Graduate Council Meeting Minutes
October 29, 2024
Present: Marcelo Alvarado-Vargas, Saad Andalib (GSA), Brian Ashburner, Tomer Avidor-Reiss, Daniel Boden, Qian Chen, Mai Dao,
Jennifer Devries, Jim Ferris, Bashar Gammoh, Rafael Garcia-Mata, David Giovannucci, Daniel Hammel, Noela Haughton,
Ahmad Javaid, John Laux, Patrick Lawrence, Edmund Lingan, Ling Na, Nagalakshmi Nadiminty, Megan Petra, Patricia Relue,
Barbara Saltzman, Angela Scardina, Constance Schall, Beth Schlemper, Zahoor Shah, Snejana Slantcheva-Durst,
Hossein Sojoudi, Kuo-hui Su, Varun Vaidya, Jerry Van Hoy, Eileen Walsh, Kandace Williams, Qiuying Zhao, Jianglong Zhu.
Absent: Edward Janak.
Excused: Andrea Kalinoski, Youssef Sari.
Guests: Interim President, Matt Schroeder
COGS - Teri Green, Tara Hana.
Call to Order, Roll Call, and Approval of Minutes
The meeting was called to order and roll called. The Minutes of September 17, 2024,
meeting were approved.
Executive Reports
Report of the Executive Committee of the Graduate Council
On behalf of Graduate Council, Chair, Dr. Barbara Saltzman reported:
- GC Chair and Vice Chair meeting with Provost Molitor
Noted change in tone of program prioritization as recently mentioned at Faculty Senate. We did not receive different messaging in our discussion. Before we can focus on where to invest, we need to know what we are cutting first.
Report of the Vice Provost for Graduate Affairs
Dr. Dan Hammel, Interim Vice Provost for Academic Affairs provided a brief report
so that in the interest of brevity allowing sufficient time for today’s agenda.
- Pipeline Programs (Combined Bachelor’/Master’s Programs, 9 shared hours overlap)
The Strategic Enrollment Plan identified these programs as an area of emphasis, thus a working group including the Provost’s and Registrar’s Offices has been formed. We need to establish clearer policies and procedures for these programs. Although details are dependent upon the program, other procedures should be codified such as:
- When a student can apply and matriculate into the program
- Entrance standards, and the definition of “well-prepared” students
- GPA, higher than standard
- Performance standards
- Track enrolled students’ progress
Although ODHE does not specify when a student can apply/matriculate, there is commonality
between a few institutions in Ohio, where applying for the combined program is typically
available upon completion of 60 UG credit hours and matriculation at 75 credit hours.
BGSU follows this standard as well.
Report of the Vice President for Research
Dr. Connie Schall, Interim Vice President for Research, provided the following reminders
encouraging Council members and their colleagues to attend the research mixers and
contact the Office of Research with any questions regarding research proposal submissions.
- Research Mixers
Social get-togethers for researchers to meet and connect and featuring monthly topic.
- October 7, 2024
10 am, CCE – HSC, Theater 1200
Evaluations Using AI
Dr. Scott Pappada, Associate Professor and Director of Research for Anesthesiology
- November 14, 2024, 2 pm, Student Union – MC, Phoenicia Restaurant
Ohio Humanities
Dr. Melvin Barnes, Jr. Program Officer
- January 27, 2025, 11 am, CCE – HSC, Theater 1200
Foundation staff discuss collaboration
- February 6, 2024, 4 pm, Student Union – MC, Phoenicia Restaurant
Visually Striking Research
Dr. Eric Ziegler, Associate Professor Art
- April 8, 2025, 9:30 am, Carlson Library – MC, Main Event Space 1005
Faculty Fulbright Scholar
Fulbright faculty alumni panel
- Proposal Submissions
Reminder to notify the Office of Research at least 10 business days ahead of submission through InfoEd, and at least 15 business days when working with other universities, the shortest amount of time when working with multiple universities. Recent cases of late preparation of proposal materials and/or last-minute proposal submission requests/changes resulted in proposal submission failures.
