forthepeoplefinal-2getting less for more: a report card on illinois state higher education

7/30/2019 ForthePeopleFinal-2Getting Less For More: A Report Card on Illinois State Higher Education

1/66

!"#$%&'(")*'+"&,-./012"3145$'"6+.2*(1&,"1,"7001,&18

American Council of Trustees and Alumni

with Illinois Policy Institute

!"#$%&'$('")*'


2/66

Cover photo of Foellinger Auditorium, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, by Dan OBrien, 2008.


3/66

!"#$%&'(")*'+"&,-./012"3145$'"6+.2*(1&,"1,"7001,&18

!9$'12*,")&.,210"&: ";'.8($$8"*,+"!0.9,1


4/66

Acknowledgments

;518"'$%&'("


5/66

Contents

67U;#>D]);7>U

7)*8!4/9:)3"^6U6#!F"6D])!;7>U"

66*8!4/9:)33)7U;6FF6);]!F"D7_6#C7;`

6;*8!4/9:)333) >_6#U!U)6

a>!#D"C;#]);]#6"!UD";#!UC-!#6U)`">Q">-6#!;7>UC"

a>!#D"!))>H-F7C3H6U;C

")>C;"!UD"6QQ6);7_6U6CC

76!449?@3A)!"C6F6);7>U")#7;6#7!"Q>#)>#6")>]#C6C

7

7=!449?@3A)*)C;]D6U;"C]#_6`

H6;3>D>F>^`


6/66

)-%-"'%@#;-%4/;67%5'B'5I%-"'%7#3,;'%#1%$"67"%C5561#6;>%

+34567%316B',;6-6';%A610%-"'@;'5B';%6;%31;3;-/61/45'J%

.#;-;%/,'%,6;619%-##%K367H5?I%/10%K3/56-?%6;%1#-%"69"%

'1#39"J


7/66


8/66

FGG=)H"!H6#7)!U")>]U)7F">Q";#]C;66C"!UD"!F]HU7

F

over 185,000 students and made expenditures totaling over six billion dollars.

Applying a common educational benchmark64 percentwe oer Illinois a

Passing or Failing grade on each point.

e rst section focuses on general educationthose courses completedusually within the rst two years of a bachelors degree program, to ensure a

common intellectual background, as well as college-level skills critical to work-

force participation. Illinois public universities have notably weak core curricula.

None of the institutions we surveyed requires students to take a broad survey of

U.S. government or history, literature, or economics. Most also do not require

a genuine, college-level mathematics course.is cries out for the attention of

trustees, faculty, and administrators. Nowhere is this truer than at the Univer-

sity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, which compares poorly to other institu-

tions in the state and to similarly high-prole universities in other states.

In the second section, we focus on intellectual diversity, a value that lies at

the very heart of the educational enterprise. In the simplest terms, intellectual

diversity means the free exchange of ideas. And according to a scientic survey

of students we commissioned, it is in trouble in Illinois. Students unambigu-

ously report violations of professional standardsincluding perceived pressure

to agree with professors views in order to get a good gradeand exhibit anunsettling lack of awareness of their rights and how to ensure those rights are

respected. Many institutions across the country have taken responsible action

in recent years to guarantee intellectual pluralism, including the University of

Missouri System.e University of Illinois and Southern Illinois University

should join them.

e third section turns to governance and actions by the University of Illi-

nois and Southern Illinois University boards of trusteestwo groups that have

made headlines lately.ese board members are responsible for the academic

and nancial well-being of the institutions they oversee and for safeguarding

the public interest. Regrettably, it appears the concerns that emerged from the

so-called clout scandal at the University of Illinois were only the beginning.

Our examination of board minutes and other publicly available materials

suggests that, in matters of transparency and many other critical areas, trustees

at both the University of Illinois and Southern Illinois University have not

been performing according to best practices. It is vital that the governor andthe taxpayers of Illinois demand that these trustees turn over a new leafal-

ways putting the public interest rstand there is ample opportunity to do so.

e University of Illinois now has almost an entirely new board and is seeking

a new system president; SIU is also seeking a new leader for its Carbondale

campus.


9/66

) ) ") " " " " " " " "CD:)/89)49D4E9")!"#6->#;")!#D">U"-]aF7)"37^36#"6D])!;7>U"7U"7FF7U>7C

#;")!#D">U"-]aF7)"37^36#"6D])!;7>U"7U"7FF7U>7C

7

>P$'*00^'*+$

F

GENERAL EDUCATION

7,8(1(.(1&,8"+&",&("5*P$"8('&,4"4$,$'*0"$+.2*(1&,"

'$b.1'$9$,(8J"C(.+$,(8"1,"7001,&18"2*,"4'*+.*($"Ud">#";36"c)>#6")]##7)]F]Hd"#6Q6#Ctorequired undergraduate courses outside the students specialization or major.

Traditionally, these courses have been subject to two limits. First, they are

relatively few in number, and second, they are general in scope.ese courses

usually completed within the rst two years of a bachelors degree program

are supposed to ensure a common intellectual background, exposure to a wide

range of disciplines, a core of fundamental knowledge, and college-level skills in

areas critical to good citizenship, workforce participation, and lifelong learning.To assess the state of general education in Illinois, we looked at the

three campuses of the University of Illinois system, the two campuses of

the Southern Illinois University system, and the individual campuses of

Chicago State University, Eastern Illinois University, Illinois State University,

Northern Illinois University, and Western Illinois University.ese institutions

represent not only the geographic breadth of the state but also the vast

majority of undergraduate students who are enrolled at Illinois four-year

public universities. Using the most recent online course catalogs for the

universities, we examined whether these institutions (or, in some cases, the

College of Liberal Arts & Sciences or BA degree) require students to take

general education courses in seven key subjects essential to a strong liberal arts

education: Composition, Literature, Foreign Language, U.S. Government or

History, Economics, Mathematics, and Natural or Physical Science.

