|
|
FACULTY SENATE
|
MINUTES
FACULTY SENATE
THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA®
September 12, 2005
Once approved, these minutes may be accessed electronically at:
http://w3fp.arizona.edu/senate/minutes.htm
Visit the faculty governance webpage at:
http://w3fp.arizona.edu/senate/1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Vice Chair Mitchell at 3:03 p.m. in the College of Law, Room 146. He acknowledged the difficulties that Hurricane Katrina has raised for students, universities and faculty colleagues as well. Vice Chair Mitchell reminded Senators that Article V, Section 2, c of the Faculty Bylaws allows for absent senators to “send a substitute who shall not vote.” He asked that all substitutes check in at the desk before the meeting begins so we can properly identify him or her in the minutes. Visitors in the gallery may not speak unless recognized by a Senator or the presiding officer. Anyone recognized to speak should please state his or her name and affiliation for the record.
Present: Senators Baca, Bernsen, Carrell, Christenson, Conway, Cromwell. Cusanovich, Dahlgran, deWinter, Garcia, Green, Gruener, Hammann, Hildebrand, Howell, Jackson, Jenkins, Jones, Marchalonis, Mitchell, Nolan, Pintozzi, Primeau, Silverman, Smith, St. John, Sterling, Tatman, Thorn, Ulreich, Ulrich, Weinand, Wheeland, Willerton, and Witte. Robert Sankey served as Parliamentarian.
Absent: Senators Asia, Burd, Chandler, D. Davis, G. Davis, Estrada, Joens, Kiefer, Likins, Mitchneck, Mountford, Mutchler, Record, Ruiz, San Martin, Sarid, Songer, Spece, Strittmatter, and Zizza.
2. OPEN SESSION
There were no speakers for the Open Session.
3. REPORTS
3A. ASUA President Cade Bernsen
ASUA President Bernsen introduced two of his three ASUA Senators, Keith Primeau and Tyler Carrell. He is honored to be named to the Presidential Search Committee and is committed to working with faculty and the Faculty Senate this year. ASUA’s four issues for this year are cheaper textbooks, legislative accountability, bringing solar energy and bringing childcare to the UA campus. He will enlist the support of former Secretary of the Interior and former Arizona governor Bruce Babbitt and Senator McCain to help outfit solar panels on at least one UA building this year. The solar campaign will be launched at noon October 3rd on the mall. There are estimated 4000-5000 student parents who could certainly benefit from an insta-care facility on campus for emergencies when the at-home parent or the sitter cannot stay with the children.
3B. GPSC President Elaine Ulrich
GPSC President Ulrich reported that graduate student orientation was excellent this year and extremely well attended. Student Showcase will take place during homecoming weekend. The Showcase will award almost $10K in prizes this year and the winners will display their exhibits at the AdVoCats legislative event in Phoenix later this winter. GPSC is currently soliciting funding for the Showcase departments and colleges to fund the Showcase. She asked that faculty encourage both undergraduate and graduate student involvement. ABOR will renegotiate the student healthcare insurance next year, so GPSC is actively polling peer institutions and students to find the best possible plan. To increase awareness of the need for low income housing, Habitat for Humanity will construct a house on campus this year. The kickoff will be on the UA’s “Day of Caring” October 3 and it is hoped that a Habitat house will be built every year thereafter.
3C. Secretary of the Faculty Jennifer Jenkins
Secretary Jenkins advised the Senate that the Faculty Center is currently conducting the annual Faculty Census. The Advisory Committee on Honorary Degrees has been formed and will begin its work in November. The Constitution and Bylaws revision is nearing completion and several more changes will be coming to the Senate for approval before the complete document goes to the entire faculty for a vote. She called Senators’ attention to a trifold brochure about Shared Governance on their desks today as well as Volume 1 Number 1 of the new faculty newsletter, which includes an editorial essay by Professor Emeritus and former longtime Senator Roger Caldwell. It is hoped the newsletter will be published twice a year. Faculty members and senators are encouraged to send information, articles, or ideas for articles to Secretary and editor Jenkins. And finally, faculty Senators and members of all standing committees are invited to a faculty reception at the Bookstore on Thursday, October 6 from 4:00-5:30 p.m. with wine and hot hors d’oeuvres.
