Members absent: Shaheen Borna (on leave), Marilyn Buck, Frank Sabatine
(Robert Koester substituted for John Motloch.)
Provost King convened the meeting at 7:30 a.m.
The minutes of September 21, 2006, were approved as distributed.
Modified Version of Goal #4 Objectives:
Before moving to Goal #4, a task force member asked to re-visit Goal #3, Objective E. Because Objective E specifically addresses Indianapolis, perhaps Objective C should read: ". . . quality of life in communities throughout Indiana."
In discussing Goal #4, members of the group made the following comments and raised some questions:
- The objectives as a whole do not convey the idea of a vibrant community, with the possible exception of Objective F.
- Are cultural activities included in cocurricular and extracurricular experiences? If they are, people will have to read "between the lines."
- An Objective G needs to be added to address cultural experiences.
- Ball State's marketing research shows that "cultural" is attached to Indiana University, but not to our university. In fact, we still fight the image of a suitcase college.
- It would therefore be strategic to increase our cultural profile.
- Our arts offerings extend beyond the campus.
- Will "the cultural" be able to find a place in this plan?
- An Objective G would say that we are intentional about cultural experiences and that they are a priority.
- Increasing the level of cultural activity may not be resource-intensive.
- Are cultural experiences an opportunity to attract philanthropy?
- We can connect cultural experiences to immersive learning.
- Objective G could read: "Expand [or Extend] the cultural vitality of the university community."
- An objective on cultural activity should be included and made parallel to Objective C, where the emphasis is on athletics.
In answer to a question about what it is that we want more of in cultural activity, several persons responded as follows:
- It might be "success," but success in relation to culture can be "sticky."
- Maybe it's "recognition and awareness" that we want.
- Perhaps we can say: "Achieve greater participation, recognition, and awareness of our cultural assets." We probably need to get the idea of enhancement of cultural vitality in the wording, too.
- If we add an Objective G, it should be different than Objective B under Goal 3.
Provost King then closed the discussion on a proposed Objective G and said that an e-mail with suggested wording could be sent to the group. However, there is some urgency because the Board of Trustees will need our draft for its retreat on October 6-8.
There was also a brief discussion of Objective D, particularly in regard to the word "enhance." Instead, do we want to "increase" the climate supporting diversity? One response was that we want to "improve" it because there is a great need to do so.
Supporting Objectives:
Provost King said that the Supporting Objectives will be placed under each goal. The following comments were made:
- Supporting Objective C needs the idea of "innovative use."
- We should say: "Maintain best-practice and innovative use of information technology in support of strategic directions."
- We should take out the sentence "The following objectives support more than one plan goal" each time that it appears after the term "Supporting Objectives."
Robert Koester than spoke to the inclusion of a statement on sustainability, explaining that we must continue the momentum of sustainability initiatives at Ball State. He presented John Motloch's proposed wording: "Foster and support activities of faculty, students, and staff that help lead society to a sustainable (environmentally responsible, socially just, and economically viable) future." In response, the following comments were made:
- The idea appears in the Values and Culture Statement. However, someone replied that this statement is "too far back" and therefore will not convey the importance of sustainability.
- The subcommittee at least partially included this idea under the addition of "quality of life" in Goal 4, Objective E.
- Sustainability could be made an explicit issue as an outcome measure under Goal 3, Objective C. However, someone said that Professor Motloch's statement makes a different point than this objective.
- Maybe our emphasis on sustainability is a differentiating element for our institution.
- If we want resources to go to sustainability issues, sustainability needs to become an objective.
- A suggestion was to add the word "sustainability" to Goal 4, Objective E, before "quality of life."
Provost King then asked for a hand vote on adding "sustainable" to an objective. The vote was evenly split: 9 to 9. Dr. King then said that he would take the matter to the Board of Trustees at its retreat. Mr. Koester thanked the task force for its consideration of the sustainability issue.
Prioritizing Objectives:
Each member was then asked to choose the eight most important objectives. These results will be tabulated as a way of prioritizing the objectives.
Celebration and Review of the Next Steps:
The Provost led applause for the work of the task force over a period of 21 months.
In response to a question, he said that the group will be checking outcome measures for their appropriateness to each objective and goal.
Adjournment:
Before adjourning the group at 8:50 a.m., Provost King expressed appreciation to Heather Shupp for her service to the task force. Members responded with applause. This will be Mrs. Shupp's final meeting as a member of the task force since she is leaving the university for another position.
The next meeting of the task force will be held on Thursday, October 19, 7:30 a.m., in the Forum Room.