In order to be counted, the subject in question must be required, not

optional. Many colleges around the country give the appearance of providinga core curriculum because they require students to take courses in several

subject areas other than their majorthe so-called distribution requirements.

However, within each subject area, it is not uncommon for students to have

dozens or even hundreds of courses from which to choosemany of them


12/66


I

narrow or frivolous.erefore, to be counted in this report, a course must be

a true general education coursebroad in scope, exposing the student to the

rich array of material that exemplies the subject. Furthermore, if a qualifying

course was one of several options that also included unqualied courses, theinstitution did not receive credit for the subject. For further details on the

criteria used, please see Appendix A.

After researching the institutions, we assigned a Passing (P) or Failing (F)

grade for each subject. Every Illinois graduate should be guaranteed exposure to

all of the broad areas outlined above; however, if a majority of institutions (six

or more) required the subject in question, a grade of P was awarded to the state.

Ifve or fewer of the institutions surveyed required the subject, a grade of F

was assigned.

On the whole, the state of Illinois earned an F, with over half of the schools

surveyed requiring only one or two of the seven core subjects and just two

institutions (the University of Illinois at Chicago and Illinois State University)

requiring a majority of them.

In comparison, when ACTA examined neighboring Missouri in 2008,

ve out of the seven universities surveyed required four or more of the core

subjectsearning the state a P.

All of the public institutions surveyed in Illinois received credit for their

Composition requirement. More than half also require Natural or Physical

Science. However, only three received credit for Foreign Language, and not a

single institution received credit for Literature, U.S. Government or History, orEconomics.

e state of mathematics general education in Illinois is also problematic.

Although every institution that we surveyed claimed that students must fulll a

Mathematics or Quantitative Reasoning requirement, only four actually require

GENERAL EDUCATION

Composition P

Literature F

Language F

U.S. Government or History F

Economics F

Mathematics F

Natural or Physical Science P

OVERALL GRADE F


13/66


14/66


15/66


=

the Natural Sciences and Mathematics area of the Introductory Courses and the Natural Sciences andMathematics area of the Distribution Courses. Students may elect one and not the other.

Chicago State University: No credit given for Foreign Language because study at the intermediate levelis not required. No credit given for Mathematics because courses with little college-level math contentmay satisfy the Mathematics requirement.

Eastern Illinois University: No credit given for Literature or Foreign Language because both subjectsare only options within the Humanities and Fine Arts requirement. No credit given for Mathematicsbecause courses with little college-level math content and a writing-intensive course may satisfy the

Mathematics requirement.

Illinois State University: No credit given for U.S. Government or History because the Middle CoreUnited States Traditions requirement may be satised by narrow courses.

Northern Illinois University: No credit given for Mathematics because courses with little college-level math content may satisfy the Core Competency in Mathematics requirement. No credit given

for Mathematics or Natural or Physical Science because the subjects are folded into the Sciences andMathematics Distributive Studies Area. Students may elect one and not the other.

Western Illinois University: No credit given for Literature or Foreign Language because both subjectsare only options within the Humanities and Fine Arts requirement. No credit given for Mathematicsbecause the Core Competency in Mathematics course has little college-level math content. Additionalmath courses are folded into the Natural Sciences and Mathematics requirement and may be avoided.


16/66

CD:)/89)49D4E9")!"#6->#;")!#D">U"-]aF7)"37^36#"6D])!;7>U"7U"7FF7U>7C

66

c7U"!U`"6D])!;7>U">Q"e]!F7;`Bstudents encounter an abundance of intel-lectual diversity.1

In 2006, the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U)

a respected national organization of which both the University of Illinois and

Southern Illinois University systems are membersissued a statement making

that assertion.

In order to experience intellectual diversity, the AAC&U explained, students

should be exposed to new knowledge, dierent perspectives, competing ideas,and alternative claims of truth.ey should learn to think criticallyso

that they understand the inappropriateness and dangers of indoctrination

see through the distortions of propaganda, and[can] assess judiciously the

persuasiveness of powerful emotional appeals.2

To make this possible, the AAC&U maintains that students require a safe

environment in order to feel free to express their own views.ey need the

freedom to express their ideas publicly as well as repeated opportunities to

explore a wide range of insights and perspectives. And as part of this process,

the AAC&U noted, faculty play a critical role in helping students to form

their own grounded judgments.3

ese sentiments are not new. In 1940, the American Association of

University Professors (AAUP) wrote in its Statement of Principles that faculty

should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter

1 Association of American Colleges & Universities, Academic Freedom and Educational Responsibility, a

statement from the Board of Directors (2006), 2.

