Peter KnuepferPresident

University Faculty Senate

A Final President’sReport, a Timeof Transition

As we move into the summer, weface a range of transitions at SUNY.This is my final report to you as yourPresident, and I look forward toworking with the new President,Gwen Kay (Prof. of History, SUNYOswego) to ensure a seamlesscontinuity of representation for you.My last day in this position is June 30,which is also the final day in thetenure of Chancellor Nancy Zimpher. Iam excited by the appointment of Dr.Kristina Johnson as the 13thChancellor of the State University ofNew York. Finally, it is also a time oftransition for the nature of thefunding of higher education in NewYork—the dawn of “free tuition” forsome families sending students toSUNY and CUNY. The implications aresignificant, uncertain, but potentiallyvery impactful on our campuses.

Chancellor SearchThe search committee for SUNY’s

13th Chancellor, on which I served,completed its work in March andrecommended four candidates to theBoard of Trustees for consideration.The Board has appointed Dr. KristinaJohnson, a member of the NationalAcademy of Engineering and theNational Academy of Inventors. Fromher days as a faculty member at theUniversity of Colorado to her years asthe Dean of Engineering at DukeUniversity to her time as the Provostat the Johns Hopkins University, Dr.Johnson established a distinguishedacademic record. She was thentapped by President Obama asUnder-Secretary of Energy, where shehelped oversee the funding of newprojects in renewable energy as partof the America Recovery Act. Thatexperience prompted her to moveinto the private sector, founding andbuilding a company that focuses ondeveloping small-scale hydroelectriccapacity, reflecting her personalcommitment to sustainabledevelopment. This three-leggedhistory—academia,public/government service, andentrepreneurship—places her into aunique position to advance thecritical roles that higher educationmust play. She brings passion to herdecision to return to highereducation, particularly in terms of adesire to ensure that every studentreceives the help and direction she orhe needs to succeed. Indeed, it washer description of what she termspersonalized education that I found

especially attractive. Of course, herresume lacks certain experiences—that of a university president,interaction with comprehensivecolleges or community colleges,among others—but her intellect issuch that she will learn very quicklyon the job. I have the utmostconfidence in her ability to continueto build on the legacy that ChancellorNancy Zimpher leaves behind.Chancellor ZimpherMany others are offering

retrospective comments aboutChancellor Zimpher in this Bulletin.While I don’t wish to duplicate thoseperspectives, I do want to add myown. As I look over the initiatives andaccomplishments of the last eightyears, one in particular stands out tome. By force of personality, bymeasure of accomplishment, byleadership in the development and

Continued on page 2

P R E S I D E N T ’ S C O R N E R

I N T H I S I S S U E

S P R I N G / S UMM E R 2 0 1 7

Faculty Senate BulletinThe State University of New YorkUniversity Faculty SenateState University Plaza, Room S120Albany, New York 12246518.320.1376 >> 800.547.1548www.suny.edu/facultysenate

EditorsNorman Goodman, EditorStony Brook University

Joe Hildreth, Arts EditorSUNY Potsdam

Faculty Senate AssistantCarol Donato, Assistant Arts Editor

Editorial Board

(Executive Committee)

Peter L. KnuepferBinghamton UniversityPresident

Gwen KaySUNY OswegoVice President/Secretary

Edward FeldmanStony Brook UniversityImmediate PastVice President/Secretary

Kenneth P. O’BrienThe College at BrockportImmediate Past President

Fred WalterStony Brook UniversityUniversity Centers

Joseph MarrenBuffalo State CollegeUniversity Colleges

Rebecca MarinoffSUNY College of OptometryHealth Science Centers

Timothy GerkenMorrisville State CollegeColleges of Technology

Peer BodeNYS College of Ceramics,Alfred UniversitySpecial and Statutory Colleges

> From the Chancellor:First, and Lasting Impressions of SUNY 5

> From the Provost and Executive Vice ChancellorTransitions 6

> From the Vice Chancellor for Financial Services and CFOSUNY 2017-2018 Operating Budget Overview 8

> From the President of the Student Assembly 11

> From the Editor’s DeskNancy Zimpher, One Big Audacious Idea 13

> Speak Out!Reflections on Nancy Zimpher 14

> The Spotlight 23

> The Poet’s Corner 26

> Announcements 27

implementation of policies as wideranging (and often controversial) asseamless transfer, diversity equityand inclusion, applied learning, andmost recently TeachNY, she haselevated the stature of SUNY as aninstitution that leads, that is a“player” in the national and eveninternational conversation abouthigher education, and she does thisby constantly pointing to SUNY asthe innovator. Whatever one thinksabout some of these and other policyinitiatives that she has developedand/or led and/or championed, atthe core of the success is anunderstanding that a system thatworks together can accomplish morethan can its individual campuses.And all of this was accomplishedwith a clear understanding of thevalue, and strong commitment to theinclusion, of shared governance. It isfor that reason in particular that theUFS conferred on her our Friend ofthe Senate award at our springplenary meeting at SUNY Canton.This is the highest honor that we canbestow on a non-member, and itreflects what she has done to engagefaculty (and student) governanceleaders in all of the policy initiativesthat have emerged during hertenure. SUNY BudgetThe Legislature and Governor

agreed to a budget for New York (andSUNY) a little over a week after theApril 1 deadline. There was certainlybetter news for SUNY than in lastyear’s budget, but New York’scommitment to operational supportfor SUNY continues to fall short, andthis remains a far-from-perfectoperating budget for the SUNYsystem. The budget authorizes therenewal of maintenance of effort interms of no cuts to SUNY’s budget forthe next four years, and alsoauthorizes the Board of Trustees toraise tuition each year by up to

$200/yr for State-operated campusesover the same four years. Thelanguage does NOT close the TAPGap, which means that the cost ofcovering the difference between$5000 and full SUNY tuitioncontinues to fall on the campuses forthose students who are eligible forfull coverage by the TuitionAssistance Program. This willcontinue to limit the effectiveincrease in campus revenue that thetuition rise may produce. It also doesnot provide funding for mandatedoperational cost increases. On theother hand, the Legislature restoredfunding increases to opportunityprograms, and there is an additional$2 million for open educationalresources. There is also significantfunding for capital investments andimprovements.Much of the discussion about

SUNY (and CUNY) budget hascentered around the ExcelsiorScholarship program and the notionof free college tuition for the middleclass. There are a number of “catches”,both for the students/families andfor SUNY, as I suspect you are aware.For students, they must complete 30credits per year and enroll for at least12 in any given semester to retainthe scholarship as well as maintain asatisfactory GPA toward their degree(a 2.0? unclear). In addition, theymust remain in New York aftergraduation for as many years as theyreceived the scholarship, consideredby some to be a “poison pill” in thefinal legislation. For SUNY, the impactof the scholarship program is mixed,in my opinion. The availability of freetuition could well increaseenrollments, which would certainlybe a positive for many of ourcampuses. On the other hand,Excelsior covers only $5500 of SUNYtuition, and campuses must provide atuition credit for the remainder.Furthermore, campuses can onlycharge Excelsior students the currenttuition ($6470) for the next fouryears, which means that if or as

tuition rises Excelsior students willnot be providing any extra revenue tothe campuses: the effects of anytuition increases will be much lessthan in the recent past. Fortunately,the State has agreed to cover the costof the tuition credit out of thegeneral fund as part of themaintenance of effort provision,although it is promised only after thestudent meets the annual creditobligation, from what I understand.And the program is underfunded,both for the upfront State money andthe reimbursement of the tuitioncredit. I have heard that currentstudents will receive priority, so whoknows if any entering students willeven see the scholarships. Will therebe pressure on SUNY to fundscholarships? I can imagine thepublic outcry if indeed the programcomes up short, and those promised“free” tuition don’t get it. Finally, itremains to be seen what the politicalfallout of this program will be incoming years; one can certainlyexpect that increases in SUNYenrollments will be at the expense ofthe independent colleges anduniversities, and what impact thatwill have is anyone’s guess (and theirgreatest fear).SUNY Policy and Sanctuary

CampusesThe University Faculty Senate

endorsed a suite of statements andresolutions during our Winter Plenaryat SUNY Old Westbury that spoke toour support for tolerance, immigrantsand undocumented students. One ofthese endorsements supported thepetition that originated from facultyat UAlbany, which called upon SUNYto declare our campuses as sanctuarycampuses. The petition specified agroup of actions that thepetitioners—and, by ourendorsement, the UFS—called uponSUNY to institute. The Board ofTrustees passed a resolution onJanuary 24, 2017 regardingAffirmation of Support forUndocumented Students that

formalizes as policy a number ofpractices that SUNY has regardingundocumented and internationalstudents and that satisfies many (butnot all) of the items in the UAlbanypetition/UFS resolution. The resolution requested 11

actions. Here I provide you asummary of the requested actionsand what SUNY is doing/has done,based on the Board of Trusteesresolution and my subsequentcommunications with Joseph Porter,SUNY’s General Counsel.a. Prevent ICE from carrying out

immigration enforcement on campuswithout a warrant unless there is anexigent excuse. [The Board resolutionreinforces this practice.]b. The SUNY System should

instruct employees on their rightsand responsibilities if ICE agentsenter or seek to enter the campus:the default response should be toinquire into the justification andauthorization for any enforcementaction. [Some general guidance isprovided in SUNY’s immigrationwebsite, www.suny.edu/immigrationand the Board resolution, particularlywith regard to the continuing SUNYposition that a warrant or other courtorder is necessary for ICE action on acampus.]c. Ensure that SUNY System

campus police will not act on behalfof ICE officials to enforce immigrationlaws. Nor should they inquire aboutan individual’s immigration status.[This is a SUNY practice that isincluded in the Board resolution andamplified by requiring that campusesadopt policies consistent with the NYSAttorney General’s ImmigrationEnforcement Guidance.]d. The SUNY SYSTEM should

provide guidance that, wherever thecampus police officers havediscretion to arrest or to handle a lawenforcement action without arrest(e.g. by issuing a ticket), they shouldopt to avoid arrest. [Unfortunately,SUNY cannot do this explicitly orsystematically due to the requirement

Presidents Message…Continued from page 1

P R E S I D E N T ’ S C O R N E R

2

to follow State law, althoughUniversity Police always havediscretion.] An arrest, even for aminor traffic offense, may lead toconsequences well beyond theintended punishment or lawenforcement purpose for certainimmigrant students, such as theissuance of an ICE detainer andpossible immigration detention andremoval proceedings. Each SUNYcampus will ensure that if an arresttakes place, campus police will notreport such arrests to ICE and will nothold anyone unnecessarily, as isconsistent with state and federallaw. [SUNY does not voluntarily detainindividuals under ICE detainers unlessrequired by appropriate court order;the latter point is made explicit in theBoard resolution].e. Guarantee student privacy by

refusing to release informationregarding immigration status andcountry of origin to any governmentagency. [FERPA protects studentinformation with two exceptions:confidential information must besupplied in response to a court orderalleging terrorist activities, andinformation supplied through theStudent Exchange and Visitor Programis subject to review by SEVP fieldrepresentatives (applies to student onF and J visas)] The SUNY Systemshould also discontinue any use of e-verify. [This applies to faculty andstaff, and General Counsel Porter ischecking about the status of this tool]f. The SUNY System will affirm

that it will continue to admitstudents consistent with itsnondiscrimination policies so thatundocumented students will beconsidered for admission under thesame criteria as U.S. citizens orpermanent residents. [SUNY has donethis.]g. Continue to allow DACA

students to pay in-state residenttuition [SUNY reaffirms this in theBoard resolution] and provideaccommodations so they may

complete their studies, such as onlinedegree completion.h. Expand financial aid efforts for

students who have lost their DACAstatus as Columbia University hasdone. [This could be done throughscholarship sources that the campusfoundations oversee, but it is notsomething that can be done withother sources which SUNY controls.]i. Assign an administrative office

to take charge of and advertisecounseling for DACA students ontheir educational and legalsituations. Provide confidentialcounseling to students, faculty, andstaff who are at risk of deportation,or whose families face this risk.[SUNY is actively making suchinformation available through itsimmigration website, as the expertiseto provide legal counseling resides offcampus.]j. Make every effort to

collaborate with legal services andnonprofit organizations, legal clinics,and private lawyers and law firmswilling to take pro-bono cases toprovide free legal counsel to studentsplaced into removal proceedings.[Again, SUNY providing links on thewebsite. Many campuses have doneso as well.]k. Protect student privacy,

following its longstandingcompliance with the FamilyEducational Rights and Privacy Act(FERPA) [Reaffirmed in the Boardresolution]. The SUNY System shallremind faculty, and staff membersthat they should not inquire into anystudent’s immigration status unlessthey are strictly required to do so bylaw. [Such information is available onthe website, but this is something wecould do ourselves through ourcampus listservs.]Neither SUNY nor the Board of

Trustees is prepared to embrace theterm “sanctuary campus”, because theterm isn’t legally defined but insteadis imbued with a great deal ofpolitical baggage. But clearly most of

the items requested in the petitionhave been reaffirmed as SUNY policyand practice. In the final analysis, thebest thing that we can do as facultyand staff is ensure that our campusesare open and welcomingenvironments to immigrants(whether or not documented) andinternational students.Membership on College

CouncilsAnother resolution passed by the

UFS at our January plenary meetingcalls for legislative action to includecampus governance leaders on localcollege councils/boards. I met withSenator Ken LaValle and Assemblymember Deborah Glick, chairs of theHigher Education Committees of theSenate and Assembly, respectively, topropose that the State education lawbe changed as requested by ourresolution to make campusgovernance leaders full ex officiomembers of local college councils (orBoard of Trustees in the case of SUNYESF). I provided them copies of theUFS resolution as well as the wordingthat I believe would need to bechanged in education law to providefor the requested membership on thecouncils/boards. They were both veryreceptive to the idea. However, weagreed that this is something thatcan best be considered outside of thebudget period, so I will continue topursue this with them in comingweeks (with the support of SystemAdministration).General EducationIt has been nearly 20 years since

the Board of Trustees imposed aSUNY-wide General Educationrequirement, and in the meantimemany campuses have worked aroundthe edges of that policy to providetheir own unique “flavor” to localgeneral education and graduationrequirements. Also, two years agoSUNY adopted a policy on Diversity,Equity, and Inclusion which ispressing further engagement inthese areas, yet we don’t have any

universal general educationrequirement for our students. Morebroadly, we should be asking thequestion, does SUNY’s generaleducation program provide thecompetencies and experiences thatwe expect every student to have inthe 21st century? Following fromdiscussions among Alex Cartwright,the SUNY Provost, Nina Tamrowski,President of the Faculty Council ofCommunity Colleges, and myself, wehave agreed to begin the process ofexamining the nearly 20-year-oldGenEd policy by convening a group offaculty, students, and administratorsto brainstorm about what it is wewish to achieve in a 21st-centuryGenEd program. This meeting willoccur (or will have occurred,depending on when you read this) inlate May, with a focus on addressingthat broad question while adheringto the work that campuses havedone in revising their GenEdprograms, supporting the goal ofseamless transfer, and being mindfulof the expectations that MiddleStates has for GenEd in theaccreditation process. I expect this tobe the start of a more deliberativeand inclusive conversation startingnext fall, with the broadest possibleoutreach. I guess that’s one “gift” Iam giving to President Kay!Applied LearningBy now, campus plans are being

finalized, and I hope that many ofyou have been involved in thecampus decision as to whether or notapplied learning will be a graduationrequirement for your students. Themore interesting and worthwhileaspect of this process will be theimplementation of any changes thatyour campus decides to pursue—allthe while increasing theopportunities our students have toengage in high-impact appliedlearning activities.Graduate and Undergraduate

Research ConferencesOur Graduate and Research

3

P R E S I D E N T ’ S C O R N E R

Committee organized a verysuccessful Graduate ResearchConference at Empire State College inSaratoga Springs on March 7. Thisevent replaced the poster programon graduate research that we’ve heldat the Legislative Office Buildingevery other year. After considerablediscussion among the Graduate,Undergraduate, and Executivecommittees, and in consultation withCUNY, we decided that theinvestment of time, energy, andresources at the LOB didn’t have asufficient impact on legislators.Instead, we decided to try a SUNY-wide Graduate Conference, and JimCampbell, Director of LegislativeRelations for SUNY, brought several ofthe student presenters to Albany tomeet with legislators and/or staffdirectly. This provided us the best ofboth worlds: a forum for graduatestudents to learn from each other in avery different kind of venue than thetypical discipline-centeredconferences which scholars attend,coupled with a set of meetings withlegislators to show off some of theexcellent scholarship that ourgraduate students do.While we are meeting in Canton,

the third SUNY UndergraduateResearch Conference will be takingplace at two venues: SURC East atSuffolk County Community Collegeon April 21, and SURC West at SUNYFredonia on April 22. With over 240student presenters registered foreach event, this promises to be anoutstanding opportunity forundergraduate students to presenttheir research and scholarship toeach other. The SURC steeringcommittee decided to accept tworequests to host the conference thisyear when it became clear that wecould provide venues at sitesdispersed across the state. Whetherfuture SURC events will be at a singlecampus or multiple ones will dependon which campuses apply to host.But for this year, the opportunity wasnot to be missed. UFS provides some

financial support for theseconferences. In future years, I hopethat we will be able to engage someof the student presenters to meetwith legislators, either in Albany or intheir home districts, to show off theirresearch and keep bringing to thelegislators the message that theirsupport for SUNY really does pay off.SUNY Voices and the Joint

Statement on Shared GovernanceThe SUNY Voices project, a

commitment to improve the qualityof shared governance across theSUNY system, has continued with aseries of events this year, and moreplanned for next year. Many of youwill have joined us April 27-28 inSuffern for the third SUNY Voicesconference, thematically focused oncontinuity in shared governancethrough leadership transitions. Weare also planning a fall CampusGovernance Leadership institute tobring together student and facultygovernance leaders from acrossSUNY; this is scheduled for Oct 6-7,with one day devoted to all threegroups (State-op and communitycollege CGLs and studentgovernment presidents) meetingtogether, the second allowing eachgroup to caucus on its own issues.The three governance groups

worked together over the last fewmonths to craft a Joint Statement onShared Governance at the SUNYSystem level, following from aninvitation that Chancellor Zimpheroffered at our Fall Plenary. Thatstatement has been adopted by allthree groups at our spring meetingsand is provided elsewhere in thisBulletin. Chancellor Zimpher haspromised to include this statement inthe briefing book that is beingdeveloped for Chancellor Johnson, sothis is an especially good opportunityto build on the improvements inshared governance that haveoccurred as a result of ChancellorZimpher’s commitments. Our hope isthat these principles can helpimprove shared governance on ourcampuses as well.