3D. Vice Chair of the Faculty Robert Mitchell
Vice Chair Mitchell welcomed the new student senators as well as Senator Paul Nolan, the newly elected replacement Senator from Pharmacy and Senator Dror Sarid from the recently created College of Optical Sciences. Vice Chair Mitchell has received the resignation of longtime Senator Dennis Larson who has accepted a fellowship abroad this year. The College of Agriculture and Life Sciences will elect a replacement within the next two weeks. Vice Chair Mitchell called attention to the Senate’s schedule in the packets as well as the Honorary Degrees process on Senators’ desks today. This process is Vice Chair Mitchell’s attempt to distill the Senate’s discussion from last spring on how to handle honorary degrees in the Senate. He asked Senators to read it through and bring any objections to his attention. The process calls for the Senate to go into Executive Session between 4:00 and 4:30 according to the number of nominees on that day and then to allow time to read the biostatements and to ask questions of the nominating College’s representatives before voting. Vice Chair Mitchell is the Chair of the Arizona Faculties Council this year and will sit at the table at all Board of Regents meetings. The Board will receive a report on tuition setting procedures and timing as well as course and program fees at its September meeting. Vice Chair Mitchell is currently serving on the Tuition Workgroup conducting this study. Provost Davis and President Likins are both out of town today.
3E. Chair of the Faculty Wanda Howell
Chair of the Faculty Wanda Howell reported that the UA’s response to the Hurricane Katrina disaster was immediate and welcoming. UA has accepted 20 undergraduate and 15 graduate students who have been incorporated into classes here. Several faculty members have agreed to host students. Senator Garcia announced that the Physics Department has offered to accept one faculty member and several students from Xavier University. Vice Provost Garcia is interested in coordinating any responses that the campus community is making. Chair Howell reminded the Senate that the two issues that would frame her term are 1) to increase the visibility of shared governance and 2) to create efficient, effective shared governance (E2SG). Visibility has begun with the shared governance trifold brochure and the new faculty newsletter, and acknowledged Secretary Jenkins and Faculty Center staff for their efforts on these two publications. Visibility is particularly critical in this year of a presidential search, to show that faculty value the concept of shared governance and have certain expectations of this search. Chair Howell expressed that she was initially concerned when the sitting Chair of the Faculty was not named to the Search Committee. She met with Regent Boice who explained that he was confused by the transition between the end of Jory Hancock’s term and the beginning of her term. Regent Boice acknowledged that she should have been on the search committee, and so offered to meet personally with as many faculty as possible. Chair Howell asked him to meet with three groups; the Committee of Eleven, the Senate Executive Committee, and the Faculty Senate. After the meeting with Committee of Eleven last Friday, Chair Howell is convinced that Regent Boice understands that UA has a culture of shared governance that is unlike any in the state, that he understands how it works, and that incorporating the faculty voice is critical on this campus. She urged Senators to feel compelled to convince their constituents that shared governance is important. Regent Boice will meet with the Senate on October 3, and it is very important for college representative Senators to gather their constituents’ point of view and bring it to that meeting. The entire faculty will have another opportunity to meet with Regent Boice, outside consultant Anne Hasselmo and members of the Search Committee on October 17 from 3:30-5:00 p.m. in the Student Union North Ballroom. The faculty have been given a voice in this search: let’s make sure it is heard. Turning to the matrix handout on Senators’ desks, Chair Howell explained that these nine decision packages were generated by the President and Provost and have gone forward to the Board of Regents and the legislature. Although these packages were generated without much shared governance input, Chair Howell will work to ensure that, early involvement and anticipation, the two overarching shared governance bodies of the Senate and the Strategic Planning and Budget Advisory Committee (SPBAC) will have more input into this process in the future. She is not certain which of these packages have a chance of being funded, but perhaps the one that calls for enhancing University access.
4. QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD FOR AGENDA ITEM 3
Senator Sterling asked whether these decision packages are in any ranked order. Chair Howell said they are not.
Senator Bernsen commented that it is critical to have as many faculty and students as possible attending the Search Committee forums. He said the open forums are an opportunity to stress just how important shared governance is to UA. Senator Garcia suggested publicizing those forums widely and often.
