ACADEMIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE Meeting 2012-2013

ACADEMIC

AFFAIRS

COMMITTEE

meeting

Thurday, May 16, 2013

Meeting/VIDEOCONFERENCE

Video Locations will be:

ABOR System Offices, 2020 North Central Ave., Ste. #$230 NAU, BAC 206, Babbitt Administration Ctr. UA, Regents Room, 7th Floor - Administration Bldg. AWC, Rm #AS118 – Agriculture and Science Bldg.

Call-In #1-877-250-4160 Passcode: 5165491#

9:30 Am – 12:00 Noon

2012-2013

Arizona Board of Regents 2020 North Central Avenue, Suite 230 Phoenix, AZ 85004-4593 602-229-2500 Fax 602-229-2555 www.azregents.edu

Arizona State University Northern Arizona University University of Arizona

MEMORANDUM

TO: Regents LuAnn Leonard, Chair Ram Krishna Greg Patterson Tyler Bowyer

COPY: Rick Myers, Chair Eileen Klein, President Nancy Tribbensee

FROM: Stephanie Jacobson

DATE: May 9, 2013

SUBJECT: May 16, 2013, Academic Affairs Committee Meeting/Videoconference

A meeting of the Academic Affairs Committee will be held on Thursday, May 16, 2013 from 9:30 am to 12:00 Noon. The meeting/videoconference will be held at the locations listed below.

ABOR System Offices, 2020 North Central Avenue, Ste. #230 NAU, BAC 206, Babbitt Administration Building UA, Regents Room, 7th Floor, Administration Building AWC, Room #AS118, Agriculture and Science Bldg.

A call-in number is also available and is listed below.

Call-in #1-877-250-4160 Passcode is 5165491#

Please review the agenda and meeting materials, and contact me at 602-229-2529 or e- mail at [email protected], if you have questions or concerns.

Board Members: Chair Rick Myers, Tucson Dennis DeConcini, Tucson Anne Mariucci, Phoenix LuAnn H. Leonard, Polacca Mark Killian, Mesa Jay Heiler, Paradise Valley Ram Krishna, Yuma Greg Patterson, Scottsdale Student Regents: Tyler Bowyer, ASU Kaitlin Thompson, NAU Governor Janice K. Brewer Superintendent of Public Instruction John Huppenthal

Enterprise Executive Committee: Eileen I. Klein, Board President Michael M. Crow, ASU President John D. Haeger, NAU President Ann Weaver Hart, UA President

Academic Affairs Committee 2012-2013

Regents

LuAnn Leonard, Regent Phone: 928-734-2275 [email protected]

Ram Kirshna, Regent Phone: 928-726-6943 [email protected]

Greg Patterson, Regent Phone: N/A [email protected]

Tyler Bowyer, Student Regent Phone: 480-239-0025 [email protected]

Ex Officio

Rick Myers, Chair Phone: 520-843-4172 [email protected]

ABOR Staff

Stephanie Jacobson, ABOR Phone: 602-229-2529 [email protected] Asst: Jewelyn Jenson (JJ), ABOR Phone: 602-229-2531 [email protected]

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting/Videoconference

Thursday, May 16, 2013 9:30 am to 12:00 noon

Pursuant to A.R.S. §38.431.02 (Items in italics are consent matters)

Videoconferencing Locations will be:

ABOR System Offices, 2020 North Central Ave., Ste. #$230 NAU, BAC 206, Babbitt Administrative Center UA, Regents Room, 7th Floor - Administration Bldg. AWC, Room AS118 – Agriculture and Science Bldg.

Call-In #1-877-250-4160 Passcode: 5165491#

AGENDA

Welcome and Introductions

1. *Approval of Minutes

 The Committee is asked to review and approve the minutes from the February 6, 2013, Academic Affairs Committee meeting.

2. Intercollegiate Athletics Programs Annual Update (ASU, NAU, UA)

 The Athletic Directors of Arizona State University, Northern Arizona University, and the University of Arizona will present the annual update on the academic progress of the student-athletes, the financial status of the intercollegiate athletics programs, and the status of student-athlete welfare at the universities.

3. Critical Issue: Teacher Preparation Programs and the Arizona Common Core Standards

 The Committee will hear a presentation on the implementation of the Arizona Common Core Standards into the universities’ teacher preparation programs. (Critical Issues is a feature of the Academic Affairs Committee to identify and provide an opportunity for in-depth discussion between the committee and the provosts on important academic issues.)

4. 2013-2014 Academic Strategic Plan for Northern Arizona University

 The Committee is asked to review and approve the 2013-2014 Academic Strategic Plan for Northern Arizona University.

5. University of Arizona Academic Strategic Plan – Addendum

 The Committee is asked to review and approve the proposed additions to the University of Arizona 2013-2014 Academic Strategic Plan.

6. Academic Affairs Enterprise Metrics Progress Report

 The Committee will receive a progress report on ten of the 32 Enterprise metrics using data from the universities and the IPEDS federal reporting system.

7. University Academic Calendars

 The Committee is asked to approve the proposed academic calendar for the three universities for AY 2017-2018, and modifications to ASU’s AY 2013-2015 and NAU’s AY 2013-2016 calendars, which were previously approved.

8. Appointment of Regents Professors

 The University of Arizona requests Academic Affairs Committee approval to appoint three faculty members to the rank of Regents’ Professor effective July 1, 2013. (1) Hsinchun Chen, Eller College; (2) Neal Armstrong, College of Science; and (3) Xiaohui Fan, College of Science.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #1 Page 1 of 10

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting

Wednesday, February 6, 2013 1:00 pm to 3:30 pm Pursuant to A.R.S. §38.431.02 (Items in italics are consent matters)

LOCATION Arizona State University Student Union Building Turquoise Room

Call-In #1-877-250-4160 Passcode: 5165491#

AGENDA

Regent Leonard called the meeting to order at 1:20 pm.

Participants at ASU: Regent LuAnn Leonard; Regent Rick Myers; Regent Greg Patterson; Regent Ram Krishna; President Eileen Klein, ABOR; Tom Anderes, Retiring President, ABOR; Stephanie Jacobson, ABOR; Mark Denke, ABOR; Dan Anderson, ABOR; Provost Andrew Comrie, UA; Provost Betty Philips, ASU; Provost Laura Huenneke, NAU; Chad Sampson, ABOR; MJ McMahon, NAU; JC Mutchler, UA; Julie Ramsden, ASU; Gail Burd, UA; Rich Stanley, ASU; Rick Kroc, UA; Pat Heauser, NAU; Mike Proctor, UA; Melissa Vito, UA; Kasey Uriquidez, UA; Phil Reiger, ASU; David Bousquet, NAU.

*- Action Items

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #1 Page 2 of 10

*Approval of Minutes (1)

Regent Krishna moved that the December 5, 2012 minutes for the Academic Affairs Committee meeting be approved and it was seconded by Regent Patterson and unanimously approved.

Critical Issue: On-Line Courses and Programs, Part II (2) (Critical Issues is a feature of the Academic Affairs Committee that provides an opportunity for in-depth discussion between the committee and the provosts on important academic issues.) The university provosts presented the second of a 2-part presentation on issues related to technology delivered education and online programs and courses. The first part was presented at the December 2012 AAC meeting by Provost Laura Huenneke from NAU.

Vice Provost Gail Burd and Dr. Laura Lunsford joined UA’s Provost Andrew Comrie at the table. Provost Comrie presented a PowerPoint overview of UA enrollments, online courses and programs. Dr. Lunsford presented a short presentation on how online courses are defined, developed and designed.

Fully Online Courses  All instruction takes place online with no required in-person activities with program staff or instructors.  Instruction may be asynchronous or requires some synchronous online “meetings”.  Course descriptions should indicate whether synchronous activities and in- person exams are required. Fully Online Program  The instructional mode is completely online, but program requirements may include attendance at an orientation session, proctored exams, or independent off-line work or a field trip or an internship without regular in-person contact with program staff or instructors.

Dr. Lunsford presented a video podcast of her online class “Mechanisms of Learning” #319. A similar podcast was presented by Provost Comrie for Dr. Bryan Carter, Assistant Professor, Africana Studies, the University of Arizona, showing the differences of the synchronous style of online teaching.

Dr. Phil Regier, Executive Vice Provost for Online and Extended Campuses at ASU, stated that 99% of the online students at ASU are asynchronous. He also stated that there are many things that can done in an online course that cannot done in a face-to- face classroom. He demonstrated an example, is the virtual fieldtrip that utilizes a camera called the Gigapan, which takes a 360 spherical scan. Because of the available technology, a lot of things that can be done in an online class are adapted to hybrid (part in class/part online) courses which frees up class time for deeper and richer discussions.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #1 Page 3 of 10

In response to questions raised by the Committee, the following issues were addressed: Regent Myers asked about the discussions in the past on how to better differentiate the E-courses and I-courses and how the students in rural areas could be given more flexibility to take courses that were not offered on campus, but were available online. He stated that since there were two different business models it would make sense to segregate them. Provost Comrie stated that technology is moving so fast that sometimes students overlap and the use of the technology to access campus will fall in different categories at different times. Regent Myers then expressed concerns about tuition pricing and that a truly off campus degree program priced at the market price needed to be segregated and transparent. Provost Betty Phillips stated that the definitions for an ASU Online course specifically states “a course with no face to face components” and that an I-Course was for a face to face student that’s taking a course taught online by a professor. The funding for the business model and how it is charged is totally different with safeguards that will not allow a student to move back and forth between programs. The student has to file a formal application, as a new student, to move between programs.

Provost Huenneke stated that NAU defined their students by the campus of origin and an online course may be used in multiple course programs, so the student’s tuition is based on classification and other aspects of campus that the student is accessing.

Regent Myers asked if the students on campus and the students off campus would be in the same course utilizing the same technology. Provost Phillips stated that the student could be in the same course, but they would be in different sections and two different learning management systems. The faculty member could also be teaching different groups. Regent Myer asked if future information could be separated as it’s described and be available for review.

Regent Krishna asked if there was a limit to the number of students that were allowed to take the online courses. Provost Comrie stated that it depended on the nature of the course, the interaction and topic of the course. However, the technology allowed adjustment to the scale when appropriate.

Regent Leonard asked if all the universities participated with the MOOCs. Provost Comrie confirmed that UA participated and that there had been a lot of discussion about the MOOCs in the past year. The reason the MOOCs are different is not because they are online courses, but because they have changed the business model so the courses are basically free or close to free.

Regent Myers asked about the concept of flipping classes and if there was the same ability to teach an asynchronous class on campus in classroom but flip the class so the focus is not on the lecturing portion of the course. He also asked if there were grants available to the professors to help them with online course development. Provost Comrie stated that the Office of Instruction and Assessment (OIA) has many tools that

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #1 Page 4 of 10

can help with instruction. There are many uses for flipped classes and with this type of teaching the classrooms now become the interaction with the students.

Regents Myers also asked if the tools were web-based or platform independent? Dr. Regier stated that there are some problems with technology and that the institutions have to have the IT personnel available that can integrate the tools into the software so it works properly.

Regent Leonard stated that the information indicated enrollment for online courses was increasing and expressed concern about high speed broadband access and asked how rural students are guaranteed access if the internet is not good. It was stated that some rural areas have a harder time with access to broadband and that it was an infrastructure access issue more than an online technology issue. Before students register, they are told what the broadband needs are so students are aware before they registers for a course. She also wanted to know how the students were informed about the different technologies. It was stated that information was available on the website, workshops and 24 hour customer service.

Regent Myers asked for more clarification on the students that are campus based but want to take an I-course. It was stated that a particular course might be available in both areas, but that they are taught at two different access points. He stated that the regents might want to give direction to the EEC to develop better segregation of the data so it is easier to understand the differences and terminology of online courses.

Outcomes: This was an information item and no action was required.

*2013-14 Academic Strategic Plan for the University of Arizona (3) The Committee was asked to review and approve the 2013-14 Academic Strategic Plan of the University of Arizona, including new programs supported with program fees.

Provost Comrie presented an overview of UA’s strategic plans first by providing an over of selected initiatives designed to improve learning and educational attainment, including Degree Search and Smart Planner, Veterans Education and Transitions Center, and the redesign of two general chemistry courses. Initiated in fall of 2008, VETS has quickly become a national model for student veteran services on a college campus.

The Office of Instruction and Assessment (OIA) is specifically designed to support faculty members with teaching and assessment of learning outcomes. Also supports faculty and teaching assistants to provide quality classroom and online instruction and assessment of student learning outcomes. He also described the proposed new academic programs: 1. Undergraduate Programs: The new interdisciplinary undergraduate programs being proposed or changed were:

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #1 Page 5 of 10

Establishment of: o BS in Bioinformatics o Increase to 68 the number of credits that will transfer into Science Teacher Preparation programs for transfer students from Arizona Community Colleges. This STEM teaching degree is a high demand field. 2. New graduate programs were requested: o MA in Museum Studies; Master of Public Policy (MPP degree); MA in Ethics, Economy, and Entrepreneurship and an MS in Finance. o PhD in Educational Leadership and Policy was also proposed.

Outcomes: Regent Leonard moved that the Committee approve the 2013-14 Academic Strategic Plan for the University of Arizona, including new programs which will be supported with program fees and Regent Krishna seconded the motion. It was unanimously approved.

*Proposed Academic Programs with Program Fees at Arizona State University (4) The Committee was asked to approve the establishment of academic programs at ASU which will be supported with program fees.

Provost Betty Phillips presented the request for the academic programs with program fees at ASU as follows:  MS in Business Analytics, W. P. Carey School of Business.  MS in Supply Chain Management and Engineering, W. P. Carey School of Business.  MS in the Science of Health Care Delivery, College of Health Solutions  Executive Masters for Sustainability Leadership, School of Sustainability

If these programs are approved, the request for the fees will be submitted to the Board at the April meeting during the tuition and fee setting process.

In response to questions raised by the Committee, the following issues were addressed: Regent Krishna asked about the enrollment projections of the MS degree in Science of Health Care Delivery and if the students would attend medical school in the future. Provost Phillips stated that the students were not medical students but professionals and that the program was a pilot program that included professionals from other fields that wanted to get into the medical field with the interest of redesigning healthcare. It is an interdisciplinary degree with modules that include health finance, behavior change, systems analysis, etc.

Regent Myers stated that there had been discussions about this in the past and that there was a need for the regents to better understand how the decisions are made to put new programs in place; what determines the need for new programs; is there a need in the community for a particular degree program; what is the cost of the program; and is the new program helping to meet the best needs of the state. Provost Phillips

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #1 Page 6 of 10

stated that the four new master’s programs were very big revenue producers and have all come about because of a dual purpose and the institutions would never do a professional master’s degree unless it made money. Because of the partnership with the Mayo Clinic, all of the degrees will have multi-dual degree possibilities.

Outcomes: Regent Leonard moved that Committee approve the establishment of the four academic programs that ASU requested and that will be supported with program fees. It was seconded by Regent Krishna and unanimously approved.

*Addendum to 2013-14 Academic Strategic Plan (ASU) (5) The Committee was asked to approve an addendum to ASU’s Academic Strategic Plan which will increase to 75 the number of Arizona community college credits that will be applied to the Bachelor of Liberal Studies degree.

Provost Phillips stated that the Bachelor of Liberal Studies has great flexibility. The community colleges offer a lot of the same courses that can be applied toward the degree at the community college level. The increased limit will also reduce the cost for a degree and become a win-win situation for the institutions and the students.

Outcomes: Regent Leonard moved that the Committee recommend for approval an amendment to ASU’s Academic Strategic Plan, which will increase to 75, the number of Arizona community college credits that will be applied to the Bachelor of Liberal Studies degree. Regent Patterson seconded the motion and it was unanimously approved.

*Extension of Exception to Policy 2-103, “Enrollment” (6) The Committee was asked to review and forward for Board action an extension, until January 1, 2015, to ABOR Policy 2-103 which increases the maximum undergraduate non-resident cap to 40%.

Provost Comrie stated that this request applies mostly to the UA and that regular ABOR policy limits full-time non-resident undergraduate enrollment to 30%. Previous 2-year exceptions were approved in 2009 and 2011.

In response to questions raised by the Committee, the following issues were addressed: Regent Krishna asked if the online learning courses would increase the number of out- of-state students. Would it affect the number of in-state students that can be admitted to the universities? It was stated that online is about access so the online courses would be available to anyone in the world and at this time all three universities admit all qualified in-state students. Regent Leonard asked what mechanisms were in place to ensure that an Arizona resident would not be penalized because of the money brought in from the out-of-state students. Provost Comrie stated that the original intent behind the ABOR Policy 2-103, was to help minimize the cost to the students in Arizona and if the universities can take advantage of the out-of-state tuition it helps support what residents studied. Provost Phillips stated that the high school graduating classes are

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #1 Page 7 of 10

decreasing in Arizona and the percentage of college qualified students is also decreasing. That being the case, all the qualified students are being admitted with plenty of room for more. There are a good number of out of state students that attend school in Arizona that stay here, which helps with the degree production in economic development.

Regent Myers asked what the limits were besides this policy. Provost Phillips stated that the goals are very high, but it is very competitive and all of the states are doing exactly the same thing, Arizona is also losing some of its very best students to other states for the same reason we’re recruiting for out-of state students. Provost Huenneke also stated that NAU works very hard to recruit every qualified student that applies and NAU is not in the business of turning away qualified students. Regent Patterson asked how long a student qualified as a non-resident student. It was stated that it’s not easy to qualify as a resident especially since most students are dependent on their parents for support and it is much more common at the graduate level for a student to become an Arizona resident.

Regent Krishna asked why the policy was being changed every two years and not changed permanently. Stephanie Jacobson stated that there had always been political sensitivity to this issue. It has been hard in the past to make clear to the public exactly what the exception for non-resident students meant; and often the perception has been that the Arizona residents lose. Regent Krishna stated that with high school enrollment going down and the UA is the only institution over 30%, why not make it permanent at 40% and then if any other changes are needed, change it at that time instead of the every two years.

Outcomes: Regent Leonard moved to forward for Board action an extension, until January 1, 2015, of the exception to ABOR Policy 2-103 which increases the maximum undergraduate non-resident cap to 40%. It was seconded by Regent Patterson and unanimously approved.

*Proposed Revision to Enterprise Metrics (7) The Committee is asked to review and approve revisions to 6 of the Enterprise metrics.

Stephanie Jacobson highlighted 6 revisions that were proposed for the Enterprise Metrics, which were mostly clean up or clarification on metrics that became evident in the first year of the reporting cycle that ended in September 2012. The revisions begin at the Academic Affairs Council or Provosts; then it goes to the Enterprise Executive Committee (EEC). The EEC has recommended these changes.

The Enterprise Metrics that were revised are as follows:  #5 - Academic Quality. Define the reporting requirements for the metric on educational quality as revised by the Board in June 2012.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #1 Page 8 of 10

 #7 - Graduation Rate. Expand the metric to include data on success and progress of students as reported in the Voluntary System of Accountability. It will not replace the 6 year graduation rate which is used nationally through the IPEDS reporting.  #13 - Research and Development Expenditure. Make a technical change to ASU’s annual total research expenditure projections. All of the universities are now using the “National Science Foundation Higher Education Research and Development” metric.  #18 – Impact of Community Engagement Activities. This metric has been pending since the metrics were first defined. Now all the universities use “INPLAN” which measures the fiscal impact on the communities and us proposed for this metric.  #20 – Number of Degrees Awarded in High Demand Fields. This is another clarification; the universities will all use the “National Science Foundation Higher Education Research and Development” list to define high demand fields.  #32 – College, Online and Other Enrollment. Separate Online from College and Other enrollments; define reporting protocols to accommodate institutional variance.

In response to questions raised by the Committee, the following issues were addressed: Regent Myers asked about the extended campuses and the wording in #32 and stated that he did not like the use of the word “other.” Asked if there might be a better word that is more descriptive and respectful. He also asked about the terminology of “degree seeking” and if it meant a student had to declare at the beginning what degree he/she wanted to complete. Provost Phillips stated that the students are admitted just like a regular student is admitted to campus into a degree program and are considered to be on the extended campuses, their data is not included in the report. Regent Myers asked, when a student is taking a credit hour and that information is included in the performance funding does it include a non-degree seeking online course? Provost Phillips stated that “no” it would not be included because they are very different. Regent Myers stated that because performance funding is being discussed there needs to be better clarification as to a degree seeking student and a student that is just taking an online class. Provost Comrie stated that currently there is a common degree structure that determines where a student is and if that student wants to change they go through a different process to change structures.

Outcomes: Regent Leonard made a motion to approve the revisions to 6 of the Enterprise Metrics and Regent Krishna seconded the motion. It was unanimously approved.

Update on Enterprise Research Metrics and the Annual Research Report (8) The Committee was provided an update on the six Enterprise Research Metrics and provided information on how to access the Annual Research Report, which reflects the progress being made by Arizona’s universities toward the Enterprise Research Metric Goals.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #1 Page 9 of 10

Chad Sampson presented an overview of the universities Annual Research Report and some of the highlights were as follows:

 Enterprise Research Metrics As part of the Enterprise Plan, the Board identified six research metrics to monitor the Enterprise’s progress toward its research goals. The Enterprise Research Metrics include: o Total Research Expenditures; o Invention Disclosures Transacted; o U. S. Patents Issued; o Intellectual Property Income; o Ph.D. Degrees Awarded; and o Startup Companies.

In 2012, the Enterprise met or exceeded its goals in: invention disclosures, U. S. patents issued, intellectual property income, doctoral degrees awarded, and start-up companies. The Enterprise missed its stated enterprise goals in total research expenditures; although increased expenditure over the previous year (2010-2011).

 The Annual Research Report The Annual Research Report categorizes the research metrics and additional research indicators for each university into five areas: o Enterprise Size o Discovery and Scholarly Impact o Economic Development o Leadership and Recognition o Technology Transfer Activity

In addition, this year, a new section was added for Strategic Initiatives to highlight the benefit of Technology and Research Initiative Fund (TRIF) investments in university research.

An Overview of research activity at each university were presented by Lesly Talbot, UA; William Grabe, NAU and Billy Phillips, ASU.

In response to questions raised by the Committee, the following issues were addressed: Regent Krishna asked Dr. Talbot if the economic market has any influence on the PhD degrees decreasing. She stated that the faculty members that have left over the past several years are very research active and are people that would have had graduate students and they are aware it has hurt some of the programs.

Regent Myers stated that he had recently met with the VP of Research and wanted to recognize the work that had been done on the research report by all three universities. He also commented on the funding for continued research and how important it was to

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #1 Page 10 of 10 build the infrastructure to help the UA continue to be one of the top 6 schools in the US for research. Regent Leonard asked why the university lost 70 faculty members. Dr. Talbot stated that the best researchers are always being pursued by other institutions and its part of the nature of doing research. Provost Comrie stated that there were several other factors like budget issues and not replacing faculty that left or retired.

Regent Patterson asked if the metrics needed to be adjusted for NAU since they are unique and different from the other institutions. Dr. Grabe stated that the metrics currently in place don’t need to be changed because NAU is different but the scale may need to be defined better to suit the institutions differences. He also stated that the metrics were good goals for them focus on and work towards completing.

Outcomes: This is an information item and no action is required.

There was a motion by Regent Leonard to adjourn and it was approved by Regent Krishna and seconded by Regent Patterson to adjourn at 3:50 pm.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2012 Agenda Item #2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page1 of 118

Item Name: Intercollegiate Athletics Programs Annual Update (ASU, NAU, UA)

Action Item Discussion Item Information Item

Issue: The Athletic Directors of Arizona State University, Northern Arizona University, and the University of Arizona will present the annual update on the academic progress of the student-athletes, the financial status of the intercollegiate athletics programs, and the status of student-athlete welfare at the universities.

Background

 Annually, the universities submit the Report on the Intercollegiate Athletics Programs Update to the Arizona Board of Regents. This annual report summarizes information submitted by the universities to the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and the NCAA.

1) Each university has submitted its annual institutional report to the NCAA, and, according to the faculty athletic representatives, each university is in compliance with all NCAA rules.

2) Each university has provided student athlete graduation rate information to the NCAA.

3) Each university has provided all required information to the Board’s president, and each university’s faculty athletic representative has certified that all student-athletes have met the minimum GPA requirements specified in Board policy.

Statutory/Policy Requirements

 Board Policy 5-209 provides for the jurisdiction and control over the athletic policies of the universities. These athletic policies are promulgated by the Board in the exercise of such powers. The Board retains plenary jurisdiction over the universities’ athletic programs, including policies regarding admission, eligibility requirements, financial information, enforcement, and recruiting practices.

Strategic Implications for the Enterprise Plan

 A key component of the Enterprise Plan is increasing the number of people in Arizona who earn a bachelor’s degree in order for the state to be nationally competitive.

