Proposal for the New College of Science (COS)
A College of Mathematics, Physical, and Life Sciences, and Earth Sciences and Engineering November 15, 2002
Prepared by: Jane C. S. Long John Anderson Jack Hayes Robert Karlin Edward Keppelman Scott Mensing Jonathan Price Robert Sheridan Dirk van Zyl Jeff Thompson Planning Dean for the Proposed COS Dir., Nevada Seismological Laboratory Chair, Dept. of Biology Chair, Geological Sciences Dept. Chair, Mathematics Dept. Chair, Geography Dept. Dir, Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology Chair, Dept. of Chemistry Chair, Mining Engineering Dept. Chair Dept. of Physics
Special note of thanks for extensive assistance to: Kent Ervin, Assoc. Chair, Chemistry Mary Ann Keith, Budget and Personnel Director, Mackay School of Mines Marci Wehry, Budget and Personnel Director, College of Arts and Sciences
Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction.................................................................................................................. 4 1.1 Why Create a College of Science ............................................................................ 4 1.2 Status of this Proposal.............................................................................................. 4 2.0 Planning to Date .......................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Prior to May 31, 2002 .............................................................................................. 5 2.2 COS Planning........................................................................................................... 7 3.0 The Vision, Values, Mission of the College of Science ................................................ 8 3.1 Vision:...................................................................................................................... 8 3.2 Values ...................................................................................................................... 8 3.3 Mission..................................................................................................................... 8 3.4 How the COS Mission Fits the Mission of UNR..................................................... 8 4.0 Goals .......................................................................................................................... 10 4.1 Academic Goals ..................................................................................................... 10 4.2 Research Goals....................................................................................................... 11 4.3 Development Goals - Integrating the Constituency Across the College ............... 13 4.4 Outreach Goals....................................................................................................... 14 5.0 The Structure of the Proposed College of Science..................................................... 16 5.1 The Guidance Used in Developing the Structure: ................................................. 16 5.2 The Organization Chart.......................................................................................... 18 5.3 Organizational Issues ............................................................................................ 19 6.0 Staffing and Other Needs:.......................................................................................... 22 6.1 Dean’s Office ......................................................................................................... 22 6.2 Director Positions................................................................................................... 27 6.3 Department Staffing Request................................................................................. 29 6.4 Additional Funding and Resources Needed to Meet College Objectives............. 38 7.0 Resources ................................................................................................................... 42 7.1 State Resources and Financial Information ........................................................... 42 Current (FY03) Operating and Salary Budgets by Department.................................... 42 7.2 Donated Monies ..................................................................................................... 47 7.3 Grants and Contracts and ICR ............................................................................... 49 7.4 Other Resources ..................................................................................................... 50 7.5 Total Budget for Proposed College........................................................................ 51 8.0 Further Planning Required........................................................................................ 52 8.1 College Committees............................................................................................... 52 8.2 Bylaws – Merging Those of MSM and CAS......................................................... 53 8.3 Search for a Dean................................................................................................... 54 8.4 Promotion and Tenure............................................................................................ 55 8.5 Core Curriculum .................................................................................................... 56 8.6 ICR Distribution..................................................................................................... 59 8.7 Structure of MSES ................................................................................................. 62
Appendix A Facts and figures about the proposed college............................................... 63 A.1 Planning Meetings for COS .................................................................................. 63 A.2 Regular State-funded Faculty................................................................................ 64 A.3 Majors and Minors ................................................................................................ 64 A.4 Students and Units Outside the Unit Served by the Unit....................................... 66 A.5 Details of MSM and CAS Endowments ............................................................... 67 A.6 Library Holdings ................................................................................................... 71 A.7 Cautions and Assumptions in Mathematics Enrollment Projections .................... 72 A.8 Core Requirements for Bachelor’s Degrees in the College of Science ................ 75
Proposal for the New College of Science
A College of Mathematics, Physical and Life Sciences, and Earth Sciences and Engineering 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Why Create a College of Science A benefit of creating a new College of Science is that it will provide a focus for science and math on the UNR campus. In this college, faculty will have common interests in science education and research. Educational science initiatives and interdisciplinary research will be facilitated. We may be able to share equipment and resources in an efficient manner. We have many problems in common and can learn from each other’s approaches to their solution. The College of Science provides a good venue for seeking new resources for the University. The college administration will have a strong voice in obtaining new faculty FTE for highly over-enrolled science and math programs that serve the entire university. The college itself is easily identifiable as being in the interest of Nevada’s future and will be a magnet for further resources. 1.2 Status of this Proposal This proposal represents a staggering amount of work done in a short time. What we present here is necessary, but may not be sufficient. We recognize that much more planning is needed before and after the launch of the College of Science. What we have done here is in two parts. We have found striking agreement on a common mission, vision, values, and goals for this college. We all want much the same thing and we all recognize a very similar definition of success. Our work in this arena was easy and energizing. While there is enthusiasm for uniting the science departments, the merger of the Arts and Science departments with those of the Mackay School has presented serious challenges as well. Some academic faculty would prefer a COS that is more purely focused on academics. These faculty find the persistence of the Mackay School in a COS hard to reconcile with the notion of having a single, unified college working with a shared vision and mission. Second, the challenges for the departments and units that will form the COS fall into two divergent categories, which are not complementary. Some departments are experiencing extreme enrollment pressure and lack sufficient faculty numbers, space, and other resources. Other departments are relatively resource rich and are not experiencing enrollment pressure. The needs of these departments are very different. Third, the strong influence exerted by the constituency for the Mackay School has not been counterbalanced by a similar advocacy for the Arts and Sciences departments.
Collectively, these and other issues made it difficult for the planning committee to reach consensus on an organization chart for the college along with a description of the administration and its duties and responsibilities. In the end, the model is a compromise that reflects the many constraints placed on the process. Section 5 highlights some of our deliberations by discussing variations of the organizations we explored and their pros and cons. This proposal brings together some of the strongest science units on campus. However, the College of Science proposed here is incomplete. The college will do a good job of uniting the physical sciences, but the life sciences remain scattered across four colleges (COS, CABNR, CoHCS and Medicine). In the future, it may be appropriate to examine organization of the life science departments at UNR. 2.0 Planning to Date 2.1 Prior to May 31, 2002 Prior to May 31, 2002, two separate planning efforts were undertaken by Mackay School of Mines and the College of Arts and Sciences. These efforts culminated in Phase II strategic plans for the two colleges. Neither plan envisioned a College of Science, although this idea was mentioned in the Mackay Plan. There was also a proposal put forth for reformation of Mackay School as an Earth and Environmental Science College including Geography. Subsequent discussions on the part of the science departments in Arts and Sciences brought the idea of the new college of science forward. The Chairs of the Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics, Physics and Psychology Departments began to meet following the release of the University Planning Committee’s (UPC) recommendations to the University President in the Spring 2002 Semester. One aspect of the UPC’s recommendation was the creation of a College of Science, which was to include departments from the College of Arts and Science. The discussions during the meeting lead to a number of general points of agreement by the Chairs regarding the possible formation of a College of Science. The Chairs of the Anthropology and Geography Departments were invited to participate in the continuing discussions. This ad hoc committee of science Department Chairs produced a draft mission statement and comments in favor, and against the formation of the proposed College of Science. The document was distributed to the University administration and faculty in the College of Arts and Science, and became a focal point of discussions in the College of Arts and Science. The Chairs of the Nutrition and Geological Science Departments were then invited to a meeting to include their perspectives in the discussions, and to discuss the possible inclusion of these Departments in a College of Science. The Chairs of the Anthropology, Biology, Chemistry, Geography, Mathematics, Physics and Psychology Departments then conducted straw polls of their faculty to determine the level of support for the concept of a College of Science by the faculty, and to determine support for Departments’ inclusion in a College of Science. The straw polls lead to the submission of a memorandum to the University President on May 9th, 2002 by the Chairs of the
Biology, Chemistry, Geography, Physics, and Psychology Departments. The memorandum summarized their opinions on the formation of a College of Science, presented a vision for the new college, and presented arguments for establishing the college. The memorandum also included a draft of a possible mission statement for the College of Science. The President incorporated the concept in his May 31, 2003 strategic plan and included a Mackay School of Earth and Environmental Science in the College. Subsequent discussions over the summer between the Mackay constituency, Dean, Faculty and the President led to a modification of the May 31 plan issued on September 17th. The modification reinstated two engineering programs (Mining and Geological Engineering) in the Mackay School of Earth Sciences within a College of Science.
2.2 COS Planning Starting in mid-September 2002, a planning group for this College of Science has been meeting to discuss and write the proposal for the College of Science. This group consists of Jane Long, Dean of the Mackay School of Mines and Planning Dean for the proposed College of Science; the chairs of the included academic departments [Alphabetically— kme], Jack Hayes (Biology), Robert Sheridan (Chemistry), Scott Mensing (Geography), Bob Karlin (Geological Sciences), Ed Keppelmann (Math), Dirk van Zyl (Mining Engineering); and the directors of the state-wide programs, Jonathan Price (Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology) and John Anderson (Nevada Seismological Laboratory). A series of meetings with each department was also held. Given the time frame, no formal student meetings were held. A series of ad hoc committees, which included other faculty from the involved units, provided input: Table 2.1 Planning Committees Committee 1. ICR Members John Anderson and Jack Hayes co-chairs with Jeff Thompson, Roberto Mancini, Jane Long Bob Sheridan and Ed Keppelman with Guy Hoelzer Jack Hayes & Jon Price, co-chairs with John Anderson, Kent Ervin, Peter Winkler, Mary Ann Keith, Yuehua Zeng, Jane Long Jon Price, chair with Dirk van Zyl, Ed Keppelman, Bob Sheridan, Peter Brussard Committee 5. Promotion and Tenure 6. Science education 7. Bylaws review Members Scott Mensing, chair with Bob Sheridan and Roberto Mancini, Bob Watters Jeff Thompson, chair with Bob Sheridan, Bob Karlin, John Anderson, Guy Hoelzer, Joe Cline Ed Keppelman with Jon Price
2. Core curriculum 3. Building Research
4. Integrating Constituency Across the College
Roberto Mancini and Bob 8. Mission /vision/values Karlin, co-chairs with Paul Starrs, Gina Tempel, Lee Weber
A large number of meetings were held to discuss this proposal. A list of these is found in Appendix A.
3.0 The Vision, Values, Mission of the College of Science 3.1 Vision: The College of Science embodies the proposition that science and mathematics are the primary source of the technological revolution transforming society in the 21st century. The College of Science will have a nucleus of specific strengths and will strive for excellence in all programs. 3.2 Values We highly value our students and their education. We value scientific curiosity, discovery, and a bold quest for new knowledge. Sound scientific ethics, integrity, respect for colleagues and different forms of scholarship, and impartiality will be our guiding principles. We value the wise distribution of faculty positions, space, and other resources that reflects excellence in academic programs, success in obtaining extramural funding, research productivity, growth opportunities, and instructional demands. 3.3 Mission This college unites disciplines in the pure and applied physical sciences, Earth sciences, life sciences and mathematics into a solid framework of education and research around the central tenets of the scientific method and logical reasoning. While maintaining and enhancing traditional disciplines, the college will develop synergies and interdisciplinary efforts that further the University’s recognition as a premier institution of scientific education and research. Graduates of the college will have a wealth of technical skills and problem solving abilities to prepare them for professional careers. The college’s education, research, and outreach missions promote scientific and numerical literacy and create an awareness of the value of science in addressing society’s problems and enhancing economic development. 3.4 How the COS Mission Fits the Mission of UNR The University mission is printed below with annotations describing how COS fits into this mission. Table 3.1 Comparison of University and COS Missions University Mission The University of Nevada is a constitutionally established, land-grant university. The university served the state of Nevada as its only state-supported institution of higher education for almost 75 years. In that historical role, it has emerged as a doctoral-granting university Annotation The COS with the Mackay School of Earth Sciences contributes directly to the land grant mission of the University through its education, research, and teaching mission and through its contributions to the Nevada mining industry and to the health, safety, and welfare of the general public through
which focuses its resources on doing a select number of things well. The University of Nevada, Reno offers a wide range of undergraduate and graduate programs, including selected doctoral and professional studies, which emphasize those programs and activities which best serve the needs of the state, region, and nation. By fostering creative and scholarly activity, it encourages and supports faculty research and application of that research to state and national problems. In performing its mission, the University of Nevada, Reno resolves to: • Offer high-quality programs in the arts, sciences, and in selected professions. • Emphasize undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs which meet the needs of the citizens of Nevada. • Maintain a select number of doctoral and organized research programs. • Offer a range of applied, interdisciplinary and career-oriented programs at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. • Provide community and public service programs through continuing education and cooperative extension. • Contribute to the advancement and dissemination of knowledge that will help to improve society at the state, regional, and national levels. • Reflect and respect the rich ethnic and cultural diversity of the citizens of Nevada in its academic programs, support programs, and in the composition of its faculty, administration, staff and student body. • Reflect and respect the pattern of gender of the citizens of Nevada in its academic programs, support programs, and in the composition of its faculty, administration, staff and student body.
programs in natural resources, hazards, and environmental protection. The COS will provide the large majority of doctoral degrees in science for UNR. Degrees in science and engineering offered by COS are critical to the economic well being of the State. COS will have the largest research program on campus with the exception of the Medical School. Research will span from basic research into the natural world to applications that can affect the economic and environmental well-being of the state. • COS will offer the majority of science degrees at UNR and of professional programs Earth sciences and engineering. COS will have nationally ranked graduate programs. COS is well positioned to emphasize interdisciplinary degree programs in the sciences at all levels and to participate in intra-campus interdisciplinary programs All units will participate in outreach, and our two statewide units have extensive public service components COS will contribute to the advancement and dissemination of knowledge about the natural world. COS will be inclusive of students and faculty from all ethnic and cultural backgrounds COS will seek to improve the representation of women and minorities in our student body, staff and faculty.
• • • •
4.0 Goals 4.1 Academic Goals The academic goals of the College of Science reflect the values, vision and mission of the College. The College’s goals demonstrate the strengths of the College’s academic programs and their commitment to undergraduate, graduate and external science education. These goals also point to long and short term needs within the College that must be addressed in order to maintain and advance the quality of the educational offerings. Our goals are: 1. To train tomorrow’s professionals by providing rigorous and high quality degree programs that emphasize logical reasoning and problem solving skills; 2. To advocate the core curriculum and liberal education by providing excellent general science and mathematics courses, capstone courses, and undergraduate research opportunities for the University; 3. To provide the modern, relevant laboratory experiences necessary for education in the scientific process in a safe learning environment; 4. To provide training in the application of computer technological tools to the discovery process; 5. To lead in developing the mathematical and scientific literacy of the citizens of Nevada; 6. To recruit high quality graduate and undergraduate students and provide advisement targeted at student advancement and retention; 7. To provide degree programs which are responsive to society and employers. 8. To continually assess our educational offerings and adapt our teaching models to most effectively disseminate information; 9. To provide high quality research programs for undergraduate and graduate education; 10. To provide interdisciplinary degree and research programs. 11. To establish PhD degree programs in Geography and Mathematics to complement the PhD's in the other disciplines of the College. 12. To make compensation for teaching assistantships nationally competitive as these positions are a key aspect of science education; 13. To obtain private funding for permanent faculty in each Department of the College. We would like to add roughly 10% to the faculty numbers in each department through private funding. As the College of Science strives toward the above goals, it is clear that the University is on the brink of a looming crisis in its ability to educate students in mathematics and the sciences. The precipitous increases in enrollments in recent years have stretched the current instructional faculty, space, and other resources of our departments to their limit; significant numbers of students are already being turned away from our courses. Based on state demographics, enormous growth in student demand is projected for the next several years, and without additional resources it will be impossible to meet these needs.
The College of Science academic programs provide the basic foundations for many of the curricula on campus. Consequently these shortages will have severe consequences for all the sciences and engineering programs university-wide.
1. Additional faculty positions are critical for addressing student class needs and providing a “critical mass” of faculty in all academic programs and specialties in the College of Science. 2. A new Science and Math education building to serve critical laboratory and classroom instruction needs. 3. An administrative faculty position in the College of Science Deans office to coordinate recruitment, retention, advising and assessment. 4. An Associate Dean for Academic Affairs to coordinate curriculum development, and contributions to the Core Curriculum, to coordinate science education and outreach initiatives for the College, to develop and coordinate educational initiatives in the College and to initiate and coordinate interdisciplinary educational projects. 5. A Development Officer to coordinate fundraising activities for academic programs and faculty positions. 6. Expansion of computer facilities for students, and computer system administration support. 7. Nationally competitive teaching assistant support to attract highly qualified graduate student researcher/teachers. 8. Coordination with the state and regional constituency of employers of COS graduates through an advisory board. 9. Modernization and maintenance of instructional laboratory instrumentation. 4.2 Research Goals The primary research goals of the COS are to maintain high quality research and to improve research productivity. The COS also supports efforts to promote interdisciplinary research, not as an end in itself, but as a means to solve current and future problems in science. Needs: Many factors can contribute to achieving the research goals of the COS, but the two most critical needs are (1) to increase the number of tenure-track faculty in Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics, and Physics as these departments are severely understaffed and (2) to provide increased and improved space for research. These two needs are interrelated because it will not be possible to increase faculty numbers substantially if additional office and research space cannot be made available. Increasing the number of tenure-track faculty will not only enhance research productivity of the college, it is also vital for meeting the college’s teaching needs.