Timelines for proposal submission:
Proposal with no subrecipient(s)
- Notify ORSP of intent to submit a proposal at least ten (10) business days
before the submission deadline though InfoEd,
https://infoed.utoledo.edu/.
Proposal with subrecipient(s)
- Notify ORSP of intent to submit a proposal at least fifteen (15) business days
before the submission deadline.
Route final budget, and other required documents for internal approval no
later than five (5) business days prior to the
submission due date. The research plan may continue to go through editing
while the proposal documents are routed. Final
documents should be uploaded at least one (1) business day before the submission
deadline date.
InfoEd help at infoed@utoledo.edu.
Report of the Graduate Student Association
Saad Andalib, Vice President of the Graduate Student Association (GSA) reported:
- General Assembly Meetings
- 1st - Wednesday, September 25th at 6:30 p.m. via WebEx (Online)
Attendees Present: 81 total (4 exec members, 73 students, 2 staff members & 2 guest speakers)
- 2nd - General Assembly meeting
Wednesday, October 16th at 6:30 p.m. in hybrid setting both in-person and via WebEx (Online)
Attendees Present: 71 total (In Person- 3 exec, 41 students, 3 staff members & Online, 1 exec member, 23 students) - GSA College Representatives
We selected our college representatives for 2024-2025 in that meeting for all the colleges except College of Nursing and College of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences. We will reach out to their graduate office this week. - Midwest Graduate Research Symposium – Saturday, April 12, 2025
GSA is now working on forming the committee, having sought interest at the general assembly meeting. Committee meeting dates to be scheduled. - Homecoming Parade 2024
GSA participated in the Homecoming Parade this year in the graduate student walking section.
We have some pictures to share with you of our recent events. (Displayed photos of the Homecoming Parade and homecoming parade and General Assembly Meeting of October 16, 2024.
The agenda was re-ordered to proceed with Standing Committee Reports to accommodate
the timing of President Schroeder joining Council under Information and Discussion
Items.
Standing Committee Reports
Report of the Curriculum Committee
Dr. Mai Dao, committee member, presented the committee’s report.
The proposals listed below were reviewed by the members of the GCCC with recommendations to approve. [Council approved unanimously]
|
7 |
CCR |
EN |
Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Eng.
|
Turbulent Flow
|
MIME 6550/8550
|
Reactivating course due to the need of students preparing for work in experimental and computational fluid dynamics, including certificate in aerospace engineering
|
|
8 |
PCR |
MD |
Physiciant Assistant Studies
|
Physician Assistant, MSBS
|
MD-PHYA-MSBS
|
The program developed new PLOs to be more concise and align with our accrediting body standards. |
The proposals listed below were approved by the members of the GCCC
|
1 |
CCR |
BU |
Accounting |
Contemporary Accounting Problems |
ACCT 6190 |
Change in Prerequisites |
|
2 |
CCR |
BU |
Accounting |
Tax and Business Strategy |
ACCT 6270 |
Change in Prerequisites |
|
3 |
CCR |
PH |
Pharmacy Practice |
Cosmetic Trends and Claims |
PHPR 5820 |
Change in Prerequisites |
|
4 |
CCR |
PH |
Pharmacy Practice |
Cosmetic Regulations, Ethics and Practices |
PHPR 5830 |
Change in Prerequisites |
|
5 |
CCR |
PH |
Pharmacy Practice |
Formulating Skin and Suncare Products |
PHPR 5840 |
Change in Prerequisites |
|
6 |
CCR |
MD |
Interdisciplinary |
On Being a Scientist |
INDI 6020/8020 |
Change in Semesters Offered with Removal of Fall Semester. |
Report of the Membership Committee
None.
Old Business
Policies Posted for Review
There are three policies applicable to graduate programs that are posted for the 30-day
comment period. Please be reminded to review for comment.
Information and Discussion Items
Discussion with Interim President— Matt Schroeder
President Schroeder thanked Council for the opportunity to speak graduate faculty.
He extended willingness to attend a Council meeting once each semester as invited.