2 Ibid, 2-3.

3 Ibid.

INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY

V510$"8(.+$,(8"*("9*I&'"7001,&18".,1P$'81(1$8"4$,$'*00=":$$0"

:'$$"(&"8%$*G"(5$1'"91,+8"&.(81+$"(5$"20*88'&&9B"(5$="+&"

,&("'$%&'("*,"*(9&8%5$'$"2&,+.21P$"(&"*"'&/.8("$M25*,4$"

&: "1+$*8"1,81+$"(5$"20*88'&&9J

CHAPTER II:>P$'*00^'*+$

F


17/66


6F

which has no relation to their subject,4 and its 1915 Declaration of Principles

is even more to the point:

;5$"($*25$'"&.45("*08&"(&"/$"$8%$21*00="&,"518"4.*'+"*4*1,8("(*G1,4".,:*1'"*+P*,(*4$"&: "(5$"8(.+$,(K8"199*(.'1(="/="

1,+&2('1,*(1,4"519"


18/66


6]U)7F">Q";#]C;66C"!UD"!F]HU7

6K

Overall, the results are extremely troubling. Signicant percentages of

students reported course readings and panel discussions that are one-sided

or unfair, professors injecting politics into class when it was not relevant, and

pressure to agree with a professors viewseither on the topic at hand or onother issuesin order to get a good grade. Few students reported being aware

of procedures in place to lodge a complaint about such concerns, and many

reported that they would feel uncomfortable doing so even if they had a good

reason. And while the results indicate that students believe theynd a more

open intellectual atmosphere outside the classroom, over a quarter of students

believed that the student newspaper would get in trouble if it criticized the

administration.

It is also notable that while Illinois students overwhelmingly knew that the

First Amendment protects their free-speech rights (and, to a slightly lesser

extent, those of their professors) on campus, they were largely unaware of a new

Illinois law enacted to protect student press freedom.11 Students also tended

not to know whether their campuses had in place restrictive speech codes,

which eectively ban certain types of expressioneven though the Foundation

for Individual Rights in Education, a free-speech watchdog organization, has

judged that both UIUC and SIUC have such codes.12

11 Illinois General Assembly, Full Text of SB0729, 2007-2008 .

12 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,e Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, accessed

1 October 2009 ; Southern Illinois University Carbondale,

e Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, accessed 1 October 2009 .


20/66


67

KEY INDICATORS OF INTELLECTUAL DIVERSITY

OFFERING DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES, COMPETING

IDEAS, AND ALTERNATIVE CLAIMS OF TRUTH GRADE: F

QUESTION

On my campus, some courses have readings that

present only one side of a controversial issue.

RESULT

61.0 percent agreed

QUESTION

On my campus, some panel discussions and public

presentations on social or political issues seem totally

one-sided.

RESULT

50.2 percent agreed

QUESTION

On my campus, some courses present social orpolitical issues in an unfair or one-sided manner.

RESULT

40.7 percent agreed

TEACHING STUDENTS TO THINK CRITICALLY GRADE: F

QUESTION

On my campus, some professors use the classroom to

present their personal political views.

RESULT

52.6 percent agreed

QUESTION

On my campus, there are courses in which students feelthey have to agree with the professors social or political

views in order to get a good grade.

RESULT

31.1 percent agreed

QUESTION

On my campus, there are courses in which students feel

they have to agree with the professors views on the topic

at hand in order to get a good grade.

RESULT

44.3 percent agreed

QUESTION

On my campus, some professors frequently comment onpolitics in class even though it has nothing to do with the

course.

RESULT

38.6 percent agreed

OFFERING A SAFE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT

FOR STUDENTS GRADE: P

QUESTION

On my campus, there are certain topics or viewpoints that

are o limits.

RESULT

33.1 percent agreed

QUESTION

Students feel free to state their social or political views

through social media, such as Facebook or MySpace,

without getting in trouble on my campus.

RESULT

4.4 percent disagreed


21/66


22/66


6;

;#]C;66C"H]C;"a6")!#6;!g6#C of the public interest, ensuring thatcolleges and universities provide a high-quality education at an aordable

price.ey need to support their institutions, but also be prepared to question

the status quo if necessary. Trustees need to work with the president and the

administration but should also be able to exercise their authority independently.

Even in a world of shared governance, it is ultimately the trustees who are

invested with the responsibility for the academic and nancial health of their

institutions.

e purpose of lay governance in higher education is to bring the viewpoint

of informed citizens to bear on the running of the university. However, it is

often the case that lay boards do not live up to the promise of eective citizen

governance. Some boards simply function as rubber stamps for administra-

tive recommendations, while other boards are actively involved in working with

administrators and other constituencies and are willing to exercise the authority

needed to make tough choices.

e pre-eminence of our system of higher education can be ensured only ifthere is informed leadership from those who are vested with the nancial and

academic health of our colleges and universitiesnamely, college and university

trustees.is section of the report examines the eectiveness of the governing

boards of the two largest public university systems in Illinois, the University of

Illinois and Southern Illinois University systems.

>P$'*00"^'*+$8

F

GOVERNANCE

;5$"],1P$'81(="&:"7001,&18"a&*'+"&: ";'.8($$8"5*8""

'$2$,(0="/$$,"%0*4.$+"/="('*,8%*'$,2="*,+"*2L

2&.,(*/101(="%'&/0$98Z"5&


23/66


6J

is report comes at a time when higher education in Illinoisespecially

at the University of Illinoisis at a crossroads. Earlier this year, the university

was embroiled in a public scandal involving a compromised admissions process,

where students were allegedly admitted to the university based on politicalconnections. In response, Governor Pat Quinn charged the Admissions Review

Commission with investigating these claims, and the commissions Report

& Recommendations were scathing in their indictment of numerous senior

administrators and trustees.e commission recommended that the entire

board resign and that the new board conduct a thorough review of top admin-

istrators. As a result, over half of the board resigned, and the systems president

announced he would step down.

is presents the newly-constituted board with a tremendous opportunity

to change direction and pursue real reform. But it would behoove the board

to keep in mind that the problems with the universitys governance go further

than admissions practices. In particular, transparency has been an issue, as the

minutes for several meetings in 2008 took over a year to be posted online.

