Source 4 OBR Minutes, November 16, 1990

8/6/2019 Source 4 OBR Minutes, November 16, 1990

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/source-4-obr-minutes-november-16-1990 1/23

MinutesOHIO BOARD OF REGENTS

Medical College of Ohio at Toledo

November 16, 1990

BUSINESS TRANSACTION SECTION, 9:30 A.M.

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Alva T. Bonda.

The roll was called by Secretary Lloyd O. Brown. Those

present were:

Alva T. BondaWilliam F. Boyle

Lloyd O. Brown

Paul M. Dutton

Ralph K. FrasierElizabeth K. LanierRaymond T. Sawyer

Mr. Brown stated "The record should show that notice of this

meeting has been given in accordance with provisions of Board ofRegents' Rule 3333-1-14, which rule itself was adopted in

accordance with Section 121.22(F) of the Ohio Administrative

Procedures Act."

Mr. Bonda introduced and welcomed two of the new Board

members who were attending today's meeting, Elizabeth K. Lanier

from Cincinnati, and William Boyle from Toledo. Jesse Phillips,the other newly appointed Regent, was not able to attend this

meeting.

In response to Mr. Bonda's inquiry regarding changes to theagenda, Chancellor Hairston replied there were no changes to theagenda as printed.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES, SEPTEMBER 14, 1990

A motion was made by Mr. Frasier to approve the minutes of

the September 14, 1990 meeting of the Board. Mr. Brown seconded

the motion, and it was unanimously passed.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

Academic and Special Programs - Mr. Sawyer reported the committee

had met with the entire Board on the previous day. He saidagenda items 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 were considered and would be

recommended for Board approval.

Mr. Bonda remarked it was his duty to appoint the committeesand the Chairmen of the respective committees. He appointed Mr.

Dutton to serve as Chairman of the Finance and Capital Committee.

The other committees will be appointed soon, he said.



2

ELECTION OF BOARD OFFICERS

Mr. Frasier, Chairman of the Nominating Committee, reportedthe committee comprised of Mr. Dutton, Mr. Brown and himself, had

met to consider and deliberate on the leadership and stewardshipof the Ohio Board of Regents for the year beginning November 16,1990.

After due committee deliberation and consideration of all

factors deemed relevant, necessary and appropriate, andconsistent with Rule 3333-1-01 of the Ohio Board of Regents, thefollowing slate of officers was unanimously proposed for

election: Chairman - Alva T. Bonda, Vice Chairperson - Anita S.Ward, and Secretary - Lloyd O. Brown.

Mr. Frasier made a motion that the nominations be closed andthe proposed slate of officers be elected by acclamation. The

motion was unanimously passed.

Chairman Bonda congratulated the Medical College of Ohio atToledo on their 25th Anniversary and he thanked President RichardRuppert and the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Phyllis Boyle,

for hosting the Regents the previous evening. He stated theBoard was very impressed with the institution. Dr. Ruppert

replied it had been a pleasure to have the Regents visit the

campus. He remarked that the Medical College is a unique

institution in that it is in the graduate education business andcooperates with its sister institutions, The University of Toledo

and Bowling Green State University, in undergraduate programs.

As a college, there are four separate schools, the School ofAllied Health, the School of Nursing, the School of Medicine, and

the Graduate Research School. Dr. Ruppert shared information

about the programs and accomplishments of the college over thepast years as well as the financial implications of the cost of

clinical education. He stated the institution looks forward to

working with the Regents in better understanding the clinicaleducation cost of medical schools and to getting back on track in

regard to actual subsidy for the school to continue its qualityteaching programs.

Mr. Dutton asked if the budget recommendations in thecurrent operating budget for 1991-1992 biennium were approved as

recommendedi what would be the impact on reducing the medicalstudents' share in the actual tuition. Dr. Ruppert replied thatit prevents the budget lines from spreading any further. He

pointed out that there is both an increase in the special linesas well as the clinical subsidy line and the instructional

subsidy line in the budget. All those things have held constantin order to help meet today's problems. Obviously, he said, whatis needed is a reexamination of the total cost of medical

education.



3

CHANCELLOR'S REPORT

Chancellor Hairston thanked President Ruppert and Chairwoman

Boyle for a wonderful visit to the Medical College of Ohio atToledo the past two days. She reflected on the opportunity to

see the Library facility, the Outpatient facility, some of theresearch areas of the college, the College of Nursing, and thehealth education and recreation sports track. The Trustees were

very informative in welcoming the Regents and staff and werewonderful ambassadors for the Medical College of Ohio. Dr.

Hairston remarked that she came away with a sense of how the

institution has grown over the years it has existed. She furtherstated that the Medical College's real contribution lies in the

students it provides Ohio and the society that it serves with an

outstanding education in medical areas.

Dr. Hairston reported she had visited with President Horton

of The University of Toledo last week where she had the

opportunity to visit with student leaders, faculty members, and

leaders of the strategic planning process that is underway. Shesaid the campus was vibrant, growing rapidly and experiencing the

growing pains that come along with increased program demands andspace constraint.

Dr. Hairston added her welcome to the new Regents, Mrs.

Lanier and Mr. Boyle, and remarked that Mr. Phillips would be

attending the meeting in December.