Contact Information: Steve Paterson, ASU 480-965-6360 [email protected] Lisa Campos, NAU 928-523-9595 [email protected] Greg Byrne, UA 520-621-4622 [email protected] Mark Denke, ABOR 602-229-2503 [email protected] Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2012 Agenda Item #2 Page 2 of 118

 Several of the key performance indicators do pertain to graduation rates and retention rates as well as a focus on closing the gaps for minorities in our system.

 The National Collegiate Athletics Association reform efforts to monitor and improve the graduation and retention of athletes in the Arizona system compliment the goals and objectives of the Board’s Enterprise Plan.

 The Enterprise plan also addresses effective use of resources. This report reflects the efforts of the universities to effectively manage intercollegiate athletics.

Discussion

 This year’s report includes two sets of academic performance criteria established by NCAA for Division I institutions: the Academic Progress Report (APR) and the Graduation Success Rate (GSR).

Academic Progress Report

 The Academic Progress Report (APR) is an academic measurement developed by NCAA for rating athletic teams, based on multi-year team achievement.

 The APR was developed to provide a more accurate, real time “snapshot” of a team’s academic success and to serve as a primary measurement on which incentives and disincentives will be based.

 Institutions recording low academic progress for their athletes are subject to penalties, including loss of scholarships.

 A series of questions and answers about the APR Report is included as Appendix II.

Graduation Success Rate (GSR)

 The NCAA Graduation Success Rate (GSR) was developed for Division I institutions in response to college and university presidents who wanted graduation data that more accurately reflect the mobility among college students today.

 The GSR improves on the federally mandated graduation rate by including students who were omitted from the federal calculation, such as students transferring into the institution.

 The GSR also allows institutions to exclude from the computation student-athletes who leave their institutions prior to graduation as long as they would have been academically eligible to compete had they remained.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2012 Agenda Item #2 Page 3 of 118

 Generally, the GSR is expected to result in a higher graduation rate than the federal computation.

 The current GSR report is shown on Table 4: “Graduation Rate Report” for each university. This table also provides a comparison to the federally mandated graduate rate (Fed Rate) for the same year.

Key Data/Findings

In the attachments that follow, four tables are provided for each university. These tables summarize the information provided to the System Office and the NCAA. The tables are defined and observations for the Arizona University System are provided. The system- wide observations summarize some of the results from the institutional data in the tables.

Table 1: Student-Athletes Eligible for Participation

Student-athletes must meet certain academic eligibility standards set by the NCAA and the university; this table provides the number of eligible student-athletes for each team for 2011-12.

System-wide Observation

 In the 2011-12 academic year in the Arizona University System, 1,240 student- athletes were eligible to participate in intercollegiate sports representing 729 (59%) men and 511 (41%) women.

Tables 2 & 3: Cumulative Grade Point Averages (GPA)

The GPA table provides each team’s average GPA since 1989-90, as well as the average GPA by gender with a comparison to all students at the institution.

System-wide Observations

 System-wide, the GPA for all scholarship athletes, male and female, has recorded some improvement since the 1994-95 report. The average GPA for males has increased from 2.61 in 1994-95 to 2.93 in 2011-12, and for women, from 2.89 to 3.12.

 Female student-athletes have a higher GPA, on average, than male student- athletes. This same trend is true for all female students, both athletes and non- athletes, who have, on average, a higher GPA than all male students. As a result, APRs and graduation rates for women’s teams are also higher than for men’s teams.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2012 Agenda Item #2 Page 4 of 118

 The overall academic performance of male student-athletes tends to be lower than for the general male student population.

 The average GPA for male student-athletes is, on average, lower for football than in other sports.

Table 4: NCAA Academic Progress Rate (APR)

 The Academic Progress Rate (also known as APR) is a metric established by the NCAA to indicate the success of collegiate athletic teams in moving student athletes towards graduation.

 The APR measures how scholarship athletes are performing semester by semester. Teams that fail to achieve an APR score of 925 (based on a perfect score of 1,000) may be penalized.

System-wide Observations

 System-wide in Arizona, the APR average for all sports, male and female, is 969.

 Female sports carry a higher APR average (975) than male sports (962).

 None of the universities fell below the 925 cutoff score and were not subject to historical or contemporaneous penalties.

Table 5: NCAA Graduation Success Rate Report (GSR)

 The GSR measures the actual percentage of student-athletes who graduate.

System-wide Observations

 This table shows both the new Graduation Success Rate (GSR) and the traditional federally mandated computation (Fed Rate).

 As was anticipated, the GSR results in a higher graduation rate from nearly all of the sports teams. Across the system, two teams had a slightly lower GSR than the federal rate while seven teams achieved a 100% graduation rate (UA women’s tennis; ASU women’s golf, tennis, swimming, and volleyball; NAU women’s golf and volleyball.)

 Female student-athletes have a higher graduation success rate on average, than male student-athletes.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2012 Agenda Item #2 Page 5 of 118

Tables 6 & 7 & 8: Athletic Budgets: Summary of Revenue and Expenses

 This table shows the statement of athletic department revenues and expenses for the years ending June 30, 2011 and 2012.

System-wide Observation

 Total revenues in FY12 for the Arizona University System increased $22.6 million or 17.7% over FY11.

 Total operating expenses in FY12 increased $26.3 million or 20.5%.

 Net revenues in FY12 decreased $3.7 million over FY11.

 Direct institutional support in FY12 decreased $241 thousand or 1.1%.

Tables

The following tables are provided for each institution as follows:

ASU (Pages 7 – 42) Table 1: Student Athletes Eligible to Participate 9 Table 2 & 3: Cumulative GPA by Academic Year 11-12 Table 4: Academic Progress Rate (APR) 13-16 Table 5: Graduation Success Rate (GSR) 17 Table 6: FY 11 & FY12 Summary Statement of Revenue and Expenses 19 Table 7: Analyses of Net Expenses (as adjusted) 21 Table 8: Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Agreed Procedures 23-34 Table 9: Highlights/Accomplishments 35-42

NAU (Pages 43 - 72) Table 1: Student Athletes Eligible to Participate 45 Table 2 & 3: Cumulative GPA by Academic Year 47-48 Table 4: Academic Progress Rate (APR) 49-52 Table 5: Graduation Success Rate (GSR) 53 Table 6: FY 11 & FY12 Summary Statement of Revenue and Expenses 55 Table 7: Analyses of Net Expenses (as adjusted) 57 Table 8: Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Agreed Procedures 59-68 Table 9: Highlights/Accomplishments 69-72

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2012 Agenda Item #2 Page 6 of 118

UA (Pages 73 - 112) Table 1: Student Athletes Eligible to Participate 75 Table 2 & 3: Cumulative GPA by Academic Year 77-78 Table 4: Academic Progress Rate (APR) 79-82 Table 5: Graduation Success Rate (GSR) 83 Table 6: FY 11 & FY12 Summary Statement of Revenue and Expenses 85 Table 7: Analyses of Net Expenses (as adjusted) 87 Table 8: Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Agreed Procedures 89-100 Table 9: Highlights/Accomplishments 101-111

Appendix

I. Athletic Department: FY 11 & FY12 System Summary Statement of Revenue and Expenses (Page 113) II. NCAA Academic Progress Report Questions & Answers (Pages115 – 118)

Recommendation

This report is provided for information. Comments and suggestions from the Academic Affairs Committee are welcome.

Page 7 of 118

ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY 2011-2012 Intercollegiate Athletic Report

Page 8 of 118

Page 9 of 118

Arizona State University Table 1 Student Athletes Eligible to Participate, 2011-12 by Race/Ethnicity, Sport, and Gender Native African Native 2 or More Non-Res Sport Amer. Asian Amer. Hispanic Hawaiian White Races Unknown Alien Total Men's Football 0 2 60 1 4 36 8 0 0 111 Men's Basketball 0040 1 3 1 0312 Men's Baseball 0207 02130134 Men's Track 0 1 13 3 0 33 5 0 0 55 Men's Other1 2348 04640976 TOTAL MEN 2 8 81 19 5 139 21 0 13 288 Women's Basketball 0180 0 4 0 0013 Women's Softball 0120 01451023 Women's Soccer 0033 01830027 Women's Volleyball 0111 11130119 Women's Track 0083 02420239 Women's Other2 2041 138202472 TOTAL WOMEN 2 3 26 8 2 109 15 1 27 193 ALL STUDENT ATHLETES 4 11 107 27 7 248 36 1 40 481

1 Men's Other Sports includes (Golf, Swimming, Wrestling). 2 Women's Other Sports includes (Golf, Gymnastics, Swimming, Tennis, Water Polo).

Page 10 of 118

Page 11 of 118

Arizona State University Table 2 Cumulative GPA by Academic Year All Student Athletes Students Academic Men All Sports Year Football Basketball Baseball Track Other1 Men Men 2011-12 2.51 2.79 2.79 3.05 2.85 2.71 2.97 2010-11 2.40 2.90 2.79 2.87 2.87 2.64 2.96 2009-10 2.30 2.63 2.75 3.03 2.91 2.61 2.94 2008-09 2.32 2.69 2.88 2.80 2.86 2.71 2.93 2007-08 2.25 2.86 3.00 2.66 2.93 2.60 2.90 2006-07 2.43 2.85 2.74 2.77 2.64 2.88 2005-06 2.52 2.54 2.68 2.68 2.74 2.64 2004-05 2.52 2.31 2.88 2.88 2.84 2.69 2003-04 2.37 2.63 2.76 2.76 2.81 2.58 2002-03 2.42 2.58 2.73 2.73 2.67 2.58 2001-02 2.36 2.42 2.62 2.62 2.68 2.54 2000-01 2.43 2.60 2.75 2.75 2.75 2.63 1999-00 2.35 2.44 2.74 2.74 2.72 2.57 1998-99 2.27 2.26 2.73 2.49 1997-98 2.34 2.41 2.76 2.57 1996-97 2.37 2.55 2.70 2.56 1995-96 2.36 2.19 2.74 2.58 1994-95 2.42 2.37 2.60 2.52 1993-94 2.23 2.51 1992-93 2.28 2.23 1991-92 2.33 2.40 1990-91 2.34 2.38 1989-90 2.30 2.07

1 Men's Other Sports includes Golf, Swimming, and Wrestling. Before 2007-08, Baseball also. Page 12 of 118

Arizona State University Table 3 Cumulative GPA by Academic Year All Student Athletes Students Academic Women All Sports Year Basketball Softball Soccer Volleyball Track Other2 Women Women 2011-12 3.08 3.26 3.35 3.48 3.26 3.27 3.28 3.10 2010-11 2.99 3.39 3.43 3.47 3.05 3.28 3.28 3.12 2009-10 2.93 3.33 3.45 3.12 3.05 3.24 3.23 3.12 2008-09 2.98 3.34 3.57 3.23 3.08 3.24 3.24 3.10 2007-08 3.22 3.25 3.54 3.18 2.98 3.11 3.18 3.08 2006-07 3.03 3.13 3.06 2005-06 3.05 3.17 3.07 2004-05 3.13 3.16 3.07 2003-04 3.08 3.12 3.05 2002-03 3.02 3.07 3.01 2001-02 3.11 3.06 3.00 2000-01 3.15 3.04 2.98 1999-00 3.10 3.03 2.95 1998-99 3.00 2.96 1997-98 2.96 2.93 1996-97 2.94 2.91 1995-96 2.81 2.86 1994-95 2.80 2.80 1993-94 2.79 1992-93 2.77 1991-92 2.78 1990-91 2.77 1989-90 2.74

1 Men's Other Sports includes Golf, Swimming, and Wrestling. Before 2007-08, Baseball also. 2 Women's Other Sports includes Golf, Tennis, Gymnastics, Water Polo, and Swimming.

Table 4 Page 13 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: Arizona State University Date of Report: 06/16/2012 This report is based on NCAA Division I Academic Progress Rate (APR) data submitted by the institution for the 2007-08, 2008-2009, 2009-10 and 2010-11 academic years.

[Note: All information contained in this report is for four academic years. Some squads may still have small sample sizes within certain sport groups. In accordance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act's (FERPA's) interpretation of federal privacy regulations, data cells containing three or fewer student-athletes have been suppressed and are indicated by an * symbol. The information in this report does not reﬂect any changes to data made after this date.]

The following chart represents by-sport APR averages for noted subgroups.

* Denotes data representing three or fewer student-athletes. In accordance with FERPA's interpretation of federal privacy regulations, institutions should not disclose statistical data contained in this report in cells made up of three or fewer students without student consent. N/A = No APR or not applicable. N = Number of teams represented. 1 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition based on institutional, athletics and student resources and the team's Graduation Success Rate. 2 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 3 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to ineligibility for postseason competition. Squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 4 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 5 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to penalties. The squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 6 Denotes APR based on a one year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 7 Denotes APR based on a two year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 8 Denotes that team is not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or penalties based on institutional resources. 9 Denotes that team`s APR data is under review. Table 4 Page 14 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: Arizona State University Date of Report: 06/16/2012

Percentile Rank Percentile Rank Public Private Football Bowl Football Championship Division I (Non- Sport (N) Multiyear APR 2010-2011 APR within All All Divison I within Sport Institutions Institutions Subdivision Subdivision Football) Sports Golf (298) 970 974 30th-40th 30th-40th 973 969 981 980 969 970 Gymnastics (16) NA NA NA NA 983 983 980 983 987 970 Ice Hockey (58) NA NA NA NA 982 975 989 980 993 980 Lacrosse (60) NA NA NA NA 972 970 973 981 973 962 Skiing (11) NA NA NA NA 975 964 995 975 985 963 Soccer (203) NA NA NA NA 968 960 976 968 972 966 Swimming (137) 962 984 20th-30th 20th-30th 974 969 982 976 972 975 Tennis (260) NA NA NA NA 973 969 979 977 970 972 Track, Indoor 968 989 50th-60th 30th-40th 963 956 979 965 960 964 (258) Track, Outdoor 963 989 40th-50th 20th-30th 965 958 980 966 963 965 (277) Volleyball (23) NA NA NA NA 976 971 982 977 982 978 Water Polo (22) NA NA NA NA 979 978 980 988 993 965 Wrestling (80) 961 987 50th-60th 20th-30th 960 955 973 964 956 957 By Sport - Women's Basketball (342) 974 982 50th-60th 40th-50th 970 965 980 971 968 971

* Denotes data representing three or fewer student-athletes. In accordance with FERPA's interpretation of federal privacy regulations, institutions should not disclose statistical data contained in this report in cells made up of three or fewer students without student consent. N/A = No APR or not applicable. N = Number of teams represented. 1 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition based on institutional, athletics and student resources and the team's Graduation Success Rate. 2 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 3 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to ineligibility for postseason competition. Squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 4 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 5 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to penalties. The squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 6 Denotes APR based on a one year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 7 Denotes APR based on a two year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 8 Denotes that team is not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or penalties based on institutional resources. 9 Denotes that team`s APR data is under review. Table 4 Page 15 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: Arizona State University Date of Report: 06/16/2012

Percentile Rank Percentile Rank Public Private Football Bowl Football Championship Division I (Non- Sport (N) Multiyear APR 2010-2011 APR within All All Divison I within Sport Institutions Institutions Subdivision Subdivision Football) Sports Bowling (34) NA NA NA NA 957 948 976 985 949 973 Cross Country 988 1000 50th-60th 60th-70th 981 978 988 984 978 982 (341) Fencing (22) NA NA NA NA 978 974 981 973 991 969 Field Hockey NA NA NA NA 990 987 992 987 992 989 (78) Golf (254) 990 941 40th-50th 70th-80th 985 982 990 987 984 983 Gymnastics (62) 978 979 20th-30th 40th-50th 988 988 993 988 993 985 Ice Hockey (34) NA NA NA NA 987 984 989 989 994 981 Lacrosse (91) NA NA NA NA 987 986 987 990 988 982 Rowing (84) NA NA NA NA 986 983 988 984 990 983 Skiing (12) NA NA NA NA 983 975 994 968 994 985 Soccer (321) 998 1000 90th-100th 80th-90th 980 976 987 981 977 981 Softball (288) 997 1000 90th-100th 80th-90th 978 974 988 981 975 978 Swimming (196) 990 1000 60th-70th 70th-80th 985 983 988 985 984 986 Tennis (321) 1000 1000 90th-100th 90th-100th 982 980 986 985 980 982

* Denotes data representing three or fewer student-athletes. In accordance with FERPA's interpretation of federal privacy regulations, institutions should not disclose statistical data contained in this report in cells made up of three or fewer students without student consent. N/A = No APR or not applicable. N = Number of teams represented. 1 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition based on institutional, athletics and student resources and the team's Graduation Success Rate. 2 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 3 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to ineligibility for postseason competition. Squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 4 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 5 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to penalties. The squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 6 Denotes APR based on a one year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 7 Denotes APR based on a two year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 8 Denotes that team is not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or penalties based on institutional resources. 9 Denotes that team`s APR data is under review. Table 4 Page 16 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: Arizona State University Date of Report: 06/16/2012

2002 - 2005 Cohorts: Arizona State University

Men's Sports Women's Sports Sport GSR Fed Rate Sport GSR Fed Rate Baseball 63 15 Basketball 93 79 Basketball 67 27 Bowling - - CC/Track 72 54 CC/Track 96 78 Fencing - - Crew/Rowing - - Football 63 48 Fencing - - Golf 86 67 Field Hockey - - Gymnastics - - Golf 100 70 Ice Hockey - - Gymnastics 92 91 Lacrosse - - W. Ice Hockey - - Mixed Riﬂe - - Lacrosse - - Skiing - - Skiing - - Soccer - - Soccer 96 82 Swimming 84 75 Softball 87 71 Tennis - 100 Swimming 100 95 Volleyball - - Tennis 100 100 Water Polo - - Volleyball 100 91 Wrestling 54 43 Water Polo 84 81 Men's Non-NCAA Sponsor. Sports - - Women's Non-NCAA Sponsor. Sports - - Page 18 of 118

Page 19 of 118

Table 6 ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY STATEMENT OF ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT REVENUES AND EXPENSES YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2011 & 2012

INC (DEC) INC (DEC) Revenue Category ASU FY11 ASU FY12 $ CHANGE % CHANGE Ticket Sales $8,103,691 $9,059,072 $955,381 11.8% Student Fees $0 $0 $0 0.0% Game Guarantees $1,726,998 $982,651 ($744,347) -43.1% Contributions $11,982,855 $11,265,732 ($717,123) -6.0% Compensation and Benefits by Third Party $365,628 $389,670 $24,042 6.6% Direct State or Other Support (Salaries) $0 $0 $0 0.0% Direct Institutional Support $9,324,476 $8,896,167 ($428,309) -4.6% Indirect Facilities and Admin Support $1,336,477 $1,447,676 $111,199 8.3% NCAA Conference Distributions $8,910,647 $12,899,470 $3,988,823 44.8% Broadcast Television Radio Rights $0 $0 $0 0.0% Program Sales, Concessions, Parking $1,728,023 $2,005,120 $277,097 16.0% Royalties, Licensing, Advertising, Spons $10,816,783 $11,167,340 $350,557 3.2% Sports Camps $39,075 $108,746 $69,671 178.3% Endowment and Investment Income $241,510 $1,047,291 $805,781 333.6% Other $717,954 $586,573 ($131,381) -18.3% Total Revenues $55,294,117 $59,855,508 $4,561,391 8.2%

Expense Category Athletic Student Aid $10,362,086 $11,168,165 $806,079 7.8% Guarantees $2,052,910 $2,542,304 $489,394 23.8% Coaching Salaries, Benefits, and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities. $10,459,711 $11,458,597 $998,886 9.5% Coaching Other Compensation and Benefits Paid by a Third Party $240,004 $259,061 $19,057 7.9% Support Staff/Administrative Salaries, Benefits and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities $7,739,010 $8,346,267 $607,257 7.8% Support Staff/Administrative Other Compensation and Benefits Paid by a Third Party $125,623 $130,610 $4,987 4.0% Severance Payments $0 $3,631,420 $3,631,420 NA Recruiting $721,889 $897,577 $175,688 24.3% Team Travel $2,970,780 $3,655,704 $684,924 23.1% Equipment, Uniforms and Supplies $2,480,300 $3,411,925 $931,625 37.6% Game Expenses $3,030,329 $3,590,202 $559,873 18.5% Fund Raising, Marketing and Promotion $2,083,692 $3,405,125 $1,321,433 63.4% Sports Camp Expenses $107,593 $108,746 $1,153 1.1% Direct Facilities, Maintenance and Rental $7,509,366 $6,452,460 ($1,056,906) -14.1% Spirit Groups $5,613 $0 ($5,613) -100.0% Indirect Facilities and Administrative Support $1,336,476 $1,447,674 $111,198 8.3% Medical Expenses and Medical Insurance $1,047,322 $1,121,391 $74,069 7.1% Memberships and Dues $31,146 $33,224 $2,078 6.7% Other Operating Expenses: $4,777,039 $3,927,452 ($849,587) -17.8% Total Operating Expenses $57,080,889 $65,587,904 $8,507,015 14.9%

Net Revenues Over (Under) Expenses ($1,786,772) ($5,732,396) ($3,945,624) 220.8% Page 20 of 118

Page 21 of 118 Table 7 ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY Analyses of University Intercollegiate Athletics Net Expenses (As Adjusted)

Arizona State University FY2011-2012 ICA Net Expenses (As Adjusted for State and Institutional Support): FY2011 FY2012 Total Revenues$ 55,294,117 $ 59,855,508 Total Expenses$ (57,080,889) $ (65,587,904) Net Expenses$ (1,786,772) $ (5,732,396)

FY'11= Tuition waivers ($4.92M) and budgeted local support ($4.39M) Deduct Direct Institutional Support (9,324,476) (8,896,167)

FY'12= Tuition waivers ($5.25M) and budgeted local support ($3.64)

Deduct Indirect Facilities & Admin Supp (1,336,477) (1,447,674) Athletic facilities utility cost

Net Expenses (As Adjusted)$ (12,447,725) $ (16,076,237)

Data Sources: Agreed-Upon Procedures Statement of Revenues and Expenses

Note: ASU ICA is responsible for debt service. The cost is included in Total Expenses above. Depreciation expense is not included in the ICA financial results.

FY2011 From Joanne Wamsley: Major components of budgeted local support include: 1) Support of Women's Sports, $560,000 2) Offset cost of nonrevenue producing sports, $1,860,000. 3) Salary and ERE costs for administrative positions in areas such as compliance, media relations, and the business office, $1,970,000.

Note: ICA makes available approximately 9,500 football reserved seats and 1,600 basketball reserved seats for students that have a total discounted value of approximately $3M.

FY2012 From Joanne Wamsley: Major components of budgeted local support include: 1) Support of Women's Sports, $560,000 2) Offset cost of nonrevenue producing sports, $1,860,000. 3) Salary and ERE costs for administrative positions in areas such as compliance, media relations, and the business office, $1,220,000.

Note: ICA makes available approximately 9,500 football reserved seats and 1,600 basketball reserved seats for students that have a total discounted value of approximately $3M. Page 22 of 118

Table 8 Page 23 of 118 Table 8 Page 24 of 118

This page left blank intentionally.

Table 8 Page 25 of 118 Table 8 Page 26 of 118 Table 8 Page 27 of 118 Table 8 Page 28 of 118 Table 8 Page 29 of 118 Table 8 Page 30 of 118 Table 8 Page 31 of 118 Table 8 Page 32 of 118 Table 8 Page 33 of 118 Table 8 Page 34 of 118

This page left blank intentionally.

