I. The minutes of the November 27, 2001 meeting were approved unanimously without changes.

II. New members of the University Senate were approved by unanimous vote. Eligible members include all Assistant, Associate, and full Professors, and members of standing committees elected by the Senate.

III. After the excuse of observers who were not Senate members, Associate Provost John Margolis, acting on behalf of Andrew Wachtel, Chair of the Committee on Honorary Degrees, presented biographies of nominees for honorary degrees to be presented in June 2003.

IV. Professor Alice Eagly presented comments of the General Faculty Committee and the Organization of Women Faculty on the 2002 University initiative on child care. Steps taken so far are important ones along the path to child care, such as an expansion of the University’s matching contribution to the dependent care flexible savings plan and raising the income limits. Remaining limitations and room for improvement include the area of on-campus child care. Evaluation of sites on the Chicago campus for child care is in progress, and more specific results are expected before long. The plan for the Evanston campus, lacking as it does on-campus child care, is less encouraging in its present stage of development. It involves reserved slots for Evanston parents at the McGaw YMCA center, which is not in easy walking distance from most Evanston Campus offices. The standard at most campuses elsewhere is on-campus centers, where quality child care in more likely. Northwestern remains the only CIC/Big Ten university without on-campus child care. The McGaw YMCA center has received mixed reviews, not having been extensively used until recently by a significant number of Evanston campus parents. Specific recommendations by the OWF and GFC include (a) that a center be established soon on the Chicago campus; (b) that a firm commitment to on-campus child care on the Evanston campus be made within the next few years in accordance with the recommendation of the Administration’s own Child Care Committee. Recommended sites for an Evanston child care facility include the Roycemore School, which is under lease until 2014 but may become available sooner if the school is able to move before then. Another recommended site is the research park area, where space is being opened up; (c) that the University seek major alumni contributions for improved child care. To achieve excellence, the University cannot fail to address quality-of-life issues such as child care in such a way that it can attract and hold faculty, staff, and graduate students who require this service. Steps taken so far in this direction are welcome, and carry the promise that Northwestern will catch up with other universities.

Senior Vice President for Business and Finance Eugene Sunshine responded that the Chicago campus presents no existing-space opportunities for child care. At least two principal locations are under study for a new facility. The Abbott Building has two potential sites; the Ward Building is the second principal location. At all these sites, there are competing uses for the available space. The Abbott spaces will not become available until the Robert H. Lurie Medical Research Center is completed. The problems are therefore physical as well as financial. The Central Administration will work closely with Chicago campus school representatives with a view to reconciling programmatic uses with the need for a child care facility. In Evanston, the present arrangements are not seen as an alternative or substitute for on-campus child care. The McGaw YMCA has about 45 children of Northwestern graduate students, staff, and faculty enrolled at present; for parents on the southern end of the campus, this location may be closer than a facility such as Roycemore on the northern end of campus. Because of its size, the YMCA also has a program enriched by classes in art, physical education, and music that are possible only with economies of scale. Regarding the Roycemore location, the University has had conversations about relocation before their lease expires in 2014. Assuming they find a suitable location, they would need considerable relocation funding. On the campus itself, questions such as the City’s zoning requirements make a location east of Sheridan Road problematic, and the City is likely to point to other locations in Evanston that they would regard as satisfactory. Another initiative the University hasunder way is The Evanston Child Care Network Program. It entails training and certification of individuals for in-home child care to provide greater flexibility and lower cost for those unable to afford large child care centers. In summary, Sunshine stated that the University fully accepts the necessity of child care on both campuses for faculty and staff recruitment and retention as well as for graduate students.

Responding to a question from Robert Decker about the possibility of retaining an outside consultant, Sunshine replied that this need has not so far arisen, given the expertise available within the University community. Before the Chicago facility is implemented, professional research is likely to be necessary to insure that code requirements and other prerequisites for certification have been met. Hamlin Jennings spoke about his conversations with prospective black engineering school graduate students who singled out child care as an issue of great importance. Northwestern’s ability to compete, especially for minority graduates, depends upon its ability to provide child care services comparable to those of other universities. Sunshine replied that the YMCA (though not the answer to all Northwestern’s requirements) provides an diversity among its participants that would be hard to match in a campus environment. To William Paden’s remark that the Roycemore location could well become available in less than ten years, Sunshine responded that while issues beyond the lease render our use of Roycemore complicated, he does not assume that a lengthy delay is inevitable. In reply to another question, Sunshine agreed with Al Hunter that the present child care arrangements in Evanston are only an interim solution. President Bienen remarked that Roycemore’s need to find a new location before the end of their lease is likely to yield a move before a decade has passed. Because of the physical space constraints faced by Northwestern, a site on campus is not a strong likelihood in the best of circumstances, which would entail a City government with fewer zoning concerns and a less complicated agenda in other ways. The City of Chicago has, by contrast, been most cooperative. Provost Lawrence Dumas remarked that there is no reason for the Faculty to distrust the Administration regarding child care objectives. Both think alike, and we are equally committed to attaining a fully competitive position with child care opportunities. He agreed that Roycemore is unlikely to wait until the end of its lease before vacating its present site. Until that time, the University needs to be opportunistic on the short run in finding more and better child care facilities. The Chicago campus offers few opportunities, with food service competing for space with child care. In both places, we are all alike looking for the best forms of accommodation. A specific time line is easier to project in Chicago, where building completion is a more or less definite prospect. In reply to a final question, Sunshine reported that though the toddler list in the Evanston Y is currently full, it should be possible to accommodate demand by summer or fall.

