Briana Clark, right, helps Amy Morin with her wings during a project exhibition for their Visual LIteracy class April 30 on the Union Plaza.

Charting our Course in Years Two, Three and Four

Chancellor Explores Future Budget Alternatives

By James Moeser, Chancellor

I want to take this opportunity to provide more background information on the budget. Many of you have asked questions concerning the budget and the prospect of future budgetary reductions in coming years. I shall attempt in this article to answer as many of these questions as possible as well as address some critical issues that we face together.

Central Administration has identified a $20 million cumulative shortfall over the next four years. Each campus has been allocated a proportionate share of the shortfall in each of the four years. In addition, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln had previously identified campus-specific unfunded imperatives for each of the next two years. The Central Administration assessment comprises 58 percent of the total reduction required.

In order to reach our goals, and in actuality, to merely keep abreast of current conditions, we must shift resources to fund those imperatives. These are, for the most part, not new programs but are realities that must be addressed to keep the university competitive and vibrant.

Last week the Academic Senate passed a resolution requesting that we find alternatives to reallocation. I accept that as a positive challenge. While we have no choice but to effect essentially across-the-board reallocation for the coming fiscal year, I believe we have a duty and a responsibility (and now a charge from the Senate) to find alternatives for years two, three, and four.

I do not believe that we can or should sustain four years of successive across-the-board reductions without serious damage to quality and our ability to deliver our core missions. What, then, are the alternatives?

First, I believe we must redouble our efforts to find alternative (and increased) sources of revenue. There are several avenues of approach, the most obvious of which is tuition revenue. If we could increase the number of out-of-state students enrolled on this campus, we could increase revenues by several million dollars, even taking into account the cost of instructing additional students. We need to involve the entire campus community, not just the admissions office, in the recruitment and retention of students. As I have stated previously, collegiate units that succeed in increasing their enrollments will be the principal beneficiaries of the revenues produced by those increases.

Second, we must intensify our delivery of instruction to non-traditional students using non-traditional methods of delivery. One can look to such distinguished institutions as UCLA, Stanford, NYU, Penn State and Maryland, to name but a few prestigious universities who have aggressively entered this market. We must get in or we will lose our opportunity.

We are not idle in this regard. We have created CLASS.com, inc., a new for-profit corporation to market the intellectual property being produced under a federal grant by the Independent Study High School. Our plan is to license CLASS.com, inc. to sell the new interactive web-based courses, with income reverting back to the university for support of more distance education.

On the research front, we must dramatically increase the level of our funded research. We have given Marsha Torr, our new Vice Chancellor for Research, the charge of doubling our funded research over the next four years.

However, we must also acknowledge that we may not be able to increase revenues sufficiently to off-set additional budget cuts by 2000-2001, the second year of the biennium. Therefore, in the light of the Senate resolution, I believe we should search for alternatives to further across-the-board cuts. Accordingly, I shall ask the Academic Planning Committee, working with the vice chancellors and deans, to recommend to me targeted areas for budgetary reduction or even programmatic elimination. I shall also ask the committee to consider academic and administrative reorganizations that might result in cost reduction.

Such a process will require work by the faculties and administrations within the colleges to weigh and evaluate their priorities asking the hard questions that we need to ask: What are our greatest areas of strength? What are the essential core offerings of the college (or department) that must be protected and preserved at all costs? Which of our offerings and programs might be considered marginal to the core mission or marginal in quality?

UNMC has actually made such targeted cuts for the coming fiscal year using the following guidelines. At UNMC, any proposed cuts

o Must not endanger the core mission (accreditation)

o Must not compromise UNMC's vision to become world class

o Must strengthen UNMC's four strategic focus areas

1. Education - raise the bar for students

2. Research - rank among the leading research medical centers

3. Community - promote health and prevention

4. Diversity - build diversity on campus

o Do the least harm to those we serve

o Must preserve current and anticipated new program development funds

o Must be realistically achievable

o Must not result in the possibility of a perverse outcome

o Administrative cuts are to be made first - starting with those functions that are least essential, working up from there, but stopping short of endangering the integrity of the core mission

o Academic program cuts are to be made last, starting with those programs that are least essential, examining closely all affiliated programs and working up from there without endangering our core mission

This is an excellent model, one that I believe the APC should adapt and adopt for our purposes.