Table 9

Page 35 of 118 ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE

88 student-athletes earned degrees in 2011-12 – 30% with HONORS • 79% Graduation Success Rate (At-time highest to date) – 80% Graduation Success Rate since reported • 100% GSR for 6 teams: Women’s Cross Country/Track & Field, Men’s & Women’s Swimming & Diving, Women’s Tennis, and Women’s Volleyball • 94% GSR for all female student-athletes

327 Sun Devil Scholar Athletes (3.00 Semester or CUM GPA) – 61% • 53 Sun Devils had a 4.00 semester GPA fall or spring • 258 Sun Devils had a cumulative GPA of 3.00 or above – 48% • All 11 Women’s teams had 3.00 or above GPA / 3.25 AVG GPA for female student-athletes

978 Academic Progress Rate (APR) average for all sports (97.8%). • 20 of 21 Sports have ABOVE 960 APR • ALL Women sports - OVER 970 APR • 8 Sports achieved ALL TIME HIGH APR scores and 8 of 21 Sports have single year APR of 1000 (100%) including Men’s Basketball and Baseball

137 student-athletes named to Academic All Conference team (28%)

ACADEMICTable 9 ACHIEVEMENTS Page 36 of 118 Academic All American and District : 2011-12

2nd in the Pac-12 for most Academic All-Americans since 2000 and 7th in the UNITED STATES for all Division I schools

9 Capital One Academic All-Americans – (3rd most in United States) • Hillary Bach (Softball) – 1st Team • Katelyn Boyd (Softball) – 1st Team • Bailey Wigness (Softball) – 1st Team • Elina Eggers (W. Swimming and Diving) 2 X 1st Team • John Kline (M. Track and Field) – 1st Team • Annie Lockwood (Softball) – 2nd Team • Jamie Sandys (M. Track and Field) – 2nd Team • Cj Navarro (W. Track and Field) – 2nd Team • Nick Happe (M. Track and Field) – 3rd Team

15 Capital One All District VIII Selections

NGCA All-American: Noemi Jimenez, Justine Lee, Giulia Molinaro, Daniela Ordonez NSCAA Women's College Scholar All-America Team: Alexandra Elston (third) ITA Scholar Athletes: Michelle Brycki, Clare Frye, Hannah James, Leighann Sahagun, Sianna Simmons, Joanna Smith, Nicole Smith USTFCCCA All-Academic: Constance Ezugha, John Kline, Hailey Hanna, Jeremy Marcinko, Alex Hartig, Brian Pierre, Ashley Lampley, Jamie Sandys, Cj Navarro, Natasa Vulic

American Volleyball Coaches Association – Team Award *2nd year College Swimming Coaches Association – Men and Women’s All Academic Team Women’s Intercollegiate Tennis Association – All Academic Team *5th year U.S. Track & Field, Cross Country Coaches Association • Men’s (4th year) & Women’s (6th year) Cross Country All-Academic Team • Women’s Track & Field All-Academic Team honors *7th straight year

Table 9 ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTS Page 37 of 118 National and Conference Awards

25 Sun Devils garnered $47,000 of Post-Graduate Scholarship money in 2011-12. 2011-12 Pac-12 Conference Woman of the 4 Pac-12 Post-Graduate Scholarship Year: Hillary Bach (Softball) Winners: Hillary Bach (Softball) Cameron Kastl (Football) John Kline (M. Track and Field) CJ Navarro (W. Track and Field)

13 Arthur Ashe Jr. Sports-Scholars (#1 in Pac-12 Conference): Deven Marrero (Baseball), Trenton Lockett (M. Basketball), Joy Burke (W. Basketball), Sierra Joseph (Soccer), Miah Mollay Finalist NCAA Woman of the Year: Hillary (Soccer), Sianna Simmons (Tennis), Daniel Bach (Softball) Auberry (M Track and Field), Darius Terry (M Track and Field), Constance Ezugha (W 3 NCAA Postgraduate Scholarship Award Winners: Track and Field), Alycia Herring (W Track and Field), Ashley Lampley (W. Track and Hillary Bach (Softball) Field), Cj Navarro (W. Track and Field), Katelyn Boyd (Softball) Shaylah Simpson (W. Track and Field). Annie Lockwood (Softball)

3 Pac-12 Scholar-Athletes of the Year: Giulia Molinaro (Women’s Golf) Katelyn Boyd (Softball) Elina Eggers (W. Swim and Dive) 2 Tom Hansen Pac-10 Conference Medal Winners: Aaron Pflugrad (Football) Katelyn Boyd (Softball)

Table 9

ATHLETIC ACHIEVEMENTS Page 38 of 118 National – 2011-12

NCAA Top-10 Finishes (4): 2012 WCWS All Series 1st Team: Amber Men's Indoor Track and Field (4th) Freeman Softball (4th)

Water Polo (5th) 2012 USA Softball Collegiate Player of th Women’s Golf (T-6 ) the Year Top 3 Finalist: Katelyn Boyd NCAA Top-25 Finishes (7): Men's Indoor Men's Indoor Track and Field (4th) 2012 Lowes Senior Class Award Softball (4th), W. Golf (T-6th), Finalist: Katelyn Boyd Baseball (21st), Men's Outdoor T&F (16th), Women's Outdoor T&F 2012 Pac-12 Conference Batting (24th), Water Polo (5th) Champion: Katelyn Boyd

NCAA Individual Champions (3): USTFCCCA All-West Region: Shelby Jordan Clarke (Indoor T&F/Shot Put); Houlihan Mason McHenry (Indoor T&F/800m); Jordan Clarke (Outdoor T&F/Shot USTFCCCA All-West Region: Put) Nick Happe (21st place)

USTFCCCA West Region Coach of the

Year: Greg Kraft

Field Athlete of the Year: Chris Bernard

USTFCCCA 'The Bowerman Award' Semifinalist: Jordan Clarke

Table 9

ATHLETIC ACHIEVEMENTS Page 39 of 118 All Americans 2011-12

2011-2012 ALL-AMERICA SELECTIONS (39): Men’s Track and Field: 1st Team: Baseball: Brady Rodgers (baseball, Jordan Clarke (indoor shot put), 2nd), Trevor Williams (baseball, Chris Benard (indoor triple jump), 2nd), Abe Ruiz (baseball, 3rd), Bryan McBride (indoor high jump), Women’s Golf: Giulia Molinaro Mason McHenry (indoor 800m); (women's golf, 1st) Jordan Clarke (outdoor shot put), Chris Benard (outdoor triple jump), Softball: Katelyn Boyd (softball, 1st), Derick Hinch (outdoor pole vault); Alix Johnson (softball, 1st), 2nd Team: Ryan Milus (indoor 60m), Nick Happe (indoor mile), Jordan Clarke (hammer), Bryan McBride (outdoor high jump), Chris Benard (outdoor long jump), 4x400m Relay (Burrow, Kline,

Caesar, Henry)

Women’s Track and Field: 1st Team: Anna Jelmini (indoor shot put), Women’s Swimming and Diving: Anna Jelmini (outdoor discus), Keia Constantin Blaha (diving), Cameron Pinnick (heptathlon), Christabel Bradshaw (diving), Elina Eggers Nettey (outdoor long jump); 2nd (diving), Rebecca Ejdervick, Team: Constance Ezugha (long Caroline Kuczynski, Katie Haron, jump), 4x100m Relay (Gooden, Shannon Landgrebe, Cassie Pinnick, Herring, Sanchez) Morrice, Tristin Baxter Water Polo: Alicia Brightwell (1st Women’s Tennis: Jacqueline Cako team), Shannan Haas (3rd team), Mariam Salloum (honorable mention)

Table 9

ATHLETIC ACHIEVEMENTS Page 40 of 118 Pac-12 Conference 2011-12

INDIVIDUAL 2011-2012 PACIFIC-12 Pac-12 Freshmen / Newcomer of CHAMPIONS (6): the year: Shelby Houlihan (W. Jordan Clarke (Outdoor T&F/Shot Put); Cross Country) Chris Benard (Outdoor T&F/Triple Jump) Constance Ezugha (Outdoor T&F/Long Jump); Anna Jelmini (Outdoor T&F/Shot Put and Discus); 4x100m Relay Outdoor Track and field: Daniel Auberry, Chris Burrows, Rashad Ross, Ryan Milus; 4x400m Relay Outdoor Track and Field: Chris Burrows, John Kline, Kelsey Caesar,

Will Henry

MPSF Champions: Chris Benard (triple jump), Ryan Milus (60m), Rashad Ross (200m), Coach of the Year: Greg Kraft – Brian Pierre (3000m), Jordan Clarke (shot MPSF (indoor track) put), Shekeia Pinnick (pentathalon) 42 Sun Devils named All Conference – Pac-12 or MPSF 10 first teamers

Table 9 Sun Devils SERVE Page 41 of 118

Sun Devil Student-athletes performed over 3500 hours of community service, impacting over 105,100 youth and adults in the community

Every Sun Devil Athletic team participated in multiple service opportunities Page 42 of 118

Page 43 of 118

NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY 2011-2012 Intercollegiate Athletic Report

Page 44 of 118

Page 45 of 118

Northern Arizona University Table 1 Student Athletes Eligible to Participate, 2011-12 by Race/Ethnicity, Sport, and Gender Native African Native 2 or More Non-Res Sport Amer. Asian Amer. Hispanic Hawaiian White Races Unknown Alien Total Men's Football 1 0 22 10 1 52 8 1 0 95 Men's Basketball 0083 0 5 1 0017 Men's Baseball 0000 0 0 0 000 Men's Track 1 0 10 4 0 20 3 3 0 41 Men's Other1 0001 0 6 0 4011 TOTAL MEN 2 0 40 18 1 83 12 8 0 164 Women's Basketball 0081 0 3 4 0016 Women's Softball 0000 0 0 0 000 Women's Soccer 0003 02440031 Women's Volleyball 0000 01310014 Women's Track 1082 02216040 Women's Other2 0103 024310041 TOTAL WOMEN 1 1 16 9 0 86 13 16 0 142 ALL STUDENT ATHLETES 3 1 56 27 1 169 25 24 0 306

1 Men's Other Sports includes Tennis. 2 Women's Other Sports includes Golf, Swimming/Diving, and Tennis. Page 46 of 118

Page 47 of 118

Northern Arizona University Table 2 Cumulative GPA by Academic Year All Student Athletes Students Academic Men All Sports Year Football Basketball Baseball Track Other1 Men Men 2011-12 2.77 2.96 3.18 3.01 2.89 2.99 2010-11 2.72 2.78 3.04 2.65 2.79 2.95 2009-10 2.72 3.00 3.19 2.83 2.86 2.96 2008-09 2.63 2.95 3.11 2.98 2.79 2.95 2007-08 2.63 2.99 2.93 2.89 2.76 2.97 2006-07 2.59 2.74 2.64 2.76 2.62 2.89 2005-06 2.61 2.51 2.73 2.79 2.64 2.91 2004-05 2.60 2.77 2.46 3.11 2.61 2.91 2003-04 2.47 2.66 2.65 2.75 2.55 2.92 2002-03 2.58 3.03 2.96 3.06 2.72 2.91 2001-02 2.58 2.70 2.85 2.89 2.68 2.93 2000-01 2.67 2.60 2.84 2.92 2.77 2.86 1999-00 2.81 2.71 3.06 2.86 2.76 1998-99 2.47 2.86 2.90 2.74 2.82 1997-98 2.68 2.81 2.88 2.78 2.75 1996-97 2.64 2.64 2.89 2.73 2.67 1995-96 2.49 2.69 2.94 2.68 2.70 1994-95 2.50 2.76 2.93 2.75 2.68 1993-94 2.60 2.62 2.61 1992-93 2.68 2.85 2.69 1991-92 2.45 2.63 2.69 1990-91 2.33 2.49 2.56 1989-90 2.34 2.29 2.63

1 Men's Other Sports includes Tennis

Page 48 of 118

Northern Arizona University Table 3 Cumulative GPA by Academic Year All Student Athletes Students Academic Women All Sports Year Basketball Softball Soccer Volleyball Track Other2 Women Women 2011-12 2.85 3.32 3.52 3.29 3.37 3.29 3.24 2010-11 3.18 3.35 3.20 2.94 3.25 3.20 3.23 2009-10 3.35 3.42 3.39 3.00 3.21 3.24 3.24 2008-09 3.25 3.30 3.31 3.14 3.22 3.23 3.25 2007-08 3.24 3.38 3.09 3.29 3.18 3.24 3.24 2006-07 3.01 3.18 3.14 2005-06 3.19 3.23 3.15 2004-05 3.17 3.14 3.14 2003-04 3.05 3.17 3.16 2002-03 3.08 3.14 3.16 2001-02 3.14 3.09 3.17 2000-01 3.21 3.27 3.17 1999-00 3.19 3.06 1998-99 3.22 3.10 1997-98 3.33 3.03 1996-97 3.10 2.95 1995-96 2.94 2.92 1994-95 3.06 2.56 1993-94 2.71 1992-93 2.59 1991-92 2.59 1990-91 2.65 1989-90 2.87

1 Men's Other Sports includes Tennis 2 Women's Other Sports includes Golf, Tennis, and Swimming

Table 4 Page 49 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: Northern Arizona University Date of Report: 06/16/2012 This report is based on NCAA Division I Academic Progress Rate (APR) data submitted by the institution for the 2007-08, 2008-2009, 2009-10 and 2010-11 academic years.

The following chart represents by-sport APR averages for noted subgroups.

Percentile Rank Percentile Rank Public Private Football Bowl Football Championship Division I (Non- Sport (N) Multiyear APR 2010-2011 APR within All All Divison I within Sport Institutions Institutions Subdivision Subdivision Football) Sports By Sport - Men's Baseball (297) NA NA NA NA 965 959 976 970 961 961 Basketball (344) 956 917 50th-60th 20th-30th 950 943 965 954 946 951 Cross Country 947 971 10th-20th 10th-20th 973 970 980 979 970 973 (314) Football (243) 949 931 50th-60th 10th-20th 948 943 963 952 944 NA Fencing (18) NA NA NA NA 970 958 975 981 971 948

* Denotes data representing three or fewer student-athletes. In accordance with FERPA's interpretation of federal privacy regulations, institutions should not disclose statistical data contained in this report in cells made up of three or fewer students without student consent. N/A = No APR or not applicable. N = Number of teams represented. 1 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition based on institutional, athletics and student resources and the team's Graduation Success Rate. 2 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 3 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to ineligibility for postseason competition. Squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 4 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 5 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to penalties. The squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 6 Denotes APR based on a one year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 7 Denotes APR based on a two year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 8 Denotes that team is not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or penalties based on institutional resources. 9 Denotes that team`s APR data is under review. Table 4 Page 50 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: Northern Arizona University Date of Report: 06/16/2012

Percentile Rank Percentile Rank Public Private Football Bowl Football Championship Division I (Non- Sport (N) Multiyear APR 2010-2011 APR within All All Divison I within Sport Institutions Institutions Subdivision Subdivision Football) Sports Golf (298) NA NA NA NA 973 969 981 980 969 970 Gymnastics (16) NA NA NA NA 983 983 980 983 987 970 Ice Hockey (58) NA NA NA NA 982 975 989 980 993 980 Lacrosse (60) NA NA NA NA 972 970 973 981 973 962 Skiing (11) NA NA NA NA 975 964 995 975 985 963 Soccer (203) NA NA NA NA 968 960 976 968 972 966 Swimming (137) NA NA NA NA 974 969 982 976 972 975 Tennis (260) 935 889 1st-10th 1st-10th 973 969 979 977 970 972 Track, Indoor 961 939 40th-50th 20th-30th 963 956 979 965 960 964 (258) Track, Outdoor 962 955 40th-50th 20th-30th 965 958 980 966 963 965 (277) Volleyball (23) NA NA NA NA 976 971 982 977 982 978 Water Polo (22) NA NA NA NA 979 978 980 988 993 965 Wrestling (80) NA NA NA NA 960 955 973 964 956 957 By Sport - Women's Basketball (342) 981 981 60th-70th 50th-60th 970 965 980 971 968 971

* Denotes data representing three or fewer student-athletes. In accordance with FERPA's interpretation of federal privacy regulations, institutions should not disclose statistical data contained in this report in cells made up of three or fewer students without student consent. N/A = No APR or not applicable. N = Number of teams represented. 1 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition based on institutional, athletics and student resources and the team's Graduation Success Rate. 2 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 3 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to ineligibility for postseason competition. Squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 4 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 5 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to penalties. The squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 6 Denotes APR based on a one year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 7 Denotes APR based on a two year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 8 Denotes that team is not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or penalties based on institutional resources. 9 Denotes that team`s APR data is under review. Table 4 Page 51 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: Northern Arizona University Date of Report: 06/16/2012

Percentile Rank Percentile Rank Public Private Football Bowl Football Championship Division I (Non- Sport (N) Multiyear APR 2010-2011 APR within All All Divison I within Sport Institutions Institutions Subdivision Subdivision Football) Sports Bowling (34) NA NA NA NA 957 948 976 985 949 973 Cross Country 970 1000 20th-30th 30th-40th 981 978 988 984 978 982 (341) Fencing (22) NA NA NA NA 978 974 981 973 991 969 Field Hockey NA NA NA NA 990 987 992 987 992 989 (78) Golf (254) 975 938 20th-30th 40th-50th 985 982 990 987 984 983 Gymnastics (62) NA NA NA NA 988 988 993 988 993 985 Ice Hockey (34) NA NA NA NA 987 984 989 989 994 981 Lacrosse (91) NA NA NA NA 987 986 987 990 988 982 Rowing (84) NA NA NA NA 986 983 988 984 990 983 Skiing (12) NA NA NA NA 983 975 994 968 994 985 Soccer (321) 985 991 50th-60th 60th-70th 980 976 987 981 977 981 Softball (288) NA NA NA NA 978 974 988 981 975 978 Swimming (196) 976 979 20th-30th 40th-50th 985 983 988 985 984 986 Tennis (321) 992 1000 60th-70th 70th-80th 982 980 986 985 980 982

* Denotes data representing three or fewer student-athletes. In accordance with FERPA's interpretation of federal privacy regulations, institutions should not disclose statistical data contained in this report in cells made up of three or fewer students without student consent. N/A = No APR or not applicable. N = Number of teams represented. 1 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition based on institutional, athletics and student resources and the team's Graduation Success Rate. 2 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 3 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to ineligibility for postseason competition. Squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 4 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 5 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to penalties. The squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 6 Denotes APR based on a one year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 7 Denotes APR based on a two year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 8 Denotes that team is not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or penalties based on institutional resources. 9 Denotes that team`s APR data is under review. Table 4 Page 52 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: Northern Arizona University Date of Report: 06/16/2012

2002 - 2005 Cohorts: Northern Arizona University

Men's Sports Women's Sports Sport GSR Fed Rate Sport GSR Fed Rate Baseball - - Basketball 93 57 Basketball 69 50 Bowling - - CC/Track 67 46 CC/Track 90 44 Fencing - - Crew/Rowing - - Football 72 41 Fencing - - Golf - - Field Hockey - - Gymnastics - - Golf 100 50 Ice Hockey - - Gymnastics - - Lacrosse - - W. Ice Hockey - - Mixed Riﬂe - - Lacrosse - - Skiing - - Skiing - - Soccer - - Soccer 95 75 Swimming - - Softball - - Tennis 83 38 Swimming 95 79 Volleyball - - Tennis 89 67 Water Polo - - Volleyball 100 53 Wrestling - - Water Polo - - Men's Non-NCAA Sponsor. Sports - - Women's Non-NCAA Sponsor. Sports - - Page 54 of 118

Page 55 of 118

Table 6 NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY STATEMENT OF ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT REVENUES AND EXPENSES YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2011 & 2012

INC (DEC) INC (DEC) Revenue Category NAU FY11 NAU FY12 $ CHANGE % CHANGE Ticket Sales $189,824 $235,261 $45,437 23.9% Student Fees $0 $0 $0 0.0% Game Guarantees $632,200 $635,800 $3,600 0.6% Contributions $164,484 $664,515 $500,031 304.0% Compensation and Benefits by Third Party $0 $0 $0 0.0% Direct State or Other Support (Salaries) $2,414,683 $2,303,325 ($111,358) -4.6% Direct Institutional Support $5,958,583 $6,336,245 $377,662 6.3% Indirect Facilities and Admin Support $0 $0 $0 0.0% NCAA Conference Distributions $631,896 $614,610 ($17,286) -2.7% Broadcast Television Radio Rights $0 $0 $0 0.0% Program Sales, Concessions, Parking $63,590 $64,358 $768 1.2% Royalties, Licensing, Advertising, Spons $332,788 $446,138 $113,350 34.1% Sports Camps $224,689 $185,169 ($39,520) -17.6% Endowment and Investment Income $0 $0 $0 0.0% Other $68,776 $52,889 ($15,887) -23.1% Total Revenues $10,681,513 $11,538,310 $856,797 8.0%

Expense Category Athletic Student Aid $4,030,142 $4,365,031 $334,889 8.3% Guarantees $93,936 $85,723 ($8,213) -8.7% Coaching Salaries, Benefits, and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities. $2,099,532 $2,428,235 $328,703 15.7% Coaching Other Compensation and Benefits Paid by a Third Party $0 $0 $0 0.0% Support Staff/Administrative Salaries, Benefits and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities $1,508,429 $1,458,062 ($50,367) -3.3% Support Staff/Administrative Other Compensation and Benefits Paid by a Third Party $0 $0 $0 0.0% Severance Payments $0 $0 $0 0.0% Recruiting $207,222 $200,659 ($6,563) -3.2% Team Travel $1,243,827 $1,177,256 ($66,571) -5.4% Equipment, Uniforms and Supplies $289,607 $313,935 $24,328 8.4% Game Expenses $238,657 $220,627 ($18,030) -7.6% Fund Raising, Marketing and Promotion $5,483 $15,370 $9,887 180.3% Sports Camp Expenses $135,356 $40,256 ($95,100) -70.3% Direct Facilities, Maintenance and Rental $187,679 $210,250 $22,571 12.0% Spirit Groups $48,441 $71,866 $23,425 48.4% Indirect Facilities and Administrative Support $0 $0 $0 0.0% Medical Expenses and Medical Insurance $267,154 $247,304 ($19,850) -7.4% Memberships and Dues $54,503 $54,747 $244 0.4% Other Operating Expenses: $587,480 $754,028 $166,548 28.3% Total Operating Expenses $10,997,448 $11,643,349 $645,901 5.9%

Net Revenues Over (Under) Expenses ($315,935) ($105,039) $210,896 -66.8% Page 56 of 118

Page 57 of 118 Table 7

NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY Analyses of University Intercollegiate Athletics Net Expenses (As Adjusted)

Northern Arizona University FY2011-2012 ICA Net Expenses (As Adjusted for State and Institutional Support): FY2011 FY2012 Total Revenues$ 10,681,513 $ 11,538,310 Total Expenses$ (10,997,448) $ (11,643,349) Net Expenses$ (315,935) $ (105,039) Deduct Direct State Support (2,414,683) (2,303,325)

FY'11= Includes the value of institutional resources for the current operations of ICA, as well as all unrestricted funds allocated to Athletics Department by the University. Between FY10 and FY11 athletic tuition waivers increased by 7% to $2.6M Deduct Direct Institutional Support (5,958,583) (6,336,245) FY'12=Includes the value of institutional resources for the current operations of ICA, as well as all unrestricted funds allocated to Athletics Department by the University. Between FY11 and FY12 athletic tuition waivers increased by 6% to $2.8M

Net Expenses (As Adjusted)$ (8,689,201) $ (8,744,609)

Data Sources: Agreed-Upon Procedures Statement of Revenues and Expenses

Note: ICA is not responsible for any debt service and the cost is excluded from Total Expenses above. Debt service is funded by locally retained tuition. The only athletics-related debt service would be for the Skydome turf, which is classified as equipment, and not considered athletics since the Skydome is a multi-use facility. Depreciation expense is not included in the ICA financial results.

'FY 2011 From Bob Norton: University local funds support $3.3M; Athletics Tuition Waivers $2.6M; total $5.9M

FY 2012 From Bob Norton: University local funds support $3.5M; Athletics Tuition Waivers $2.8M; total $6.3M Page 58 of 118

Page 59 of 118 Page 60 of 118 Page 61 of 118 Page 62 of 118 Page 63 of 118 Page 64 of 118 Page 65 of 118 Page 66 of 118 Page 67 of 118 Page 68 of 118 Page 69 of 118 2011-12 Year in Review

ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENTS

The Northern Arizona University athletics department recorded a cumulative grade point average of 3.15 among its more than 300 student-athletes during the 2011-12 academic year. It was the second-best cumulative semester GPA in school history.

The University boasted 124 Academic All-Big Sky selections, two Academic All-Americans and three academic all-district selections.

Golden Eagle Distributors, Inc., honored 174 Northern Arizona University student-athletes for their scholastic and athletic accomplishments at the 34th annual Golden Eagle Awards.

Overall, 40 student-athletes earned a semester 4.0 GPA and 170 earned a semester 3.0 or better GPA.

The swimming and diving program had the highest GPA among all programs at 3.55. Volleyball’s Lauren Campbell (above) was chosen for the Capital One Academic All- All 15 sponsored sports exceeded NCAA America® Volleyball Team in 2011. She Academic Progress Rate (APR) standards for joined football’s Ben Bachelier as Academic All- the third straight year. America selections last season. Overall, 11 student-athletes have been honored on the Capital The NAU football program had its highest One Academic All-District teams over the last semester GPA since 2008. four seasons.

Track and Field’s Tim Freriks and golfers Stephanie Kim, Laura Jabczenski and Melissa Olson earned All-Academic honors from their respective sport’s coaches associations. Page 70 of 118 COMMUNITY SERVICE

Student-athletes, coaches and athletic depart- The football program participated in more than ment staff combined to volunteer and participate 1,000 community service hours, while the in 3,716 community service hours over the swimming and diving program contributed 597 2011-12 academic year. The Lumberjacks service hours during the year. assisted with events like Red Ribbon Week, Welcome Back Jacks, St. Mary's Food Bank and Flagstaff Earth Week.