Fall semester has been off to a great start as the President meets with each of the
colleges and the faculty directly, receiving feedback. Hopefully, everyone had the
opportunity to attend or listen to the State of the University address on October
16, 2024. He was pleased with the efforts that our faculty continue to make as it
relates to research. Yes, the Schroeder administration is pro-research. He is pleased
that researchers have put up $72million in FY 24 at the same time as declining tenure-tenure-track
faculty environment. It is understandable that this is not a sustainable environment
for growth just as the amount of licensing on a per capita basis is unsustainable.
Questions from Graduate Council to President Schroeder:
Q1: Does the University commit to the continued financial support of those non-STEM graduate
programs that provide important
benefits to the academic mission of UT and remain essential in support of research
productivity, including securing and
undertaking external grant funded projects, and our R1 designation?
President Schroeder responded that we are currently a solid R2 status and poised to
move to R1 based on changes within
Carnegie. There is support and commitment to what is in our power to maintain R1 status.
In some ways Carnegie Research Status is similar to U.S. News and World Report rankings in which these goals or finish line each year or cycle, can be moved while our competitors are investing more resources into research or other areas that drive their ranking. To assume that R1 criteria today is going to be the same way three years from now, is not known.
Discussion on Question 1:
What is the new criteria for R1 status and what changed?
Dr. Connie Schall, Interim Vice Provost for Research, responded that, UToledo has had the required consecutive years of $50M+ in research expenditures (NSF publicly accessible data) with the required 70+ Ph.D. graduates over the same period. Dr. Dan Hammel, Acting Vice Provost for Graduate Education, added that our average is at the ~120 range.
Dr. Rafael Garcia-Mata noted erosion of support for research in terms of tuition waiver with grants. R15 grants with the NIH have had their budgets increased from $100K to $125K, however UToledo still only supports providing tuition support on their previous budget amount of $100K. He questioned whether UToledo would provide tuition support for R15 grants at the $125K level?
President Schroeder recalled that it was requested that assistantship support be built into grant applications. This may have worked for some areas and not others. If a faculty member includes the stipend, the University is still providing the tuition waiver if under $100K. He indicated that he would request that Research, Graduate VP and Provost discuss possible increase threshold waiver for $15 grants to $125K.
Dr. Hammel pointed out that assistant professors are not asked to request tuition support in grants and that researchers should request support for tuition in the proposal, adding that the Provost’s initial reaction was that it was not enough of an increase to make the shift. The grant would cover in-state tuition and COGS would cover out-of-state tuition if applicable.
Dr. Schall clarified that uniform guidance does not permit the university to charge anything other than in-state tuition on grants. It doesn't matter if the student is in or out-of-state.
President Schroeder asked whether we are adding tuition on grants or whether we have opted away due for competitive reasons.
Dr. Tomer Avidor-Reiss replied that when you put tuition on your grant and you do not use it for tuition, the university will not get indirect costs. If I then negotiate with the university not to pay that, I lose the indirect, e.g. 50% percent. It is poor motivation.
Dr. Rafael Garcia-Mata confirmed that he has been adding tuition to all of his new applications.
Dr. David Giovannucci stated that the College of Medicine and Life Sciences is not eligible for the R15 mechanism, but primarily R1 and R21 funding.
Even a non-modular R1 would is stressed in trying to provide both stipend and tuition, limiting students we can take. We have the option of putting in non-modular grants. For R15, there are not enough direct costs to cover science and technical staff and students and their tuition, it makes it so that you are not going to be able to produce on the grants. It is reasonable to adjust the support rate on R15 because there is more capacity to support more staff.
Dr. Hammel added that there is a limited budget for tuition waivers that we have not exceeded and hope not to. We do need to carefully monitor the budget while trying to do everything we can to make the path toward external funding as easy as possible. It is a balance.
Q2: As faculty retire and leave the University there has been a limited allotment for
replacement. Given declining faculty numbers,
how are you planning to manage this in order to avoid impacting the R1 status?
