied the heaviest on loans (58.9 percent) and also were the highest percentage group to work off campus (48.1 percent). European Americans relied heavily on loans (52.5 percent), had a better level of parental financial support (34.7 percent), but were second highest in working off campus (46.5 percent).

Students report generally low levels of participation in many activities outside of class, whether those activities were general extracurricular (81.3 percent reported never or occasionally participated) or in ethnic/cultural events (89.7 percent reported never or occasionally). Additionally, most said that they would feel welcome at such events (73.1 percent said welcome at general events; 58.8 percent said welcome at cultural/ethnic events). However, in a series of statements designed to explore how hospitable their campuses felt, 2.7 percent overall said that they felt rejected.

Enrollment in diversity-related courses was widespread among all groups (43.3 percent). African American students were the most likely to have enrolled in such courses (46.6 percent) and also were most likely to have participated in diversity-related activities out of class (60.3 percent). Women were more likely than men to have enrolled in a diversity-related class (47.2 percent for women and 38.0 percent for men).

Racial/ethnic diversity on campus was generally viewed as a positive value and experience by students of all groups. The specifics of satisfaction and dissatisfaction varied by group:

Student satisfaction varied according to the topic. Students were generally pleased with their treatment in classes (92.6 percent), although minority students complained about a lack of faculty role models (e.g., African Americans, 54.8 percent; Asian Americans, 33.8 percent; Native Americans, 31.0 percent were dissatisfied in this regard). For those students expressing an opinion, observations regarding other aspects of campus climate included:

Students had some reservations that "experiences with different ethnic groups had a major impact on their intellectual development" (45.4 percent agree, 42.5 percent disagree).

More often than not, students agreed with the statement that they were "more likely to participate in a cultural event or activity" (47.7 percent agree, 37.2 percent disagree).

Students generally indicated they "share values similar to my faculty instructors" (56.1 percent agree, 26.9 percent disagree), and that "faculty are interested in my academic development" (69.5 percent agree, 25.5 percent disagree).

A significant proportion of students agreed with the statement "I am satisfied with the time I invest in preparing for classes" (67.1 percent agree, 30.8 percent disagree).

Incidents of discrimination were reported by all racial/ethnic groups on all campuses:

African American students appeared to experience more discrimination than other groups, reporting the highest percentage at 75 percent (9 of 12) of the categories explored. The percentage of reports exceeded 19 percent in seven categories of discrimination: (1) by student's race (54.8 percent); (2) by other students (41.1 percent); (3) by gender (23.2 percent); (4) by age (20.5 percent); (5) by administrators (20.5 percent); (6) by choosing not to participate in an African American group event (19.2 percent); and (7) by faculty (19.2 percent).

Native Americans indicated they experienced discrimination from students (20.6 percent), due to their heritage (24.9 percent), gender (21.8), age (18.4 percent), and religion (9.2 percent).

For Asian Americans, the common types of discrimination reported were from other students (21.1 percent) and due to their heritage (24.9 percent). Discrimination by gender (13.4 percent) and by faculty (13.1 percent) was also reported.

Hispanic/Latino students reported less overall discrimination, but still significant for them was harassment by other students (15.7 percent), due to their racial heritage (16.2 percent), by gender (15.2 percent), and by faculty (10.8 percent).

European American students reported the lowest overall rates of discrimination, but still reported negative experiences related to gender (14.0 percent), age (10.1 percent), and from faculty (9.3 percent).

The results of this study suggest the following implications for policymakers in Oregon:

Campus diversity policies should be deliberately planned and thoughtfully implemented in Oregon's public higher education institutions.

Oregon's higher education policymakers and administrators need to stay informed and current with the changing perspectives of individual racial/ethnic groups.

Campus administrators should find ways to keep informed of discriminatory incidents, practices, and attitudes at their institutions, and must be able to take appropriate and timely action to address such behavior.

Students of all racial/ethnic backgrounds need positive and productive models of racial/ethnic diversity. All students have a right to an environment in which they feel safe and affirmed, and in which diversity becomes an enriching element of their educational experience.