Such delays are unacceptable for a public board that spends taxpayer dollars.

e Illinois Auditor General also found several serious problems with respect

to budgeting and nancial accountability. In addition, the board should take amore proactive stance in favor of improving academic quality and enhancing

aordability.

e Southern Illinois University Board of Trustees also faces signicant

challenges. During the review period, the board was caught up in several con-

troversies involving alleged conict of interest and plagiarism. But our analysis

shows a board with other problems: a lack of engagement in improving aca-

demic quality, and a startling lack of transparency, particularly regarding the

recent renewal of the presidents contract.

is section is divided into two parts. Part I examines the eectiveness of

each boards structure and the transparency of its operations, based on elements

viewed as eective governance practices by such organizations as Independent

Sector, ACTAs Institute for Eective Governance, the Internal Revenue Ser-

vice, and the Committee on Finance of the United States Senate.ese metrics

include: availability and accessibility of trustees names and contact information;

meeting frequency; member attendance; board size; the boards periodic reviewof its bylaws and/or policies; member engagement in professional development;

transparency of the boards activities and actions; the boards committee struc-

ture including its use of an executive committee; the boards role in presidential


24/66


6=

searches and its assessment of the president and chancellors; and the boards

involvement in the development and monitoring of a long-range plan.

Part II examines each boards actual outcomes with particular emphasis on

system-wide academic quality and scal accountability. Elements examinedinclude actions the board has taken to improve academic quality, assess student

learning, and control costs.is part also examines whether the items brought

by the administration to the board were ever rejected and whether action items

ever received dissenting votes. Both criteria are designed to assess whether

board members are asking questions and engaging issues thoughtfully as op-

posed to simply rubber-stamping administrative and starecommendations.

To summarize, Part I examines how well the two boards are structured to do

their work, while Part II examines what these boards have accomplished during

a given period.

e analysis covers board actions from January 2007 to August 2009. Board

meeting minutes, meeting materials, media documents, policies and bylaws,

and other UI and SIU documents were consulted. We also wrote to the two

institutions board secretaries and invited them to submit information on board

accomplishments and practices.

Grading is on a Pass/Fail basis. Each board received a Passing grade (P)if its formal actions demonstrated that good governance practices were being

implemented. If not, then the board received a Failing grade (F). If the

information available did not clearly indicate either, the board received an

Incomplete (I).


25/66


FG

PART I: BOARD STRUCTURE AND TRANSPARENCY OF OPERATIONS

e University of Illinois system is under the direction of a Board of Trusteesthat is composed of thirteen members, eleven of whom have ocial votes.

Nine members are appointed by the governor and conrmed by the IllinoisState Senate for six-year terms.ree members are student trustees electedby the students at each of the three campuses. One of the student members isdesignated by the governor to have an ocial vote on the board.e governoralso sits on the board as an ex ocio member.e board oversees threecampusesUrbana-Champaign, Chicago, and Springeld.

e Southern Illinois Universitysystem is under the direction of a Board

of Trustees, which oversees campuses in Carbondale and Edwardsville.eboard consists of seven members, who are appointed by the governor with theadvice and consent of the State Senate, and two student membersone fromeach campuselected from the student body. One of the student trustees isdesignated by the governor as a voting member.

Governance

Element Evaluation

Names andcontact information

of board members

publicly available

and easily accessible

UI Grade: F

SIU Grade: F

To hold a board accountable, the public needs to know andhave access to its members.13

University of Illinois System

e website for the board contains the names, pictures, and

extensive biographical information for each board member.

However, the public cannot contact the trustees directly, as in

other states, since communications are directed through the UI

administrative oces.

Southern Illinois University System

e board website has the name, photograph, and biographical

information of each member prominently posted. However, the

public cannot contact the trustees directly, as in other states, since

all correspondence for the board is directed through its executive

secretary.

13 Martin Anderson, Impostors in the Temple(Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press, 1996), 202.


26/66


F6

Governance

Element Evaluation

Board meets

frequently

UI Grade: P

A board should meet as often as necessary to conduct its busi-

ness.14

While the necessary number of meetings to conductbusiness will vary, meeting regularly, at least quarterly, and

calling other meetings as necessary, is a good general practice.


e boards bylaws provide for an annual meeting on the third

ursday of January.e board also holds regular meetings

throughout the year, and the chair or any three members may call

special meetings as deemed necessary. In 2008, the board met

nine times (seven regular meetings and two special meetings),and in 2007 the board met six times (all regular meetings). It has

met regularly throughout 2009.

SIU Grade: P Southern Illinois University System

e boards bylaws provide for regular meetings at least quarterly

during the calendar year.e board may schedule additional

regular meetings, and the chair may call special meetings as

needed. In 2008, the board met eight times (seven regular meet-

ings and one special meeting), and in 2007 the board met nine

times (seven regular meetings and two special meetings). It has

met regularly throughout 2009.

14 Principles for Good Governance and Ethical Practice: A Guide for Charities and Foundations(Washington,

DC: Panel on the Nonprot Sector, 2007), 13.


27/66


FF

Governance

Element Evaluation

Board members

attend regularly

UI Grade: P

SIU Grade: P

A board that meets to conduct business cannot be eective if a

majority of the board members are not present or members failto attend regularly.15


e boards bylaws stipulate that a majority of the voting mem-

bers of the board must be present in order to conduct business

transactions.e bylaws do not establish the number of absences

allowed for each board member or a process for removing mem-

bers that do not meet attendance requirements. For the period

reviewed, meeting attendance by appointed and student trusteesaveraged 96 percent with only one instance of a trustee attending

remotely.


e boards bylaws require that a quorum (ve voting members)

be physically present at a meeting in order to conduct business.