Changes in the Composition ofthe FacultyThe UFS Operations Committee,

specifically past chair Thomas Sinclairand his graduate assistant AyloneKatzin of Binghamton University, hascompleted a large report on thechanges in the composition of thefaculty among the State-operatedcampuses over the last two decades.To quote from the study:“Among the most significant

findings of the report:“Total Black faculty in tenured and

tenure-track ranks increased from304 in 1995-96 to 323 in 2015-16, a gain of 19 positions

and a 6.2 percent increase. Thepercentage of Black faculty in theacademic ranks rose from 3.8 to

3.9 percent in this time. That is lessthan one Black faculty memberper campus. “The percentage of tenured and

tenure-track faculty system-widedeclined from 60.3 percent in1995-96 to 38.7 percent in 2015-

16.”Many of the findings of the report

simply confirm what we already see:little change in the number of facultyof color, and a very significantincrease in the number of non-tenure-stream faculty. The completereport is available on the UFSwebsite, and I urge you to downloadit and, especially, examine thechanges that have occurred on yourcampus. Open Access and Open

Educational ResourcesOur ways of reporting and sharing

the results of scholarly inquiry arechanging, and SUNY must change(and lead) in the initiatives that areoccurring on a national level. Oneinitiative that we are developing atthe system level mirrors efforts onmany of our campuses: theestablishment of open-accessrepositories through which scholarscan make their published workavailable to a wide audience, shouldthey so choose. SUNY is examining

how a system-wide repository couldbe established, not to supersedeefforts ongoing at the individualcampuses, but to coordinate campusefforts so that a scholar can find workthat has been produced by otherscholars across the SUNY system.These discussions are still in theirinitial stages, but I expect that thedevelopment of voluntary repositorymechanisms, generally coordinatedthrough our libraries, will continue togrow, with help from SUNY(especially for the smallercampuses).A somewhat related area of open

access is the ongoing national andinternational development of openeducational resources, such as opentextbooks, lectures, assignments, etc.A line item in the recently passedState budget allocates $4 million toSUNY, split between the State-operated and community collegecampuses. This funding, coupledwith commitments SUNY has madeto faculty and campuses through theinvestment fund and other grants,should provide significantopportunities for interested facultyto develop and make available onlineresources for use in classes. Thedevelopment of high-quality OERmaterials can be difficult, but therewards for students can beenormous, both in cost savings and inlinking to the wide array ofinformation that exists at ourfingertips.Some Final Retrospective

ThoughtsFinally, as is not surprising, I’ve

been thinking back to what I hadhoped to accomplish as yourPresident. Four years ago, when I waselected, I felt it was very important toimprove our relationship with theother body representing faculty andprofessional staff—UUP—andthrough a mutual commitment byUUP Fred Kowal and myself, I believewe have been very successful.Whenever possible, Fred and I attendeach other’s plenary meetings and

4

P R E S I D E N T ’ S C O R N E R

speak to the respective group aboutwhat our organization is involvedwith. Our leadership teams haveheld a number of meetings to discussissues of common concern, and whenpossible we coordinate our message,whether in advocacy to Statelegislators or in messages to ourconstituents.I also sought to improve our

communication both within andexternal to our organization. This

remains a work in progress, but withthe great support of colleagues suchas Joe Hildreth, Gwen Kay, JoeMarren, and Phil Glick, we haveestablished better communicationabout what transpires at ourplenaries, we have developed anonline presence, and I haveadvocated on behalf of our majorconcerns to legislative leaders. Thereis still much to be accomplished, and Iexpect that President Kay will put

additional pieces into place duringher tenure.It has been an honor and privilege

to serve you these last four years asPresident of the University FacultySenate and member of the SUNYBoard of Trustees. I believe the UFShas continued its growth as a bodythat can make a difference, that canwork effectively to recommend,encourage, and support thedevelopment of meaningful policies

for the State University of New York. Ihave sought to continue to elevatethe relevance of this body, and Ibelieve that not only have wecontinued to make strides over thelast four years, but that the trajectorythat was started by my predecessorswill continue under the ableleadership of President Gwen Kay. Iam delighted to leave you in goodhands.

Nancy L. ZimpherChancellor

The State University of New York

First, and LastingImpressions of SUNY

I met The State University of NewYork in 2009. In June of that year Ibecame the sixty-year-old system’stwelfth chancellor, and I immediatelyembarked on a campus-by-campustour to get to know the state and theinstitution, to discover how we couldelevate SUNY across the board to anew level of excellence. On the road, over the course of one

hundred days, I met a universitysystem that felt like a looseconstellation of schools. There wereheralded colleges, universities, andprograms among them, and many ofthem were doing a good jobproducing skilled, knowledgeablegraduates. But it quickly becameclear to me that we weren’t makingthe most of being a system. We

weren’t thinking or acting in the kindof coordinated, disciplined way thatcould empower us to do the best jobwe possibly could to serve the peopleof New York. In New York State today, about 70

percent of jobs require a collegedegree but only 46 percent of adultshave one, putting millions of NewYorkers at a disadvantage thattranslates into fewer career choices,limited mobility, and low income. Itdoesn’t have to be this way. Frankly,it can’t be this way: New York’sstrength and vibrancy depend onclosing that gap. Eight years ago, SUNY looked in

the mirror. We assessed our strengthsand our students’ and New York’sneeds, and we set clear goals forimprovement. Cultivating sharedgovernance—shared responsibilityfor the better student outcomes weneed to achieve—has beenindispensable to our transformationas a system. With the formal additionof UFS, FCCC, and Student Assemblyvoices to the Board of Trustees andthe chancellor’s cabinet, SUNYleadership is better informed andstronger than ever. Together, weforged and followed a bold strategicplan. We advocated for and won arational tuition plan. We created fromthe ground up multiple initiatives—seamless transfer, Smart Track, OpenSUNY, applied learning, and dozensmore—to make SUNY moreaccessible and to help students finish

their degrees on time and protectthem from debt. We are reinventingand elevating teacher training. Wemade history in sexual assaultprevention and diversity-buildingmeasures. We increased transparencyand accountability. We built workingpartnerships with our colleagues inK-12 to create seamless educationpipelines in New York and to thatmake sure when students finish highschool, they’re ready to succeed inwhatever comes next. All of this system-defining,

progressive, transformative workhappened at the hands of many—because of the care, expertise, anddedication of thousands in the SUNYfamily. Public higher education is in the

business of creating opportunity, ofcreating knowledgeable, skilled,conscientious citizens andprofessionals. We know that withmore education, people are morelikely to be more civically engaged.Countries with more educated,engaged citizens have strongereconomies, more stablegovernments, and an over-all higherquality of life. This is the picture of asociety that we at SUNY envision andthat we work toward realizingtogether every day, every year. SUNY’s mission does not change. It

is forever grounded in ourunwavering, solemn commitment toserve all New Yorkers—to put highereducation within reach for everyone,

to offer the widest spectrum ofcourses and degrees, and to ensurethat any and everyone who attends aSUNY school feels safe, welcome, andhopeful for their future.What I have learned for certain

over the last eight years, what I havebeen more convinced of every day, isthe inexhaustibility of SUNY’spotential to do good for the state andgood in the world. So, thank you. Thank you to the courageous and

thoughtful presidents of the UFS whoserved SUNY with me, Ken O’Brienand Peter Knuepfer, and for theseriousness and good will theybrought to the SUNY leadership tableand the consequential roles theyplayed in shared governance. Thankyou, SUNY’s tens of thousands offaculty, for sharing your expertise inthe thousands of fields, disciplines,and initiatives our systemencompasses. Thank you for beingstrong voices, speaking to the truthof the necessity and value of publichigher education. Thank you for yourdedication to your students and yourresearch, to elevating SUNY to newlevels of excellence. Thank you for allof this, and for your partnership inbuilding The State University of NewYork that we know today—acohesive, focused, dynamic, andcoordinated system that is ready tomeet the challenging needs of achanging world.

5

P R E S I D E N T ’ S C O R N E R

F R OM T H E C H A N C E L LO R

Alexander N. CartwrightProvost and

Executive Vice Chancellor

Transitions

It’s hard for me to believe that thismarks my last contribution to theUFS Bulletin; that in fact, my days atSUNY are winding down. As some ofyou may know, I will be leavingSUNY shortly to move to theUniversity of Missouri-Columbia(Mizzou) as Chancellor. It is anincredibly bitter-sweet transition forme. I have been part of the SUNYfamily for over 20 years, having hada terrific experience as a facultymember, department chair, andadministrator at the University atBuffalo before coming to work asSystem Provost in 2014. I will be at System until the end of

July and still have a number ofimportant items on my to-do list;one of which is to extend my sincerethanks to the University Senate. I amparticularly grateful for my workwith faculty governance as Provost.Having a strong workingrelationship with the UniversityFaculty Senate and the FacultyCouncil of Community Colleges wasvery important to me andsomething that proved to beinvaluable. I welcomed and benefited from

the guidance of President Knuepferand from my interactions with thebroader Senate. I enjoyed its toughquestions and high expectations andbenefitted greatly from its wisecounsel. I loved being able to share

early ideas with the Senate and toget its feedback. I will truly miss myinteractions with the UFS.Of course, the Provost’s Office at

System is far from the only changeahead. Summer 2017 marks a periodof transition for SUNY as a whole aswe celebrate Chancellor Zimpher’stenure and prepare to welcomeChancellor Johnson. We are alsopreparing to welcome a number ofnew campus presidents. Thesechanges come at a time when weanticipate federal education andimmigration policy changes and arealso navigating a new State plan forfree tuition. We are working to meetthe needs of an increasingly diversestudent body and recruitingstudents in an increasinglycompetitive environment where thestates closest to New York are facingsignificant declines in the numbersof high school graduates. The interesting thing about

transitions in SUNY is that wecollectively stand on the incrediblystrong foundation of our mission to,“provide to the people of New Yorkeducational services of the highestquality, with the broadest possibleaccess, fully representative of allsegments of the population in acomplete range of academic,professional and vocationalpostsecondary programs….”We have been given a charge and

hold a commitment to New Yorkersthat is unwavering and consistentregardless of leadership transitions,“These services and activities shallbe offered through a geographicallydistributed comprehensive system ofdiverse campuses which shall havedifferentiated and designatedmissions designed to provide acomprehensive program of highereducation, to meet the needs of bothtraditional and non-traditionalstudents and to address local,regional and state needs and goals.”In fact, institutionally, I am more

confident than ever in SUNY’s abilityto weather challenges, adapt to

change, and also to be successful innew engagements andopportunities. Educational Effectiveness and

Strategic Enrollment or EESEOver the past six months, Chief

Financial Officer Eileen McLoughlinand Senior Vice Chancellor JohannaDuncan-Poitier and I have had theopportunity to meet face to facewith campus leadership teams aspart of the Educational Effectivenessand Strategic Enrollment (EESE)planning process. These candidconversations provided us with anopportunity to hear first-hand aboutprogress toward PerformanceImprovement Plan Goals(benchmarks set in the areas ofaccess, completion, success, inquiryand engagement). Each campusleader also had the opportunity toshare their vision for theirinstitution—now and through2025; discuss strengths, challengesand opportunities; and, importantly,identify ways that SystemAdministration could be supportivemoving forward. Our goals for the process were to:

re-establish the enrollment/resourceconnection; create and/or modifyplans/policies/resource strategiesthat eliminate barriers to greaterperformance; eliminate theperceptions and reality ofunwarranted internal enrollmentcompetition; leverage ourconnectedness to better meet theneeds of applicants on a regionaland System-wide basis; andfacilitate conversations aboutmission creep/distinctiveness. The really good news is that, in

practice, the EESE meetings arehelping us determine how toachieve these goals. Aftercompleting 63 of these meetings(SUNY Downstate’s meeting waspostponed to give the new Presidenttime to settle in but will be heldsoon), we have a dynamic lensthrough which we can see a clearpath forward. There are really

outstanding areas of strength allacross the System—programs,policies, practices, and initiatives—that could be further scaled to othercampuses. There are also commonchallenges that we think can benefitfrom collaborative solutions. Common StrengthsOne of the very first strengths we

identified during the EESE processcenters on vision. Clarity aroundcampus identity—what makes aninstitution distinctive—was verystrong at campuses that seemed tobe weathering challengesparticularly well. Specifically, theyhad identified a clear vision, thatwas also flexible, allowing thecampus to adapt as its operatingenvironment inevitably changes,whether these are changes inpersonnel, the needs of incomingstudents, advances in the fields onwhich their degree programs arebased, or demands for programs innew and emerging fields. We also saw that while nearly

every campus had plans foracademic program growth andmany for research growth; theirapproaches varied. Some of the mosttransformative planning came fromthinking about how to build on andaround existing areas of expertise.There are new programs campuseswant to offer to meet emergingdemands, but there may be ways tobuild on existing strengths to getthere. Several campuses that are

consistently seeing gains inretention and graduation rates haverealized that the changing demandsof students required a new approachto service and support. Instead ofsiloed services that are on standbywaiting for students to seek help,they have transitioned to anenvironment where the student is atthe center of an integrated approachto student support; where all serviceproviders are talking to and learningfrom one another about how best tomeet individual student needs and,

6

F R OM T H E P R O V O S T A N D E X E C U T I V E V I C E C H A N C E L LO R

7

where possible, are located in onecentral location. Service hours arealso extended to evenings andweekends. This approach, somethingthat research from the GatesFoundation has supported for anumber of years through itsIntegrated Planning and Advising forStudent Success or IPASS initiative, isparticularly important as we servemore at-risk and non-traditionalstudents. Another marker of strength we

identified at a number of campuseswas investment in faculty supportand innovations. Supporting moreinterdisciplinary connections in thecurriculum and between and acrossfaculty provides a more practicalexperience for students andencourages innovation. Initiativesinclude multi-disciplinaryappointments; dedicated learningcenters for faculty andadministrators to ensure continuedprofessional development; andmultiple outlets for faculty to learnthe most effective approaches forhigh-quality online and blendedlearning instruction. An increasing focus on data

analytics to inform student learningand retention is emerging as a keystrength; this is an area where statesupport for System-level analyticscould be invaluable. We are waitingon word of a 2020 proposal that willsupport University Centers lendingtheir expertise to smallerinstitutions to build a system-wideeffort. Summer or Bridge programs are

consistently proving to be successful.Students who weren’t sure if theycould succeed in college were able toease into college life through theseprograms and learn valuable skills tohelp them prepare for college-levelwork and to interact with facultyand staff.And the list goes on…ChallengesAs long as the list of strengths is

that exists within the system, the

EESE process underscored the factthat we are also facing multiplecommon challenges. A number of campuses are facing

enrollment declines and, as notedabove, competition for new studentsis at an all-time high. We are seeingsome progress in the retention andgraduation rates of students whoidentify as under-representedminority students, yet achievementgaps persist. In addition to gapsbetween URM students and theirnon-URM peers, we continue to seeachievement gaps between malestudents and their female peers, andbetween academicallydisadvantaged students and theircounterparts. Consistent with SUNY’sDiversity, Equity, and Inclusion policy,and consistent with our mission,closing achievement gaps must beone of SUNY’s highest prioritiesgoing forward.We heard almost universally that

we need targeted investments inprofessional development forfaculty, staff and administrators tolearn new strategies to help addressachievement gaps, to adapt tochanging technologies, to exploreopen educational resources, to planfor and respond to crises, and more.In all of our meetings, it was clear

that campuses were open to, andmany were eager for, a collaborativeapproach to problem solving. One ofthe ways that we are trying to dothat is by aligning the performanceimprovement fund to the EESEprocess. Aligning the Performance

