Attendees: School of Dentistry: Judith Buchanan, Edward Combe. Medical School: Susan Berry, Linda Perkowski. School of Nursing: Linda Lindeke, Mary Rowan. College of Pharmacy: Kristin Janke, Michael Brown. School of Public Health: Judith Garrard, Matthew Simcik. College of Veterinary Medicine: Sandra Godden. BioMedical Library: James Beattie. Graduate School: Shirley Garner. Office of the Senior Vice President for Health Sciences: Barbara Brandt, Cathy Muchow.
Not attending: College of Veterinary Medicine: Jody Lulich
Guest: Debra Olson, Associate Dean for Public Health Practice Education.
Barbara Brandt welcomed Council members and asked that they review and approve the May 21 minutes. Ed Combe completed the first bullet of the Overview of May 4 meeting section to read: “Concern was expressed that the Council was criticizing the proposal for using existing courses at the University and the Council considered these courses inadequate.” With this addition, Council members approved the May 21 minutes.
Review and Approval of Proposal Process for New Academic Professional Programs
Barbara Brandt asked members for their input on the draft Proposal Process document; stating that a subcommittee, consisting of Michael Brown, Mary Rowan, and herself with assistance of Cathy Muchow and Jennifer Cieslak, had worked on this document over the summer. Members were asked to keep in mind that this document is meant to be an overview of the process. A second document will be developed to give more detailed “how to” information. Barbara Brandt agreed that this is a “high level” document, and there are at least two more documents that need to be developed: (1) detailed “how to” and (2) criteria for assessment of the proposal. Members agreed that the Council should develop a more detailed format and have it available for faculty to use.
Concern was expressed that faculty members are not happy about the need to go through what they considered as the bureaucracy of developing a proposal, five-year pro forma, and the requirement of going through an approval process. Barbara Brandt shared that Dr. Cerra is aware of the faculty's concerns to the proposal process and stated that this process for professional programs is similar to what the Graduate School expects for its proposals and the approval process, resulting in the Board of Regents approval. It was noted that this is a new process, and as a result, there will be a `little flack” before it becomes a common process.
It was noted that the Graduate School has a budget available on their website; the format is very explicit and it might be a good vehicle to create a pro forma. Barbara Brandt stated a five-year pro forma template has been developed with the AHC chief financial officer who in turn is available to work with the school financial officers on any new program proposals.
Members suggested that it would be a good idea to develop a flow chart showing what processes various types of proposals would be required to follow.
It was also suggested that it could be useful to give an example of a good proposal. Barbara Brandt stated that with the development of the Proposal Process document and creating the detailed “how to” and “criteria for assessment” documents will assist faculty to understand what is expected in the future.
A question was asked how the program process detail was determined in the draft document. Barbara Brandt indicated that the framework for the Proposal is directly taken from the Provost's Office format and has not changed. She developed this guidance specifically for health professions programs with John Ziegenhagen, Director of Strategic Programs, over the past eighteen months. The detail has been added to guide the development specifically for health sciences, based upon what has been learned.
Question was asked about the process for approval of a concentration. Barbara Brandt stated that a concentration, equivalent to a minor or subspecialty, does not need a complete proposal. New programs are expected to provide the detail indicated in the Proposal Process document.
Members discussed the need to develop a process to make amendments to the Proposal document.
Barbara Brandt asked for a formal vote of the Academic Council members to approve the Proposal Process for New Academic Professional Programs. The document received unanimous approval.
As a matter of process, Barbara Brandt asked Council members to determine whether members of a school should be present at a discussion of a program proposal of the members' own school. Additionally, should the members of the school be allowed to vote in this instance? She noted that typically in accreditation agency proceedings council members are required to recuse themselves from the meeting. After discussion of the matter, Council members agreed that it would be beneficial to have the Council members in the meeting but that the members should not vote.
Global Health Practice Program - A Cross-Border India-Minnesota Partnership Proposal Overview
Barbara Brandt welcomed Debra Olson, Associate Dean for Public Health Practice Education, who was invited to present the Global Health Practice Program proposal in the absence of William Toscano who was in India.
Debra Olson stated that this is not a new degree program; rather it is an addition of an international site to an already existing program. Dr. Toscano, division head, is leading this initiative. One of the primary principles of opening a public health program in India is the great need for public health professionals in that country. Having the program in India would increase the likelihood that the graduates would work there - rather than a brain drain when students leave to go to other countries for education and training.