Finally, this study suggests that minority group students are only partially satisfied with diversity-oriented programs on their campuses. What appears to be more important than programming is access to higher education, especially with regard to financial resources to finish their education and feeling welcome and safe on campus. These universal concerns of college students today are particularly intense among students of color.

(No Board action required)

STATUS OF THE WESTERN UNDERGRADUATE EXCHANGE PROGRAM

Staff Report

The following is the annual report of Oregon's experience with the Western Undergraduate Exchange Program (WUE) established by the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) in 1988. In 1989, the Oregon State Board of Higher Education approved a staff recommendation for OSSHE institutions to begin participating in WUE.

The goals of WUE are to increase student access and choice while enhancing the efficient use of educational resources among the western states. The basic assumptions underlying WUE are: (1) that most institutions have some programs that can accommodate additional students at little or no additional cost, and (2) that additional nonresident students can be attracted to those programs by offering a tuition discount.

Institutions charge nonresident WUE students 150 percent of resident tuition if they apply and are admitted to one of the designated WUE programs. WUE tuition is significantly less than nonresident tuition at all participating institutions.

Participating institutions specify which programs will be available to WUE students and admit WUE students to those programs on a space-available basis. Institutions are under no obligation to admit WUE students.

WUE has proven to be a popular program with students and parents in all of the participating states. Across all participating states, WUE enrollments have increased dramatically over the life of the program, increasing from 3,931 students in 1990-91 to 7,353 students in 1996-97, an increase of 87 percent. Oregon students enrolling in WUE programs in participating states have increased from 288 students in 1990-91 to 689 students in 1996-97, an increase of 139 percent. However, since 1994-95, the flow of Oregon students to other WUE states has declined by 12 percent. WUE students from other states enrolling in Oregon institutions increased from 62 in 1990-91 to 395 in 1996-97, an increase of 537 percent. And in one year alone, from 1995-96 to 1996-97, the number of WUE students enrolling in Oregon institutions increased by 25 percent. Overall, Oregon currently has a net outflow of 294 students under the WUE program. Almost 75 percent of Oregon students enrolled under the WUE program attend colleges in Idaho, Montana, and Nevada. Enrollment in Nevada colleges has increased 123 percent since 1994-95.

The following tables reflect a history of Oregon WUE enrollments since 1990-91.

Western Undergraduate Exchange (WUE) Enrollment History
Students from WUE States Enrolled at Oregon Institutions

Institution 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

EOU N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
OIT 32 33 55 58 67 70 55
OSU 9 21 34 46 79 112 180
PSU 3 4 3 2 5 6 7
SOU 7 14 36 37 34 66 87
UO 11 16 28 52 84 56 63
WOU 0 0 0 0 2 3 3
TOTALS 62 88 156 195 271

313

395
% Change 42% 77% 25% 39%

15%

26%


Oregon Students Enrolled at Institutions in WUE States*

State 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

Alaska 1 15 13 27 25 34 14
Colorado 10 13 17 28 39 50 55
Hawaii 4 3 1 3 6 4 11
Idaho 147 352 285 305 327 288 226
Minnesota 12 15 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Montana 87 131 247 269 215 140 114
Nevada 0 0 13 62 73 135 163
New
Mexico
1 2 4 6 5 4 4
North
Dakota
11 18 19 16 37 34 29
South
Dakota
2 8 8 12 12 17 19
Utah 7 6 17 20 32 31 34
Wyoming 6 5 11 17 13 27 20
TOTALS 288 568 635 765 784 764 689
% Change 97% 12% 20% 25% -3% -10%

* Arizona, California, and Washington do not participate in WUE.