Improvement Fund to EESEAt each EESE meeting, we talked

to campuses about potentialinvestment fund projects that wouldallow us to scale up successes andaddress challenges. Campuses wereasked to succinctly submit theirideas for review. We received 293proposal ideas from 51 campusesand reviewed them through a lens ofmeeting challenges, continuousimprovement, and opportunities for

collaboration.Our review of all of these ideas

found that they could be groupedinto 4 strategic areas:1. Shaping Effective EducationalStrategy;- New Forms of Degree andCredentialing Programs

- New Technology-EnabledInnovations for SUNYEducational Offerings

- An Expansion of AppliedLearning Opportunities

2. Strengthening StudentRecruitment and SuccessInfrastructures;

3. Enhancing Diversity andInclusion Across the System;and

4. Knowledge Creation, Creativityand Impact.

These areas are consistent withSUNY Excels and with the needsexpressed in EESE meetings. Buildingon what we have learned from lastyears’ Performance Investment Fundprocess, this year, we identifiedcontent experts to help articulatestrategic objectives in each of thefour strategic areas above. Thesecontent experts or facilitatorsarticulated principles/criteria for thescreening of campus proposals; theythen selected those proposal ideasthat they felt had the highestpotential to not only help oneinstitution, but to more broadly scalesuccesses or address commonchallenges.The most distinctive component

of this year’s performance fundprocess is our commitment tosustainable progress. To do that wepropose bringing campuses togetheras communities of practice or whatwe are going to call: “communitiesof innovation” in each of the fourareas identified above.These Communities of Innovation

will serve as ready networks to helpsolve difficult challenges. After theawarding decisions are made for thisyear, System will facilitate ongoingregional or system-wide discussions

for award winners and othercampuses seeking to participate.The goal is to encourage new and

stronger campus connections andpartnerships that increase theimpact of the PIF investmenttogether with other campus andsystem resources to enable the bestoutcomes in each of these areas. Ibelieve that this will create anenduring framework for strategicand collaborative system andcampus planning in mission-criticalstrategic areas across the system.All of this work will be very

beneficial as SUNY moves throughits many upcoming transitions. Itallows funding support for essentialprogress in priority areas that arenot leadership-dependent butrather foundational. Leading this process has only

underscored for me the manystrengths of SUNY and its vastpotential. There are many transitionsahead…but you, and SUNY areready. Again, my thanks to all of you. I

hope to see Mizzou/SUNYpartnerships in the future!

F R OM T H E P R O V O S T A N D E X E C U T I V E V I C E C H A N C E L LO R

Eileen McLoughlinVice Chancellor

Financial Services and Financial Officer

State University of New York (SUNY)2017/18 Operating and Capital

Budget SummaryGreetings,Here is a summary of the recently passed New York State Enacted Budget

relevant to SUNY.Background:A 2017/18 New York State budget has been passed. Major highlights include the passage of a modified version of Governor

Cuomo’s Excelsior Scholarship Program, a slight increase in community college“base aid” per FTE, restoration of funding for University-wide programs reducedin the Executive Budget, and the return of a predictable tuition plan andMaintenance of Effort for the State-operated campuses. The definition ofMaintenance of Effort in the enacted budget is flat direct cash support withcontinued support of indirect costs.The positive implications for the current year Budget is that cash support is

stable and there is continued indirect State support, meaning the State paysthe debt service and fringe benefit costs. The chart below illustrates thehistory.

The negative implication, is that there is no additional direct cash support toinvest in salary increases or programs. However, the capital budget has beenincreased to enable SUNY to address critical maintenance issues in facilities.There are additional challenges in the budget with the uncertainty of the

impacts of the Excelsior Program. The program provides free tuition forqualified students. The challenge for the State-operated Campuses is theunknown of the impact on enrollment and managing the administrativeprocess.

The enacted budget also allows SUNY to raise tuition up to $200 dollars for

the next four years. This will be an ongoing discussion as SUNY will need toconsider the resource needs of the Campuses versus the desire of our Studentsto maintain tuition levels.Overall a stable budget in terms of operating and capital funding, but a

budget that does present its challenges. A summary of the funding changes,both operating and capital, along with a summary of relevant legislation canbe found in CFO McLoughlin’s presentation to the SUNY Faculty Senate at theApril Plenary in Canton. Budget Office Report - Eileen McLoughlinFunding Changes:The 2017/18 Enacted Budget table below only reflects funding directly to

SUNY and does not include indirect support(e.g.,fringe benefits which areprojected to increase year-to-year) and/or funding available in other areas ofthe budget.

State University of New York (SUNY) 2017/18 Capital BudgetAppropriation SummaryThe current Capital Budget appropriation bill for SUNY includes all prior year

appropriations (re-appropriations) and new appropriations as detailed in thetable below. For the Educational Facilities program, the Executive’s proposed$396.6M lump sum for high priority critical maintenance projects has been

reduced by $100.0M and reallocated to each campus based on the usualformula. While this $100M is for critical maintenance projects, theappropriation does allow for this funding to be used for new construction. Inaddition, language that was included in the Executive Budget appropriation billauthorizing the use of the “design/build” project delivery mechanism is notincluded.In addition, several prior year re-appropriations for specific projects have

been repurposed, including:• $8.0M for two appropriations originally provided in 2008 for Binghamton

University to support the renovation of a former manufacturing facility at 48Corliss Avenue in Johnson City for the Decker School of Nursing. The originalappropriations provided $5.0 million for new athletic fields and $3.0 million fora programming study related to establishing a Law School at BinghamtonUniversity.• $5.0 million for an appropriation originally provided in 2008 for Stony

Brook University to support the development of academic and studentprogram space at the Southampton campus. The original appropriationprovided $5.0 million for a monorail feasibility study.• $2.5 million of remaining balances on several strategic initiative re-

appropriations originally provided for various projects at Delhi are repurposedto allow these funds to support the renovation of Farnsworth Hall.ITEMThe Excelsior Scholarship ProgramSUMMARY- Subject to appropriation and based on the availability of funds, the HigherEducation Services Corporation (HESC) is provided authority to establishapplication procedures and a method of selecting recipients to eligiblestudents for a last dollar award of up to $5,500 (or actual tuition).

- Eligible students are as follows:o Attend a public institutiono If student was previously enrolled in college, they must havecompleted at least 30 credits per year, in the program of study, toqualify. If previous credits were in a private college, at least 30 creditsper year must be accepted upon transfer in order to qualify.

F R OM T H E V I C E C H A N C E L LO R F O R F I N A N C I A L S E R V I C E S A N D C H I E F F I N A N C I A L O F F I C E R

8

9

o After acceptance in the program, students must complete at least 30credits per year, and enroll in at least 12 credits per semester, in theprogram of study. HESC can prescribe limited exceptions to thisrequirement in regulation.

o In a student's last semester, they must complete at least 12 credits,with at least one course needed to meet graduation requirements.

o HESC will promulgate modified criteria for students with disabilities.o Meet Adjusted Gross Income limits as follows:

� $100,000 in 2017/18� $110,000 in 2018/19� $125,000 in 2019/20 and thereafter.o Awards are limited to the length of the program (2 year, 4 year, or 5year). HESC can define allowable interruptions in study in regulation.

o Must have their Grade Point Average (GPA) certified by their institutionto indicate that they are eligible to successfully complete theircoursework.

o Must agree to live in New York State for a continuous number of yearsequal to the duration of the award received. There is no requirementthat the student be employed during that period, but they cannot workin another State. If a student fails to meet these requirements theaward will be converted to a student loan.

- Tuition charged to recipients of the Excelsior Scholarship program is“frozen” at 2016/17 levels until 2021/22. Starting in 2021/22 and everyfour years after, the new “frozen” rate will be the rate approved for theupcoming year

- SUNY and CUNY institutions are required to provide an ExcelsiorScholarship Program Tuition Credit to eligible students to meet thedifference between $5,500 and the charged tuition rateo Note that the repayment of this Excelsior Scholarship Tuition Credit isintended to be made by the State and is added to the re- introducedMaintenance of Effort.

ITEMPredictable Tuition / Maintenance of EffortSUMMARY- The SUNY Board of Trustees is authorized to increase Resident

Undergraduate tuition by a maximum of $200/year from 2017/18 to2020/21.

- The Maintenance of Effort (MOE) provision Enacted with the 2011/12budget, stipulating that State shall provide funding at a level equal to orgreater than the amount of funding provided in the 2011/12 state fiscalyear, has been restored starting in 2017/18 and ending in 2020/21.o State responsibility to repay SUNY for paying the Excelsior ScholarshipProgram Tuition Credit has also been added to this MOE, and fundinghas been provided in Transfer Language to effectuate the payment upto $20.0M.

- Campuses continue to be responsible for the SUNY TAP Gap / TuitionCredit, which requires campuses to cover the difference between SUNY'scurrent Resident Undergraduate Tuition Rate and $5,000.

ITEMEnhanced Tuition AwardsSUMMARY- Subject to appropriation and based on the availability of funds, EnhancedTuition Awards shall be made to eligible students in approved programsat not-for-profit private degree granting institutions in an amount, whencombined with the student’s TAP award and the required matching awardfrom the institution, shall not exceed $6,000.

- Eligibility requirements mirror those found in the Excelsior Scholarshipprogram.

- Participating private institutions are required to provide a matchingaward that is applied after all institutional aid received by that student.

- Tuition rates charged to students receiving an award shall not be changedfor the duration of time the student receives the award.

- Institutions may choose not to participate in the program.ITEMPart-Time Student Scholarship at SUNY and CUNY Community CollegesSUMMARY- A new scholarship program is created at and managed by HESC that will,subject to appropriation and availability of funds, provide awards of up to

$1,500 a semester to eligible students for a total of four semesters- Eligible students:o Must take between 6 and 12 credits a semester.o Maintain a 2.0 or above Grade Point Average.

ITEMReport on Making College More AffordableSUMMARY- On June 30, 2018 the President of HESC is to deliver a report on makingcollege more affordable. Such report shall include:o Options for a program to allow students to refinance student loan debtfor students out of college for at least 10 years

o Alternative methods to lower student loan debto A review student housing and costs at SUNY and CUNYo Recommendations on programs and options for families to affordcollege, including pre-paid college programs

o Additional affordability options at public and private universities,including:

• Reducing textbook costs• Reducing the cost of student housing• Student transportation• Reduction of administrative costs

F R OM T H E V I C E C H A N C E L LO R F O R F I N A N C I A L S E R V I C E S A N D C H I E F F I N A N C I A L O F F I C E R

Joe Hildreth, Distinguished Service Professor from SUNY Potsdam honored withthe Carl P. Wiezalis University Faculty Senate Fellow Award.

10

• The creation of on campus jobso An exploration, in partnership with the SUNY and CUNY Chancellor, ofhow students who receive opportunity program benefits retain thosebenefits when they transfer or move between community colleges andfour year institutions.

ITEMHospital Disproportionate Share (DSH) Payments / ReimbursementsSUMMARY- Language is provided in the Department of Health (DOH) “Global Cap”appropriations that makes a portion available for payment of DSHreimbursement to SUNY Hospitals dependent on those institutionsproviding sufficient financial information to evaluate the need to supportcurrent and future reimbursements.

ITEMNYS Child Welfare Worker Incentive Scholarship Program / Child Welfare

Worker Loan Forgiveness ProgramSUMMARY- Would provide full cost of attendance scholarships (based on SUNY costsand not more than $20K if attending a private institution) to eligiblestudents working in a not-for-profit child welfare agency on acompetitive basis and agrees to remain working at such an institution fora five-year period.

- Would also provide up to ten loan forgiveness awards on a competitivebasis.

ITEMExcelsior Jobs Program Tax CreditSUMMARY- The prospective Enacted Budget creates the Excelsior Jobs Tax CreditProgramo This will allows a participant in the Excelsior Jobs program to claim atax credit that is equal to fifty percent of the participants federalresearch and development tax credit on the same expenditures in NYSduring the taxable year, however the tax credit will not be greater thansix percent of the total attributable research and developmentexpenditures.

ITEMExcelsior Jobs Program / Start-Up NY AdjustmentsSUMMARY- Adjusts the definition of significant job creation for the Excelsior Jobsprogram from 50 to 10 for manufacturing jobs, from twenty to ten foragricultural jobs, from 300 to 100 net new jobs for financial services, etc.,from 20 net new jobs to ten for scientific research and development firms,others from 300 to 150.

- Also newly defines what is a significant capital investment; $1.0M formanufacturing jobs, $250.0K for agriculture jobs, $3.0M for financialservices, $15.0M for a distribution center, $3.0M for research anddevelopment, $3.0M for other businesses

- Repeals the reporting requirements for the START-UP NY / Excelsior Jobsprogram. Both the State reporting requirements and the individualbusiness reporting requirements are repealed.

ITEMEconomic Development ReportsSUMMARY- Requires the Department of Economic Development to prepare an annualcomprehensive report listing economic development assistance providedby the New York State Urban Development Corporation and theDepartment of Economic Development.

In addition, legislation was provided to allow for the use of the Design /Build approach for several (outside of SUNY) upstate capital projects, includingthe prospective Life Sciences Laboratory project and the Executive Budgetinitiative to recognize the cost of facility related workers by moving their salarycosts (in the first instance) to hard dollar capital appropriations is also included.

F R OM T H E V I C E C H A N C E L LO R F O R F I N A N C I A L S E R V I C E S A N D C H I E F F I N A N C I A L O F F I C E R

Chancellor Nancy Zimpher and Faculty Senate President Pete Knuepfer at theSUNY Canton Plenary.

11

Marc CohenPresident, SUNY Student Assembly

Before I share with you theprogress made by the Assembly overthe past year, I wanted to thankPresident Knuepfer and the entireUniversity Faculty Senate forextending such a warm welcome tothe Assembly, and to me personally,over the past year.Just before our September

meeting, Nick Simons, my Chief ofStaff, and three of ourrepresentatives were honored to jointhe University Faculty Senate inAlbany for its Fall Planning Meeting.With the Student Assemblyrepresented on the Student Life,Governance, Ethics, Undergraduate,and Graduate committees, we hadthe opportunity to insert studentperspectives into engagingdiscussions at the faculty level.Joining the Senate at its Fall,

Winter, and Spring Plenaries thispast year were some of thehighlights of my tenure as Presidentto date, and the generosity of thecampus hosts at Cortland, OldWestbury, and Canton is very muchappreciated.Since taking office in June, I’ve

had the honor to serve as presidentand trustee on behalf of the 600,000students across the SUNY system.Since my first Board meeting, I’vevoted against raising tuition to makeup for losses from thediscontinuation of SUNY 2020,arguing that our families shouldn’tcarry a heavier burden, and instead

advocating for expanded state aid. Ialso voted in June to approve thenew SUNY patent policy, which waschanged for the first time indecades. The policy gives moreflexibility to students and facultyaffiliated with the University whenregistering patents and inventions.