Dr. Hairston called attention to a less bright light on the

horizon and said the status of the state's financial condition

was being watched carefully by everyone. It appears there weresome shortfalls in revenues within the last several months,

although October revenues were higher. Those shortfalls haveoccasioned a four percent budget decrease to some agencies of

state government and, she said, the Governor has proposed some

potential ways of solving the remaining deficit which wouldinvolve a potential cut to higher education. No cut has taken

place in higher education subsidies yet but the possibility

exists, she pointed out. In her conversations with thepresidents of the universities and colleges in Ohio, Dr. Hairston

said she had urged them to be mindful of this, to be very prudent

in their expenditures, and to ensure as much flexibility as

possible for their colleges and universities in light of the fact

that the longer in the fiscal year a decision is delayed withregard to what fiscal cuts need to be taken, if any, the more

difficult it becomes to absorb those cuts. She said she believes

the presidents have been very responsible in announcing thesekinds of constraints to their faculties and their deans who need

to be mindful that the presidents are operating in the best

interest of their institutions. It is tough to say no wherethere are ongoing programs and people already in classrooms.



4

CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF STATEWIDE ARTICULATION AND TRANSFER

POLICY

Dr. E. Garrison Walters, Vice Chancellor for Academic and

Special Programs, said the policy on Articulation and Transferreflects a significant change in higher education that hasoccurred in Ohio in the last 25 years. At that time, he said,there were only 5 state-assisted universities, and there were

virtually no two-year campuses offering transfer degrees. Now

there are 13 state universities, 9 community colleges, 14

technical colleges, and 24 branch campuses of the universities.There are 33 campuses who offer as a part of their principalmission, programs designed for transfer to baccalaureate degrees.

Dr. Walters explained that this considerable diversity in Ohio's

higher education has developed over a period of time and has leadto some concerns about the system's responsiveness to studentswho were moving from one campus to another.

Last year, he said, the General Assembly asked the Board of

Regents to develop a coherent state policy in support of transferfrom one campus to another. In response, Chancellor Coulter

appointed a 21-member Commission and asked that the issue be

studied and a policy be recommended. That Commission met monthly

from November of 1989 through June of 1990. In the process, the

Commission consulted regularly with all of the campuses in the

system, including independent colleges. Two drafts of the policy

document were circulated for review and comment as was the final

recommendation of the Commission, which was sent to the campuses

for extensive comment. Comments were received in mid-October.

Thus, this is a policy that has been widely considered and

debated. Dr. Walters remarked that it is his belief there is astrong consensus that the policy provides an effective framework

for moving ahead to resolve the concerns about student transfer.

Dr. Walters called attention to three core policy

principles. First, he said, transfer students and native

students (students who started at the campus) should receiveequitable consideration at the baccalaureate campus; i.e., there

should not be one policy for native students and another policy

for transfer students as far as curricular or other kinds of

requirements are concerned. Second, students who begin theiracademic study at community colleges or univerSity branchcampuses should be encouraged to complete the Associate of Arts

or the Associate of Science degrees intended for transfer to abaccalaureate program. This recommendation is based on strongresearch that those students who proceeded in that fashion were

successful. The third policy prinCiple is that institutional

autonomy, which is a characteristic of the Ohio's system, must be

maintained, and the integrity of the general educationrequirements on the various campuses must be defended.



5

Dr. Walters pointed out the four elements of the policy

framework. The first, admissions, says that the receiving

institutions make decisions about whom to admit, but stronglyurges that priority be given to students who have completed theAssociate of Arts or the Associate of Science degrees. The

second refers to transfer credit and emphasizes that for studentswho have completed these degrees, all transfer credit should beaccepted by the baccalaureate institution, although the

institution maintains its right to determine which of those

courses apply to a given major. Courses that don't apply to amajor can be treated as elective courses. Another element is

known as a "transfer module", a subset of general education

requirements developed by colleges and universities as a

significant core that a student will complete at one campus thatwill not need to be completed at a second campus. This, he said,

provides for a high level of assurance for students that the work

they complete will transfer and also should reduce considerably

the paperwork and review processes of receiving institutions.

A third element, and one that is very significant, is where

the articulation aspect of articulation and transfer comes in.

Students should understand that they have a responsibility for

planning their curriculum and in making those plans early if theyintend to transfer. No mechanism, like the transfer module, can

overcome a bad student decision. Major efforts need to be madeto assist students in understanding the importance of this early

planning and help them to make sure they do an effective job.

The fourth part, Dr. Walters stated, is an appeals process

that says a multi-level appeals process should be available on

each campus where students can ask for reconsideration of theinitial decision. There should be a statewide appeals advisoryboard to address concerns not resolved on the campuses and make

non-binding recommendations to the campuses to help resolve them

and also build refinements into the policy as it evolves.

Finally, he said, looking toward implementation of thepolicy, the Chancellor will move to appoint an Articulation and

Transfer Advisory Council. The Council, in turn, will set up a

statewide faculty committee to bring into fruition the transfer

module concept in time for operation in the Fall of 1991. TheCouncil will also look at important information systems issues,

e.g., a student tracking system, so that better information about

what students are doing can be available and, therefore, forecastand support them better. Dr. Walters emphasized as being of

particular importance, the electronic student transfer guide sothat students at one campus can look at their current course

selections and find out how they might apply at other campuses.Dr. Walters mentioned other activities the Council would

undertake included investigating related issues of financial aid

for students. He noted the 1991-93 budget recommendationsinclude funds to support these activities.



