University Senate - February 26, 2024 Minutes

UNIVERSITY SENATE

Meeting Minutes

February 26, 2024

The University Senate was called to order at 3:30 p.m., in 111 Harrison Hall on Monday, February 26, 2024. Members absent: Kenya Ash, Cheryl Chafin, Riley Crabtree, Amie Earls, Evan Gallagher, Venus Harvey, Frank Huang, Patrick Houlihan, Yong Lin, Peter Mkhatshwa, Liz Mullenix, Carla Myers, August Ogunnowo, Nyah, Lynn Stevens, Peng Wang

Call to Order and Announcements and Remarks – Tracy Haynes, Chair of University Senate Executive Committee
1. The Senate Survey is coming out this week. Please be on the lookout for the survey and if you can help fill in a spot, we encourage you to sign up.
2. A Microphone has been requested, because we have some that are having issues hearing presenters and questions. Until a microphone is available we ask that everyone speak up so that everyone can hear clearly.

Approval of University Senate Minutes
1. University Senate Full Meeting Minutes12.2024 (Results: 44-Yes, 00-No, 01-Abstain)
  1. With update to absentee list

Consent Calendar: The following items were received and accepted on the Consent Calendar:
1. Curricular Items _02.21.2024
2. Graduate Council Minutes_02.13.2024
3. LEC Meeting Minutes_02.06.2024