Senator Silverman commented that he was most concerned when Chair Howell was not named to the Search Committee, and also that all but one of the faculty on the committee hold an administrative title. He hopes the Senate will receive regular reports about the search and the search process, without violating any confidentiality.
Senator Ulrich expressed her disappointment that a GPSC representative was not named to the Search Committee. Regent Boice assured her that the Search Committee meetings are open to the public and those meetings abide by the Open Meetings Law. Later on, some of the meetings will be held in executive session. Senator Ulrich is attending those meetings.
Senator Ulreich commented that some years ago, he worked on the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) when childcare on campus was an issue then, much as it is today. Senator Ulreich commented that sadly, not much has changed and suggested Senator Bernsen contact the CSW for more information.
5. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF MAY 2, 2005
The minutes of May 2, 2005 were approved.
6. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEM FORWARDED AS A SECONDED MOTION FROM THE INSTRUCTION AND CURRICULUM POLICY COMMITTEE (attachment)
The consent agenda item forwarded by the ICPC and detailed at the end of these minutes [Motion 2005/06-12], was approved.
7. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: PROMOTION AND TENURE REPORT (attachment)
Vice Provost Garcia thanked Anna Elias-Cesnik from the Provost’s office for her work on the Promotion and Tenure report. Reviewing Promotion and Tenure packets is one of the most important things the Provost’s office does. It is ongoing and the office continually tries to improve the process. The data shows that UA loses 30% of faculty before they get to the level of P&T so the Provost’s office is developing a more extensive and concrete exit interview to determine whether internal or external pressures are responsible for this statistic. Vice Provost Garcia is also looking at Harvard’s Trower survey of incoming faculty for comparative analysis. Of 428 cases reviewed in the past five years, 91% of that cohort was approved with 90% minorities, 91% non-minorities, 89% males and 94% females. Senators’ questions and comments included: 1) What is the process of the final decision making, specifically if the department, college and University-wide committees have approved a dossier but the Provost decides against it. Vice Provost Garcia explained that this doesn’t happen very often and that all committees are advisory to the Provost. One thing that his office looks at closely is whether the dossier accurately reflects the workload statement and whether the department and college standards and criteria were followed and adhered to. Before deciding against a packet, though, the Provost will return to the University-wide committee for further input. A negative decision is subject to appeal, of course. 2) What is the success rate of appeals? Many appeals don’t move beyond the beginning of the process in which the candidate has access to his/her redacted file. Most appeals are withdrawn at that point. Some appeals are still pending. In the last five years there have not been any appeals of denial that were reversed. In the previous five years under Provost Sypherd, there were two appeals in which the President did not reverse the decision but did recommend a re-review the following year. One denial was then upheld and the other was reversed. 3) How many appeals per year? In the time period between 1995-99 there were 23 appeals out of 453 cases and only one was reversed. 4) In the past the Senate received a chart showing each stage of where the decisions were made. Is this a change in policy? It is not a change in policy but we would not be able to guarantee confidentiality. 5) At the gross level? The University level? What percentage of denials occurred at that last stage? We did not provide that chart because the numbers were so small that confidentiality could not be preserved. Vice Chair Mitchell negotiated the release of this data and was persuaded that this was a reasonable approach with the proviso that if the Senate saw any red flags, the APPC could take a closer look at this data. 6) The number of successful cases is lower than in the past; 83% this year, whereas in the past it was in the low 90’s. Chair Mitchell will work with APPC to look at this data. Vice Provost Garcia indicated that the standards vary from college to college and from year to year. Some colleges that are less rigid may have fewer cases in a given year. Vice Chair Mitchell said when he discovered that the last time the Senate received a P&T report was in 1997, he and the Vice Provost decided just to go back as far as George Davis’ term as Provost. 7) There is some question about the accuracy of page 2, the five year summary, about promotion to full professor. Senators are asked to please email concerns to Chair Mitchell at mitchellr@u.library.arizona.edu. 8) Could the APPC please look at the complete data and report back to the Senate? 9) In the five-year summary, the rate among doctoral-granting programs (COH, SBS, SCI) runs around 90% but the rate in the professional schools such as Law, Nursing, Medicine, Optical Sciences, Pharmacy, and Public Health is running at 100% over five years. It appears that Eller and Engineering are dragging them down? Vice Provost Garcia has no insight about this. 10) Is there any possibility of standardization of procedure for P&T committees and even offering training sessions for potential committee members, like the one for candidates? The P&T committee experience varies vastly across campus and even among departments within colleges. This is a good idea and might ameliorate the wide disparity that sometimes occurs among the committees as members interpret the criteria or apply the standards differently. 11) The campus community is fairly consistent about standards of research and service, but if we believe that teaching is central to what we do, then we need to be clearer about what constitutes excellence in teaching. This year the Provost’s office plans to reexamine the evaluation of teaching and provide a wider range of quantifiable measures. That would be an enormously useful tool for mentoring junior faculty. Vice Chair Mitchell mentioned that the APPC would like to publicize the P&T report to the rest of the faculty. Vice Chair Mitchell remarked that the faculty officers are trying to regularize annual reports to the Senate from all sectors of the University, similar to the annual Athletics report.
8. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: DEAN OF LIBRARIES REPORT
Dean Carla Stoffle remarked that she is grateful for the opportunity to report to the Senate about “Library Excellence in an Era of Declining Budgets.” The UA faculty and administration have a long history of pride in and support for the University Libraries, and the Libraries’ faculty and staff greatly appreciate this support, and are working hard every day to provide outstanding collections and services in support of the learning and research goals of the University. Libraries are a strong and vibrant presence on the UA campus, but they are facing challenges that Dean Stoffle wants the Senate to understand and be prepared for in the future. The University Libraries own 4,794,126 print volumes, subscribe to 23,135 serials, and provide access to over 28,000 full-text electronic journals and 167,833 electronic books. From 2002-2004, the Libraries achieved a cost avoidance of $6,253,127 through leveraged buying of electronic journals. In the past two years, the Libraries purchased nearly $1 million in electronic journal back files and electronic books using ARU and Access-TRIF funds. The Center for Creative Photography (CCP) has acquired several new collections and is in negotiation for the archives of a major photographer and with the McCartney/Eastman families for the Linda Eastman-McCartney archive. CCP has $1.5 million in grant applications for funding to expand online access to collections and create a new print conservation lab. CCP received no cuts in 2004 and 2005 and has filled six new positions including a research assistant and teaching assistant. Services have increased in the areas of instruction, open reserves (to allow people to serve themselves), express checkout (because of fewer staff) and coming soon is express check-in. Interlibrary loan requests are now processed within 24 hours, 7 days a week with desktop delivery within two days. A 24-hour chat reference has been added in addition to email and in-person reference. The Libraries’ WebPages were visited over 5 million times and the databases received over 1.4 million hours’ use. Library staff spent the past year researching how to facilitate cross-database searching for students and faculty. The Libraries are engaged in digitization projects including the Western Waters Digital Library project with libraries in 6 states, the Rangelands Project with 17 states, and locally with the Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum. The UA Libraries are the “first” electronic depository library in the country, which means that UA gets its government publications from the federal government electronically. The Information Commons remains one of the most highly respected learning environments among libraries in the nation and between 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. the Commons serves 300-500 individuals every hour. The Libraries hope to expand the Information Commons to the Science-Engineering Library (SEL) with more computers, multimedia workstations, and a group presentation room where students can practice a presentation. The Music and Architecture libraries were combined to create the Fine Arts Library. Dean Stoffle is now engaged in planning and pursuing fundraising to build a North Campus Library in the parking lot behind CCP and Harvill to combine collections for Architecture, Music, Art, Art History, Photography, and elements of Business, Social Sciences, and Information Technology. The facility would include community meeting/green space and a high tech environment. In spite of the age of electronic resources, the Libraries experienced 2.2 million visits in the buildings last year. UA Libraries are ranked 30th in the nation by the Association for Research Libraries and is highly respected and viewed as a leader in innovation among research libraries. In 2004, University of Arizona Library faculty and staff produced 34 publications, made 65 presentations at national meetings, 106 service commitments at the national level, and received 5 awards/honors. In 2005, Government Documents librarian Atifa Rawan was named recipient of the American Library Association’s Elizabeth Futas Catalyst for Change Award. Total funds raised by the UA Libraries and CCP in FY04-05 was over $2 million in gifts in-kind and cash, mostly in kind collections to CCP. The Libraries have been pursuing new sources of revenue and have hired a new Grants and Revenue Coordinator to help the Libraries be more effective in pursuing outside funding and the Friends of the UA Library now features the Alexandrian Circle, for contribution levels at $1,000.