Space • • • • • • Cutting-edge research requires both high quality space and sufficient space. Space needs are so large that a new building must be a paramount priority for the COS. Old space needs to be remodeled to be safer and to allow enhanced productivity. Remodeling support on campus needs to improve. There is a strong shared perception that support from Facilities Management could be substantially improved. While increasing and upgrading space, the COS also will assess current space use to maximize efficiency and ensure that utilization of space optimizes research productivity Space issues in the COS will be handled primarily by the Dean and the Director of the Academic Council. Development Officer(s) will assist in raising external support for new space for the college Administrative Support COS faculty members should spend their time on research and teaching, not on administration. The COS should provide support for: • hiring • budget preparation and revision • fiscal reporting and monitoring • purchasing support • computer support, particularly for networking, security, UNIX, and other more sophisticated needs, and for frequent replacement of computers. • The Dean’s Office will coordinate the hiring of staff to provide needed administrative support. Technicians and Equipment Research productivity depends on technical support and equipment. The COS will assess what new technical support staff (e.g., electronics, computers) are needed to enhance the effectiveness of the college. The possible efficiencies of sharing technical support and high-end equipment across the college will be explored as will the possibilities for multiuser equipment grants and Foundation grants. The Associate Dean, the Director/Chair of the Academic Council, and the Director of the MSES will take the lead on these issues. Research Personnel The effectiveness of the COS depends on the ability to hire and retain qualified faculty and staff. New job classifications and employment criteria are needed to address several important issues. The COS departments need to employ highly skilled research scientists, engineers, and technicians. These employees may not fit well in either the faculty or classified system. The COS also intends to review whether current personnel policies are adequate for aligning hiring needs with grant and contract duration. The 12
COS will have a large and growing number of faculty supported by grants and contracts. The voting rights, job security, and promotion procedures for these individuals need further discussion and definition. The Dean’s office will take the lead in examining these issues. Interdisciplinary and Major Project Needs COS supports efforts to promote interdisciplinary research, not as an end in itself, but as a means to solve current and future problems in science. The COS also wants to provide better support for investigators and teams planning major research initiatives. The COS intends to support increased interaction and sharing of information across disciplines. Possible mechanisms to achieve these objectives include: (1) developing a College Web site that posts abstracts of all papers and grant awards, (2) seeking donors to endow a college-wide distinguished speaker series, (3) instituting a local and informal interdisciplinary colloquium, (4) making the fostering of interdisciplinary collaborations and support for development of major research initiatives be part of the responsibilities of the Chair of the Academic Council and the Director of the Mackay School, and (5) having regular meetings of the Academic Council to share information on current projects, explore funding opportunities, and develop initiatives. 4.3 Development Goals - Integrating the Constituency Across the College The overall goal of development for the College is to build endowment, donations, and political support for the entire College of Science and its units. Critical needs exist throughout the College for space (classrooms, laboratories, offices, storage), and positions (faculty and support staff). We must build endowments and constituencies that broadly support the mission of the College of Science. College Advisory Board and other Advisory Boards and Committees The College of Science Advisory Board should: • advise the College on objectives, strategies, and a business plan for the College; • form ad hoc or standing advisory boards and committees for individual departments, intradepartmental programs, research programs, interdisciplinary programs, or specific needs (e.g., a new building), when these are considered advantageous for political or strategic reasons; • be structured in such a way that there are ample opportunities for the faculty to communicate their issues, concerns, and priorities; • include individuals who have significant political and economic influence in Nevada and the region and who enthusiastically agree with the vision and mission of the College; • represent the interests of the breadth of constituents of the College (students and their parents, alumni, and organizations that hire our students and that benefit from our research); • be constituted carefully, with membership selected after the Dean of the College is chosen and after consultation with a broad group of constituents, including members
of the current advisory boards for the Mackay School of Mines and the College of Arts and Sciences, the Central Administration (Vice President for Development and Alumni Relations, Provost, and President), and the faculty of the College. The Executive Advisory Board for the Mackay School of Earth Sciences should: • be chosen carefully, in consultation with constituents, after selecting the Director of the School; • act under the auspices of the full College Advisory Board; • include one or two members who also serve on the College Advisory Board, to assure that fundraising and lobbying efforts are coordinated and to build industrial and other constituent support for Biology, Chemistry, Geography, Math, and Physics as well as the geoscience and engineering units of the College. Development The College should: • have two development officers or directors assigned by the Vice President for Development and Alumni Relations; • continue to seek opportunities with the constituency of the Mackay School; • raise funds for all the departments within the College and for the College as a whole; • dedicate significant time (primarily on the part of the Dean, the Dean's staff, and departmental chairs and directors) to support fundraising efforts for the College; • strive for non-State funds (from endowments, gifts, grants, and contracts) to cover the salaries and fringe benefits of 10% of the permanent faculty involved in instruction, recognizing that grants and contracts currently cover a large number of the faculty involved solely in research. The Dean, with the help of the College faculty and College Advisory Board, should: • develop fundraising plans that draw on the strengths of all the units within the College of Science; • focus on Nevada's future and stress the need for a highly scientifically and technically trained workforce and the usefulness of fundamental and applied research. 4.4 Outreach Goals The primary goal of outreach for the College of Science is to serve the public. The outreach efforts are broken into two broad areas: (1) applied research, which, when properly conveyed to the public and appropriate decision makers, benefits the health, safety, and welfare of our citizens and communities, and (2) helping the public make informed decisions. Applied Research The College of Science contains two Statewide Programs, whose missions as research and public service units should continue to be supported and enhanced through State appropriations: 14
Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, the State geological survey, with duties defined by the Legislature in the areas of natural resources, geological hazards, economic development, and environmental concerns related to the geology of the State; Nevada Seismological Laboratory, with duties to operate a statewide network of seismographic stations and investigate the sizes, frequencies of occurrence, and distribution of earthquakes in the region, and other problems related to seismic risk in Nevada.
The College also has several centers that focus on research with applications to societal needs. These centers should be fostered, and new ones should be encouraged to develop as opportunities and needs arise: • Biological Resources Research Center, which conducts scientific research and planning efforts necessary to preserve the distinct biotic diversity of Nevada while simultaneously providing for economic viability and other needs of its citizens; • Great Basin Center for Geothermal Energy, which conducts research, collects and disseminates critical information, and holds workshops to help develop geothermal resources, particularly in Nevada; • Ralph J. Roberts Center for Research in Economic Geology, which concentrates on research related to ore deposits, practical training of graduate students, and interaction with industry geologists; • Mining Life-Cycle Center, which focuses on the key environmental issues facing domestic and overseas mining throughout its life cycle, beginning with exploration and ending with mine closure, reclamation, and reuse. • Center for Neotectonic Studies, which provides graduate students and post-doctoral researchers opportunities to conduct research on geologically recent motions of the earth's crust, particularly those produced by earthquakes, with an aim toward understanding the physics of earthquake recurrence, the growth of mountains, and the seismic hazard embodied in these processes. Helping the Public Make Informed Decisions The College of Science leads the effort to develop scientific and numerical literacy among graduates of the University of Nevada, Reno, including future K-12 teachers. In addition, the College should continue and, as appropriate, expand its efforts in • K-12 Education, such as: development and implementation of standards for teaching of natural science, geography, and mathematics in Nevada schools; tours for students and teachers; research opportunities for high-school students and K-12 teachers; training of in-service K-12 teachers. • Informal Science Education, such as tours and programs of the W.M. Keck Museum at the Mackay School of Earth Sciences; Science and Technology Day laboratory experiences for high school students;
Earth-Science Week and Earthquake Awareness Week activities, including field trips for the general public; selected Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology publications that are written for the general public. Interaction with decision makers and the news media, such as: service on State and local governmental boards, commissions, and advisory committees; service with local, regional, national, and international professional and scientific organizations; providing expert opinions and facts on scientific issues. 5.0 The Structure of the Proposed College of Science 5.1 The Guidance Used in Developing the Structure:
The proposed College of Science Chairs and Directors had extensive discussions about the proposed structure of the College. The fundamental difficulty we faced was merging two types of units, those from CAS and those from MSM. CAS units brought strong enrollment and MSM units brought a strong constituency. (Research is strong across the board.) Further, the MSM units, plus Geography represent a number of separate units with different missions, but united by a common focus on earth science. The Mackay School of Earth Sciences was designed to unify these, but the unification of some units and not others created inequities. The organizational structure we recommend attempts to minimize these inequities, but it does not eliminate them. We had the following guidance: President Lilley’s May 31st speech, and September 17th addendum: May 31:
“I am recommending that we create a new College of Science containing the Mackay School of Earth and Environmental Sciences…The engineering disciplines currently housed in the Mackay School of Mines will be incorporated into the College of Engineering…The earth science programs, including geological sciences, the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, and the Seismology Lab, will be included in the Mackay School of Earth and Environmental Sciences. The consultation with the Faculty Senate will determine the exact composition of the environmental part of the school and could, for example, include a new Department of Hydrology and also other environmental programs currently housed in the College of Agriculture, Biotechnology, and Natural Resources. Other departments assigned to the College of Science would include biology, chemistry, mathematics, and physics…Faculty in the Departments of Anthropology, Geography, and Psychology have advocated for a College of Science, and many of those faculty have expressed a desire to be located in such a college. However, I am deferring a recommendation concerning the location of these disciplines and am asking that the Faculty Senate provide me with their advice on the question of where these departments can do their best work.”
The President subsequently decided not to include Anthropology and Psychology in the College of Science. Sept 17th:
“A new department to be a combination of Geological Sciences (including Geological Engineering) and Mining Engineering, Geography, some portion of Environmental and Resource Sciences, the Seismological Laboratory, and the Bureau of Mines and Geology will constitute a Mackay School of Earth Sciences (note the change of name) within a new College of Science.”
Further verbal clarification from the President to Dean Long yielded these principles: 1. There should be a Mackay School of Earth Sciences (MSES) in COS. 2. There should be an in-line director of MSES. 3. There should be only one layer of management between faculty and dean. 4. Asks us to determine inner structure of COS/MSES that makes sense. The combination of principles 1, 2 and 3 could be taken to imply that MSES could not contain separate departments with “in-line” department chairs. After much discussion of this issue, we identified the following basic principles and values that governed our deliberations choice: Principles and Values 1. Department structure is fundamental to the delivery of services and education: Departments allocate and utilize resources more efficiently than any other university structure. Chairs do a significant amount of administrative work that provides for the efficient delivery of courses to students and disbursement of existing resources. Chairs are active members of departments, continuing with the role of teaching and research, so by maintaining department members in these positions, the administration receives administrative support at the level closest to individual faculty, at a very minor expense. The loss of departments would result in only trivial cost savings (not even the loss of a classified office manager) at great expense in relation to the day-to-day management of the university, its faculty, and its students. The existing Departments in the proposed COS are each nationally recognized. Loss of departmental identity would result in loss of visibility for the University of Nevada, Reno. Maintaining departments supports the strategic goal of enhancing the University’s visibility. Another goal of the strategic plan is to build on existing strengths. The Departments in the COS have demonstrated that they are very strong in the areas of teaching, research and service. This strength comes from the combined efforts of individuals working together with a common mission in related disciplines. Departmental missions and academic programs are not built overnight but are the result of sustained combined efforts of individuals with a common sense of identity. Maintaining departmental structures builds on existing strengths and provides the structure for continued success.
2. Departments will set and implement academic priorities and standards. 3. The administrative structure should be managerially efficient, balanced and effective. 4. The administrative structure should enable interdisciplinary synergies. 5. The College will be inclusive of different styles of scholarship and contribution. 6. The College should be unified. 5.2 The Organization Chart A large number of models were examined carefully from the perspective of the above criteria. The model selected is shown below. This model fundamentally recognizes the importance of mission oriented departments with department chairs and the need to coordinate academic programs at the department level. The elected Academic Council Director will focus on initiatives and issues that cut across all the sciences, and will provide focused support for the departments of Chemistry, Math, Biology and Physics, units that are not part of MSES. Currently, there are five units that have Earth Science missions. The proposed structure unites these earth science units through the Mackay School of Earth Sciences (MSES). MSES provides a transformed identity for the constituency that currently supports the Mackay School of Mines. The change in the name of Mackay to a school of Earth Sciences is an important and literal recognition of the broader mission of the school. Figure 5.1 Organization Chart for the College of Science
Academic Council with Elected Director/Chair
Earth Science & Engin.
This structure has the following features: • There is a Mackay School of Earth Sciences headed by an in-line director, i.e. the chairs of the MSES units report to the director rather than directly to the Dean. • There is an association of academic departments in COS that will have a leadership council and an elected “director” who will not have “in-line” functions. The departments outside of MSES will report directly to the Dean. The director will provide balance between MSES and the highly enrolled science departments. • The director/chair will provide balance between MSES and the highly enrolled science departments. The director/chair will provide an advocate and point of contact for initiatives not related to the Earth Sciences, and coordinate academic initiatives common among all academic departments. Salient features of MSES include: • The current departments of Geography, Geological Sciences, Mining Engineering, Nevada Seismological Lab, and the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology will be in MSES. • The MSES will be comprised of separate departments, (i.e., the departments in MSES will not be merged into one super department), but some departments may merge (e.g., Geological Sciences and Mining Engineering). • The Atmospheric Sciences Program in the Physics Department will also be associated with MSES, as will the Hydrological Sciences Program. • Any faculty member or department with research interests in Earth Sciences may be associated with the school. • The MSES will have a director, who will probably be appointed from the existing faculty. This director will have line authority. • Discussions about merging the Geological Sciences Department and Mining Engineering Department are ongoing. The outcome of this process is not finalized. Salient features of the Academic Council include: • All academic departments (i.e. all units except NBMG and NSL) will participate in the Academic Council. • The Director/Chair will be elected and may be a chair of one of the departments. The job is expected to be approximately half time and we expect to be able to reimburse the donating department in order to replace the lost teaching. Initiatives led by this Director will include all appropriate units in the College of Science (or beyond). • The Chair/Director will seek out and coordinate research and teaching initiatives that span the academic disciplines and work with the Director of MSES to ensure success of these initiatives within the college mission and goals. 5.3 Organizational Issues In the end, the committee and faculty considered two primary types of models: Models with no school(s) and models with school(s). Within these a large number of variations were discussed and ultimately discarded. The balance of representation is a concern with 19
the model presented. The Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics, and Physics (BCMP) departments have almost all the students, the majority of the research funding, and the majority of the faculty. BCMP are represented by four departments, whereas the MSES departments are represented by an equal or greater number of departments plus a school. This situation represents a lingering concern with the balance of the proposed structure. It is important to recognize that many faculty members in most, but not all, departments prefer an organizational model that does not include any schools. However, this class of models was extensively discussed and finally rejected by the planning committee, because such structures eliminate Mackay as an Earth Science entity and internationally recognized “brand” name. Moreover, a “no-school” approach puts a heavy burden on the Dean to act as the sole focus for the important minerals constituency. Furthermore, the “no-school” model violates nearly all of the President’s instructions. The fact is that UNR has at least five separate academic units and several interdisciplinary programs in the earth sciences. It is important to draw these groups together and coordinate them under a common umbrella. Of the models with schools within colleges, we felt that the only school at present that made sense was MSES. In the long term, however, we see strong possibilities for three additional schools: • School of Life Sciences: The Biology Department has sufficient majors, enrollment, and research productivity to justify a School of Life Sciences, but as a single department there is no administrative need for a school. • School of Mathematics: Our current department is clearly clustering into three sub-disciplines: statistics, pure and applied mathematics. Eventually, it may make sense to recognize these as explicit units within a school. • School of Physical Sciences: Physics and Chemistry are very compatible and closely related departments. Development of a school of Physical Sciences would recognize the strength of these units. These schools might be considered “proto-colleges” and over time may evolve to be full colleges. We see the multi-school model as a likely scenario within about ten years. For the model we chose, we have honored nearly all of the principles articulated by the President. However, the concept of only one layer of administration between faculty members and the Dean proved incompatible with the President’s other instructions and unworkable in practice. The reasons for this are: • We could not honor this concept, have a school, have an “in-line” director, and have departments which we felt was fundamental to the successful functionality of a university. The MSES is far too large to be treated as one department with approximately 56 state-funded and research faculty members with units of highly different missions. Sub-directors of some kind were deemed imperative to effective management. Consequently we saw no organizational or financial advantage in destroying the functionality of departments. • If we had decided to have MSES be only a “super department”, then the director would necessarily be academically oriented instead of outward looking and
should probably be elected as an academic leader. Consequently, it would have made no sense to have the non-academic state-wide units (NBMG and NSL) report to this director. The strong desire of Geography to remain a separate department would have meant that Geography would prefer not to be part of MSES. The consequence was that MSES would have been a school of Earth Sciences that included only two of the five earth sciences units (Geology and Mining). This makes little sense in view of the University Bylaws which define schools. Some issues remain on the internal organization of the College. We expect ongoing discussions to resolve these details, both by the planning committee and the bylaws committee. (a) The MSES Director should have some duties normally performed by the Dean and some duties normally performed by the chairs. (b) The duties of the Chair/Director of the Academic Council need to be more fully delineated. Depending on staffing in the Dean's office, this person may assume some of the oversight roles associated with an Associate Dean for both Academic Affairs and Research. However, this person should not be responsible for managing routine tasks. (c) There are possible mergers of departments within MSES. The merger of Mining and Geology is on the table, but is not resolved. As the school evaluates its mission within the Earth Sciences and comes to a common set of goals and values, further mergers within the school may emerge. Coming to this relative consensus on a structure was extremely difficult. The ideas presented here (particularly in regard to the proposed structure of the college), represent a delicate and long sought compromise between a large variety of serious and valid concerns among the faculty, researchers, our commitment to the needs of students, and our sense of the Mackay constituency.