Special Report
1. Update on Low-Enrolled Majors and a Vision for the Future - Carolyn Haynes, Senior Associate Provost for Strategic Initiatives
  1. Update #2 on Low-Enrolled �� - Some personal caveats, musings & assumptions
  2. Dilemma Facing Higher Education
    1. Higher education is in many ways highly progressive in its commitment to learning access, and equity
    2. Yet, it also is markedly steadfast with longstanding and siloed organizational structures (campuses, divisions, departments, and programs/subfields within departments)
    3. Faculty are hired into positions often anticipating that they will research and teach in the same program, department and division throughout their working lives
    4. Decisions are made through shared governance which ideally necessitates lots of deliberation but takes significant time
    5. While they have many strengths, these structures also make rapid & timely responses to changing & critical dynamics challenging
  3. Rapidly Shifting Landscape
    1. Declining public support and state funding for higher ed
    2. Higher costs of healthcare and other routine expenditures, leading to financial pressures
    3. Number of traditionally aged college students diminishing in Ohio and the nearby regions where we successfully yield students leading to lower enrollments & financial pressures
    4. Fierce competitive market for students (i.e., more universities than needed in the region) leading to tuition reductions and less net tuition revenue
    5. Facing a turbulent world, students and their parents increasingly seeking “majors” in pre-professional fields rather than traditional liberal arts disciplines
    6. Student interests & employer needs likely to change again in the future
  4. These trends are forcing lib arts program cuts and layoffs
    1. UNC Greensboro
    2. Queens College
    3. Wright State
    4. West Virginia University
    5. UNC Asheville
    6. University of Arizona
    7. U Mass Lowell
    8. Warren Wilson College
    9. Manhattan College
    10. Methodist University
    11. Goddard College
    12. Drake University
    13. University of Toledo
    14. Connecticut State Colleges & Universities
    15. University of Chicago
    16. Penn State University
    17. Univ of New Hampshire
    18. Univ of Wisconsin Platteville
    19. Bradley University
    20. University of Kansas
    21. Eastern Kentucky University
    22. SUNY Potsdam
    23. Baldwin Wallace University
    24. Park University
    25. University of Alaska System
  5. Yet, we know……
    1. Liberal education and liberal arts outcomes prepare students for professional and personal success and happiness
    2. Employers highly value liberal education/arts outcomes:
      1. Critical & creative thinking
      2. Written communication
      3. Teamwork and collaboration
      4. Intercultural understanding
      5. Authentic learning experiences (internships, fieldwork, research, co-ops, service learning) where students wrestle with thorny, interdisciplinary problems
  6. Advancing a New Vision
    1. Infusing the power of interdisciplinarity and collaboration into the way we teach, serve and work so that our graduates are ready to thrive as leaders in their professions and fields and enjoy a fulfilling life
    2. Streamlining and redesigning our academic program portfolio while advancing liberal arts outcomes across the curriculum
    3. Moving away from privileging only the major
    4. Offering majors that align with student demand PLUS providing a range of other credentials (co-major, minor, certificate, microcredential) that advance career, liberal arts and liberal education outcomes and student success
    5. Ensuring the �� Plan effectively advances outcomes and meets student needs
    6. Creating centers and institutes that cross departmental/disciplinary boundaries
    7. Offering students a customized set of learning experiences inside and outside the classroom (multiple credentials, experiential learning) that are aligned with their personal and professional goals
  7. Streamlining the Portfolio: Low-Enrolled Majors
    1. A. American Studies
    2. A. Art & Architectural History
    3. A. Classical Studies
    4. A. Critical Race & Ethnic Studies
    5. A. French
    6. A. Geography
    7. A. German
    8. A. Health Communication
    9. A. Italian Studies
    10. A. Latino/Latina, Caribbean Studies
    11. A. Religion
    12. A. Russian, East European & Eurasian Studies
    13. A. Social Justice
    14. A. Women’s, Gender & Sexuality Studies
    15. S. Chinese Education
    16. S. Education Studies
    17. S. French Education
    18. S. German Education
    19. S. Latin Education
    20. S. Spanish Education
    21. S. Health Information Technology
    22. S. KNH, Public Health
    23. S. Quantitative Economics
  8. Redesigning & Diversifying the Portfolio - Redesigning the curricular portfolio to feature more than the major, better meet student demand, and continue to advance liberal arts/education outcomes, including:
    1. Co-Majors which provide a complementary perspective to a student’s primary major and may be career-oriented, applied, professionally-oriented, or focus on an interdisciplinary or pioneering new field
    2. Minors which are designated sequence of courses in a discipline or defined area of undergraduate study and have coherence and increasing sophistication