6

In summary, Dr. Walters remarked he felt this was a very

important step forward for Ohioi one that will be a great benefit

to students and one that will greatly reinforce the work of thosewho are trying to improve student access to higher education.

Chancellor Hairston commented that she wanted to recognizepublicly the work of this Committee. The Committee was chaired

by Dr. Roy Church, President of Lorain County Community College,

and co-chaired by Dr. James Bruning, Provost at Ohio University.This was a 21-member committee that wrestled with some verydifficult questions. Dr. Hairston stated that the policy has

been well-thought through and diligently applied. She praisedthe work of the group.

A motion was made by Mr. Brown to approve Resolution 1991-25

for the adoption of a statewide Articulation and Transfer Policy.

Mr. Frasier seconded the motion and it was unanimously passed.

RESOLUTION 1991-25

WHEREAS, the Ohio General Assembly has directedthe Ohio Board of Regents to develop a coherent state

policy for the transfer of students between higher

education institutions in Ohio; and

WHEREAS, the Chancellor appointed a 21-member

Commission on Articulation and Transfer and charged theCommission to develop guidelines for enhancing student

mobility through the higher education system; and

WHEREAS, the Commission drafted a policy frameworkfor statewide articulation and transfer, and forwarded

a report on its deliberations to the Chancellor; and

WHEREAS, the Commission Report has been circulatedto all Ohio COllege campuses for review and comment;

NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED: that the Ohio Board of Regentsaccept and endorse the report of the Commission on

Articulation and Transfer and that the Chancellor shallbegin to implement the recommendations of the

Commission.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: that the Board of Regents

recognizes the importance of the proposed Advisory

Council on Articulation and Transfer and charges thisbody with careful review of the workings of thearticulation and transfer process in OhiO, with special



7

emphasis on the Board's goal of ensuring that studentssucceed in moving through higher education to the bestof their ability; to this end, the Advisory Council is

asked to provide annual reports to the Chancellor.

PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF OHIO BOARD OF REGENTS RULE 3333-1-21 FORTHE ADMINISTRATION OF THE ACTION AND INVESTMENT FUNDS

Dr. Carol Blum, Director, Graduate and Special Programs,presented a request for preliminary approval of Board Rule 3333-

1-21, for the administration of the Action and Investment Funds.

She said the Action and Investment Funds are the programmaticinitiatives for the distribution of the capital bill

appropriation loan program. This appropriation's intent istargeted to strengthening the academic research infrastructure in

the state by providing matching grants and loans for majorconstruction or renovation of, or instrumentation for researchand research-oriented instruction. Grants are provided as a

match to the institution's cost sharing in applications for majorexternal funding awards. Loans are provided interest free for

major renovation or reconstruction projects on the campuses.Institutions eligible for these grants or loans include all

state-assisted colleges and universities.

Dr. Blum said the Rule being presented for approval was

reviewed and approved by the Joint Legislative Committee forEducation Oversight. She explained that with Board approval

today, the Chancellor would be authorized to transmit the Rule toappropriate legislative committees in anticipation of final

approval at the next appropriate Board meeting. The Rule was

approved by the Regents Academic and Special Programs Committeeand she recommended its approval by the Board.

A motion was made by Mr. Sawyer to approve Resolution 1991-26 granting preliminary approval of Ohio Board of Regents Rule

3333-1-21. Mr. Frasier seconded the motion and it was

unanimously passed.

RESOLUTION 1991-26

WHEREAS, the Ohio General Assembly has mandated in

Substitute House Bill 808, the biennial capitalappropriation bill for the 1990-1992 biennium, that the

Ohio Board of Regents adopt rules regarding theapplication for and approval of Research FacilityInvestment Loans and Grants, known as Action and

Investment Funds; and

WHEREAS, that same bill provides an appropriationto the Ohio Board of Regents for that purpose;

NOW, THEREFORE,



8

BE IT RESOLVED: upon the recommendation of theChancellor and with concurrence of the Academic and

Special Programs Committee of the Ohio Board of

Regents, that a new rule 3333-1-21, attached and made apart hereto, receive preliminary approval, and that it

be transmitted to the Joint Committee on Agency RuleReview, Legislative Service Commission, and theSecretary of State.

CONSIDERATION OF PARTIAL DISTRIBUTION AND RELEASE OF FUNDS FOR

HEALTH EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Dr. Matthew Filipic, Vice Chancellor for Administration,said these agenda items involve the release of various healtheducation appropriation items for the remainder of the fiscal

year. Dr. Filipic reinforced Dr. Ruppert's comments about the

financing of medical education that are not addressed in thebudget recommendations of the Board this past September because

the staff work was not done that would have allowed the Board tomake a recommendation. Work will have to be done in the future

to come to a better understanding of those issues, he said, andto offer to the Board more solid recommendations on those

questions. Dr. Filipic explained the problems are very complex

and that considerable study of them will have to be made.

Dr. Filipic stated the Board has among its responsibilitiesthe release of appropriations made by the General Assembly. Some

of the releases are quite routine inasmuch as the GeneralAssembly makes clear in its appropriations to whom the monies

should be distributed and under what conditions; others require

more judgment. Traditionally, he said, the Board of Regents hasexercised some judgment with regard to the health education lineitems because it must choose how to allocate money appropriated

for a given function among the several medical schools thatperform that function.

