Missouri S&T Geology Advisory Board Fall Meeting, October 17, 2013

Meeting Minutes

Meeting called to order at 2:02 p.m.

In attendance: Suzan Wiemers, Keith Wedge, Bob Laudon, Cheryl Seeger, Edith Starbuck, Trish Gregg, Ann Hagni, Dave Bardsley, Amy Reeves, Liz Griffith, Robert Koch, Steve Young, John Hogan, Franca Oboh-Ikuenobe, Ralph Flori, Kelly Liu, Steve Gao, Dave Wronkiewicz, John Held.

Program Report – Franca Oboh-Ikuenobe

The following Program highlights were noted:

  • Welcomed Dr. Alan Chapman to the faculty; he was unable to attend the meeting.
  • The Program has 167 students, which is a new record.
  • Funding for graduate students continues to be an issue. Faculty continue to work with students to get research funding as well.
  • The program had over $500k in research expenditures in 2012-2013.
  • The faculty are doing well on publications with students as co-authors in over 40 percent of the publications. Citations are also up for faculty and are higher than S&T faculty averages. The faculty also engages undergraduates in research.
  • Steve Gao received an Outstanding Teaching Award.
  • The student societies are very active.
  • Both undergraduates and graduates have won awards for research and presentations.
  • Currently 15 M.S. candidates are on a non-thesis option. An internship is required for this option.
  • Completed a successful Field Class to the Bahamas in conjunction with Biology and English.
  • 67 students attended the Advanced Field Camp.
  • Research is being done both locally and internationally.
  • The seismic observatory requires an additional $20k for completion; Board Member Mike Party called before the meeting to commit to the amount needed for completion.
  • The wish list from the 2007 meeting was reviewed; the faculty was grateful to the Board for their support for these goals.
  • The faculty also thanked Suzan for her work as Board Chair.

There was discussion of the S&T proposal to move G&G out of GSE and into Arts and Sciences. The good working relationship with Petroleum Engineering and with other programs and departments within G&G’s current location was noted as a strong reason to stay in GSE. Keith Wedge noted he had requested to be on the Academy agenda to discuss the potential move and felt that G&G will get support from the Academy. Franca Oboh-Ikuenobe suggested that alumni should email the Chancellor about the issue. Keith noted that the Academy would like to see reinstatement of a Mines and Metallurgy Dean position.

Advisory Board Items – Suzan Wiemers

Alumni Field Trip – Suzan Wiemers

Suzan thanked Edith and Cheryl for work on the field trip. John Hogan suggested that in future the alumni field trip be done in conjunction with the freshman field trip to the St. Francois Mountains.

John Hogan also asked about interest in doing the trip on Sunday after the board meeting; several board members expressed interest in this due to travel. It was discussed that this change will need to be cleared with the staff member leading the field trip, as the optimum time for the trip for the students may not coincide with the board meeting. It was noted that the meeting and banquet would need to be moved so that there was not a two-day gap between them and the trip. It was also noted that changing the time of the meeting and banquet would likely conflict with other Homecoming activities. Ralph Flori suggested the meeting could be held on Saturday morning. Sunday was also suggested. An alternate time was not suggested for the banquet. It was decided that this required further discussion. Suzan noted that she would prefer Saturday, with Friday as a second choice; Thursday and Sunday are not good choices for her schedule.

Faculty Deficiencies – Suzan Wiemers

Suzan reviewedthe content of the letter that was previously sent to address this issue. The board recommendations were noted in the accompanying presentation. A request was made for comment from the faculty. Franca said the positions G&Ghave requested have been sent to Ralph Flori. Ralph’s recommendations will then be sent to the Vice-Provosts then to the Provosts. GSE is currently looking at requesting 11 tenure track positions and five non-tenure track. There will be another round of competitions in January. It is felt the current requests are good. Ralph stated that the input from the Board has been noticed, but that an annual letter restating the case will be useful. It was agreed that another letter should be sent from the Board in the next few weeks. The current G&G request is for three tenure-track positions. Ralph noted that he ranks one of the G&G requests as number one; he is not yet sure how the other two G&G requests rank. Ralph noted that the role of G&G in the university needs to be stressed. G&G is tied as the smallest PhD-granting program for geology departments in the country. However, Ralph noted, the faculty accomplishments are “astounding.” The specialties within geology that are being requested are economic geology, subsurface (petroleum) and surface processes/natural hazards (remote sensing, neotectonics and GIS).

John Hogan stated that the action by the Board is noticed, but so much is on the chancellor and provost’s plates that it might be useful to reengage them on the subject of the Board’s July 1 letter again to refresh the topic (Nov-Dec, after the 5 VPs meet). It is also useful because the entire campus is now competing for faculty in the context of the current strategic plan. It was suggested to just resend the July 1 letter. It was also suggested that an annual letter might be very useful. Ann Hagni requested that the board review the next letter before it is sent.

Suzan shared that in the interest of time and the amount of time it took to write the letter (2 months), the key authors (Bob, Franca, Ralph, Suzan) were deemed sufficient for the summer 2013 communication request by the board in March. There was an original verbal expectation for a six weekto two month turnaround to create and send the letter. Suzan also set the expectation that a sub-committtee chair and volunteers be tasked to do the annual letter research and writing, especially if this is going to be an annual exercise.

Board Membership – Trish Gregg

Trish stated that the Board needs a “strategic development plan and focused efforts to raise money and advocate to S&T administration.” She noted that one of the major groups missing from the current Board membership is mid-career graduates (late 1970s to 1990s). She noted a comparison between where alumni are workingvs. the current board membership. Approximately 50 percent of current alumni work in petroleum, while only 22 percent of the Board works in that industry. Conversely, five percent of alumni are in academia, while 26 percent of Board members are employed there. It was noted that the Board needs greater membership from the petroleum industry than we currently have.