At September’s Board meeting,graciously hosted by SUNY Cortland,we made history with a new policyspearheaded by student leaders atour Spring Conference: Ban the Box.Formally known as a ban on “pre-admission inquiry into prior felonyconvictions,” this was brought to theAssembly by the University atAlbany’s Graduate StudentAssociation and the New PaltzStudent Association. Chairman CarlMcCall praised SUNYSA for takingsuch a persistent and head-onapproach to this important issue,and I articulated my thanks to NewPaltz and Albany, as well as all of thestudent leaders who played such asignificant role in its passage.Also in September, the Board re-

instated the Student Life Committee,co-chaired by myself and TrusteeEunice Lewin. The Committee had itsfirst formal gathering at Cortland,and Trustee Lewin and I have usedthis platform throughout the year towork with students directly onissues like food security, mentalhealth services, issues faced bystudent veterans and active dutymilitary personnel, as well asservices specifically for students ofcolor. The Student Life Committeehas met at each Board meetingsince, with discussions includingfaculty, staff, and students from ahalf-dozen campuses talking aboutthe issues that directly affect thestudent experience with the trusteeswho set policies for their colleges.On September 23-24, we held the

first semi-annual PresidentialSummit in Albany, where ourcampus SGA presidents met to

discuss concerns and learn from eachother’s experiences. This event wasalso meant to enhance a feeling ofunity throughout the system. Beinga system this large andcomprehensive, our unified power isimmense. Advocacy breakoutsessions were held in addition topanel discussions, a meeting withChancellor Zimpher and other seniorstaff, and remarks from SAleadership. There is a largeopportunity to sustain this event formany years to come. We also had avery successful spring meeting ofSGA Presidents in Albany in lateFebruary. We were joined by AlbanyMayor Kathy Sheehan, AngelaWright from SUNY GovernmentRelations and Carlos Medina, SUNY’sChief Diversity Officer. Diversity wasthe theme of the summit and manyconversations stemmed fromensuring diversity is a main facet ofthis system moving forward.One goal of mine this year has

been to really enforce the notionthat my work is closely overseen andguided by the representatives thathave been elected by the studentleaders of each sector. I broughtTreasurer Emeritus Robert Drummback to the Executive Committee asChief of Staff for Student Affairs, andhe’s gone above and beyondoverseeing our representatives andcampus relations chairs.Community Colleges Committee

Chair Josh Barry, the student trusteeat Finger Lakes Community Collegeand a former representative himself,has led the committee throughperiods of turnover and led thecharge on numerous initiatives. OurState-Operated CampusesCommittee, led by Nicole Pereira,President from SUNY Oneonta andincoming Student Assembly VicePresident, has made significantstrides in policy development thisyear, including passing acomprehensive policy on broad-based fees at our colleges and

universities. I’m thrilled to haveNicole join our senior leadership asVice-President for the upcomingterm.Legislative Affairs Director Rey

Muniz worked actively on theformulation of our legislativeagenda for the year ahead. Withsuch critical issues facing highereducation institutions and students,there are so many opportunities toadvocate and ensure the studentvoice is conveyed effectively.In late November, the SUNY FY18

proposed budget request passed theTrustee’s Finance & Administrationand Executive Committees. I votedagainst the budget, as it calls forincreases to tuition, a position firmlyopposed by the Assembly.That same day, I also testified

before the Tuition AssistanceProgram subcommittee of the JointCommittee on Higher Education. Weworked with members of the Senateand Assembly Higher Educationcommittees, as well as AssemblyWays & Means and Senate Finance;we planned to target our advocacyin Albany, Binghamton, Rochester,Buffalo, Manhattan, Long Island, andthe North Country.Governor Cuomo introduced a

proposal to make tuition free forstudents from households withunder $125,000 of income called theExcelsior Scholarship program. Theproposal works by covering thedifference between the cost oftuition and financial aid thatstudents receive including TAP andPELL grants. According to theGovernor's office, they expect theprogram to cost the state a little over$160 million per year without anyeffect on our taxes. The StudentAssembly stands firmly in favor ofmeasures to provide moreaccessibility to affordable publichigher education. I articulatedduring interviews and subsequentconversations that the debt issue inour state and country go far beyond

F R OM T H E P R E S I D E N T O F T H E S T U D E N T A S S EMB LY

12

tuition, however, to include fees andcosts associated with obtaining ahigher education degree. I was invited to attend Governor

Cuomo’s State of the State Addressand brought with me a few localmembers of the Student Assemblyleadership team. The Governorunveiled his plans for the year aheadwhich included a rigorous highereducation agenda. We were happy tohear a number of our initiativesincorporated including child carefunding, ridesharing, the DREAM Act,and state aid. He also discussedfunding for early college highschools and P-Tech schools, andaligning regional economicdevelopment councils andcommunity college regional councilsthrough an industry-drivenpartnership.As the Board of Trustees met in

late January, I testified alongsideChancellor Zimpher, Senior ViceChancellor and CFO EileenMcLoughlin, and members of theirsenior leadership teams about therising costs of college. Among otherissues discussed were mental healthresources on campus, food securityissues, and campus child care. Inaddition, college preparednessprograms, community college baseaid, and EOP funding were recurringthemes throughout the afternoon.A week later, many members of

our Executive Committee called theirfederal representatives in an effortto elevate widespread discontentwith executive orders coming fromthe Trump administrationconcerning undocumentedindividuals. This united effort willhopefully catch the attention ofpertinent members in thelegislature. SUNYSA stands squarelyin the corner of our undocumentedstudents and we must make it clearthat SUNY is, and will always be, asafe, welcoming and inclusive family.We began March with a bang,

with advocacy days at the Capitol on

Thursday, March 2, for HigherEducation Advocacy Day and March3 for our Local Advocacy Day. OnThursday, we joined groups fromacross the state to lobby legislatorsfor our higher education asks. Onelarge piece of our advocacy centeredaround the mental health proposalput forth by the SUNYSA LegislativeAffairs team and Dr. Ricardo Azziz,Chief Officer for Academic Healthand Hospital Affairs at SUNY SystemAdministration. We had materialdisseminated across the system sostudents on their campuses couldreach out to local members, byphone, to talk about these issues in amore intimate setting. Rey Munizand his team did a spectacular jobwith Dr. Azziz and his.In collaboration with CUNY’s

University Student Senate, wereleased two joint statements thisyear. In October, we discussedinjecting a substantive highereducation question into the recentpresidential debate. Continuedcollaboration between ourorganizations opens many doors toincreased advocacy and unites thestudents of the public institutions ofhigher education in this state. At theclose of January, SUNYSA and CUNYUSS authored a joint statement todenounce the executive orderregarding immigration signed byPresident Trump. This efforthighlighted the strength of publichigher education in the state of NewYork. It also served as a reminder ofthe collective strength of ourstudent population, now greaterthan one million students betweenthe two systems. The releaseincluded a resource sheet forstudents who then called theirrepresentatives to voice theirconcerns.I’ve also been grateful to work

with faculty on the development ofthe TeachNY program and policiesover the past year, workingalongside Dr. Knuepfer and many

faculty representatives.I traveled to Saratoga for the

Capital Region TeachNY Speak-out inOctober. Students, teachers, andmaster teachers from around thearea gathered at SUNY Empire todiscuss the importance of teacherpreparedness and K-12 education.Chancellor Zimpher andCommissioner Elia did not hesitateto express their deepest gratitude toSUNY’s faculty for your involvementin the initiative.TeachNY met with the Chancellor,

Provost, and members of theSteering Committee to discuss aproposed resolution for the Board ofTrustees adopting the TeachNYprogram in early January. Along withmembers of my team, I attendedand worked in breakout groups todiscuss the resolution's variousprovisions with faculty andadministrators from SUNYcampuses, state agencies, and P-12schools.I was re-elected to another term

as President at our SpringConference in Rochester a few weeksago. With a new year comes newchallenges and new initiatives tofocus on. For me, one of the mostimportant things is continuing tobuild our network of studentgovernments across the system. As aStudent Assembly, we speak with alarge voice because we can speak forstudents across the system. Thatmuch power necessitatesrepresenting the interests of allstudents, whether they are highlyengaged on their campuses or not.Luckily, we have built a strongrelationship this year with thestudent government associationsacross the system and their studentpresidents. This brings us one stepcloser to representing all students,all across the state, equally. Another important issue for this

coming year is advancing the fightfor college affordability. TheGovernor did us a favor by offering

help to the middle class with theExcelsior Scholarship. That said, otheraspects of debt need to beaddressed as well. We have themouthpiece and the will power tobattle for these issues that areimportant to students across thestate, no matter what campus theyattend. Again, that starts withrepresenting the students asaccurately as we can. I look forwardto what we as students can do oncewe all realize the true power of ourcollective voice.In closing, I want to extend my

deepest thanks to PresidentKnuepfer. As a trustee, Pete has beena strong supporter of the StudentAssembly and a guide, mentor, andfriend to me personally. I lookforward to working with Dr. Kay overthe next year in her roles asPresident and Trustee, and theStudent Assembly and I willremember the contributions thatPete has made to strengtheningshared governance at the StateUniversity of New York.

F R OM T H E P R E S I D E N T O F T H E S T U D E N T A S S EMB LY

13

Norman GoodmanStony Brook University

Nancy Zimpher,One Big

Audacious Idea

The next section of this issuecontains articles by severalindividuals who, in differentpositions, have worked withChancellor Zimpher and have offeredtheir reflection on that experience.In reviewing these reflections, I wasinitially at a loss for what I mightcontribute to it. As I thought aboutit more and more, I decided to focuson her role as an advocate for SUNYand her ability to understand theimportance of balancing the needfor SUNY to act as a system (shecoined the term “systemness” for thispurpose) with the wisdom ofallowing campus flexibility to carryout system initiatives based on theirinstitutional missions—and doingthis in the context of sharedgovernance.I was impressed with Nancy

Zimpher even before I met her. Itwasn’t only because of hercommitment to her new positionand the energy level she evidencedthat led her to spend her first fewmonths as chancellor visiting all 64campuses, although that in itselfwas impressive; it was also becauseof a conversation I had with mycolleague, Ken O’Brien, who hadbecome president of the UniversityFaculty Senate at the same time that

Nancy Zimpher became the 12thSUNY chancellor. She invited him tojoin her on her now famouswhirlwind tour of the 64 campuseswhen it was convenient for him. Hetold me of a most impressivecharacteristic of Nancy Zimpher: shelistened to people she spoke with,remembered who they were, andwhat they said. He told me about aday that he joined her as she visiteda particular campus, met with agroup of students early in themorning at which time theydiscussed with her their experienceson that campus, their concerns, theirhopes, their needs. After a full day ofmeetings with faculty,administrators, Council members,etc., she then met again with thesame students in the evening andremembered each of their namesand what they had discussed. Mostimpressive!Very early in her tenure,

Chancellor Zimpher launched aprocess to develop a strategic planfor SUNY. A process that was uniquein that it was not developed solelyby administrators, as a previous planhad been. She set in motion aprocess that involved 200individuals--administrators, faculty,staff, students, trustees, civic andbusiness leaders—meeting overseveral months. The result was whatshe called “Six Big Audacious Ideas:”SUNY and the EntrepreneurialCentury, SUNY and the SeamlessEducation Pipeline, SUNY and aHealthier New York, SUNY and anEnergy-Smart New York, SUNY andthe Vibrant Community, and SUNYand the World. For each of theseideas, work groups were formed todevelop specific action items tomeet these goals. The groups werealso required to develop metrics,where possible, so that the ongoingstatus of these actions could beevaluated. To ensure accountability,she insisted that SUNY provide apublicly-available annual report card

on what had actually beenaccomplished. This was clearly animportant way of setting system-wide goals and actions while, at thesame time, allowing individualcampuses to devise their own waysof meeting these goalsI have worked in SUNY-wide

governance with 7 chancellors andinterim chancellors. None matchesNancy Zimpher as outspoken andeffective cheerleader for publichigher education in general and forSUNY in particular. She has beenrelentless in highlighting, on boththe regional and national stage, theimportance of public highereducation to a well-functioning andvibrant civil society. It is no accidentthat at a meeting of campus andsystem heads at the White House,President Obama chose her to be thespokesperson to the press for theevent.Over the years, I have had

substantial contact with NancyZimpher as a University FacultySenator, UFS VicePresident/Secretary, and member ofthe UFS Executive Committee. It wasin these contexts that her deepcommitment to shared governancewas evident. Her decision to put thepresidents of the three SUNYgovernance organizations (FacultyCouncil of Community Colleges,Student Assembly, University FacultySenate) in her cabinet was a clearsignal of the importance sheattributed to shared governance. Shewelcomed collaboration withfaculty, staff, and students as animportant element in SUNY’sfunctioning—and it evidenced atrust she had in the commitment ofthese governance organizations toadvancing the quality of SUNY andelevating its status in the academicworld. In her introductory remarks atthe first Annual SUNY Voices SharedGovernance Conference in 2014, shemade the astute observation that“collaboration moves at the speed of

trust.” It is that trust between thechancellor and the three governanceorganizations, despite occasionalpolicy differences, that has been amajor factor in SUNY’s ability tomove forward collaboratively onvarious initiatives. When Imentioned to her on one occasionthat some campus presidents do notshare her understanding of andcommitment to shared governance,she used her next meeting with thecampus presidents to discuss theimportance of shared governance onthe campus as well as system level.I have also had the opportunity to

work with Nancy Zimpher in my roleas editor of this Bulletin There is adedicated column in each issue ofthe Bulletin for her to communicatedirectly with the SUNY faculty andprofessional staff. She is almostalways the first person to submit thematerial for her column. She hasoften used her column to provideinformation about what sheconsiders important for SUNY. Forexample, in the last issue of thisBulletin, she devoted her column tothe importance for SUNY to trainteachers and a mechanism to do so,TeachNY. In a special issue of thisBulletin on Shared Governance(October 2012), she entitled hercomments “Shared Governance Drives Our

Greatest Accomplishments.” In thatarticle, she wrote, “Carried outeffectively, shared governance servesas the foundation for a sustainablesystem of higher education that isoperating at its highest potential…

F R OM T H E E D I T O R ’ S D E S K

14

.” She is a willing communicator ofher ideas, as evidenced in herdiscussions with the UniversityFaculty Senate at its PlenaryMeetings, which she both attendsand participates—and in herdedicated column in each issue ofthis Bulletin. In some of her columns, earlier in

her tenure, she focused on theimportance of SUNY to the economicrevitalization of New York State andits collaboration with the governor’soffice and the legislature in thisendeavor. Important as this is forgaining state government supportfor SUNY’s need for an adequatebudget and regulatory relief, Ipointed out to her that the SUNYfaculty and professional staff wouldalso like to know about her ideasabout and support for the academicenterprise that is SUNY. To her credit,she devoted her column in the nextseveral issues of the Bulletin to theacademic activities of SUNY,particularly as they are detailed inthe SUNY Strategic Plan, known as“The Power of SUNY.” Some of theinitiatives for SUNY that weredeveloped under her directioninclude: seamless transfer to facilitatestudent mobility; teacher educationprograms and working with schoolsystem through the appointment of aVice Chancellor for the SeamlessPipeline to facilitate “cradle to career”education; Open SUNY to fosteronline education; SUNY Excels torequire specific plans and metrics

from campuses on how they willenhance student access and thesuccessful completion of theiracademic goals, and how they willimprove their academic and co-curricular programs to justifyapplying for additional performancefunding; focusing attention on theimportance of including an appliedlearning experience in thecurriculum, but allowing eachcampus to decide whether to make ita graduation requirement; requiringeach campus to have a DiversityOfficer reporting to its president toinsure diversity in its staff, students,and programs and to foster inclusionof traditionally underrepresentedgroups. In sum, though there have been

occasional differences between theUniversity Faculty Senate andChancellor Zimpher, they have neverled her to abandon her commitmentto shared governance and to workclosely with it (and the othergovernance organizations) for thebenefit of SUNY. She has not onlyenhanced the quality of SUNY as asystem, but she has also elevated itsprofile in the academic world. Shehas been an effective and exemplaryadvocate for SUNY, and will be a hardact to follow, but the previousexperience of the newly appointedchancellor, Dr. Kristina M. Johnson, asan academic administrator, anindustrial entrepreneur, and agovernment official suggests that shewill be an ample successor.

F R OM T H E E D I T O R ’ S D E S K

[In this issue, this section is devotedto a series of reflections on the tenureof Nancy Zimpher as Chancellor of theState University of New York by aformer member of the SUNY Board ofTrustees (Ronald G. Ehrenberg), aformer SUNY Provost (David Lavallee),a former President of the UniversityFaculty Senate (Kenneth P. O’Brien),and a former President of the FacultyCouncil of Community Colleges (TinaGood).]