A member may attend via audio or video conference if unable to

attend in person, although he or she needs to indicate the reason,

and the other members must take a vote to determine whether

or not it is permissible for the absent member to attend remotely.

e bylaws do not establish the number of absences allowed for

each board member or a process for removing members that do

not meet attendance requirements. For the period reviewed, at-

tendance at regular meetings averaged 88 percent, or 84 percent

when only counting those members who were physically present

at the meetings rather than participating via teleconference.

15 Best Practices in University Governance, expert testimony by ACTAs Institute for Eective Governance

at U.S. Senate Finance Committee Roundtable Discussion, March 3, 2006.


28/66


F]U)7F">Q";#]C;66C"!UD"!F]HU7

FK

Governance

Element Evaluation

Pre-service

training and/orprofessional

development

UI Grade: F

SIU Grade: F

Trustees should be oriented in their new role and receive expert

advice from inside and outside the institution throughout theirboard service.18


According to the boards bylaws, the Governance Committee

helps provide orientation assistance for new trustees, including

a mentoring program for which the Board chair, in consultation

with the committee chair, appoints mentors for new trustees.

e recent scandal over admissions practices at the University of

Illinois has raised questions about the adequacy of the currentorientation and training practices.e report from the Admis-

sions Review Committee stated that the trustees have not

collectively demonstrated an inclination to armatively seek out

ethics or other training that could have at least heightened their

sensitivity to the admissions-related issues raised here.e re-

port specically called for the formation of an Ethics Committee

with the responsibility to develop and administer an orienta-

tion and training program that requires all Trustees to annuallycertify that they understand and will abide by applicable rules of

conduct. It is apparent that the current system for training and

professional development needs to be reassessed and revamped.


e boards bylaws and statutes are silent on orientation or

professional development for trustees. In response to a tele-

phone inquiry, the boards executive secretary indicated that new

trustees participate in a day-long orientation program consistingmainly of meetings with administrators and that the board sets

up workshops for itself periodically. It also appears that some

board members occasionally attend conferences, but there is no

evidence that continuing regular professional development is

expected or required.

18 Best Practices in University Governance; Principles for Good Governance and Ethical Practice, 17.


30/66


F7

Governance

Element Evaluation

Transparency

of board activitiesand actions

UI Grade: I

SIU Grade: P

e ability of the public to see how the board operates and

what it is doing is a critical element to a boards success.19Transparency helps the board communicate with the univer-

sity community at large and build trust and condence in the

universitys overseers.


e board puts advance notice of its meetings on its website

and has recently begun posting audio recordings of its meet-

ings online, following an executive order from Governor Quinn.

e board also posts the current scal years Budget Summaryin a prominent place on its website. Meeting minutes from May

2008 onward, however, were not posted online until September

2009over a year after some of the meetings occurred.is

failure to post public information in a timely fashion signicantly

undermines transparency. It should be noted that the newly-con-

stituted board has been considerably more prompt in approving

meeting minutes, indicating that there is a positive trend in favor

of more open and transparent operations.is must continue.


e board gives advance notice of all of its meetings on its

website and posts agendas for the executive sessions, regular

meetings, and committee meetings.e website also has archived

meeting minutes from 2004 to the present, including committee

meeting minutes and agendas.

19 Principles for Good Governance and Ethical Practice, 12.


31/66


FI

Governance

Element Evaluation

Functioning

committeestructure

UI Grade: F

SIU Grade: P

For a board to conduct its work eectively and delve into issues

in meaningful ways, it should have standing committees withspecic roles and duties.20


In addition to the Executive Committee, the board has a number

of standing committees. All board members serve on all com-

mittees, and the board chair appoints one trustee to chair each

committee for one year.e committees are as follows: Academic

Aairs, Access, Athletics, Budget and Audit, Buildings and

Grounds, External Aairs, Finance and Investment, Governance,Human Resources, Legal Aairs, Strategic Planning, Student

Aairs, Technology and Economic Development, and Univer-

sity Hospital. Based on the board meeting materials, committee

meetings generally convene during the course of the regular

meetings while the entire board is present and consist primar-

ily of hearing reports from various campus constituencies and

approving agenda items.e lack of distinct working committees

exploring and reporting to the board on specic issues inhibitsin-depth examination.


e board has an Executive Committee and four other stand-

ing committees whose members are appointed by the chair: the

Academic Matters Committee, the Architecture and Design

Committee, the Finance Committee, and the Audit Committee.

With board approval, the chair may also appoint other special

committees as needed. All trustees do not serve on all commit-tees, and the committees meet regularly and separately from

the full board.is structure is more likely to allow for in-depth

examination of pertinent issues.

20 Best Practices in University Governance.


32/66


F;

Governance

Element Evaluation

Executive

Committees

UI Grade: P

Executive Committees are typically responsible for developing

meeting agendas, planning board activities, reviewing com-pensation and reappointments, and monitoring committee

work. In some cases, they also act on emergency or other items

when the full board cannot convene. Given the important

issues the Executive Committee frequently addresses, it is

important that it not represent a quorum so that its actions are

not binding on the full board.21


e Executive Committee consists of the board chair and twoother board members who are elected to the committee.e Ex-

ecutive Committee has all the powers of the full board and meets

on the call of the chair or any two members for transactions that

are urgent and unable to be postponed until the next full board

meeting.e three members do not represent a quorum of the

boardwhich is good practice.e Executive Committee regu-

larly reports its activities to the full board.