Board guidelines for OSSHE participation in WUE require the following:

A WUE program must be able to accommodate a limited number of additional students without requiring additional resources;

WUE admissions must be on a space-available basis and limited to the programs approved for WUE participation by the State System Office of Academic Affairs;

Nonresident students previously or currently enrolled at OSSHE institutions will not be allowed to convert to WUE status;

WUE students who change majors to a non-WUE program will lose their WUE status;

WUE students enrolled in accordance with the above guidelines shall continue to be eligible for the WUE tuition rate for the duration of their undergraduate academic program, even if that program is removed from the approved list; and

Institutions participating in WUE are required to provide an annual report to the State System Office of Academic Affairs reflecting the number of WUE students enrolled by program, together with the students' states of origin.

The number of WUE students coming into the state is limited by the programs in which WUE students may enroll. The State System has adhered to the original WUE policy of maximizing state resources by attracting additional students to targeted programs that can accommodate additional students at no additional cost and with no adverse effect on access for residents. In contrast, some other states have allowed their institutions to make most or all of their programs available to WUE students.

In sum, the WUE program continues to provide Oregonians with competitively priced out-of-state higher education alternatives. For example, in 1996-97, the average OSSHE resident tuition rate of $3,269 was lower than the WUE tuition rate of $3,742 at the University of Montana, but considerably higher than the WUE tuition rate of $2,644 at the University of Idaho. The net outflow of students represents a potential loss of enrollment for OSSHE institutions, particularly the large losses to institutions in Idaho, Montana, and Nevada. However, it should be noted that fewer Oregon students elected to attend college in Montana and Idaho this past academic year than in the previous year. Enrollment in Nevada institutions continues to increase.

(No Board action required)

RIVERFRONT RESEARCH PARK, UO

Staff Report to the Board

The Board will hear a presentation and update on the Riverfront Research Park, a public/private project of the University of Oregon. The project briefly described below is more fully presented in the supplemental material, which is on file in the Board's office. At the July meeting, the Board will be requested to review and approve a long-term ground lease and property subdivision to allow for the development of a 47,000-square-foot multi-tenant building and the construction of a public street.

The Riverfront Research Park project is a cooperative effort of the University of Oregon, the City of Eugene/Urban Renewal Agency (URA), and private developers to build a university-related research park adjacent to the University campus on the south bank of the Willamette River. The project provides a master-planned setting where knowledge-based businesses and organizations can develop collaborative association with the research capabilities of the University. The Research Park is expected to help diversify the region's economy and provide quality employment opportunities. It is being developed in phases over an approximate 20-year period as there is market demand.

The Research Park is governed by an intergovernmental agreement among the University, the City/Urban Renewal Agency, and the State Board of Higher Education and is overseen by the Riverfront Research Park Commission. The land, owned by the Oregon State Board of Higher Education on behalf of the University, is leased in parcels on a long-term basis (up to 98 years) to developers who then own the buildings they construct on the land. At the end of the lease, ownership of the buildings reverts to the State Board of Higher Education.

The University serves as the focus for technology transfer and provides access to its faculty, equipment, and facilities, in addition to managing the ongoing project. The Urban Renewal Agency is providing public infrastructure, financed primarily with tax increment revenues from the Riverfront district. Private developers are responsible for the acquisition of financing, construction, ownership, and management of the Research Park's buildings, parking, utilities, landscaping, amenities, and maintenance.

The Research Park was in the planning and pre-development stages in 1985-1990. Construction of the first-phase infrastructure occurred in 1990-91, and the first building was constructed in 1992-93. The second building, known as the Riverfront Innovation Center, opened in 1994. The second-phase infrastructure, including a railroad underpass and the extension of Riverfront Parkway, was completed in 1996. The third building and the extension of Millrace Drive will be constructed in 1997.

The Research Park houses an impressive array of high-technology tenants including Dynamix Incorporated, System Technology Development Corporation, the Computational Intelligence Research Laboratory, the New Media Center, the Software Engineering Research Center, Electrical Geodesics Incorporated, and Marker Gene Technologies. Percon Incorporated, a company that researches, designs, manufactures, and markets bar-code-based data collection and software management products will be the anchor tenant of the third building scheduled for completion during 1997.

