University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Chancellor's Committee on the Status of Women

Meeting Minutes

12:00-1:00 p.m., 400 Swanlund Administration Building

I. Announcements

A. Welcome to all members.

II. Old Business

A. Approval of minutes of the March 28, 2006 meeting.

III. New Business

A. College of Engineering - Mentoring and Graduate Students Maternity Benefits:
    Cheryl Bullock introduced our guest speaker from the College of Engineering, Susan Larson,
    the Assistant Dean and Director of Women in Engineering.

1. Susan Larson provided an overview of the graduate student maternity benefits
    policy of Stanford University, which was adopted in January 2006. This policy is
    based on the fact that a woman's prime childbearing years correspond to her
    graduate school years. In case the student wished to retain her status as a full-
    time student, she is accountable to pay her loans during that period and for
    international students, visa status becomes a problem. Thus, this was seen as
    more of a retention issue for women students and the policy was designed to
    aid their transition back to classes and research. This policy was not supposed
    to be viewed as a leave of absence.

2. Susan Larson apprised the committee that there were mainly four postulates of
    the Stanford Policy. All female graduate students who were pregnant or had
    recently given birth were eligible for an 'academic accommodation period' of up
    to two academic quarters before and after the birth, during which the student
    was permitted to postpone course assignments, examinations and other
    academic requirements. However, the students were still expected to attend
    classes and attend meetings. They were also eligible for full-time enrollment and
    had access to all Stanford facilities. Students were also granted an automatic
    one-quarter extension of university and departmental requirements. In addition,
    those who were supported be fellowships, teaching and research assistantships
    were excused from their regular duties for a period of six weeks with full
    support.

3. Susan Larson informed the committee that MIT had a similar policy under which
    a two-month accommodation called the 'Childbirth Accommodation' was given.
    This was paid through the University's Childbirth Accommodation Insurance Pool
    so that the departments did not have to bear the cost. She felt that probably
    Stanford had adopted MIT's policy since it had been active for quite some time
    now.

4. Susan Larson informed the committee that Stanford already had policies that
    covered adoptions, foster care placement and paternity leaves. Thus, this policy
    was new and fresh in its approach and was very generous. Stanford estimated that
    about two dozen women would benefit from this new policy annually at a cost of
    $100,000 borne by the University.

5. Susan Larson apprised the committee that she wanted to compare the number
    of graduate students between Stanford and the University of Illinois to present an
    accurate comparative analysis.

6. Carol Livingstone informed that we had a greater number of graduate students
    and about twice the number of graduate, teaching and research assistants
    comparatively.

7. Susan Larson informed the committee about Caltech's policy where a student
    was allowed to register and was eligible for six weeks of paid leave and an
    additional six weeks without pay.

8. Susan Larson apprised the committee that Stanford's policy was more
    generous than any maternity leave policy for an employee at the University of
    Illinois. She had requested Nora Few to examine these policies and draw
    comparisons with those available on our campus. Parental leave was a part of
    the GEO contract under which eligible assistants were entitled to up to two
    weeks of parental leave without the loss of pay following the birth of a child, or
    upon either the initial placement or the legal adoption of a child under 19 years
    of age. In cases of academic staff, six months of service was a requirement.
    Parental leave was counted as a part of the 12-week entitlement accorded by
    the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).

9. Susan Larson informed the committee that the University of Illinois had very
    family-friendly policies for faculty and they should be extended to graduate
    students as well. She recounted her experiences in Caltech as a graduate student
    and her involvement with the graduate student government. Caltech found it an
    easy and low investment since it did not have a substantial number of women
    graduate students at the time. Susan emphasized the relevance and importance
    of such a policy but raised her concerns about its financial feasibility for our
    institution.

10. Cheryl Bullock inquired if this policy was applicable university-wide or
      department-wide at Stanford.

11. Susan Larson informed that it was a university-wide policy though certain
      departments grant leave extensions to their students.