Dr. Filipic pointed out that in July, the Board released

appropriations for the first quarter of the fiscal year so thatcash could continue to be distributed while final decisions were

being made about the annual allocation. Appropriate data has nowbeen received, he said, from the medical schools andrecommendations are ready to be made that are consistent with the

procedures that have been discussed over the years with the

medical deans. One request involves the release ofappropriations for Family Practice and Primary Care which has

been appropriated by the General Assembly since the mid-1970's toencourage a focus on these medical specialties by recent

graduates of the medical schools. The money is allocated on aformula basis that has not changed in recent years and itrecognizes the number of people going into appropriate

residencies and the number of people who are currently residents.



9

Another request involves Geriatric Medicine and assures that

subject matter related to the special health care problems of theelderly be included in the medical education curriculum. In past

years, Dr. Filipic said, this item had also been allocated on aformula basis but throughout the 1980's each of the institutions

had done practically the same things with regard to geriatriceducation so the formula was producing essentially an equalallocation to each of them. Last year, for the first time, Dr.

Filipic said it was determined that we should recognize that fact

and to distribute the appropriation equally among the medical

schools.

Dr. Filipic pointed out the Area Health Education Center

program was also allocated equally among the medical schools witha separate allocation to the Medical College of Ohio at Toledo

for its work in attempting to attract additional external funds

for the program. A small remaining balance of $22,000 would beused for some strategic studies to be brought before the Board at

a later time. He said current considerations were that this

amount would be used to conduct a study of Allied Health

profession issues.

Mr. Dutton made a motion to adopt Resolutions 1991-27, 1991-

28 and 1991-29 for the distribution of funds for Health Educationprograms. Mr. Frasier seconded the motion and it was unanimously

passed.

RESOLUTION 1991-27

WHEREAS, the Ohio Board of Regents is mandated by

the Ohio General Assembly to administer thedistribution of operating appropriations inCluded in

Am. Sub. H. B. 111 of the 118th General Assembly; and

WHEREAS, included in Am. Sub. H. B. 111 are

appropriations for the support of programs in family

practice and primary care at state-supported and state-assisted medical schools;

NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED: that the proposed schedules fordistribution of operating appropriations for family practice

and primary care, attached to and made a part hereof, arehereby approved.

RESOLUTION 1991-28

WHEREAS, the Ohio Board of Regents is mandated by

the Ohio General Assembly to administer the

distribution of operating appropriations included inAm. Sub. H. B. 111 of the 118th General Assembly; and



10

WHEREAS, included in Am. Sub. H. B. 111 are

appropriations for the support of programs in geriatric

medicine at state-supported and state-assisted medicalschoolsj

NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED: that the proposed schedules for

distribution of operating appropriations for geriatricmedicine, attached to and made a part hereof, are

hereby approved.

RESOLUTION 1991-29

WHEREAS, the Ohio Board of Regents is mandated bythe Ohio General Assembly to administer the

distribution of operating appropriations included in

Am. Sub. 111 of the 118th General Assembly; and

WHEREAS, included in Am. Sub. 111 areappropriations for the support of the Area Health

Education Centers (AHEC) Programs;

NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED: that the proposed schedules for

distribution of operating appropriations for the Area

Health Education Centers (AHEC) Programs, attached to

and made a part hereof, are hereby approved.

Mr. Boyle said that in discussing the MCO funding, Dr.

Filipic had remarked the formula would remain the same in this

budget because of the need to study the way medical colleges are

funded. He questioned if that means it would not be addressed

until the next budget. Dr. Filipic replied he would hope that in

this particular budget cycle an Executive Budget will not be

produced until mid-March rather than in January because of the

new Governor. He said the law permits a March 15 introductiondate rather than in January. Therefore, it might be possible to

make a recommendation that would make some change to what was

proposed in September before an Executive Budget is out. He

stated it would not be possible to do the more comprehensive

study that needs to be done, however. He further said he viewedthe medical education issue the one major outstanding issue that

may be brought back for change in the upcoming budget.



11

CONSIDERATION OF PARTIAL DISTRIBUTION AND RELEASE OF FUNDS

a. Productivity Improvement Challenge - Level II

North Central Technical College $25,000

b. Access ImprovementShawnee State University

Postsecondary Education Demonstration

The University of Toledo

$50,000Laboratories

$25,044

c.

Dr. Ann Moore, Vice Chancellor for Planning and

Organizational Development, said the three requests on the agendaare also related to programs in the biennial executive bUdget.

The major distribution of the funds occurred last year.

The Productivity Improvement Challenge item is a new request

from North Central Technical College for $25,000 to match an

industrial contribution to do a special project in super-abrasives technology. The Productivity Improvement Challenge

program is one that stimulates the involvement of the two-year

colleges in working with business and industry. The colleges

are being encouraged to take a major role in helping industry in

their efforts at retraining the workforce. Dr. Moore said the

superabrasive technology has been used successfully in off-shore

manufacturing and is now being looked at by manufacturers in Ohio

as a new way of doing business. The college has volunteered itsservices to work with companies to develop curriculum, training

materials and to train faculty in this new technology so that

industry in Ohio can be helped to catch up with some of the new

ways of manufacturing. Dr. Moore remarked the campuses would

share the curriculum materials with other colleges and will beinvolved in the Train-the-Trainer project which is used to train

faculty in other cOlleges so that manufacturing knowledge can be

expanded very quickly.