    3. Certificates which are often supplementary to other degree programs by providing students with new competencies for professional development, technical knowledge, or lifelong learning; or may be building blocks toward future degree completion
    4. Microcredentials which provide in-demand skills, know-how and experience, can be completed quickly and can be “stacked” as a pathway to a certificate or full degree
  9. Possible Collaborative Innovations
    1. Contributing to sites of innovation (Honors College, �� Plan Signature Inquiry, Education Abroad, etc.)
    2. Offering “shared” core courses across multiple majors
    3. Combining stand-alone programs into one consolidated major with multiple concentrations
    4. Creating new interdisciplinary programs (majors, co-majors, certificates, minors) or team-designed MP courses or co-curricular programs
    5. Collaborating on developing new centers/institutes that address interdisciplinary problems and issues and bring faculty together from different disciplines to teach and generate knowledge
  10. Departments’ Creative Responses - All of the programs on the list have created plans for further exploration and implementation (with general timeline). Some are still gathering data. Plans include:
    1. Consolidating majors (combining two or more programs)
    2. Infusing existing courses into another or multiple majors
    3. Creating new center with interdisciplinary certificates and other initiatives
    4. Creating co-major based on market research
    5. Designing shared courses across programs
    6. Enhancing the minor to appeal to greater cross-section of students
    7. Infusing a new concentration into an existing major
  11. Another Response: HumanitiesFUTURES - Projects underway:
    1. Honors College Curriculum: Plan for pilot version of core course to be offered in fall 2025 (10 sections) which includes template(s) for the course and budget plan
    2. Humanities in the �� Plan: Create professional development plan for helping faculty to develop and revise MP courses (Humanities, SI) to appeal to pre-professional students and to help them understand the value of humanities
    3. Medical Humanities: Plan for revision of medical humanities program; new course ideas; partnership with Mallory-Wilson established
    4. FSB Curricular Collaborations: Explore pursuing a Teagle grant to develop new curricular ideas
    5. HumanitiesWORKS (Career Development): Plan for fully implementing HumanitiesWORKS initiative, template for field-specific outcome sheet, video, website plans
    6. Outreach: Plan for communicating about humanities to advisors and exploratory studies students
  12. Benefits
    1. Builds on and updates our liberal education/liberal arts tradition
    2. Meets students where they are while still offering them an extraordinary education designed for lifelong success
    3. Advances collaboration and new partnerships across the University; breaks down siloed thinking
    4. Fuels experimentation (easier to launch and sunset programs with fewer credits)
    5. Helps to retain our talented, continuing, full-time faculty and ideally provide them meaningful opportunities for advancing learning
    6. Enables low-enrolled programs to move off the radar, thus reducing stress and labor
  13. Comparative Religion’s Proposal
    1. Important to consider it on its own merits
    2. When asked to find a solution for their major (which has 8 students), faculty developed their own proposal for their future, including wanting to create a new interdisciplinary center (and eliminating dept structure) and embedding their field into other curricula. In fact, they were first to generate a new idea.
    3. Faculty will have same protections as before.
    4. Faculty will teach many of the same courses as they do now, but may also pursue other opportunities and contribute as appropriate to their credentials and as needed in their new department.
    5. Faculty will work with CAS to find suitable homes in other CAS departments. MoUs will allocate responsibilities between Religion courses and others.
    6. Shared admin will continue as long as the dept still exists; REL course scheduling will be supported in a department TBD (will keep assessing to ensure staff are leveraged in areas of most need)
    7. Centers can offer curricula (courses, microcredentials, professional education). Institutes can offer degree programs. Or, Religion courses can be scheduled by another department.
    8. Short-term savings: reduce some upper level offerings; dept chair additional salary; less focus on trying to recruit new majors
    9. Long term: As faculty and staff come and go, Provost and Dean have discretion to repurpose positions to areas of critical need. Enables greater flexibility as landscape shifts.
    10. Larger Benefit: REL faculty are carving out places where they can promote meaningful and valued learning. Goal is to continue offering exciting disciplinary and interdisciplinary learning opportunities relating to comparative religion.
  14. Process Coordination
    1. Designed to be a deliberate, transparent process, involving key stakeholders
    2. PC will engage in a am impact analysis and create a proposal with recommended action steps that address the concerns raised by stakeholders
    3. PC will present to University Senate and Deans
    4. Senate can request multiple presentations