Nancy Zimpher: Perceptions from an “Unusual” SUNY Trustee

Ronald G. Ehrenberg, Former member of the SUNY Boardof Trustees; currently, Irving M. IvesProfessor of Industrial and LaborRelations and Economics, and

Stephen H. Weiss Presidential Fel-low at Cornell University, and Direc-tor of the Cornell Higher Education

Research Institute (CHERI)

I. On Becoming a TrusteeSubject to the approval of the NYS

Senate, the Governor appoints 15people to the 18 person SUNY Boardof Trustees. The other three membersare the nonvoting presidents of thestatewide 4-year and 2-year SUNYcampus faculty governance bodiesand the president of the statewideSUNY student governance unit. Thelatter is a voting member, however asI shall argue below, I believe thatwhether these 3 members can vote isalmost irrelevant to the roles theyplay and their importance as boardmembers.Appointment to the SUNY Board is

typically a plum patronage positionand appointees usually have somepersonal connection to the Governoror important people in the state whoknow the Governor. While I am aregistered Democrat, I am a relativelyapolitical person and I have never

contributed large sums of money toany political candidate. Myappointment to the SUNY Board wasdue to a rather unusual set ofcircumstances.Many readers will remember that

in March 2008, Elliot Spitzer resignedas Governor of NYS and was replacedby Lt. Gov. David Patterson. Most ofSpitzer’s senior aides left theirpositions when Spitzer resigned anda new relatively young aide in chargeof higher education was walking inthe Capitol that fall when he ran intothe Cornell administrator in charge ofstate relations and casuallymentioned that Gov. Patterson,needed to appoint a number ofpeople to the SUNY Board. Our guyquickly said we have an expert on theeconomics of higher education onour faculty, he has been a Cornell vicepresident and is currently a Cornelltrustee, he has written extensively onthe issues facing public highereducation, and to top it off, he is agraduate of SUNY. The Governor’s aidewas sent a number of things I hadwritten and he saw something inthem that led him to schedule ameeting for me with the Governor’sappointments secretary.At that meeting I told her that as a

Cornell vice president my major goalswas to make Cornell greater than thesum of its individual colleges byencouraging productivecollaborations across our units. I saidthat as a trustee of the 64 campusSUNY system, my goal would be tomake the system greater than thesum of its campuses. What I saidmost have made sense to herbecause in May 2009, GovernorPatterson, who I never met,nominated me to become a memberof the Board. I was confirmed by theNYS Senate in March 2010 in time forthe board meeting that month. Meanwhile Nancy, who had been

named the SUNY Chancellor inFebruary 2009, had assumed herposition in June 2009. What I did not

S P E A K O U T

15

know until I met her at the firstboard meeting I was permitted toattend as an observer, was that hergoal as chancellor was exactly thesame as mine. Our transformationalChancellor is SUNY’s first leader whotook on the task of making thesystem more than a set of 64separate campuses and whoharnessed its resources to make thewhole better than the sum of itsparts. She wanted each campus inevery sector of the system toprosper. She tirelessly advocated onbehalf of all of our colleges andworked every day to make SUNY thebest higher education system in thenation. So in my role as a trustee,supporting the Chancellor, which isone of the primary responsibilities ofthe board, has been easy for mebecause I was so in synch with hergoals.The SUNY system’s

accomplishments during her yearsas chancellor are too numerous tolist here and I will only note a fewthat I feel are extraordinarilyimportant for the system’s future:1. The development of the SUNY

2020 plan in which theGovernor promised to halt cutbacks in state appropriationsfor higher education and gavethe system permission toincrease instate undergraduatetuition by a predictable smallamount each year for fiveyears; this gave our campusesthe ability to build back theirresources after the cuts ofprevious years.

2. The development of aSeamless Transfer Initiativeto facilitate transfers from our2-year campuses to our 4-yearcampuses.

3. The development of OpenSUNY –a menu of high qualityonline classes and onlinedegree programs offered byindividual campuses. Subjectto availability, students from

one campus who can’t find aclass they need to graduate, orsimply a class that intereststhem, on their own campus,can enroll in an Open SUNYclass offered by anothercampus, subject to theapproval by the campus atwhich the student ismatriculated.

4. The development of aPerformance FundingInvestment Program toimprove individual campusand system performance thatencourages campuses tocollaborate with each other inthe development of theirproposals.

5. The development of a SharedService Initiative thatincluded taking advantage ofsystem wide scale discounts inpurchasing and theconsolidation of serviceprovision between nearbySUNY campuses to achievesavings in administrative costs,which then could be directedback to the academic andstudent support missions ofthe campuses. During the firstfive years of the initiative theprogram reached a total ofover $108 million in savings,with $30 million of this totalbeing recurrent operatingexpenses. The program todaycontinues under the titleOperation Excellence and isfocusing on continuousimprovement in ongoingsavings in areas such asstrategic sourcing and shared

IT platforms. 6. Finally, and perhaps most

important, a broader overallinitiative to improve studentsuccess by increasing theeffectives of remediationprograms, reducing times todegree, improving graduationrates and dramaticallyexpanding the number ofstudents receiving degrees orprogram certificates fromSUNY. This initiative clearlytakes advantage of all of theother initiatives discussedabove.

II. What Can I Say AboutNancy?Nancy is an extraordinary

energetic leader who gave newmeaning to the Chancellor’s positionbeing more than a 24/7 job. Duringthe initial months of her tenure, shevisited all 64 campuses andestablished a strategic planningprocess to define the goals of thesystem. This process included centraladministrators, campusadministrators, faculty, students,trustees and alumni. Sheunderstood right from her start thata leader leads by building consensusand listening to the views of allstakeholders.Nancy believes in articulating “Big

Audacious” goals, setting time tablesfor reaching these goals, anddeveloping metrics that can be usedto publicly measure progresstowards meeting the goals. Whileshe knew the importance of havingstable leadership at the top of thesystem, she also knew that her timein the position would be finite andthis sometimes led her to publiclyarticulate big goals before the boardhad agreed upon them. Sheunderstood that a chancellor cannever rest on her past laurels andcontinually introduced newprograms and policies to move thesystem forward. This sometimes putstress on the campuses whose

capacity to innovate wasoccasionally less than her ambition.Nancy understood that in order to

help make the system greater thanthe sum of its parts, the outsideworld needed to learn about SUNY.She spent an enormous amount oftime externally publicizing what wasgoing on at SUNY and with the aid ofkey staff hosted in NYC a series ofannual national SUNY conferenceson big issues in higher education.Each conference receivedconsiderable media attention andresulted in widely disseminatedconference volumes published bySUNY Press. She also established thefirst SUNY System Foundation togenerate revenues from privatesources to help fund future systemwide initiatives. Our chancellor understood the key

role that the campus presidents play.My rough calculation is that at least5 to 7 presidential searches occurredeach year that I was on the boardSearches for the campus presidentsare run, in the case of our 4-yearcampuses, by their college councilsand, in the case of our two-yearcampuses, by their campus boards oftrustees. Each search is supposed tolead to two or three candidatesbeing presented to the chancellorwho then makes the final decision.Given her understanding of the keyroles of the presidents, Nancy setvery high standards for presidentialappointments. In at least two cases,when she felt the recommendedcandidates were not up to what thecampus needed in a leader, sherejected the recommendations andinstructed the campuses to continuetheir searches. Nancy knew from herfirst day in office the importance ofthe two faculty and the studenttrustees, as well as the governancebodies that they led. Each of thesetrustees, as heads of theirgovernance units, had an office inthe SUNY administration buildingand she named each to her

S P E A K O U T

16

leadership cabinet that heldmonthly meetings. In many respects,these three trustees became in myview among the most importanttrustees because from their cabinetand faculty governance roles theyhad much better information aboutthe issues being discussed thanmost of the other trustees. Andbecause of the constituents theyrepresented, our students and ourfaculty, when the spoke at board andcommittee meetings the othertrustees listened very carefully andtook their concerns very seriously. Iview the fact that the two facultytrustees were nonvoting membersas almost irrelevant to theireffectiveness as board members andat times during my term on theboard faculty trustees each served aschair, or acting chair, of thecommunity college and academicaffairs committees of the board.Both of the faculty trustees and thestudent trustee were also among thesubset of trustees that weremembers of the search committeefor Nancy’s successor.Shared governance is part of

Nancy’s DNA. So, for example, whenthe seamless transfer initiative wasbeing developed, it was a bottom upprocess with faculty from across thetwo-year and four-year campusesdetermining the classes from eachtwo-year college that would beaccepted at each four-year collegefor transfer credit towards specificmajors, rather than being dictatedtop down by administrative fiat.Nancy and her provosts heavilyinvolved the faculty and studentgovernance groups in thedevelopment and shaping of virtualall new initiatives. Because of theirinvolvement in system wide decisionmaking, the governance groupsoften felt able to provide politicalsupport for SUNY during budgetdiscussions with the governor andthe legislature.Finally, Nancy had the capacity to

keep her focus on the well-being ofthe system as a whole, even in theface of severe problems that couldhave caused mere mortals to thinkabout whether staying in theposition was worth it. To mentionbut a few of these problems. Early inher term as chancellor, a governorallowed us to raise tuition but took80% of the increase in tuition backto help offset state budgetproblems. She and the board spentthe better part of two years trying todevelop a more rational budgetallocation process that wouldprovide incentives for campuses tobehave in ways to help accomplishsystem goals; complaints bycampuses that would receive lessfunding under such a plan led thepolitical process to tell us to drop theidea. She and the board also spentyears trying to stabilize DownstateMedical Center that had severefinancial problems and trying tonegotiate the sale of Long IslandCommunity Hospital (LICH), whichwas losing millions of dollars amonth and draining resources fromthe rest of the system. She had todeal with very serious issues relatingto the leaders of Upstate MedicalCenter and SUNY Poly and to thefinances and future of the latterinstitution. In each of these cases shedid not lose her focus on the rest ofthe system and maintained herforward looking attitude. Her abilityto cope with these problems wasfacilitated by her ability to delegateresponsibilities to various senioradministrators and to herrelationship with our extraordinarychair during the latter years of herterm, Carl McCall. III. Final ThoughtsSUNY has been very lucky to have

such a transformational chancellorwho has truly helped to make thesystem much more than the sum ofits parts. Nancy has long said thatshe hoped to stay in her role longenough to institutionalize many of

the changes that have taken place.Her efforts have been facilitated inrecent years by a system Provost,Alex Cartwright, who has madesubstantial efforts to involve campuspresidents and provosts indiscussions about proposed systempolicies long before the policies areadopted. But individual campuspresidents do not like to viewthemselves as middle managers andtheir objectives for their owncampuses may not always be in stepwith those of the system as a whole.It will be incumbent on the newchancellor to make sure the gains ofthe past years do not gradually fadeaway. Continuing to stress Nancy’sshared governance efforts andinvolving all of the systemgovernance bodies and otherstakeholders in the discussionsabout the directions in which thesystem should will be of absoluteimportance.My term as SUNY Trustee will

most likely have ended by the timeyou are reading this piece. Being amember of the SUNY Board ofTrustees has been one of thegreatest honors of my career. As PeteKnuepfer and Ken O’ Brien, pastpresidents of the University FacultySenate who I served on the boardwith, can attest, my majorcontribution to the board may wellhave been my continually remindingmy fellow board members thatacademic decisions are best made byacademics. I believe most of theboard has fully internalized thisproposition.

Working withthe BestDavid Lavallee

Former SUNY Provost; currently, Professor of Chemistry,

SUNY New Paltz

I had the unexpected pleasure ofbeing asked to serve briefly asinterim provost for the SUNY systemand then spending four years

working with the best team I couldimagine. I will direct my remarksspecifically to my workingrelationship with ChancellorZimpher, but, at the outset, I wouldlike to acknowledge the dedicated,experienced and wonderfullytalented group that surrounded andsupported me in the provost’s office– Beth, Carey, Carlos, Bob, Dan, Ed,Cherie, the IR crew, especially John,Rick, Lisa, Teresa and Jinrong and, ofcourse, Shirley, Cindy and Peg, as wellas those in the offices that wedepended on for support: budget,computing, HR, legal and theChancellor’s staff as well. We got alot done together because of theirdedication and hard work.Chancellor Zimpher and I came

together “sight unseen,” quiteliterally. We had never met andthere was no face-to-face interview.I had basically agreed to “fill in” afterthe previous provost left betweenthe time Chancellor Zimpher washired and when she arrived atSystem Administration to begin herduties. But she needed to give her“ok” and I did want to be sure wewould be compatible. I wasn’tinterested in spending any time inAlbany, however short, unless itcould be productive. So, when wespoke for the first time, it was a jointinterview. In our phoneconversation, we told each otherwhat we had done that we wereproud of, what I felt I had to offerand where she wanted to direct herefforts over the next five years or so.It was clear, at least to me, that weheld similar values and, importantly,we complemented each other. Shehad grand, audacious plans, with the

S P E A K O U T

17

necessary confidence andbackground from being a seasonedcampus president to move anagenda forward. I had a broad anddeep knowledge of SUNY, as well asCUNY, and the history of highereducation in New York – and whatwas required to accomplishsignificant change with public,unionized campuses having strongtraditions of shared governance (anda distaste for anything “mandated”or imposed). She was a naturalstrategist and I a veteran tactician.Soon, it was Nancy and David. Our

relationship, outside of boardmeetings and that sort of thing, wasinformal, open and candid. She sawthings from 30,000 feet and I madesure there was nothing hidden in theweeds that could trip us up. Shemade it clear with just a word, or byglancing at me during a cabinetmeeting, that I needed to devoteattention to a particular initiative,whether part of developing or, later,implementing the strategic plan ordealing with the crisis du jour.Otherwise, she expected me to usemy effort and that of my staff, toundertake projects that wereconsistent with her generaldirection. As those in facultygovernance well know, a big part ofthat was enhancing student success.It was a sign of her support for meand my office that she had thepatience for us to work with facultygovernance and the campuses forthe full four years I was at systemadministration to see theimplementation of “seamlesstransfer” and, here come “theweeds,” SUNY-wide adoption of astudent degree audit system. Nancylike things done well, but with notime wasted – and she was willingto wait, literally years, for this result.I learned a lot from working with

Nancy. She is no-nonsense, highenergy and, yes, can be demanding.But she asks no less of herself. Herenergy level reminded me of Donna

Shalala, whom I worked with atHunter College. Always on the move,her mind working almost visibly, butalways with time for a smile and ahumorous or encouraging remark.Meetings only with an agenda, allmeetings start and end on time,always a plan at the end.Quite a few of her (which became

our) audacious projects were highlysuccessful. The strategic plan was(and continues to be) a big stepforward and the reputation of SUNYhas been, deservedly, enhanced. Forfive years, SUNY’s budget wasstabilized. The Research Foundationwas greatly strengthened. Nancy’sown projects in improving pre-college education (STRIVE, TeachNY)and enhancing the collegeexperience (SUNY Works and theSUNY Passport) are of monumentalscale and import. I needed hersupport to revitalize SUNY Press,disentangle SUNY from our TVnetwork (the original NY PBS) andan obsolete library support office –“weeds,” but very large budget anddifficult personnel issues. And, ofcourse, our many projects to improvestudents’ academic progress andsuccess. We were largely successfulin recruiting great talent for campusleadership – and of resolvingleadership problems on severalcampuses – falling short only in thelevel of diversity we had hoped toachieve. I was pleased that I coulduse my knowledge of SUNY to have anumber of successful interimpresidents appointed.And, then, of course, there were

the audacious challenges unmet –campus consolidation and a rationalbudgeting plan. Nancy could verywell have just turned to me in publicmeetings where the shortcomings ofthese efforts were being (sometimesvehemently) questioned and said“well, David, what have you got tosay for yourself here?” or “where didthis #$%^ idea come from?” Butshe never did.

A little background on thecampus consolidation, if I may. In hiscampaign and early speeches asgovernor, we heard, quite correctly,that a major reason for New York’shigh taxes are the hundreds ofoverlapping jurisdictions for publicworks (villages in towns in countiesin the state, all having their trucksand plows, etc.), utilities and otherservices. So, naively in retrospect,Nancy and I thought this would bethe go-ahead to combine servicesand, in a few cases, small campusesclose to each other, especially if apresidential position was likely to beopen soon. We didn’t reckon withthe local governor-appointed (!)college councils. Although unpaidand with few actual powers (parkingand student disciplinary code), theyvalued their positions and resistedvigorously. And, ironically, facultyand staff supported keepingexpensive administration when thefunds could have been used for morefaculty and staff. Though a littleintervention might have gone a longway, no support for thisconsolidation was forthcoming fromthe governor’s office.I have been and continue to be

upset with myself for pursuing theselost causes far too long, butwhenever I do bring either up withNancy, she shrugs it off as a good tryfor a lost cause; never that it was Iwho put her in a difficult positionwith the board and our campuses.And she brings up one of oursuccesses or something we startedthat was continuing to develop well.I could not have asked for a more

encouraging or supporting mentor,

but most of all, for such a warm andinspiring role model and friend.Thank you, Nancy!