DEPARTMENT HIGHLIGHTS

NAU ranked in the Learfield Sports Directors' Cup standings for the seventh consecutive season, tying for 173rd in the final standings. The Lumberjacks scored at the NCAA Championships in men’s cross country (14th) and indoor track and field (35th) during the 2011- 12 season.

TEAM PERFORMANCES

The Lumberjack Swimming & Diving team The men’s basketball team posted an upset capped a fantastic season with a second- win over Arizona State on guard Stallon place finish at the 2012 WAC Swimming & Saldivar’s game-winning shot at the buzzer. Diving Championship. The team won five individual titles and set eight school records during The track and field program sent four student- the meet with 20 all-time top-five event times. athletes to the NCAA Outdoor Track & Field Championships. The Lumberjacks qualified The volleyball team put together a historic start Pascal Tang in the hammer, Josh DeKonty in the to the season, breaking school and Big Sky long jump, Deante Kemper in the high jump and records with a 12-0 record to begin the sea- Caroline Hogardh in the 3,000 steeplechase. son. Page 71 of 118 INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCES

Junior Diego Estrada was a three-time All- America in 2011-12, earning a pair of All- America honors at the NCAA Indoor Championships and All-America status in cross country. He finished fifth in the 5,000m and seventh in the 3,000m. He also ran in the 2012 Olympics in the 5,000m for Mexico.

Golfer Kaitlen Parsons was the top finisher for the Lumberjacks at the Big Sky Conference Championships, finishing seventh overall.

Junior swimmer Fi Connell and sophomores Jordan Burnes, Emma Lowther and Rachel Palmer were each named CollegeSwimming.com Mid-Major All- Americans after recording NCAA ‘B’ standard times at the 2012 WAC Swimming & Diving Championships.

NAU had 81 all-conference performers in the Big Sky and Western Athletic Conferences.

GOLD AXE AWARDS COACHING HONORS

Four Lumberjack student-athletes were among Eric Heins was named Big Sky Conference the 68 graduating seniors that were recognized men’s coach of the year after leading the with the prestigious Gold Axe Award for the Lumberjacks to the team titles in cross country, spring semester at a ceremony at the DuBois indoor and outdoor track and field. Center on the Northern Arizona University campus. The 2011-12 recipients included football’s Ben Bachelier, swimming and diving’s Holly Frost, soccer’s Ally Cwiekowski and track and field’s Lisette Michaels.The award is a tribute to outstanding academic performance, leadership and service to the community. Page 72 of 118 NATIONAL EXPOSURE

NAU produced three Olympains that competed in the London Olympics: Diego Estrada of Mexico, Lopez Lomong of the USA (right) and David McNeill of Australia.

The NAU football team made five appearances on Fox College Sports, four of which were games produced by NAU's Television Services department. Overall, NAU had nine of its 11 football games on live television.

The men’s and women’s basketball teams had more than 20 games on television including the following networks: NAU TV, Fox College Sports, Fox Sports Arizona and Altitude.

NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY ATHLETICS BUDGET

FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12

Beginning Fund Balance 0.00 0.00 444,264 109,826

Revenues 7,802,702 7,985,545 8,132,173 8,687,941

Expenditures 7,802,702 7,541,281 8,466,611 8,797,767

Ending Fund Balance 0.00 444,264 109,826 0.00

FY12 Schedule of Budgeted Revenues and Expenditures: Football and Men’s Basketball

Football Basketball

Revenues 2,002,563 896,744

Exepnditures 2,002,563 896,744

Net 0.00 0.00 Page 73 of 118

UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2011-2012 Intercollegiate Athletic Report

Page 74 of 118

Page 75 of 118

The University of Arizona Table 1 Student Athletes Eligible to Participate, 2011-12 by Race/Ethnicity, Sport, and Gender Native African Native 2 or More Non-Res Sport Amer. Asian Amer. Hispanic Hawaiian White Races Unknown Alien Total Men's Football 3 4 51 11 6 40 3 1 1 120 Men's Basketball001110400117 Men's Baseball3126 12520040 Men's Track 0 1 12 6 0 12 1 0 8 40 Men's Other1 1218 03711960 TOTAL MEN 7 8 77 32 7 118 7 2 19 277 Women's Basketball0091 0300013 Women's Softball0121 01531023 Women's Soccer0016 01501225 Women's Volleyball0022 1800114 Women's Track 1 1 15 4 0 20 0 0 3 44 Women's Other2 0123 036011457 TOTAL WOMEN 1 3 31 17 1 97 3 3 20 176 ALL STUDENT ATHLETES 8 11 108 49 8 215 10 5 39 453

1 Men's Other Sports includes Golf, Swimming and Tennis 2Women's Other Sports includes Golf, Gymnastics, Swimming and Tennis

Page 76 of 118

Page 77 of 118

University of Arizona Table 2 Cumulative GPA by Academic Year All Student Athletes Students Academic Men All Sports Year Football Basketball Baseball Track Other1 Men Men 2011-12 2.51 2.31 2.72 2.91 2.93 2.67 2.82 2010-11 2.47 2.14 2.53 2.87 2.92 2.60 2.82 2009-10 2.49 2.21 2.71 2.66 2.98 2.61 3.04 2008-09 2.50 2.47 2.49 2.79 2.93 2.63 2.94 2007-08 2.41 2.41 2.50 2.72 2.87 2.55 2.90 2006-07 2.49 2.42 2.89 2.74 2.64 2.76 2005-06 2.48 2.22 2.81 2.62 2.56 2.92 2004-05 2.39 2.50 2.71 2.71 2.56 2.76 2003-04 2.43 2.78 2.74 2.81 2.65 2.75 2002-03 2.43 2.66 2.90 2.77 2.62 2.75 2001-02 2.35 2.50 2.91 2.66 2.56 2.81 2000-01 2.39 2.31 2.86 2.76 2.58 2.81 1999-00 2.32 2.40 2.89 2.74 2.53 2.77 1998-99 2.30 2.37 2.60 2.46 2.74 1997-98 2.28 2.33 2.62 2.53 2.75 1996-97 2.28 2.30 2.49 2.43 2.83 1995-96 2.31 1.96 2.63 2.48 2.91 1994-95 2.35 2.17 2.57 2.47 2.78 1993-94 2.44 2.46 2.76 1992-93 2.51 2.41 2.78 1991-92 2.42 2.20 2.77 1990-91 2.36 2.47 2.72 1989-90 2.38 2.66 2.69

1 Men's Other Sports includes Golf, Swimming, and Tennis.

Page 78 of 118

University of Arizona Table 3 Cumulative GPA by Academic Year All Student Athletes Students Academic Women All Sports Year Basketball Softball Soccer Volleyball Track Other2 Women Women 2011-12 2.73 2.70 3.12 2.75 3.06 3.16 3.00 3.02 2010-11 2.53 2.71 2.98 2.73 3.14 3.17 3.00 3.01 2009-10 2.62 2.67 3.10 2.92 3.00 3.20 3.04 3.18 2008-09 2.57 2.60 3.13 2.95 3.07 3.20 3.03 3.10 2007-08 2.60 2.52 3.22 3.00 3.11 3.19 3.00 3.07 2006-07 2.93 2.92 2.96 2005-06 3.02 2.96 3.10 2004-05 3.14 2.99 2.97 2003-04 3.15 2.95 2.97 2002-03 3.26 2.96 2.95 2001-02 3.14 2.92 3.01 2000-01 3.07 2.90 2.98 1999-00 2.90 2.78 2.95 1998-99 2.72 2.91 1997-98 2.68 2.92 1996-97 2.58 3.00 1995-96 2.73 2.76 1994-95 2.81 2.93 1993-94 2.92 1992-93 2.92 1991-92 2.90 1990-91 2.87 1989-90 2.81

1 Men's Other Sports includes Golf, Swimming, and Tennis. 2 Women's Other Sports includes Golf, Tennis, Gymnastics, and Swimming Table 4 Page 79 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: University of Arizona Date of Report: 06/16/2012 This report is based on NCAA Division I Academic Progress Rate (APR) data submitted by the institution for the 2007-08, 2008-2009, 2009-10 and 2010-11 academic years.

The following chart represents by-sport APR averages for noted subgroups.

* Denotes data representing three or fewer student-athletes. In accordance with FERPA's interpretation of federal privacy regulations, institutions should not disclose statistical data contained in this report in cells made up of three or fewer students without student consent. N/A = No APR or not applicable. N = Number of teams represented. 1 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition based on institutional, athletics and student resources and the team's Graduation Success Rate. 2 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 3 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to ineligibility for postseason competition. Squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 4 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 5 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to penalties. The squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 6 Denotes APR based on a one year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 7 Denotes APR based on a two year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 8 Denotes that team is not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or penalties based on institutional resources. 9 Denotes that team`s APR data is under review. Table 4 Page 80 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: University of Arizona Date of Report: 06/16/2012

Percentile Rank Percentile Rank Public Private Football Bowl Football Championship Division I (Non- Sport (N) Multiyear APR 2010-2011 APR within All All Divison I within Sport Institutions Institutions Subdivision Subdivision Football) Sports Golf (298) 1000 1000 90th-100th 90th-100th 973 969 981 980 969 970 Gymnastics (16) NA NA NA NA 983 983 980 983 987 970 Ice Hockey (58) NA NA NA NA 982 975 989 980 993 980 Lacrosse (60) NA NA NA NA 972 970 973 981 973 962 Skiing (11) NA NA NA NA 975 964 995 975 985 963 Soccer (203) NA NA NA NA 968 960 976 968 972 966 Swimming (137) 980 970 50th-60th 50th-60th 974 969 982 976 972 975 Tennis (260) 975 970 40th-50th 40th-50th 973 969 979 977 970 972 Track, Indoor 935 961 10th-20th 1st-10th 963 956 979 965 960 964 (258) Track, Outdoor 940 961 10th-20th 10th-20th 965 958 980 966 963 965 (277) Volleyball (23) NA NA NA NA 976 971 982 977 982 978 Water Polo (22) NA NA NA NA 979 978 980 988 993 965 Wrestling (80) NA NA NA NA 960 955 973 964 956 957 By Sport - Women's Basketball (342) 925 957 1st-10th 1st-10th 970 965 980 971 968 971

* Denotes data representing three or fewer student-athletes. In accordance with FERPA's interpretation of federal privacy regulations, institutions should not disclose statistical data contained in this report in cells made up of three or fewer students without student consent. N/A = No APR or not applicable. N = Number of teams represented. 1 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition based on institutional, athletics and student resources and the team's Graduation Success Rate. 2 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 3 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to ineligibility for postseason competition. Squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 4 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 5 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to penalties. The squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 6 Denotes APR based on a one year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 7 Denotes APR based on a two year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 8 Denotes that team is not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or penalties based on institutional resources. 9 Denotes that team`s APR data is under review. Table 4 Page 81 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: University of Arizona Date of Report: 06/16/2012

Percentile Rank Percentile Rank Public Private Football Bowl Football Championship Division I (Non- Sport (N) Multiyear APR 2010-2011 APR within All All Divison I within Sport Institutions Institutions Subdivision Subdivision Football) Sports Bowling (34) NA NA NA NA 957 948 976 985 949 973 Cross Country 962 932 10th-20th 20th-30th 981 978 988 984 978 982 (341) Fencing (22) NA NA NA NA 978 974 981 973 991 969 Field Hockey NA NA NA NA 990 987 992 987 992 989 (78) Golf (254) 975 917 20th-30th 40th-50th 985 982 990 987 984 983 Gymnastics (62) 1000 1000 90th-100th 90th-100th 988 988 993 988 993 985 Ice Hockey (34) NA NA NA NA 987 984 989 989 994 981 Lacrosse (91) NA NA NA NA 987 986 987 990 988 982 Rowing (84) NA NA NA NA 986 983 988 984 990 983 Skiing (12) NA NA NA NA 983 975 994 968 994 985 Soccer (321) 972 966 20th-30th 40th-50th 980 976 987 981 977 981 Softball (288) 981 1000 40th-50th 50th-60th 978 974 988 981 975 978 Swimming (196) 965 956 1st-10th 20th-30th 985 983 988 985 984 986 Tennis (321) 985 1000 50th-60th 60th-70th 982 980 986 985 980 982

* Denotes data representing three or fewer student-athletes. In accordance with FERPA's interpretation of federal privacy regulations, institutions should not disclose statistical data contained in this report in cells made up of three or fewer students without student consent. N/A = No APR or not applicable. N = Number of teams represented. 1 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition based on institutional, athletics and student resources and the team's Graduation Success Rate. 2 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 3 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to ineligibility for postseason competition due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to ineligibility for postseason competition. Squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 4 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the team's demonstrated academic improvement. 5 Denotes APR that does not subject the team to penalties due to the squad-size adjustment. The "upper conﬁdence boundary" of a team's APR must be below 900 for that team to be subject to penalties. The squad-size adjustment does not apply to teams with four years of APR data and a multiyear cohort of 30 or more student-athletes. 6 Denotes APR based on a one year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 7 Denotes APR based on a two year cohort, not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or any penalties. 8 Denotes that team is not subject to ineligibility for postseason competition and/or penalties based on institutional resources. 9 Denotes that team`s APR data is under review. Table 4 Page 82 of 118 NCAA Division I 2010 - 2011 Academic Progress Rate Public Report Institution: University of Arizona Date of Report: 06/16/2012

2002 - 2005 Cohorts: University of Arizona

Men's Sports Women's Sports Sport GSR Fed Rate Sport GSR Fed Rate Baseball 20 8 Basketball 76 60 Basketball 54 47 Bowling - - CC/Track 60 46 CC/Track 76 58 Fencing - - Crew/Rowing - - Football 53 49 Fencing - - Golf 75 50 Field Hockey - - Gymnastics - - Golf 83 60 Ice Hockey - - Gymnastics 85 85 Lacrosse - - W. Ice Hockey - - Mixed Riﬂe - - Lacrosse - - Skiing - - Skiing - - Soccer - - Soccer 91 71 Swimming 79 50 Softball 73 75 Tennis 70 71 Swimming 92 83 Volleyball - - Tennis 100 67 Water Polo - - Volleyball 83 69 Wrestling - - Water Polo - - Men's Non-NCAA Sponsor. Sports - - Women's Non-NCAA Sponsor. Sports - - Page 84 of 118

Page 85 of 118

Table 6 UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA STATEMENT OF ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT REVENUES AND EXPENSES YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2011 & 2012

INC (DEC) INC (DEC) Revenue Category UA FY11 UA FY12 $ CHANGE % CHANGE Ticket Sales $13,762,225 $12,710,520 ($1,051,705) -7.6% Student Fees $0 $0 $0 0.0% Game Guarantees $1,195,104 $1,686,884 $491,780 41.1% Contributions $16,264,474 $34,508,919 $18,244,445 112.2% Compensation and Benefits by Third Party $750,000 $968,000 $218,000 29.1% Direct State or Other Support (Salaries) $0 $0 $0 0.0% Direct Institutional Support $6,390,342 $6,199,868 ($190,474) -3.0% Indirect Facilities and Admin Support $1,006,250 $1,056,600 $50,350 5.0% NCAA Conference Distributions $12,633,208 $11,265,471 ($1,367,737) -10.8% Broadcast Television Radio Rights $0 $0 $0 0.0% Program Sales, Concessions, Parking $1,877,744 $1,668,414 ($209,330) -11.1% Royalties, Licensing, Advertising, Spons $6,507,566 $7,111,792 $604,226 9.3% Sports Camps $0 $0 $0 0.0% Endowment and Investment Income $977,846 $592,754 ($385,092) -39.4% Other $110,338 $885,953 $775,615 702.9% Total Revenues $61,475,097 $78,655,175 $17,180,078 27.9%

Expense Category Athletic Student Aid $9,743,954 $9,790,285 $46,331 0.5% Guarantees $2,662,038 $2,621,551 ($40,487) -1.5% Coaching Salaries, Benefits, and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities. $10,819,604 $12,636,558 $1,816,954 16.8% Coaching Other Compensation and Benefits Paid by a Third Party $750,000 $968,000 $218,000 29.1% Support Staff/Administrative Salaries, Benefits and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities $9,389,380 $10,002,660 $613,280 6.5% Support Staff/Administrative Other Compensation and Benefits Paid by a Third Party $0 $0 $0 0.0% Severance Payments $0 $1,387,397 $1,387,397 0.0% Recruiting $1,113,234 $1,418,237 $305,003 27.4% Team Travel $4,890,166 $4,549,454 ($340,712) -7.0% Equipment, Uniforms and Supplies $1,501,523 $1,342,525 ($158,998) -10.6% Game Expenses $3,017,399 $3,413,796 $396,397 13.1% Fund Raising, Marketing and Promotion $2,124,357 $991,272 ($1,133,085) -53.3% Sports Camp Expenses $0 $0 $0 0.0% Direct Facilities, Maintenance and Rental $9,530,757 $20,236,199 $10,705,442 112.3% Spirit Groups $263,184 $141,372 ($121,812) -46.3% Indirect Facilities and Administrative Support $1,006,250 $1,056,600 $50,350 5.0% Medical Expenses and Medical Insurance $1,051,290 $1,074,461 $23,171 2.2% Memberships and Dues $122,367 $112,644 ($9,723) -7.9% Other Operating Expenses: $2,332,774 $5,690,623 $3,357,849 143.9% Total Operating Expenses $60,318,277 $77,433,634 $17,115,357 28.4%

Net Revenues Over (Under) Expenses $1,156,820 $1,221,541 $64,721 5.6% Page 86 of 118

Table 7 Page 87 of 118 UNIVERSITY of ARIZONA Analyses of University Intercollegiate Athletics Net Expenses (As Adjusted)

University of Arizona FY2011-2012 ICA Net Expenses (As Adjusted for State and Institutional Support): FY2011 FY2012 Total Revenues$ 61,475,097 $ 78,655,175 Total Expenses$ (60,318,277) $ (77,433,634) Net Revenues$ 1,156,820 $ 1,221,541 FY'11 = 100% Tuition Waivers Change from PY (Football +$100k, Other Sports + 600k)

Deduct Direct Institutional Support (6,390,342) (6,199,868) FY'12= change from Prior Year (FB -$85,100, Men's Basketball -$29,000, Baseball -$27,000, all other sports -$49,300). The annual amount fluctuates based on tuition rate and mix of in-state and out-of- state student-athletes.

FY'11 = This amount is an estimation of imputed Utility costs for the year. Administrative Service Charges of $1,105,851 were made directly to ICA Deduct Indirect Facilities & and are included in Other Operating Expenses. (1,006,250) (1,056,600) Administrative Support FY'12 = This amount is an estimation of imputed utility costs for the year. The $1,056,600 ASC was charged directly to ICA and is included in Other Operating Expenses. Net Expenses (As Adjusted)$ (6,239,772) $ (6,034,927)

Data Sources: Agreed-Upon Procedures Statement of Revenues and Expenses

Note: UA ICA is responsible for debt service. The cost is included in Total Expenses above. Depreciation expense is not included in the ICA financial results.

FY2011FromBrad Peterson:Tuitionwaiversarescholarshipswhichareawardedtocovermandatorytuitionandfeessothatthereisno costtothestudent.TuitionwaiversareforgonerevenueintheUniversityfinancialstatements(usedtocalculatenettuition) andall student'sarecountedtowardsthe22:1formulafundingreceivedfromthestateaspartofourappropriation.

FY2012From MarkMcGurk:Tuitionwaiversarescholarshipswhichareawardedtocovermandatorytuitionandfeessothatthereisno costtothestudent.TuitionwaiversareforgonerevenueintheUniversityfinancialstatements(usedtocalculatenettuition) andall student'sarecountedtowardstheperformanceformulafundingreceivedfromthestateaspartofourappropriation.

'FY2011FromBrad Peterson: ThepurposeoftheAdministrativeServiceChargeistorecoveroverheadcostsincurredbytheinstitutionon behalfofaccountswhicharenotdirectlyfundedbyeitherstateappropriationsorsponsoredgrantsandcontracts.Therevenues generated fromtheAdministrativeServiceCharge(ASC)areusedspecificallytosupportoverheadcosts(activitiesoncampuswhichbenefit theentire institution,butwhicharenoteasilyassignabletoanyoneunit,forexample,utilities,processingpayrollandpurchaseorders).

'FY2012FromMarkMcGurk: ThepurposeoftheAdministrativeServiceChargeistorecoveroverheadcostsincurredbytheinstitutionon behalfofaccountswhicharenotdirectlyfundedbyeitherstateappropriationsorsponsoredgrantsandcontracts.Therevenues generated fromtheAdministrativeServiceCharge(ASC)areusedspecificallytosupportoverheadcosts(activitiesoncampuswhichbenefit theentire institution,butwhicharenoteasilyassignabletoanyoneunit,forexample,utilities,processingpayrollandpurchaseorders). Page 88 of 118

Table 8 Page 89 of 118

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS’ REPORT ON THE APPLICATION OF AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2012

MCGLADREY ALLIANCE IS A PREMIER AFFILIATION OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTING AND CONSULTING FIRMS. MCGLADREY ALLIANCE MEMBER FIRMS MAINTAIN THEIR NAME, AUTONOMY AND INDEPENDENCE AND ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN CLIENT FEE ARRANGEMENTS, DELIVERY OF SERVICES AND MAINTENANCE OF CLIENT RELATIONSHIPS. Table 8 Page 90 of 118

INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS’ REPORT ON THE APPLICATION OF AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES

Ann Weaver Hart, Ph.D. President and Chief Executive The University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona

Dear President Hart:

We have performed the procedures enumerated below, which were agreed to by the chief executive of the University of Arizona (the “University”), solely to assist you in evaluating whether the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures of the University is in compliance with the National Collegiate Athletic Association (“NCAA”) Bylaw 3.2.4.16 for the year ended June 30, 2012. The University’s management is responsible for the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures and the statement’s compliance with those requirements. This agreed-upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The sufficiency of these procedures is solely the responsibility of those parties specified in this report. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose.

Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures - General

The procedures that we performed and our findings are as follows:

1. We obtained a general understanding of the control environment of the University of Arizona Department of Intercollegiate Athletics (“ICA”). As part of this:

We obtained the ICA’s organizational chart and noted that the organizational chart clearly displayed structure of the ICA department, in terms of relationships among personnel and lines of authority.

We made inquiries of management regarding the control consciousness of staff members, noting that the ICA maintains an Office Procedures Manual which requires review and approval of all ICA transactions by departmental supervisors.

We made inquiries of management regarding the use of internal auditors, noting that the ICA is subject to random audits by the University’s internal auditors.

We made inquiries of management regarding the competence of personnel, noting that all ICA employees are hired in accordance with the University’s hiring policies.

We made inquiries of management regarding the adequacy of safeguarding and control of records and assets, noting the ICA offices contain keypad code locks to restrict access from unauthorized personnel, including the University’s ticket office. Furthermore, the ticket office has a vault where all cash receipts are stored. In addition, we noted that confidential records, including accounting records and personnel files, are maintained by the Accounting Office of the University in restricted areas.

We made inquiries of management regarding controls over information technology, noting that the ICA accounting system, including the University’s network, requires security level passwords, in order to access the system.

Table 8 Page 91 of 118

Ann Weaver Hart, Ph.D. President and Chief Executive The University of Arizona Page 2

Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures – General (continued)

2. We obtained the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures of the ICA for the year ended June 30, 2012 as prepared by management and included on page nine of this report. We recalculated the addition of the amounts on the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures, and agreed the total amounts to the University’s general ledger with no exceptions.

3. We performed various analytical procedures to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures to identify unusual items. We compared current year revenues and expenditures to prior year and were able to obtain reasonable explanations for the variances. We compared actual revenue and expenditures to budgeted amounts and were able to obtain reasonable explanations for the variances. We evaluated the reasonableness of ticket revenue based on ticket prices and attendance.

4. Management identified the University of Arizona Foundation as the related outside organization in existence during fiscal year 2012. We reviewed a report of the revenues and expenditures of the outside organization for, or on behalf of, the ICA for the year ended June 30, 2012. Expenditures of $24,440,597 directly incurred by the outside organization, for recruiting, direct facilities maintenance and rental on behalf of the ICA are included in the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures as contributions to the extent of the expenditures. Expenditures on behalf of the ICA are not recorded on the University of Arizona’s general ledger.

5. We reviewed the audited financial statements of the University of Arizona Foundation for the year ended June 30, 2012. The University of Arizona Foundation was given an unqualified opinion by Ernst and Young LLP, dated September 21, 2012. The management letter that was issued with this opinion stated that no deficiencies in internal control that were considered to be material weaknesses were identified.