  15. Final Thoughts - We are facing very hard times. But remember:
    1. We have incredibly gifted & hard-working faculty who care deeply about their students, learning, teaching and knowledge creation.
    2. Our students are smart and intellectually curious. They may be choosing to major in mostly professional fields, but they still value learning other fields and disciplines.
    3. �� University is a special place with many assets, including a dedicated, competent and helpful staff.
    4. We can succeed, if we trust one another, exude grace and collaborate constructively.
  16. Senator Questions and Comments
    1. Senator: During the BOT there was a quote of “infusing the best of humanities into all our programs”. Who is the we that wanted to protect the Liberal Arts? (A) I don’t have communication with the BOT. I have been in strategic planning sessions, so we’re inserting this into conversations on a regular basis. I want students to be as successful as they can be. I can’t speak for everybody else.
    2. Senator: What would be the appropriate forum to express our concerns and frustration that the university is going through with closing down majors? Is there a spot where we can make our voices heard or has the train left the station already? (A) I feel like you have and I think on these 22 programs the train has left the station. What you can do is help them thrive. I believe all these fields will end up thriving- maybe in different forms. I would encourage you to say “let’s partner”. Find ways to work together with your colleagues from other disciplines.
    3. Senator: I’ve been here 32 years and I have always heard “we value Liberal Arts”. To me it is valued in word only and not in action. If it was important then we would have some serious conversations about this as no one is teaching in an empty classroom. How do we embed liberal arts and humanities into all these set programs/majors and make it viable to make such a connection? (A) Totally agree. That really is the impetus behind the HumanitiesFutures group. This is why we need to be open.
    4. Senator: I want to remind this body that you came here before COVID and we voted on this very process. So, this process coordinator is part of that process that we have voted on, correct? Also, according to that process, this does come back to us again during the process; Correct? What is our strategy? If we had a strategy we could stick to that instead of chasing revenue. (A) It’s important not to conflate elimination of a program and elimination of a department. Right- you’re going to see all of this. You can ask people to come in to talk about their plans. It’s remarkable to me that when people are heartbroken, they can come up with incredible ideas. I have to have a vision in the way I operate. I have to know I’m following the principles I believe in.
    5. Senator: Thank you for coming in as this really helps with the bigger picture. LEC is considering cutting requirements for DEI. To what extent are we really talking about cutting here? (A) I don't think there’s a grand vision. I think they’re exploring options. In the strategic planning process, I hope we don’t make major changes to the �� Plan, but I don’t think we have specific plans yet.
    6. Senator: I understand the problems that you have outlined here and we hear you when you say to help our colleagues. However, our hearts are all full and our tanks are all empty. We have more work with less compensation, which is not helping. We need to have better leadership and the answer can’t be faculty taking on additional work. (A) Let me clarify- I didn’t mean to do more work. I mean, it’s a mindset- to be open when colleagues want to collaborate. We have no extra resources- I understand.
    7. Senator: We have talked about shared governance, but I have deep concerns about how this process has gone. I feel like I have found out more through the press than through official decisions. At one point there were 35 majors that needed to be eliminated. It seems to have moved to 40, according to what was shared in the BOT meeting, but no one has ever told us. At the BOT, there was also talk about a creation of a single language major, but that has not been shared with us either. It just seems to me that since we are the governance here at ��, that before this information is announced publicly, we should have also been informed. I also don’t understand how by removing student majors we are making it more appealing to students. (A) That’s because some were eliminated through the APEIP process. With the world languages, they (the departments) are working on that.
    8. Senator: What opportunity is there in reinvesting in majors and revamping them to make them thrive again? (A) Any time a faculty member wants to consider a new program, we have a process that helps them to explore.
    9. Senator: One of my colleagues also asked, “Why is she hearing more from the media than from the Senate minutes?”. How are our students going to be impacted by these major changes? What is the timeframe for this? (A) The elimination of programs doesn’t happen until they all graduate. Once a program decides they’re going to be eliminated, a teach out plan takes 4-5 years and there is a process for notifying the accrediting body and the students.
    10. Senator: Who are defined as contingent faculty? (A) Not TCPLS. We’re talking about non full-time.

