November 22, 2010

Strategic Planning Committee
Monday, November 22, 2010
12:00-1:30 p.m.
Campus Board Room - C306
Attending: Dr. Robert Anderson, Mr. Rommel Borras, Dr. Cihan Cobanoglu, Dr. James Curran,
Mr. David Eckel, Ms. Laura Hoffman, Dr. Richard King, Dr. Lora Kosten, Ms. Julie Lazaris,
Mr. Axel Lohrisch, Ms. Christine Manring, Dr. Jane Rose, Ms. Christine Starosta, Ms. Alexis
Upham, Ms. Mary Beth Wallace
Regrets: Mr. Richard Lyttle, Ms. Kelly Robbins, Ms. Ashley Tyrrell
Recorder: Ms. Barbara Melfi
Dr. Rose welcomed all and shared the SACS impact of separate accreditation. She said USFSM
is on track for accreditation June 2011, meaning we should be a separately accredited institution
in Fall 20ll. Dr. Rose said we need a sense of our institution as it exists now and asked Ms.
Laura Hoffman to give an Institutional Profile presentation, explaining the significance of the
numbers. Ms. Hoffman gave committee members a copy of the presentation.
Dr. Rose said before our strategic planning can move forward, we must revisit our mission and
have clarity regarding our mission. She said the Strategic Planning Committee and the Faculty
Senate are both considering revisions. The Executive Council is scheduled to discuss a
procedure for moving revision forward at its meeting today, November 22, 2010. Dr. Rose
suggested the committee look at the current Mission Statement and see how it could be changed.
Dr. Anderson said we are creating a mission for years going forward, at least five years forward.
He said USFSM will be measured against this mission.
The suggestion to delete “upper division” from the current Mission Statement was suggested by
Dr. Rose.
Ms. Laura Hoffman suggested use of the following words: student engagement, field practicum,
internships, engaged learning, applied learning.
Mr. Axel Lohrisch asked the question, “Is this a community’s university or a global jewel?” He
said that decision needs to be made, and the committee needs to determine the target audience.
Dr. Jim Curran said Tampa is a research 1 institution. USFSM could be a teaching 1institution,
with smaller classes, more individual attention to students. Mr. Axel Lohrisch said this suggested
focus on teaching is appealing, as the student is our customer. He said we need to focus on our
customer, which is the student, preparing them for employment and satisfying careers. Dr.
Curran said we serve 2 communities: 1. the employer, so the students we produce must be top
quality; and 2. the student, encouraging analytical and communication skills.
Dr. Bob Anderson said Mission statements are often very generic, and we can differentiate in the
Values. Applied research, community involvement, and smaller classes could be in the Values.
He said Vision is key for this campus and we need to consider what we see 50/100 years
Ms. Christine Starosta said the Mission Statement should grab one’s attention. Dr. Richard King
suggested it be kept succinct and then expanded on in the Values and Vision areas, as in a
statement that would be put on a billboard. Dr. Rose suggested the statement contain the ideas of
student centered, community engaged, and research intensive.
Ms. Christine Manring suggested we emphasize that we are engaged in student success, in class,
in the community, in careers, and in life.
Dr. Anderson noted students are our priority; education is our priority. We educate the students;
some will go to work; some will move on to graduate school.
Dr. Rose shared a model of building the mission statement (one sentence) and identifying
statement components as tools for developing the identity statement. Some of the ideas that came
forward are:
 What will be famous for?
 USFSM =??
 Define tangibly, what we do that no one else does. We need an identifier.
 Part of monumental university, but small, private school setting.
 Proud that we are accessible. Key that separates us is that we are accessible and high
 Attractive – cost-wise and schedule-wise.
 Internationally recognized.
 Hometown campus – maybe not what we want to be.
Dr. Jim Curran shared Faculty Senate is in the early stages of drafting a proposal for a Mission
Statement. The timeline is early February to consider the draft.
Dr. Rose suggested the committee consider filling in Identity Statements = Values.
The meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m.