President Schroeder agreed that tenure/tenure-track faculty numbers are declining. He appreciated the Provost’s Office working thoughtfully and analytically, whether through retirement or natural attrition. In speaking with the Provost recently regarding preparation for the R1 designation, presently, our faculty numbers are appropriate and in the near term assuming natural attrition. As discussed with Faculty Senate, and stated at the recent State of University address, we have to start investing in growth programs, putting our best foot forward with research. Although tenure/tenure-track have not been replaced or have been replaced by lecturers, the trend line is absolutely not sustainable. As many of you receive larger research awards, your capacity is quickly gobbled up. It is my expectation of the Provost and his team that as we refresh our five-year financial plan, which will take to the Board in March, that looking out on the horizon, not only are we investing for fiscal 26 and beyond in growth programs, that there has to be a concrete plan or a set of assumptions in place to begin to reinvest in tenure/tenure-track faculty that are highly productive from a research standpoint.
President Schroeder asked whether there was any disagreement in terms of trend lines and what is seen in the field. And asked whether it is fair to say that from a capacity standpoint, you and your fellow researchers are quickly approaching capacity?
Dr. Avidor-Reiss replied that we exceeded capacity. Consider that faculty conducting research are also a part of the research training for Ph.D. students, master’s students and undergraduate students. For example, in my lab, there are 15 undergraduate students doing research. Additionally, we need to teach and do service, because we are the remaining faculty.
Graduate Council was in agreement.
Dr. Megan Petra agreed, adding that research is a part of what we do as faculty. A large part is teaching and service. Faculty that run professional, accredited programs are often required to be tenure/tenure-track.
When we do not have enough faculty or are unable to replace them with tenure/tenure-track Ph.D. level faculty, we are jeopardizing our ability to bring in the same number of graduate students. Otherwise, we would be out of compliance with our accreditation. Implications affect not only grants but bringing in enrollment and tuition if we cannot offer quality graduate programs.
President Schroeder agreed on the importance of appropriate numbers of tenure/tenure-track faculty. He asked Dr. Hammel for his perspective on management of that environment where we need to grow enrollment.
Dr. Hammel responded that those conversations start with the programs and college deans with the deans being made fully informed about where those dangers lie. This has occurred in the past for brief periods of time because essentially we did not have the appropriate numbers of tenure-track faculty with specific sets of requirements. This is a concern, particularly with professionally accredited programs. Decisions about hiring are going to be made at the college dean level. Although he was not aware of a watch list, the area of the Provost’s Area of Provost Office that oversees accreditation and review could probably do this, if they do not already.
President Schroeder asked Dr. Petra for a concrete example that is or was concerning.
Dr. Petra responded that the social work program has seen a loss of three tenure-track faculty that was finally replaced with a lecturer. We are not out of compliance with accreditation but are very close and we are going through reaccreditation. We may be okay since our enrollment numbers are a little bit down. However, the ability to grow programs back are limited without replacing at least one of these Ph.D. faculty. Additionally, we would like to look into an online Master’s of Social Work program, as other universities are doing. This would not be a possibility until we have the additional faculty on board, with more than half required to have Ph.D.’s according to the accrediting body. Counseling and Counselor education has encountered challenges as well.
President Schroeder asked Dr. Hammel to share Dr. Petra’s comments regarding Master’s of Social Work program with his team.
Dr. Noela Haughton suggested that all accredited programs be looked at.
Dr. Hammel responded that state program review as well as internal program review brings into focus any such issues, providing notice/warning prior to the accreditation process.
Dr. Hossein Sojoudi noted that his department has a 50 to 60 student faculty ratio that is not sustainable by part-time instructors that is exacerbated by the pay of $3000-$5000, which is less than what teaching assistants are offered. In some cases, we need to use TA funds to have classes taught, which impacts student success. This is an important consideration as you think about replacing faculty who have left through retirement or attrition.