6.0 Staffing and Other Needs: 6.1 Dean’s Office The college as proposed will have nearly 400 employees, a budget of well over $30,000,000 per year, and approximately 11,000 students. The Dean’s office must be configured to provide service to the college such that faculty can perform required duties. We envision the need for the following State-funded positions in the Dean’s office: For clarity, we provide a comparison with the current MSM and CAS Dean’s staffing. We are proposing a very efficient structure in recognition of the overwhelming need for teaching staff in over-enrolled departments. Table 6.1 State Funded Positions in the Dean’s office. Employee Type Dean Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Faculty Classified Classified Classified Classified Classified Dean The Dean is both the manager of the College and its representative to the university administration and external constituencies. The Dean promotes the mission and goals of the whole college and those of its units. The success of the College demands that the Dean's office have sufficient support staff to free the Dean's time from routine managerial and academic duties, allowing the Dean to be outward-looking, The first Dean will have the special responsibility of working with faculty and the departments to create a new, unified College of Science. It is important that the great potential of synergies among all of the departments, including those in the Mackay School and outside of it, be fully exploited and that potential divisions be avoided. The 22 Title Dean Associate Dean Director of the Academic Council Director of the MSES Budget and Personnel Coordinator Director of Student Services Electrical Engineer Computer Software Engineer Computer Electronics Engineer Computer System Administrator Administrative Assistant IV (Grade 29) Administrative Assistant III (Grade 27) Personnel Assistant (Grade 29) Accounting Assistant (Grade 27) Administrative Assistant I (Grade 21) TOTALS MSM Current FTE 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 CAS Current FTE 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.06 1.0 .50 7.56 Proposed COS FTE 1.0 .5 -1.0 .5 .5 – 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 17.0 – 17.5
Chairs' working group found it very easy to come to common values and goals on fundamental academic and research-related issues affecting the departments, but the school-within-a-college structure may require a delicate balancing of interests. The Dean should make every effort to remove barriers between departments and schools, thus making a truly unified college. The Dean should strive to educate the Mackay constituency as to the value and necessity of the natural sciences, and the natural science and mathematics constituency should be built that understands the importance of the Mackay tradition in Nevada. If all these units really belong together in a common college, then the case will be easy to make but must be done so consistently. In addition, this means the Dean should make important resource allocations on behalf of the entire college after consulting with key directors and faculty. Associate Dean(s) Ideally, a college this size should have two Associate Deans, one for research and one for academic affairs. We recognize that this level of staffing may be a few years away. In the ideal case, the Associate Dean(s) will: 1. take the lead on University Core-curriculum issues for the College; will sit on the University Core-Curriculum Board, and act the College’s liaison with Director of the Core Board; 2. chair the College Curriculum committee. (note: with only one Assoc. Dean, will need a faculty member to do this); 3. assist Departments in course scheduling and aid coordination of course scheduling between departments; 4. act as a College representative in course, curriculum, and other student-related issues involving other Colleges; 5. act as College representative in course, curriculum, and other student-related issues involving other units within UCCSN, for example Common Course numbering, transfer, articulation, etc., concerns; 6. be the lead contact person for the university catalog, vis-à-vis College issues; 7. be the overseer of student advising in the College; 8. play a key role in recruiting and retaining of majors in the College; 9. oversee College-wide undergraduate seminar programs; 10. organize an advisory committee comprised of undergraduates, and work with College’s student senators; 11. serve as the Dean’s representative as required; 12. facilitate College-directed Instructional Enhancement Programs; 13. act as ombudsman for LOAs in the college, and help departments in coordinating LOA requests; 14. act as ombudsman for teaching assistants and graduate students in general in the college and help departments in coordinating TA requests; 15. play a lead role in departmental instructional assessment programs, as well as College-wide assessments; 16. handle grade appeals, student grievance issues, etc.;
17. take the lead on K-12 opportunities, and coordinate outreach, instructional initiatives, AP programs; be the key contact in the College for the Washoe County School system; 18. work closely with the Budget and Personnel Coordinator on instructional resources and issues; 19. work closely and supervise activities of College Director of Student Services. 20. take the lead in seeking out, developing, coordinating, and writing proposals for integrative science education, as well as overseeing implementation; 21. participate in supporting interdisciplinary efforts and major research initiatives across the College; 22. help to develop constituents for the physical and life sciences; 23. advise the Dean on curricula, positions, student recruitment, endowment and development related to the sciences and mathematics; 24. help in development of endowment; 25. work with Budget and Personnel Director for Research to provide PI service for College; 26. oversee College-wide equipment and technicians; 27. provide support on soft-money faculty issues; 28. take lead in evaluating whether research personnel policies need revision; 29. chair the College computer committee. Note that some of these responsibilities may be assumed by or coordinated with the Director of the Academic Council and the Director of MSES. Director of Student Services There are currently 11,121 students enrolled in classes of the departments that will compose the new college. There are 786 undergraduate majors currently in these departments, spanning 15 degree programs and options. Thus it is essential that the College have an Administrative Faculty level Director of Student Services who, working with an Associate Dean of Academic Affairs, will oversee College-level advising, recruitment, and retention activities. Moreover, in accordance with University mandate, each college must have a professional advisor to provide for those students who have undeclared majors or pre-majors. This position will report to the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs. This is a very high priority position. Duties will include: 1. Advising undeclared science majors, and declared majors in College-related issues; 2. Augmenting departmental advising, training departmental advisors, and keeping advisors informed of advisement- and curricular-related-issues; maintaining Advisors’ Listserv with most current information; 3. Evaluating student progress towards degree completion, working with DARS and SIS, and providing information to department advisors; certifying all College of Science candidates for graduation; 4. Providing assessment support, data, etc. to departments and to Associate Dean 5. Planning and implementing student retention strategies;
6. Maintaining student records, files, databases, etc.; 7. Developing and implementing student recruitment strategies; playing key role in recruiting majors from under-represented groups; 8. Developing mentoring programs, both at departmental level and College level. 9. Maintaining COS web page related to recruiting; 10. Updating COS data in the University Catalog; 11. Working with the Associate Dean and the Curriculum Committee to keep track of course proposals, advise departments on new courses, and track proposals through the university approval process; 12. Working with Admissions and Records; 13. Organizing orientation programs for new students; 14. Handling details, meetings, paperwork, of student grade appeals, approval of course substitutions, special students circumstances, etc.; 15. Serving as College outreach coordinator in promoting and advertising degree programs of College. Office of Budget and Personnel: Budget and Personnel Coordinator 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Critical to the college as the main contact for budget and personnel matters for the Dean’s office and the departments with higher administration and other UNR offices in the day to day running of the college. Is the fiscal officer of the college and will ensure its fiscal integrity. Works with the Dean and Associate Deans to oversee the state budgets, selfsupporting budgets and research budgets, which are anticipated to total over $100M. Works with the Dean and Associate Deans on personnel matters within the college. Ensure that contracts and related personnel documents for approximately 450 persons are accurate and timely. Assists the research faculty with pre-award and post-award budget and personnel issues. Supervises financial/personnel assistants for the college. This is a critical position and must be filled by a professional with experience in supervising academic support staff, planning and implementing academic budgets, and dealing with academic personnel policies. Provides training in all budget matters to all of the college’s departmental staff.
Administrative Assistant IV: this position will act as the assistant to the Dean Calendar for Dean. Travel for Dean. Maintain college and academic calendar. Correspondence for Dean. Process paperwork for college elections, faculty evaluations, and promotion and tenure packages. 6. Oversees day-to-day activities of the Dean’s office. 7. Supervises Admin Asst I. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Administrative Assistant III: this position will act as the assistant to the Associate Dean(s) and Directors. 1. 2. 3. 4. Calendar for Associate Dean(s). Travel for Associate Dean(s). Correspondence for Associate Dean(s). Assist the Director/Chair of the Academic Council and the Director of MSES.
Accounting Assistant III 1. Assist the fiscal officer of the college with the daily business of the college in regards to budget and account issues for state, self supporting and research accounts. Due to the large volume of accounts to be overseen, this position is critical to the success of the fiscal officer and the college. 2. Assist the fiscal officer with serving as resource for the research faculty for proposal budgets and post award accounting. Personnel Assistant III 1. Assist the fiscal officer of the college with the daily business of the college in regards to personnel. Due to the large volume of contracts (about 450 PAFS/contracts annually for all employee types) to be overseen, this position is critical to the success of the fiscal officer and the college. 2. Assist the fiscal officer with serving as resource for the research faculty for hiring on grants/contracts 3. Assist the fiscal officer with personnel forms and contracts for the college. 4. Process student payroll. 5. Process personnel leave records. 6. Assist with searches in the college. Administrative Assistant I 1. Serves as receptionist for the Dean’s office 2. Assists the student advisor with scheduling of appointments and record keeping 3. Assists the Administrative Assistant IV with the day-to-day business of the Dean’s office. 4. Classroom scheduling. Administrative Faculty Positions Seven Administrative Faculty positions are needed in the Dean’s office to provide support for the research and academic missions in the College of Science. These positions are necessary due to the extensive laboratory-based instruction and research needs in the College. These support personnel are not currently available to the Departments in the College. The position descriptions are:
• • • •
Electrical Engineer Computer Software Engineer Computer Electronics Engineer (2) Computer System Administrators (3) 6.2 Director Positions
Director of the Academic Council This position is essential to provide balance and vision in the new college. Moreover, it formally ties together the academic departments from the Mackay School with those outside of the school. The planning committee considers this position equal with the position of Director of the Mackay School in importance to the new college. This position should be half-time for a faculty member from an academic department. Because the MSES departments are already represented by the Director of the MSES, it is preferable to fill this position with a faculty member from the Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics, or Physics departments. The administration should provide this person’s department with 0.5 FTE and provide a stipend to the director. In addition, because this position is vital for achieving the mission of the COS, the director should receive a discretionary budget ($40,000/year) sufficient to support a postdoctoral associate that will help maintain his or her productivity. This person will be a champion for the academic mission of the College and will provide essential counterbalance to the strong influence of the Director of the MSES and that School’s strong external constituency. The principal duties of this position are to: 1. Serve as the Dean’s primary advisor within the college on academic positions, research initiatives, curricula, student recruitment, assessment, endowment, and development; 2. Be a strong advocate for the academic mission of the college; 3. Promote research in the academic units of the college; 4. Work to develop a constituency for the College as a whole, but particularly for the Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics and Physics departments as the other departments already receive this support from the Director of the MSES; 5. Assess the use of space in the college and advise the Dean on how to develop new space and how to use available space most effectively; 6. Represents the academic departments both within and outside the university; 7. Lead and develop interdisciplinary efforts in physical science, life sciences, and mathematics; 8. Coordinate college-wide initiatives with the Director of MSES; 9. Develop research opportunities related to expertise within the College 10. Promote meaningful interaction across academic departments; 11. Advise development director on how to develop endowments for departments not associated with the Mackay School.
Director of MSES A director is essential to the success of the Mackay School of Earth Sciences. Although this may eventually require a full-time appointed position, at minimum a half-time stipend is necessary for a MSES faculty member to direct the school, advise the Dean on earth science related matters, foster and maintain close contact with the Mackay constituency, administer the Mackay endowment, develop large-scale funding opportunities, oversee the faculty, and coordinate the earth sciences curricula, recruitment, retention, and assessment programs. The principal duties of this position are: 1. Serve as a Dean’s primary advisor to the Dean on matters pertaining to the MSES 2. Advise the Dean on curricula, positions, student recruitment, endowment and development related to the Earth sciences and engineering; 3. Work with the Dean to ensure that sufficient resources flow to departments within the MSES; 4. Strongly advocate the earth sciences education, research and outreach missions of the school; 5. Represent the Dean and the Mackay faculty to “the outside world” in all matters related to the MSES and provide primary contact and facilitate relations between the Mackay constituency and the school; 6. Develop research opportunities related to expertise within the School; 7. Lead interdisciplinary efforts related to earth sciences for the school and across the college; 8. Coordinate fundraising efforts to build endowments for units within the School and for the School itself in collaboration with development director; 9. Coordinate the distribution of expendable funds from the School's endowment; 10. Coordinate college-wide initiatives with the Director of the Academic Council; 11. Coordinate engineering programs within the College and be a liaison with the College of Engineering; 12. Set up and run advisory committee for the Mackay School of Earth Sciences; 13. Expand the Mackay constituency to be inclusive of the new mission, vision and goals of a broad-based school of “Earth Sciences.”
6.3 Department Staffing Request Clerical Staff Statewide programs are funded from different line items than academics. Consequently, we have separated these requests. Table 6.2 Department Staffing Request. Dept. Employee Type Title Current Proposed FTE FTE Staff Research Associate IV 0.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant II 0.0 1.0 Administrative Assistant III 0.0 0.5 0.0 2.5 0.92 0.0 0.92 1.0 2.0 3.0
Biology Classified Physics Classified GSD Classified Total Academic Depts:
NBMG Classified Administrative Assistant IV NSL Classified Seismological Technician Total Statewide Programs:
Justification: Staff Research Associate IV. The biology department teaches a large number of laboratory courses. The preparation of materials for these laboratories is time consuming and requires a fairly high skill level. At present, preparations for these laboratories are accomplished with the support of an LOA and student helpers. Growing enrollment and increased sophistication in the exercise undertaken in the laboratories are making this approach increasingly problematic, and the department is extremely dependent on the help of a particularly motivated and competent LOA. The department desperately needs a full-time laboratory preparation person. Administrative Assistant III: The current GSD/ME staff will consist of 20.54 statefunded academic faculty and 4 research faculty and is currently understaffed. We request an additional 0.5 FTE to be allocated to assist this large department and the chair with the day to day business required to support these faculty and the students. In addition, this person’s other 0.5 FTE would assist the MSES Director, creating a cohesive link between the college and administration and the department. The Physics Department currently has 12 state-funded academic faculty, 10 research faculty and 2 postdoctoral research associates, and the administrative staff consists of 1 Administrative Assistant III and a student worker. The lack of administrative assistance in the Department severely hampers the research and administrative functions of the Department and the administrative function of the unit. NBMG's executive assistant was upgraded from an Administrative Assistant III to IV a couple of years ago but was unable to keep this position at 100% State funding, which it should be.
The Nevada Seismological Laboratory is expanding its seismi network to more adequately cover geographic areas throughout the State and to place more strong-motion instruments in urban areas, where data are critical to understanding performance of buildings during earthquakes. Two full-time technicians are needed to keep the instruments functioning. Instructional Needs The number of state-funded tenure track faculty positions is inadequate to teach even a fraction of the classes needed by the students of COS. Each year, significant additional instructional staffing resources, beyond budgeted state faculty positions, are required to meet all course demand in each department. The looming enormous growth expected in university enrollments will require a commensurate increase in funding for temporary faculty and LOAs. Current and projected future estimates for the additional funding necessary for these positions are detailed in section 7 below. Instructional Needs for Math • In Fall 02 the SCH generated was approximately 14,029—an 11.7% increase over Fall 01 • In addition to the above increases (see the end of this report), an additional 2953 SCH (about 21% of our total SCH) was turned away due to lack of instructors, and classroom/office space. Table 6.3 Instructional Needs for Math
Grading Money $25,000 $26,250 $30,200 $33,220 $36,540 Lecturers and Temp Postdocs Faculty $407,000 11 $444,000 12 $555,000 15 $666,000 18 $777,000 21
YEAR 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
LOAs $111800 $111800 $111800 $111800 $111800
TA TOTAL Fall SCH Growth $84,000 $627,800 14029 $105,000 $687,050 14730 5% $126,000 $823,000 16940 15% $147,000 $958,020 18634 10% $168,000 $1,093,340 20497 10%
Assumptions underlying the above projections are given in the Appendix. Instructional Needs for Biology The Biology Department’s current 19.5 FTE include a faculty member serving in central administration (Vice Provost Ort), 1.25 unfilled positions, and one administrative faculty member who is not a biologist. According to enrollment data for last year (2001-2002), the department should have 28 FTE. The 8.5 FTE formula shortfall, the 1.25 currently unfilled positions, and the fact that one FTE is administrative, not instructional, indicate that the department should add 10 or more FTE to achieve formula funding. With >500 majors, extensive service teaching, and graduate programs, the department needs new positions. Over the next 4 years, the department wishes to add 10 new faculty positions to meet the demands for Biology’s service courses (including support for the Core 30
Curriculum), to enable undergraduates to obtain meaningful research experiences, to offer an adequate range of upper division electives, to offer required courses often enough that majors can graduate in four years, and to fill critical expertise gaps in the department. While the departments has many demands on its teaching, it is particularly important that the department offer sufficient upper division courses to meet the demands of its many majors. More faculty are needed to meet these demands as well as advise more than 500 majors. The return of Dean Mead to the Department in spring 2004 will provide one of the needed FTE. The other 9 positions will need to be new hires. Details of the specific areas of expertise needed by the department are available in the department’s strategic plan. Another instructional need over the next few years will be replacements for senior faculty who retire. When these faculty retire, it will be important to replace them without gaps in service. Besides the need to hire tenure-track faculty, the department needs temporary faculty and part-time teachers. Biology currently has one faculty member serving full-time in central administration, 1.25 unfilled positions, 1 faculty member on a 1-semester unpaid leave, 1 faculty member on half-year sabbatical, 1 faculty member on full-year sabbatical, and 1 faculty member who has bought out 50% of their time this year to run a multi-million dollar project. The instructional and advising duties of these 4.75 positions are being handled in part by one temporary lecturer, one half-time advisor, a 0.45 LOA, and a few LOAs with lower FTE for a total of 2.51 FTE. These part-time and temporary faculty are unable to replace all the teaching and advising duties of the 4.75 faculty unavailable to the department this year, but the most essential courses and advising have been covered. Future needs for temporary and part-time faculty are expected to be similar to those for this year.