6. We reviewed contributions received directly by the ICA from the outside organization and agreed the contributions to ICA’s general ledger without exception.

Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures – Revenues

1. Ticket Sales

We selected a sample of 12 games during the year ended June 30, 2012, which represented 58% of the ticket sales revenue total, and compared tickets sold and complimentary tickets provided during the reporting period to the related revenue reported by the ICA in the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures and the related attendance figures.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

2. Guarantees

We selected a sample of 1 settlement reports for away games during the reporting period, which represented 35% of the guarantees revenue total, and agreed the selection to the ICA’s general ledger.

We obtained the contractual agreements pertaining to revenues from the guaranteed contest and compared to the settlement report selected above.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

2 Table 8 Page 92 of 118

Ann Weaver Hart, Ph.D. President and Chief Executive The University of Arizona Page 3

Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures – Revenues (continued)

3. Contributions

We compared each major revenue account to prior period amounts and budget estimates.

We obtained and documented our understanding of any significant variations.

During the reporting period, there were three individual contributions from the University of Arizona Foundation which constituted 35% of all contributions received.

4. Third Party Support and Benefits Provided by a Third-Party

We obtained the summary of revenues from affiliated and outside organizations as of the end of the reporting period.

We selected a sample of 3 contracts, which represented 37% of the third party support revenue and compared and agreed each selection to supporting documentation (contract) and to ICA’s general ledger.

We recalculated totals.

No significant exceptions noted.

5. Direct Institutional Support

We compared the direct institutional support recorded by the ICA during the reporting period with corroborative supporting documentation pursuant to the Arizona State Board of Regents Policies for tuition waivers.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

6. Indirect Facilities and Administrative Support

We obtained and documented an understanding of the ICA’s methodology for allocating indirect facilities support and considered the reasonableness of the method.

We compared the indirect ICA support recorded by the ICA in its general ledger system during the reporting period with ICA’s stated methodology.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

7. NCAA/Conference Distributions (Including All Tournament Revenues)

We obtained and inspected a sample of 4 receipts from the conference agreement related to ICA’s participation in revenues from tournaments during the reporting period, which represented 87% of the NCAA/conference distributions (including all tournament revenues), and gained an understanding of the relevant terms and conditions.

3 Table 8 Page 93 of 118

Ann Weaver Hart, Ph.D. President and Chief Executive The University of Arizona Page 4

Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures – Revenues (continued)

NCAA/Conference Distributions (Including All Tournament Revenues) (continued)

We compared and agreed the related revenues to the ICA’s general ledger.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

8. Program Concessions, Novelty and Parking

We compared and agreed program concessions, novelty and parking revenue to supporting schedules.

We selected and compared a sample of 5 receipts obtained from the supporting schedules, which represented 42% of the program sales, concessions, novelty sales and parking revenue total, to supporting documentation.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

9. Royalties, Licensing, Advertisements and Sponsorships

We obtained the summary of revenues from royalties, licensing, advertisement and sponsorships as of the end of the reporting period.

We selected a sample of 2 receipts from the summary, which represented 50% of the royalties, licensing, advertisements and sponsorships revenue total, and inspected supporting documentation including the related agreements in order to gain an understanding of the relevant terms and conditions.

We compared and agreed the related revenues to the ICA’s general ledger.

We recalculated totals.

No significant exceptions noted.

10. Endowment and Investment Income

We obtained and inspected a sample of 4 receipts of endowment income, representing 49% of the endowment and investment income revenue total, and gained an understanding of the relevant terms and conditions.

We compared and agreed the classification and use of endowment and investment income reported in the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures during the reporting period to the uses of income defined within related endowment agreements reviewed.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

4 Table 8 Page 94 of 118

Ann Weaver Hart, Ph.D. President and Chief Executive The University of Arizona Page 5

Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures – Revenues (continued)

11. Other Revenue

We compared and agreed other revenue to supporting schedules.

We compared each major other revenue account to prior period amounts and budget estimates. We obtained and documented an understanding of any significant variations.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures – Expenditures

1. Athletic Student Aid

We selected a sample of 15 students from the listing of institutional student aid recipients during the reporting period.

We obtained individual student-account detail for each selection and compared total aid allocated from the related aid award letter to the student’s account.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

2. Guarantees

We obtained and inspected 5 away-game settlement reports received by the ICA during the reporting period, which represented 65% of the guarantees expense total, and agreed each selection to supporting documentation (settlement reports) and to ICA’s general ledger.

We obtained and inspected the contractual agreements pertaining to expenses recorded by the ICA from guaranteed contests and agreed amounts to corresponding settlement reports selected above.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

3. Coaching Salaries, Benefits, and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Party.

We obtained and inspected a listing of coaches employed by the ICA during the reporting period.

We selected a sample of 4 coaches’ contracts, including football, men’s basketball and women’s basketball, which represented 43% of the coaching salaries, benefits and bonuses paid expense total.

We compared and agreed the financial terms and conditions of each selection to the related coaching salaries, benefits and bonuses recorded by the ICA as reported in the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures during the reporting period.

We obtained and inspected W-2s for each selection. 5 Table 8 Page 95 of 118

Ann Weaver Hart, Ph.D. President and Chief Executive The University of Arizona Page 6

Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures – Expenditures (continued)

Coaching Salaries, Benefits, and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities (continued)

We compared and reconciled related W-2s to the related coaching salaries, benefits and bonuses paid by the ICA and related entities expense recorded by the ICA in the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures during the reporting period.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

4. Coaching and Other Compensation and Benefits Paid by a Third-Party

We obtained and inspected a listing of compensation paid during the reporting period to coaches by third parties and contractually guaranteed by the University of Arizona.

We obtained and inspected the corresponding contract with the third party for 3 coaches, which represented 37% of the expense total, and compared and agreed the financial terms to the coaching and other compensation and benefits paid by a third party recorded by the ICA in the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures during the reporting period.

We inquired of the ICA’s Associate Athletics Director of Finance of any addendums to the corresponding contract with the third party and we were represented that there were none.

We recalculated totals.

No significant exceptions noted.

5. Support Staff/Administrative Salaries, Benefits and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities

We selected a sample of 23 support staff/administrative personnel employed by the ICA and related entities during the reporting period, which represented 36% of the expense total.

We obtained and inspected W-2s for each selection.

We compared and agreed related W-2s to the related support staff/administrative salaries, benefits and bonuses paid by the ICA as recorded by the ICA in the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures during the reporting period.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

6. Severance Payments

We selected one employee receiving severance payments made by the ICA during the reporting period, representing 100% of the total severance payments, and agreed the severance payment to the related employment contract.

We recalculated totals

6 Table 8 Page 96 of 118

Ann Weaver Hart, Ph.D. President and Chief Executive The University of Arizona Page 7

Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures – Expenditures (continued)

Severance Payments (continued)

No exceptions noted.

7. Recruiting

We obtained and documented an understanding of the ICA’s recruiting expense policies.

We compared and agreed the existing institutional and NCAA related policies.

No exceptions noted.

8. Team Travel

We obtained and documented an understanding of the ICA’s team travel policies.

We compared and agreed the existing institutional and NCAA related policies.

No exceptions noted.

9. We performed the following procedures for the following Listed Expense Classifications

1. Equipment, Uniforms and Supplies

2. Game Expenses

3. Fund Raising, Marketing and Promotion

4. Direct Facilities, Maintenance and Rental

5. Medical Expenses and Medical Insurance

We compared and agreed expense categories to supporting schedules.

We compared amounts to prior period amounts and budget estimates.

We obtained and documented an understanding for any significant variations from prior periods and budgeted estimates:

We compared and agreed a random sample of 14 expenses obtained from the above line items to adequate supporting documentation. We recalculated totals. No exceptions noted. 10. We performed the following procedures for the remaining Listed Expense Classifications

1. Spirit Groups

2. Membership and Dues

7 Table 8 Page 97 of 118

Ann Weaver Hart, Ph.D. President and Chief Executive The University of Arizona Page 8

Agreed-Upon Procedures Related to the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures – Expenditures (continued)

We performed the following procedures for the remaining Listed Expense Classifications (continued)

3. Other Operating Expenses

We compared and agreed expense categories to supporting schedules.

We compared amounts to prior period amounts and budget estimates.

We obtained and documented an understanding for any significant from prior periods and budgeted estimates:

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

11. Indirect Facilities and Administrative Support

We obtained and documented an understanding of the ICA’s methodology for allocating indirect facilities support.

We summed the indirect facilities-support and indirect institutional-support totals reported by the ICA in the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures.

We compared and agreed Indirect Facilities and Administrative Support reported by the ICA in the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures to the corresponding revenue category (indirect facilities and administrative support) reported by the ICA in the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures.

We recalculated totals.

No exceptions noted.

We were not engaged to and did not conduct an examination or review, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the compliance, of the accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures of the University. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion. Had we performed additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of the specified parties listed above, and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.

Tucson, Arizona January 7, 2013

8 Table 8 Page 98 of 118

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA - INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS DEPARTMENT

STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES INCLUDING AMOUNTS DIRECTLY INCURRED ON BEHALF OF THE ICA BY THE OUTSIDE ORGANIZATION NOT UNDER THE ACCOUNTING CONTROL OF THE UNIVERSITY FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2012 (UNAUDITED) - updated April 26, 2013

Women's Non-Program Football Basketball Basketball Other Sports Specific Total Revenues Ticket Sales $ 6,322,240 $ 5,452,851 $ 100,179 $ 835,250 $ - $ 12,710,520 Student Fees ------Guarantees 1,496,869 131,585 5,000 53,430 - 1,686,884 Contributions 4,720,399 4,514,277 19,057 360,294 24,894,892 34,508,919 Third Party Support 210,600 409,500 32,000 311,500 4,400 968,000 Direct State / Other Govt. Support ------Direct Institutional Support 1,886,192 260,912 273,483 3,779,281 - 6,199,868 Indirect Facilities & Admin. Support - - - - 1,056,600 1,056,600 NCAA / Conference Distributions 5,632,736 5,632,735 - - - 11,265,471 Broadcast TV, Radio and Internet Rights ------Program, Concession, Novelty, Parking 834,207 834,207 - - - 1,668,414 Royalties, Advertisements and Sponsorships 3,432,333 3,323,137 20,115 336,207 - 7,111,792 Sports Camps Revenues ------Endowment and Investment Income 139,284 103,571 8,206 160,680 181,013 592,754 Other - - - - 885,953 885,953 Total Revenues 24,674,860 20,662,775 458,040 5,836,642 27,022,858 78,655,175

Expenditures Athletic Student Aid 3,259,394 467,189 503,008 5,560,694 - 9,790,285 Guarantees 1,890,000 581,321 27,000 123,230 - 2,621,551 Coaching Salaries, Benefits, and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Party 5,497,779 3,112,613 673,901 3,352,265 - 12,636,558 Coaching Compensation and Benefits Paid by a Third Party 210,600 409,500 32,000 311,500 4,400 968,000 Support Staff / Admin. Salaries, Benefits and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities 497,021 252,886 147,001 60,394 9,045,358 10,002,660

Support Staff / Admin. Other Compensation ------and Benefits Paid by a Third Party Severance Payments 1,387,397 - - - - 1,387,397 Recruiting 552,018 341,993 107,272 416,954 - 1,418,237 Team Travel 1,560,477 894,743 301,787 1,792,447 - 4,549,454 Equipment, Uniforms and Supplies 555,975 194,351 21,979 570,220 - 1,342,525 Game Expenses 1,513,915 1,294,574 133,490 471,817 - 3,413,796 Fund Raising, Marketing and Promotion 250,667 34,182 39,879 666,544 - 991,272 Sports Camp Expenses ------Direct Facilities, Maintenance and Rental 5,045,108 689,489 801,024 13,434,336 266,242 20,236,199 Spirit Groups 11,524 1,571 1,833 30,644 95,800 141,372 Indirect Facilities and Admin. Support - - - - 1,056,600 1,056,600 Medical Expenses and Medical Insurance 271,703 37,050 43,226 722,482 - 1,074,461 Memberships and Dues 28,485 3,884 4,532 75,743 - 112,644 Other Operating Expenses 1,439,008 196,229 228,933 3,826,453 - 5,690,623 Total Expenditures 23,971,071 8,511,575 3,066,865 31,415,723 10,468,400 77,433,634

Excess (deficit) of Revenues over Expenditures $ 703,789 $ 12,151,200 $ (2,608,825) $ (25,579,081) $ 16,554,458 $ 1,221,541

THE ACCOMPANYING NOTES ARE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THIS STATEMENT 9 Table 8 Page 99 of 118

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA – INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS DEPARTMENT ______

NOTES TO THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES

1. Basis of Presentation

The accompanying Statement of Revenues and Expenditures of the University of Arizona Department of Intercollegiate Athletics (“ICA”) for the year ended June 30, 2012, has been prepared on the accrual basis of accounting in accordance with the standards of accounting and financial reporting under the AICPA Audit and Accounting Guide, Not-for-Profit Organizations, FASB Accounting Standards Codification 958, Not-for-Profit Organizations and the NACUBO publication entitled “College and University Business Administration”. The purpose of the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures is to present a summary of current fund revenues and expenditures of the Intercollegiate Athletics Program of the University of Arizona (including amounts expended by outside organizations not under the accounting control of the University) for the year ended June 30, 2012. Because this Statement of Revenues and Expenditures presents only a selected portion of the activities of the University, it is not intended to and does not present either the financial position, changes in fund balances, or other current fund revenues and other additions, expenditures, transfers, and other deductions for the year then ended for the University of Arizona.

2. Expenditures Reported by Outside Organizations

The University’s Intercollegiate Athletics Program is supported by the following organization not under the accounting control of the University:

The University of Arizona Foundation – The Foundation is a nonprofit corporation organized and existing for the purpose of providing financial assistance to educational and scientific activities either in its own name or in conjunction with the University of Arizona. In addition to gifts and donations, the Foundation also pays certain expenditures directly on behalf of the University of Arizona Intercollegiate Athletics Program. Direct expenditures on behalf of the ICA have been included in the accompanying June 30, 2012 Statement of Revenues and Expenditures. Consequently, the ICA recognizes revenue to the extent of these expenditures made on its behalf.

3. Significant Individual and Organizational Contributions

Contributions received directly by, or on behalf of, the Intercollegiate Athletics Program from any outside organization, agency, or individual may be in the form of monies, goods, or services. For the year ended June 30, 2012, there were three individual contributions from the University of Arizona Foundation which constituted 35% of all contributions received.

4. Capital Assets

Capital assets are stated at cost at the date of acquisition or, if donated, at fair value at date received. Interest incurred during the construction phase of projects is capitalized, net of interest earned on the invested proceeds over the same period.

Capital assets, other than land and construction in progress, are depreciated over their estimated useful lives using the straight line method. The capitalization thresholds and estimated useful lives for capital assets are as follows:

Capitalization Estimated Asset Category Threshold ($) Useful Life (yrs)

Infrastructure $ 100,000 $ 20 - 100 Buildings and improvements 100,000 20 - 50 Equipment 5,000 3 - 25 Construction in progress 5,000 n/a 10 Table 8 Page 100 of 118

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA – INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS DEPARTMENT ______

NOTES TO THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES

5. Debt Service Repayment Schedule

A summary of annual debt service repayments (consisting of principal and interest) at June 30, 2012 is as follows:

Year Ending June 30 Amount

2013 $ 3,814,900 2014 7,028,300 2015 7,030,600 2016 8,056,300 2017 7,866,300 Thereafter 152,441,629 Total $ 186,238,029

11 Table 9 Page 101 of 118

2011-12 & 2012-13 (YTD) Intercollegiate Athletics Pride Points

2011-12 ATHLETICS ACCOMPLISHMENTS

• NCAA Team Champions Baseball • 11 NCAA National Individual/Relay Team Champions Men’s Cross Country: Lawi Lalang

Men’s Swimming & Diving: Ben Grado (platform diving); Cory Chitwood (200 backstroke); Austen Thompson (400 IM); Kevin Cordes (100 breaststroke); 200 Medley Relay (Adam Small, Mitch Friedemann, Kevin Cordes, Giles Smith)

Men’s Indoor Track & Field: Lawi Lalang (3,000 & 5,000 meter); Nick Ross (high jump)

Women’s Track & Field: Brigetta Barrett (indoor and outdoor high jump) • 2 National Player of the Year Honors

Lawi Lalang (USTFCCCA National Men’s Cross Country & Indoor Track & Field Athlete of the Year) • 4 Region Players of the Year Honors

Lawi Lalang (USTFCCCA Male West Region Cross Country & West Region Track Athlete of the Year)

Brigetta Barrett (USTFCCA West Region Female Field Athlete of the Year)

Natasha Marks (ITA Division I Southwest Region Senior of the Year) Table 9 Page 102 of 118

2011-12 ATHLETICS ACCOMPLISHMENTS (con’t)

• N4A Wilma Rudolph Award

Kevin Parrom (men’s basketball) • 2 All-District Teams

Kyle Fogg (men’s basketball All-District IX)

Solomon Hill (men’s basketball All-District 20) • Pac-12 Conference Co-Champions Baseball • 6 Pac-12 Conference Athletes of the Year Awards

Lawi Lalang (Cross Country Runner & Newcomer of the Year)

Alex Mejia (Baseball Player of the Year & Defensive Player of the Year)

Ben Grado (Diver of the Year)

Nick Ross (Men’s Field Athlete of the Year) • 9 Pac-12 Individual/Relay Team Champions Men’s Cross Country: Lawi Lalang

Men’s Swimming & Diving: Carl Mickelson (100 breast; 200 breast)

Men’s Track & Field: Lawi Lalang (1,500 meter); Nick Ross (high jump); Stephen Sambu (10,000 meter)

Women’s Track & Field: Brigetta Barrett (high jump); Georganne Moline (400-meter hurdles); 4X400 Meter Relay (Shapri Romero, Echos Blevins, Tamara Pridgett, Georganne Moline) Table 9 Page 103 of 118

2011-12 ATHLETICS ACCOMPLISHMENTS (con’t)

• Pac-12 Sportsmanship Award

Bryson Bierne (football) • Pac-12 Conference Medal Winners

Ben Grado (men’s diving) Katie Matusik (gymnastics) • 2 Mountain Pacific Sports Federation Athletes of the Year Lawi Lalang (Indoor Track & Field) Brigetta Barrett (Indoor Track & Field) • 4 Mountain Pacific Sports Federation Individual Champions Men’s Track & Field: Lawi Lalang (3,000 meter); Nick Ross (high jump) Women’s Track & Field: Brigetta Barrett (high jump); Julie LaBonte’ (shot put) • 107 All-American Honors 4 baseball; 1 women’s basketball; 1 men’s cross country; 1 women’s cross country; 1 football; 1 gymnastics; 42 men’s swimming & diving; 30 women’s swimming & diving; 17 men’s track & field; 9 women’s track & field. Table 9 Page 104 of 118

2011-12 COACHES ACCOMPLISHMENTS • 7 Coaching Honors Andy Lopez (Collegiate Baseball & Perfect Game National Coach of the Year, Pac-12 Coach of the Year) Shaun Cole (Collegiate Baseball National Pitching Coach of the Year) James Li (USTFCCA West Region Men’s Assistant Coach of the Year) Sheldon Blockburger (USTFCCCA West Region Women’s Assistant Coach of the Year) Omar Ojeda (Pac-12 Diving Coach of the Year) Table 9 Page 105 of 118

2012-13 (YTD) ATHLETICS ACCOMPLISHMENTS

• Team Champions Gildan New Mexico Football Bowl • 9 NCAA National Individual/Relay Team Champions

Men’s Swimming & Diving: Kevin Cordes (200 Breast & 100 Breast); 400 Medley Relay (Kevin Cordes, Mitchell Friedemann, Giles Smith, Nimrod Shapira Bar-Or)

Women’s Swimming & Diving: Margo Geer (50 & 100 Free; Samantha Pickens (1M diving)

Men’s Indoor Track & Field: Lawi Lalang (mile & 3,000 meter)

Women’s Indoor Track & Field: Brigetta Barrett (high jump) • 2 National Athlete of the Year Honors Lawi Lalang (USTFCCA Indoor Track Athlete of the Year (2nd consecutive year); Division I Indoor National Men’s Track Athlete of the Year)

Kevin Cordes (NCAA Men’s Swimmer of the Year) • 2 Region Player of the Year Honors

Lawi Lalang (USTFCCA Male West Region Cross Country Athlete of the Year & West Region Track Athlete of the Year, 2nd consecutive year in both catagories) • 4 Pac-12 Athletes of the Year Lawi Lalang (Cross Country Male Athlete of the Year) Kevin Cordes (Men’s Swimmer of the Year) Rafael Quintero (Men’s Swimming Newcomer of the Year) Samantha Pickens (Women’s Diver of the Year) Table 9 Page 106 of 118

2012-13 (YTD) ATHLETICS ACCOMPLISHMENTS

• 4 All-District Honors Solomon Hill (NABC All-District 20; USBWA All-District IX)

Mark Lyons (NABC All-District 20; USBWA All-District IX) • Pac-12 Individual Champion Lawi Lalang (Cross Country, 2nd consecutive year) • 2 MPSF Individual Champions

Brigetta Barrett (high jump)

Julie Labonte’ (shot put) Table 9 Page 107 of 118

2011-12 ACADEMIC CHAMPIONS

• USTFCCCA Indoor Field Scholar Athlete of the Year Brigetta Barrett (women’s track & field, 2nd consecutive year) • 10 Academic All-America Scholars Philip Bagdade (men’s golf); Rebecca Cardenas (gymnastics); Katie Matusik (gymnastics); Britnie Jones (gymnastics); Aubree Cristello (gymnastics); Barbara Donaldson (gymnastics); Shana Sangston (gymnastics); Austen Thompon (men’s swimming & diving); Edgar Rivera-Morales (men’s track & field); Brigetta Barrett (women’s track & field) • 4 CoSIDA Academic All-District Paul Vassallo (football); Austen Thompson (men’s swimming & diving); Edgar Rivera-Morales (men’s track & field); Brigetta Barrett (women’s track & field) • Merrill P. Freeman Medal Recipient Hanna Henson (cross country) • 4 Pac-12 Postgraduate Scholarship Recipients Trace Biskin (football); Ainsley Oliver (diving), Andy Guerra (diving), Rebecca Cardenas (gymnastics) • Pac-12/MSPF All-Academic Teams 103 student-athletes were named to the Pac-12 and /or MSPF All-Academic Teams. Table 9 Page 108 of 118

2011-12 ACADEMIC CHAMPIONS (con’t)

• GPA 61 student-athletes had a fall or spring semester GPA of 4.0 with 18 earning a 4.0 cumulative GPA for both semesters. 115 student- athletes earned a 4.0 GPA for the summer semester. 214 student-athletes achieved a 3.0 or higher in the fall semester, 209 in the spring semester and 223 student-athletes averaged a 3.0 or higher GPA for the academic year. 183 student-athletes have a cumulative GPA of 3.0 or above. • APR/GSR Gymnastics earned a perfect 1000 multiyear APR based on the four most recent academic years ending in 2011-12 (2013 NCAA release). Men’s Basketball achieved a 969 multiyear APR; Football earned a 956 multiyear APR (2013 NCAA release). 6 teams scored a perfect 1000 annual APR (2013 NCAA release) (men’s basketball, women’s cross country, women’s golf, gymnastics, women’s swimming & diving, and women’s tennis). A total of 18 teams (including the 6 above) earned an annual APR score 950 or above (2013 NCAA release). Women’s Tennis achieved a 100% GSR. Table 9 Page 109 of 118

2012-13 (YTD) ACADEMIC CHAMPIONS • NCAA Postgraduate Scholar Award John Bonano (football) • Pac-12 Scholar Athlete of the Year John Bonano (football) • CoSIDA Capital One Academic All-America Team John Bonano (football) • CoSIDA Capital One Academic All-District Team John Bonano (football) • Merrill P. Freeman Medal Jonathan Denton Schneider (swimming) • 2 UA Pillars of Excellence Awards John Bonano (football) Megan Meyer (cross country) • 2 UA Outstanding Senior Awards Megan Meyer, Dept of Nutritional Sciences (cross country) Jonathan Denton Schneider, Dept of Economics (swimming) Table 9 Page 110 of 118

COMMUNITY SERVICE

• Over 3,900 hours of community service were served by 386 student- athletes. • All 19 sports teams participated in community service and worked with over 50 Tucson organizations. • Gymnastics team served over 700 hours, averaging to approximately 42 hours per gymnast.