Old Business
1. SR 24-08 Sense of the Senate: Department of Comparative Religion Elimination, Nathan French, Associate Professor, Department of Comparative Religion, and James C. Hanges, Professor and Chair, Department of Comparative Religion - (Results: 43-Yes, 00-No, 02-Abstain)
  1. Friendly Amendment Proposed:
    1. Whereas �� University’s founding charter commits �� to “the instruction of youth in all the various branches of the liberal arts and sciences, for the promotion of good education, virtue, religion and morality, and for conferring all the literary honours granted in similar institutions” (from ��’s founding charter (February 17, 1809, referenced in �� University Policy Manual, 3339.01);
    2. BE IT RESOLVED
      1. We, the members of the �� University Senate, recommend to the Office of the Provost, pursuant to Section 8, Appendix A (SR 14-01) of the University Senate By-Laws, to accept the plans for the Department of Comparative Religion proposed by the faculty of the Department, to commit to the continued existence of the academic study of religion at �� in our curriculum and research, to commit to the reassignment of the Department’s faculty in alignment with extant policy, and to proceed with the assignment of a process coordinator to discuss the elimination of the Department and reassignment of the Department’s faculty in alignment with extant policy to explore possible futures for the Department, inclusive of elimination, consolidation, or partition. Senate strongly recommends retention of our valuable employees currently serving in Comparative Religion, tenured, TCPL and staff.
  2. REL Courses, Majors, Minors - Please see slideshow presentation for slide graph showing numbers.
  3. Senator Questions and Comments
    1. Senator: Do you want me to vote yes for this? (A) I have department members with me here today. Can you raise your hands if you approve of this? As you can see, we are all in agreement on this.
    2. Senator: Called to Questions (Results: 43-Yes, 00-No, 02-Abstain)
2. SR 24-09 MME - Mechanical and Smart Manufacturing Engineering, Master of Engineering, Kumar Singh, Professor and Department Chair - (Results: 40-Yes, 01-No, 04-Abstain)
  1. Senator Questions and Comments
    1. Senator: I think in your presentation you mentioned that this would basically double your current masters enrollment. If so, are you certain that there will be no additional expenditures for faculty? For example, will current faculty have to be moved to cover courses for this program, leading you to need new faculty for older programs? (A) Our current graduate program has 25-30 students (including combined students). In the new program, a derivative curricular option, we anticipate an additional 15-20 students at the end of 4 years. Due to the current program's small size, we have a relatively low enrollment of graduate students in MME 5XX/6XX course sections (typically 8-13 students). With this new curricular pathway and anticipated increase in enrollment, we will have sections of 15-25 students. This is the reason we do not anticipate additional course sections or expenditure on faculty. The graduate courses offered in both program options are the same. The only change we anticipate is offering some graduate-level courses in a hybrid manner if we see increased interest from working professionals.
    2. Senator: Why wasn’t any independent demand analysis completed for this major? (A) This is a derivative curricular pathway/option allowed by the ODHE if the overall credits are more than 50% of the existing MS program. Similar to what we have done recently in the approval of the Masters in Computer Science Program and MEng in Chemical and Biomedical Engineering program, we are creating an alternative curricular pathway for non research (thesis) options for students. As highlighted above, the proposed curricular program/option does not require additional courses/resources. Therefore, a separate student demand analysis may not be warranted here. The main idea is to create innovative curriculum pathways from the existing curricula so we can attract more professionals and international students who may not be interested in pursuing research-based master's and are interested in obtaining a graduate degree in a relatively short time frame
  2. REL Courses, Majors, Minors - Please see slideshow presentation for slide graph showing numbers.
  3. Senator Questions and Comments
    1. Senator: Do you want me to vote yes for this? (A) I have department members with me here today. Can you raise your hands if you approve of this? As you can see, we are all in agreement on this.
    2. Senator: Called to Questions (Results: 43-Yes, 00-No, 02-Abstain)
    3. SR 24-09 MME - Mechanical and Smart Manufacturing Engineering, Master of Engineering, Kumar Singh, Professor and Department Chair - (Results: 40-Yes, 01-No, 04-Abstain)
      1. Senator Questions and Comments
        