One indicator of endangered excellence includes the budget. There have been no base increases to the Libraries’ information access budget for the past three years, while inflation in the cost of information resources averaged eight percent each year nationally. Budget reductions in FY04/05 resulted in the loss of 4 staff/faculty positions and FY 05/06 will see the loss of 6 additional positions. Library expenditures as a percent of University expenditures continue to fall and regularized sources of increased base budget funding is a necessity. In 04/05 print book purchases fell 26% and serial subscriptions fell 11%. In 05/06 there will likely be an additional reduction resulting in 4,000 fewer books and 1,000 fewer serial subscriptions. An additional $500,000 in cuts to books and serials is projected in 06/07 if no new funding is made available. The Libraries have been moving to more self-service options due to staff shortages; there are no librarians on the service desks at night or on weekends, and librarians are only available at the Information Commons service desk on weekdays during daytime hours. Several disciplines will receive a smaller portion of librarians’ time. The Libraries are struggling with space constraints and borrowed $450,000 this year to install compact shelving. Maintenance has been deferred on library buildings and is reaching a crucial point: SEL’s deferred maintenance alone totals $1.5 million, and this does not include technology upgrades. The Libraries have been forced to give up innovative new projects that serve the academic community, such as the digital Journal of Insect Science. The Libraries’ primary goal at this point is to locate alternative funding sources and strategies to support information resources acquisitions and library operations that provide access and delivery of information and enhanced learning opportunities at the level of excellence expected by the campus community.
The UA Libraries have prepared a resolution that is now before the Faculty Senate on Open Access, and the Libraries continue to monitor threats to access as well as the effects of the USA PATRIOT Act on patron confidentiality. The FBI does seize patron records without a warrant or other formality, eroding privacy rights. UA librarians share concerns about piracy and copyright infringement, but continue to support peer-to-peer networks as a legitimate and viable method of sharing information and furthering scholarship. Dean Stoffle asked faculty to support fair use and information policies within academia that enhance scholarship instead of restricting it, despite challenges from corporations and individuals.
Dean Stoffle asked Senators to stand with the Libraries as they move toward new budgeting models and to be patient with new reductions in collections and services, which will not be done without consulting with the faculty. She concluded with her hope that departments and colleges will consider including the Libraries in their fundraising, decision packages, and grant proposals as an additional way to sustain excellence. Senator’s questions and comments included the following: 1) What is our rank among our peer institutions? About in the middle. 2) Can you comment on building a library on the north campus while cutting back on collections and services? A donor provided funding for a site study, which is all the money that has gone into this so far. There will be no campus money for such a building which would cost about $35-40M. The Libraries are actively engaged in and focused on fundraising for collections.