CATS LIFE SKILLS AND LEADERSHIP

• Nike Internships: Victoria Moore (volleyball) and James Eichberger (track & field) • STEP UP! Program • The STEP UP! Be a Leader, Make a Difference, a bystander intervention program, was developed in 2007 by Becky Bell, UA Associate Athletics Director for C.A.T.S. Life Skills. Hundreds of Division I universities have adopted and implemented the STEP UP! Program. Since the STEP UP! website was launched in August 2009, 53,000 site visits and over 130,000 page visits have been made to the website (www.stepupprogram.org). • The University of Arizona hosted the “National Facilitator Training and Conference” in May 2012, in Tucson. The NCAA is sponsored 30 institutions (2 people per school) to attend and 150 people from different areas on campus were in attendance (Campus Health, Greek Life, Residence Life, Dean of Students, etc.) Table 9 Page 111 of 118

BUDGET

• ICA is well supported by The University of Arizona and the Arizona Board of Regents and receives 315 tuition waivers annually at a current value of $6.2 million. Additionally, the university does not charge ICA for the majority of utilities it uses each year which is currently estimated to be $1.056 million. These two items total 9.4% of ICA’s total expenditure budget of $77.4 million.

• ICA is responsible for covering the balance of its budget (90.6%) through self generated funds such as; ticket sales, media rights fees, corporate sponsorships, private donations, concessions and souvenir sales, licensing fees and post-season bowl games and tournaments.

• ICA has not run a negative fund balance on the portion of the budget it is responsible for since 1985.

• Effective July 1, 2003, athletics no longer receives an annual $1.2 million allocation of state appropriated monies.

• ICA agreed to help fund the new Student Union facility by giving back to the University its annual registration fee allocation of $495,000. The annual allocation to the Athletics Department was reduced by $100,000 per year, starting with the 1999-2000 fiscal year. As of June 30, 2004, the Athletics Department no longer receives registration fee allocations.

• ICA provides an annual allotment of $150,000 (starting FY 13-14) to help fund the UA Band. Additionally, ICA provides full funding for the band to attend post-season games. Page 112 of 118

Page 113 of 118 APPENDIX I

ARIZONA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM STATEMENT OF ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT REVENUES AND EXPENSES YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2011 & 2012

INC (DEC) INC (DEC) Revenue Category AUS FY11 AUS FY12 $ CHANGE % CHANGE Ticket Sales $22,055,740 $22,004,853 ($50,887) -0.2% Student Fees $0 $0 $0 0.0% Game Guarantees $3,554,302 $3,305,335 ($248,967) -7.0% Contributions $28,411,813 $46,439,166 $18,027,353 63.5% Compensation and Benefits by Third Party $1,115,628 $1,357,670 $242,042 21.7% Direct State or Other Support (Salaries) $2,414,683 $2,303,325 ($111,358) -4.6% Direct Institutional Support $21,673,401 $21,432,280 ($241,121) -1.1% Indirect Facilities and Admin Support $2,342,727 $2,504,276 $161,549 6.9% NCAA Conference Distributions $22,175,751 $24,779,551 $2,603,800 11.7% Broadcast Television Radio Rights $0 $0 $0 0.0% Program Sales, Concessions, Parking $3,669,357 $3,737,892 $68,535 1.9% Royalties, Licensing, Advertising, Spons $17,657,137 $18,725,270 $1,068,133 6.0% Sports Camps $263,764 $293,915 $30,151 11.4% Endowment and Investment Income $1,219,356 $1,640,045 $420,689 34.5% Other $897,068 $1,525,415 $628,347 70.0% Total Revenues $127,450,727 $150,048,993 $22,598,266 17.7%

Expense Category Athletic Student Aid $24,136,182 $25,323,481 $1,187,299 4.9% Guarantees $4,808,884 $5,249,578 $440,694 9.2% Coaching Salaries, Benefits, and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities. $23,378,847 $26,523,390 $3,144,543 13.5% Coaching Other Compensation and Benefits Paid by a Third Party $990,004 $1,227,061 $237,057 23.9% Support Staff/Administrative Salaries, Benefits and Bonuses Paid by the University and Related Entities $18,636,819 $19,806,989 $1,170,170 6.3% Support Staff/Administrative Other Compensation and Benefits Paid by a Third Party $125,623 $130,610 $4,987 4.0% Severance Payments $0 $5,018,817 $5,018,817 0.0% Recruiting $2,042,345 $2,516,473 $474,128 23.2% Team Travel $9,104,773 $9,382,414 $277,641 3.0% Equipment, Uniforms and Supplies $4,271,430 $5,068,385 $796,955 18.7% Game Expenses $6,286,385 $7,224,625 $938,240 14.9% Fund Raising, Marketing and Promotion $4,213,532 $4,411,767 $198,235 4.7% Sports Camp Expenses $242,949 $149,002 ($93,947) -38.7% Direct Facilities, Maintenance and Rental $17,227,802 $26,898,909 $9,671,107 56.1% Spirit Groups $317,238 $213,238 ($104,000) -32.8% Indirect Facilities and Administrative Support $2,342,726 $2,504,274 $161,548 6.9% Medical Expenses and Medical Insurance $2,365,766 $2,443,156 $77,390 3.3% Memberships and Dues $208,016 $200,615 ($7,401) -3.6% Other Operating Expenses: $7,697,293 $10,372,103 $2,674,810 34.8% Total Operating Expenses $128,396,614 $154,664,887 $26,268,273 20.5%

Net Revenues Over (Under) Expenses ($945,887) ($4,615,894) ($3,670,007) 388.0% Page 114 of 118

Page 115 of 118

Appendix II

NCAA Academic Progress Report Questions & Answers

What is the definition of the Academic Progress Rate (APR)? The APR is a real-time assessment of a team's academic performance, which awards two points each term to scholarship student-athletes who meet academic-eligibility standards and who remain with the institution. A team's APR is the total points earned by the team at a given time divided by the total points possible.

What is the Graduation Success Rate (GSR)? The GSR is an alternative graduation-rate methodology established by the NCAA. The new rate, which will supplement and not replace the federal methodology, credits institutions for incoming transfers who graduate. This will not adversely affect the team rate for outgoing transfers who leave the institution as long as they would have been academically eligible had they returned. The new rate also accounts for midyear enrollees and will be calculated for every sport.

Why is the NCAA implementing this new academic program? The APR is part of a new academic reform program related to initial eligibility for prospective student-athletes and term-by-term progress toward earning a degree for current student-athletes. The new academic measurements will hold teams accountable and lead to increased academic success and graduation for student- athletes.

Why was an APR cut score of 925 selected? An APR score of 925 correlates to an expected graduation rate of approximately 50 percent, using the federal graduation rate methodology.

What is the contemporaneous or real-time penalty? These are the most immediate penalties in the academic-reform structure. They occur when a team's APR (after an appropriate squad-size adjustment) is under the "cut" score (925) and loses a student-athlete who would not have been academically eligible had he or she returned to the institution (what's known as "0-for-2" under the APR calculations). A contemporaneous penalty means that teams cannot re-award that grant-in-aid to another player for one year. Page 116 of 118

What is the purpose of the contemporaneous penalty? The contemporaneous penalties are meant to give immediate feedback to specific teams, to inform them that some of their student-athletes are on the wrong track and need to make changes to turn things around academically. It is part of a larger academic reform package designed to improve the academic success and graduation of student-athletes.

How are contemporaneous penalties determined? Teams with an APR below the "cut" score are subject to contemporaneous penalties when a student-athlete on that team withdraws from the institution, does not return the following fall term and would not have been academically eligible to compete during the regular academic term following his or her departure.

Is the contemporaneous penalty applicable only for student-athletes who are "0- for-2" for the year, or "0-for-2" in any term? A student-athlete subjects the institution to a penalty if he or she is "0-for-2" (student- athlete left the institution and would not have been academically eligible had he or she returned) for any regular academic term. A student-athlete who is a 2-for-2 in the fall semester but 0-for-2 in the spring semester (2-for-4 for the year) does subject the institution to penalty.

What is the maximum contemporaneous penalty to be imposed on each team? A maximum limit on the number of scholarships a team could lose in a given year has been set. The limit is approximately 10 percent of the maximum financial aid limit in the specific sport. A team is not subject to penalties in excess of this capped amount, unless the team has carryover penalties from the previous year. In addition, contemporaneous penalties are applied in addition to any other financial aid restrictions imposed on a team (e.g., penalties imposed due to infractions).

Is the penalty taken off the NCAA maximum team limit? The contemporaneous penalties will be deducted from the NCAA maximum team financial aid limit, even if a team does not award the NCAA maximum number of scholarships in that sport.

EXAMPLE: Team X awards 11 scholarships annually in the sport of men's basketball. For the following academic year, the men's basketball team is subject to a contemporaneous penalty of 2 scholarships. The NCAA maximum team amount in

Page 117 of 118

men's basketball is 13 scholarships. The penalized amount of 2 is deducted from the maximum limit of 13, resulting in a total of 11 men's basketball scholarships that may be awarded. If the team annually awards only 11 scholarships, it still will be permitted to award the usual 11 scholarships for the following academic year.

When must the penalty be taken? Teams must take contemporaneous penalties the academic year immediately following the student-athlete's departure, unless the institution already has received written notification of acceptance of its offers of athletics aid. If an institution already has committed all financial aid to prospective student-athletes for the current academic year and does not have enough scholarships available to apply the penalty, only then may an institution delay the penalty until the next academic year.

How many years of data will be used in calculating a team's APR score? The APR eventually will be comprised of four years of APR data. Beginning in fall 2007, the APR will be based on four years of data (i.e., 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07). Every year thereafter, the most current year's data will be added and the oldest year of data will be removed, creating a four-year rolling rate.

Are adjustments made for teams based on their squad size? Adjustments are made to the APR score for squad sizes to avoid unfair penalties. A squad-size adjustment is made relative to the number of scholarship student-athletes in the APR calculation, thus accounting for possible fluctuation in the short term due to squad size. There is no change to the team's APR score or to the 925 "cut" score. The NCAA will account for small squad sizes using a standard statistical margin of error similar to that used in presidential polling. Variables playing a part in the adjustments are a team's academic performance, the number of student-athletes on the squad and the number of years of data available. This squad-size adjustment will likely be eliminated when additional years of data are available.

What is the application of the contemporaneous penalty for student-athletes who have exhausted their eligibility? An institution may re-award the financial aid of a student-athlete who exhausted eligibility in the sport in which the aid was awarded. Although the countable financial aid may be re-awarded, the student-athlete still shall be used in calculating the team's APR score for each term in which he or she received the aid, including the last term before withdrawal.

Page 118 of 118

Which sports will be affected most by the contemporaneous penalties? Current data indicates football, baseball, and men's basketball will be the sports most impacted by the contemporaneous penalties unless and until behaviors begin to change.

Is there an appeals process? The CAP Subcommittee on Appeals has the authority to waive penalties. An institution appealing the penalties may submit its waiver online.

If an institution is subject to the contemporaneous penalties and loses a scholarship(s), where does the money from that scholarship(s) go? The money from lost scholarships resides with the institution. It may be used for another sport, assuming that sport has not exceeded it maximum team limit and that team is not subject to penalties. The institution also may utilize the money for other areas on campus, such as academic services or operations.

What are historically based penalties? The historical penalty structure is based on the APR scores and GSR and are designed to be more punitive than contemporaneous penalties. Penalties will include additional scholarship reductions, recruiting restrictions, lack of access to postseason competition, and restricted membership. In addition to contemporaneous penalties, if a sports team does not meet the minimum APR score, it will first receive a warning letter under the historical penalty structure. This will occur after 3 years of data has been collected. If a team does not meet the score for a second year, recruiting and/or financial aid limitations will be imposed.

Academic Affairs Committee May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 1 of 9

Item Name: Critical Issue: Teacher Preparation Programs and the Arizona Common Core Standards

Action Item Discussion Item Information Item

Issue: The Committee will hear a presentation on the implementation of the Arizona Common Core Standards into the universities’ teacher preparation programs.

(Critical Issues is a feature of the Academic Affairs Committee to identify and provide an opportunity for in-depth discussion between the committee and the provosts on important academic issues.).

BACKGROUND

Common Core State Standards

Arizona joined with 46 other states to create the Common Core State Standards for English language arts and mathematics. The Arizona State Board of Education adopted these standards as the Arizona Common Core Standards (ACCS) on June 28, 2010. The standards were developed in collaboration with teachers, education leaders and higher education content experts to provide a clear and consistent framework to prepare students in K-12 for college and the 21st century workforce. This multi- state effort was coordinated by the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).

Assessment of Student Achievement on the Standards

Arizona is a governing state in the 24-state Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC). These new grades 3 through high school assessments being developed by K-12 and higher education will build a pathway to college and career readiness and will replace the current AIMS test to measure student’s progress beginning with the 2014-2015 school year. The junior year assessments, are also intended to serve as placement exams for first year entry level math and English composition courses at universities and community colleges.

Teachers entering the teaching profession will need to be well prepared in both the content of and the pedagogy for teaching the standards before they enter the teaching profession.

Contact Information: Betty Phillips, Provost, ASU (480) 965-1244 [email protected] Laura Huenneke, Provost, NAU (928) 523-2230 [email protected] Andrew Comrie, Provost, UA (520) 621-1856 [email protected] Stephanie Jacobson, ABOR (602) 229-2529 [email protected] Academic Affairs Committee May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #3 Page 2 of 9

Relationship to Enterprise metrics, statute

ABOR’s aggressive goals to increase the numbers of quality graduates are dependent on a strong K-12 pipeline. Ensuring our pre-service teaching students enter the profession well prepared to educate students for college level coursework is one critical component required to achieve these goals.

Discussion

Representative from the universities’ pre-service teacher preparation programs will describe how the programs are being modified to insure students are well prepared in the common core state standards. They will also describe professional development programs with local school districts supported, in part, by a federal $1 million, ABOR- administered grant. Additional information is provided in the appendices.

Appendix

Attachment A: Arizona State University Attachment B: Northern Arizona University Attachment C: The University of Arizona’ Attachment D: The Improving Teacher Quality Grant Program

Recommendation

This is a discussion item; guidance from the Regents is welcomed.

Academic Affairs Committee May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #3 Attachment A Page 3 of 9 Arizona State University Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College Implementation of the Common Core State Standards

Since the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) were adopted, Fulton Teachers College has mobilized to ensure that all personnel in the college, including faculty members, advisors, and staff, recognize the CCSS and are well versed in them. In addition, Teachers College faculty members have reached out to and are working with many K-12 districts. Our priority, however, is on ensuring that the students in the college’s teacher certification programs will graduate with the necessary knowledge of the CCSS to be implemented effectively in their own classrooms upon graduation.

Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College efforts are described below.

 All course syllabi (approximately 130) in both the graduate and undergraduate teacher preparation programs are being revised to align to the CCSS and will be ready by fall 2014. There are approximately 3500 students in the undergraduate and graduate teacher education programs who will take these courses.

 Through the Teachers College undergraduate iTeachAZ and graduate Induction Masters and Certification programs, faculty and students are embedded in schools for a full school year. During that year, Teachers College faculty collaborate with K-8 teachers in, among other things, applying the CCSS to their lessons, and Teachers College students fully participate in district-lead trainings on the CCSS. There are approximately 500 students in these programs.

 According to a survey conducted by Teachers College, teachers are in great need of resources and other materials aligned to the CCSS. In response to this need, Fulton Teachers College has developed the online Professional Learning Library (https://pll.asu.edu) for college faculty and K-12 educators. Materials aligned to the CCSS are being made available and accessible to anyone. Fulton Teachers College faculty are producing and evaluating lesson plans aligned to the CCSS for K-12 teachers on an ongoing basis and uploading them to the site.

 Teachers College is offering two summer classes for K-12 teachers on application of the Common Core. Mentor teachers (who mentor student teachers) have been individually encouraged to participate in these courses to build their capacities to effectively mentor students in the use of the CCSS. One course focuses on elementary education math and ELA, while the other focuses on secondary math and ELA. These masters’ level courses are designed for practicing teachers. The courses will help teachers come to a deeper understanding of the CCSS and will require them to create or revise their own lesson plans that they can use in their classrooms right away. The courses will be offered July 3-Aug. 8. One course will be offered in the Osborn School District and the other will be offered on the West campus.

Academic Affairs Committee May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #3 Attachment A Page 4 of 9

 Throughout the 2013-2014 school year, Fulton Teachers College will be conducting systematic professional development for faculty and staff that will be increasingly complex. There are seven sessions planned for the year and will be part of Teachers College monthly faculty meetings, which is attended by all full time faculty. Fulton Teachers College faculty members who helped write and review the CCSS, have written grants on the Common Core, have been trainers, and faculty with content expertise will conduct the sessions. By the end of the 2014 school year, all Fulton Teachers College faculty members, including part time faculty, who teach in the certification programs, will have expertise in the CCSS.

 During the 2012-2013 school year, faculty were given opportunities to attend workshops conducted by the ADE and various other professional organizations, as well as training provided by Teachers College Regional Master Teachers. The Regional Master Teachers (who work with K-12 teachers in regions throughout the state) were trained in the CCSS and were on the PARCC national committee. The Regional Master Teachers provide trainings to K-12 and university educators across the state.

 In addition to Teachers College faculty conducting and receiving training on the CCSS, advisors, recruiters, clinical supervisors, and some key staff have also received training in the CCSS.

As part of our mission, Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College is focused on preparing teachers who can meet the demands of 21st Century classrooms and teach according to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). Faculty and staff of Fulton Teachers College take the CCSS and the accompanying PARCC assessment very seriously and have been systematically preparing faculty and students for implementation of them. As part of the college’s outreach efforts, we are also working with K-12 districts in helping them implement the CCSS as well.

Academic Affairs Committee May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #3 Attachment B Page 5 of 9

Creating the Future: Northern Arizona University’s Leadership in the Common Core State Standards

The Professional Education Unit at Northern Arizona University is a leader in teacher preparation and is fully accredited through the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). We recognize the responsibility to prepare future teachers to meet the needs of 21st century schools. The Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) is a critical element of this current preparation and complements our goal articulated by the NCATE Blue Ribbon Panel report which states:

To prepare effective teachers for 21st century classrooms, teacher education must shift away from a norm which emphasizes academic preparation and course work loosely linked to school-based experiences. Rather, it must move to programs that are fully grounded in clinical practice and interwoven with academic content and professional courses. (NCATE, 2010, para. 1).

Preparing for the Common Core State Standards

 NAU is a participant in the College and Career Readiness Partnership (CCRP). A representative of the provost’s office serves on the CCRP team, which is facilitating planning and coordination of statewide efforts of higher education in support of implementation of the common core standards. This group is pursuing several lines of policy and action among Arizona colleges and universities in Arizona; defining college and career readiness, alignment of the first year of college, transitional support for high school seniors, teacher preparation, and professional development for in-service teachers.  All course syllabi in NAU’s teacher education courses were aligned with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and the Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) Model Core Teaching Standards.  In Spring 2013, the NAU College of Education established the Common Core Task Force, which is comprised of faculty members from the Mountain Campus in Flagstaff and NAU-Yuma.  Evaluation forms for student teaching have been revised to assess student teachers’ ability to plan their lessons and embed the Common Core State Standards  We have worked to ensure teacher candidates and NAU faculty members have a deep understanding of the intersection of CCSS, InTASC, and their relation to the new Arizona teacher and principal evaluation process (i.e., Senate Bill 1040).

NAU State Leadership in Implementing the Common Core State Standards

 In Fall 2012, NAU hosted the Common Core State Standards Initiative Summit for teacher candidates, NAU faculty members, early childhood professionals, and community members.  A joint Arizona Western College/NAU-Yuma Common Core State Standards Committee was established in 2012-2103 and is comprised of faculty members from science, social studies, mathematics, and English to address issues related to the Common Core. NAU-Yuma has worked closely with local school districts to plan for the implantation of the CCSSI and the new PARRC assessments.

Academic Affairs Committee May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #3 Attachment B Page 6 of 9

 The Arizona K-12 Center, located in Phoenix and administratively housed within the NAU College of Education, continues to provide practical and hands-on professional development workshops for current teachers on the implementation of the CCSSI. For example, the five-day workshop titled “Math Camp 2.0: Assessment and the Common Core” will be held in Phoenix in July 2013.  Under the editorialship of Dr. Rosemary Papa, Del and Jewell Lewis Endowed Chair in Educational Leadership, the book “Media Rich Instruction: Connecting Curriculum and Learners”, is under contract with Sage Publications. Twenty NAU faculty members are contributing to the book that focuses on using technology for student learning grounded in the Common Core.  The NAU Department of Educational Leadership has provided seminars focusing on how principals can support the implementation of the Common Core.  Several grants are pending written by staff members in the NAU Center for Science Teaching and Learning that would provide funding for professional development for current teachers on how to integrate CCSS and the Next Generation Science Standards, with specific emphasis placed on the new engineering design standards embedded in NGSS.

Future Directions

 Continued collaboration with school districts and charter schools across the state to assess teacher’s needs as they make the instructional shifts required by Common Core.  Fall semester 2013 Common Core Summit at NAU to include students, faculty, teachers from across the state, and community members.  Collaborate with the Arizona Regional Education Service and Support Centers to provide exceptional understanding of the CCSSI for our students, faculty, practicing teachers, and community members.  Revise all teacher preparation courses for the new PARCC (i.e., the new state K-12 student assessment).  A small core group of NAU faculty members have identified a research agenda focusing on Common Core implementation to be launched in Fall 2013.  Program review including course sequences, practicum experiences, syllabi, data analyses in relation to CCSSI, InTASC, and NCATE Blue Ribbon Panel recommendations.  All coursework is being revised to ensure that teacher candidates understand how: . early childhood education provides the foundation for the Common Core. . curriculum and instructional strategies may need to be adapted, accommodated, and modified depending on the nature and extent of the disability and the development level of the student.  The assessment system underlying the Professional Education Unit at NAU is being revised to reflect the principles and practices of Common Core, Next Generation Science Standards, and InTASC Standards to support our continuing NCATE accreditation.

Academic Affairs Committee May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #3 Attachment C Page 7 of 9

University of Arizona - Common Core State Standards in Teacher Preparation

Teacher preparation programs at UA are incorporating the Common Core State Standards into the curriculum. The Colleges of Education, Science, Agriculture and Life Sciences, Fine Arts, and Humanities participate in twenty teacher preparation programs that are approved by the State Board of Education. This includes undergraduate degree programs in elementary education, early childhood education, special education, secondary science education, secondary mathematics education, agricultural education, and master’s degrees in secondary education (English, mathematics, science, social studies, Spanish, French, German, and Latin). There are also several programs in specific types of special education and in art and music education, education programs for principals, school psychology, and school counseling, and an educational leadership program for superintendents.

All of the programs promote awareness of the Common Core State Standards, require assignments in which prospective teachers design lessons around the standards, require prospective teachers to build in assessments of children’s and adolescents’ learning related to the standards, and link coursework to actual classroom practice in which they are designing and implementing standards- based instruction in early childhood, elementary and secondary classrooms. Examples of specific courses and sample activities are provided below, grouped into the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM) and for English Language Arts (CCSSELA).

In addition, the UA College of Education is partnering with Colleges of Education at ASU and NAU to provide first, second, and third year teachers a professional development session related to the Common Core State Standards and to investigate the links between what our graduates learned while in their teacher preparation programs and their experiences once they begin teaching in local schools.

Examples of Courses that Incorporate Instruction in the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM): Coursework within Teach Arizona (MS degree program) TTE 524 Curriculum Issues and Practices – Mathematics Coursework within Secondary Mathematics Education MATH 315 Introduction to Number Theory and Modern Algebra MATH 205 Teaching Secondary Mathematics MATH 406A Curriculum & Assessment In Secondary Mathematics MATH 406b Methods In Secondary Mathematics Coursework within Secondary Science Education STCH 250 Teaching Science Coursework within Early Childhood Education MATH 302A Understanding Elementary Mathematics (A) MATH 302B Understanding Elementary Mathematics (B)

Academic Affairs Committee May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #3 Attachment C Page 8 of 9 Coursework within Elementary Education MATH 302A Understanding Elementary Mathematics (A) MATH 302B Understanding Elementary Mathematics (B) TTE 326 Teaching Elementary Mathematics in a Tech Age

Sample Activities related to Common Core State Standards for Mathematics: Analysis of classroom tasks, planning of lessons and units, design of assessments, assessment design, task-based student interview, implementation of three consecutive day lessons aligned with CCSSM standards, observation of a mentor teacher, comments on how mathematical practices students see in the classroom might be enhanced in relation to CCSSM, and analysis of sample lesson plans for alignment with assessments with the Next Generation Science Standards and their associations with the Common Core State Standards.