President Schroeder replied that his expectation as president and commitment to the board is going to be a recast five-year financial plan, Scott, Dan and San and Deans will be asked. We are presently okay with R1 status, however, with the components of teaching, research and service required of tenure-tenure-track faculty, the current trajectory is not sustainable. This is not sustainable at a research institution. We are a research institution and will continue to be a research institution. The provost, vice provost, and deans will be looking at programs we are investing in, and within those programs, looking at a tenure/tenure-track. Beginning in fiscal year 2026 or 2027 through 2030, we can build into our long-range planning based on assumptions around natural attrition of the loss of 30-40 faculty members per year, making those investments by reviewing within these programs while maintaining R1 status and $70million per year in research awards, with an ultimate goal to reach $100 million.
His commitment to the Graduate Council is that with the current trendline being unsustainable, that in planning for stabilization and growth going forward, we have to get back to prioritizing a commitment to retaining and replacing tenure/tenure-track faculty with aspirations to get to $100 million in annual research awards.
President Schroeder asked Council if there were any questions, suggestions or obstacles he could help remove in terms start-up packages, noting the College of Medicine and Life Sciences handles directly because of the indirects landing with the college. He sought input on retaining top faculty in competitive environments.
Dr. Marcelo Alvarado-Vargas noted that the entrepreneurship and innovation major in the College of Business and Innovation is a listed program for prioritization/possibly cutting for low enrollment while at the same time the State of Ohio opened an innovation hub in Perrysburg. He asked how the administration could assist as the college hopes to increase enrollment and create a link to the innovation hub.
President Schroeder responded by saying that the glass innovation hub in Perrysburg is narrowly defined working with five corporate partners and BGSU focusing on glass, glass technology, codings, PV, etc. Within the umbrella of entrepreneurship in the College of Business and Innovation, is innovation more loosely defined as just trying to nurture thought and creative ideas or how is the college approaching innovation just to sort of help me answer your question?
Dr. Alvarado-Vargas indicated that he teaches a class Strategic Management of Innovation that involves teaching students to see innovation from a strategic perspective whether managing a start up or traditional business or in new product development. It is a good fit regionally and has potential possible collaborations with the College of Engineering.
President Schroeder suggested that Dr. Alvarado-Vargas meet with Dr. Frank Calzonetti and Dr. Connie Schall and college dean, Dr. Anne Balasz to discuss potential connections.
Dr. Hammel pointed out that the current program prioritization is for discussion and not final. There are various reasons that programs support the mission and strategic direction of the university. These are important aspects to remember in conversations between programs and college deans and with the Provost. Your task as faculty is to discuss with your college dean. Where you have low enrolled courses, look at the curriculum to streamline efficiency where possible.
President Schroeder agreed that Dr. Alvarado-Vargas should discuss justification and formulating a plan, indicating future growth and possibilities, with the department chair to bring to the college dean. He asked Graduate Council member and Faculty Senate President, Dr. Jerry Van Hoy, for any additional comments in regard to the program prioritization list (memo from the Provost to the college deans) shared with faculty.
Dr. Van Hoy noted that while the memo tries to lay out a process for reviewing and having conversations about the programs on that list, it also mentions the process for selecting programs to invest in, not just the programs that might be subject to disinvestment. Part of the problem is that there needs to be a structured way to have these conversations about programs with the college deans. Faculty may make the assumption that the deans are working on these programs representing their faculty, which is probably true, but until they talk to their faculty about it, it not known what is going on with a short timeline for colleges to respond to the Provost by the end of fall semester.
President Schroeder noted Dr. Van Hoy’s makes a valid point in that colleges handle differently. Can the academic side of the house provide some guidance and/or a roadmap or guidance on how to facilitate the conversation with faculty. The investment piece is quite important in terms of where we will invest and what that looks like in terms of undergraduate and graduate students so that economic assumptions can be made. Central enrollment management will have a line of sight on developments at the college level from an investment standpoint.
Dr. Hammel replied that he would speak with Provost Molitor about this. Part of SEP implementation is to try to find programs at tipping points that are at capacity, but with investment could grow and those that can grow without investment, in the 12–18-month horizon. It gets complicated but we can work with deans to identify these programs. President Schroeder pointed out the MSN program.