Access Improvement funds are another line item which

provides the Board with flexibility in implementing the Access

and Retention Policy. Dr. Moore explained work has been done

with the colleges and universities in the 28 Appalachian Counties

in Ohio that are part of the Appalachian region in the United

States. This area of the state is significantly underrepresentedin higher education and strategies have been examined to improve

the participation in higher education of students from those

areas. These colleges and universities wish to work together indeveloping a common strategy across southeast Ohio, and she said,

Chancellor Hairston has met with them on a couple occasions. Dr.

Moore said the proposal being brought to the Board would allowthem to employ a coordinator that would work with all the

colleges and universities in identifying successful models of

access and retention strategies that work in other rural areas of

the country and that would allow them to do some planning and

programming across the 28 counties. Currently, she said, one



12

institution cannot cover the cost that would be involved in thecoordination of the effort and they would all be contributing in

the programming. Originally, the request was for $125,000 to

incorporate a marketing plan. Dr. Moore said they are not ready

at this point to work on the marketing plan, therefore, the

recommendation today was changed to $50,000. The marketing planwill be brought to the Board for discussion at a later time.

Dr. Moore presented the third program, the Postsecondary

Education Demonstration Laboratories, another access and

retention strategy in the planning and developing phase.Currently, there are six major urban centers involved in

developing a very solid educational pipeline for students so that

fewer students are lost through the cracks that exist between

elementary and secondary and higher education. Each of thedemonstration sites includes public school representation,

college and university representation, and community

representation. One of the urban projects submitted a budget

that was a little low and they have realized the budget theysubmitted did not cover their full operating costs. They are now

submitting the remainder that is well in line with the other

projects that have been funded. Dr. Moore recommended that The

University of Toledo, the fiscal agent for the Toledo Area

project, be granted another $25,044 to bring their budget up to

the same level as the other programs.

Mr. Sawyer commented on the access program for the

southeastern part of the state and said it had been a very active

program with former Board member Bob Evans' leadership. He

remarked there was a conference held at Rio Grande College that

was one of the first efforts in the state to deal with the

access problem in a part of the state that really needs it.

Mr. Brown made a motion to approve Resolution 1991-30 as

amended for the release of funds for the Productivity Improvement

Challenge program, Access Improvement, and Postsecondary

Education Demonstration Laboratories. Mr. Frasier seconded the

motion and it was unanimously passed.

RESOLUTION 1991-30

BE IT RESOLVED: upon the recommendation of the

Chancellor, and with the concurrence of the Academic

and Special Programs Committee of the Board of Regents,that the following program allocations be made:

a. Productivity Improvement Challenge -Level II

North Central Technical College $25,000

b. Access Improvement

Shawnee State University $50,000



13

c. Postsecondary Education Demonstration

LaboratoriesThe University of Toledo $25,044

CONSIDERATION OF NEW DEGREES AND NEW DEGREE PROGRAMS

a. Master of Science in Exercise Science, The

University of Toledo

Dr. Uvieja Leighton, Administrator, Graduate and Special

Programs, said The University of Toledo requested approval to

offer a Master of Science in Exercise Science degree program.

She said the program was housed in the College of Education in

Allied Health. Previously, there was an Exercise Science

Concentration for students. However, they found that students

were not going into education, yet there was a required core of

education courses they had to take. The students were getting

jobs in the allied health field or they were going on to graduateschool in the sciences. Dr. Leighton called the degree a

misnomer because students are going into the allied health field,

not education, and they feel it has hindered their acceptance

into graduate school in science-based programs and their ability

to find jobs in allied health fields. They have a good science

base in this program but it is not recognized. Dr. Leighton

pOinted out the curriculum has both an applied and a theoretical

focus. Students will be able to select one of three options -

Biomechanics, Exercise Physiology or Motor Learning. The Regents

Advisory Committee on Graduate Programs approved the program and

Dr. Leighton recommended its approval by the Board.

Mr. Dutton said one of his ongoing concerns is the

duplication of programs. In some instances, programs will be

offered from quadrants of the state under a different

nomenclature that in effect is substantially the same type of

program offered at a nearby institution. He stated he had never

before heard the terminology "Master of Science in Exercise" or

"Exercise Education." He asked what distinguishes this program

from a Masters degree in Physical Education or Physiology, or

some related discipline with more traditional terminology. He

questioned if this might be a replication of existing programs

offered by Bowling Green State University or one of the other

nearby institutions.

Dr. Leighton responded that Bowling Green does have a

related program. She referred Mr. Dutton's question to Dr. John

Drowatsky, Chairman of the Department of Health Promotion in

Human Performance at The University of Toledo. Dr. Drowatsky

said the program in Physical Education has an education component

which deals with the teaching of physical activities to

elementary and secondary school children. It deals to a large

extent with teaching methods and traditional types of activities



14

including track and field, the wellness activities, basketball

and other activities that may be used for leisure activity.

Exercise Science does not include any of the teaching methods,nor does it include a study of those types of activities. With

Exercise Physiology there are two areas, one in which the student

can deal with the biophysiological aspects of physical exercise,particularly as it relates to changes in metabolism and healthactivity. In that area, Dr. Drowatsky explained tissue samples

are done, "stick" and blood assays are done and there isparticular emphasis on the effects of tense or moderate activity

on different types of individuals. The second is an applied area

to study cardiac rehabilitation programs. People are put into

situations where they assist with exercise testing, cardiac

rehabilitation and exercise programs and they may work with

physicians or others in terms of test technology and program

development. In the biomechanics area there is a combination ofphysics and engineering programming where such things as gait,

the effect of various disabilities on gait and the applications

of these principles in developing equipment or prostheticdevices, etc., are observed. With motor learning, motor control

is looked at, e.g., how people control physical activities which

could range from dealing with children who have spini bifida to

children with learning disabilities to normal individuals.