12. Cheryl Bullock inquired if this policy would influence graduate students in
      selecting their institutions.

13. Susan Larson informed that in her opinion it was more of a retention issue
      than a recruitment one. In addition, she was not aware of the number of women
      who were married at the time of enrollment into graduate school to be able to
      give an accurate answer. Married women would certainly be concerned about
      the employment opportunities for their spouses.

14. Dale Bauer inquired about similar provisions for faculty and staff members.

15. Susan Larson informed that two weeks as maternity/paternity leave was
      available and it could be extended by using sick days or vacation.

16. Stephanie Foote informed that only one parent or the primary caregiver was
      allowed to take this leave.

17. Dale Bauer indicated that the University of Wisconsin-Madison permitted both
      parents to take leave.

18. Joyce Wright inquired about the adoption policies.

19. Susan Larson apprised that Stanford had a separate adoption policy. At the
      University of Illinois, tenure rollback was offered as an option.

20. Cheryl Bullock inquired about the number of men and women that employed
      this policy.

21. Susan Larson informed that she was sure that it was recorded by some unit on
      campus, though she was not aware of the figures herself. This was increasingly
      being seen as a recruitment tool for both men and women.

22. Carol Livingstone raised her concerns that this was a sort of double-edged
      sword since many faculty members wished to complete their tenure clock as
      soon as possible. Thus, these faculty members did not wish to take up the
      extra time.

23. Susan Larson informed that the faculty members were given a choice if they
      wished to count that extra time in their tenure clock.

24. Stephanie Foote referred to the discussions on tenure rollback for junior
      women faculty that were held last year by the committee. She recalled that
      those discussion themes were seen as an effective retention tool, although
      junior women faculty were often hesitant to choose it.

25. Susan Larson informed that, according to her, the department heads were
      not as aware of this policy as they should have been.

26. Dale Bauer inquired about the availability of statistics that represented this
      issue.

27. Carol Livingstone offered to find out about such statistics.

28. Joyce Wright informed that sometimes people were of the opinion that
      rollback was a problematic issue.

29. Susan Larson apprised the committee that it was assumed that a woman
      faculty member would take rollback for childcare while her male counterpart
      would do that to write a paper.

30. Susan Larson gave an overview about the undergraduate mentoring program
      at the College of Engineering. She informed that they did not have a formal
      mentoring program for graduate students though they were always willing to
      help them. Officially, the Graduate Student Career Office was responsible for
      this. However, the Graduate College did not have a formal mentoring
      program.

31. Carol Livingstone informed that the Graduate College required more
      resources to conduct such a program.

32. Susan Larson informed that it was always assumed that the graduate
      students had faculty advisors, who served as their mentors. This was
      obviously not always the case, but it was still assumed. Susan Larson
      reiterated the need for a professional career development program for
      women graduate students who wished to become faculty members since
      there were so few women faculty members in the sciences and engineering
      programs. However, availability of funds and staff was a problem.

33. Susan Larson offered to answer any questions on the undergraduate
      mentoring program which was presented by Susan Linnemeyer at the last
      meeting. She also informed that the College of Engineering was in the
      process of developing a course for undergraduate students to facilitate the
      transition from high school to college.

34. Cheryl Bullock inquired if the College of Engineering has had any success in
      recruiting more women faculty over the last few years.

35. Susan Larson informed that the College had seen success during the tenure
      of Dean Daniel when he pushed for the diversity hire policy. Consequently,
      there were 9% women faculty members last year, which was considered
      a great achievement. The goal was to have 20-25% female faculty in the
      next 10 years and to achieve that annually 30-40% women faculty need
      to be hired and retained.

36. Dale Bauer inquired if any such discussions had a place in the strategic plan.

37. Cheryl Bullock informed that the strategic plan aimed for increased retention
      of female faculty.

38. Susan Larson informed that since they had small samples within the engineering
      departments, statistical analysis issues were common. Thus, long-term trends
      should be analyzed.