We have already done much of that heavy lifting in our first reallocation. However, I believe this is the far preferable track to across-the-board reductions, which become a continued and continuous blood-letting that is ultimately destructive of our morale, injuring perhaps most of all our most successful and most essential programs.

I believe that through a combination of these approaches-finding new revenues and making some targeted programmatic reductions-we can protect the essential elements of quality and mission. We need to clearly identify areas of strength, areas that we not only protect from cuts but in which we invest new private funds to take to a new level of quality and excellence.

The irony of our situation is that we are receiving the greatest level of private support in the history of the University. However, this is not money that can be used to supplant public support. That is the quickest way to kill philanthropy. Rather, we must find the discipline and the will to narrow our focus, to stop attempting to be all things to everyone, and to concentrate on what is essential, what we do best, and what the state needs most.

What are those things? We all need to be a part of the dialogue in answering that question.

Let me again summarize the actual budgetary situation that we face for the coming year and answer the questions that have been asked about several items on the list.

o $701,252 for information technology. This number has been reduced from an initial working figure of $1.2 million. It includes the costs of providing software and hardware upgrades; costs associated with Internet2; LotusNotes implementation; and costs of continuing to network and wire campus buildings.

Some have questioned our commitment to Internet2 and doubt whether it is essential. I believe Internet2 is every bit as essential as Internet1 was when it was first conceived. And not only for research, for which it is an essential tool, but for distance learning as well. As the Internet becomes increasingly clogged with traffic, Internet2 will be an ever more essential medium for transmitting large data sets.

The assessment from central administration for the systemwide technology plan and the campus-specific information technology piece are all continuing costs. I know it is hard to imagine how or why information technology could be so expensive on an on-going basis. Technology is a cost that just keeps asking for more. There is no such thing as a one-time solution.

o $433,000 each year for Kiewit Institute faculty support. This amount funds the first half of our commitment for faculty lines in the UNL-supported portion of the Peter Kiewit Institute in Omaha and fulfills UNL's agreement in the Business Plan established by the Regents in 1996.

Many have asked why we have dollars for Omaha in both the central assessment and in our campus imperatives. The answer is that the central assessment covers the remainder of the legislative request that went unappropriated in the previous biennium, and was in the request again for the current session. Signals from the legislature show that it may not be funded this session either. The campus-specific ISTE request covers that portion of the business plan that the President and the Regents committed the university to fund through reallocation on the campuses.

o $322,000 to cover deficits in scholarship support. The decision to create a number of scholarships, particularly for high ability students, has had the benefit of maintaining enrollments and resulted in demonstrably more-qualified students. The scholarships include book scholarships for students enrolling in the Honors Program; Distinguished Scholar Awards for those students who don't quite qualify for full Regents Scholarships; transfer student scholarships and National Merit Scholarships. Had we not implemented these scholarships, the enrollment decline would have been far greater because these highly recruited students surely would have elected an institution that offered scholarship assistance.

o $350,000 for medical insurance benefits for graduate assistants.

All GTAs who qualify for tuition remission will be eligible. Those GTAs on state-aided funds will be covered by this assessment; those supported by grants will be funded from the grants. To remain competitive in enrolling graduate students, we must offer these benefits, which already are being offered by most other institutions.

o $150,000 for diversity. Most of this money will be used to satisfy training requirements for all supervisors as mandated by the federal government's Office of Civil Rights.

I have been asked, "Who determined the 'unfunded imperatives'?" They were developed in conversation with the academic deans and the vice chancellors and were first mentioned in my State of the University address last August. This list has been circulating on campus for several months and was posted on a website. In addition, we held several open forums on them over the winter. The list is composed of those things which we regard as absolutely essential for which there is no other funding source. These imperatives are not new program initiatives; rather, they are essential to maintaining our present course.

I fully acknowledge that this round of reductions, coming on the heels of difficult reallocation decisions two year ago, are painful and unwanted. My deepest wish is that these did not have to occur at any time. Reality, however, intervenes.