Chair Saltzman added that it would be beneficial to look at other programs that may be affected by the elimination of programs. For example, with the elimination of Ph.D. in Health Education, students were cross-listed with the MPH program, resulting in almost no available electives to the MPH program. This is true across programs and colleges, for example, in the past some epidemiology courses in the College of Health and Human Services were populated by Pharmacy students. Some programs function in a silo while others are interweaved with one another.
Dr. Hammel mentioned that her comment had made an impression on the Provost as he has mentioned that specifically.
President Schroeder pointed out that the portfolio of academic programs within stem disciplines and professional schools, when layered in with health sciences, our academic medical center, and our peer group becomes relatively small as it relates to universities that look like UToledo.
Within that portfolio we have some bright stars that need polished with resources to continue to grow. He asked Council, while setting personal preferences aside which graduate programs they get excited about for upside potential for students having an interest and employment opportunities, within our existing portfolio that differentiates us from other universities? He asked Dr. Avidor-Reiss and Dr. David Giovannucci for their input.
Dr. Avidor-Reiss noted that in the United States there are only a couple of companies that build solar, and they are in the Toledo area and one associated with the University of Toledo. This is certainly a highlight because many people care about climate change.
Dr. Giovannucci noted that the Physician Assistant program within the College of Medicine and Life Sciences, while at capacity presently, is a professional, graduate student program that could grow with investment. It is capped presently at 40 seats.
Dr. Giovannucci added that in response to a previous question regarding ways to retain a successful research faculty, keeping costs for students low, as well as the cost of housing animals. Additionally, indirect costs get swept at the end of every year. It makes more strategic sense for the funds to be available to researchers in helping to supplement supporting students or obtain scientific instrumentation. Dr. Patty Relue supported this idea as well.
Vice Chair, Dr. Dan Boden pointed out that as he starts his 6th year at UToledo, every year resources taken from program and with added resources the Public Administration program could grow. A concern is external partners in the community, both public and non-profit sectors, not wanting to join our advisory committee, as they view UToledo as having an unreliable commitment to this program that they view as going away. We could have more support from leaders and non-profit organizations if we could demonstrate a commitment from the university. Public Administration is a multidisciplinary practice degree for those with a liberal arts or humanities degree. Additionally, civil engineers who work as government contractors would also benefit.
Dr. Eileen Walsh added that the family nurse practitioner program could be expanded. A master’s in nursing combined with an MBA is a desire for some nursing leadership positions in the area. Another program for growth would be nurse educator.
Dr. Bashar Gammoh stated that the online MBA has been driving growth. Curricular modifications were made that supported making it attractive to working professionals. MBA would be glad to discuss a program with Nursing as we do with other programs across disciplines within the university.
President Schroeder summarized Councils concerns and follow up items and follow up:
- Threshold value of tuition waiver currently at $100K discuss increasing to $125K
on eligibility around tuition waivers to match R15
grants. Dr. Hammel, Provost Molitor and possibly Dr. Schall to discuss.
- Recasting our five-year financial plan to be presented to the Board of Trustees in March 2025, President Schroeder will discuss
with Larry Kelly, CFO and Provost Molitor and Dr. Hammel to work closely to respond to the trend line of tenure/tenure track
natural attrition and retirements of faculty to ensure there is a growth plan within the five-year financial plan with TTT
retirements and attritions to ensure there is a growth plan supporting our research institution.
- Unique programs, while some may be tied to low enrollment, there should be a baseline
process in place for discussion within
the colleges between now and the of the semester. It should include sharing
of data and conversations around the data,
justification of programs and potential areas of growth. The variances between
the colleges are not as great as it was during
round one of program prioritization.
- Accreditation programs coming up with concern of low tenure/tenure-track faculty numbers.
- Business innovation program requires Dr. Marcelo Alvarado-Vargas to discuss with
department and college dean as well follow
up with Dr. Calzonetti and Dr. Schall on possible connections involving the Glass
Innovation hub in Perrysburg.
- In preparation for FY 26 ability for researchers to keep indirect costs rather than being swept.
President Schroeder expressed his willingness to join Graduate Council at a future
meeting.
New Business
None.
Adjournment
There being no further business, the Council adjourned at 2:08 p.m.