Content
Members Present: Bradshaw, Clarke, Combs, Cressler, Davis, Eklund, Gay, Hanrahan, Heng-Moss, Henson, Jemkur, McLean, Mueller, Sharif, Tschetter, Van Den Wymelenberg, Wilkins
Members Absent: Nelson, Wilkins
Guests:
Note: These are not verbatim minutes. This is a summary of the discussions at the Academic Planning Committee meeting as corrected by those participating.
1.0 Call
Hanrahan called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m.
2.0 APC Representative needed for the Philosophy APR (March 9-10, 2026)
Hanrahan stated that a representative from the APC was needed to serve on the Philosophy APR. Gay volunteered to serve.
3.0 APC Representative needed for Modern Languages & Literatures APR (September 14-15, 2026)
Hanrahan stated that he was willing to serve as the representative on the Modern Languages & Literature APR.
4.0 Election of a Vice Chair
Hanrahan noted that a new Vice Chair was needed since he assumed the role of Chair recently. Tschetter nominated Bradshaw as Vice Chair. Bradshaw accepted the nomination and the APC voted unanimously to approve him as Vice Chair.
5.0 Report on Chemistry APR (Cressler)
Cressler reported that the External Review Team (ERT) for the Chemistry APR was very good and included two people from other Big Ten universities, which was very helpful because they can contrast what they do at their university with what we do here. He stated that the ERT felt that the department’s self-study and related materials were adequate but voiced concern that the report may have been primarily written by the chair of the department. As a result, the ERT, which was well prepared, had a long list of questions that the team felt were inadequately addressed or were completely missing from the self-study.
Cressler noted that two key issues that were repeatedly highlighted in the meetings included that Chemistry did not have enough faculty to adequately deliver a comprehensive chemistry education, both in terms of coursework and research opportunities at both the undergraduate and graduate level. He pointed out that the chemistry department at UNL is the smallest in the Big Ten and there is concern within the department that they will be losing some of the older faculty members in the near future.
Cressler stated that the other concern is graduate student recruitment and particularly the challenges the department is dealing with in recruiting more domestic students. He pointed out that 75% of the graduate students are international students and the last two cohorts of students had no domestic graduate students. He noted that the faculty are concerned that the lack of domestic students could make them more vulnerable due to the current political climate.
Cressler reported that the ERT’s report was detailed and highlighted the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats in the short-, medium- and long-terms, as well as concrete suggestions to help the department improve. He pointed out that the department was very receptive to the recommendations and provided appropriate details on how they would actualize the suggestions made by the ERT.
Cressler stated that overall, the APR went well and there is no need for a follow-up formal hearing. He did note that the ERT felt that there was not adequate time for the ERT to meet with the different groups in the department and that some meetings were scheduled simultaneously so team members had to be spread out to cover the meetings, which required them to miss some of the meetings. He pointed out that he conveyed this information to AVC Marks.
6.0 Report from EVC Button
Button reported that the Fall 2025 update for undergraduate academic performance is now out and we wanted to emphasize how great our students are doing and how effectively the faculty and staff across the campus are working to help our students. He stated that our highest ever recorded 6-year graduation rate is 67% which is the highest it has ever been and we have had a 13.6% increase in our four-year graduation rates over the past decade. In addition, we have reached some of our highest retention rates of 85.7%. He noted that these numbers show the commitment we have to creating a place where every person and every interaction matters. He stated that these figures are a real credit to our faculty who meet with students, to our academic navigators and our academic advisors and he wants to thank everybody for helping us achieve these goals.
Button stated that through the remainder of this academic year we will work on developing UNL’s specific strategic plan which will align with the NU system’s Odyssey to the Extraordinary. He noted that having this plan will help drive our vision for the future and there have been some very preliminary stages of work with college leadership to create an outline for a strategic framework. He stated that he is looking forward in the new year to going to the colleges, and meeting with the units to discuss how we can begin to imagine the future of the university.
Button noted that a lot of things are coming up with respect to the joint accreditation with UNMC and a system strategic plan that we will need to align with. However, he pointed out that we still want to make sure that our campus has its own clear strategic vision for the future, and he is excited to begin working on this. He stated that the N2025 plan officially ends with the year 2025, so we need to do work to develop our next strategic plan, and work has begun with the college deans to draft a broad framework that units can then use to help envision what they think their units will look like in the future.