SIU Grade: P Southern Illinois University System

e Executive Committee consists of the board chair and two

other board members who are elected to the committee. Accord-

ing to the boards website, the Executive Committee has au-

thority to transact such routine business as may arise during the

recess of the Board and to act for the Board in all matters of an

emergency nature upon which immediate decisions are necessary

for the present welfare of the University.e three members

do not represent a quorum of the board. All actions taken bythe Executive Committee need to be reported in writing to the

whole board at its next regular or special meeting, and they need

to be recorded in that meetings minutes, although the full board

does not have to ratify the actions.

21 Ibid.


33/66


FJ

Governance

Element Evaluation

Involvement in

presidential searchcommittees

UI Grade: F

Selecting a president is a boards most important decision.

While boards should seek input from higher educations variedconstituencies, they should always maintain control over the

search process and ultimately the candidates from which they

will make their selection. Boards must remember that they

hire,re, and evaluate the chief executive and to delegate or

abdicate their most importantduciary duty is not good gov-

ernance practice.22


e last time the University of Illinois system conducted a presi-dential search was in 2004. For this process, the board selected a

search rm and authorized a 19-member consultative commit-

tee (whose composition was suggested by the University Senates

Conference, a faculty group) to assist with the search.e secre-

tary of the board, who is employed in the administrative oces,

served as a liaison between the board and the committee, and the

two groups met periodically to assess the progress of the search

process. However, no board member participated in the delibera-tions of the consultative committee, its interview of candidates,

or its selection ofve nalists for the boards consideration. Since

selecting a president is the most important action a board takes,

the boards relative lack of involvement until the nal stages of

the process merits a Failing grade.

SIU Grade: F Southern Illinois University System

According to the boards bylaws, at least one-half of the total

membership of the Board shall be required for the initialselection of the President or the termination of the Presidents

services.e Board shall set that ocers compensation. SIU

performed its most recent presidential search in 2005. While

the board established itself as a Committee of the Whole for

the process and chose the president from among the nalists, it

delegated the screening of candidates and selection ofnalists

to a search rm and a 22-member Presidential Search Advisory

Committee (PSAC) made up of various campus constituencies.A board member did serve as a liaison to the PSAC to oversee

the day-to-day activities of the search but appears to have had a

minimal role in selecting the candidates.

22 Selecting a New President: What to do Before You Hire a Search Firm (Washington, DC: ACTAs Institute for

Eective Governance, 2004).


34/66


F=

Governance

Element Evaluation

Renewal of

presidentialcontracts based on

regular evaluation

UI Grade: I

SIU Grade: F

Regular evaluations of the president prior to compensation

adjustments and contract renewals or reappointments areimportant to ensure that board goals are being achieved.23


According to news reports, the contract for current University of

Illinois president Joseph White provides for the boards peri-

odic review of his performance to determine whether to extend

his contract and how much to increase his salary. In November

2008, the board voted to extend President Whites contract;

however, the process was not transparent. Meeting minutes andagendas do not indicate how the board reached its decision or

how it evaluated the presidents performance.e president re-

cently announced his plans to retire. Evaluations of his successor

should be much more transparent.


According to the board statutes, the board conducts an annual

evaluation of the president based upon a previously established

statement of goals and objectives formulated by the president

and agreed upon by the Board.e president is evaluated in an

individual session at a time designated by the Board chair, and

the board sets the presidents compensation on an annual basis.

While the board agenda for May 2009 included a presidential

contract extension, minutes show that the extension was ap-

proved with no public discussion at the end of a meeting that

included the adoption of a Con

ict of Interest Policy and aPlagiarism Policy Guideboth of which had arisen in light

of allegations of misconduct involving the president and board

members. Although the board voted a ve-year extension,

meeting materials show that the only public announcement of

the extension read, Amendment to the Presidential Employ-

ment Agreement, with no other background material provided

or elaboration on the process. On top of that, press accounts

reported that board members promised the president a contract

extension as early as 2008.

23 Principles for Good Governance and Ethical Practice, 15 andAssessing the Presidents Performance: A How To

Guide for Trustees(Washington, DC: ACTAs Institute for Eective Governance, 2006).


35/66



36/66



37/66


38/66


39/66



40/66



41/66



42/66


43/66


44/66


KG

Given these numbers, it is imperative that higher education earn the

condence of the public in the use of funds.

is section examines the three campuses of the University of Illinois

system, the two campuses of the Southern Illinois University system, and theindividual campuses of Chicago State University, Eastern Illinois University,

Illinois State University, Northern Illinois University, and Western Illinois

University in terms of cost and eectiveness.e report takes a look at

trends in spending and tuition and fee increases. It examines whether the ten

universities are successful in graduating rst-time, full-time freshmen. It also

looks at whether the universities are successful in retaining full-time freshmen

after their rst year of study. In addition, this section evaluates the handling of

unproductive programs and whether institutions use performance as a criterion

in funding allocations.

e period of evaluation is generallyve years; however, periods of measure

may vary based on data availability and the specic measure.e most recent

year for which data is available is generally 2007.

Grading is on a Pass/Fail basis.e following describes the various elements

used to evaluate the universities and explains the grading criteria.

Instructional vs. administrative spending.is measure assesses thecommitment of the institutions to instructional versus administrative spending.