In my message to faculty and staff published in the April 1, 1999 Scarlet, I noted that our budgetary challenges will test our character as an institution. We can retreat into negativity and react to successive cuts. Or we can find ways to be more efficient, more resourceful and, ultimately, a better university. We can only do that by collaboration, by using our creativity and imagination, not only to solve our immediate problems, but also to use all the resources that we have. We must all work together.

Some will say we are foolish to pursue excellence during times of fiscal difficulty. But our vision must surpass our immediate crisis. I am not minimizing the difficulty we shall soon face, but I am hopeful that our conversations and procedures will enable us to determine the core values of the institution, those things we hold most dear and must protect at all costs.

We must reach beyond our own time frames. We are laying the foundation for the university at which our current students' grandchildren will matriculate. We cannot afford to mislay the bricks.

Nebraska pioneers built this university from the ground up in the 1870s. They started with nothing but vision, hope and courage. The result was a proud institution known for excellence. Let us honor our heritage by continuing that tradition.

Highly Regarded NU Ag Research Bulletin on Corn Reprinted 50 Years Later

By Jon Houghton, IANR news assistant

A 50-year-old University of Nebraska research publication long regarded as a valuable reference for plant scientists worldwide is back in print.

The Structure and Reproduction of Corn, by Theodore A. Kiesselbach, longtime NU College of Agriculture agronomist and geneticist, was originally published in 1949 as Nebraska Agricultural Experiment Station Research Bulletin 161.

It became a seminal reference in plant biology labs. It was reprinted in 1980 by University of Nebraska Press but had, until recently, been out of print for several years.

In a testament to the continued relevance of Kiesselbach's work, New York's Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press recently re-issued the book on the 50th anniversary of its original publication.

Kiesselbach, a Nebraska native who grew up in Broken Bow, Michigan and Lincoln, joined NU as an agronomy assistant in 1908. He earned his bachelor's, master's and doctorate degrees from NU, and was an agronomy professor from 1912 to 1952. He died in 1964.

As a world leader in crop research during the first half of the century, he studied all major Nebraska field crops but was best known for his corn research. The T.A. Kiesselbach Crops Research Laboratory on UNL's East Campus bears his name.

Ken Cassman, head of UNL's agronomy department, said Kiesselbach's research bulletin has become a seminal reference for plant scientists. It has been used for years in some of the world's most prestigious scientific institutions.

"It's a landmark piece of work regarding the physiology and anatomy of the corn plant," he said.

Kiesselbach's work throughout his career helped pave the way for development of the hybrid seed industry, Cassman said. Kiesselbach and NU colleague E.G. Montgomery were the first scientists to develop hybrid corn west of Connecticut, he said.

John Inglis, executive director of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, said demand for Kiesselbach's book by scientists at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory sparked his interest in the reprint.

"This book was mentioned as something that was still found tremendously useful," he said.

Help from Kiesselbach's family and Rosalyn Morris, a former NU colleague of Kiesselbach's, eased the task of obtaining original copies of the text and photos, Inglis said. Kiesselbach's relatives also provided portions of his unpublished autobiography, which shed light on the man behind the science.

Inglis said Kiesselbach's book was his press's best seller at a recent corn research conference in Wisconsin.

"They were delighted to have the book there," he said.

Cassman said Kiesselbach's book epitomized the high level of scholarship at the University of Nebraska.

"The fact that Cold Spring thought it was worthwhile attests to the fact that this book is recognized worldwide as a relevant and scientifically significant piece of work," he said.

The book is available for $25 from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press at 1-800-843-4388.

Carranza Working to Break Cycle of Disadvantage

By Gabi Volgyes, Diversity Reporter

When Miguel Carranza received the Chancellor's "Fulfilling the Dream" Award for Exemplary Service on Dr. Martin Luther King Day, he was surprised and humbled. But not so surprised that he couldn't figure out why he received it. The associate professor of sociology and ethnic studies knew that his everyday contributions mattered; the award simply recognized "the day to day activities that I've been involved in since I came to campus."