Public Health has a long history of curriculum development for on-line and courses offered at the Public Health Institute. The same strategies will be used for this international program along with exchange of faculty members. Students from the United States can choose to take courses in India. The Kasturba Medical College of Manipal University was chosen to partner with the University for its excellent reputation. Manipal University also has three branch colleges in India. The School of Public Health already has a Memorandum of Agreement with Manipal University. A Public Health faculty member will reside in Bangalore and will have oversight of this program and also serve as an advisor.
Barbara Brandt opened the discussion to questions from the Council members:
Questions (Q)/Responses(R):
(Q) Would the same admission requirements be expected of Indian applicants as would be expected of United States students?
(R) Applicants would need to meet the same criteria as applicants from the United States.
(Q) Who evaluates the transcripts?
(R) There is a person already in the program that will continue to provide this service; but it would be a good idea to include this information in the proposal.
Comment: The Graduate School has information on their website regarding TOEFL scores for India.
(Q) Question was asked if it is possible to offer a dual degree option or is this a stand-alone program. There are two dental schools at Manipal which are excellent, and it would be a good option for any of these students to collaborate with this program. Veterinary Medicine students should also be considered. It would be good to offer dual degrees in India. The timing of the courses is key.
(R) We haven't worked out anything specific, but this would be a good fit with the on-line and Institute combination.
(Q) Would you use faculty from Kasturba; if so, what are their credentials? Will they have to go through the same appointment process as an adjunct faculty member on the Minneapolis campus to allow them to serve as an advisor or instructor? It would be helpful to describe the appointment process in the proposal.
(R) Faculty from Kasturba would have to go through the same appointment process.
(Q) On page 12, under Course Delivery, the third sentence “The on-line courses will be delivered using advanced digital technology available both at the University of Minnesota and Kasturba Medical College” - is this possible for both schools considering the time change? You might want to expand on how this will work.
(R) One-third of the courses are on-line. Students are required to work together in group work but not necessarily at the same time.
(Q) External Advisory Committee is composed of community stakeholders. Who are these stakeholders? What types of people? How often will they meet? How will they be chosen? What is their role?
(R) The membership of the oversight committee has not been determined at this time. There are a couple of organizations in India that are equivalent to our NIH and Public Health Foundations that will likely be members of the Committee. Research, community practice, healthcare systems, some village clinics, some physicians are the types of individuals envisioned to serve on this Committee. The specifics of the committee have not been determined.
Comment: It would be helpful to have someone invested in both countries but not directly related to either university, with a global view, serve on the Committee.
(Q) Nursing leadership in India is strong. Will you contact nurses? If so, the International Council of Nursing would be a good contact.
(R) Village clinics will be contacted and with this contact nurses/midwives will be involved.
(Q) The proposal states that someone from the School of Public Health will be in residence for a couple of years. Will this be ongoing?
(R) The plan is to keep someone on site. As the program director, Bill Toscano will be responsible for this appointment.
(Q) The proposal indicates that the tuition will come here. How will this tuition be used in the India program?
(R) Tuition dollars will support the entire program.
(Q) If this program is available for anyone, how will you contact veterinarians, nurses, and dentists?
(R) Perhaps faculty members from these programs should go over to India with the next delegation.
(Q) On page 5, the Executive Oversight Committee, it is substantially slanted toward the University of Minnesota campus; concern is that the majority of input will be from one side. It would be beneficial if the proposal addressed how the students on the India campus will have their voices heard with future representation on this Committee.
(R) We will add this to the proposal.
(Q) What is Kasturba Medical College's investment in this program? Will resources and buy-in come from the Medical College?
(R) The Medical College has shown a major commitment to this program over the last two years. They have been helping our faculty engage with the communities. They are desperate for public health expertise.
(Q) Is the vision that United States students would participate in the program at the India location?
(R) The United States students will have the option to take courses in India. An ideal mix would be 50/50.
(Q) This is a lot of work. Is there enough support? For example, the salary for the program support is only $12,000 - is this enough?
(R) The Dean is committed to global education.
(Q) Does the budget have enough staff indicated to support this program?
(R) We will add further staffing information to the proposal.
(Q) What support will the India students have? What are the issues with financial aid for Indian students similar to US students?
(R) They will have the same support as the students in the United States. We will add more detail in the proposal.
(Q) Is there a possibility of program duplication and competitiveness?
(R) The Association of Schools of Public Health is acting as the coordinating body.
Barbara Brandt thanked Debra Olson for presenting to the Council.
Barbara Brandt informed the Council members that the Proposal Process for New Academic Professional Programs framework needed to guide the assessment of the program. She asked for general comments first.
General discussion and observations:
Supportive of the proposal.
There is a group from the University of Minnesota going to India in conjunction with the Governor's visit. Dr. Cerra plans to announce this program at Manipal in October. Barbara Brandt indicated that Dr. Cerra expects this proposal to be given the same consideration as any proposal and that it must be correct for recommendation to the Provost for Board of Regents' approval.