Therefore, the focus is primarily in science. There are no

educational courses. There are pure science courses in biology,

physics, psychology, an so forth. Looking at the two programs

side by side, one of the programs emphasizes applied study in

terms of education whereas the other program looks at the use of

science and development of programs in these areas.

Mr. Dutton concluded that these are distinctions of

substance. Dr. Drowatsky replied that was true. Mr. Dutton then

inquired if the market place demands, or requires, a Masters

degree in Exercise Science. Dr. Drowatsky said most of the

students find employment in health-related activities or they go

into the doctoral programs. Three students have come to the

Medical College after taking the Masters program and a number of

students have gone to Adelphi and to Ohio University and other

schools for the physical therapy programs. However, most of themgo into university teaching and research as opposed to the ones

who take the Master of Education in Physical Education in orderto try to improve their teaching and become master teachers in

the public schools. Dr. Hairston added that in many instances

this program might be characterized as a renaming of an activityat the institution. Dr. Drowatsky stated there is no change and

that this has been done for a long period of time. This is a

trend in physical education to separate the two, i.e., Physical

Education and Exercise Science, a trend that has occurredthroughout the country at both the Masters and the Bachelor's

degree levels. He emphasized their programs are not duplicated

with what is offered at Bowling Greeni that they confer with



15

Bowling Green's faculty and use faculty at the Medical College

and Bowling Green as instructors and in working with the research

thesis.

Mr. Sawyer made a motion to approve Resolution 1991-31 for

The University of Toledo to offer the Master of Science degree inExercise Science. Mr. Brown seconded the motion and it was

unanimously passed.

RESOLUTION 1991-31

WHEREAS, there is evidence of a need for a masters

program in exercise science in Northeast Ohio; and

WHEREAS, The University of Toledo has developed aMaster of Science in Exercise Science; and

WHEREAS, the Regents' Advisory Committee on

Graduate Study has unanimously recommended the programfor unconditional approval;

NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED: The University of Toledo is

authorized to offer the Master of Science in Exercise

Science degree, effective immediately.

b. Master of Arts in Women's Studies, The Ohio

State UniverSity

Dr. Leighton said The Ohio State University requested

approval to offer the Master of Arts in Women's Studies program.

In the past, she said, students have been able to pursue a focus

in this program and now it is desired to concentrate that into a

degree. Women in the past have been studied in history as Women

in History, Women in Communication, Women in Sociology, and over

the years, a body of knowledge has developed to make this a

unique discipline.

Dr. Leighton explained that because there has been a focus

in this area, a faculty has been built of seven people teaching

in Women's Studies. She added that the Regents' Advisory

Committee on Graduate Studies (RACGS) complimented them sayingthey are the most outstanding in this area of the country and are

seen as a model program. Others come to them to set up their own

programs. This degree is cross-disciplinary, it promotes anunderstanding of how an issue such as women in poverty (because

there is a growing number of women in poverty) is interrelated

among disciplines, not just women in history. Women who receive

this degree would pursue doctoral work in a specific discipline;

some of them would go out to pursue employment in this area.



16

In the 1990's more women are going into the workforce and willconstitute 50 percent of the new entrants into the workforce.

Employers are looking for people who have an understanding of

women's issues and can help them solve problems effectively andfast.

Dr. Leighton repeated that RACGS had highly complimented the

program and recommended Board approval.

Mr.

The Ohio

Studies.

passed.

Sawyer made a motion to approve Resolution 1991-32 for

State University to offer the Master of Arts in Women's

Mr. Brown seconded the motion and it was unanimously

RESOLUTION 1991-32

WHEREAS, there is evidence of a need for a masters

program in women's studies in Ohio; and

WHEREAS, The Ohio State University has developed a

Master of Arts in Women's Studies; and


Graduate Study has unanimously recommended the program

for unconditional approval;

NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED: The Ohio State University is

authorized to offer the Master of Arts in Women's

Studies degree, effective immediately.

c. Master of Education with an Emphasis in

Elementary Education, Off-Campus Program at

Ohio University Ironton Campus and Portsmouth

Resident Credit Center, for the Academic

Years 1990-91 through Summer 1992

d. Master in Counselor Education, Off-Campus

Program at Ohio University Belmont Campus,

for the Academic Years 1990-91 through 1992-

1993

Dr. Blum stated Ohio University requested approval to offer

two Masters degree programs in Education at two of its regional

campus sites. The curriculum at the off-campus sites would bethe same course of study provided at the central campus. The

Elementary Education program proposed at the Ironton and

Portsmouth campuses emphasizes the current research in

mathematics, science and reading instructional methods as well as

reading diagnostic techniques.



17

Dr. Blum said the second request proposed to offer the

Master of Education in Counselor Education at the Belmont Campus.

This program, which prepares school guidance counselors, is

accredited by the Council for Accreditation for Counseling andRelated Education programs and the Council for Accreditation of

Teacher Education.