Table 6.4 Instructional Needs for Biology YEAR 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 LOAs $105,863 $105,863 $105,863 $105,863 $105,863 Temp. Faculty 2.51 2.51 2.51 2.51 2.51
Instructional Needs for Chemistry This year Chemistry is spending $36,000 to fund replacements for faculty who have taken administrative positions. These funds pay for two retired faculty to come back and teach, and Chemistry needs to pay this much to make it attractive to instructors with this level of experience. An additional $22,750 is being spent to provide LOA stipends to the 10 local high school teachers who run the department's evening AP Chemistry Laboratory Program.
Currently, these positions are funded solely from salary savings in the department from vacant positions, plus a 0.4 FTE Lecturer position (ca. $17,500) left purposely vacant to cover part of the AP Chemistry stipends. Next year Chemistry will need this much financial assistance again plus one additional LOA at ca. $5,000. We anticipate that we will be able to cover these again from the salary savings from vacant faculty positions. Future projections are based on adding $5,000 for additional LOAs each year, and assume that outside funds will be necessary. The Department of Chemistry currently has 18.4 state-funded faculty FTE positions, which includes one administrative faculty position and 0.4 FTE utilized for funding 10 AP Chemistry High School Teachers. This total is 7 faculty positions short of numbers generated by SFTE formula, based on 2001-2002 enrollments. This fall's enrollment increases suggest that this year we will actually be ca. 8 positions underfunded compared to formula. Moreover, this year the department has 1.75 faculty positions vacant from faculty in administrative positions plus one faculty member on a one-semester sabbatical, exacerbating this shortage. This shortage of faculty positions has made it difficult for us to meet course needs at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. Moreover, we have not been able to build critical masses of faculty in key research and instructional areas. We plan to address these problems by a gradual addition of permanent faculty positions, both tenure-track and lecturer. However, to meet expected enormous increases in enrollments, we will need to continue to have courses taught by temporary faculty. This year Chemistry is spending $36,000 to fund temporary replacements for faculty who have taken administrative positions. These funds pay for 2 retired faculty returning to teach; this level of compensation is necessary to attractive instructors with this level of experience. An additional $22,750 is being spent to provide LOA stipends to the 10 local high school teachers who run the department's evening AP Chemistry Laboratory Program. Next year, we anticipate that Chemistry will need this much financial assistance again plus one additional LOA at ca. $5,000. Future projections for temporary faculty are based on adding $5,000 for additional LOAs each year. Table 6.5 Instructional Needs for Chemistry YEAR LOAs 2002-03 $58,750 2003-04 $63,750 2004-05 $68,750 2005-06 $73,750 2006-07 $78,750 Temp Faculty 12 13 14 15 16
The following gives a timeline for adding additional permanent faculty to the department: • 2003-2004 • Add theoretical chemist to support Chemical Physics program 32
2004-2005 • Add bioorganic chemist to support increasing biological chemistry program, and aid instruction pressures from increasing organic enrollments • Add full-time Organic Chemistry Lecturer 2005-2006 • Add bioinorganic chemist to support increasing biological chemistry program 2006-2007 • Add materials chemist to support increasing materials program • Add another full time lecturer position in analytical chemistry
Instructional Needs for Physics This year the Physics Department is spending $24,000 to fund LOAs for faculty positions that are unfilled or on sabbatical. The Department hires instructors holding a Ph.D. in Physics to instruct courses that cannot taught by faculty members without impacting research programs in the Department. Each LOA is paid $4,000 per three-credit course, which is justified by the academic level and teaching experience of the instructors. Projections of needs for LOAs in the Department are based on enrollment growth in introductory physics courses. Table 6.6 Instructional Needs for Physics Year 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 LOAs $28,000 $28,000 $32,000 $32,000 $36,000
This year the Physics Department is spending $24,000 to fund LOA’s for faculty positions that are unfilled or on sabbatical. The Department hires instructors holding a Ph.D. in Physics to instruct courses that cannot taught by faculty members without impacting research programs in the Department. Each LOA is paid $4,000 per three credit course, which is justified by the academic level and teaching experience of the instructors. Projections of needs for LOA’s in the Department are based on enrollment growth in introductory physics courses. The Physics Department has 13 FTE as of Fall 2002. This FTE count includes two vacant positions that will be filled in January 2003 and July 2003, and one position that is funding for the Atmospheric Sciences program, which is administered through the Physics Department by DRI faculty. The Department anticipates adding three to four new faculty positions by 2007, based on current student FTE and anticipated enrollment
growth. Research areas for these anticipated hires include plasma physics, soft condensed matter physics, physics education, and biophysics. The Physics Department will also need additional teaching assistants to meet the anticipated enrollment growth in the introductory physics classes. Every introductory physics class has a coordinating laboratory section. The Physics Department will need to add four additional TA positions over the next five years to meet anticipated enrollment growth. Instructional Needs for Geology The Department of Geological Sciences is listed as having 15.5 FTE, but in actuality has 13.5 teaching FTE. An additional FTE is mistakenly counted for a Regent’s Professorship and another FTE is budgeted as pass through-money for DRI teaching in the Hydrology Program. In Table 7.2, Geological Sciences generated 12.9 student FTE in 2001 so the Department is close to being in accord with funding formulas. GSD LOA costs for Geology core introductory and 200 level courses were $43,184 in 2002. More than 25% of the academic faculty teach 100 level courses and any further assignment to such courses would seriously impair the undergraduate and graduate degree programs. The 100 level courses have been growing at a rate of 25% to 33% per year for the last four years and have doubled in enrollment since 1999. This is considerably higher than the university average. We anticipate the need to continue LOA appointments for the foreseeable future. Increased stable state funding is necessary to allow core undergraduate and graduate courses to be taught on a regularly scheduled basis to meet enrollment demands. This funding should include increased LOA support for DGS and DRI research faculty where needed.
Table 6.7 Department of Geological Sciences projected LOA needs FY 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 LOA $ $44,000 $51,000 $58,000 $65,000 $72,000 $79,000
The GSD department has a strong need for new positions in the next five years, depending in part on projected enrollment growth. Apart from funding formulas, these positions are needed to maintain and enhance the quality of the research and teaching programs. • At least one full-time position to teach introductory classes and to coordinate our K12 earth science education efforts. This would include initiating and managing
BS/MS degree programs, developing new courses and refining existing curricula in earth science education to train K-12 teachers in earth sciences and in the new science and math standards. A first-class petrologist/ high temperature geochemist to teach essential core classes in mineralogy and petrology at both the undergraduate and graduate level and develop a strong research program that complements and expands the research capabilities of the department. A position in surficial processes, possibly shared with Anthropology and/or Geography. The need for this position will particularly acute when a DRI faculty member, Nick Lancaster, who has taught Geomorphology and Surficial Processes courses for the last several years, moves on to a government directorship in 2003. Replacement positions for senior faculty (esp. in seismology) as they retire. At least two more TAs to cover core classes. In addition to helping us fulfill our teaching mission and meeting enrollment demands, more TA positions would allow us to attract more high quality graduate students to our program.
Instructional Needs for Geography Although by the current funding formula Geography is seen as meeting its needs on a per faculty basis, we would be considered to be short 3.4 faculty members if we were rated as a ‘High’ cost program. Our greatest faculty need is in the area of GIS (Geographic Information Systems) which is a growing field that employs many of our graduates. This field has seen the addition of four regularly taught courses within the last three years. We also have great need for additional faculty in the area of Human/Environment relations. This is a position that would interface well with the goals of the new School of Earth Sciences. At this time we only receive funding for five TA positions annually. This means that our core curriculum science and social science courses with enrollments varying from 120 to 160 per semester have only 1 to a maximum of 2 TAs per section. We have had to teach some courses in which one TA served 160 students. We feel this is an unacceptable ratio for meaningful discussion sections and request additional TA positions in the future. We request three new permanent TA positions now with the addition of two more in the future. To maintain our current evening course offerings that are part of the degree at night program, and sustain courses not covered by tenured faculty, we need continued LOA support equivalent to 5 courses per semester or 10 per year at an annual cost of $35,000. Assuming growth in our program, two new courses per year, this will increase by $7,000 per year. Our department vision calls for a Ph.D. program as soon as is practicable. We feel that that will require at least 10 full time faculty, with support of adjuncts. Since this is unlikely to come through new hires, we are discussing possible faculty mergers with our department as part of the reorganization.
Table 6.8 Instructional Needs for Geography YEAR 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 LOAs $35,000 $42,000 $49,000 $56,000 $63,000 Courses taught 10 12 14 16 18
Instructional Needs for Mining Engineering The Mining Engineering Department presently has five faculty members. It is expected that this number will remain constant over the next five years if a successful business plan can be implemented, otherwise it is possible that the number will be reduced to four. Maintaining ABET accreditation will be difficult if the number is further reduced. It is projected that one of the Mining Engineering faculty will retire in the next five years. A fund raising campaign for an endowed professorship will start in early 2003. These funds will be used to fund the replacement of the retiring faculty member. In summary the rest of the business plan is to provide at least one more faculty member’s salary from private funds and to develop a professional development program that can fund one additional faculty member. These efforts plus increased enrollment will make it possible for the Mining Engineering program to be self-sustaining in terms of FTE. Ongoing support at about $5,000 per year is required to fund one LOA for the Mine Surveying course. Current TA and technician support is sufficient to maintain the laboratory and class instruction required for a strong Mining Engineering Department. Interdisciplinary Program Needs: Several of the interdisciplinary graduate programs have funding lines that come through departments in COS. Hydrologic Sciences Program comes through Geological Sciences Department. Atmospheric Sciences comes through the Physics Department. The UNR support for these programs shows up as an unfilled position in the department. As this “position” never receives merit raises, the buying power has essentially been shrinking. Hydrology has a very strong program which is the only UNR graduate program to show up as nationally ranked. Atmospheric Sciences, also a very strong program, has no faculty at UNR, all the faculty are at DRI, which means DRI is heavily (and unhappily) subsidizing the program. Chemical Physics is supported by Chemistry and Physics and has no funds of its own and needs at least administrative support. Consequently we are requesting the following increases in department budgets to support these programs and these amounts have been factored into our proposed FY04 and FY07 State-funded budget projections.
Table 6.9 Additions to FY03 Budget for Interdisciplinary Programs Addition to FY04 Budget What $ .5 admin assist $31,000 plus 10K operating Additional $20,000 instructional dollars Additional $100,000 instructional dollars and Director salary Addition to FY07 Budget What $ 1 admin assist $72,000 plus 10K operating Additional $80,000 instructional dollars Additional $300,000 instructional dollars and Director salary
Chemical Physics (new line Hydrological Sciences (Geol) Atmospheric Sciences (Physics)
The Biology Department participates in two interdisciplinary PhD programs, the Cell and Molecular Biology Program and the Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology Program. The CMB program is currently merging with two other programs to form a new Molecular Biosciences program. Neither program is supported directly with funding through the Biology Department, but the Biology Department’s success in graduate education depends critically on these programs. While funding for these programs is from other sources within the university, the COS strongly supports continued and enhanced funding for Molecular Biosciences and Ecology, Evolution, and Conservation Biology. These programs need continued support for operating, classified staff and so on, but their most pressing need is likely to be for improved stipends for graduate stipends. Increased funding to support the enhancement of graduate stipends is strongly recommended. Statewide Program Needs Positions: The State needs much more to be done in the critical areas of natural hazards (particularly earthquakes); mineral, energy, and water resources; and environment. Additional State funding is needed for faculty positions and classified-staff positions in NBMG and NSL. The needs to add new State-funded positions are justified in NBMG's biennial report (www.nbmg.unr.edu/dox/biennial2.pdf) and in NSL's strategic plan. Based on those documents, this proposal calls for the following new positions in NBMG and NSL: Table 6.10 Statewide Program Needs New positions beyond FY'03 New faculty FTE New classified staff FTE NBMG FY'04 1.0 1.0 NSL FY'04 1.0 1.0 NBMG FY'07 4.0 0.08 NSL FY'07 4.0 2.0
Operational Budgets: NBMG and NSL have stable staffs and rarely have salary savings that meet the mandated salary savings that the University requires us to return to the State budget each year. Additional State funds are needed to cover the mandated salary savings, thereby guaranteeing an annual operating budget that will meet minimal needs of the public-service functions of the statewide programs. • The Nevada Seismological Laboratory strategic plan identified needs for a statefunded technician to support the statewide seismograph network, which we identify as a need for FY04. Second, we identify the need for a branch office in Las Vegas, considering that a recent FEMA report concludes that the seismic risk in Las Vegas is greater than in the Reno-Carson region. The second classified person would run the office in Las Vegas. The Nevada Seismological Laboratory strategic plan identifies value in hiring four additional faculty members. We believe that hiring these people would result in much improved service to the state to accomplish the NSL mission, and that this would be cost effective in the sense that the additional faculty could attract more research funds and more ICR than the cost to the state. 6.4 Additional Funding and Resources Needed to Meet College Objectives Additional funding to meet the objectives of the College is substantial but can be met gradually with increased support from the state and vigorous development efforts. Besides the critical need for additional state funding of faculty positions to support the massive understaffing of Math, Biology, Chemistry, and Physics, the two other most substantial needs are to provide space and startup funding. Space Overall Space Needs The College of Science suffers from a critical lack of space. There is insufficient laboratory space for both teaching and research. Modern, high-tech classrooms and labs are required to get to the next level of excellence in our science programs. There is insufficient office space not only for tenure-track faculty but also for graduate students and postdocs. Space for soft-money faculty is extremely limited and must grow if the University is to meet its strategic goal of increasing the number soft-money faculty. Large (> 220-seat) lecture halls are needed to accommodate the large enrollments in some classes. The only effective solution to the space needs of the COS is a new building for teaching and research. If all laboratory courses can be taught in this building, then existing teaching labs can be remodeled to provide research labs. Preliminary planning has indicated the need for a 175,000 square ft building at a cost of $55M. The COS departments estimate that as much as $20,000,000 additional funding will be needed to convert teaching labs in old building into research laboratories, to improve safety and efficiency in old research laboratories, to remodel to provide offices, and to update other low quality space so that it can support cutting-edge research. To
achieve this goal will require a substantial commitment by the state and a highly effective development effort. Immediate Space Needs Immediate needs include research laboratory space for new hires in Biology, Chemistry, and Physics and new office space for new hires in Mathematics and Biology. Chemistry Chemistry can add no additional research-active faculty within their current building. New research-active faculty members require a minimum of about 1,200 square feet of research laboratory space, equipped with about six exhaust hoods, depending on research area. It is possible to consolidate current faculty office space into more offices in the chemistry building, but instructional labs are now fully scheduled. So, space is currently the limiting factor in meeting the needs for new staff as well as more classes. If we are able to replace John Frederick’s position with another theoretician, this would likely entail housing that person in Frederick’s research space and office. Otherwise, there is no laboratory space. When the new library becomes available, moving the Physical Sciences library into this new facility would open up about 3,600 square feet of space in the building, in turn generating about three 1,200 square feet labs at an estimated remodeling cost of $2.1 million total. Physics The Physics Department has one empty faculty office that will be occupied after the anticipated hire in July 2003. After this office is filled, if the Criminal Justice Department continues to be housed in Leifson Physics, additional faculty hires will require remodeling of space currently used by teaching assistants into faculty office spaces. Office remodeling costs are estimated at $100,000 per office, which includes remodeling of space used by teaching assistants to accommodate the additional TAs. Additional research space for new faculty will require redistributing research space in laboratories currently used by Physics faculty. This will require remodeling walls and doors as well as additional HVAC, electrical power, recirculating cooling water, drains, and vent hoods. The remodeling cost per new laboratory is estimated at $300,000. An additional critical need in the Physics Department is the addition of a teaching laboratory on the first floor of Leifson Physics. Remodeling a student lounge into an instructional laboratory would increase the number of students that could enroll in the introductory physics series per semester. Remodeling costs for additional electrical power, compressed air, and water distribution, plus additional laboratory tables is $75,000. Geography Geography needs a wet laboratory facility for teaching Natural Science Geography labs that is large enough for 20 students. In the longer term Geography needs additional office, graduate student, and lab space to accommodate growth associated with adding a PhD. program.