39. Carol Livingstone informed the committee about her discussion with a former
      department head in engineering who had an aggressive program to find qualified
      minority candidates. They targeted women students in reputed engineering
      schools at the beginning of their graduate careers and made them participate in
      seminars and conferences. She inquired if any such programs were being
      implemented currently in the College of Engineering.

40. Susan Larson informed that they had submitted a grant to recruit faculty
      members in the same fashion as the sports team recruitment procedure. The
      international student community did not know the Champaign-Urbana area as
      well as some of the other metropolitan areas in the country and this was a
      problem in recruitment as well. In addition, spousal hiring also presented an
      obstacle at the University of Illinois.

41. Carol Livingstone inquired if there existed strong support for such initiatives
      from other women faculty in the college.

42. Susan Larson informed that they try to be as supportive as possible although
      all of them had very busy schedules.

43. Cheryl Bullock thanked Susan Larson on behalf of the community for her talk.

44. Susan Larson urged the committee to look at mentoring programs for all
      graduate students in the university.

IV. Other Items

A. Cheryl Bullock informed the committee that Dale Bauer had kindly agreed to talk about her
     research at the next meeting. She also apprised the committee about the next steps that the
     committee needed to take. She would prepare the report based on the minutes and discuss
     the main issues that we deliberated over during our meetings. Cheryl informed that the report
     would also furnish recommendations for action. She would send the report by the first week
     of June and send it electronically to the members for their comments and suggestions. Within
     two weeks, she would compile all the information and incorporate the comments to prepare
     the final report.

B. Cheryl Bullock asked the committee members for their suggestions on issues that should be
     incorporated in the report.

C. Stephanie Foote suggested that we needed to examine issues related to day care and elder
     care.

D. Dale Bauer suggested taking up gender equity issues and looking at issues like impact of
     parental leave on women faculty.

E. Carol Livingstone informed that there were old gender equity and salary studies available on
     the internet.

F. Stephanie Foote suggested recommending a department-wide service survey since women
    faculty members were involved in a host of unrecognized activities and services.

G. Dale Bauer informed that she wrote an essay on 'academic housework' and offered to talk
     about it in the next meeting. She also inquired about the traditional relationship between
     CCSW and Gender and Women Studies (GWS) Program and if there was a need for a
     stronger connection.

H. Cheryl Bullock informed that she was serving on the advisory committee of GWS and last
     year, Kal Alston, the director of GWS served as the CCSW chair. Probably the break had
     come about this year due to unexpected incidents but there were a number of informal
     connections.

I. Mansi Sachdev informed that the GWS director usually served as an ex-officio member on
   CCSW. However, in the current year it was not probable because an interim director replaced
   Kal Alston.

J. Dale Bauer expressed her views on a stronger connection between the two units.

K. Cheryl Bullock agreed that this was a very strong recommendation.

L. Patty Garcia suggested looking at ways to connect undergraduate students to such formal
    programs as well.

M. Joyce Wright inquired about the views of the new provost on such issues.

N. Cheryl Bullock informed that she was scheduled to meet with her on July 28, 2006.

O. Carol Livingstone raised her concerns that women on campus do not understand all the
     programs available to them. She suggested that this committee could take up a more
     educational role in informing women about the policy resources available and a web site
     would be helpful.

P. Alice Dilts informed that policy for civil servants was also not widely known.

Q. Dale Bauer suggested that a CCSW representative could meet all the department heads/unit
     officers during their summer meeting to spread the word about the committee and its work.

R. Carol Livingstone informed that the women on campus listserve are an important resource.

S. Cheryl Bullock suggested that in the following year, the committee chair could assign issues to
    various committee members and request them to work on them the whole year.

T. Carol Livingstone suggested that a graduate assistant could be hired to update the committee's
     web site.

U. Stephanie Foote emphasized the importance of such a resource for graduate students, faculty
     members as well as civil servants.