In both programs, she said, the central campus faculty will

provide the instruction at the off-campus sites. Both programs

provide for very clearly articulated and identified needs inthese communities of place-bound students who live in and around

the Ironton, Portsmouth and Belmont areas. The RACGS approved

both programs and unanimously recommended them for Board

approval.

Mr. Frasier made a motion to approve Resolutions 1991-33 and

1991-34 for Ohio University to offer off-campus programs at

Ironton, Portsmouth and Belmont. Mr. Sawyer seconded the motion

and it was unanimously passed.

RESOLUTION 1991-33

WHEREAS, there is evidence of a regional need for

a graduate program in elementary education in Ironton

an Portsmouth, Ohio; and

WHEREAS, Ohio UniverSity offers a Master of

Education with an emphasis in Elementary Education on

its Athens Campus; and

WHEREAS, Ohio University has a regional campus in

Ironton, Ohio and the Portsmouth Resident Credit

Center; and


Graduate Study has unanimously recommended Ohio

UniverSity to offer the Master of Education with an

emphasis in Elementary Education at its Ironton Campusand at the Portsmouth Resident Credit Center;

NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED: Ohio University is authorized to

offer the degree Master of Education with an emphasisin Elementary Education at Ohio UniverSity/Ironton and

the Portsmouth Resident Credit Center for Academic

Years 1990-91 through 1992-93.



18

RESOLUTION 1991-34

WHEREAS, there is evidence of a regional need fora graduate program in counselor education in BelmontCounty, Ohio; and

WHEREAS, Ohio University offers a Master of

Education in Counselor Education at its Athens Campus;and

WHEREAS: Ohio University has a regional campus in

Belmont County, Ohioj and


Graduate Study has unanimously recommended Ohio

University to offer the Master of Education in

Counselor Education at its Belmont Campus;

NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED: Ohio University is authorized to

offer the degree Master of Education in Counselor

Education at Ohio UniverSity/Belmont for Academic Years

1990-91 through Summer 1992.

CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING THE JOINT USE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE

UNIVERSITY OF AKRON AND NATIONAL INVENTION CENTER

Dr. Filipic said this consideration involves a modificationof the Joint Use Agreement the Board approved in October, 1989.

He said, the Capital bill, H. B. 810, appropriated $4 million toThe University of Akron for the National Inventor's Hall of Fame.

The bill also required the Board of Regents to adopt rules

regarding the release of money for projects, such rules to

require a Joint Use Agreement between the university or college

receiving the appropriation and an entity that would actually

receive the building. The agreement would have to provide for an

educational use in the building by the college or univerSity for

a minimum of 15 years - the period of time over which the moneywould be borrowed to pay for the building. There must also be an

arrangement for reimbursing the state should that use be denied

anywhere in the 15 year period and there are stipulations that

the non-profit organization would comply with applicable statelaws and rules.

Dr. Filipic said an agreement was put together that met thestandards of the Board and the Board approved it in October of

1989. Part of the agreement, he said, was the schedule of

payments of state appropriations (a "draw schedule") which

indicated not only the timing, but more importantly, the purpose

for which those payments would be made. Although most of these



19

agreements indicate that a portion of the state appropriationswould be used for planning, this particular agreement did noti it

indicated that all the funds would be used for construction.Some time earlier this year, after Board approval of the

agreement as presented by the university and the National

Inventor's Center, there was a change of heart in Akron and thedesire to use some of the state appropriations - $500,000 out of

the total $4 million appropriation - for planning purposes.

Consequently, Dr. Filipic stated, the change brought to the Board

today is the change in the draw schedule that identifies one half

million dollars being used for that purpose.

Dr. Filipic said in the meantime there have been other

changes in the financing of the project. Originally, he said,

the budget that was presented last year suggested that the total

project would cost $28 million. Therefore, the state money was a

very small fraction of the total. Currently, estimates for Phase

I of the project are costing approximately $23 million which

includes a $3 million endowment to support long-term operationsof the Center and also some short-term operating costs. Of the

$23 million total, $15 million would be for capital purposes:

the planning, acquisition of the land, and the construction of

the building itself. Against the $15 million capital cost, Dr.

Filipic explained, there is the $4 million state appropriation

and also $9.6 million in pledges or commitments from the City of

Akron, Summit County and number of the major corporations in the

Akron area. Although the exact size of the facility is still

under question, there seems to be a substantial local commitment

to the project and there does not seem to be any danger that

commitment of state funds for planning would result in no

ultimate construction.

Mr. Dutton indicated the Board members did not have a copy

of the existing draw schedule, that they only had a copy of the

proposed revised draw schedule. He asked if the existing draw

schedule illustrated what the local commitment of funds for theproject would be, and more importantly, that the planning monies

would come out of the local funds. Dr. Filipic replied the

existing draw schedule was identical to the proposed one in form

and simply described only the $4 million state appropriation and

just indicated that the $4 million would be used for the items

under heading "B" in the proposed draw schedule, the construction

portion. The materials describing the overall budget of the

project that were received were not part of the agreement butwere rather for information purposes a year ago. Mr. Dutton

asked if the existing agreement only shows how the $4 million

state funding would be spent and does not connect that in any way

as a condition precedent to having in place the commitments for

the private money. Dr. Filipic replied that was correct. Mr.