Mathematics Space is a severe problem! No one new can be hired without major space allocation. In fact, we currently have no office space for two new tenure-track hires that will join us next year. New space is also needed for enhanced computational needs—especially in applied math and additional lecturers, LOAs, and teaching assistants. Biology The Biology Department is critically space limited. Immediate needs are for more offices and research laboratories. The department also needs improved animal care facilities. The department urgently needs a suitable research laboratory for our next hire (a position for which a search is underway). In FY04, two senior administrators will return to the Biology faculty. One of these will need office space; the other will use space in their laboratory. In addition, the department anticipates hiring at least three new postdocs and possibly some research faculty. These individuals will need offices. NBMG\ NSL NBMG and NSL have needs for approximately 4,000 square feet of additional research space. The statewide programs need research-laboratory space for their existing academic faculty totaling an additional 1,920 square feet. Unlike most of their counterparts in the academic departments, these faculty members do not have individual research laboratories or work spaces for themselves and their graduate students. They have their individual offices, and, with the exception of some small amounts of common research and graduate-student space, they have no additional research space. We estimate the needed space to be 190 square feet per faculty member (the approximate size of a faculty office). In addition, NBMG and NSL have near-term needs for 2,140 square feet in additional offices and research laboratories for grant-supported hires. Startup Packages One of the pressing problems for the COS is that the Math, Biology, Chemistry, and Physics departments are critically understaffed. High-quality faculty can only be recruited in the sciences if they are provided with substantial startup packages that enable the new faculty members to initiate independent research programs. Startup costs for new faculty in mathematicians are modest compared to those of the natural science departments so they are not included here. (See the discussion of instructional needs for Math below). Based on the FTE shortfalls for last year, Biology needs 10 faculty, Chemistry needs 7, and Physics needs 3-4. • $2.5 million for 10 new faculty hires in Biology with average startup $250,000. • $2.625 million for 7 new faculty hires in Chemistry with average startup of 375,000. • $1.2M million for 3 new faculty hires in Physics with average startup of 400,000 • In addition, over the next five years we may have three retirements in geoscience units (NBMG and NSL in particular), which will require startup funds averaging $100,000 each, for a total of $300,000. • Total startup costs for these new faculty members will be about $ 6.2 million.
While these startup costs are substantial, it is important to note that startup costs are a capital investment. For example, currently Biology has in excess of $5 million in grants and contracts. Thus, investment in startup costs is well justified. Geography is in need of a tenure-track GIS faculty to run the expanding GIS program. A start-up package for such a position would range from $50,000 $100,000.
New Equipment Needs The College of Science will have a particular need to keep computing facilities current to address educational and research activities. Every Department in the College requires high end computational resources, and current software and software licenses to incorporate modern techniques in their curriculum and research programs. The College of Science will house nine computer labs with approximately 160 computers in use. The Departments in the College of Science administer 16 servers, and there are approximately one hundred and twenty-five computers administered by academic faculty. A hardware replacement cycle of three years is used for estimating hardware costs. The unit cost for computers in labs and faculty computers is estimated at $2k, and unit cost for servers is estimated at $10k. The following table breaks down the anticipated costs for computer hardware in categories. Table 6.11 Computer Replacement Schedule Number of computers Departmental Servers Computer Labs Faculty Computers Total 16 160 125 Cost per Number unit replaced per year $10,000 5 $2,000 $2,000 53 42 Total cost per Year $50k $106k $84k $240,000
The cost of updating, purchasing and licensing software is estimated as $30,000 per year. The total hardware and software cost for the College of Science is estimated at $270,000 per year. In mathematics, roughly 25 tenure-track faculty, 11 lecturers, and 11 teaching assistants will need computer upgrades about once every three years. Since they have just recently been provided with new machines, this will not be an issue again until July, 2005.
7.0 Resources 7.1 State Resources and Financial Information Additional data related to the COS are found in Appendix A. Current Operating and Salary Budgets Table 7.1 Current Salary and Operating Budgets
Current (FY03) Operating and Salary Budgets by Department (Pre-Budget Cut Numbers) Faculty FTE MSM Dean's Ofc Biology Biodiversity (estate tax) Chemistry Chem (EPSCoR) (estate tax) Geography Geol Sciences Hydrology Math Mining E Museum NBMG Physics Seismology Lab Total 2.17 Faculty Grad Classified Classified Wages FTE Salaries Salaries 275,432 21,000 183,750 0 231,000 286,000 52,500 84,000 10,500 73,500 10,500 10,500 21,000 136,500 10,500 1.00 1.53 .52 6.46 2.84 2.00 1.00 0.50 2.00 2.00 0.00 8.47 4.00 1.00 36,690 54,821 13,681 7,383 4,000 4,000 Fringe 66,644 308,589 11,905 352,651 60,627 112,984 263,401 6,530 324,865 104,547 184 309,849 223,669 69,721 Operating 119,354 97,363 14,674 129,940 20,092 16,530 32,025 3,870 43,600 15,750 3,288 42,357 49,860 11,044 $ Total 526,503 2,128,034 78,965 2,485,070 591,378 733,459 1,901,221 39,222 2,346,623 698,636 13,972 1,828,466 1,576,813 422,150
19.50 1,479,511 .71 34,705 18.40 1,468,162 2.00 111,703 6.00 470,142 15.54 1,483,641 0.00 0 23.75 1,535,703 5.00 483,095 0.00 0 12.22 1,050,825 13.00 947,242 2.80 296,760
286,817 16,500 112,956 0 80,716 37,124 18,322 366,955 83,714 0 404,435 214,542 34,125 587 1,030 2,000 1,030 0 0 5,000 0
121.71 9,636,921 1,131250
33.36 1,744,898 41,530 2,216,166
Proposed salary and operating budgets In this section, we attempt to project future budgets next year and five years hence, based on currently unmet needs. The future budgets represent an assessment of the resources deemed necessary for the College to ultimately reach its mission-oriented goals. These projections are based on the following baseline assumptions: 1. An ultimate objective of the projections is to achieve equity, at the end of five years, with numbers of departmental instructional faculty based on student FTEbased state funding formulas.
2. The projections are based primarily on current student FTE’s and the High, Medium, and Low-cost program models, and do not include anticipated enrollment increases. 3. Attempts were made to include increases in minimal resources such as operating budgets, supporting personnel, etc., commensurate with the faculty increases. 4. Cost of living/merit increases were not included in projecting future budgets. 5. This “ramp-up” in numbers of faculty was spread out over a five year period. 6. Attempts were made, in a strategic planning sense, to target new faculty positions in key disciplinary areas, and to anticipate ancillary office and research space needs. 7. Attempts were made to estimate costs associated with anticipated “start-up” packages and space renovation for the new hires. 8. The anticipated costs for replacing retiring faculty were not included. 9. In certain programs, operating and support personnel are so clearly inadequate to support the mission of the units, that increases are projected in the model to be realistic. The programs in Biodiversity and Chemistry funded by the Estate Tax budget are in looming danger because of the expected elimination of the Federal estate tax. The funding to Biodiversity covers some technical support and miscellaneous items but its use is for administrative infrastructure (i.e., handling budget, personnel, etc.). The Biology Department does not have the staff needed to handle these administrative needs. Because about 20% of the total state funding of Chemistry is through the Estate Tax/EPSCoR budget, its elimination would decimate the department's research and instructional programs. In particular, it would eliminate about half of the chemistry laboratory sections now offered because the graduate teaching assistants are supported by the Estate Tax budget. That would severely disrupt the entire science curriculum at the University. Also, the technical support staff for research in Chemistry would largely disappear. Therefore, it is essential that the Estate Tax budgets be rolled over into regular state budgets. The following table provides the number of faculty that would be justified by the current formulas and 80% of the current formulas.
Table 7.2 FTE Formula Implications
2001-2002 Enrollment Data “Taxonomy” category Lower Division UG Student Credit Hours (SCH) Student FTE Faculty FTE generated Upper Division UG Student Credit Hours (SCH) Student FTE Faculty FTE generated Master's Student Credit Hours (SCH) Student FTE Faculty FTE generated Doctoral Student Credit Hours (SCH) Student FTE Faculty FTE generated Totals Student Credit Hours (SCH) Student FTE Faculty FTE generated by formula 2001-2002 Biology Chemistry Geol Sci Mining EngGeography Math Physics high high high high low medium high 3434.0 228.9 12.7 2254.5 150.3 11.6 173.0 14.4 1.4 165.5 18.4 2.3 6027.0 412.0 28.0 3464.0 230.9 12.8 1514.5 101.0 7.8 56.0 4.7 0.5 333.0 37.0 4.6 5367.5 373.6 25.7 20.6 17 1166.5 77.8 4.3 258.0 17.2 1.3 355.0 29.6 3.0 312.5 34.7 4.3 2092.0 159.3 12.9 10.4 13.5 23.0 1.5 0.1 70.5 4.7 0.4 27.5 2.3 0.2 26.5 2.9 1423.5 94.9 3.7 459.5 30.6 1.4 172.5 14.4 0.9 19.5 2.2 0.3 2075.0 142.1 6.2 5.0 6 10282.0 2928.0 685.5 195.2 32.6 10.8 853.0 56.9 2.7 136.5 11.4 0.5 40.5 4.5 0.2 144.0 9.6 0.7 83.0 6.9 0.7 239.5 26.6 3.3
147.5 11.5 1.0 0.8 5
11312.0 3394.5 758.2 238.3 36.1 28.9 22 15.6 12.5 11
Faculty FTE funded by legislature (80% of formula) 22.4 Actual budgeted professional 18 FTE 2001-2002
Based on the formulas, there is a clear need for faculty positions in Math (14), Biology (10), Chemistry (7.3) and Physics (3.6). The new FTE formula with rankings of High, Medium, and Low automatically produces inequities in determining need for faculty. For every 69 lower division students taught in a ‘High’ cost department, a ‘Low’ cost department must teach 100 students to generate an equivalent FTE. Thus, ‘Low’ cost programs need to serve significantly more students before they can justify the need for more faculty using the new formula. We suggest that the current FTE formula not be the sole factor used when weighing need for positions within departments. Other factors that are important are internal and external recognition of the departments, university service, departmental productivity, accreditation needs, etc. In addition, student enrollments themselves do not always reflect numbers of students who tried to enroll but were denied because of lack of space. We suggest that, within the Mackay School of Earth Sciences, all departments should be rated equally for calculating FTE. This would require changing Geography from a ‘Low’
cost program to a ‘High’ cost program, similar to Geological Sciences and Mining Engineering. A comparison of the teaching within each department finds that the types of costs associated with Geography courses are comparable with Geology in terms of field courses, lab courses and lecture courses. Establishing Geography as a ‘High’ cost program makes sense in terms of evaluating needs of the departments in the school and college equally. We recognize that there is a massive need for new faculty to serve ever-increasing enrollments at UNR. We also recognize that there will not likely be abundant new state positions to fill these needs right away. We ask that a process for filling FTE positions be articulated that encompasses the criteria highlighted in this proposal, so that as positions become available there is a clear understanding of how they will be filled. Table 7.3 Proposed Operating and Salary Budgets for FY04
Faculty Faculty FTE Salaries COS Dean's Ofc Biology1 Biodiversity (estate tax) Chemistry Chemistry (EPSCoR) (estate tax) Chemical Physics Geography Geol Sciences Hydrology Math Mining E Museum NBMG Physics Seismology Lab Total
Grad Salaries 21,000 205,000 0 241,500 286,000
Classified Classified Wages Fringe FTE 5.00 2.53 .52 6.46 2.84 .5 228,690 102,500 13,681 7,383 8,000 4,000 233,355 489,000 11,905 352,651 60,627 7,000 125,000 416,516 6,530 348,155 104,547 5,184 334,938 309,734 102,893
Operating Total 158,390 110,000 14,674 136,437 20,092 10,000 18,000 32,025 3,870 43,600 15,750 3,288 81,687 74,357 19,044 741,214 1,559,250 2,573,611 78,965 2,547,067 591,378 32,000 974,250 2,160,336 39,222 2,480,443 698,636 38,972 1,952,885 1,831,085 559,587 18,117,687
10.5 21.50 .71 19.40 2.00
910,432 1,659,111 34,705 1,513,162 111,703
286,817 16,500 112,956 0 15,000 87,000 52,124 0 1,500 1,030
8.00 16.54 0.00 25.75 5.00 0.5 13.22 14.00 3.80 140.92
646,750 1,553,641 0 1,625,233 483,095 20,000 1,110,825 1,047,242 353,025 11,068,924
96,000 105,000 10,500 94,500 10,500 10,500 21,000 178,500 10,500 1,290,500
2.00 1.05 0.50 2.00 2.00 0.00 8.47 5.00 2.00
18,322 366,955 2,000 83,714 1,030 0 0 404,435 0 211,252 10,000 74,125 0
41.37 2,057,571 51,443 2,908.034
Includes return of Dean Mead to his home department.
Table 7.4 Proposed Operating and Salary Budgets for FY07
Faculty FTE COS Dean's Ofc Biology Biodiversity (estate tax) Chemistry Chem (EPSCoR) Geography Geol Sciences Hydrology Math Mining E Museum NBMG Physics Seismology Lab Total 12.5 28.50 .71 25.70 2.00 0.0 10 18.54 0.00 31.75 3.00 0.50 16.22 17.82 6.80 Faculty Salaries 1,070,432 2,017,011 34,705 1,804,259 111,703 0 800,000 1,723,641 0 1,891,591 290,000 20,000 1,236,769 1,416,289 516,760 Grad Classified Classified Wages FTE Salaries 21,000 288,750 0 257,250 286,000 0 120,000 84,000 10,500 157,500 10,500 10,500 21,000 178,500 10,500 5.50 2.53 .52 7.46 2.84 1.0 2.00 2.0 0.50 3.0 2.00 0.00 8.55 5 3.0 228,690 84,821 13,681 7,383 4,000 4,000 Fringe 325,277 530,581 11,905 535,060 60,627 14,000 150,000 449,179 6,530 574,928 90,000 5,184 410,669 460,228 162,905 Operating 125,322 102,231 15,408 136,437 21,097 10,000 19,000 42,025 $ Total 1,778,104 3,027,394 79,699 3,066,323 592,383 54,000 1,190,800 2,366,999
316,817 16,500 112,956 0 30,000 100,000 67,124 0 1,800 1,030
18,322 396,955 2,000 83,714 1,030 0 0 407,435 0 211,252 12,500 134,125 0
3,870 39,222 45,780 3,068,754 16,538 491,782 3,452 39,136 87,886 2,163,759 74,357 2,353,126, 23,596 847,886 726,999 21,159,368
174.05 12,933,160 1,456,000
45.9 2,205,892 50,243 3,787,073
Notes: • Budget projects assume no COLA or merit increases for salaries. • See earlier statement regarding needs of faculty positions: Biology (10) Chemistry (7.3) and Physics (3.6) • Although Math needs a total of 14 new FTE, they believe that they can only absorb two per year, therefore only 8 have been included in the projection. However, as the instructional need section discusses below, math will also need many new temporary lecturers and teaching postdocs. • Geography’s anticipated growth has generated a request above the FTE generated number to 3.4 and has been used in this calculation. • Increase of one TA position for each faculty position added at $10,500 each. • Operating dollars increased by 5%. • Fully funded Dean’s office per proposal request. One faculty member (student advisor) and four classified positions at an average of $35K. • Using Asst Prof Rank II salary at Q1 ($46,265) from current salary schedule. • Adding classified administrative support staff at grade 27 at $30,000 to Biology, Chemistry, Geography, Geological Sciences, Math, and Physics. • Mining Engineering will cover two faculty members through private funds; estimated cost based on replacing a senior faculty member with a junior. • We have included the salary for the Director of MSES in the Dean’s office, but, if as expected, the director is appointed from the faculty, some salary would then be subtracted from an MSES department budget. • Geography has been asked to grow towards the targeted ten faculty members as a minimum size of departments at UNR. We are pleased and excited to grow, and given the current funding situation, see that the only way for this to happen in the short term is through the addition of new faculty to our department that have expressed a desire to
leave their current departments and join Geography. This process requires discussions and negotiation, since in each case faculty would not only be coming from other departments, but from other colleges as well. Our goal is to not just strengthen Geography, but to strengthen UNR as well in the process by making mergers that make sense both in terms of economic efficiency, and the merging of like disciplinary units. We are in process with these discussions and anticipate that they will extend over a period of time, from months to possibly years. Therefore, our five-year plan indicates the addition of at lest another four faculty members achieved through campus mergers. We may add more than four faculty, however this is our minimum estimate. Faculty FTE dollar increases in Geology and Physics include increases in the instructional budgets for Hydrologic Sciences and Atmospheric Sciences. These may be used to hire faculty at DRI and not be actual countable FTE.