It examines instructional and administrative expenditures as a percentage of

Educational and General expenditures (E&G) relative to the base year.e

percentage change in instructional and administrative spending over the period

is also examined. If the percentage increase in instructional spending was

equal to or higher than the percentage increase in administrative spending

signifying that instruction was a prioritythe universities received a Passing

grade. If the opposite was true, the institutions received a Failing grade.

Trends in in-state undergraduate tuition and fees.is measure assesses

the commitment of the universities to keeping tuition and fee increases at

reasonable levels. If over the ve-year period, tuition and fees increased at a rate

equal to or less than the rate of ination (using the Consumer Price Index),

the institutions received a Passing grade. If, however, tuition and fees increased

more rapidly than the rate of ination, the institutions received a Failing grade.

Tuition and fees as a percentage of median household income.ismeasure indicates whether the universities have kept higher education

aordable relative to median household income. If the percentage of median

household income required to pay for tuition and fees decreased or remained


45/66


46/66


47/66


48/66


KK

Cost/Effectiveness

Element Evaluation

Trends in in-state under-

graduate tuition and fees

Grade: F

Ination-adjusted tuition and required fees skyrocketed

throughout Illinois during the ve-year period examined.From 2002 to 2007, in-state tuition and fees jumped by

an average of 56 percent, with no campus increasing rates

by less than 42 percent and two campuses increasing rates

by more than 70 percent.us, a Failing grade for each

university and the state as a whole.

INSTITUTION 2002 2007 % Change

GRADE


Urbana-Champaign $6,645 $9,966 50.0% F

Chicago 6,452 9,748 51.1 F

Springeld 4,151 7,252 74.7 F


Carbondale 4,879 7,795 59.8 FEdwardsville 3,774 5,938 57.3 F

Chicago State University 3,984 7,138 79.2 F

Eastern Illinois University 4,933 7,035 42.6 F

Illinois State University 5,145 8,040 56.3 F

Northern Illinois University 5,521 7,871 42.6 F

Western Illinois University 4,911 7,411 50.9 F

OVERALL GRADE: F

Source: Illinois Board of Higher EducationNote: 2002 dollar amounts are expressed in 2007 ination-adjusted numbers.

TRENDS IN UNDERGRADUATE TUITION & FEES


49/66


K7

Cost/Effectiveness

Element Evaluation

Annual in-state under-

graduate tuition and feesas a percentage of median

household income

Grade: F

In 2007-08, annual in-state undergraduate tuition and

required fees at all ten universities surveyed required agreater percentage of ination-adjusted median household

income than they did just ve years earlier. In 2002-03, Il-

linois families could expect to pay an average of 11.8 per-

cent of their household income for annual in-state tuition

and fees; in 2007-08, an average of 14.9 percent of median

household income was required.is represents an average

increase of more than 25 percent for the ve-year period,

even after adjusting for ination.us, a Failing grade foreach university and for the state as a whole.

UNDERGRADUATE TUITION & FEES AS A PERCENTAGE OF

MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME

INSTITUTION 2002 2007 Change in% Points % Change GRADEUniversity of Illinois System

Urbana-Champaign 15.6% 19.0% 3.4% 22.0% F

Chicago 15.1 18.6 3.5 22.9 F

Springeld 9.7 13.8 4.1 42.1 F


Carbondale 11.4 14.8 3.4 30.0 F

Edwardsville 8.8 11.3 2.5 28.0 F

Chicago State University 9.3 13.6 4.3 45.7 F

Eastern Illinois University 11.5 13.4 1.9 16.0 F

Illinois State University 12.0 15.3 3.3 27.1 F

Northern Illinois University 12.9 15.0 2.1 16.0 F

Western Illinois University 11.5 14.1 2.6 22.8 F

OVERALL GRADE: F

Sources: Illinois Board of Higher Education and U.S. Census Bureau

Note: 2002 dollar amounts for tuition & fees and median income were based on 2007 ination-adjustednumbers.


50/66


KI

Cost/Effectiveness

Element Evaluation

Baccalaureate graduation

rates for rst-time,full-time freshmen

Grade: F

Although universities are only required to report their six-

year graduation rates to the U.S. Department of Educa-tion, eight out of the ten universities surveyed in Illinois

have voluntarily reported their four- and ve-year gradu-

ation rates for every incoming freshman class since 1997.

is level of transparency is to be applauded.

However, the graduation rates throughout the state are

not encouraging. Students who entered Illinois universi-

ties in 2001expecting to graduate in 2005were about

evenly divided in 2007 between those who had earned adegree and those who had not. In the best case, more than

80 percent of 2001 freshmen at UIUC had graduated by

2007. But in the worst case, at Chicago State, the numbers

were more than reversed: for every student who graduated

within six years, there were ve who did not. Seven out of

the ten universities surveyed increased their percentage of

six-year graduates during the period that was examined,

but given how low the graduation rates remain, there isstill a great deal of work to be done.

Overall, only two institutionsUIUC and Illinois State

graduated more than 64 percent of their 2001 freshmen

by 2007. Since eight out of the ten campuses surveyed did

not receive a Passing grade, the state as a whole receives a

Failing grade.


51/66


52/66


53/66


K=

Cost/Effectiveness

Element Evaluation

Ratio of new programs

to closed programs

Grade: I

We could nd no reliable data on how many degree

programs have been closed in Illinois during the reviewperiod. Indeed, the Illinois Board of Higher Education

was unable to produce a record of closed programs at the

states universities. In the interests of transparency and

accountability, the institutions and the Illinois Board of

Higher Education should keep track of such data and

make it available to the public online, just as they do for

new programs. Other states, such as Missouri, post infor-

mation about new and closed academic programs on thehigher education coordinating boards website.