Nancy L. Zimpher,Chancellor

ExtraordinaireCandace S. Vancko

SUNY Delhi President, retired

In 2008-09 I was invited to serveon the search Committee for SUNY’snext Chancellor. We worked hard,spent a lot of time with a searchfirm, reviewed resumes, intervieweda number of candidates and agreedthat we just hadn’t found the rightperson, that is, until Nancy Zimpherwalked through the door. Her smilelit up the entire room, her energywas contagious and hercommitment to moving SUNY fromgood to great was exactly what wehad hoped to find. That day was the beginning of

many firsts for SUNY underChancellor Zimpher’s leadership. Itmay be hard for those who didn’tknow SUNY until after ChancellorZimpher’s arrival to imagine howdifferent the environment was. Ijoined the SUNY family in 1999when I became president of SUNYDelhi--that wasn’t its name then—it was Delhi College—manycolleges in the SUNY system didn’tsee it as advantageous to includeSUNY in their name. That’s just oneexample of the state of SUNY “pre-Zimpher.” One SUNY colleague,hoping to help me betterunderstand, described the SUNYsystem as a dysfunctional family.Some faculty and staff on mycampus truly believed SUNY failed totreat campuses fairly, that SUNY hadfavorites and that those favoredcampuses received more resources.Once, facing budget cuts andadditional SUNY mandates requiringmore reporting and personnel time,a College Council member asked ifthe college wouldn’t be better off as

S P E A K O U T

18

a private college. Suffice to say, “pre-Zimpher,” the relationship SUNY“Central” (“the mother ship”) hadwith the campuses wasn’t alwayswarm and fuzzy.At that time SUNY Presidents

annually faced the fiscal conundrumof perhaps needing to lay off someemployees to fund mandatednegotiated increases for others. Late(sometimes nearly six months) statebudgets were the norm making italmost impossible for SUNYPresidents to plan. How could Iapprove additional faculty positionswhen I didn’t have a budget for theupcoming year? Mid-year cutsweren’t uncommon and often anasty surprise. Just when I thought Ihad figured out a way to managethe campus finances, I was hit with asubstantial budget cut (sometimesretroactive!). Prior to ChancellorZimpher, SUNY presidents facedsignificant challenges in fiscalplanning.A similar scenario existed

regarding capital funding.Campuses located in politicaldistricts with powerful politicalleaders scored special line iteminitiatives for new academicbuildings, athletic facilities andspecial projects, leaving lesspolitically endowed campuses withno special funding. In terms ofcapital projects, SUNY was a systemof haves and have nots pre-Zimpher.Creating a system-wide capital planoutlining each campus’ needs andeducating the public on thedesirability of capital funding andcritical maintenance dollars for allSUNY campuses was also a huge winfor this Chancellor.And of course, pre-Zimpher SUNY

played “tuition roulette.” Tuition isdetermined by the New York StateLegislature and I came tounderstand that no politician ofsound mind would advocate for atuition increase in an election year.Nor would a politician be interested

in supporting a tuition increaseduring a financial downturn. Theresult, of course, was no tuitionincreases for a number of yearsfinally followed by a large tuitionincrease in the belief that it wouldtake care of all the campuses’ needsfor a very long time. It wasn’t untilChancellor Zimpher tackled thisissue that SUNY campuses couldbegin to make financial plans basedon a predictable tuition policy—one that was fair to both studentsand their families and to campusleaders who needed to make budgetdecisions. It was a big lift, but to hercredit, Chancellor Zimphereventually prevailed and campuspresidents breathed sighs of relief.While some campuses had

national profiles, the SUNY systemwas not well understood outside ofNew York state (and perhaps insideas well). I would be introduced atnational conferences as someonefrom “Sunny” Delhi. SUNY was noton the national radar as a mover andshaker in higher education pre-Zimpher. Chancellor Zimpher tookon a number of national challenges,teacher education being oneexample. She focused on thenecessity of providing the very besteducation for our nation’s children,embracing it as SUNY’s responsibilityto insure a high quality seamlesseducation pipeline. This includedproviding the very best educationfor our future teachers. ChancellorZimpher declared SUNY would leadthe way to the national solution. Very early in her tenure

Chancellor Zimpher undertook theHerculean effort of visiting everySUNY campus. We were incrediblyexcited to meet our new Chancellor

and to showcase our beautifulcampus, wonderful faculty, staff andstudents! This plan was politicalgenius on her part—she got to seeeach campus first-hand, learn theirstrengths and culture and to promiseher advocacy on their behalf as wellas for the SUNY system.As she gathered and synthesized

information from her campus visits,she began to formulate a vision forSUNY. The plan had to be ambitious,yet attainable. “The Power of SUNY,”a strategic plan with broad goalsand specific measures to documentprogress and be held accountablewas created. Its launch provided theChancellor with the opportunity toinform the public about the greatthings SUNY was accomplishing andhow we as a system were going tobe even better. She promisedtransparent tracking of our progresstoward the goals (The SUNY ReportCard) and promised that data woulddrive decision-making. She focusedon The Power of SUNY whenevaluating presidentialperformance, and encouragedpresidents to set ambitious goals.Governor Cuomo focused on the

economic revitalization of our state,particularly the upstate region andChancellor Zimpher made certainthat SUNY played a key role (ACompetitive New York), positioningcampuses as economic developmentengines. She declared that not onlyis SUNY preparing today’s andtomorrow’s skilled workforce, butalso that SUNY has an unmatchedability to create jobs, foster ground-breaking research, discover newtechnologies, support New York’shealth care industry and strengthenthe education pipeline from cradleto career. Who better than SUNY tostrengthen New York’s economy?Chancellor Zimpher provided

critical leadership for organizationalchanges within SUNY. One thatstands out in my mind is herchampioning the concept of

“seamless transfer” across SUNYinstitutions. After formulating thevision, she then worked hard toimplement it. The same is true formany initiatives—she would helpus to establish the goal, the ideal,then inspire, cajole—do whatever ittook—to convince campuses toadopt it and make it their own. Wewere urged and expected to increasecampus retention and graduationrates even though SUNY ratesalready exceeded national averages.This was great for our students andtheir families, great for ourcampuses (placing the focus onacademic outcomes) and great forenhancing SUNY’s nationalprominence. Under her leadership SUNY urged

campuses to increase their attentionto diversity (Diversity Counts) instudent populations, faculty andstaff and to increase culturalawareness across campuses. Thisfocus is invaluable to SUNYgraduates who will enter the workforce well prepared with strongacademic backgrounds and a myriadof cultural experiences that willprovide them with advantages inthe work place and in life. SUNYneeded a Chancellor who couldbalance the external requirementsof the position with the need to becampus-and student focused--notan easy task, but one she quicklymastered. She spent time withelected officials, SUNY Trustees,corporations and philanthropicorganizations. And she spent timewith the University Faculty Senate,campus presidents, distinguishedfaculty, student organizations, etc. Itseemed she was present at everyevent involving SUNY! Not only didshe balance SUNY’s external andinternal constituencies, but she alsoundertook to enhance SUNY’sposition as a national leader inhigher education. And on a personal level, working

with Nancy Zimpher was productive

S P E A K O U T

19

and fulfilling. She is an excellentlistener and no matter how full herschedule, she made time if youneeded her. She is “direct speak,” aquality I appreciated. And of course,she expected the same in return.She is thoughtful and caring, but iswilling to make the tough decisionwhen necessary. Her tireless energyand her positive outlook wereinspiring and I took pride in herwork and our work on behalf ofSUNY.And no conversation about the

Chancellor would be completewithout mention of the term,“systemness” which she coined. Sheaspired for SUNY to be a vibrant,dynamic, ever-evolving system, awhole greater than the sum of itsparts. She believed that we could bebetter as a system than we could asindividual campuses. She believedwe could provide an even moreexceptional education for ourstudents by sharing our strengthsand working together to overcomechallenges. Chancellor Nancy Zimpher is the

definition of a transformationalleader. She has moved SUNY fromgreat to world class.

Nancy Zimpher and Shared Governance, A Comment

Kenneth P. O’Brien, Immediate PastPresident, University Faculty Sen-ate; currently, Associate Professorof History, The College at Brockport

Historians know that anassessment of Nancy Zimpher’stenure as Chancellor is premature,but that’s what I was asked to do.For me this assignment is bothdeeply personal, necessarily relyingon my perspective as President ofthe University Faculty Senate duringher first years, and professional, theproduct of a professional historian.

To make this piece manageable, I’llfocus on the changes the Chancellorbrought to SUNY’s system of sharedgovernance. I’ll start with the springof 2009, two months before her termbegan, when a serendipitous seriesof events came together to serve asan introduction of Nancy Zimpher tothe SUNY system. That spring, my colleague,

Distinguished Professor W. BruceLeslie, and I organized a scholarlyconference focused on the history ofSUNY for the 60th anniversary of itsfounding. With funding fromInterim Chancellor John Clark, webrought together professionalhistorians of higher education andold SUNY hands for a two-dayconference. By the time of theconference, March 2009, the then-current President of the University ofCincinnati, Nancy Zimpher, had beennamed SUNY’s twelfth Chancellor. Adistinguished scholar of educationand educator preparation, Dr.Zimpher had great experience inpublic higher education, withprevious major administrativeappointments at both The Ohio StateUniversity (Dean of the School ofEducation) and the University ofWisconsin, Milwaukee (Chancellor).Throughout the conference, she wasspotted moving from panel to panel,taking more than twenty pages ofnotes on yellow legal pads, learningall she could about SUNY’scomplicated history and themultiple missions of its 64campuses.In early May 2009, I was elected

President of the University FacultySenate, and during my first weeks,even before I officially took the officeon July 1, I encountered what couldonly be called an “interesting”comparison of administrative styles.Shortly after my election I visited theUFS offices to handle a number ofdetails, such as travel arrangementsfor Albany meetings scheduled inJune and the next Board of Trustees

meeting, where I was sworn in asone of the newest Board members.

When I met with SUNY’s “Officer-in-charge” in June, he recalled anincident at a previous universitywhen they nabbed a miscreantfaculty member who had pilferedprecious art books from theUniversity’s Special Collections andsold them to a Greenwich Villagebookstore. He wondered what Ithought about that, and of course, Irecognized the professor had beencharged with a crime and thejudicial system would resolve theproblem. That wasn’t enough, hesaid. He and armed university policehad marched into the professor’sclass and arrested him in front of hisstudents! Was it true? Had it actually

happened as relayed it to me? Whoknows? But, the fact that he usedour meeting as an occasion to tellthat story, with its veiled threat,spoke volumes to me about theproblems we had been having for adecade with shared governance onthe system level. For a decade, sincethe battles over the Board ofTrustee’s imposition of the SUNY GERin December 1998, there had been aseries of issues that revealed timeand again that at the highest levelthere were administrators who hadlittle experience with or appreciationfor campus cultures, but whogenerally disregarded facultyparticipation in system governancewhenever it promised to becomemore than window dressing. My first private meeting with

Chancellor Zimpher went quitedifferently. Without any mention offaculty misdeeds, we spent an hour

one-on-one sharing our ideas aboutSUNY’s history and universitygovernance in general, during whichshe extended an invitation for me(and the two other presiding officersof system-wide governanceorganizations) to join her “Cabinet,”a twenty-member group that wouldbe scheduled to meet monthly.Additionally, she invited me to joinher, whenever my schedule allowed,on a planned tour of 64 campusesand, in return, I invited her to attendthe UFS’s Executive Committee’sSummer Planning meeting later thatmonth. She accepted, establishing awarm relationship with members ofthe UFS’s Executive Committee. Wealso agreed to set a regular meetingschedule for the year, with thepromise that I would have accesswhenever necessary, a promise sheand her staff kept.A stark truth about SUNY, to a

greater extent than many publiclysupported state systems, is that it isa product of state politics. Evenduring the “glory days” a half-century earlier, it was GovernorNelson Rockefeller’s singularcommitment to build a great stateuniversity system that finallypersuaded Albany politicians to fundthe growing system. The battle tofree SUNY from crippling stateregulations, a function of its legalposition as a state agency, has beenone of the on-going themes of thesystem’s history. Former ChancellorRobert King, who had been New YorkState’s Director of Budgetimmediately preceding hisappointment to head the system,once commented that his majorbudget objective was to move theState University up the ladder ofbudget priorities . . . just one rungabove that of the Department ofMotor Vehicles.

In addition, the long-termnation-wide process of state“disinvestment” in public highereducation that began in the 1980’s

S P E A K O U T

20

accelerated markedly in the firstdecade of the new century with firstthe economic downturn in 2001,which was then followed by theGreat Recession of 2009. NeitherSUNY nor CUNY leadership couldeffectively challenge the loss of statesupport, which fell from 80% ofinstructional costs in the mid-1980to approximately 30% two decadeslater. Increasingly, public highereducation would languish for longstretches with cuts in public fundingthat were replaced by increasedtuition charges, which really meantincreased debt financed by federaland private student loans. Many of the problems had been

catalogued in the 2007 Report of theNew York State Commission onHigher Education that charged NewYork State’s public higher educationsector had “slipped in stature” due tochronic underfunding and NewYork’s lack of a clear strategy forinvestment. Facing a difficultbudget season in 2007-2008 and asudden resignation of Governor EliotSpitzer in March 2008, New York’spoliticians ignored the call for majornew investments in SUNY and CUNY.And then the great recession hit, andfor New York, it hit with avengeance, as personal income taxcollections fell dramatically andunemployment insurance costsmounted.This then was the state of SUNY in

June 2009 when Nancy Zimpherjoined SUNY. To familiarize herselfwith the system’s many campusesand their leadership, she launched athree-month, 9,000-mile whirlwindtour of the state, visiting each ofSUNY’s 64 campuses, at each stopmeeting with members of both thecampus communities and theregional political, business andeconomic leadership. With extensivenotes in hand, she and her staff thendesigned a strategic planningprocess for the university. While strategic planning in the

first year of a presidency can befound on page one in the “newadministrator’s” handbook, theapproach adopted in this case wasdistinct. A new strategic plan hadbeen high on the Board of Trustee’s“to-do” for the Chancellor, but thespecific process was hers, and it wasas inclusive as possible. First,approximately 200 participants,drawn from both SUNY campusesand the larger community, met sixtimes over six months in locationsspread all across the state. Each ofthe meetings focused on a specificissue facing the university and largersociety, but a small SteeringCommittee on which sat the leadersof each of the system’s governancegroups oversaw the process.The inclusive process stands in

stark contrast to that used for theprevious strategic plan, which hadbeen produced by a small group ofSUNY administrators. The 2010 plan,“The Power of SUNY,” offered adistinctive “reboot” of SUNY’srelationship with the public.Adopting the spirit of the “WisconsinPlan” and teaching-research-publicservice ethic of land-grantuniversities, SUNY committed itselfto developing and using knowledgethat addressed the critical issuesfacing the society: providing moreadequate high-quality health care;generating and using energy moreefficiently; enhancingentrepreneurial abilities; supportingvibrant community life; stemmingthe leaks in the educational pipeline;and working effectively in aglobalizing world. Each of the “SixBig Ideas” contained a special note

termed “Diversity Counts,” a fittingcommitment for a system foundedto combat discrimination. Soon, andeach of these ideas had a workinggroup of senior administrators,campus representatives and facultyproviding goals for implementation.Together they formed theoverarching commitment, which was“to revitalize the economy andenhance the quality of life” for all NewYorkers. By the end of Chancellor Zimpher’s

first year, then, SUNY’s administrationhad adopted a much more inclusiveframework for policy development,with governance representatives,chosen by the governanceorganizations, fully participating inboth the development andimplementation of the system’splanning processes. In fact, sharedgovernance had been one of severalinitiatives in the strategic planningprocess, and it has been continuallyfunded through both direct support ofthe governance organizations and theSUNY Voices initiative. This patternwas repeated with other systeminitiatives, two of which I’ll brieflydiscuss here, “Seamless Transfer,” anissue that had plagued the system fordecades, and PHEEIA (the PublicHigher Education Empowerment andInnovation Act), and its successor,NYSUNY2020, both of which werecreated to gain more resources fromthe state. The problems with system-wide

transfer practices had beenhighlighted most recently by theHigher Education Commission’s 2007Report. One of the Commission’smembers was the President of theStudent Assembly, and he had beendenied credit for a core course in hismajor, despite earning an “A”, after hehad transferred from a SUNYcommunity college to one of itsuniversity centers. The Board insistedthat the issue, which had beenreaffirmed as system policy seventimes since 1972, be finally resolved.