In addition to the COS State-funded budget, additional funds are needed to support instruction. These were described in section 6.3. The financial implications are summarized below. Tabel 7.5 Summary of LOA/Lecturer funding needs Biology Chemistry Geography Geological Math Physics Total Sciences FY04 105,863 63,750 42,000 51,000 687,050 28,000 977,663 FY07 105,863 78,750 63,000 72,000 1,093,340 36,000 1,448,953
7.2 Donated Monies Endowment The endowment of both Arts and Sciences and Mackay School of Mines will be divided. The details of this division are not completely determined at this time. The principles used to divide the endowment are: • First: the wishes of the donor • Second: where possible, prior use Much of the endowed funds are dedicated to specific departments or uses, but some has been given to the two colleges involved. The following tables list all of the endowed funds and a short summary of the purpose of the gift. This process should necessarily take place after the formation of COS is approved. MSM has a substantial endowment which has been given largely to support the mission of Mackay with respect to the resource industry. It is expected that some of this endowment will go to the CoEn according to the principles above. The remainder will be used by COS to support the Mackay School of Earth Sciences.
The College of Arts and Sciences has most of its endowments given to specific departments. There are a few endowments that are held for the college as a whole. For those used by the Dean for discretionary funds, the following distribution is proposed: For those funds established for research and teaching awards, the above principles will hold. Given donor approval, we expect a joint COS-CLA committee to propose distribution. Details of these endowments are found in Appendix A. Table 7.6 Summary of total MSM and AS Endowments, Income, and Gifts: Existing Spending Authority on Gift Account Endowments at Endowments FY03 (not Expenditures UNR and UCCSN including scholarships) FY02 11,986,564 435,663 322,644 176,680 2,405 141,594 12,163,244 438,068 464,238
MSM CAS Total
Scholarship and Faculty Award Monies: Table 7.7 Scholarships and Faculty Awards Monies Scholarships (2002-2003) Biology Chemistry Geography Geol Sciences Hydrology Math Mining E Physics Total 9,913 7,652 7,673 30,758 5,123 1,133 52,334 4,359 118,945 Projected Scholarships (2003-2004) 9,913 7,652 7,673 30,758 5,123 1,133 52,334 4,359 118,945
MSM does not have any Faculty awards. CAS has two (Bible and Feltner) college-wide endowed awards (see above) and these should most likely be split in someway between CLA and COS.
Non-endowed funds Both CAS and MSM will carry funds over from FY03 to FY04. In the case of CAS, we suggest these funds be divided in half with half going to COS and half to the College of Liberal Arts. The MSM funds will all roll over to COS. The figures below are current values that will be decreased as they are spent through July 1, 2003. Table 7.8 Non-endowed Foundation Funds Assets Foundation accounts Nov. 2002 CAS 347,662 ½ CAS 173,831 MSM 309,054 COS Total $ 482,885
7.3 Grants and Contracts and ICR Grants and Contracts The data below describe the amount of ICR generated by COS units and the amount returned. Section 8.6 below describes our proposal for ICR distribution and use in the future. Table 7.9 Grants and Contracts New Grant Awards FY02 Biology Chemistry CREG Geography Geol Sci Math Mining Engineering NBMG Neotectonics Physics NSL Dean's Office – MSM (includes Geothermal accounts and museum) Total 5,209,498 1,398,527 40,000 384,391 745,262 60,807 1,150,202 2,571,242 53,931 3,683,361 2,760,731 1,095,290 19,153,242 Research Expenditures FY02 3,294,794 853,363 16,533 256,235 830,993 57,338 1,033,035 1,394,561 164,919 3,524,935 2,259,193 337,337 14,023,236 Total ICR Estimated ICR Returned to Returned to the the Colleges COS (30%) (25%) FY02 FY04 155,439 186,527 43,900 52,680 0 0 8,229 9,875 40,343 48,411 2802 3,362 61,393 73,671 53,990 64,788 10,308 12,369 225,146 270,176 138,777 166,533 9,065 10,878 749,392 899,270
No current information is available for FY03 projections for Expenditures or ICR at this time, therefore we used FY02 data and projected the FY04 budget from that. ICR Carryover From FY03 Both CAS and MSM spend ICR Dean’s office accounts the year after they are accrued. Consequently, both colleges have ICR accounts to roll over from FY03 to FY04. In the case of CAS we suggest that one half of these go to CLA even though the vast majority was generated by science units. The MSM accounts will role over to COS. Table 7.10 ICR Carryover Assets ICR roll over estimate CAS 164,309 ½ CAS 82,154 MSM 110,000 COS Total $ 192,154
7.4 Other Resources The following table shows the income generated in sales and service and program development accounts for the departments in FY02: Table 7.11 Income from Other Resources: Sales/Service Revenue FY02 Biology Chemistry Geography Geol Sciences Math Mining Eng Physics NSL NMBG Total 0 0 8,271 88,847 0 37,278 11,050 0 13,551 158,997
7.5 Total Budget for Proposed College Table 7.12 Total Budget for the College Current CAS Science Depts State Funding Budget (FY03) Research Expenditures (FY02) Endowment Income (FY03) Scholarships Awarded (2002-2003) Gift Expenditures (FY02) ICR Returned to Colleges (FY02) Sales/Service Revenue (FY02) Mandated Salary savings return Sub Total LOA and temp. dollars from Provost Total 9,940,342 7,986,655 2,405 30,730 141,594 436,988 19,771 (821,180) 17,737,305 977,596 18,714,901 Current MSM Depts 5,430,170 6,036,570 435,663 118,945 322,644 313,825 139,226 (86,980) 12,710,063 0 12,710,063 Total College Estimated FY04 Total Budget 15,370,512 18,117,687 14,023,225 14,724,397 438,068 149,675 464,238 750,813 158,997 510,000 200,000 450,000 900,000 167,000
(908,160) 34,006,820 30,447,368 977,596 977,663
8.0 Further Planning Required Further planning is required to implement the College of Science. Five areas of further planning were discussed by the planning committee: College committees needed, bylaws, promotion and tenure, the core curriculum and the distribution of ICR. 8.1 College Committees The following COS committees will be constructed to manage the college: College Planning Committee The planning committee will include the Dean, chairs or directors of all major units, , Director of the Mackay School of Earth Sciences, Director/Chair of the Academic Council, and essential members of the Dean’s office. (This committee will be charged with oversight responsibility of the ongoing planning and development of the new college. This committee would also be responsible for developing an evaluation process to review the general success or failure of the new structure.) Academic Council This council shall consist of the Dean, Director/Chair of the Academic Council, chairs of all academic units plus appointees from the Dean’s office deemed necessary to support the academic and research mission of the college. (The goal of this committee will be to support and enhance research and teaching initiatives among the academic departments.) Curriculum Committee This committee will include 1 representative from each academic department. Their role will be to review and approve or deny course proposals, manage interdepartmental effects of departmental course changes, coordinate university core curriculum proposals, and develop COS core curriculum policies. Personnel Committee This committee will be broadly representative of all academic and non-academic appointments eligible for tenure or promotion. The exact composition of the committee will be determined by discussions between the planning committee, the academic council, and the Dean. The duties of the committee will be to review probationary faculty, review applications for promotion and tenure, and review appeals. Equipment and Computer Committee(s) This committee or committees will consist of representatives from the academic departments and state agencies and will be charged with assessing computing and
equipment needs across the college and with making recommendations to the Dean regarding allocation of funds and development of initiatives. Ad Hoc Bylaws Committee This committee will consist of representatives of the academic units, state units and the Dean’s office and will be charged with developing and periodically updating the College by-laws. 8.2 Bylaws – Merging Those of MSM and CAS It would be unreasonable during the planning process of the new college of science to properly incorporate all the detailed concerns expressed in the separate bylaws of the two colleges. To provide for the proper time and speculation needed to sort out all the complexities involved, the following provisional merging bylaws are proposed. COS Provisional Bylaws Until such time as the college of science is able to write and approve its own set of independent bylaws, the college will adopt the union of the MSM bylaws of 2/16/2001 and the revised CAS bylaws of 10/25/2001 as outlined below: COS Bylaw Creation The creation of COS will carry with it the mandate of creating a bylaws committee as set forth in section 14, subsection (5) of the CAS bylaws referred to above with the clarification that the bylaw committee shall consist of one member from each COS unit and no appointments from the Dean. When the proposed bylaws are presented to the COS faculty and Dean for approval the committee will indicate, for each proposed bylaw, [more than one may apply] roughly whether the bylaw is (a) derived from CAS; (b) derived from MSM; (c) in contradiction to CAS; (d) in contradiction to MSM, (e) a compromise of CAS and MSM bylaws, or (e) entirely new. The committee will also indicate the existence of any bylaws in the MSM or CAS documents referred to above which are not represented in the new document. Resolving Ambiguity and Inappropriate Language Before COS bylaws are created, (with the exception of the issues addressed below for the selection of a new Dean) if bylaw questions for COS arise, then the following procedure will be followed: 1. If the question is addressed in either or both set of bylaws but not in a contradictory way, then the relevant statement will apply. 2. If the bylaws are contradictory on the point in question, then the bylaw committee will make a recommendation to the Dean as to which of the two versions, or combination of them, will apply. The Dean will then have the authority to resolve
the question but he/she must do so in such a way that in no cases are both the original MSM and CAS bylaws contradicted, any individual unit in COS is treated unnecessarily unequally, academic freedom is preserved, and the vision and goals of the college are respected. The decision of the Dean on this matter will represent a one time decision and hence not be precedent setting. 3. In the event that language in either MSM or CAS bylaws addresses the issues but in such a way that the relevant language is inappropriate (e.g. because it refers to the three unit groups currently in CAS or the individual units of MSM), this will not in itself be grounds for rendering the clause irrelevant. Instead, the sprit of the original wording must be delineated and respected. Adoption of this Procedure The adoption of this procedure for bylaw creation and merging of the separate college bylaws will require mail in ballot approval by a majority of the faculty of the proposed COS. This should occur as soon as possible, preferably before the new college is officially constituted. 8.3 Search for a Dean Acting Dean Prior to the creation of COS, an acting dean search committee will be formed with possible appointments by the President plus the following: • 7 faculty members from Biology, Chemistry, Mathematics, and Physics Departments • 4 faculty members from MSES with at least one either NSL or NBMG • 1 member from the current CAS advisory board • 1 member from the current MSM advisory board • 1 student • 1 UNR faculty from outside COS This committee will assist the President and Provost in searching for an Acting Dean for the new college whose term of office shall not exceed 24 months. In the event of an appointment which exceeds 12 months, the Acting Dean will be evaluated in accordance with CAS and MSM bylaws. New Dean Search Procedures Consistent with section 66 of the University of Nevada, Reno Bylaws, a nationwide search shall be conducted for the new Dean of COS. The search committee shall forward its recommendations to the President for consideration. The search committee shall be appointed in the same manner as the Acting Dean Search committee described above.
8.4 Promotion and Tenure The following principles should govern promotion and tenure in COS: 1. Quality in scholarship and teaching are expected for promotion and tenure. 2. The college includes multiple faculty roles, ranging from solely research to almost solely teaching to roles that mix research, teaching, and service. Faculty role statements, developed within departments and approved by the Dean, will provide the basis for evaluation for promotion and tenure. In cases (i.e. NBMG) where the service component may include some teaching activities, this should be explained in the role statement. 3. In recognition of the diversity within the college, a wide array of forms of peerreviewed publication are expected and encouraged as evidence of meaningful scholarship. This would include journal articles, books, professional and trade journal articles, chapters, and abstracts. 4. In cases where departmental standards or criteria exceed college standards, the departmental standard will be respected in the promotion and tenure process. However, singular criteria important to specific disciplines will not be applied to all departments within the college. For example, obtaining significant external research funding is one measure of performance, but this criterion should not be applied to faculty for whom this criterion is not considered critical to successful scholarship. 5. The personnel committee will be broadly representative of college disciplines. 6. The college bylaws will define the eligibility, standards and process for promotion and tenure, and third-year evaluations. Role of the Personnel Committee 1. Review recommendations for promotion and tenure 2. Review all probationary faculty in their third year 3. Review all requests for reconsideration, whether in tenure, promotion or merit distribution cases. 4. Ensure that annual evaluations of faculty are fairly done across the college. Issues for further consideration 1. Personnel committee – what is broad representation? Within disciplines, should representation be proportional within disciplines? Should there be specific representation of soft-money faculty? 2. Roles statements vs. goal statements. Should role statements be broadly written to define a position, or be more specific for evaluation purposes? Should there be annual goal statements written for evaluation purposes? Role statements should be consistent across the college in terms of specifying comparable elements. 3. We need to develop fair and consistent practices for soft-money research faculty that are eligible for promotion.
4. Given the importance of graduate students within this college, we need to develop effective ways for evaluating teaching beyond the undergraduate level, including mentoring of graduate students and supervising post-doctorates. 5. The college needs to resolve the question concerning who is eligible to vote within departments on cases of tenure and promotion. What voting rights and privileges are associated with what positions? 6. Regarding annual evaluations, should these be redesigned to examine a longer period of time? Such a change might help promote forms of research and publication that are not consistent with ‘annual’ reviews of merit and productivity. 7. Teaching loads should be evaluated for appropriateness.
Decisions to be made through by-laws or P&T guidelines:
1. Years brought in for tenure needs to be clearly identified in tenure and promotion packages. 2. How many years are required before going up for full professor? 3. The provost has requested that P & T packages need a minimum of four outside letters from non-collaborators. Do we want to have a different criteria for outside letters? 4. P & T packages need to address only achievements since the last relevant personnel action. Is there a way to enforce this to allow for more consistent evaluation of achievements? 8.5 Core Curriculum The core requirements for the degree from the college There are similar core requirements for all B.S. and B.A. degrees in the proposed College of Science. These are summarized in Appendix A.9. The College of Science Planning Group felt that a College Curriculum Committee should be formed and one of the duties of the committee would be to recommend a core curriculum for the bachelor’s degrees from the College. Given the time constraints and careful thought required to generalize requirements from the department to the college level, the group has decided to defer this effort until after the College is formed. The University Core Curriculum and the College of Science • COS will provide most of the Core instruction in the sciences and mathematics for the entire university. In recognition of the significant, and rapidly increasing, role that science and technology plays in modern society, the Core Curriculum strives to endow all students with a foundation in mathematical reasoning and scientific knowledge. In enthusiastic support of this objective, the departments of the new College of Science will continue to provide the bulk of the Core instruction in the sciences and mathematics. In pure numbers of credits, the College of Science departments are currently responsible for 20% – 33% of total Core credits required for each
undergraduate student on campus, exclusive of capstone and diversity courses. Thus, the College has a vested interest in the administration of the Core, and must be an active partner in its healthy growth. • COS must play an active role in the management of the Core. For most of the departments in the College of Science, the majority of the Core courses that they offer are tightly integrated with their entire undergraduate curricula, in a fashion not commonly found outside the college. For example, the Core-fulfilling courses CHEM 101 and 201 form the introductory foundation in chemistry for most of the sciences and engineering majors on campus; this “General Chemistry” course is required for 27 diverse majors programs in the university. Analogous situations hold for other courses such as Biology 190, Physics 151, Math 181, and Geography 103. In accordance with the recent core curriculum strategic plan and current assessment efforts, the role of MATH 120 needs to be reexamined, adjusted and further integrated with the entire COS core curricula. Core MATH 152 (introduction to statistics), which is a popular alternative to MATH 120, could also play a significant role in this integration. In fact, one of the advantages of the new College of Science and its closer affiliation of academic science units, is the opportunity to integrate more of our curricula (both within and outside of the core). • It is essential that departments maintain maximum control over faculty positions (i.e. associated Core-related resources must vest in the departments.) Each department must carefully balance each semester the pressing core needs of rapidly increasing enrollments in science and mathematics-dependent majors on campus, with the needs of providing the necessary Core foundations to non-scientists. Teaching assistants, LOAs, lecturers, and postdocs must be carefully monitored and mentored in their teaching. Curriculums will undergo constant change as they integrate and respond to changes in society. Since these same curricula must prepare students for future work within and outside the core, individual departmental understanding, ownership and responsibility for the core is the only viable option. All the academic departments of the college also offer “terminal” core courses for non science majors. It is often the case that these courses do not form prerequisites for further study. A serious exception to this rule, however, is MATH 120 which was designed in part to provide the math prerequisites for all other terminal natural science core courses. The College of Science terminal core courses are important outreach to the general university population. Scientific and numerical literacy is essential for an educated populace in a democratic society and we take this responsibility very seriously. However, There are important and complex resource issues that each science department must address in offering these terminal courses. In Fall 2002, for example, the Math department offered 20 sections of MATH 120. Only one of these sections was taught
by a permanent faculty member. While the University has stated its plan to have more core courses taught by permanent faculty, great changes in this regard are not practical given current growth rates, other priorities, and budget and space constraints and uncertainties. This can be even more problematic in natural science Core courses which also require laboratory experiences and hence an additional dimension of space and personnel requirements that must be addressed as enrollments grow. • Active and continual communication must be maintained between the Center for the Core Curriculum and COS. To foster the necessary relationship between the College of Science and the Core, we would envision meetings between the Dean and the Core Director at regular intervals. Furthermore, college interests should be represented on Core administrative boards by the Leader of the Academic Council or his/her appointed representative. It is expected that a COS curriculum committee, in addition to doing the usual monitoring of new course proposals, will also help to coordinate core and non core instruction and innovation within the college. The synergy of COS departments make possible several new dimensions for Core science instruction. Core Humanities (formerly Western Traditions) will obviously be supported in large part by the College of Liberal Arts. In a similar vein, COS is very interested in pursuing the idea of a sequence of interdisciplinary Core Math and Science courses to broadly serve the UNR student population that would simultaneously teach requisite math skills and give students a deeper appreciation of their usefulness in many contexts. In our quickly changing technology dependent world, it is extremely important that COS majors gain an appreciation for the historical and ethical issues associated with the expertise they are obtaining. In this regard we feel that the College of Liberal Arts would be strongly encouraged to help us develop a required philosophy of science course for majors in our college. This could form the basis for a kind of core curriculum specific to COS – probably separate from the Center for the CORE. Since most programs do not have room for extra requirements, we could still work with the CORE board on such a course to see that it could be used to satisfy some of the existing university CORE requirements. It is quite clear that majors in a college of science will easily have math and science skills typically far stronger than those of the general UNR student population. This in theory should make it possible to create interdisciplinary science capstone courses with prerequisites that are typically much stronger than those ever taken by the general UNR population. With the permission of the Core board these could then break the traditional low-, or no-prerequisite rules for general capstone offerings.
