To:
Congress
From: Congress Executive Committee (CEC)
Date: March 10, 2006
Re:
Priority Objectives of the Strategic Plan 2002-2010
Background
A strategic plan ought to govern the budgetary and planning decisions of the institution,
defining priorities and setting targets for achievement. However, the UH Hilo Strategic
Plan 2002-2010, mandated by the UH system and developed by representatives of the UH
Hilo community during a year of intense labor, has not been effectively revisited since its
approval by the Board of Regents, nor have concerted attempts been made to implement
its objectives.
We are convinced that the faculty of the university must take the initiative for moving
forward with using the Strategic Plan as a vehicle for making UH Hilo the premier
institution of higher learning we envision. Moreover, this progress will strengthen our
position during the next WASC review.
We have reviewed the plan—its goals, objectives, strategies, and performance indicators.
We find the goals and objectives unobjectionable, somewhat idealistic, and so broad as to
require definition and redefinition, but also so broad as to allow for continuous and often
unexpected changes in the institution and its context.
Recommendations
We have concluded that Congress should identify a small number of priority objectives,
publicize them, and work together with faculty, students, staff, and administration to
achieve them. This effort should not be construed as a replacement for periodic review
of the Strategic Plan to determine if it adequately communicates our evolving vision of
our institution. Nor should this effort preclude systematic assessment of whether our
institution is meeting its stated goals and objectives. It is the view of the CEC that
responsibility for conducting systematic assessment (based on quantifiable or
documentable measures) is the responsibility of the administration. We feel that it is the
responsibility of the faculty to identify what we feel are academic priorities for the
institution. Further, in view of the extremely broad nature of the Strategic Plan,
identification of a few key objectives will facilitate assessment.
The 2002-2010 Strategic Plan, which was developed by UH-Hilo and approved by the
Board of Regents, is built on six broad goals. Each goal is broken into a number of more
specific objectives. From the many existing objectives, the CEC recommends that the
following seven objectives be given priority. Our selection is based on: 1) importance to
our core mission, 2) urgency of need, 3) prospects for significant improvement, and 4)
ability to document improvements.
1
Objective #1
Ensure that the general education curriculum prescribed for students offers them
the opportunity to develop the knowledge and skills expected of an educated
person.
Rationale for selection: General Education is foundational to the academic mission of
UHH. Meeting this objective requires a structure for fostering dialog and commitment for
implementation and assessment.
Objective #2
Continue to raise the level of academic challenge in courses and programs, in
order to improve the quality of the educational experience and the value of our
graduates to graduate programs, their professions, and communities.
Rationale for selection: Data suggest that UH-Hilo students have fewer challenging
assignments than their peers at other universities. Increasing the level of academic
challenge can only improve our reputation. The quality of our programs can be enhanced
if there are incentives that encourage faculty to raise the bar. Moreover, there is currently
no UHH policy or initiative regarding periodic review of courses and programs in order to
determine their relevance to our educational objectives and whether their rigor is
sufficient to prepare our students for their post-graduate careers. While program reviews
may reveal inadequacies, a frequent, standardized effort is needed.
Objective #3
Develop a “culture of effectiveness” by making assessment of program quality
part of the regular functioning of the university and using the results of
assessment to improve our programs.
Rationale for selection: Academic departments can ensure continuous improvement in
curriculum and pedagogy by systematically reviewing how well students are meeting
learning objectives in both GE and major courses and by adjusting delivery accordingly;
administration is responsible for supporting these efforts.
Objective #4
Improve crucial services for all students, especially those that affect student
learning and the successful transition to life after college.
Rationale for selection: Student learning and retention are at the core of our mission.
There is room for improvement in the services we offer, and it is realistic to expect that
we can make measurable progress. This objective is broad enough to encompass many
of the other objectives in the Strategic Plan.
2
Objective #5
Address deficiencies in our level of support staff and resources for service units.
Rationale for selection: It is becoming increasingly apparent that we are severely understaffed (and/or under-funded) in terms of maintenance, computing support, student
records, fiscal services, clerical support, and so forth. These services are central to our
ability to deliver quality education.
Objective #6
Provide services to the people of the island and state that are natural products of
our educational and research programs.
Rationale for selection: We would like to have the local community view UH-Hilo as a
valuable asset. Too many of our faculty are not actively engaged in using their expertise
and experience to address the wide range of problems affecting our community. Rather
than there being a flourishing town-gown relationship, UHH is more like an island in the
middle of a stream. Efforts must be made to change this.
Objective #7
Within the principles of shared governance, develop transparent and consultative
planning and budgeting processes, with clear and consistent linkages between the
two.
Rationale for selection: The combined expertise of the entire university community is
needed to achieve our potential. Planning is pointless unless it informs budgeting and is
constrained by fiscal realities.
3