The Chancellor, who had hadexperience with a state-wide transfersystem in Ohio, accepted thechallenge, but in what was to prove acharacteristic way. She insisted thatthe solution emerge from a processthat included faculty governancewithout providing a specific detailedprescription. By appointing DavidLavallee as Interim Provost – and thenrecommending that the Board ofTrustees make it permanent – sheempowered a senior administratorwho had both great experience withthe issue and the respect of facultygovernance to draft both the newpolicy and the process that wouldgovern SUNY transfer in the future. The often labored process by which

it has been handled over the pasteight years has been chronicledelsewhere and need not be repeatedhere. But, SUNY addressed theproblem through extensiveconsultation with disciplinary facultyacross the system that in its finalphase authorized 900 faculty fromevery campus in the system to crafttransfer paths that identifiedfoundational courses in more thanfifty academic majors. Today, theProvost’s Student Mobility Committee,chaired in alternate years by thepresiding officers of the FCCC (FacultyCouncil of Community Colleges) andthe UFS, makes policyrecommendations and serves as aboard of review for any transfer issuesthat emerge. While student mobility was an

issue internal to the university system,state funding involved a number ofexternal communities, each of whichbrought different perspectives andinterests to the decisions. In January2010, Governor David Patersonpresented the Public Higher EducationEmpowerment and Innovation Act,which had largely been designed bySUNY staff to provide new fundingthrough modest tuition increases overeach of the next five years withoutcuts in state aid, and greater flexibility

S P E A K O U T

21

for the state’s two public universitysystems. But, since almost all of theadditional funding was to come fromstudents and their families throughhigher tuition, opposition emerged.Ultimately, three concerns killed thebill: 1. The legislature was reluctant tocede control to what many hadtermed the most “overregulated”public university systems; 2. Theburden families would face with thecertainty of increased tuition charges,and 3. Strong union oppositiongrounded principally in the fear thatthe legislation would result in further“privatizing” the public system bytransferring a number of current stateresponsibilities to private companies. For governance, especially the

University Faculty Senate, PHEEIAposed a number of distinct problems,including the possibility of creating adivision on the issue with the unions,especially those that representedfaculty and professional staff, anddeep fissures among the Senate’s fivesectors. The four university centersstrongly supported the legislation,which offered “differential tuition,”while other sectors remained divided.It was essential that Senate leadershipmeet with SUNY administrators,including the Chancellor and the ViceChancellor for Finance, pressing themto address the concerns expressed bythe union and many of the Senate’smembership and to engage in anactive educational campaign with theSenators about the bill’s possiblestrengths and potential pitfalls. Out ofthe dialogues came a clearerunderstanding of what the legislationmeant for SUNY and the guaranteesneeded. A year later, newly-elected

Governor Andrew Cuomo introducedNYSUNY2020, a proposal that mirroredmany of the major features of PHEEIAand that one of the New York State’smost acute scholars, termed “PHEEIALight”. The patterns established in these

first years have persisted throughoutChancellor Zimpher’s term. As theUniversity looked inward to “Build aBetter SUNY,” governancerepresentatives were at every table; forexample, warning of the dangers of“shared services,” which soundedworkable in the principle but proveddifficult to implement at scale acrossthe system. Every major initiative ofthe SUNY system in recent hadgovernance representatives at thetable, usually very early in theplanning process. This list includes theDiversity initiative, SUNY Excels, andApplied Learning, among others. Several Concluding ThoughtsIf real estate success is determined

by location, location, location, goodgovernance can only occur when thereis access, access, access; and no matterwhat we think SHOULD be the case, itis college and universityadministrators who are thegatekeepers who provide seats at thetable when policies and specialinitiatives are in their formativestages. By that measure, the Zimpheradministration earns a high grade forits willingness to engage governanceleadership in meaningful, that is, early,consultation. It didn’t always work assmoothly as we would have liked,remember Shared Services and thenew BAM (Budget Allocation Model),but shared governance during hertenure improved significantly over

what we had seen before. And whenwe go to AAUP or other nationalmeetings to talk about academicgovernance, we are reminded of theprogress we have made. Finally, itmust be remembered that the tone forthat cooperation and collaborationbegan at the top. When faculty governance leaders

think of “shared governance,” whichthe AAUP wants us to call “academicgovernance” now, we too often fail tosee it in its genuine complexity. Intruth, it involves more than simply therelationship between theadministration and faculty and staffgovernance organizations. Studentsare, and must be, a meaningful part ofthe governance process, as are outsideagencies, which is especially the casefor public colleges and universities.And, finally there are the governingboards, which have the final fiduciaryand appointing authority overacademic policies. With that in mind, Ijudge the Zimpher administration tohave done very well, balancing theperspectives of many groups in thecreation of and administration ofuniversity policy and practice.

But, to us, faculty and professionalstaff governance organizations occupya special place in these processes, afact Chancellor Zimpher as a formergovernance leader understood. TheUFS meets in plenary sessions threetimes annually, which she regularlyattended (21 of 24 plenaries, I thinkwas the final count), offering herviews on the latest administrativeinitiatives, and then taking questionsfrom the five campus sectors and theCampus Governance Leaders.Following her lead, the other senior

system administrators did the same,each time taking unscripted questionsfrom the floor. The questioning oftenbecame sharp, other times not.Sometimes the Chancellor, Provost andChief Financial Officer left a bit morebruised than they, or we, hadanticipated, but she – and they –returned again and again. For hersupport of shared governance, and thechanges in practice during heradministration, she received theFriend of the Senate Award, thehighest honor the Senate can bestowon a non-Senator. Lastly, I think personalities matter.

While that may not be thedetermining factor in the goodrelations upon which good universitygovernance rests, I think it is essentialto break down the stereotypesthrough which we too often seeothers. We see in our current nationalpolitical discourse too muchdemonizing, turning opponents intoenemies, a pattern all too familiar onmany campuses. Perhaps her years asa faculty member and a campusacademic administrator made it easierfor her to remember her roots,understand the faculty concerns andappreciate the real work of theuniversity in its classrooms, labs, andstudios. At this point, I am deeplyappreciative of the opportunity I hadto represent the University FacultySenate at the time she served asSUNY’s Chancellor, the one who putshared governance back on SUNY’ssystem agenda.

Reflection onChancellor Zimpher

Tina Good, Former President of the Faculty Council of CommunityColleges; currently, Professor ofEnglish, Suffolk Community County Community College

"Imagine the competitiveadvantage for New York State if SUNYinstitutions joined forces as neverbefore, pushing and building on eachother's ideas and collaborating in

S P E A K O U T

22

ways that deploy our distinctivecapabilities to the fullest extentpossible. Imagine the impact if, fromthis day on, we work toward acommon goal: to revitalize New York'seconomy and enhance the quality oflife for all its citizens." This is thevision that Nancy Zimpher, our newChancellor, asked us to embrace in thenew strategic plan known as, ThePower of SUNY.Well before I met Chancellor

Zimpher, a department chair oncesaid to me, "You know, Tina,sometimes, it's hard to do the rightthing or even know what the rightthing is when you're a chair." She wasa dynamic leader who had workedcollaboratively with faculty to create ashared vision for the department, butwhen it came to implementation ofthat vision, the resistance sheexperienced, well, shall we say, wasanything but collegial. A couple ofyears after having this conversation, Imet Nancy Zimpher, the newchancellor of the State University ofNew York, who introduced theconcept of leaders "striving together"to effect positive and sustainablechange.I was the new president of the

Faculty Council of CommunityColleges when Chancellor Zimpherstarted challenging all of us withinSUNY to re-imagine the possibilitiesthat our colleges could achieve notonly as autonomous institutions butas a system of public highereducation within the state of New

York. "Big ideas," she said. "Good togreat," she said. "Move the dial," shesaid. Wait, I thought. Why are wecreating new challenges? We havenot resolved the existing problemsyet. Through existing concepts offaculty governance and academicfreedom, the Faculty Council wasstruggling to achieve equalrepresentation, collegial respect, andthe fair treatment of our students.These were old fights, she suggested,that divided us rather thanempowered us. How can we reframethe controversies of the past into anew paradigm that will enable us towork together rather than againsteach other, she asked? She invited usto join her on a journey that wouldexplore this question along with manyothers.Quite literally, we journeyed. I had

not known how big the state of NewYork really was until the StrategicPlanning Steering Council and thegroup of 200 traveled the state tolearn from each other and fromvarious experts about the needs andpossibilities of our communities andinstitutions. The first of these forumsfocused on the concept of the"education pipeline." Admittedly, Iwas among those who critiqued thetroublesome metaphor, but beyondthe metaphor, I was also concernedabout the cost of such a vision. Not thefinancial cost, per se, but the cost toour institutions if SUNY SystemAdministration was directing itsenergies away from our institutions.My thinking, as Jim Collins--oft citedby our Chancellor--would say,constructed higher education into siloswith strict boundaries. Yet, communitycollege faculty had throughout theirhistory sought ways to actuallyfunction as that transitional space thattraversed the boundaries of ourAmerican education system. It was nottoo big of a step, therefore, to join thatconversation, and begin imaginingnew possibilities withoutcompromising our fundamental

principles. Commitment to open access for our

students while maintaining academicrigor is a core value for those of us whohave dedicated our lives to thecommunity college mission. As aconsequence of this mission, we arecontinually mocked mercilessly inacademic, entertainment, and evenpolitical circles, but such ridicule oftenjust strengthens our resolve. Whileresisting the boundaries of silos,Chancellor Zimpher still understoodthe need for equality and mutualrespect across the sectors. It wasencouraging to have a chancellor whounderstood that open access did notmean a lack of standards, but insteadmeant diminishing the impact of thebarriers our students face. Whetherthose barriers included academicpreparedness, transportation, access totechnology, finances, coursescheduling, negotiating academicbureaucracies, family support, etc., wecould begin imagining a newframework through which ourstudents could transform their livesthrough higher education withoutincurring overwhelming debt.As we began to imagine the Power

of SUNY, Chancellor Zimpher, however,did not trivialize the problems of thepast or minimize the importance ofprocess. Among her efforts to improvefunding mechanisms, expand ourdata systems, and develop 21st-century infrastructures for ourstudents, for our faculty, and for ourinstitutions, her unwavering belief inthe need for intentional collaborationled to the celebration of sharedgovernance at the campus andsystem levels. If SUNY was going toachieve a collective impact that wassustainable, an infrastructure thatprovided pathways of collaborationtoward that end had to beinstitutionalized. Through workingwith the University Faculty Senate,the Faculty Council, and the StudentAssembly, Chancellor Zimpher helpedus establish SUNY Voices, the ongoing

initiative that explicitly articulatesshared governance as a SUNY corevalue.We should not have been surprised

by her support of shared governance.Striving together was a valueChancellor Zimpher brought with herwhen she came to SUNY, and is aconcept that helped us operationalizethe concepts of an education pipelineand shared governance within SUNY.The word "strive" can be defined as"doing one's best to achieve a goal"or "struggling against opposition."One definition suggests collaborationand the other suggests quarrelsomeengagement, but, in any case, the ideaof working together, arguing witheach other, and identifying pathwaysforward in order to contribute to theachievement of a more equal,empathetic, and educated democracy,was a concept that many faculty andfaculty governance groups couldembrace. Striving together as amethod of inquiry allowed us tocreate a paradigm of explorationrather than a monolithic goal withwhich we could either get on board orbe left behind. Striving togetherallowed us to ask questions such as,what are the right things to do, howcan we move forward, and whenshould we regroup, reflect, and evenre-imagine.There were times when I wished

our striving together would havebeen a little less contentious. Therewere times when striving togetherled us the wrong way down one-waypaths or even down paths with deadends, but such are the perils ofexploration. What has been clear overthese last eight years, however, is thatChancellor Zimpher expected us to beour best selves, to be intentional inour work, to think big, and tocelebrate the Power of SUNY. Weaccepted her challenge.Consequently, we may be a littlemore exhausted, but the lessons sheleaves behind will keep SUNYmoving forward from good to great.

S P E A K O U T

23

[Editor’s note: Though most facultyand professional staff are generallyfamiliar with the history andactivities of their own campus, theyare often less knowledgeable of thehistory and activities of the othercampuses in the SUNY system.Consequently, in each issue of theBulletin, this section is used to shinethe spotlight on the history andactivities of one of the SUNYcampuses. In addition, this sectionalso provides a description of therecent activities of one of theUniversity Faculty Senate’s StandingCommittees that highlights its role inaffecting SUNY policies and programsthat eventually impact the individualcampuses and its variousconstituencies.]

Alfred State CollegeFrom a School of Agriculture to a College

of Technology: A Century ofAdministrative Evolution at Alfred State

Joseph Petrick, Alfred State College

Throughout its history AlfredState, like other academicinstitutions in SUNY, has had to beresponsive to New York Stategovernment. As a result of itsrelationship to the State, Alfred Statehas evolved into a hybrid institution,offering associate, certificate andbaccalaureate programs in theapplied sciences and technologies,but also with limited offerings in theliberal arts. Alfred State started as apublicly funded School of Agriculturein the first decades of the twentiethcentury, and many of the majorchanges to the mission of AlfredState have resulted from

administrative actions coming ofstate government. The college hasundergone changes over more thanhundred years, and can be seen as acase study of the relations of publicpostsecondary schools with theState.A School of AgricultureWith the establishment around

the turn of the twentieth century ofstate-funded veterinary, agriculturaland forestry colleges at Cornell, andthe clay-working college at AlfredUniversity, the administration at St.Lawrence University petitioned thestate legislature for a school ofagriculture. Alfred University, whichhad already gone through thelegislative process to create theCollege of Clay-Working, followedthe lead of St. Lawrence University inpetitioning its state senator andassemblyman for an agriculturalschool, and legislation creating theNew York State School of Agricultureat Alfred University was passed onMay 6, 1908. From the time of its inception to

1927 the relations between theSchool of Agriculture at AlfredUniversity and its host institutionwas controlled by the University’sBoard of Trustees. The HughesCommission of 1926 proposedchanges to the structure of stategovernment, and was the firstcommission or committee topropose that there be a singleadministrator responsible to thegovernor. Legislation putting thechanges into effect was passed in1927. As a result, the New York StateSchool of Agriculture at AlfredUniversity was taken out of thedirect control of Alfred University,and came under the directsupervision of the EducationDepartment. A Board of Visitorsoversaw the campus for theEducation Department. An Agricultural and Technical

InstituteIn 1935 Lewis A. Wilson, then

Assistant Commissioner for

Vocational and Extension Educationfor the State of New York, authored areport on technical education in NewYork State entitled “A New York StateTechnical Institute.” Wilsonenvisioned institutions that wouldtrain students for industry in amanner similar to the agriculturaleducation available at the Schools ofAgriculture. Because there was aperceived need for technicaleducation, and because federalfunding became available, the NewYork State Education Department in1937 asked the Schools ofAgriculture at Alfred, Canton,Morrisville, and Delhi to offerindustrial and technical courses.Thus, the Schools of Agriculturebecame Technical Institutes, and forthe first time graduation from highschool became mandatory foradmission. Tuition continued to befree, but nominal fees were chargedfor materials. With the expansion ofthe scope of the agricultural schoolcame the possibility of an increase inenrollment. In 1941 the school hadbeen renamed the New York StateAgricultural and Technical Instituteat Alfred. During World War II itbecame involved in the war effort,including training pilots whoobtained flight time at the Hornellairport. In 1948 a Division of Technical

Institutes was created, and the sixAgricultural and Technical Instituteswere joined by five Institutes ofApplied Arts and Sciences that hadbeen created as a result of the Boardof Regents wartime plan, comprisinga total of eleven institutions servingthe post-secondary vocationaleducation needs of the state. The fiveInstitutes of Applied Arts andSciences were converted tocommunity colleges in the 1950s.The State of New York considered theposition for the Agricultural andTechnical Institutes, and decided toseparate them from the network ofcommunity colleges that was beingdeveloped.