Trish discussed the model used by Oklahoma State. Their board has one mandatory meeting and one at Homecoming. Their executive board (10 to 15 members, primarily officers) meets weekly, as do the six standing sub-committees. The board created "buzz" leading to people wanting to be part of it. Oklahoma State has succeeded in making board membership enticing and an honor. They also readily drop inactive members. Membership is not restricted to alumni. Oklahoma State raised over $27 million in the seven years since expanding their advisory board to approximately 120 members. The GAB currently has 23 members with 50 percent of those contributing.

Recommendations for Board membership included:

  • Create a steering committee of four to five mid- to late-career alumni, consisting of four from industry and one from academia.
  • Invite approximately 100 new members, focusing on alumni who work in industry.
  • Focus on graduates from the 1980s who are in upper level industry positions.
  • Find the next large donor similar to McNutt or Radcliff.

Amy Reeves noted that we need to keep more influence on mining than is shown in the presentation, especially since the program is trying to gain an economic geology faculty position. She noted that the general manager where she was working gave $1 million the last time he was asked to give. Trish responed that she did not feel that the mining industry does not support academics in the same way as the petroleum industry. Cheryl Seeger noted that mining companies are often very good at supporting graduate research; Dave Bardsley supported this. Franca noted that the Mining Engineering Department has very good success in gaining support from industry, with the support continually increasing. Suzan requested that Board members email Trish if they are interested in serving on the subcommittee.

Corporate Gifts – Dave Bardsley

Dave discussed the fact that a “shotgun” approach to finding corporate donors does not work. He noted that G&G and the Board need to build relationships and network with the alumni to gain corporate support. The list of alumni from 1941 to the present contains approximately 1,000 names. It was discussed that the available lists of alumni do not show who they work for; this information is very important to developing strong corporate sponsors. The alumni department has this information; the campus website has company affiliations. It was noted that alumni in mid-career need to be targeted. The importance of these needs were stressed by several committee members.

John Held (Development Office) said that his office could help with this issue, and suggested an in-depth call to develop the needed lists and strategies. He committed to talk to Dave several weeks after the meeting. Suzan thanked him and said that the Board welcomes this opportunity, as it has not been able to get this information in the past. Dave asked if employer names could be requested during the phonathon; Franca stated that that information could only be used for the phonathon. Dave then noted the need for a strategic plan to tell where the funds will be used to increase success with attracting donors.

It was recognized that the Corporate Gift and Board Membership committees, chaired by Dave Bardsley and Trish Gregg, will need to dovetail considerably on their work. It was aslo recognized that a strategic plan for Board Membership is required first.

Field Camp Fund – Amy Reeves

A case for action has been prepared to raise awareness of field camp needs. Amy noted that the field camp fund was noted for donations during the phonathon; Franca stated that totals will be known by the end of the calendar year when all donations are in. Amy noted that information is on Facebook. She also stated that the Board needs to design a strategic plan for this fundraising while making sure that monies are not diverted from other needs. The need for an endowment model was discussed as well as a collaborative effort between the different committees. It was decided that the issue needs to be addressed before further Board recruitment occurs. The need for fundraising events was discussed; it was decided that local ones could be the starting point, and involve faculty. Amy offerred a golf fundraiser and volunteered to coordinate the event. Ralph noted that a fundraising event in Houston combined with Petroleum and Geological Engineering could be useful. Marble Falls, Texas was suggested by Amy; Houston was suggested by Suzan.

Jerry Rupert Seismic Observatory – Steve Gao

Steve stated that the station has been placed to the west of the Computer Science building. The vault has been completed and power is available. A few purchases still need to be made. The Board collectively thanked Mike Party for his donation of the remaining $20,000 to complete the original project goal. Steve also noted additional technology that could increase the use of the station as a teaching tool; this will require additional funding. Current plans are to use the station for teaching, research and outreach. Bob Laudon noted that UMC has a station.

There was some discussion on potential additional costs for purchases of display equipment and software to pipe the data to a public monitoring site inside McNutt Hall. These purchases are not in the scope of the original costing estimate of $60,000.

Field Camp Reunion (June 2015) – Bob Laudon

Bob gave a summary of the planned itinerary for the trip and noted that he has had five alumni plus spouses that have responded so far. He noted the possibility of meeting up with that year’s field camp and having the students give presentations to the attendees.

Bob in previous conversations with Suzan indicated a preferred trip date as late in June as possible for personal scheduling reasons. Franca mentioned that if we were trying to meet that year's field camp (May), the alumni trip would need to be held in early June. It was decided that integrating with the students’ field camp timing is not required nor a priority if it can’t be worked out (Suzan, from previous conversations with Bob).

Election of new officers

Chair – Suzan is willing to act for 1.5 years. She noted that she rescinded her earlier offer to act as Chair for two years to allow the chairmanship to get back on a regular October to October schedule.

Requests for Vice-Chair – Trish did not feel she had the seniority to take this office, per earlier discussions. Cheryl was nominated and declined. Dave was nominated and declined due to his work schedule, but said he could likely do it in a few years. There were no other nominations or volunteers. Suzan suggested that the Vice-Chair position be filled after new member recruitment, and that she would try to solicit someone from outside the current board.

Cheryl volunteered to remain as secretary.

The next meeting of the Board is on the Thursday of St. Pats.

The meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Cheryl Seeger, Secretary