8.6 ICR Distribution Proposal : Currently, both Arts and Sciences and Mackay School of Mines receive 25% of the total ICR generated by contracts and grants for PI’s within the colleges. The distribution of ICR within the colleges is different (Table 8.6.1). The proposed distribution for the COS is 10% to the Dean and 10% to the Department and 10% to the PI’s of the total ICR recovery from each grant. This contrasts with some proposals to calculate ICR return to the college based on a percentage of the ICR returned to UNR, i.e. 75% of the total ICR in the grant. Table 8.1 Indirect Cost Recovery Distribution (fraction of total indirect costs from each grant) MSM PI Departments Dean Total 12% 3% 10% 25% CAS 8.34% 8.33% 8.33% 25% Proposed for COS 10% 10% 10% 30%
Justification for maintaining a return of at least 25%: Indirect cost recovery funds are a major issue for the College of Science. In FY 2002, departments that will become part of COS spent $14,023,242 in contract and grant research, and received an ICR return of $749,392. Table 8.1 shows how these funds are currently distributed, and how we propose that they should be distributed in the College of Science. We identify the following uses of these funds that are returned to the college. Expenditures in FY02 are given in Table 8.2. • Costs of performing the research that are not allowed by the granting agencies. These typically include secretarial services, telephones, copying, postage, and office supplies. • PI services from the Dean’s office. These include accounting support, support for developing new proposals, etc. • Partial contribution to the startup packages for newly hired faculty, supplementing additional contributions from higher levels in the administration. • Departmental costs associated with the research enterprise, such as costs of integrating research and teaching, costs of maintaining or replacing some shared research equipment, costs of remodeling space, and costs of meeting safety and environmental regulations. • A bridge between grants to pay the salaries of faculty and support staff. This is an important safety net for grant-supported faculty.
Program development activities. These include support for faculty or students to travel to conferences or research planning meetings, costs of bringing speakers onto campus to give seminars, and costs of exploratory research that is used to win the next grant. Discretionary funds for PI’s. Faculty use ICR funds for a wide variety of purposes, such as purchase of equipment and costs of exploratory research which may include providing students the opportunity to pursue promising new ideas where the faculty member does not (yet) have research support for that line of activity. The current method of distribution of ICR has been a marvelous incentive for recruiting and retaining top-notch researchers, and should be continued at the present rates
Principles to be followed in deciding how ICR should be distributed: • ICR return rates to the college should, first, be set at levels that at least pay for the indirect costs of the project. Those indirect costs should be fully and openly identified, the responsibilities of different levels in the administration for different indirect costs should be recognized, and the costs realistically estimated. All of the current uses of indirect costs, as identified above, should be and are appropriate uses of indirect cost returns to the college. All of the current uses of indirect costs, as identified above, should be recognized as vital for completion of grants and contracts, for maintenance of our grant-winning capabilities, and for the health and growth of the research and educational enterprise in general. The decisions on how to divide the indirect cost returns among the uses listed above are most efficiently made at the college level or below. Some faculty have been recruited with specific promises about the distribution of ICR. The College of Science is committed to respecting those promises by increasing the ICR return to the individual at the expense of the department in those cases Flexibility to adapt to departmental needs can and should be preserved within the College of Science. For instance, while the contribution to the Dean’s office is expected to be identical for all grants, the division of funds between the Department and the Principal Investigators may be variable. The departmental portion of ICR for each PI should be returned to the department which houses that PI, thus prohibiting any “shopping around” for the best deal by the PI. When multiple PI’s are involved within a single department, the ICR return to the PI’s should be agreed upon among all of them at the time the proposal is submitted, considering contributions to the project and other factors. If multiple departments are involved within a single college, the return to each department should similarly be proportional to the contributions of investigators in each department. If multiple colleges are involved, then the return to the college should similarly be proportional the contributions of PI’s in each college. In the case when a PI is associated with more than one department, he should submit the proposal through the department from which he will receive the majority of 60
• • •
support services in completing the work. We expect that problems of this type will be rare. Averaged over intervals of several years, the present Colleges and Departments do not get enough money in ICR to cover all the indirect-cost related items that need to be covered. Theoretically, this deficit could be corrected with adequate state operating budgets, but funds from the state operating budgets that can be used for this purpose are effectively zero. In some years (e.g. FY02) not all ICR to the college is spent, especially due to PI’s saving their personal ICR as much as possible. Based on careful, quantitative considerations, we conclude that under these principles, and paying for the above uses, the distribution of total ICR to the College of Science should be increased to 30% of the total ICR generated by each grant. We are prepared to present details upon request. The effect of not paying the college the true indirect costs of the research is to force our scientists to spend a lot of time doing mundane activities in place of their research or teaching, as they are the ones who ultimately take the responsibility to see that things are accomplished. A corollary is that, dollar for dollar, we will do less for the research grant money than others who have more infrastructure supplied by the institution. This will affect our long term "grant-getting" capacity. Table 8.2 Use of FY02 ICR Expenditures by the Departments, PIs, and Dean’s Offices
Geol Min Category Sciences Eng Fac Sal Classified Sal Grad Sal Student Wages Fringe Travel Operating Equipment Transfers Out Totals Notes:: • • • • 21,390 0 3,817 0.00 0 0 0 0 NBMG 0 0 0 0 0 3,058 20,229 0 0 23,287 NSL Biol Chem 0 0 0 0 Geog Math Physics 0 0 0 214 0 0 0 0 19,455 2,983 1,746 38,999 6,033 7,495 29,485 179 0 MSM Dean 39,373 0 0 0 11,789 15 28,633 9,284 42,739 CAS Dean 23,074 6,535 0 0 4,258 8,982 3,000 0 0 45,849 Total ICR Expend. 110,092 9,518 5,563 42,115 23,131 40,950 165,079 34,467 43,239 474,154
4,550 2,250 0 0 0 0
182 2,720 82 530 5,558 3,181 27,696 18,237 2,314 20,351 0 500
435 0 1,139 6,914 14,773 8,263 2,339 0 0 0
0 4 0 4,003 605 0 11,462 2,099 1,202 0.00 0 0 0.00 0 0
15,465 2,922 1,202 106,375 131,833
These department numbers include both the Dept ICR account and all PI ICR accounts. The Neotectonic Center and the Geothermal Center dollars are included in Geological Sciences. MSM Dean's ICR transfers out include mandated salary savings payment, payment of overage for FY01 for the departments. ICR expenses were for college-wide support for all departments. CAS Dean’s ICR expenses are for those expenses made by the departments.
8.7 Structure of MSES Although we have determined that Mackay School of Earth Sciences will have departments and an “in-line” director, we have not resolved all of the issues about: • Possible mergers of departments within MSES. The merger of Mining and Geology is on the table, but is not resolved. A possible merger of Geography with faculty from other departments or a merger with Geology is also being discussed. More time is required to deliberate the issues, pros and cons of these possibilities. • Some issues remain on the internal organization of MSES. The director should have some duties normally performed by the Dean and some duties normally performed by the chairs. We expect ongoing discussions to resolve these details. Likewise, ICR distribution is normally to the Dean, departments and PI. How the school will be treated is to be determined.
Appendix A Facts and figures about the proposed college
A.1 Planning Meetings for COS
Date Sept 11 Sept 12 Sept 17 Sept 18 Sept 22 Sept 23 Sept 30 Sept 30 Oct 1 Oct 1 Oct 2 Oct 2 Oct 7 Oct 10 Oct 11 Oct 14 Oct 15 Oct 16 Oct 17 Oct 18 Oct 21 Oct 22 Oct 23
Topic COS chairs meeting Seismology faculty meeting COS meeting Geography faculty meeting COS Retreat Biology faculty meeting Seismology faculty meeting Mining Engineering faculty meeting NBMG faculty meeting Math faculty meeting Physics faculty meeting Chemistry faculty meeting Geology faculty meeting COS meeting COS meeting ICR Core Curriculum Promotion and tenure; definition of success with Rich Perry constituency building for the college Mission/vision/values with Marilyn Johnson – Development for COS, Bylaws Education and Research Goals and functionality-this meeting should include revision of all committee reports due to discussion in above meetings and input from faculty
Date Oct 24 Oct 28 Oct 29 Oct 30 Oct 31 Nov 1
Nov 4 - 8 Nov 4 Nov 4 Nov 4 Nov 5 Nov 5 Nov 5 Nov 5 Nov 6 Nov 6 Nov 7 Nov 12 Nov 13 Nov 14
Topic finish goals and functionality structure of the college structure again if needed Draft presentation in place-Whatever we need to do to finish practice presentation prepare for all faculty meeting if necessary (probably not needed) all COS faculty meeting, presentation of organizations Dept. meetings and faculty review Chemistry Geol. Sciences Biology Seismology Mathematics NBMG Mining Engineering Physics Geography Meet to determine organization Final meeting Comment and input deadline Submit proposal
A.2 Regular State-funded Faculty
Biology Chemistry Geography Geol Sci Math Mining E NBMG Physics NSL Instr Spt (MSM) Total
Regular Faculty FTE FY99 18.50 17.30 5.75 15.04 19.00 4.00 12.29 10.00 2.80 1.00 105.68
Regular Faculty FTE FY00 17.50 17.30 5.75 14.32 19.00 4.00 12.60 10.00 2.80 1.00 104.27
Regular Faculty FTE FY01 17.50 17.30 6.00 14.04 21.00 4.00 12.35 11.00 2.80 1.00 106.99
Regular Faculty FTE FY02 17.50 17.40 6.00 15.54 21.75 4.00 12.35 12.00 2.80 1.00 110.34
Regular Faculty FTE FY03 19.50 18.40 6.00 15.54 23.75 5.00 12.22 13.00 2.80 1.00 117.21
A.3 Majors and Minors
Program Code PM-ASP PM-AST PM-ASX PM-MN BA-MA BS-BI BS-CEC BS-CH BS-CHP BS-GG BS-GL BS-GE BS-GPH BS-HYG BS-MA BS-MAA BS-MAS Program Code
Academic Program Univ Admit, No Major Pre-Major Undeclared Transfer Pre-Major A&S (Exploratory) Pre-Mines Mathematics Biology Environmental Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Professional Geography Geology Geological Engineering Geophysics Hydrogeology Mathematics Mathematics (Applied) Mathematics (Statistics) Academic Program
2001-2002 Fall Spring 76 67 321 280 806 661 6 5 507 475 2 2 44 39 5 5 43 45 42 33 15 13 5 4 8 8 46 45 1 3 1 3 2001-2002 Fall Spring
BS-MIN BS-PHY DM-B50 DM-112 DM-115 DM-178 DM-195 DM-196 DM-201 DM-207 DM-209 Total undergrad GS-AS GS-MN MA-TM MS-BI MS-CH MS-CHI MS-GCH MS-GGR MS-GE MS-GL MS-GPH MS-MA MS-MIN MS-PHY DR-CPY DR-CH DR-CHI DR-CHO DR-CHP DR-GCH DR-GE DR-GL DR-GPH DR-PHY Total graduate
Mining Engineering Physics Physics / Math Biology / Health Sci. Math / Computer Science Math / English Chemistry / Computer Sci. Biology / Computer Science Mathematics / Physics English (Writing) / Spanish Biology / Chemistry Declared majors only Grad Spec AS Undeclared Grad Spec MN Undeclared Teaching of Mathematics Biology Chemistry Chemistry (Inorganic) Geochemistry Geography Geological Engineering Geology Geophysics Mathematics Mining Engineering Physics Chemical Physics Chemistry Chemistry (Inorganic) Chemistry (Organic) Chemistry (Physical) Geochemistry Geo-Engineering Geology Geophysics Physics Declared majors only
20 27 1 1
1 1 2,059 710 10 3 24 7 2 19 6 18 2 11 5 7 8 38 2 1 4 22 3 18 920 1,737 637 9 2 20 8 1 17 8 19 3 12 5 9 10 31
1 5 20 3 19 839
A.4 College FTE Count Estimated from 2001-2002 Data Undergraduate SCH FTE 5688.5 379.3 4978.5 331.9 1892.0 126.2 11135.0 742.3 3072.0 204.8 1424.5 95.0 93.5 6.3 28284.0 1885.6 Graduate SCH FTE 338.5 32.8 389.0 41.7 192.0 16.6 177.0 15.9 322.5 33.6 667.5 64.3 54.0 5.3 2140.5 210.0 Total SCH 6027.0 5367.5 2084.0 11312.0 3394.5 2092.0 147.5 30424.5 FTE 412.1 373.6 142.7 758.3 238.3 159.3 11.5 2095.6
BIOL CHEM GEOG MATH PHYS GEOL MINE TOTAL
A.4 Students and Units Outside the Unit Served by the Unit.
Serves Interdisciplinary Prog. x x x x x Geological Sciences Mining Engineering
Dept.↓ Biology Chemistry Geograph y Geol Sci Math MinEng NBMG Physics NSL
x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x
Mathematics serves nearly every major on campus. Biology’s teaching mission fills the complete spectrum. Besides serving the largest number of majors on campus (> 500), the Biology department makes a substantial contribution to the core curriculum (i.e., Biology 100 is a particularly popular choice for filling core curriculum science) and does extensive service teaching, including a major commitment to support nursing, nutrition, biochemistry, and others. Chemistry serves ca. 1,500 students each year in Core fulfilling courses (CHEM 100, 101, 102, 201, and 202). Chemistry and Physics are
required for all BS degrees and pre-health majors. Geology and Geography provide core science classes. NBMG provides occasional geographic information system (GIS), cartographic, drafting, base-map, inorganic analytical, historical and scientific information and services to a wide variety of users on and off campus, including the University of Nevada Press, Nevada Historical Society, Fleischmann Planetarium and Science Center, and College of Education. NSL supports a number of graduate students from GSD and provides research projects for their degrees.
A.5 Details of MSM and CAS Endowments MSM Endowments
Name Bell, Enfield –. Billick, Viven –. Butler, John –. Gignoux Family – Hartung, Royal – Hunt, S.F. –
Description scholarship, junior, senior, graduate student in geology
$ 44,720 Scholarship geology $137,339 Scholarship MSM
scholarship, “mining major,” interpreted as any Mackay major, NV resident or resident of Sierra County, first consideration is financial need $22,502 Scholarship chem/met scholarship, graduate student in “mineral dressing, chemical engineering, or metallurgical engineering. We have been splitting between chemical and metallurgical engineering $82,770 Scholarship MSM scholarship “mining major,” interpreted as any Mackay major. “outstanding student mining major,” high level of academic excellence endowment established by S.F. Hunt the discoverer of Rio Tinto and given during John Fulton tenure to cover the costs of sending students on field trip as a means of teaching them geology, mineral prospecting and related subjects.” As Hunt originally gave some vehicles, the fund became known as one that support vehicles, but in fact its original purpose is more broadly to support field research. student loan/scholarship fund. Converted to 100% scholarships for MSM undergraduates and graduates. Fund is housed in Financial Aid and Nancee Langley has signature authority, but the fund is restricted to MSM students general operating for MSM, currently supporting MSM Development (Connie). scholarship, “worthy, deserving” MSM undergraduate general operating for MSM, currently supporting MSM Development (Mati). this endowment was set up as a general support for MSM scholarship, “worthy student in geology.”