Dutton then inquired what assurance was there that public money

won't be expended in the planning stages and that the private

money will never materialize. Dr. Filipic responded there were



20

two assurances. First of all, he said, only $500,000 of the $4

million state appropriation could be used for planning in the new

schedule. The remaining $3.5 million would be reserved for the

actual construction. Therefore, what would be at risk would beone-half million dollars and not the full $4 million state

appropriation. He remarked he had been told there were othercash needs earlier on and that acquisition of land was part of it

and that it was coming from local non-state funds. Secondly, he

said, he has information from the National Invention Center that

they do have commitments (in writing) from the city, county andcorporations amounting $9.6 million.


to amend the Joint Use Agreement between The University of Akron

and the National Invention Center. Mr. Frasier seconded the

motion and it was unanimously passed.

RESOLUTION 1991-35

WHEREAS, in October 1989, the Ohio Board of

Regents approved a joint use agreement between The

University of Akron and the National Invention Center;

and

WHEREAS, both parties to the joint use agreement

have requested modification of Exhibit D of that

agreement, which stipulates the amounts, times and

purposes for which payments may be made to the National

Invention Center by the State of Ohio for developing

the National Inventor's Hall of Fame; and

WHEREAS, the modification of Exhibit D authorizing

state payments for architectural design services as

well as facility construction is consistent with terms

of the capital appropriation made by the General

Assembly;

NOW, THEREFORE,

BE IT RESOLVED: upon the recommendation of theChancellor and with the concurrence of the Finance and

Capital Committee of the Ohio Board of Regents, that

substitute Exhibit D, attached and made part hereof, of

the joint use agreement between The University of Akronand the National Invention Center, be approved.

CONSIDERATION OF REQUESTS TO THE CONTROLLING BOARD FOR THE PERIODSEPTEMBER I, 1990 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 1990

Dr. Fi1ipic said the capital appropriation bills that the

General Assembly adopts from time to time always require, with

regard to higher education capital improvements, a recommendation



21

for release from the Board of Regents. The mechanism that has

been chosen to provide that recommendation is simply a

ratification of the Controlling Board requests being submittedvia the Board of Regents to the state Office of Budget and

Management or the Controlling Board, he explained. Every month

as part of the agenda, a listing of Controlling Board requeststhat have been received and a code, either a "1" or a 112"indicating whether or not it is staff judgment that the requests

can be forwarded to the Office of Budget and Management. A "2"

would indicate that it is being held for further review. Dr.

Filipic said it is important for the Board members to understand,

(since there were two new Board members present today) that inorder to prevent delays in a capital process that is already very

time consuming, the staff assumes Board's concurrence in their

recommendations and forwards the requests rather than waiting for

the actual action of the Board. Essentially, the Board is

ratifying something that has already been done by the staff.Typically, the requests can be pulled back if the Board members

disagree at the time of their meeting, but members need to notethat when two months have gone between a previous meeting some

have already been acted upon by the Controlling Board as well.

He said the staff tries to anticipate members' judgment on thesematters and to notify the Finance Committee Chairman or others

who might be interested if there is a particular problem on a

request. However, in the interest of speed, all of the items are

not held until formal action by the Board.

Dr. Filipic explained there were two lists this month, one

for requests received in September and one for requests received

in October. (A Board meeting was not held in October).

Mr. Dutton stated he would like to be recorded as abstaining

from voting on Youngstown State University item No. 16 because at

the time the original project was under way he served as a

trustee of the university and had the misfortune of recommending

the contract at that time.


for the approval of Controlling Board requests for the period

September 1, 1990 through October 31, 1990. Mr. Frasier secondedthe motion and it was passed with one abstention.

RESOLUTION 1991-36

BE IT RESOLVED: upon the recommendation of theChancellor and with the concurrence of the Finance and

Capital Committee of the Ohio Board of Regents, thatthe requests for release of capital improvements funds

received in the period September 1, 1990 through

October 31, 1990, as shown on the sheets attached

hereto, are hereby approved, and recommended for

approval by the Controlling Board.



22

PERSONNEL ACTIONS

Chancellor Hairston called attention to the new

appointments, promotions and reassignments as listed in Boardmaterials.

A motion was made by Mr. Sawyer to approve Resolution 1991-37, Personnel Actions. Mrs. Lanier seconded the motion and itwas unanimously passed.

RESOLUTION 1991-37

BE IT RESOLVED: upon the recommendation of the

Chancellor that the following personnel actions beapproved:

APPOINTMENTS SALARY EFFECTIVE DATE

Daryl W. WrightAdministratorInformation Systems &Research

$27,000 10/21/90

N. Jane FullertonAdministrativeAssistant, Operations

$30,000 10/21/90

Robert P. Johnson

AdministrativeAssistant, Planning

& Organizational

Development

$29,500 10/21/90

PROMOTIONS

Patricia M. HillAssistant Director

Information Systems& Research

$41,000 10/07/90

REASSIGNMENTS

Uvieja G. LeightonAdministrator

Graduate and Special

Programs

$40,000 10/21/90

Margaret M. DittoePersonnel Officer 3Operations

$16.54 hourly 10/21/90



23

There being no further business to be brought before theBoard, the meeting was adjourned.

The next meeting of the Board Will~b Friday, December 14,

1990, 9:30 a.m., in the Main Conference m of the Regents'

Office, 36th Floor, State Office Tower.

December 14~ 1990

Date

December 14, 1990

Date

mjk

Documents

Source 4 OBR Minutes, November 16, 1990