        Senator: I think in your presentation you mentioned that this would basically double your current masters enrollment. If so, are you certain that there will be no additional expenditures for faculty? For example, will current faculty have to be moved to cover courses for this program, leading you to need new faculty for older programs? (A) Our current graduate program has 25-30 students (including combined students). In the new program, a derivative curricular option, we anticipate an additional 15-20 students at the end of 4 years. Due to the current program's small size, we have a relatively low enrollment of graduate students in MME 5XX/6XX course sections (typically 8-13 students). With this new curricular pathway and anticipated increase in enrollment, we will have sections of 15-25 students. This is the reason we do not anticipate additional course sections or expenditure on faculty. The graduate courses offered in both program options are the same. The only change we anticipate is offering some graduate-level courses in a hybrid manner if we see increased interest from working professionals.
        
        Senator: Why wasn’t any independent demand analysis completed for this major? (A) This is a derivative curricular pathway/option allowed by the ODHE if the overall credits are more than 50% of the existing MS program. Similar to what we have done recently in the approval of the Masters in Computer Science Program and MEng in Chemical and Biomedical Engineering program, we are creating an alternative curricular pathway for non research (thesis) options for students. As highlighted above, the proposed curricular program/option does not require additional courses/resources. Therefore, a separate student demand analysis may not be warranted here. The main idea is to create innovative curriculum pathways from the existing curricula so we can attract more professionals and international students who may not be interested in pursuing research-based master's and are interested in obtaining a graduate degree in a relatively short time frame
New Business
1. Department Planning & Improvement Process Committee Minutes_10.26.2023 - Discussion and Anticipated Vote on February 26, 2024 - (Results: 45-Yes, 00-No, 00-Abstain)
  1. Senator Questions and Comments
    1. Senator: On p36 of the minutes (p3 of DPIP Minutes), section on Guidelines for Reviewer Selection, the language makes it sound like having an external reviewer is optional: "could be internal or external." The rest of the process description doesn't seem to imply that external reviewers are optional, so I wonder whether it's just a wording issue in the passage. My memory is that Senate wanted to have external reviewers be part of the process. (A) External reviewers are optional. It is up to the department to decide if they want external reviewers to be part of the process.
    2. Senator: A Lot of times, what we need to hear we are not going to hear if it is an internal review. How do we ensure that when a department needs an external review that will happen? (A) there have been 7 recently that have requested an external review and I have not received any complaints about the process.
    3. Senator: What do we do with the external review? (A) In the past, little to no communication between the key people has occurred. Departments used to use it as an opportunity to request resources. Dean would come back and say “we don’t have those resources”. DPI process leads to me meeting two years ahead with the chair to identify goals/vision for the future. They work with their faculty. Chair, faculty, dean, and CH meet to discuss those goals. Our hope is that outcomes are useful. DPI is about goal-setting. Team comes in to bring ideas that will help a department/program meet their goals. So far, chairs have liked the process. Areas must be: 1) curriculum-related, 2) student-related, 3) whatever you choose. We give you a list of questions that help you get started on it.
    4. Senator: It would be good to see processes like this paired with incentives for departments to demonstrate types of interdisciplinarity as we pivot to increasing numbers of minors and certificates. Otherwise I fear that they [i.e., those numbers] will get swallowed up in the marketplace. This is just an observation and doesn't require a response at this time.
    5. Senator: Could the process include that the departments could include internal and external reviewers? (A) There’s a whole Canvas site and there’s a whole section that discusses the selection of reviewers.
Special Reports
1. LEC �� Plan Update - Leighton Peterson, Director of Liberal Education and Associate Professor of Anthropology
  1. I want to start off with a thank you to the LEC; as they meet every week for at least 2-3 hours, they are primarily non-tenurable TCPL faculty, and I encourage senators and senate to acknowledge their work and dedication to our students.
  2. I'll provide an update on the implementation of the �� Plan, will mention recent actions of the LEC and recent GMP and �� Plan policy adjustments, and will provide clarifications from the Office of Liberal education, as approved by LEC
    1. This is a regular part of what LEC does by advising the office of liberal education on the running and implementation of the plans on a regular basis. By looking at the LEC minutes, you see how busy they have been. I believe only 2 sets of minutes this semester have been made available to you at this point, but there has been much more done.
  3. Today I want to talk about the policies that have been realigned in order to look towards the future. Everything about the �� Plan and Office of Liberal Education implementation is designed to support student success. These policies that are appearing in minutes include transfer waiver credit policy, transfer credit policies for OT 36 approved GenEd courses at other institutions, application of advanced hours within advanced thematic sequence, and a policy allowing stand alone policies to carry other prospective areas’ designations. These are mostly all minor changes being made.