V. GFC Chair Al Hunter presented a CIC Faculty Leaders Resolution on Intercollegiate Athletics. He argued that Northwestern is uniquely positioned by virtue of its traditional restraint in varsity athletics to take a leadership role. The CIC resolution, coming from faculty senates in member universities, originated from the PAC Ten universities and has moved on to other conferences in the U.S. It calls for a faculty coalition “that will address national problems in intercollegiate athletics . . . related to academics, student welfare, costs, and commercialization.” The resolution proposes to work together with two national associations: the Association of Governing Boards and the American Association of University Professors. It is hoped that the resolution will develop a cooperative effort toward reform rather than a series of defensive posturings. Copies of the resolution were distributed. The resolution was separated into two documents: the resolution itself, and an addendum calling for more specific measures. Only the resolution was presented for a vote.

President Bienen, who in the normal rotation is currently Chair of the Big Ten Conference Council of Presidents/Chancellors, acknowledged that Northwestern has in fact taken something of a leadership role. But in many respects, particularly in athletics, Northwestern is not like other Big Ten universities. Standards and graduation rates in these other universities are quite different from Northwestern’s and yield much stronger teams with much lower academic capabilities and aspirations. All student athletes at Northwestern, over a four-year average for the classes of 1992 to 1995, have graduated at a 90% rate, compared with a 92% rate for all students. All Division I private universities have a 72% graduation rate for all students compared with a 70% rate for student athletes; all Division I universities go from a 57% rate for all students to a 59% for student athletes. Northwestern competes yearly with Stanford for the highest SAT scores for football players. There are years when no basketball players graduate at some Big Ten universities. Northwestern follows strong rules with regard to its governance of intercollegiate athletics. If the Office of Admissions denies admission to an athlete, coaches may appeal only through the Athletic Director, who may carry the appeal to the Provost, who is the final arbiter. The Faculty Committee on Athletics and Recreation, chaired by Professor Kenneth Seeskin, meets four times a year to review grades team by team, examine scheduling, and interview graduating student athletes. Another faculty committee is responsible for the President’s Directive on self-regulation of intercollegiate athletics, which also reviews the physical well-being of student athletes, intercollegiate financial affairs, and other issues. Professor Bob Gundlach is the faculty athletics representative who works closely with the Committee on Athletics and with Eugene Lowe, Assistant and deputy to the President for athletic matters, Athletic Director Rick Taylor, and President Bienen himself. The many issues of concern in intercollegiate athletics do not pertain to Northwestern in particular; these include recent incidents of violence at games. There are many things wrong with big-time intercollegiate athletics which will be hard to set right if it can be done at all. Some of these are being addressed by the six major football conferences of which the Big Ten is a member. The CIC Faculty Leaders Resolution on Intercollegiate Athletics now proposed for endorsement is a loosely written document, especially considering its origin from a faculty organization. Many of the measures it calls for are in place at Northwestern. The “arms race” of intercollegiate athletics involves serious anti-trust issues. For example, the NCAA cost its member universities $60 million some years ago as a result of trying to fix assistant coaches’ salaries. As for inappropriate commercialization, there is a case to be made for more commercialization at Northwestern. A modest contract with Adidas is now mostly lost; there are issues of signage at some universities, and of the number of breaks in games for commercials — though there is little room for negotiation. The proposed resolution plays in contrary directions because the largest flow of funds to Northwestern and other Big Ten universities comes from television contracts. This income would be reduced if commercial breaks were reduced. More important than the present resolution is how the reform of intercollegiate athletics can be effected. President Bienen assured the faculty that he has tried to play a vigorous role in such reform, though not at the NCAA, which he finds too difficult an institution. New leadership there, in the person of Myles Brand of Indiana University, is committed to making changes and has Bienen’s best wishes in this objective.

