Advisory Council of Faculty (ACF) Report
Higher Education Faculty Day at the Capitol
February 24, 2006

The Higher Education Faculty display was set up beside the House chamber door in the Upper Rotunda, a propitious location for House members to view Higher Education issues and meet faculty representatives. Faculty position papers on PROMISE, AEI, and other issues were located at the display, as well as the informational ACF brochure, hardcopies of the Higher Education Resource Directory and other information. Faculty attended a number of ACF scheduled meetings, as well as other individually scheduled meetings with local legislators. The following is a report on official ACF meetings; an ACF update letter to faculty on the legislative status of AEI will follow this report; please contact your local ACF representative for copies of the update.

Meeting with Senator Helmick, Chair of Senate Finance:
Senator Helmick assured us that Senate Finance would approve SB587, sponsored by Plymale and Edgell—the AEI bill. The ACF delegation stressed the importance of full-funding and shared details concerning the short-fall between the amount the Governor had placed in the budget ($2,026,368) and the amount the AEI would cost ($3,123,708), explaining that faculty did not wish incremental pay to come at the expense of student programs or other staff benefits. The ACF also shared our position on full-funding of PROMISE, without strings or conditions on institutions or on students.

2) Meeting with Delegates Michael (Chair of House Finance) and Campbell (Chair of House Education):
Chair Michael was quite frank to say that Del. John Doyle (Vice-Chair of House Finance) would be the point person for us on AEI, by virtue of Doyle’s position as Finance representative on the Education Committee. Other than saying that, Michael was non-committal concerning the AEI. It was clear from the conversation that John Doyle (Shepherdstown delegate) will be key in the success or failure of AEI once it gets to the House, which means that the Shepherd faculty response will be essential.

3) Meeting with Senators Plymale and Edgell (Chair and Vice-chair of Senate Education):
This meeting was an opportunity for the ACF to offer “thank-yous” to both senators who have supported faculty issues and expressed appreciation of ACF advice and communication of faculty positions. Senator Plymale introduced ACF and other faculty representatives in the 11:00 a.m. session of the Senate. Both Plymale and Edgell sit on the Senate Finance Committee.

4) Meeting with Senator Unger (member Senate Education and Senate Finance): This meeting was to seek assurance from Senator Unger that SB715 (giving higher education faculty the right to serve) would in no way endanger faculty receiving incremental pay or the passage of SB587. Senator Unger said that it would not, that he didn’t see the two bills in conflict—certainly that was not the intention of offering the legislation. We shared HEPC attorney Bruce Walker’s interpretation that essentially agreed with that supposition. Senator Unger explained that the decision to sponsor such a bill was to tap in on faculty expertise which he believed would improve the quality of the legislative process. Unger is responsible for the Education Committee’s request for the Faculty Resource Directory two years ago, which he hopes will become a resource for the legislature and other state agencies (see link from the ACF website at http://www.wvacf.org/wvacf/home.aspx). Senator Unger, along with several of his senate colleagues on the Education Committee, is also essentially responsible for university status legislation for Shepherd, Fairmont State, Concord, and WV State.

5) Meeting with Governor Manchin:
This was by far the most interesting and challenging meeting of the day. Governor Manchin began the discussion by challenging the faculty and higher education on a number of issues, including what he saw as a weakness in Higher Education’s seizing market opportunities and reacting expeditiously to create programs that would train people for a dynamic economic landscape. He lamented the typical response of institutions to immediately ask for funding to start up new programs. We countered with a reminder that budgets had been cut and all institutions were operating “bare-bone” as is. When we brought up the PROMISE issue, Governor Manchin lamented the rise in tuition that had accompanied PROMISE success; again we shared the fact that when the Higher Education budgets are cut, tuition rise is inevitable, even as institutions stream-line program offerings and belt-tighten. When the Governor expressed his concern that grade inflation might be a result of PROMISE, the ACF responded that, while grade inflation was always a concern, WV high school students must receive ACT scores of at least 21 or SAT scores of at least 1000 in order to qualify for PROMISE. The state over-all increase in ACT composite scores, up from 20.3 in 2001 to 21.1 in 2005 appears to testify to the fact that PROMISE benefits students in terms of the seriousness with which they approach their high school work. The 2008 increase in graduation requirements (math, science, arts and language units) will also serve to maintain PROMISE integrity. We asked the Governor about Meet and Confer, and it doesn’t appear now to be an issue of concern—in other words, it is not an idea that has captured a ground-swell of interest at this point in time, though Governor Manchin was candid about his preference in having one group deal with faculty and employee issues with the Legislature and on the various campuses. We did respond with the fact that ACCE and ACF were instituted through code to act in liaison capacity and to confer with a variety of groups, and we shared the fact that our issues are well vetted and voted on by institutional senates/assemblies.

Governor Manchin is a formidable presence, a straight-forward and powerful personality, who appears to put aside the usual political niceties and facades in order to “cut to the quick.” His point of view for Higher Education is more aligned with practical education and training than liberal education. While the Governor made a strong point about institutions’ reacting expediently to market changes and being more aware of and in tune with the global and economic forces around us, he listened to our points about the importance of critical thinking and literate expression—and the “usefulness” of those arts, humanities, and science degrees that foster these. We stressed the importance of Higher Education’s not only offering students specific skills and training but those “higher order skills” that are crucial as the economic landscape changes and as people achieve the intellectual flexibility to retool and adapt to those changes. Both the ACF and Governor Manchin agreed that education was the key factor in the future economic success of the State.

When the discussion ended, Jay Cole, the Governor’s Education liaison and assistant, caught us in the rotunda as we were “meeting and conferring” about the extraordinary interview that had just occurred. He said that the Governor’s extending his meeting with us was very unusual—and that he wasn’t offended by the points we made (Jay noted the Governor did not necessarily appreciate obsequiousness and that we were not). Jay believed that the interview had been useful for the Governor, and he agreed it was a good idea for us to schedule other, regular meetings for such exchanges. The meeting was useful for the Faculty, as we have a better understanding of how this Governor thinks and what we must do to both encourage the Governor’s understanding of our issues and our institutions’ ability to be innovative and embrace economic and global events as we continually update curricula to respond to the world around us.

One final note, we tried to schedule an appointment with Del. Doyle, but he wouldn’t give us a specific time. He did, however, collar me for a 10-minute conversation as he grabbed a bite to eat after the House session Friday and before a meeting. He told me that he did “not agree with the faculty position on AEI” and that he would use whatever leverage he had on House Finance concerning the AEI bill for support of locality pay (HB2248 and HB2370). No legislators we spoke with Friday said that a bill for locality pay would pass this session, while the AEI (which has been on the docket for three years) will pass with Doyle’s support.

On March 2 the HEPC Faculty Study Subcommittee will meet to review materials sent by institutions and to make recommendations mandated by code concerning Higher Education Faculty. Report submitted by Sylvia Bailey Shurbutt, Chair of the Advisory Council of Faculty.