And those day to day activities certainly have added up. In the 24 years since he first came to Nebraska from the University of Notre Dame, he has held a plethora of positions in the Institute for Ethnic Studies, the Dean of Arts and Sciences' Office, the National Association for Chicano Studies, the National Association for Ethnic Studies, the Midwest Consortium for Latino Research, and on the YMCA Board of Directors. Now, he'd like to get back to teaching, doing research, and making a difference the best way he knows how.

Carranza is convinced that "one of the key issues at the University of Nebraska­Lincoln and at colleges and universities all over the country is the issue of campus climate and environment." The way people interact, overtly and covertly, the way they talk about race, gender, sexuality, and ethnicity; all of these affect the atmosphere on campus, and all of these affect how students learn, especially those students who belonging to minority groups. Carranza considers it vital to "create a climate that will emphasize the positive attributes of the campus, and will link very different people together."

Taking ownership of the campus climate is one way to do this, Carranza says. Addressing the everyday incivilities and negative epithets that, directly or indirectly, affect the campus climate, is an important first step towards establishing a climate that is inclusive and friendly to everyone. He cited the example of jokes that were designed to "put people in their place;" however, by speaking out about offensive jokes, even a casual observer can make the environment more inclusive.

Today, Carranza's goals are primarily twofold. First, he wants to help the university and its students, faculty and staff adjust to the changing demands of an increasingly pluralistic world. According to Carranza, the needs of today's college graduate are much more diverse than they have been ever before. However, that doesn't mean that the colleges are meeting the demands of a more pluralistic society, and they need to be. "Pluralism is a solution that can work, but it will entail work to make it work," Carranza states. "We can be a pluralistic society, but it's not going to be easy."

The second upcoming focus for Carranza is that of trying to change the cycle of disadvantage. The best way to do this, he affirms, is to make a commitment to change the status quo and to get ahead of upcoming problems, because the problems aren't going to go away. "Lets not wait," he said, "until we have racial conflict, or an increasing antagonism between minorities and police officers; instead, lets try to think of solutions today."

Increasing perceptions of success and decreasing the chances of failure will also go a long way toward breaking the cycle of disadvantage. He plans to focus on creating opportunities, mentoring, and helping the leaders of the future excel today; perhaps more importantly, he will help to give them the tools they need to succeed. And while this seems a huge undertaking, he does not seem daunted by it.

Perhaps that's because of his support system. Carranza grew up with his three sisters, the only son of a Platte River valley migrant worker who had been unable to finish 10th grade. All three of his sisters also have higher educational degrees; Carranza credits his parents with enormous amounts of "unconditional" support, not only for education but also for whatever choices he made in his life. He also credits them with instilling in him the knowledge that though he might face roadblocks, they would encourage him.

Other role models, both formal and informal, also gave Carranza the courage to persevere in the face of hardship, and to achieve whatever he set his mind to. Teachers and colleagues helped him; he also particularly remembered the influence of a second-grade teacher who encouraged him to read. His educational influences, particularly a Sociology professor who "gave life to the discipline," and a graduate adviser here at Nebraska, who convinced him to seek his graduate degree, have also guided his path and helped him on the way to his success.

His primary incentive to achieving success, Carranza says, was that of "making a difference so that I can help other students." Through his campus, community, public and personal achievements, Carranza hopes to provide hope to others, and the courage to take risks to change the campus, one day at a time.

Foreign Students Enrich Intellectual Climate at Nebraska

By Tom Simons, Public Relations

When international students come to the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, they do much more than pick up knowledge that will help their native countries' economies. They add to the knowledge base at the university, often with positive effects on the Nebraska economy.

That's particularly true in agriculture, said Stephen Baenziger, professor of plant breeding and agronomy in the Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

"In some ways agriculture has benefited as much or more than some of the other fields from our foreign students," Baenziger said. "In nearly every other country, agriculture is taken less for granted than it is in the U.S. and a lot of their best and brightest go into agriculture. As a result, we have many, many exceptional students come here, often with their own funding, and they help us immensely with our projects."