The SUNY Institute ofAgriculture and TechnologyWith the creation of the State

University of New York, theAgricultural and Technical Institutescould award associate degrees, begranted accreditation by the MiddleStates Association of Colleges andSecondary Schools, and studentscould compete for transfer to otherunits in the University. The stand-alone institute could continue muchas it had before, but createdparticular problems for its hostinstitution. Although the Institute atAlfred had become independent ofAlfred University, the main buildingswere surrounded by Alfred Universityproperty. As the Institute grew inenrollment it increasing placed aburden on the private university thathad lobbied for it over forty yearsearlier. In contrast, the New York StateSchool of Ceramics was notindependent, and continued to beadministered by Alfred University.SUNY did not immediately takeaction that would result in solvingthe problems created by having apublic Institute of Agriculture andTechnology located on a privateuniversity campus. Alfred UniversityPresident, J. Ellis Drake, reported tothe Alfred University Board ofTrustees in June of 1948 that therelocation of the Ag-Tech would bebeneficial to Alfred University, since itwould relieve the housing shortagein Alfred both for faculty andstudents, and would allow theUniversity to expand its classroomand laboratory facilities. By 1955 theenrollment at the Ag-Tech hadsurpassed the University’s by a fewhundred students, even though they

S P O T L I G H T

24

were located on the same grounds.The strategy of Alfred University, asexpressed by President Drake to theAlfred University Board of Trustees in1955, was to wait for the Institute tomove to another location. Eventuallyland was purchased across MainStreet from Alfred University, and theAg-Tech built its campus essentiallyacross the street from AlfredUniversity. Alfred State CollegeTen years after Governor Thomas

Dewey signed legislation creatingthe State University of New York,Nelson Rockefeller was elected to hisfirst term as Governor. Soon after,Rockefeller empaneled a Committeeon Higher Education, which inNovember 1960 issued the HealdReport, recommending that SUNYshould be given greater freedom tocarry out construction and chargetuition. Like most other SUNY unitsthe Institute of Agriculture andTechnology increased the number ofits buildings in the 1960s, andsubstituted the word “college” for“institute,” becoming the StateUniversity of New York College ofAgriculture and Technology. Inaddition to the ongoing constructionat the Alfred campus, a VocationalDivision was created by renovatingand remodeling eight buildings atthe deactivated Sinclair Oil Refineryin Wellsville, and classes began therein October of 1966. Although thelocation of Vocational Division hadadvantages such as the use ofexisting structures, it is locatedfourteen miles from the maincampus in Alfred and students livingat the main campus have to betransported by bus to the Wellsvillecampus, because dormitories havenot been built in Wellsville. The administrations of the

agricultural and technical instituteshave sometimes been interested inexpanding their missions. Oneexample is President DavidHuntington’s 1972 “Proposal for aPolytechnic College at Alfred,” whichincluded bachelor of technology andbachelor of business administrationdegree programs. Such elements ofthe proposal were of obvious concernto the administration at AlfredUniversity, which was relieved thatSUNY would not approve bachelor’sdegrees at what PresidentHuntington was already callingAlfred State College. It was not untilthe mid-1980s that SUNYencouraged the Agricultural andTechnical Colleges to offer their firstbachelor’s degree. After the buildingconstruction of the 1960s, theState Education Department in 1982recommended the establishment ofupper-division programs inengineering technologies, because ofa perceived general need for moreengineers in New York State. TheSUNY Board of Trustees acted on thereport by encouraging the Institutesto offer a limited amount ofbaccalaureate degrees in engineeringtechnology. For example, in 1985Alfred State offered a bachelor oftechnology in electrical engineeringtechnology degree in conjunctionwith the State University of New Yorkat Binghamton. In 1987 theAgricultural and Technology CollegesPresidents Association agreed tochange the names of the college tothe SUNY College of Technology atAlfred, soon known as Alfred StateCollege.Today Alfred State is comprised of

the School of Arts and Sciences andthe School of Management andEngineering. A recent addition toLiberal Arts and Sciences is the

Radiologic Technology program, inthe Physical and Life SciencesDepartment. Another recentaddition is Criminal Justice in theSocial and Behavior SciencesDepartment. Other departmentsinclude Mathematics, English andHumanities, and the AgricultureDepartment, which includesVeterinary Technology. The School ofManagement and EngineeringTechnology includes Business,Architecture, Civil Engineering, DigitalMedia and Animation, andMechanical and ElectricalEngineering. A recent addition to thephysical plant at the Alfred campusincludes the Student LeadershipCenter, which houses the Center forStudent Engagement. The School of Applied Technology

in Wellsville includes Culinary Arts,Automotive Trades, Building Trades,and other vocational offerings. Therecently-built WorkforceDevelopment Center and theSustainable AdvancedManufacturing Center enhance theapplied learning experience at theWellsville campus. ConclusionThe college at Alfred, having

evolved from a School of Agricultureto an Agricultural and TechnicalInstitute to a Colleges of Technologyhas long been responsive topressures from various agencies andadministrations in the State of NewYork. Its founding depended not onlyon the passage of legislation by theNew York State Legislature, but alsosuccessive gubernatorialadministrations. As the StateEducation Department suggested achange in mission, the schoolchanged its curricula. With theirinclusion into the State University ofNew York, the school continued to beresponsive to the State as it has since,either through cooperation throughbuilding construction, a change inmission towards increasedbaccalaureate programs, or theexperiment of a collective structure

of the Union of Colleges ofTechnology. Alfred State hasaccommodated successive New Yorkadministrations, and will continue todo so. To paraphrase the report of the1946 Joint Committee on RuralEducational Services, the rural peopleof New York will support Alfred Stateif the State continues to make itworthy of support. Adapted from “From Schools of

Agriculture to Colleges of Technology:A Century of Evolution” by JosephPetrick, in SUNY at Sixty: The Promiseof the State University of New York,edited by John B. Clark, W. BruceLeslie, and Kenneth P. O’Brien. SUNYPress, 2010.

The UndergraduateAcademic Programs

and Policies Committee

Ron Sarner, Chair, SUNY PolyThe charge of the UndergraduateAcademic Programs and Policies

Committee is as follows:

The Committee shall provide adviceand guidance to the Faculty Senateon matters relating to undergraduateprograms and policies throughout theUniversity. To these ends, theCommittee may review such areas asexisting and proposed curricula,standards for academic degrees,undergraduate academic assessment,teaching techniques and evaluation,special undergraduate programs,articulation among units of StateUniversity of New York and thevarious aspects of internationaleducation and development.In recent years a recurring area of

interest for the Committee has beenapplied learning. In 2016, theCommittee developed and publisheda comprehensive 106-pagehandbook (available on line at:http://system.suny.edu/media/suny/content-assets/documents/faculty-senate/Internship-Guide--update-10.19.16.pdf) entitled Internships

S P O T L I G H T

25

and Co-ops: A Guide for Planning,Implementation and Assessment.An important resource for manyfaculty in its own right, the relevanceof the Guide is enhanced as thesystem-wide emphasis on appliedlearning rolls out. In addition to thesections on planning,implementation, and assessmentsuggested by the title, the Guideincludes material on relevant laws,regulations, and policies and anextensive bibliography includingresources from federal and stateagencies, accrediting bodies, SUNY,and the campuses. Appendicesinclude sample learning outcomes,evaluation rubrics, and learningagreements.A second area of Committee

interest with respect to appliedlearning has been to ensure thatfaculty retain control of thecurriculum. As noted in the seminal1966 Statement on Government ofColleges and Universities, jointlydeveloped by the AmericanAssociation of University Professors,the American Council on Education,and the Association of GoverningBoards of Universities and Colleges(available on line at:https://www.aaup.org/report/statement-government-colleges-and-universities), “the faculty hasprimary responsibility for suchfundamental areas as curriculum,subject matter and methods ofinstruction, research, faculty status,and those aspects of student lifewhich relate to the educationalprocess.” The Undergraduate Academic

Programs and Policies Committee hasdeveloped several resolutions inrecent years reaffirming the primacyof the faculty with respect to theformulation of policy associated withapplied learning and with thedelivery of applied learningexperiences. Resolution 170-02-1adopted by the University FacultySenate at its Spring 2015 Plenarymeeting at Plattsburgh states in part:

“all applied learning and/orexperiential education earningacademic credit shall be aresponsibility of appropriate facultywho are members of the academicdepartment (or similar academicunit) within the discipline in whichthe internship is offered and shouldbe qualified to supervise theinternship and other experientialeducation in the respective subjectarea.”This was followed up with a

resolution adopted at the Fall 2016Plenary meeting at Cortland callingupon campus governance bodies to:“develop and adopt policies to

ensure that: 1) Academic facultyretain responsibility for thecurriculum, for assessingstudent learningoutcomes, and forassigning grades inapplied learningactivities as for otherdegree requirements; 2)The campus-level determination ofwhat meets the applied learningmandate be made through thenormal campus and governancecurricular processes; and 3) thecertification of an activity or courseas meeting the applied learningrequirement also follows the normalcampus and governance curricularprocesses.”That resolution further called

upon the Chancellor to ensure thatnormal governance processes haveindeed been followed. The resultwas that reports on the appliedlearning initiative by campuspresidents to System Administrationmust contain a certification by thecampus president that propergovernance processes werefollowed. The intent here is toprevent campus administrationsfrom doing an end-run aroundgovernance.This spring the Undergraduate

Committee published a reportdetailing the results of a survey thatwas administered by Wendy Gordon

from Plattsburgh to determine theextent to which campus governancehas been involved in the decision oneach campus to make an appliedlearning experience a graduationrequirement.General Education is another area

of interest to the UndergraduateCommittee. Provost Cartwright hasexpressed an interest in re-examining the SUNY GeneralEducation requirements, noting thatthe essential structure of the plan isnow close to twenty years old.Originally implemented by theBoard of Trustees requiring onecourse in each of ten areas (as wellas information literacy and criticalthinking), for a total of 30 credits,

the plan was modifiedseveral years ago togive campuses theoption of requiringbasic communication,mathematics, and

five of the remaining eightcategories, still with a minimum of30 credits. The committee believesthat as these discussions begin it isuseful to have a firm grasp oncurrent practice. To that end, it hassurveyed the campuses to ascertainwhich have opted for the seven often, which have retained the ten often, and has also sought to chroniclelocal graduation requirements thathave been added. While this seemslike a straight-forward task, it is notalways so; some campusesincorporate the SUNY requirementsinto a somewhat different localtaxonomy. A preliminary version ofthis report has been distributed toSenators for verification of the entryfor their campus and the finalversion should be available shortly.A further complication for General

Education are new requirements inthe Middle States accreditationstandards. The new Standard IIImandates a general educationprogram that:“...offers a sufficient scope to

draw students into new areas of

intellectual experience, expandingtheir cultural and global awarenessand cultural sensitivity, andpreparing them to make well-reasoned judgments outside as wellas within their academic field.”The Undergraduate Committee

sponsored a presentation byDeborah Moeckel, its SystemAdministration liaison, at the Spring2017 Plenary at Canton, explainingthe new Standard III and howcampuses might meet therequirements for global awarenessand cultural sensitivity.Another area of interest to the

committee is the practice of offeringcredit-bearing college courses athigh schools across the state. Asubcommittee, headed by AliceKrause from Delhi, has beeninvestigating these programs, alsoknown as dual enrollment, and seeksto develop a white paper detailingbest practice. There are a number ofissues associated with dualenrollment including academicpreparation of the teachers doingthe instruction, appropriateoversight by appropriate collegefaculty, ensuring academic rigor ofthe course, evaluation of learningoutcomes, and cost to the student.As a first step, the subcommitteeproduced a report, distributed at theUFS Spring Plenary at Canton,identifying the state-operatedcampuses involved in dualenrollment, and providing somebasic information about the extentof offerings, supervision, andstudent cost.Our committee, largely due to the

excellent contributions from JaneNepkie from Oneonta, has a knackfor identifying anachronistic SUNYacademic policies; two wereidentified this year and resolutionswere passed by the Senate urgingthe Chancellor to resolve theinconsistencies. At the WinterPlenary at Old Westbury, a resolutionwas passed asking the Chancellor toamend a 1976 Memorandum to

S P O T L I G H T

26

Poems by Dick CollierSUNY Polytechnic Institute

Thank you, Chancellor Zimpher!

Nancy Zimpher came on board whenwe were under stress,And many felt their campus wasneglected, weak or puny, So her response was coining our newmantra “Systemness”Reminding us that we—together—are “The Power ofSUNY!”Each campus has its own uniquepedagogic fareAppealing to our target students--unless they are place bound.Expanding online courses is a naturalway to shareOur knowledge, not just in New Yorkbut all the world around.

But SUNY students should be first ofall the world’s great mobsTo get the courses needed for theirmind (and resume).Our mission also is to help NewYorkers land good jobs--And “Open SUNY” is for some like“Open Sesame!”An “economic engine” is anotherSUNY missionTo maximize good research andbusiness in the state,So grad students too need access inreturn for their tuitionAs Open SUNY spreads to mastersand the doctorate.

Of course there’s still the problem ofconflicting day and timeThat hinders students taking ourvaried provenderOf unique offerings and gen ed –weneed a paradigmAddressing issues of each site’sincongruous calendar.So far as that is feasible it would bequite a boonEspecially for those with jobs andother obligations.For marketing online courses it is alsoopportune(And faculty and students couldbetter plan vacations!)

The disparate residence rules couldalso use rethinkingAllowing Open SUNY to be fullyutilizedAnd two- and four-year programscould be truly interlinkingWithout a transfer’s credits beingcruelly minimized. We also should eschew the sillyancient numbers gamePretending 300-level work is always“more advanced”Than major “sophomore” courses thatessentially are the sameSo speed to finishing degrees canbetter be enhanced.

In Zimpher’s tenure also camemandated “Applied Learning”,A change which for our undergradsshould help them withemployment,Reducing crushing debts, and withthe higher pay they’re earningAllow alums to give back dough forcampuses’ enjoyment.But coursework, seminars, I.S., andlabs and practicaYield credit by the Carnegie fifty-minute clock.“Why sixty minutes for ‘ExperientialLearning’?” Duh,It’s stayed that way since ’76—isn’tthat a shock!

Though all of us of course resentwhen politics and porkJust squander funds that should havegone to education (formal),The Chancellor was right in hersupport of “Teach New York”And urging those that can return tobeing somewhat “Normal.”If we’re not satisfied that our newstudents are equippedTo face our courses’ syllabi and ourprofessors’ rigor,One reason why perhaps from ourcollective minds has slipped—We used to train most teachers butnow fewer, so “go figure!”

She’s met each challenge with soundprograms, not some fad orgimmick,And well deserves our thanks aswell as every recognition, Most recently “Support of Teacher EdAward” (the “Imig”)—True leader, intercessor, and a fineacademician!The plans are laid but then, of course,more challenges remainSo that the work she started can beeven more perfectedBy Chancellor Johnson for ourcommon good and public gainSo SUNY’s worth and value will beproperly respected.

Presidents that provided a fixedcontact hour to credit hour formulafor internships and other appliedlearning activities. A parallel StateEducation Department policyspecified the minimum number ofcontact hours per credit hour, not afixed formula, and our resolutionurged the Chancellor to bring SUNYpolicy in line with the SEDguidelines.At the Spring Plenary at Canton

we introduced a resolution askingthat another 1976 policy, this onespecifying a maximum number ofcredits that can be required in asingle discipline for programsleading to the award of a Bachelorof Arts or a Bachelor of Sciencedegree be eliminated. We notedthat SUNY has regularly approvedprograms exceeding these limitsand that SED guidelines do notrequire them.The work of the committee this

year has set the stage for next year'sagenda. Discussions on GeneralEducation will still be in the earlystages. Implementation of appliedlearning will be rolling out as agraduation requirement on many ofour campuses, and the role of theUndergraduate Committee is tomonitor the roll out and chroniclethe level of faculty-involvement inboth the design andimplementation phases. Workremains on development of a whitepaper on dual enrollment. We alsohave a subcommittee that will beexamining the role of faculty inmicro-credentialing with an interestin ensuring appropriate facultyinvolvement and oversight. Thetopics are interesting and timely,and the work of the committeeshould be valuable.

S P O T L I G H T T H E P O E T ’ S C O R N E R

27

Chancellor Nancy L. Zimpher will step downas chancellor at the end of August, 2017 andbecome Chancellor Emeritus. At that time, she willjoin SUNY’s Rockefeller Institute of Government asa Senior Fellow and officially launch the nation’sfirst “Center for Education Pipeline SystemsChange” The Center will continue the initiativesthat Chancellor Zimpher introduced in SUNY tofurther a “collective impact approach to educationand community building, and the importance ofapproaching education policymaking and fundingacross the full continuum from cradle to career.”Additionally, she will join the faculty of theUniversity at Albany’s Schools of Education andSocial Work and serve as a chief advisor toPresident Rodriguez and his staff for cradle-to-career partnerships. She will also chair the firstStrive Together Board of Directors, an organizationthat she originally co-founded that involves anational network of 70 communities in 31 statesand Washington D.C. to provide coaching,connectedness, and resources to local partnershipsto foster quality education.

Dr. Kristina M. Johnson has been appointedthe 13th chancellor of SUNY. Dr. Johnson receivedher B.S. with distinction, M.S. and Ph.D. in electricalengineering from Stanford University. She was aprofessor at the University of Colorado-Boulderfrom 1985 to 1998, and directed the NSF/ERC forOptoelectronics Computing Systems Center at theUniversity of Colorado and Colorado StateUniversity. She was dean of the Pratt School ofEngineering at Duke University from 1999 to 2007and then provost and senior vice president forAcademic Affairs at Johns Hopkins University from2007to 2009. Dr. Johnson is the current founder and chief

executive officer of Cube Hydro Partners, LLC, whichdevelops hydroelectric generations facilities thatprovide clean energy to communities andbusinesses throughout the country. She wasappointed by President Barak Obama as U.S. UnderSecretary of Energy. She has received numerousawards and honorary degrees, holds 42 U.S.patents, and has published 149 referenced papersand proceedings.

Dr. Alexander N. Cartwright will be leaving hispost as provost and executive vice chancellor ofSUNY, a position in which he has served since 2014,to become the chancellor of the University ofMissouri-Columbia. Previously, Dr. Cartwright wasvice president for Research and EconomicDevelopment, professor of Electrical Engineeringand adjunct professor of Physics at the Universityof Buffalo. He received his B.S. and Ph.D. at theUniversity of Iowa in Electrical and ComputerEngineering. He is a recipient of many awards andhas published more than 160 journal papers andconference proceedings. He holds six patents andhis technologies have been licensed by threestartup companies.

A NN O UN C EM E N T S

The State University of New YorkUniversity Faculty Senate

State University Plaza, Room S120Albany, New York 12246

518.320.1376 >> 800.547.1548www.system.suny.edu/facultysenate