Kenneth Seeskin, Chair of the Committee on Athletics and Recreation, asked Hunter why the main resolution does not mention graduation rates, which he considers a serious omission. Hunter explained that this specific is contained in the spirit of addendum item 2 concerning academic standards, which mentions academic expectations as robust for athletes as for students generally. Professor Carol Simpson Stern spoke in support of the resolution from the standpoint of the interests of the teaching profession. Her role as past national president of the AAUP and currently as Chair of its Committee on Teaching, Research, and Publication, leading to her recent report to this committee on “The Faculty Role in the Reform of Intercollegiate Athletics,” formed the background for her comment. Though it is poorly crafted, she said, the present resolution is a most important first move; she added that the infringement on academic freedom resulting from present abuses in intercollegiate athletics is very real. Professor Robert Gundlach, Northwestern’s faculty representative to the NCAA, also spoke on behalf of the resolution, agreeing that although it is not well articulated Northwestern needs to be on the list of signatories. Professor Robert Decker commented that although the resolution’s wording comes out of a compromise that soft-pedals the hard issues, it deserves support as private institutions begin to do hard work on athletic reform. Northwestern’s good reputation for self-regulation makes its participation especially important, he said. President Bienen replied that leadership in reform will not come from the Northwesterns, Dukes, and Stanfords but from the Berkeleys, UCLAs, and Michigans: the best of the public institutions, whose presidents face issues with state legislatures and communities. It is seen as the self-serving act of an outlying community when Northwestern speaks about reform. Though he speaks strongly on this matter, he does not believe his voice is the one that carries the influence. Professor Seeskin spoke against the resolution, arguing that it is merely window dressing whose few specifics do not apply to Northwestern. A better document would deserve Northwestern support and show greater leadership. Bienen agreed that the CIC resolution on the floor is too weak in not addressing graduation rates and other specifics, though he took Gundlach’s point that Northwestern’s voice should be heard. Hunter stressed that the CIC resolution is not the final word on athletic reform but an initial collective statement for Northwestern to ratify on its way to a more individualized additional statement at a later time. Professor Mario Ruggero suggested that an additional declaration of specific reforms could be added now as a supplement to the CIC resolution. President Bienen remarked that he had been hopeful at an earlier date that reform would come from the six conferences but he is less optimistic now. Big Ten presidents are sounding readier to enact reform, but other conferences have backed away from standards that would improve the climate of intercollegiate athletics. Important as they are, higher standards involve difficult conversations at present and reform will come in small increments if at all, over a long time. Reform within the Big Ten is not impossible, and he will continue to be a strong advocate within our own conference. Within the present week, he reported, Big Ten presidents were unaware of the CIC resolution. To Professor Seeskin’s question whether Big Ten institutions intend to cut down on advertising at athletic events, Bienen replied that one member had banned advertising in the stadium, but he would be unwilling for Northwestern to take such a measure because of its contribution to the university’s revenue. Northwestern operates on a scale that is dwarfed by other Big Ten schools. Michigan, for example, generates $2 million and more annually from the sale of its logos on hats, shirts, and similar gear where Northwestern generated $100,000. The resolution came to a vote under the pressure of time. It carried by a considerable margin.

VI. In his remarks on other matters, President Bienen stated that the affirmative action complaint against the University of Michigan may have implications for Northwestern, but the University remains committed to diversity in its student body. Northwestern has filed an amicus brief is support of the University of Michigan.

On the state of the University budget, he warned that all budgets at Northwestern will be constrained and difficult to form. They will not, however, involve faculty freezes or cuts. In the face of an endowment payout that is expected to flat or negative, the University will pursue its objectives in a more limited way.

VII. Associate Provost John Margolis announced that the nominees for honorary degrees presented earlier in the meeting had been confirmed in the subsequent balloting.

VIII. Bob Ten Eick, Chair of the GFC Benefits Subcommittee, reported in a written statement on University health insurance coverage that his committee and the Committee of Emeritus Professors support the following recommendations: 1) that coverage under Blue Cross/Blue Shield Plan A should be expanded to include birth control coverage; 2) that the cost of co-pay prescriptions should not be increased; 3) that coverage for Viagra, discontinued from Plan A without consultation, should be restored; 4) that the University should survey faculty and staff to determine needs and flexibilities in coverage. He noted that prescription co-pay tends to discourage the use of more expensive but more effective drugs and may be counter-productive, according to a recent report from the National Bureau of Economic Research. Professor Cynthia Bowman spoke on the need for contraceptive coverage, citing three main arguments: 1) Contraception is an authentic health need; 2) it is cost effective because it reduces more expensive pregnancies and complications; 3) coverage that does not include contraception is potentially actionable sex discrimination. She added that seventeen states (not including Illinois) require equity in this matter, and that Northwestern should not falter in affirming such equity. Provost Lawrence Dumas raised the question of how many such new kinds of coverage we can afford when birth control alone could add $200,000 to the cost of health coverage. In choosing between birth control and child care, the University prioritized child care. President Bienen noted that cafeteria-style menus of coverage may under present circumstances be the best way to cover a range of different health needs and added that the University tries to be responsive to demand but rising rates for coverage impose limitations on what the budget can afford. One measure to reduce costs, he said, has been the adoption of more generic drugs in place of name brands. Ten Eick noted that while Northwestern pays ¾of prescription costs under Plan A, retirees must pay the entire cost. Professor Alice Eagly spoke on behalf of greater awareness of gender discrimination, noting that as a national average, women pay $600 annually for birth control. Dumas asked whether she would have prioritized birth control over child care. Eagly replied that without access to the University budget she could not make such a decision.

IX. Under constraints of time, the meeting was adjourned at 5:43 PM

Respectfully submitted,

Daniel H. Garrison
Secretary to the University Senate