Among those students are Peter Setimela, a third-year doctoral student from Botswana, who's working with NU agronomist David Andrews to develop heat- and drought-resistant sorghum varieties; Kyung-Moon Kim from South Korea, who's concerned with developing faster methods of creating new wheat varieties; and Hikmet Budak, a visiting scientist from the Turkish ministry of agriculture, who's trying to develop wheat varieties that can be made into flour for dough that will mix quickly, not turn to "wallpaper paste" if it's overmixed and still have a high protein content.

"I'm trying to find genotypes (of sorghum) that can do better under heat stress, that's the No. 1 problem in Botswana," said Setimela, whose home country contains a large chunk of the Kalahari Desert in southern Africa. "Nowadays, with the weather changing everywhere and people maybe not wanting to irrigate as much, this will become important where they cannot grow corn."

Nebraska will benefit from that, too, Baenziger said. He explained that sorghum is a crop that's normally grown under dry conditions and if dry conditions persist in El Nino and La Nina years, producers may want to turn to a crop like sorghum - especially if they have a variety that's tough enough to withstand heat and drought so they don't have to replant.

Kim's work with Baenziger in developing improved wheat transformation systems through what is called the "doubled-haploid breeding system" could also help producers adapt quickly to changing conditions, particularly if new wheat diseases show up. Kim explained that while many cereal crops, such as corn, rice and barley have two genomes (one from the male parent, one from the female), wheat has six (three each from the male and female parents) and therefore it is much more difficult to develop new wheat varieties, including disease-resistant ones.

"If we use the doubled-haploid breeding system we can reduce the time it takes to breed a new variety of wheat," he said. "It would take eight to 10 years and normally it takes around 12 years now. We can also use haploid embryos to achieve genetic improvement in wheat."

Meanwhile, Budak's research with cereal chemist David Shelton has a more direct effect on an end product of wheat - bread dough. "We grew 45 lines of wheat in eight environments to see how the environment affects baking quality and protein content," Budak said. "We looked at how it affects hardness, whether the kernel is hard or soft, and how it affects end-use quality. We've found many differences. Each of the eight environments has an effect on the lines."

In the end, Baenziger said, the relationship between the university and the international students is a good for both, and for Nebraska. "These students are trading their intellectual capital and their hard work for an education. It's a good situation all the way around."

'University' Replaces 'Distinguished' in Some Professorial Titles

By Tom Simons, Public Relations

Beginning this week, the 26 University of Nebraska-Lincoln faculty members who have held the campuswide title of "Distinguished Professor" are eligible to use a new title-"University Professor."

It's a change approved by Chancellor James Moeser, the Office of Academic Affairs and the former Distinguished Professors Committee, and one that's designed to eliminate a degree of confusion that has existed about the nature of the "distinguished" title.

"Part of the confusion stems from the fact that when the decision was made several years ago to give the campuswide professorships the title of 'Distinguished Professor,' there were already in existence some endowed chairs that had the name 'distinguished' by the agreement of the donor," said Richard Edwards, senior vice chancellor for academic affairs.

Edwards said there have been many more cases in the last few years of donors who wanted or insisted that the chairs they set up include the term 'distinguished.' He said trying to monitor the boundary between campuswide and endowed 'distinguished' professorships has proven to be problematical.

"In some cases, it has led to some embarrassment," Edwards said. "We don't want to suggest that the other people are not distinguished and we don't want to lose contributions that can create new endowed chairs. It seemed like it made sense to try a different designation for the people who are currently included as (campuswide) Distinguished Professors that would be a clear demarcation and a clear communication of their status.

"What we hope to do is on the model of other institutions where 'University Professor' means the highest distinction possible for a faculty member."

Edwards said individual faculty members who are eligible to use the title "University Professor," will still be able to use the name of their endowed chair. As an example, he said Fred Luthans, the long-time chair of the (former) Distinguished Professors Committee, could now use the title of "University Professor and George Holmes Distinguished Professor of Management."

"We have changed the name of the group and in future, individuals elevated to campuswide status will bear the title University Professor. But for current holders, we will leave it up to the individual whether he or she wants to change or not," Edwards said.