Examples of Courses that Incorporate Instruction in the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts (CCSSELA): Coursework within Teach Arizona (MS degree program) TTE 540 Curriculum Issues and Practices – English TTE 596c Curriculum Issues and Practices -- Spanish TTE 527 Curriculum Issues and Practices – Social Studies TTE 523 Curriculum Issues and Practices – Science Coursework within Secondary Science Education STCH 250 Teaching Science Coursework within Early Childhood Education TTE 321C Creative Arts: Young Child Birth- Age 8 EDP 301 Child Development LRC 416 Introduction to Sheltered English Immersion Coursework within Elementary Education EDP 301 Child Development TTE 327 Teaching Elem. Social Studies in a Multicultural Society TTE 323 Teaching Reading and Decoding in Elementary School TTE 322 Teaching Language Arts in Elementary School LRC 416 Intro to SEI

Sample Activities related to Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts: CCSSELA standards are included on all lesson plans, tie art and music assignments and assessment to CCSSELA, reflect on how effective students own lessons are based on children’s performance, model techniques for close reading of secondary sources, teach a guided reading group using an activity based on a common core standard, and examine the CCSSELA text exemplars and the writing samples - comparing them to what is being taught in their classrooms. In summary, our faculty is well aware of the Common Core State Standards and is incorporating them into coursework and fieldwork. Furthermore, faculty members within programs are meeting to discuss how to continue this progress and, when the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Career (PARCC) assessments are released, they will discuss how these can be incorporated, as well.

Academic Affairs Committee May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #3 Attachment D Page 9 of 9 Improving Teacher Quality Common Core Collaborative Grant

Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College is the lead-Principal Investigator on a statewide federally-funded/ABOR administered Improving Teacher Quality grant of approximately $1 million focused on the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM). The three ABOR state education colleges are collaborating to provide professional development in the CCSSM to K-12 educators throughout the state. ASU is managing the funds and is the lead coordinator.

Each university is conducting professional development activities with teachers across the state.

 ASU’s Fulton Teachers College is collaborating with Roosevelt School District in Phoenix. Teachers College math faculty will provide professional development to approximately 50 of their K-8 teachers, 17 instructional coaches and principals.

 UA will collaborate with the Southern Arizona Regional Education Center in providing professional development to K-8 teachers throughout the southern region of the state.

 NAU is teaming up with Prescott College and the Flagstaff Unified School district to provide training to elementary teachers in the northern regions of the state.

In addition to providing training to practicing teachers, faculty from all universities will infuse the knowledge learned and materials created from the grant into the preservice math education courses, affecting approximately 1500 future teachers in Fulton Teachers College alone. By working with both practicing teachers and college students, the knowledge gained and materials produced will reach current and future teachers. Their work will ensure that the next generation of teachers will have the knowledge and resources to be ready to teach the CCSSM upon graduation. In addition to conducting professional development activities with K-12 teachers, Teachers College faculty will also produce materials aligned to the CCSSM that will be accessible to anyone through Teachers College Professional Learning Library, an online resource library, located at https://pll.asu.edu/.

Related news stories about the grant can be found at: https://asunews.asu.edu/20130221_teachers_college_grant

http://kjzz.org/content/1303/1-million-federal-grant-will-help-improve-arizona-math- standards

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 1 of 11

Item Name: 2013-2014 Academic Strategic Plan for Northern Arizona University

Action Item Discussion Item Information Item

Issue: The Committee is asked to review and approve the 2013-2014 Academic Strategic Plan for Northern Arizona University.

Background

ABOR Policy 2-223.A requires each university to submit an annual Academic Strategic Plan to the Academic Affairs Committee for approval. The Plan is intended to provide information on the key academic initiatives planned by the institution and describe how they support both the University’s strategic plan and the system-wide strategic plan of the Arizona Board of Regents.

Statutory/Policy Requirements

ABOR Policy 2-223.A – The Academic Strategic Plan

Strategic Implications

The Academic Strategic Plan serves as a primary mechanism by which the Board provides oversight and direction for the academic initiatives and academic mission of each university.

Discussion

The 2013-2014 Academic Strategic Plan from Northern Arizona University includes a discussion of current initiatives to improve student learning and educational attainment, and requests for new academic programs.

Outline of Academic Strategic Plan

The Academic Strategic Plan for NAU includes the following requests and information:

Part I. Narrative Overview  Overview of Initiatives to Improve Learning and Educational Attainment  Academic Programs and Organizational Unit Overview  Academic Programs that will require program fees

Part II. Academic Programs  New Academic Programs  Changes in Academic Programs

Contact Information: Laura Huenneke, Provost, NAU 928.523.2230 [email protected] Stephanie Jacobson, ABOR 602-229-2529 [email protected] Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 Page 2 of 11

Part III. Academic Units – none submitted at this time  Academic Units may be modified on an addendum to the Academic Strategic Plan at a subsequent Academic Affairs Committee meeting.

 Upon approval by the Committee, most proposals listed on the Plan may be implemented without further review or action.

 Academic programs that will be funded with additional state funds or programs fees require additional approval by the Academic Affairs Committee before they may be implemented or enroll new students. Requests may be submitted either concurrently with the Academic Startegic Plan or at a subsequent meeting. Approval of the program by the AAC does not constitute approval of program fees; that occurs during the Board’s regular fee setting process.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Academic Affairs Committee review and approve the 2013- 2014 Academic Strategic Plan for Northern Arizona University.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 Page 3 of 11

Northern Arizona University Academic Strategic Plan 2013-2014

Narrative Overview

Part I: Narrative Overview

A. Overview of Initiatives to Improve Learning and Educational Attainment

i. In 2010-2011, Northern Arizona University launched a comprehensive curricular reform initiative to streamline and simplify student pathways to completion: numerous deletions of degrees, minors, and emphases within degree programs were achieved through this initiative to reshape NAU’s program portfolio to align with strategic goals and fiscal constraints. Reductions and streamlining of course requirements within some majors were also accomplished. The university continues to pursue opportunities for the simplification of curricula as a rigorous framework of intentional curricular design, and mapping is pursued (including university-wide commitment to the description and assessment of learning outcomes at course, program and university levels).

ii. Also in 2010-11, the university launched an effort in redesigning key “gatekeeper” courses and tracking student success in those courses. The First Year Learning Initiative (FYLI) focuses on explicit design of 100-level courses to structure student activities, timing of assessments, and other best-practice course design elements to improve student learning and success. The program has achieved significant improvement in student success for many key courses, and is being expanded to 200-level courses in the near future. The focus on student success has expanded more recently to include both the President’s Technology Initiative and the establishment of the University College (see below).

iii. President’s Technology Initiative: We are now in our third round of competitive proposals being sought from departments seeking to redesign large-enrollment, multi-section courses to incorporate the use of innovative technologies for improving student learning and reducing instructional costs. The program aims to increase our capacity to accommodate growing enrollments and to increase student learning (and builds upon more than 5 years of previous experience in using technology to increase student learning in selected courses). To date 9 courses have been selected for investment, and the first cohort of courses has been piloted and is currently under revision for continued improvement. The Lumberjack Mathematics Center continues to add key mathematics courses to its portfolio and to refine the design and implementation of adaptive, assessment based models for lower-division mathematics courses that have been identified as important elements of student success.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 Page 4 of 11 iv. ePlanning: Academic Affairs has collaborated with Information Technology Services to develop a web-based planning and advising framework built upon our PeopleSoft student information system. The system continues to be refined and improved as we adapt best practices in advising and communication to NAU’s students and their patterns of preparation and decision-making. v. University College: The University College officially began operations in summer 2012. UC faculty and staff promote achievement through a full range of services and programs to enhance undergraduate education on the Flagstaff campus, with an emphasis on the first-year of college as a foundation for student achievement and successful degree completion. UC programs include academic transition programs, success coaching, academic advising and career services at multiple levels, course linked academic support and First Year Seminars. UC also supports civic engagement, the university’s Liberal Studies program, and the Bachelor of University Studies. vi. Extended Campuses a. Extended Campuses’ Personalized Learning (PL) effort was established in 2012 to use cutting edge technology and new pedagogies to increase the number of students earning degrees and to maximize their learning as they progress toward graduation. The results of intensive assessment of learning outcomes are reported to faculty and students in near real time; faculty then revise materials to further augment student learning. PL degrees will be launched in Spring 2013 pending HLC approval. b. Extended Campuses has reorganized student services and advising to improve student’s interactions with their community campuses and faculty.

B. Academic Programs and Organization Unit Overview i. On the Flagstaff campus we are proposing a new degree program in the College of Health and Human Services, the M.S. in Athletic Training. This program recognizes that Athletic Training as a discipline increasingly requires a master’s degree as an entry-level credential. The university’s successful track record in recruiting students to (and graduating students from) the existing baccalaureate program provides the foundation for a master’s level degree. The university proposes to eliminate the B.S. in Athletic Training as current students complete their degrees, in order to move to the new M.S. A program fee has been requested for the new program, to cover the expense of expanded research opportunities and clinical experience for students at the master’s level. Cohort size will be increased for this program (from 24 to 30) with the move to the master’s level. ii. Extended Campuses has been changing its reliance on the Bachelor of Interdisciplinary Studies to other, more easily recognized, kinds of bachelor’s degrees. Community college partners have informed NAU that students prefer

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 Page 5 of 11 traditional bachelor’s degrees to degrees in interdisciplinary studies with attendant specializations. EC advisors confirm this information.

Extended Campuses has offered degrees in public administration for many years. To help students earn the degrees that work best for them, the public administration major will be offered as a BA and a BS. EC has also added a BA and BS in justice studies; the new justice studies major offers more theory than that in public administration. Students who are interested in working for public and non-profit agencies will continue to choose public administration; those who are more interested in working in corrections and in attending graduate or law school will choose justice studies. Students are offered the option of either a BA or a BS in order to maximize their use of transfer credit. Offering these options is expected to increase enrollment and degree attainment.

Psychology and Sociology are attractive majors to many students. EC students need majors that dovetail with community college requirements; the new psychological sciences and sociology studies majors are built using courses with pre-requisites found at Arizona community colleges. The degree titles (Bachelor Degrees in Psychological Sciences and in Sociology Studies) have been selected to clearly differentiate between Flagstaff campus degrees and Extended Campus degrees, to minimize student confusion. Rather than offering BA and BS alternatives, the Bachelor degrees will offer two tracks allowing students to maximize their transfer credits - one with a modern language requirement and the other with a science requirement. The new majors in psychological sciences and sociological studies are specifically designed to work seamlessly with community colleges’ course offerings so that students may graduate with as close to 120 credit hours as possible. Offering these majors as bachelor’s degrees will increase student degree attainment.

NAU-Yuma is adding two new education majors in secondary education, one in biology and the other in physical science, because NAU-Yuma has been unable to meet recent demands for teachers in these important areas through existing offerings. The majors will create secondary teachers in biology, chemistry, math and science. Only the BS is being offered for these majors to maximize the number of science credits that these students take during their undergraduate careers. The new secondary education degrees developed and delivered at NAU-Yuma will increase the number of STEM teachers produced in Yuma, with the objective of thereby increasing, over time, the number of high school students attending institutions of higher education.

EC originally submitted three degrees from Personalized Learning (PL) with the addendum to the NAU 2012-2013 Academic Strategic Plan presented July 30, 2012. At that time, EC requested BBA’s in computer information technology and small business administration. It turned out that offering BBA’s in these disciplines would be detrimental to the BBA program and its degrees due to external accreditation policies. Consequently, EC determined that offering these

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 Page 6 of 11 majors as BA’s and BS’s was the more prudent option. In addition to the previously approved BA in liberal arts, PL is adding a BS. In order to maximize transfer credits for students entering PL, EC has decided to offer students both degrees so students with the required amount of language can choose the BA and those with the required amount of science can choose the BS.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 Page 7 of 11 Table 1 - Proposed New Programs

Name of College/School Program Fee Additional Projected 3rd Year Proposed Degree (location) Required? (Yes State Funds Brief Description/Justification Enrollment & (degree type and or No) Required? (max 100 words) Implementation major) (Yes or No) Date Athletic Training, College of Health Yes No The NAU Bachelor of Science in Athletic Training is a 60 MS and Human very successful degree. However the profession is Fall 2014 Services moving toward entry-level at the master’s degree. The new master’s degree in Athletic Training will continue to prepare students to take the National Board of Certification exam for Athletic Training and therefore continue to fill the need in Arizona for Athletic Trainers. The graduate program will offer a much greater emphasis in research and clinical practice.

Bachelor of Arts NAU No No This new plan meets student demand, and has been 125 Bachelor of Extended created in response to feedback from our community Fall 2013 Science Campuses college partners. The community colleges indicated -Public that their students prefer the BA/BS degrees in Administration comparison to our existing BIS standard transfer degree. We have been asked by our community college partners to offer a BA/BS degree in Public Administration so they can market this degree to their students. This new plan will extend and enhance NAU’s statewide presence

Bachelor of Arts NAU No No The need for the plan was determined by seeking 200 Bachelor of Extended feedback from law enforcement agencies in the valley, Fall 2013 Science Campuses the military, community colleges throughout the state, -Justice Studies areas coordinators, and prospective students. These stakeholders advised that criminal justice organizations are looking for employees with specific skills: leadership, ethics, communications, cultural diversity, an understanding of the court system and laws, research methods, an knowledge of justice theories, and laws governing juvenile offenders

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 Page 8 of 11 Bachelor of NAU No No Psychology is one of the most popular degrees offered 230 Psychological Extended at any institution of higher education. It is also one of Fall 2013 Sciences Campuses the most flexible in terms of both course offerings and potential job opportunities. The degree is valued both because of the specific nature of the courses core to the discipline and because it offers a well-rounded liberal studies foundation. Off-campus students need courses offered via the web, on weekends, evening and in short time blocks. Offering a degree that offers 100 percent of the courses needed for graduation in all of the available modalities is a plus.

Bachelor of NAU No No This plan is proposed as part of the four-year 175 Sociological Extended experience by building on the partnership with Fall 2013 Studies Campuses community colleges in the Lower Colorado River region. It extends and enhances NAU’s statewide presence. The proposed major has been developed in a logical progression from emphasis to specialization to major. This plan meets student demand in the wake of elimination of the previously offered emphasis. Additionally, as the Yuma Branch Campus prepares to meet the growing professional needs of its demographic region it is essential that it continue to develop its own programs of delivery.

Bachelor of NAU No No NAU-Yuma has been unable to meet the demands for 45 Science in Extended Biology teachers in the Yuma County schools. Yuma Fall 2013 Education – Campuses residents interested in pursuing a career as Biology Secondary teachers have been thwarted without the bachelor Education -Biology program offered locally. Offering this program in Yuma NAU-Yuma contributes to the vitality and growth of our community.

This program has been designed with intent to submit an Application for Independent Program Approval Status to the Arizona Department of Education which, if approved, will allow the NAU-Yuma Education Department to issue its own Institutional Recommendation for Teacher Certification.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 Page 9 of 11 Bachelor of NAU No No NAU-Yuma has been unable to meet the demands for 45 Science in Extended chemistry, math and sciences teachers in the Yuma Fall 2013 Education – Campuses County schools. Yuma residents interested in pursuing Secondary a career as science teachers have been thwarted Education - without the bachelor program offered locally. Offering Physical Science – this program in Yuma contributes to the vitality and NAU-Yuma growth of our community.

Bachelor of Arts NAU Extended No No This degree will help to fill the current IT skills gap. 450 Bachelor of Campuses Combining the latest technology and pedagogy, the May 2013 Science in major in Computer Information Technology gives Computer students an in-depth education that is built around work Information place competencies. This major will provide students Technology with sufficient knowledge to begin careers or advance current careers in the areas of Business Analyst, Programmer, Systems Administrator, Database Administrator, and Web Developer of Project Manage. The program is designed to provide the foundational skills for continuous learning. Students will also augment their IT skills with the social, verbal and intercultural business skills demanded by today’s work environments. This degree is part of the Personalized Learning program previously presented and approved. The degrees will be delivered completely online.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 Page 10 of 11 Bachelor of Arts NAU Extended No No NAU-funded research shows that the Phoenix 500 Bachelor of Campuses metropolitan area has need of skilled professional in May 2013 Science in Small business-related fields. On-line degrees in business Business are those highest in demand by students. The major in Administration Small Business Administration gives student a broad general education that is built around competencies entrepreneurs and those who work with them most need. SBA students will participate in internships and mentoring programs. Capstone experience includes the completion of a business plan. This major fulfills Extended Campuses’ Work Force and Access missions. This degree is part of the Personalized Learning program previously presented and approved. The degrees will be delivered completely online.

Bachelor of Arts NAU Extended No No The major in Liberal Arts gives students a broad 300 Bachelor of Campuses general education that is built around work place May 2013 Science in Liberal competencies. A student majoring in Liberal Arts Arts through the Personal Learning Division will study broadly from history, philosophy, literature and the arts. The student will learn how to analyze, interpret and evaluate important cultural artifacts of diverse cultures. The program is competency based with the core competencies chosen from the qualities that employers say they value most, including communicating well with diverse populations, solving complex problems, analyzing complicated materials and writing and presenting well that analysis. This degree is part of the Personalized Learning program previously presented and approved. The degree will be delivered completely online.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #4 Page 11 of 11 Table 2 - High Demand Programs Proposed for Elimination

Unit Requested Justification/Brief Description of the Impact on Current Students Expected fiscal Action proposed action (max 50 words) impact (max 100 words) College of Health Eliminate BS in The profession is moving towards entry-level There is no foreseeable impact on any other None and Human Athletic Training preparation being at the master’s degree programs at NAU. We will require the same Services level. Rather than wait until this is mandated, pre-requisite courses for application to the we are proposing the creation of the master’s master’s degree that we currently require as program and the elimination of the bachelor’s part of our bachelor’s degree, with the program. The current bachelor’s degree addition of a statistics course. Thus, the program will be phased out with one year of impact on other courses/programs should be overlap with the first master’s degree class. minimal.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 1 of 4

Item Name: University of Arizona Academic Strategic Plan - Addendum

Action Item Discussion Item Information Item

Issue: The Committee is asked to review and approve the proposed additions to the University of Arizona 2013-2014 Academic Strategic Plan.

Background

At the February 2013 meeting, the Committee approved the University of Arizona’s Academic Strategic Plan for 2013-2014. As provided in Board policy, Academic Strategic Plans may be modified during the year with the approval of the Academic Affairs Committee.

Statutory/Policy Requirements

ABOR Policy 2-223.A.4., Academic Strategic Plans.

Discussion

UA proposes the following changes to the 2013-2014 Academic Strategic Plan:

 Approval to offer the Master of Legal Studies and Master of Professional Studies in Indigenous Governance in the College of Law.

The description and rationale for the proposed new academic program will be found in Attachment A.

Recommendation

It is recommended that The Committee approve the addendum to University of Arizona’s 2013-2014 Academic Strategic Plan, as presented in this Executive Summary.

Contact Information: Andrew Comrie, Provost, UA 520-626-8121 [email protected] Stephanie Jacobson, ABOR 602-229-2529 [email protected]

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting Academic Strategic Plan 2013-14 May 16, 2013 May 6, 2013 Addendum Agenda Item #5 Page 2 of 4 NEW ACADEMIC PROGRAMS – Planning Request Attachment A Proposed New Program(s):

Name of Proposed Program Fee or Program Differential Tuition Additional State College Required? Funds Required? Projected (include major and Brief Description/Justification Enrollment degree) Indicate Indicate (max 100 words) per Year Yes or No Yes or No Establishing an MLS program would enable Arizona Law to admit *Master of Legal Law *Yes No economists, educators, people in business, government and non- 15 Studies governmental organizations, and public policy professionals who wish to broaden their legal knowledge, but do not have the time or Plan to inclination to pursue a three year JD degree. The addition of MLS implement degrees is an emerging trend in legal education: it is especially program in appropriate at law schools located as part of leading and broad- fall 2013 based research universities and at law schools with strong interdisciplinary programs already in place such as the College of Law at the University of Arizona. Establishing an MLS program would enable the College of Law to maintain a competitive edge in a market where the Master of Legal Studies and Master of Jurisprudence degrees are becoming increasingly common. The College of Law is the preeminent law school in the United *Master of Law *Yes No States for the study of Indian and Indigenous Peoples law. It is the 12 Professional only law school offering all three law degrees (JD, LLM, and SJD) Studies in with a specialization in that field. Those programs have been Plan to Indigenous tremendously successful, due in large measure to two primary implement Governance factors: (1) the national and international reputation of the faculty, program in and (2) the program’s experiential learning component, which spring 2014 teaches students how to apply classroom learning to real life situations. The College of Law frequently receives inquiries from prospective students interested in a master’s degree for non- lawyers. This proposal responds to those inquiries by creating an MPS in Indigenous Governance to complement the LLM in Indigenous Peoples Law & Policy already offered. It draws on existing courses, faculty, and administrative resources.

*Because of the timing of the ABOR decisions on tuition and fees and our plan to implement the program this fall, the fee request was submitted and subsequently approved at the April 2013 ABOR meeting.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #5 Page 3 of 4 University of Arizona 2013-2014

Request to Establish a New Academic Program Requiring a Program Fee Program Name / Degree: Master of Legal Studies (MLS) Requested by University of Arizona, College of Law Initial Student Enrollment Fall 2013 (Sem/Yr) Level Graduate CIP Code 22.9999 Program Description The MLS program will provide a legal coursework and background to economists, educators, professionals in business, government and non-governmental organizations, and public policy professionals who wish to broaden their legal knowledge, but do not have the time or inclination to pursue a three year JD degree. This is neither a pre-law nor a paralegal program. Professionals will take courses in legal areas that relate to their routine professional work.

Justification for Program The addition of MLS degrees is an emerging trend in legal (State /regional need; education: it is especially appropriate at law schools located as relationship to part of leading and broad-based research universities and at law institutional and system schools with strong interdisciplinary programs already in place strategic plans) such as the College of Law at the University of Arizona. Establishing an MLS program would enable the College of Law to maintain a competitive edge in a market where the Master of Legal Studies and Master of Jurisprudence degrees are becoming increasingly common. We regularly receive requests for such a program. ABA acquiescence is also required and we will seek approval at their next meeting.

Projected Student 5-year projected annual enrollment Demand Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5 9 13 15 15 Description of and The fixed price program fee of $18,000 (tuition, mandatory fees, Rationale for Program Fee and program fee) will cover costs associated with the program that go beyond those covered by tuition and mandatory fees alone. The fee will cover the high cost of individual, student- focused time faculty spend with each student, partial cost of the library expenses, institutional and advising personnel, support staff, and operating expenses.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #5 Page 4 of 4 University of Arizona 2013-2014

Request to Establish a New Academic Program Requiring a Program Fee Master of Professional Studies in Indigenous Governance Program Name / Degree: (MPS) Requested by University of Arizona, College of Law Initial Student Enrollment Spring 2014 (Sem/Yr) Level Graduate CIP Code 22.0299 Program Description The MPS in Indigenous Governance expands access to the college’s nationally acclaimed Indian and Indigenous law curriculum by reaching out to include the emerging group of professionals who work with tribal governments and tribal businesses. These are individuals whose jobs require knowledge of the law, but not a law degree. Our location puts this degree within easy reach of over half of the tribal governments in the continental US. Students will engage in theoretical classroom teachings and gain real-life practical experience through clinical instruction and advocacy workshops. Justification for Program The College of Law is the preeminent law school in the United (State /regional need; States for the study of Indian and Indigenous Peoples law. It is relationship to the only law school offering all three law degrees (JD, LLM, and institutional and system SJD) with a specialization in this field. These programs have strategic plans) been tremendously successful, due in large measure to two primary factors: (1) the national and international reputation of the faculty, and (2) the program’s experiential learning component, which teaches students how to apply classroom learning to real life situations. The College of Law frequently receives inquiries from prospective students interested in a master’s degree for non-lawyers focused on indigenous governance. ABA acquiescence is also required and we will seek approval at their next meeting. Projected Student 5-year projected annual enrollment Demand Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5 8 11 12 12 Description of and The fixed price program fee of $26,000 (tuition, mandatory fees, Rationale for Program Fee and program fee) will cover costs associated with the program that go beyond those covered by tuition and mandatory fees alone. The fee enables the program to offer real-life practical experience through clinical instruction and advocacy workshops and other outreach projects. This model is time- and resource- intensive, necessitating a low student/faculty ratio. The cost of the fee covers institutional and advising personnel, support staff for the program, and the additional operating and library expenses of the program.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 1 of 6

Item Name: Academic Affairs Enterprise Metrics Progress Report

Action Item Discussion Item Information Item

Issue: The Committee will receive a progress report on ten of the 32 Enterprise metrics using data from the universities and the IPEDS federal reporting system.

Background

 The Enterprise metrics, approved by the Board in June 2011, are updated periodically during the year as new data becomes available and are presented to the appropriate committee.

 New data is now available for the AAC review which updates ten metrics related to academic and student affairs.