Button stated that the Board of Regents approved new apportionment categories which now include community engagement, outreach and clinical. He reported that rough guidelines for what these apportionments will look like are occurring so faculty may see some new apportionment categories that are appropriate for the work that they do. He noted that the guidelines will seek to provide more detailed information about the categories.
Eklund pointed out that it is likely that the campus will be facing another round of budget reductions. He asked if we have any idea when this would happen and what methods will be used to deal with the reductions. Button stated that we are still in the midst of this round of budget reductions and the Board of Regents are scheduled to make a decision about this on Friday. He noted that there are certainly no numbers regarding future budget reductions, and stated that he is first interested in working with the campus and having broader engagement about refining the academic program indicators that were utilized for the budget reductions. He reported that he is going to be sharing a new data visualization report with the deans next week so that they can see how the administration has been assessing programs by different criteria of student credit hours and tuition and research performance. He stated that the administration wants everyone to be able to see what these indicators look like for their units and for the units to be able to go back to the original data source so they can see where the data is coming from. He stated that he wants everyone to understand the quantitative assessment of programs and to consider what additional refinements and additional indicators we need to utilize. He noted that the extremely short-time frame for dealing with the budget reductions this year did not allow us to have more engagement and discussion about the metrics. He believes that having broader engagement to refine the academic program indicators will help us align with the strategic planning process he described and it could indicate where greater investments are needed.
Hanrahan asked if the teach-out plans have been developed yet for those programs that have been identified for elimination. Button reported that some work has begun but the work will really gear up in early January. He noted that the plans need to be completed by March 1 because they need to be ready for the advisors and transition coordinators. Clarke asked what resources would be in place to help these departments and Combs asked what role the transition coordinators play. Button stated that the transition coordinators would be the contact point for students, both undergraduates and graduates and they will work with the students to assist them in putting their academic plan together. Clarke pointed out that not all of the units know who their transition coordinator is. Button stated that this information will be coming out next week, but the coordinators’ responsibilities would not start until 2026. He stated that he would be meeting with all, if not most, of the affected units next week.
Cressler stated that he has been hearing rumblings about vision sync and metrics coming from the President’s Office. He asked if we have any further information about this, and if not, when we will be hearing about it so that units can start thinking about how they can report their metrics. Button stated that he was just in a meeting with President Gold this morning and asked that the metrics be shared as a system-wide communication since central administration has now settled on the rolled up aggregate metrics across the whole system. He pointed out that when we know more about the system’s metrics, we can think about how we structure our own aspirations and goals alongside the key pillars. He stated that it is his understanding that colleges will be the primary drivers for making sure that they have strategies that align with the broader NU strategic plan, but it won’t be pushed down to the individual units until after the new year. However, the administration does want everyone to begin thinking at the college level about how each college and unit is going to contribute to these key measurements. He pointed out that none of the measurements will be a surprise. He stated that he thinks the really important work for our campus is to think about our own identity and how we as a campus want to elevate what we are doing.
Combs asked if defining the appropriate metrics for the campus is a process that will take place at the campus level or will it all become a top-down process from the system office. Button noted that President Gold and the Chancellors came up with the metrics for each of the five pillars in the Odyssey to Extraordinary and they are metrics that span over a three-year period. He stated that it will be up to our colleges and units to think about how we contribute to those different aspects of the metrics. He noted that an example is student success rates, and while our campus is moving in an accelerated fashion towards the key performance measures in this area, we need to consider what would be some new strategies that we could commit ourselves to in order to make even greater improvements.
Combs reported that she has heard that some of the tenured faculty members in the departments that are to be eliminated have already had discussions about being placed in different units or colleges. She asked what is being done for junior faculty members because the ones she has spoken with have said they are being left out in the cold. She asked if these people should be out in the job market seeking other employment. Button stated that he has not heard this and pointed out that all of the faculty should be talking to their dean, or associate dean, or they could reach out to AVC Marks or AVC Bischoff to discuss their individual circumstance. He noted that every faculty member, whether they are tenured or not, has the right to pursue a change in their tenure home. However, for faculty members in the programs proposed for elimination, they would need to have a conversation with either the EVC office or the VC of IANR office.
7.0 Other Business
7.1 Finalizing the Statement to the Board of Regents
The APC then worked on refining the statement to the Board of Regents that APC Chair Hanrahan will make on Friday to the Board.
The meeting adjourned at 4:19 p.m. The next meeting of the APC will be on Wednesday, January 14, 2026. The minutes are respectfully submitted by Karen Griffin, Coordinator.