9. INFORMATION AND DISCUSSION: AGENCIES OF CHANGE: FACULTY LEADERSHIP IN INTIATING AND SUSTAINING DIVERSITY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA (attachment)
Lindy Brigham explained the goal of this study was to follow up on what has happened as a result of the Millennium Project in 2000-01. This study was a collaboration between the Association of Women Faculty (AWF), the chair of the Millennium Report Oversight Committee (MROC) and the executive director of the SW Institute for Research on Women (SIROW) plus a consultant and graduate research assistant. Funding was provided through Rutgers University by the Ford Foundation and matched by the Provost’s Office. Dr. Mills thanked the Provost’s Office and Wendy Miley of the Office of Institutional Research and Evaluation for assistance with data compilation and analysis, much of which is available online. The study attempted to determine how faculty leadership engage in change. The study conducted interviews from AFW, CALS, SBS, COE and SCI plus the MROC executive committee, the Diversity Coalition, and the college MROCS from SCI and SBS. By and large, the Millennium Project was qualitative, and so was this study, but there is also some quantitative analysis. There was great diversity of responses but most faculty feel there are many more opportunities for involvement. One outcome is that faculty believe that the inclusion of staff and administration is important in building diversity. Shared governance needs to consider the fact that, since 1976 there has been 132% increase in female non-tenured faculty and 54% increase in male non-tenured faculty across campuses in the US. It is also clear that help is needed from the administration with funding these projects. Barbara Mills explained that MROC is highly involved on campus and is trying to keep diversity and equity issues in the forefront of meetings. MROC personnel attended recent workshops on cluster hiring and subtle discrimination and she hopes they had an effect. MROC is the only campus-based organization that is solely committed to looking at women and minority faculty. One very important and positive local-level change that has taken place is that many colleges now have college-level MROCs. Because many interviewees’ shared the perception that there has been little change, the study decided to look at data from the past ten years. Turning to the color graphs distributed on Senators’ desks, Dr. Mills pointed out that the increases in women and minorities are basically flat over the past 10 years, with women increasing from 23% to 28%, and minorities from 11% to 15%. For the individual colleges, though, the data becomes more complex. For the seven largest colleges, (CALS, COE, SCI, SBS, ENGR, FA and COH) however, the graph is almost a bifurcation in terms of percent of women and minority faculty. Three colleges, SCI, ENGR and CALS are of particular concern. The pattern fluctuates a great deal regarding new tenure-track hires and the researchers see no discernible trend or impact of the Millennium project on the data. Regarding faculty salaries, the study found that faculty women’s salaries have improved slightly but are still much less than males’ and there is no data for minorities’ salaries. The data on salaries is aggregate and so it is difficult to see trends but MROC is now requesting more specific data from the colleges. There is a positive and dramatic increase in the numbers of women and minority faculty retained which may be seen as a direct result of MROC. It is important for diversity to remain in the forefront now with the transition in leadership coming. Senators’ questions and comments included: 1) How do these trends compare to our peers and how do we compare with ASU in terms of the numbers of women and Ph.D.s graduating from UA? This was a pilot study for a larger, five-year study with MROC, which will compare with peer institutions. The pool is there and our graduate student body does not match our faculty. 2) These figures are troubling after ten years and after so much discussion. The Faculty Senate should be concerned and should think about what it can do. Dr. Mills suggested three things: a) Mentoring new faculty; b) Broadening the scope when units or colleges are engaged in searches for new faculty; and c) Reviewing the statistics for one’s own college and talking about them. 3) The Senate appreciates the researchers’ persistence in keeping momentum going with this project. While it is important to look at the retention rates, it is also important to look at tracking and promotion rates. 4) The flatness is typical of the academy, but not typical of corporate America where real progress has been made. It seems that our institutional structures resist diversification. 5) This study is to be commended for making these statistics public. 6) Part of the problem nationally is with the tenure-track system for women faculty of childbearing age who must prove themselves early in their careers and view childbearing as a luxury, versus the corporate world or scientific community where people often do their best work later in their careers. Vice Chair Mitchell will help the Senate to work with Dr. Mills’ group to get the P&T data from the colleges through the Provost’s office.
10. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:08 p.m.
Jennifer L. Jenkins, Secretary of the Faculty
Pamela S. Bridgmon, Recording SecretaryAppendix*
1. Faculty Senate Meeting Schedule 2005-2006
2. Faculty Senate Standing Committees 2005-2006
3. General Faculty Standing Committees 2005-2006
4. Other University Committees 2005-2006
5. Process for Senate Review of Honorary Degrees
6. FY 2007 Decision Package Opportunities: Preliminary Draft for Cabinet Presentation dated 7-25-05
7. Consent Agenda item forwarded from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee.
8. Promotion and Tenure/Continuing Status 5-page report dated 8/23/05
9. Dean of Libraries report outline
10. Executive Summary: Agencies of Change: Faculty Leadership in Initiating and Sustaining Diversity at the University of AZ
11. Four-page colored graphs depicting percentages of male, female and minority tenure-track faculty 1994-2005
*Copies of material listed in the Appendix are attached to the original minutes and are on file in the Faculty Center.
Motions of the Meeting of September 12, 2005
Motion 2005/06-12 Seconded motion from the Instruction and Curriculum Policy Committee to approve the proposal to delete the Academic Warning Status from the Catalog. Motion carried.
The University of Arizona Faculty Center
facsen@u.arizona.edu
last updated
10/05/05