    1. I want to remind the senate that LEC is a senate committee. I want to make sure we lay this foundation for the future. The only change to the �� Plan for this year is this one:
      1. Based upon at least a year’s worth of research and in collaboration with the Howe Center for Writing Excellence, the LEC is considering allowing the overlapping of advanced hours to other prospective areas’ hours. This is in alignment with what our office does best, which is to lay the groundwork for student success, based upon best practices.
    2. Things are going as planned. Learning while doing, themed coursework, and things that once seemed like a checklist now has meaning again. This has not been reported by advisors, but from students themselves.
    3. Liberal education is different from liberal arts education. Liberal arts education is indeed disciplinary, rooted in classical Greek versus liberal education which is about transferable skills and ethical decision making.
  4. LEC is going to bring the Advanced Writing requirement to Senate for consideration so that it can "double count".
    1. The Howe Center for Writing Excellence has done a fantastic job.
      1. Because of this work LEC is able to consider what is best practice and why we are separating writing to learn from learning to write.
  5. Review Handout that for the basics of the new �� Plan
    1. We want to clear up any misconceptions that you may have had.
    2. The 2nd handout shows you exactly what we have been working on.
    3. We want to meet students where they are and are not “selling out”.
    4. Leverage the plan by bringing together the faculty where there are gaps based on students wanting these gaps filled.
    5. This is what faculty have always wanted to do and we are giving them the opportunity to do that now.
  6. Senator Questions and Comments
    1. Senator: I would hope that all courses taught by individuals within this area have a degree in that area? (A) Thanks for the question- I might look at it like this: when we talk about these things, we’re talking about the basics. Some disciplines are more in tune with certain subjects. Your point is well taken. We have federal and ODHE guidelines.
    2. Senator: If you have a course approved in one area like computer science and diversity but the professor teaching the course has no experience in the diversity area, to me is an issue. (A) I think the entire process and the LEC process is r/t course design- not policing. Ongoing review processes can lead to review and assessment to be sure we’re all on track and teaching to the expected outcomes. I do understand your point.
    3. Senator: I have spoken to some students in degree programs and their issue is related to knowing what courses to take. How are you communicating this to students so that they can make sure they are taking the correct courses? How are we making sure that advisors have this information to help guide the students? (A) From a student perspective, we recommend that you talk to a professional advisor and departmental/program advisors. Thank you- we’ll keep working on that.
    4. Senator: In previous minutes there was a note that mentions SB 83 and since then, SB 83 has changed so many times. Are you reviewing the updates as they come through? (A) As you’ll see in subsequent minutes, LEC has spent a lot of time debating the issues related to �� Plan hours and DE&I. The language related to curricular issues are no longer there. We won’t be spending time on potential ”what ifs”.ours and DE&I. The language related to curricular issues are no longer there. We won’t be spending time on potential ”what ifs”.
2. Advanced Manufacturing Hub at Vora Technology Park - Ande Durojaiye, Vice President of Regional Campuses, and Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Applied Science
  1. Creating an Advanced Manufacturing Workforce Development and Research Center
    1. Why?
      1. Leverage opportunities in manufacturing- Ohio is #3 in the US in manufacturing workforce
      2. Promote efficient use of resources, maintain long-term financial viability, align �� Regionals with applied degrees and in-demand degrees
      3. Develop a partnership and program that will increase program enrollment and retention in a rapidly growing field and capitalize on the need for applied degrees and upskilled workers
      4. Utilize and build on relationships within the community to financially support a center that will serve �� students, Butler Tech students, community members, employers, and the city
  2. Manufacturing leads in Ohio
    1. Focusing on advanced manufacturing, connection to ASPIRE, etc. is Key Strategy in One�� Strategic planning
    2. Manufacturing represents the largest major economic sector in Ohio
    3. REDI Cincinnati has identified advanced manufacturing as one of four core industries in the region- regional growth in manufacturing has more than doubled the national average during the last five years
    4. Manufacturing is designated a key economic sector by the Dayton Development Coalition
    5. Local manufacturers will benefit directly from the integrated training opportunities through Butler Tech and ��
    6. The annual payroll for Ohio manufacturing jobs is $42 billion
  3. Our numbers say it all - Ohio’s manufacturing industry continues to lead in the U.S.
    1. Largest workforce in glass product manufacturing
    2. Nationally in rubber product manufacturing GDP
    3. Largest manufacturing workforce
    4. Largest manufacturing GDP of any state
  4. Opportunities to re-align the Regional footprint and improve impact - Creating a Workforce Development and Research Center in Hamilton will allow �� University Regionals to promote new opportunities for applied degree demand, create pathways for Butler Tech students, and private partnerships in the county
    1. Opportunities
      1. Creation of a national model not seen anywhere else
      2. Savings from repositioning to expand in Vora Technology Park to meet demand and enrollment trends
      3. Revenue and grant opportunities from the uniqueness of the Butler Tech - �� consortium
      4. Connecting with educational and community partners for use of space at Middletown
        