(No Board action required)

HUMAN RESOURCES INFORMATION SYSTEM (HRIS)

Staff Report to the Board

This is the first status report to the Board on the Systemwide Human Resources Information System (HRIS) since April 1995. At that time, an HRIS steering committee was evaluating the administrative processing requirements of all campuses in conjunction with selection of a human resources software system. By April 1996, OSSHE had decided to proceed with implementation of the HRIS as the third major component of an integrated enterprise solution for administrative information systems using the SCT Banner product. The first two major administrative information systems, the Student Information System and the Financial Information System, were fully implemented in 1991 and 1995 respectively. By fall 1996, HRIS implementation was underway, with a master implementation plan calling for the system to "go live" in July 1998. The HRIS project is currently under budget and on schedule.

This project will provide key elements of a higher education management information system. The new HRIS will complete integration of the three administrative information systems into a single database, with common data elements and common software technology. Payroll and personnel information will be integrated with the existing financial information system. The integrated systems will enable all appropriate staff to access administrative information. It is designed to improve currency and accuracy of human resources data available to personnel officers, administrators, and academic departments as well as selected staff in the Chancellor's Office.

The current system does not meet state standards for "open systems." It uses outdated and unsupported operating software and hardware technology that will not function after the year 1999. By decommissioning the existing mainframe computer and associated software, and implementing the new HRIS system using new software, one of OSSHE's most significant Year 2000 problems will be resolved.

The HRIS project supports the goals of Senate Bill 271, the Higher Education Administrative Efficiency Act. It gives campus administrators an opportunity to evaluate personnel procedures and organizational structures to improve them as appropriate. The project will result in new personnel and payroll processing efficiencies, reducing or eliminating duplicate work and reducing the cost per transaction. In many cases, human resource functions that are now performed manually will be automated. Campuses have the opportunity to decide which offices and staff will have access to the HRIS. Some campuses have elected to fully distribute access at the department level within the constraints of data security, while others prefer to offer centralized services from the campus business or personnel office.

OSSHE has selected a distributed data architecture to implement the software. The human resources databases are physically located on each of the campuses of the three larger universities (OSU, PSU, and UO) and are integrated with the student and financial data that also reside on the local mainframe computers. The regional campuses (EOU, SOU, WOU, and OIT) are supported through OSSHE's "fifth site" model with the financial and human resources databases physically located on the mainframe in Corvallis and supported by the Chancellor's Office information technology staff. The "fifth site" model allows full integration of each regional university's financial and human resources data but relies on a data warehouse to integrate the student data for management reporting and information analysis.

While the HRIS project initiatives are now focused on implementing the SCT Human Resources Information System for both personnel and payroll operations, ancillary systems include an applicant tracking system and time and attendance system. An applicant tracking system has been successfully implemented on all the campuses. Campus human resource professionals have expressed positive feedback on the short learning curve for training, ease of use, and reporting capabilities of the new system. A vendor for the new time and attendance system will be selected soon as a result of a Request for Proposals (RFP) issued earlier this year. All products use a relational database system that will simplify the interface with the Banner product personnel and payroll system.

The project budget now totals $12.2 million plus contingency, which is 36 percent lower than the total $19.2 million budget the legislature had previously approved to finance this project using Certificates of Participation (COPs). Budget reductions were achieved as a result of several factors: OSSHE campuses have gained experience from previous Banner implementations that will reduce start-up costs; OSSHE was able to hire a senior analyst who is expert on the Banner product to write program modifications; and campuses are utilizing enhanced versions of the hardware and software already in place for the student and financial information systems. In addition, about $500,000 in annual operating costs will be saved by decommissioning the existing mainframe computer in July 1998.

In summary, the HRIS project represents a major milestone for OSSHE on the road to installing a fully integrated administrative information system. The project has been carefully planned, involves active participation by representatives from all OSSHE institutions and the Chancellor's Office, and is proceeding according to schedule and within a revised, lower budget. Staff will keep the Board apprised of the final stages of the implementation effort in the coming months.

(No Board action required)