PROGRAM PRIORITIZATION Open Forum October 10, 2012

advertisement

PROGRAM

PRIORITIZATION

Open Forum

October 10, 2012

PROGRAM

PRIORITIZATION

Committee Introduction

Overview of process

PROGRAM

PRIORITIZATION

Institutional Comparisons within UNC:

NCSU

UNC-G

ECU

Regional Comprehensive comparison:

Sacramento State University

Timeframe

Mid November

– complete background research

– develop criteria and finalize process

– submit information requests to departments,

Institutional Planning and Effectiveness

Late November/early December

Forum (Criteria)

Timeframe

Mid February

Departmental profiles assembled from IPE data and departmental reports

Mid to late February

Forum (mid-point forum / departmental data)

Late February

Programs complete examination of profiles

– submit corrections or additional data to be considered in review

Timeframe

Early April

Task Force completes review and publishes report

Early to mid April

– two Forums (feedback / questions)

Mid to late April

Programs submit responses, requests for revisions

Early May

Final report with recommendations submitted to the

Chancellor

PROGRAM

PRIORITIZATION

Criteria – a preliminary discussion

PROGRAM

PRIORITIZATION

Success

Concerns

Hurdles

PROGRAM

PRIORITIZATION

What will we define as success of this task force?

What will we define as success of this task force?

Faculty buy-in / support

– the sense that this was a fair and organized process, based on objective, quantitative data

University to be healthier, more effective at meeting our mission, distinguish from other institutions

Programs take this time to be reflective formative and summative

What will we define as success of this task force?

Programs of excellence be identified that make

WCU more distinctive

Change WCU’s image in the state

Align our resources with the strategic plan

Be proactive with a set of priorities

What will we define as success of this task force?

Clear communication:

Articulate reasons and justifications

Forums, website, visual / weekly email flash with links

Faculty / Staff Senate meetings / newsletter

Communication via Department Heads

Redundancy is good.

Clearly articulate the role of finance / budget in the process.

– martial our resources to maximize student success

(One of the reasons the QEP has been successful is because individuals agree this makes our students successful).

This can set us up for the comprehensive campaign coming in the future

PROGRAM

PRIORITIZATION

What concerns do we have about this process?

What concerns do we have about this process?

WCU community - We are a small community and our decisions will impact our friends, our neighbors, our colleagues.

Timing - what are the intersections of general education review and program prioritization?

Tension between strategic priorities and quality of program

What concerns do we have about this process?

Credibility and fairness

The process must be credible. Must avoid any perception that something was a done deal.

It must be clear we are not replicating the previous process. Some previous data can feed into it, but it is a new process.

Perception that central data is not reliable undermines the credibility of the process… We have to sort out artifacts we can control.

This process is a way to make this a better institution for our students (current and future), not just about the bottom line.

PROGRAM

PRIORITIZATION

What hurdles do we need to overcome?

What hurdles do we need to overcome?

Faculty culture

A faculty culture that protects itself and colleagues, preservation of the status quo

Generalizations about faculty culture. We have a lot of positive aspects to our faculty; we must not buy into ideas that we are a certain kind of culture that is unilateral.

The last program prioritization process

A perception or push toward democracy or equality in resources

Data issues – we need a more objective comprehensive data base.

Timeframe

http://www.wcu.edu/31453.asp

Feedback / question submission coming soon .

Download