        Head Start classroom opened in the lower level of Verity Lodge with a major grant from the Middletown Community Foundation
      5. Cincinnati State upskilling programs
      6. Day care and BCRTA bus services available on site for those participating in programing
  5. Community and Partner Support
    1. Current Funding
      1. $10.5 Million contributions from partners
        
        Butler Tech received $8M in ARPA funds from County Commissioners to support construction of an advanced manufacturing facility in Hamilton
        
        $2.5 Million from the City of Hamilton
    2. Future Funding
      1. Butler County County Commissioners Butler Tech
      2. State Capital Budget (Community Projects Fund)
      3. Ohio Department of Development Innovation Hub
      4. Federal Manufacturing Funding Opportunities
        
        NSF, EDA Grants
    3. Enrollment
      1. Creates an integrated educational system at the secondary and postsecondary levels, providing students with maximum opportunities to earn certificates as well as microcredentials, associate degrees, and bachelor’s degrees
      2. 120 Butler Tech students attend class from 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. ENT would schedule courses in the afternoons (MWF) and midday (TR) that will enable Butler Tech students to use College Credit Plus toward their certificate or associate’s degree
      3. Butler Tech has secured 17 area employers who will work directly with both schools, providing opportunities for students
      4. The partnership will expand ENT enrollments:
        
        40 students projected to be in the Assoc. of Applied Science
        
        Courses supporting �� microcredentials in Manufacturing Foundations, Computer Aided Design, and Logic Controllers
        
        30 new students are expected for ENT in Fall 2026
  6. Senator Questions and Comments
    1. Senator: I am just wondering if there are ways to embed humanities into these associate degrees offered here. We don’t know how to start these conversations and I just think it would be good to have those conversations now because the Ohio population will be diversifying and it would be good to have those conversations in the classrooms. (A) Thank you- I appreciate that.
    2. Senator: How do we find the money for the things we want, but not for other things? When there is a will there's a way, but at the same time we are losing programs, faculty are being denied raises, and they’re being given more work. This is very frustrating. This has nothing to do with you and I do think this is a great thing. I just want to say out loud what a lot of people in the room are probably thinking. (A) I appreciate that. I don’t want to go into that. You know I’m coming from the Regional campuses. All my buildings were built in the 60s. Only University Hall has been renovated. Our team went to the community and asked them how we can align to meet their needs. This was a partnership across the board.
    3. Senator: Butler Tech and College Credit Plus. Are we getting tuition from them? (A) We will have high school students there and college students there. We’ll receive tuition for the college students.

8. Adjournment

��������

��