Statutory/Policy Requirements

 ABOR Policy 7-104 (Strategic Planning) requires the universities to submit strategic plans to the Board. The 32 Enterprise key indicators will be used by all entities when constructing their five year plans for the Board and in the annual presentation of the ABOR five-year plan to the OSPB and JLBC (A.R.S.§35-122).

Relationship to Enterprise Plan

 The Enterprise Plan establishes aggressive goals to be achieved by 2020 in four key areas, including academic quality and productivity. Monitoring annual targets by the Committee and the Board for both the universities and the system and identifying any impediments to that progress is necessary in order to ensure steady and appropriate progress.

Discussion

 New data for the following metrics related to academic achievement become available in the spring of each year.  Refer to the following pages for a summary on the progress of each of these metrics. The charts show the progress toward targets and 2020 goals for most of the metrics. Targets and goals are pending on three of the metrics due to recent revisions approved by the Committee.

Contact Information: Dan Anderson, ABOR 602-229-2544 [email protected] Stephanie Jacobson, ABOR 602-229-2529 [email protected]

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #6 Page 2 of 6 Goal One: Educational Excellence & Access  Freshman Retention Rate  6‐Year Graduation Rate  Success and Progress Rate (based on Voluntary System of Accountability)  Arizona Community College Transfers  Number of Arizona Community College Transfer Students Awarded Bachelor Degrees  4‐Year Graduation Rate of Arizona Community College Transfers

Goal Four: Productivity  Exclusively Online Enrollment  Exclusively Online Degrees  Exclusively Online Certificates  College and Other Enrollment

Key Data/Findings  Refer to attached summary.

Recommendation

This report is provided for the Committee’s information.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #6 Page 3 of 6 ARIZONA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM ENTERPRISE METRICS 2012-2013 UPDATE REPORT Based on latest available data; data falls across multiple academic/fiscal years

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2011-2012 2012-2013 2012-2013 2019-2020 Projected Actual Projected Actual I. FRESHMAN-BASED METRICS Freshman Retention Rate (#8) ASU 79.5% 81.2% 84.0% 83.5% 85.0% 80.0% 88.5% NAU 69.3% 72.2% 71.5% 72.8% 73.5% 76.1% 76.0% UA 79.3% 78.1% 77.2% 77.2% 79.8% 80.2% 88.8% System Total 78.0% 78.2% 79.3% 79.0% 80.9% 79.4% 86.0%

6-year Graduation Rate (#7) ASU 55.8% 55.8% 58.7% 57.5% 59.0% 56.8% 67.5% NAU 52.6% 50.0% 49.2% 51.5% 51.0% 49.1% 58.0% UA 57.2% 58.4% 59.7% 61.4% 60.5% 61.3% 64.3% System Total 55.5% 55.8% 58.0% 57.8% 58.3% 57.2% 64.5%

Success and Progress Rate (#7.a)

New: Students who began as freshmen at this university and graduated within 6 years, received a degree elsewhere or are still enrolled. Based on Voluntary System of Accountabiilty. ASU 81.7% 83.3% 84.0% 83.8% 82.8% NAU 85.4% 74.9% 75.8% 76.9% 72.2% UA 83.6% 84.0% 83.9% 83.4% System Total 82.3% 82.8% 82.9% 81.4% TBD

II. TRANSFER STUDENT METRICS Arizona Community College Transfers ( #3) ASU 5,457 5,454 5,775 5,695 5,918 …… 6,629 NAU 1,917 2,151 2,376 2,500 2,606 3,800 UA 1,621 1,617 1,643 1,900 1,643 3,000 System Total 8,995 9,222 9,794 10,095 10,167 13,429

Number of Arizona Community College Transfer Students Awarded Bachelor’s Degrees (#4) ASU 3,746 3,995 4,023 4,218 4,215 …… 5,685 NAU 1,035 1,234 1,397 1,400 1,525 2,300 UA 991 1,028 1,051 1,230 1,094 2,000 System Total 5,772 6,257 6,471 6,848 6,834 9,985

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #6 Page 4 of 6 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2011-2012 2012-2013 2012-2013 2019-2020 Projected Actual Projected Actual

Four Year Graduation Rate of Arizona Community College Transfers (#11) ASU 69.5% 68.2% 70.0% 72.2% 71.0% 72.3% 74.5% NAU 69.3% 68.0% 68.4% 67.3% 68.3% 66.8% 70.1% UA 62.1% 63.3% 65.3% 66.9% 66.3% 65.7% 69.6% System Total 67.9% 67.2% 68.7% 70.0% 69.5% 69.8% 72.4%

III. ONLINE Due to recent changes to metric, annual targets are to be determined in some sections.

Exclusively Online Enrollment (#32) Undergraduate Headcount ASU 294 894 1,655 3,314 5,016 NAU 1,424 1,547 1,767 2,019 2,412 UA na na 23 32 47 System Subtotal 1,718 2,441 3,445 5,365 7,475

Graduate Headcount ASU 700 932 1,368 1,780 2,428 NAU 1,169 1,115 1,189 1,274 1,347 UA 472 515 655 System Subtotal 1,869 2,047 3,029 3,569 4,430 System Total 3,587 4,488 6,474 8,934 11,905

Undergraduate FTE ASU 207 677 1,278 2,592 3,751 NAU 741 820 987 1,167 1,371 UA 12 23 32 System Subtotal 948 1,497 2,277 3,782 5,154

Graduate FTE ASU 579 758 1,079 1,339 1,636 NAU 512 516 564 621 688 UA 329 369 471 System Subtotal 1,091 1,274 1,972 2,329 2,795 System Total 2,039 2,771 4,249 6,111 7,949

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #6 Page 5 of 6 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2011-2012 2012-2013 2012-2013 2019-2020 Projected Actual Projected Actual Exclusively Online Degrees (#29) Undergraduate ASU 80 206 389 0 599 …… 2,152 NAU 253 296 289 365 425 810 UA 37715 9 400 System Subtotal 336 509 685 380 1,033 3,362

Graduate ASU 215 329 417 247 594 …… 1,240 NAU 281 323 331 370 338 540 UA 217 210 218 260 256 600 System Subtotal 713 862 966 877 1,188 2,380 System Total 1,049 1,371 1,651 1,257 2,221 5,742

Exclusively Online Certificates (#29.B)) Undergraduate ASU 110…… NAU 23 26 44 32 33 48 UA 0 System Subtotal 23 27 44 32 43 48

Graduate ASU 112…… NAU 39 37 42 42 45 62 UA 44 56 70 65 500 System Subtotal 39 81 99 112 122 562 System Total 62 108 143 144 165 610

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #6 Page 6 of 6 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2011-2012 2012-2013 2012-2013 2019-2020 Projected Actual Projected Actual IV. NEW MODELS

College and Other Enrollment (32.B)

Undergraduate Headcount ASU 93 NAU 2,130 2,382 2,496 2,493 2,531 UA 609 639 804 System Subtotal 2,130 2,382 3,105 3,132 3,428

Graduate Headcount ASU 2 NAU 3,018 2,524 2,223 1,817 1,420 UA 607 670 690 System Subtotal 3,018 2,524 2,830 2,487 2,112 System Total 5,148 4,906 5,935 5,619 5,540

Undergraduate FTE ASU 93 NAU 1,759 1,995 2,163 2,154 2,238 UA 504 558 647 System Subtotal 1,759 1,995 2,667 2,712 2,978

Graduate FTE ASU 0.3 NAU 1,850 1,563 1,445 1,193 968 UA 378 475 526 System Subtotal 1,850 1,563 1,823 1,668 1,494 System Total 3,609 3,558 4,490 4,380 4,472

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 1 of 3

Item Name: University Academic Calendars

Action Item Discussion Item Information Item

Issue: The Committee is asked to approve the proposed academic calendar for the three universities for AY 2017-2018, and modifications to ASU’s AY 2013-2015 and NAU’s AY 2013-2016 calendars, which were previously approved.

Background

 According to Board Policy 2-320, Academic Year Calendar, the Academic Affairs Committee shall adopt academic year calendars setting the first day of instruction and the last day of final examinations for each university in the Arizona University System for the Fall and Spring semesters.

 The last day of the Fall semester must be no later than December 22.

 All variations from the approved dates must be authorized by the committee at least one year in advance.

 Within the approved dates, each university may arrange its class and holiday schedule depending upon the needs of its students, local customs, and the requirements of Board Policy 2-224.A, Definition of a Unit of Credit.

Statutory/Policy Requirements

ABOR Policy 2-320 - Academic Year Calendar; and ABOR Policy 2-224.A - Definition of a Unit of Credit.

Discussion

 NAU previously submitted and had approved the academic calendar for 2013 – 2014. NAU proposes to move the date of final examinations (bold red) one day later in order to accommodate an exam preparation period for students. Commencement will also be moved back one day to better accommodate families and friends traveling to Flagstaff. There will be no change to Spring 2014.

ASU previously submitted and had approved the academic calendars for 2013 – 2014 and 2014-2015. ASU proposes to move final examinations to a Monday – Saturday schedule rather than the current split week schedule consisting of Thursday-Saturday and Monday-Wednesday. Commencements and convocations

will be the following week with graduate commencement on Tuesday and the undergraduate commencement on Wednesday. At this time, ASU is proposing changes (bold red) for Fall 2013, Spring 2014 and Fall 2014 in order to assess how this new structure works before requesting any further changes.

 This request will also add the AY 2017-2018 academic year, which is highlighted in bold red, to the calendars for each academic year in order to maintain a 5-year approved calendar. The 2014-2017 academic years were already approved.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Committee approve the addition of the AY 2017-2018 academic year to the ASU, NAU and UA academic calendars and the modifications to ASU’s AY 2013-2015 and NAU’s academic calendar for the AY’s 2013-2016 as presented in this Executive Summary.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #7 Page 3 of 3 5-Year University Academic Calendar Proposed Addition of the AY 2017-2018

ARIZONA STATE NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY OF UNIVERSITY UNIVERSITY ARIZONA

2013-2014 2013-2014 2013-2014 Fall 8/22/13 – 12/1614/13 Fall 8/28/13 - 12/1718/13 Fall 8/26/13 - 12/19/13 Spring 1/13/14 – 5/1210/14 Spring 1/13/14 - 5/08/14 Spring 1/15/14 - 5/15/14 Commencement Commencement Commencement Fall: December 17, 2013 Fall: December 1819, 2013 Fall: December 21, 2013 and December 18, 2013 Spring: May 9, 2014 and May 16, 2014 Spring: May 13, 2014 May 10, 2014 Spring: May 17, 2014 and May 14, 2014

2014-2015 2014-2015 2014-2015 Fall 8/21/14 – 12/1513/14 Fall 8/2625/14 - 12/1511/14 Fall 8/25/14 - 12/18/14 Spring 1/12/15 – 5/11/15 Spring 1/12/15 - 5/07/15 Spring 1/14/15 - 5/14/15 Commencement Commencement Commencement Fall: December 16, 2014 Fall: December 1612, 2014 Fall: December 20, 2014 and December 17, 2014 Spring: May 8, 2015 and May 15, 2015 Spring: May 13, 2015 May 9, 2015 Spring: May 16, 2015

2015-2016 2015-2016 2015-2016 Fall 8/20/15 – 12/14/15 Fall 8/31/15 - 12/11/15 Fall 8/24/15 - 12/17/15 Spring 1/11/16 – 5/09/16 Spring 1/19/16 - 5/06/16 Spring 1/13/16 - 5/12/16 Commencement Commencement Commencement Fall: December 15, 2015 Fall: December 18, 2015 Fall: December 19, 2015 Spring: May 10, 2016 Spring: May 13 , 2016 and Spring: May 13, 2016 and May 14, 2016 May 14, 2016

2016-2017 Fall 08/18/16 – 12/12/16 2016-2017 2016-2017 Spring 01/09/17 – 05/08/17 Fall 08/2829/16 - 12/15/16 Fall 08/22/16 - 12/15/16 *Spring 01/16/17 – 05/11/17 Spring 01/11/17 - 05/11/17 Commencement Fall: December 13, 2016 Commencement Commencement Spring: May 9, 2017 Fall: December 16, 2016 Fall: December 17, 2016 Spring: May 12, 2017 and Spring: May 12, 2017 and May 13, 2017 May 13, 2017

2017-2018 2017-2018 2017-2018 Fall 08/17/17 –12/11/17 Fall 8/21/17 – 12/7/17 Fall 08/21/17 - 12/14/17 Spring 01/08/18 – 05/07/18 Spring 1/16/18 – 5/10/18 Spring 01/10/18 - 05/10/18

Commencement Commencement Commencement Fall: December 12, 2017 Fall: December 8, 2017 Fall: December 16, 2017 Spring: May 8, 2018 Spring: May 11, 2018 Spring: May 11, 2018 and and May 12, 2018 May12, 2018

Semester begins on the first day Semester begins on first day of Semester begins on first day of classes and ends on last day classes and ends on last day of of classes and ends on last of semester examinations. semester examinations. day of semester examinations. *Martin Luther King Day; classes begin 1-16-2017.

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #8 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 1 of 5

Item Name: Appointment of Regents’ Professors

Action Item Discussion Item Information Item

Issue: The University of Arizona requests Academic Affairs Committee approval to appoint three faculty members to the rank of Regents’ Professor effective July 1, 2013. (1) Hsinchun Chen, Eller College; (2) Neal Armstrong, College of Science; and (3) Xiaohui Fan, College of Science.

Background  Pursuant to ABOR Policy 6-208, the title “Regents’ Professor” is reserved for faculty members with exceptional achievements that have brought them national or international distinction. The title serves as recognition of the highest merit and unusual contributions to the quality of the individual’s university. At any one time the number of Regents’ Professors at a university shall not exceed three percent (3%) of the total number of tenured and tenure-track faculty members.

 With the adoption of the Academic Affairs Committee Charter in September 2010, the Regents’ Academic Affairs Committee has responsibility for reviewing the selection of Regents’ Professors.

 The University of Arizona’s Regents’ Professor Advisory Committee, comprised of a representative group of distinguished faculty, including Regents’ Professors, is charged with reviewing the dossiers of nominees for this honorific designation. The Committee makes its recommendations to the University of Arizona President.

 With ABOR approval, the University of Arizona is then authorized to appoint its recommended nominees to the rank of Regents’ Professor, effective July 1 of that fiscal year and to award the $5,000 salary increase that customarily accompanies these appointments.

Professor Hsinchun Chen

One of the pressing issues of our time is how to make sense of the large amounts of data at our fingertips for the good of society. The world’s libraries are being digitized, in addition to on-line newspapers, scientific journals blogs, Websites, twitter blogs, email messages and information from many other devices adding to the vast amount of data available at our disposal. The world’s technologies have generated more than 2.7 zettabytes (2.7x1021 bytes) of data in 2012 alone.

Contact Information: President Ann Weaver Hart 520-621-5511 [email protected] JC Mutchler 520-621-5511 [email protected] Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #8 Page 2 of 5

Hsinchun Chen, McClelland Professor of Management Information Systems, has a record of extraordinary productivity as a researcher, teacher and entrepreneur and provides excellent service to his department and locally, nationally and internationally. He was researching “big data” for 20 years before the topic “big data” became a popular and highly visible research area. Hsinchun Chen is an international leader in making sense of extremely large amounts of data through the development of artificial intelligence (AI) tools for analyzing, categorizing and visualizing the data. He was one of the first researchers in information retrieval to go beyond searching for numbers to analyzing text, videos and Web pages. Chen has contributed significantly to scholarship in information systems, digital libraries, biomedical informatics, and intelligence and security informatics over the past 24 years at the University of Arizona (UA). He is the founding director of the Artificial Intelligence Lab at the UA. He has contributed significantly to UA’s MIS undergraduate and graduate education and the top-five national ranking of the MIS Department.

Dr. Chen was educated in information management and computer science at New York University. He has adopted the AI approach to creating computer programs that emulate human mental faculties and intelligence. He has made seminal contributions to the area of data-mining, bioinformatics and knowledge management. Dr. Chen is a Fellow of IEEE and AAAS. He received the IEEE Computer Society 2006 Technical Achievement Award and the INFORMS Design Science Award in 2008. He has served as a Scientific Counselor/Advisor of the National Library of Medicine (USA), Academia Sinica (Taiwan), and National Library of China (China). Dr. Chen is the author of 256 journal articles, 148 refereed conference articles, 15 books, and 33 book chapters. Dr. Chen’s Google Scholar H-index is 64, which is among the top four of all information science faculty in the world. He has received 82 research grants, primarily from federal agencies, totaling more than $30M, including 32 NSF grants, since 1989. The letters of recommendation on Dr. Chen are from the very top people in the field such as Dr. John King (University of Michigan) and Dr. Larry Smarr (UCSD). Dr. King states, “He is one of the undisputed research leaders in information systems…” and Dr. Smarr states, “I know of no peer of Prof. Chen in the US…”

Dr. Chen has made significant societal impacts through his COPLINK System. The COPLINK System has been adopted by more than 3500 law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The COPLINK program advances research in crime data mining, deception detection, criminal network analysis, crime-based spatial-temporal analysis, and intelligence visualization. The COPLINK project was selected as a finalist by the prestigious International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)/Motorola 2003 Weaver Seavey Award for Quality. The COPLINK research has drawn significant international attention and has been featured in The New York Times, Newsweek, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, Boston Globe, and ABC News among others. It was used to help in the DC sniper investigation in 2002 and is referred to as “A Google for Cops.” Dr. Chen is also a successful IT entrepreneur. His search engine work was coveted by major computing firms such as Digital Equipment and IBM. He founded the Knowledge

Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #8 Page 3 of 5

Computing Corporation (KCC) in 1999, a UA spin-off software company to commercialize the COPLINK system. KCC was acquired by I2 in 2009 and I2 was acquired by IMB in 2011 for approximately $500 million.

Dr. Chen’s teaching evaluations are among the highest in the university. He has taught graduate and undergraduate courses on data structures, data mining, Web computing, and knowledge management and graduated 27 doctoral students, all except one of whom currently serve as faculty members at major academic institutions such as Carnegie Mellon University and Pennsylvania State University.

Professor Chen exemplifies the highest standards of the UA through his scholarship, research and teaching and is an ideal candidate for a Regents’ Professorship.

Professor Neal R. Armstrong

Converting solar energy directly into electricity is one of the major technical challenges of our time. Especially exciting and promising are composite materials that can combine thin films of organic polymers with semiconductors to create flexible, portable solar-powered devices that can be incorporated directly into products to provide electrical power independent of external sources or batteries. However, development of the technology to fabricate such solar-energy devices requires a detailed understanding of the complicated surface chemistry involving the interfaces of thin films of organic semiconducting materials with metals and complex metal oxide surfaces. Professor Armstrong has been a world leader in developing and characterizing such materials throughout his 35-year career at the University of Arizona. He has pioneered the preparation of thin films on carefully prepared surfaces under ultra-high vacuum conditions. His characterization of these composite systems has been at the forefront of fundamental research on molecular photoactive organic semiconductors. The results from his research are critical to the technological development of new types of solar cells (organic photovoltaics, OPVs), as well as devices that directly convert electricity into light (organic light emitting diodes, OLEDs), found in the colorful displays of smart phones.

Professor Armstrong’s outstanding contributions go well beyond fundamental analytic methods that underlie the characterization and application of new solar-energy materials. He has led several multi-investigator, multi-institution initiatives to prepare new materials, characterize their properties, and fabricate the materials into molecular electronic devices. Particularly noteworthy is the Center for Interface Science: Solar- Electric Materials (CIS: SEM), an Energy Frontier Research Center (EFRC) funded by the Department of Energy for $15M in 2009. Professor Armstrong conceptualized the Center and its scientific focus, and he currently serves as the Director of the Center, which is headquartered at the UA. This highly collaborative, multi-disciplinary effort involves 6 UA co-investigators and 10 additional co-investigators from four other universities and laboratories. The Center addresses the basic science issues underlying critical interfacial processes, at nanometer length scales, in order to improve Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #8 Page 4 of 5 their energy conversion efficiencies and facilitate the scale-up to inexpensive solar-to- electric energy conversion technologies. Not only is the scientific focus of this Center important and timely, but it also provides unique, cross-disciplinary student training opportunities.

Professor Armstrong has received numerous awards for his research including: the Senior Alexander von Humboldt Research Prize (2002); two NSF-Chemistry Special Awards for Creativity (1996, 2000); Galileo Circle UA College of Science (2011); and UA Leading Edge Award (2011).

During his UA career, Professor Armstrong has been the dissertation/thesis advisor to about 60 Ph.D. and M.S. students. Because of the breadth of training his students receive, they are highly sought after for employment both in the US and abroad by government laboratories, large industrial firms, small businesses, and colleges and universities. In addition, he has been an outstanding contributor to teaching of the Chemistry curriculum at all levels, from freshman chemistry to upper division courses, to specialized graduate courses that introduce students to current research methods. His excellence as a classroom instructor was recognized by a Career Teaching Award from the UA College of Science.

In summary, Professor Neal Armstrong is an exceptional scientist and scholar carrying out significant cutting-edge research at the triple interfaces of chemistry, materials science, and functional molecular electronic devices. All of his activities at UA exemplify the high standards expected for a Regents Professor.

Professor Xiaohui Fan

Twenty-five years ago, the youngest known objects in the Universe were nearly 2 billion years old. Twelve years ago Xiaohui Fan discovered quasars – extremely energetic compact sources powered by matter falling into massive black holes – that were less than a billion years old. Why was this a paradigm shift? Astronomers working 2 billion years into the life of the Universe would describe their surroundings so similarly to our current descriptions that it would take an expert to tell the difference. The “action” that shaped our Universe occurred in the first billion years; Fan had discovered objects across this threshold in sufficient numbers to study them systematically. Pursuing Fan’s lead into the formative era of the Universe is one of the three highest priorities for the entire field of astronomy, as described in the National Academy strategic plan for this decade. Accelerating the pace of this work is the foundation for NASA’s next major astrophysics mission, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST).

Out of great discoveries come profound questions. Given their youth, it is tempting to call Fan’s objects “baby quasars.” Over the past decade, he has led a broad suite of studies that show this designation to be wrong. They are fully grown! As with mature, local quasars, their central black holes are some billion times more massive than the Sun. If matter falls into them too quickly, Einstein’s theory of relativity predicts that the Academic Affairs Committee Meeting May 16, 2013 Agenda Item #8 Page 5 of 5 energy pouring out will blow it away. Given their young ages, it is difficult to understand how this limit was circumvented to form these quasars. Furthermore, the matter is composed of a mixture of elements similar in proportions to the mix in the Sun. However, our mix was built up by stars over many millions of years; it is unclear how galaxies evolved quickly enough around the early black holes for this process to run its course. These issues are so puzzling that study of Fan’s quasars is highlighted in the National Academy strategic plan: “it is now known that such galaxies quickly grow black holes in their nuclei with masses that can exceed a billion times the mass of the Sun and become extraordinarily luminous quasars. How this happens is a mystery.“ The distant quasars are also relatively bright, allowing observation of the imprint of the Universe on their light as it traverses the immense path to our telescopes. The neutral hydrogen absorption feature in this light points to the critical “epoch of reionization” in the development of the Universe, before which the gas was largely neutral and after which sufficient energetic sources of ultraviolet light -- hot stars and quasars -- had formed to strip the electrons from the hydrogen atoms to ionize them.

Fan is also a popular teacher and advisor who has mentored eight graduate students and five postdoctoral fellows and who works with Chinese students through the Kavli Institute at Peking University. Fan’s work has been recognized by the Newton Lacy Pierce Prize (2003), the most prestigious award of the American Astronomical Society for researchers under the age of 36, by a Packard Fellowship in 2004 and a Guggenheim Fellowship in 2008. His supporting letters are drawn from a Who’s Who of astronomy: “Xiaohui Fan has established himself as a superstar in his field.” (Lars Hernquist, Mallinckrodt Professor of Astrophysics, Harvard); “Professor Fan has established himself as one of the world’s leading observational extragalactic astronomers.” (Robert Kennicutt, Plumian Professor of Astronomy, Cambridge University; Royal Astronomical Society and US National Academy of Sciences); “Dr. Fan is truly exceptional in his ability, achievements, and potential.” (Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal); “he is a brilliant researcher, whose work truly has changed what we know about the first big objects that formed in the early Universe, and whose outstanding worldwide reputation has done the department and University proud.” (Hans-Walter Rix, Director, Mas-Planck Institute for Astronomy).

Professor Fan exemplifies the UA’s highest standards of scholarship, research and teaching and is an outstanding candidate for a Regents’ Professorship.

Recommendation: That the Committee review and approve the authorization for the University of Arizona to appoint Prof. Hsinchun Chen, Prof. Neal R. Armstrong, and Prof. Xiaohui Fan to the rank of Regents’ Professor, effective July 1, 2013, and to award the $5,000 salary increase that customarily accompanies these appointments.