Members absent: Bellaver, Buck, Hanson, Ober, Park
Interim Provost Deborah Balogh convened the meeting at 7:35 a.m.
The minutes of September 16, 2005, were approved.
Announcements: Dr. Balogh announced that she has been slated on the agenda of the Senate to present an update on the progress of the Strategic Planning Task Force and to announce plans for the Open Forums. It was suggested that the forums might take place the week after the Administrative Retreat (Fall Break).
Dr. Balogh asked the task force to hold the 7:30 a.m. time on their schedules for meetings on October 14 and 21 in case they are needed.
Continuation of Strategic Directions and Initial Discussion of Field Guide: Dr. Sabatine referred the group to the list of Strategic Directions sent to the members on September 29th. He pointed out that Item No.12 has been changed to reflect the group's suggestions from the previous task force meeting. Also, a No. 13 has been added: "Strengthen professional development initiatives for faculty." In No. 6, "Guarantee" should be replaced by "Provide" as suggested at the last task force meeting
A discussion then ensued about whether "Provide" is the right word. Some members felt that "Guarantee" is a stronger, more distinctive word and therefore indicates a new strategic direction whereas "Provide" reiterates what many institutions do already. However, it was pointed out that "Guarantee" might indicate that access to study abroad is a promise or pledge, something that might be impossible to fulfill at times.
Others were concerned that Item No. 6 asks more of faculty without re-directing allocations of their time to meet this strategic direction. It was also pointed out that not everyone would know or agree upon a definition of "immersive," so maybe the item ought to say "Provide [or Guarantee] students access to "significant . . . ." As an alternative, a revised Item No. 6 might read "Guarantee students access to intensive out-of-class learning experiences, such as immersion programs, study abroad, internships, and research learning opportunities." The consensus seemed to be that the important thing is not to let "the bar" get so low that all institutions can meet it. Can the proposed Strategic Directions be made still more distinctive?
A suggestion was then made to strengthen Item No. 9. Also, in relation to Item No. 1, a comment was made that we can certainly use our assessment information to transform teaching and learning. Learning especially can be transformed by using empirically-based pedagogy.
It was noted that the task force must decide how to make the Strategic Directions part of the plan. Perhaps the list of Strategic Directions should be reordered to tie into the three Goals, thereby giving more structure to the units.
In reference to the Strategic Directions box in the proposed Implementation Guide or Field Guide (also sent out on September 29), it was pointed out that the subcommittee studying other final strategic plans did not see a list of directives between the goals and objectives. Is this where the list belongs? One suggestion was to place the Strategic Directions box under the Goals and Objectives with dotted lines serving as a connector.
It was also suggested that the Strategic Directions be presented to faculty as a quest for distinctiveness in the document. Dr. Sabatine asked if that meant dropping out the "normal" items, and someone responded that all are essential to the quality of the institution. Maybe the list should be called "Institutional Priorities" or "Planning Considerations." Some members saw the list embodying two approaches: A third of the items are probably essential building blocks (the items of quality that enable the university to carry on "business as usual"), and the other 2/3 are items the institution can aspire to go beyond (distinctive components).
The question was raised about whether or not the Cabinet might want the list narrowed. Also, some groups might look back and even get stuck on the SWOT, an indication that it would be helpful to units if at least some of the Strategic Directions were attached to specific Goals. Some persons have felt that the last planning cycle did not effectively merge top-down and bottom-up thinking, so it is particularly important this time to provide more assistance to units.
Someone asked if there should be broad university Objectives, as well as unit Objectives, since a smaller number of anything is always easier to absorb. However, perhaps the Strategic Directions
are the university Objectives.
The discussion concluded with these comments, among others:
- The Strategic Directions should connect to the Vision, which is the attainment of "a national model." However, the connection should be clear in the Objectives.
- We should return to the idea of calling the Strategic Directions "Planning Considerations" and take the list out of the line of boxes. The boxes should be seen as a process map with a feedback loop from assessment to the boxes.
- The idea of using dotted lines to connect the Strategic Directions should be a serious consideration.
- Some faculty will require a definition of "entrepreneurial" as well as "national model." For many, "entrepreneurial" means "innovative."
- Dividing the 13 Strategic Directions into "essential building blocks" and "distinctive components" could limit thinking and reduce their flexibility.
- Using the model of Healthy People 2010, the Strategic Directions could be seen as focus areas.
- Can some kind of report or directive go to the chairpersons or deans at this point, or is it premature?
Dr. Balogh remarked that some ambiguity must be tolerated as individual task force members reflect upon the unanswered questions raised at today's meeting. She asked that the "Best Practices" subcommittee reflect upon the discussion and come back to the task force on October 14 with some recommendations. Since the task force has an information base, she will still plan to report to the University Senate.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 a.m. The next meeting will be held on Friday, October 14, 7:30 a.m., in Cardinal Hall A.
RELATED LINK:
Agenda for September 30, 2005