The financial pro-forma was a great format.
The pro forma indicates the program will lose money in the first year. Will the school be able to absorb the financial loss? It was shared that the dean has some reserves he could use toward the program. It is a matter of cost pools - however, the school can absorb this in the short-term. The cost pools could “kill” the program, and there is a possibility that it would need to be closed.
This proposal needs to be more explicit with information.
Our students have been pushing for global exposure, but is this the mechanism to give students what they are requesting?
The courses are not developed yet; should we assume there will be cultural responsiveness built into the courses - what are the faculty and resources?
The program needs to consider if the United States and Indian students will have the same access to the University of Minnesota Biomedical Library services. Will there be equity? One noted that Manipal may have superior access to library services.
Discussion on specific criteria:
1. Program alignment with Collegiate, AHC, and University Priorities.
Comment: The proposal is in perfect alignment with the School of Public Health and the University's priorities.
2. Program Market/needs analysis
Comment: Is there a formal analysis? Not a very well codified discussion. Want to see more information about the enrollment and how the Minneapolis program is expanding. Members agreed that the proposal needs a more formal assessment along with more complete data.
Comment: The Council would like to see more discussion.
Comment: More information is needed on who is teaching, oversight, the External Advisory Committee, quality of the courses, student learning outcomes, competencies, and how will the program be evaluated. Is there equity of student issues, e.g. do the United States and India students have the same access to the Biomedical Library's services? The student support section needs to be strengthen, e.g., technology, financial aid, travel. The tuition has to pay for the program. It is unclear whether these have been taken into consideration. Memorandum of Agreements should be included. The courses are not yet developed; should we assume there will be cultural responsiveness built into the courses?
5. Student Services and Career Advancement
Comment: This section needs more clarity and detail.
Comment: Need to make certain that there is cultural appropriateness in the curriculum.
Comment: More detail is needed regarding the faculty; who are the faculty members teaching which courses at the India campus? Bill Toscano's qualifications were not clear.
8. Program Evaluation and Assessment Plan and Timetable
Comment: What are the accreditation requirements? Would the accrediting body go there? Currently there isn't an accrediting body. At this time, the Council is the reviewing entity.
9. Program Resources: Resource Plan for academic program
Comment: Where is this information? We have experience in Duluth with administering programs at a distance. Is there dedicated classroom space in India? Provide information on the experiential education resources. How will the program ensure the preceptors are competent? What is the oversight of the preceptors?
10. Program Financial Plan
Comment: The financial pro forma was a great format. The pro forma indicates the program will lose money in the first year. Will the school be able to absorb the financial loss? Yes, the Dean has some reserves that he could use. It is a matter of cost pools - they can do this in the short term. Cost pools could kill this program and there is a possibility it would need to be closed down. Memorandum of Agreements need to be provided.
Program Review and Approval:
Barbara Brandt asked members to make recommendations on how to move this proposal forward.
Council members unanimously voted for a conditional approval. Members agreed that they want to reassess this proposal once it has been revised.
Feedback will be reviewed at the September 13 meeting. The proposal could possibly be placed on the Board of Regent's October docket.
Preliminary Review of the Aging Studies Post-Baccalaureate Certificate Program
This proposal was sent through the College of Continuing Education (CCE). Did Public Health “bless” this proposal? Yes, the Dean supports it.
What is being validated by this certificate program?
We need a more detailed description of the program.
There is a problem with the proposal's terminology.
Why isn't this in the School of Public Health? This program is meant to reach a broader group of people and this can happen in CCE.
There are two populations this certificate program might attract: terminal and those going forward with another degree.
These are graduate level courses.
Is this a collection of courses; what is indicated as competence as a result of taking these courses?
Does this certificate belong in the Graduate School?
From a process standpoint, what information will be required?
If this were in the Graduate School they would want a letter from Public Health saying they can support the certificate with faculty and resources to teach the courses.
We need more clarity on the certificate proposal - what is the product?
Codify issues surrounding the certificate proposal.
There are reservations around this proposal.
Should CCE present this proposal?
There should be an agreement from CCE and Public Health.
Should there be the same level of information as a program proposal?
Barbara Brandt will develop feedback for the Global Health Practice Program - A Cross-Border India-Minnesota Partnership Proposal and send to Council members for their review and input.
Barbara Brandt will invite CCE and the faculty member to present the Aging Studies Post-Baccalaureate Certificate Program to a future Council meeting.
Certificate information will be gathered for Council members to review; this will include Graduate School certificate information.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