Performance as a

criterion for funding

Grade: F

It does not appear that the individual universities sur-

veyed, the Illinois Board of Higher Education, or the Il-

linois legislature use performance measures to set funding

levels, either for the universities themselves or for specic

programs. Greater attention ought to be paid to perfor-

mance during budgeting sessions, and institutions should

consciously incorporate performance elements into theirfunding allocations.us, a Failing grade.

OVERALL GRADE: F


54/66


55/66


56/66


7F

Economics

A course covering basic economic principles, generally an introductory micro-

or macroeconomics course taught by faculty from the economics or business

departments.

Mathematics

A college-level course in mathematics. Includes advanced algebra, trigonometry,

calculus, computer programming, statistics/probability, or mathematical reason-

ing at or above the intermediate level. Remedial courses or SAT Reasoning Test

scores may not be used as substitutes. Symbolic or mathematical logic courses

and computer science courses count, while linguistic courses or computer lit-

eracy courses do not, as the math content is usually minimal.

Natural or Physical Science

A course in astronomy, biology, chemistry, geology, physics, or environmental

science, preferably with a laboratory component. Overly narrow courses, courses

with weak scientic content, and courses taught by faculty outside of the sci-

ence departments do not count. Psychology courses count if they are focused on

the biological, chemical, or neuroscience aspects of the eld.


57/66


7]U)7F">Q";#]C;66C"!UD"!F]HU7

7K

!"#$%&'($)*+),%-./0)1(.(/0&23)/)4(4*(0)"56) ) )

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"#$%&'()!*+,)'&-!+.!/%,01$$0!()2!"-,#)&!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3--&)+&0!4,5-&'!6)&7$%0&1&$0!8,%7$9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/+1(-!8(#:-$!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!8$:1$#5$%!;D)

E90(() BF?) @B>?)8'0"#9-+)E90(() C?) F>G)

))

H"'/-) ?AB) BGG>G)

) ) ) )

!8#$%&$'($)*'+,-.$-/'0$)/,1-0-$9*:0$10*63&;-$29*2$+10-0&2$/&4($/&0$-360$/5$*$)/&21/:01-3*4$3--,0#$

)) #) 7)

8'0"#9-+):;./90(() @B) C>G)

:;./90(() ABB) @G)

E90(() @AB)8'0"#9-+)E90(() CC) D>F)

))

H"'/-) ?AB) BGG>G)

) ) ) )

!D)

))

H"'/-) ?AB) BGG>G)!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3--&)+&0!4,5-&'!6)&7$%0&1&$0!8,%7$9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/+1(-!8(#:-$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


59/66


60/66


7I

!"#$%&'($)*+),%-./0)1(.(/0&23)/)4(4*(0)"56) ) ) )

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"#$%&'()!*+,)'&-!+.!/%,01$$0!()2!"-,#)&!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3--&)+&0!4,5-&'!6)&7$%0&1&$0!8,%7$9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/+1(-!8(#:-$!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!8$:1$#5$%!;) BC@?) )

D90(() ) ):;./90(()


61/66


62/66


7J

!"#$%&'($)*+),%-./0)1(.(/0&23)/)4(4*(0)"56) ) ) )

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"#$%&'()!*+,)'&-!+.!/%,01$$0!()2!"-,#)&!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!3--&)+&0!4,5-&'!6)&7$%0&1&$0!8,%7$9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/+1(-!8(#:-$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!8$:1$#5$%!;% )

)) #) 7) )1/$H&/-)I(5') 9E) ?% )

)) #) 7) )PH#()O0'.) E9) 9


63/66


64/66


IG

'7.&4%$?.$0'5.".+0#%$P)*./='$0%2)'$%6;#1/2'%/='&)$;./=)/0'$)#)*01./''$";)&A1$.&$'A)&181)='$10)'$"10%71#10>'";./'&)%*+1/2')%*+'*%6;"$D'9+)>')$0%7#1$+)='8#.'%$U)='0+)'$*&))/1/2'G")$01./'.8'W4&)'>."'%'$0"=)/0'%0'?*.##)2)@XY'%/='%'A)&7%#'8.##.."'%'$.;+.6.&)I'E"/1.&I'.&'$)/1.&XY'9+)'G")$01.//%1&)'&);)%0)='0+)'"/=)&2&%="%0)'$*&))/1/2'G")$01./D'()8"$%#$''*./0&.#'6)%$"&)$'1/*#"=)I'7"0'%&)'/.0'#1610)='0.3'

IJ' C2$2B./'K#."?'>/2#$#$BV%0%'*.##)*01./'6%/%2)&$'./'0+1$'$"&A)>'+%A)'%##'&)*)1A)=')Q0)/$1A)'0&%1/1/2'%/='*./="*0)='6"#01;#)'

*%6;"$'$"&A)>$D'9+)>'+%A)';%&01*1;%0)='1/')Q0)/$1A)'0&%1/1/2'0+%0'1/*#"=)='6.*U'1/0)&A1)'&)*)1A)='7>'%'6%/%2)&'1$'+%/=F*+)*U)='$.'0+%0'G")$01.//%1&)$'F-%&7./=%#)']'D_R'0.'LD_`

5234"#$B'N//%/P%6;#1/2')&&.&'8.&'`LK'*.6;#)0)='$"&A)>$'1$'abFRc


65/66


66/66

forthepeoplefinal-2getting less for more: a report card on illinois state higher education

Documents