$158,331 Scholarship minE $580,376 field trip support geology
Jackling, D.C.#1 –.
$786,929 Scholarship MSM
Jackling, D.C. #2 – Liddell, Parker –.
$1,204,535 MSM support
$43,197 Scholarship MSM MSM MSM
Mackay Endowment $1,295,853 MSM support Nevada AIME –. Noble, Larry – $45,758 MSM support
$35,517 Scholarship geology
O’Keefe, Daniel & Edith – Rennie, Douglas – Richardson, Warren –
$314,541 MSM support
to be used exclusively by MSM for MSM faculty salaries, all salary costs such as LOAs, start up packages for new MSM faculty, and for professional development costs for MSM faculty. $27,058 Scholarship hydrology scholarship hydrology/hydrogeology graduate student, can be awarded to an undergraduate in hydrology. $64,793 Scholarship MSM “academically deserving student in MSM with financial need.”
B) UNR Foundation – Endowments Other Than for Scholarships
Arentz Student Center – Arthur Brant Endowed Chair in Geophysics –. John Butler Professorship in Metallurgy or Chemical Engineering – Jay A. Carpenter Fund Evasovic Field Camp – Gibson Faculty Endowment –. Lilli Brant Reading Room –. Mining Engineering Chair – MSM Keck Museum Curator – Museum.” Robert Reeves Geophysics Graduate Fellowship – Steven Arland Roberts Endowment for Research in Economic Geology – ThinkQuest Endowment – Don Yardley Endowment in Economic Geology –. $9,887 MSM support $1,654,187 chair $358,921 faculty geology to support the needs of the Arentz Student Center, restricted to , poison pill clause. provides for endowed chair in geophysics
chem/met provides salary funding for professorship in metallurgy or chemical engineering. ( Approx. $1 million is needed to accomplish the goal of this endowment, current MV is approx. $358,000) NBMG supports activities of the NBMG Information Office, including conversion of paper files to digital products on the Web to support operating needs of geological sciences field camp. to provide salary support to MSM faculty members to provide operating support for the Lilli Brant Reading Room this is a multi donor building endowment for a chair in mining engineering. It is restricted to the mining engineering department. (Currently, only $25K is in the corpus.) endowment to “fund and support the curator of the W.M. Keck intended to provide salary support for a graduate research fellowship in geophysics. Interest is currently being reinvested into the principal. ( This should probably be converted to undergraduate scholarship as corpus is too far away from supporting a graduate fellowship.) operating type endowment to provide support funds for the Ralph Roberts Center for Research in Economic Geology. The principal purposes are to provide GRA support and meet operating needs for CREG. to support the earth science and minerals educational outreach programs of the Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology. Under the control of the Director of the NBMG. provides support for distinguished lecture series in economic geology
$91,118 geology geology field camp $ 77,319 MSM support $27,555 MSM support $25,582 chair $ 877,814 Museum support MSM MSM minE Keck museum
$20,231 scholarship geology
$801,057 Economic geology
$8,855 NBMG support $47,683 Economic geology
C) UNR Foundation – Scholarship Endowments LT Larson Geology Endowment Geological Society of Nevada –. James Cashman, III – Cashman to split these into $2,500 scholarships.) Arthur Baker, III – $10,335 scholarship $27,542 scholarship $250,000 scholarship geology geology MSM scholarship, provides support for field studies for graduate students n geology or economic geology. We have hoped to award this as a “summer scholarship for field studies. scholarship to geology student with highest overall GPA, minimum of 3.0, emphasis on student who did well a field camp. Student should be interested in the minerals industry scholarships to student in MSM majors, junior or senior (exceptional cases to sophomores), financial need is important criteria, first preference to Nevada residents/ $5,000 scholarships (In the past, we have received verbal permission from Mary Kaye junior or senior students in geological sciences or mining engineering, 3.0 GPA, full time. If no eligible students in above majors, it can be awarded to chemical or metallurgical engineering. undergraduate student in MSM, 3.0 GPA graduate student in hydrology/hydrogeology undergraduate student in MSM $5,000 plus award, Mackay’s largest, to an undergraduate in mining engineering/ must have 3.0 GPA to receive award initially, must then maintain 3.4 GPA each year/ both need and merit to be considered in the selection. scholarship to undergraduate or graduate in mining engineering, or to other MSM major junior or senior in chemical engineering with the highest GPA.
Class of 1951–, Lambert Scholarship –. John Mackay, III –. Hugh Ingle, Jr. –
$14,625 scholarship $10,000 scholarship $32,940 scholarship $109,294 scholarship
MSM hydrology MSM minE
John & Robert Fulton –. Frank Bowdish – Mike Evasovic – Eagle Picher Minerals, Inc/ V. John Eisinger. – Harold G. Biegler –. Victor & LaVerne Kral –
$62,400 scholarship $15,000 scholarship $50,000 scholarship $10,000 scholarship
$ 10,000 scholarship $15,000 scholarship
chem/met or scholarship to student in chemical, metallurgical or mining minE engineering, must maintain a 2.0 GPA. Preference is to sophomore, juniors and seniors. MSM science, geological sciences, mining engineering, geological engineering/ fullscholarship to all MSM majors, listed as (chemical engineering, metallurgical engineering, materials load (12 credits)/ sophomore, junior or seniors/3.0 GPA. MSM scholarship to undergraduate MSM student/ 12 credits/3.0GPA MSM scholarship to undergraduate student in mining engineering, engineering geological engineering or extractive metallurgy. To a student who wants to work in the mineral industry and is “well rounded.” Can be awarded to student in any year and to more than 4 year seniors/ 2.0 GPA/ preference for financial need scholarship, to junior or senior male in mining engineering or geology/full time/3.0 GPA.
Frank Margrave –
minE basis, $2.3-2.4 million/ 1/3 discretionary for recruiting or Howard Winn Estate $2,500,000 MSM – cost engineering MSM scholarships/ 2/3rd scholarships or graduate research students engineering fellowships. (We anticipate receiving this endowment by April of 2002.) Total:$11,986,564
Distribution of CAS Science and Math Endowments
Department Biology Biology Biology Biology Biology Biology Biology Biology Biology Biology Biology Biology Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Chemistry Geography Geography Geography Geography Geography Geography
Account Name Biology Department May Foundation Gift for Biology CAS John D. Winters Scholarship Endowment Biology Faculty Research & Development Fund Conservation Biology Research Joe Moose Scholarship Tibbitts Memorial Fund Sheldon National Wildlife Refuge Society for Conservation Biology Account Mountain Quail Restoration Rolan and Rachel Mead Scholarship Sierra Pacific Power Company $2000 Scholarship Sierra Pacific Power Company $2000 Scholarship Chemistry Department Jack Thurston Memorial Scholarship Chemistry Department Research Enhancement Project Chemistry Department Hosting Account Frontier Fund for Chemical Instrumentation Clinical Chemistry Account Chemistry Building Fund Dr. R.C. Fuson Schulich Gift Fund The Young-Ai and Hyung Kyu Shin Earn./Dist. Visitor Program Chemistry Faculty Scholarship Kenneth C. Kemp Chemistry Scholarship Jonathan H. Reeder Memorial Hans Wolfe Endowed Scholarship Mountain & Desert Research Endowment Geography Department Mountain & Desert Research Endowment Income Account Sierra Pacific Power Company $2000 Scholarship Geographic Alliance in Nevada **1200-112-0820** GAIN Endowed Campaign
$Endowed $ spendable 2,617 4,918 9,456 12,838 350 3,886 4,909 2,275 2,000 2,000 274 203 404 1,300 988 1,200 513 2,405 679 2,506 1,467 1,000 1,332 659 660 2,000 47,582 3,945
15,315 21,280 12,800 12,500 22,430
Geography Geography Geography Geography Geography Math Math Math Math Math Math Math Math Math Math Center Physics Physics Physics Physics Physics Physics Physics Physics Physics
Geoffrey David Terrille Memorial Scholarship Richard Taylor Scholarship American Planning Associates Scholarship Geography Scholarship CAS Marie Crowley Geography Scholarship Computer Math Science Fund Mathematics Department Gupta Meerschaert Math Modeling Account Mary W. Butler Scholarship Guy Benham Math Scholarship Joseph Weihe Scholarship Robert C. Hooper Endowed Scholarship CAS Talbot Memorial Scholarship in Math Math Contest Awards Mathematics Center Hosting Account Physics Department (Research Support Bruch) Physics Faculty, Staff & Student Development Account - hosting R.C. Mancini Research Account Physics Department Gift Account Samuel Goudsmit- scholarship Hedvig & Sigmond Leifson Scholarship Dr. Frazier Scholarship Fund Samuel Goudsmit Mackenzie Scholarship in Physics
20,000 10,000 11,100 20,000
5,340 11,702 27,170 10,000
1,000 1,200 250 1,070 2,153 4,601 59 130 301 554 579 3,752 161 19,865 6,794 10,538 363 654 2,820 363 1,539 697,119
32,734 59,045 32,734 21,000 TOTAL
A.6 Library Holdings
The DeLaMare Libary (Mackay Mines) serves the Earth Sciences and Engineering, as well as engineering disciplines in the College of Engineering. In addition, the W.M.Keck Earth Sciences and Mining Research Information Center provides specialized and localized geospatial data resources and scientific visualization and modeling tools. The Physical Sciences Library (Chemistry Building) primarily serves Chemistry and Physics. The Life and Health Sciences Library (Fleischman Agriculture Building) and serves Biology and other life science and health disciplines in CABNR and CHCS. The Savitt Medical Library serves Biology along with other life science departments in CABNR and CHCS. The mathematics and geography holdings are largely in the main library.
DeLaMare Life & Health Sciences Physical Sciences Cataloged Volumes (Bound or Unbound) Bound Periodicals Government Documents Cartographic Materials: Maps - Documents Maps – Non-document Current Periodical Titles 56,678 41,312 24,002 131,503 5,624 1,066 33,701 29,915 71,031 721 604 12,436 26,635
Library holdings for the COS disciplines are currently adequate, but the high cost and high inflation of science journals and books will make maintenance of the holdings difficult. The DeLaMare Library has a beautiful new facility, but the Physical Sciences and Life and Health Sciences branches are in need of refurbishing and expansion. However, these existing and continuing needs are not affected by the creation of the College of Science. One option to create critically needed new research lab space in the Chemistry Building is to move the Physical Sciences Library holdings to the new main library building. The Chemistry department has been reluctant to take this drastic step because the great value of an on-site library facility for research and education.
A.7 Cautions and Assumptions in Mathematics Enrollment Projections
The following should be taken into account in section 6.3 projections of instructional needs for Math. • The growth percentages are very rough estimations – and probably very conservative: 5% in 03-04 would be the smallest we have seen in many years and the 15% figure is very modest given the massive size of the current WCSD High School Junior class. Traditionally, math enrollment has gone at a rate well above overall university growth rates and in addition, large numbers of students who are turned away each fall will create a short term backlog of math course demands which are very hard to estimate. The number of additional sections (offered each Fall) implied by these growth rates are roughly as follows: (Based on 3-credit 40 student enrollment which simplifies the complications introduced by 4-credit calculus and 5 credit precalculus courses)
Math Sections YEAR # of New Sections 2002-03 2003-04 6 2004-05 19 2005-06 15 2006-07 16
A TA can handle 2 sections (but are not qualified to teach calculus) and a lecturer can do 4. However, as our current students advance through their curriculum and reach courses like differential equations, statistics, and multivariable calculus that only Phd faculty can teach, the need for more tenure track faculty is again demonstrated. To relocate quality lecturers to Reno, committed 3-year appointments are a necessity with the ability to advertise during the Fall if not sooner. LOA numbers do not rise in these projections. This is because the local LOA market is completely exhausted. Furthermore, a number of our LOAs are currently employed in emergency LOB overload type positions. This means the above figures are actually optimistic that more qualified LOAs can be found. Addition of new faculty should not come solely in the form of more temporary faculty. For the health of the research mission of the university and the proper growth of the department and support of other disciplines – especially in statistics and applied math ( PDE modeling), tenure track hires are needed. The above growth rates of lecturers are alone not enough to support the projected growth rates – tenure track hires are needed. Our applied math and statistics faculty must continually turn away inquiries and potential collaborations because they are already extremely overworked. There is great potential here – for example, the new math fundamentals course we are developing for PhD Hydrogeology students is expected to generate about 60 doctoral FTE per year. department is also extremely strong in several areas of pure mathematics (e.g. operator algebras and differential geometry where prestigious NSF funding is now common). To maintain our dominance, these research areas must be supported as well. The cost of these additional positions is not a part of these calculations. The only bright spot here is that Math hires tend to be relatively inexpensive ($55-$65 thousand dollars/year) with modest startup packages ($20-$25 thousand) compared to other science disciplines. Addition of tenure track faculty at the rate of 1-2 positions per year (which is probably way too optimistic) would still leave us well behind in the FTE funding formulas. As a medium cost program, (with next year’s hires) we are still almost 6 full time positions short of the number of positions needed to meet the funding formulas at the 80% level. Thus new additions are unlikely to even reach equality with these 02-03 80% numbers, much less account for growth. These projections are independent of COS or A&S organizational structure.
The growth in TAs is also very modest – especially as we develop our Phd program. However, more TAs will slightly help to relieve our demands for lecturers.
Unmet Demand in Fall 2002
Course Hits 1 120 122 123 124 128 152 176 181 182 283 285 310 330 352 GRAND TOTAL Number 68 220 34 19 222 113 43 36 81 6 6 5 6 10 9 Credits 3 3 3 3 3 5 3 3 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 Total SCH 204 660 102 57 666 565 129 108 324 24 24 15 18 30 27 2953
A.8 Core Requirements for Bachelor’s Degrees in the College of Science
Degree B.S., Biology Major English ENGL 101-102 Mathemat ics MATH 181 Natural Sciences CHEM 101 OR 201, CHEM 102 OR 202 CHEM 101 OR 201, CHEM 102 OR 202 CHEM 201/202 (CHEM 101 & 102 are acceptable) CHEM 201/202 (CHEM 101 & 102 are acceptable) Refer to Natural Sciences section, Core Curriculum CHEM 101 OR 201, CHEM 102 OR 202 CHEM 101 OR 201, CHEM 102 OR 202 CHEM 201/202 (CHEM 201/202 strongly recommen ded but Social Sciences Refer to Social Sciences section, Core Curriculum Refer to Social Sciences section, Core Curriculum Refer to Social Sciences section, Core Curriculum Refer to Social Sciences section, Core Curriculum Refer to Social Sciences section, Core Curriculum EC 101 OR 102 Fine Arts Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curriculum Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curricul um Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curriculum Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curricul um Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curricul um Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curriculum Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curriculum Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curriculum Western Traditio ns WT 201, 202 & 203 Capstone Courses BIOL 415 Refer to Capstone Courses for 2nd capstone course BIOT 777 Refer to Capstone 2nd for second capstone course CHEM 497 Refer to Capstone Courses for second capstone course Refer to Capstone Courses (Recomme nds CHEM 497) Refer to Capstone Courses section, Core Curriculum GEOL 451 Refer to Capstone Courses for second capstone course GEOL 451 & GEOL 487 Diversity Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculum Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculum Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculum Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculum Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculum Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculum Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculum Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculum
B.S./M.S., Biotechnolo gy
WT 201, 202 & 203
B.S. in Chemistry, Professional & Environme ntal Options B.S., Chemistry Major (Field of Concentrati on) B.S. in Geography, Options 1 & 2
WT 201, 202 & 203
WT 201, 202 & 203
MATH 120, 128, 152, 176, 178, 181, APST 270* MATH 181
WT 201, 202 & 203
B.S. in Geology
WT 201, 202 & 203
B.S. in Geological Engineering
EC 101 OR 102
WT 201, 202 & 203
B.S. in Geophysics
EC 101 OR 102
WT 201, 202 & 203
GEOL 451 Refer to Capstone Courses for second capstone course
Natural Sciences CHEM 101/102 will also be accepted.) CHEM 201/202
Western Traditio ns
B. S. in Hydrogeolo gy
B.A. and B.S., Mathematic s Major
Refer to Mathemati cs
Refer to Natural Sciences section, Core Curriculum CHEM 101 & GEOL 101 & 103 (CHEM 201 is acceptable) PHYS 180, 181,180L, 181L
B.S. in Mining Engineering
Refer to Social Sciences section, Core Curricul um Refer to Social Sciences section, Core Curricul um EC 102
Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curricul um Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curricul um Refer to Fine Arts section, Core Curricul um
WT 201, 202 & 203
WT 201, 202 & 203
GEOL 451 Refer to Capstone Courses for second capstone course Refer to Capstone Courses section, Core Curriculum Included in Major Requireme nts (MINE 418 & MINE 472) PHYS 497 Refer to Capstone Courses for second capstone
Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculu m Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculu m Included in Major Requireme nts (MINE 472) Refer to Diversity section, Core Curriculu m
WT 201, 202 & 203
Refer to Refer to WT 201, Social Fine Arts 202 & Sciences section, 203 section, Core Curricul Core Curricul um um * APST 270 – Must complete MATH 124 or achieve satisfactory score on placement examination. B.S., Physics Major
ENGLI SH 101102