THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO
Central Planning Team Meeting
July 26, 2006Present: Jim Almazan, Rosalie Ambrosino, Ericka Barrera, Marty Baylor, Lisa Blazer, Albert Carrizales, Gerry Dizinno, Carolyn Ellis, David Gabler, Julius Gribou, Jeff Kantor, Kerry Kennedy, Richard Lewis, Sonia Martinez, Bob McKinley, Betty Merchant, Donna Nanny, George Norton, Kevin Price, Bruce Tingle, Patrick Valdez, Sandra Welch, Steve Wilkerson 1. Introductions of committee members 2. Sandy Welch was elected Chair and Donna Nanny was elected Secretary 3. Rosalie said that a draft of the strategic plan was due by the end of Fall 2006 and the finalized product is due in May 2007. Dr. Romo will convene the Retreat Groups in early Fall and again in early Spring. In August, the ELC will meet and Dr. Romo wants a report on where we are with the Strategic Plan. He would also like for two thematic teams to meet once a month with the ELC to provide a brief overview of the progress. 4. Each Team presented a summary of their progress to date and all team minutes were distributed to the committee. * Faculty/Staff Success: have met twice and they are looking at growth projection, incentives, salary equity, faculty salaries, successive planning, mentoring. Their group will meet again next week to refine their discussions in the form of questions and combine with benchmarking from other Institutions. * Enrollment Management: They are looking at improved undergraduate education, data collection, instructional budgets per student, applicant co-horts, success by student groups, admission criteria, and coordinated enrollment programs with the community colleges. A timeline will be developed and assignments of tasks were made within their team. The team expressed a need for data collection. * Rosalie suggested another meeting to discuss enrollment management issues to include admission standards, who is successful when they are at UTSA, and how to frame changing admission standards to the community. Gerry said his office will be able to provide data from a database that they have developed. * Globalization: need to define globalization, how to better prepare students, benchmark success at other universities, use a survey to determine what is going on within UTSA. Gerry said that he will be able to provide data from external institutions and suggested that we identify base institutions for benchmarking. . Community Engagement: need to establish an identity at UTSA. The team looked at past surveys, need to look at comparable institutions. It was discussed that one survey be used, including all team's questions. * Research: Determine where the future funding is and technology and where the intersection is. Look at areas that have potential to become major research topics and look within each field at what is important for success and how to measure success. The team will look at where UTSA wants to be in 2016. * Resource Development: Resources or financial needs are a thread that is connected to each team. They have identified three subgroups - (1) resource development fact sheet (2) key management indicators (3) innovation * Accountability: Accountability is a thread that runs through every team. We are accountable to the community and to each other. Perhaps it will be useful to develop some guiding principles of accountability that are not prescriptive and restrictive. This team can volunteer to look at the accountability thread in other teams. * Student Success: What will UTSA look like is 2016? There is a need to define student success. What are some of the qualitative barriers? Look at all the graduate programs and see if they are working. * Infrastructure: The team narrowed the focus and there is also a thread here among the other teams. Do we have the facilities to handle the growth? Resources should set the priorities. * Vision/Mission Rewrite: This is an ongoing discussion, a dynamic and living document. There is a need for more discussion on values and to work with other stakeholders such as students, alumni, system, development board, elected officials, and community groups. Rosalie suggested that the team bring a draft to the Central Committee to present to the broader group for discussion. 5. The Retreat Report was distributed. 6. Schedules for deadlines, standards for review of work, and formats will be discussed at the next meeting. The next meeting will be August 24th from 9:00 - 10:00 in JPL 4.03.08 (Assembly Room). |
August 24, 2006Present: Ericka Barrera, Jeff Kantor, Carolyn Ellis, Sandra Welch, Rosalie Ambrosino, Jude Valdez, Marty Baylor, David Gabler, Gerry Dizinno, Kevin Price, Steve Wilkerson, George Norton, Lisa Blazer, Cindy Orth, Mauli Agrawal, Julius Gribou, John McGowan, Richard Lewis, Bob McKinley, Albert Carrisalez, Donna Nanny Absent: Jim Almazan, Kerry Kennedy, Sonia Martinez, Adam Cowdin, Betty Merchant, Robert Gracy, John Davis, Mansour El-Kikhia, David R. Johnson Agenda Item: Update Overview Discussion: * Team meeting dates reviewed. Team chairs will meet with Sandy Welch on September 1st to discuss progress and address issues/concerns. * Enrollment update - some of the thematic teams are struggling to develop a plan where they won't know what the future enrollments will be. The CMO met and gave a projected enrollment of 35,000 for the in 2016 for planning purposes. Each college should also project their enrollments, project new programs, and enrollment by category. It is not just the total end that is important, but how we look at what we need to do, both in quality and quantity. Think of the mission in balancing both education and research. * Mission and Vision Statements - It was the general consensus that the mission statement says what we want, except that globalization needs to be added. The Mission/Vision team will come up with the mission/vision statements and bring them back to the group. We need to articulate values. The focus on a new vision statement should be that it is simple, all the pieces fit together, and that is a continuous process. One example is: Top urban research university. Action items: Team chairs meeting with Sandra Welch on Sept 1st. Mission/Vision team will bring draft of mission and vision statements to next meeting in September. Agenda Item: Workshops * Discussion: The Strategic Planning workshop is video streamed and will be available for review for 90 days. All are encouraged to view it. * Project Management classes have been arranged for 3 sessions: September 26, 27, 28. To sign up, email Betty Settlemeyer in HR. Team chairs were asked to encourage all team members to attend one of the sessions. Action items: Encourage team members to sign up for Project Management and view the video on Strategic Planning Agenda Item: The Accountability team will develop guiding principles of accountability in September. Discussion: Betty Merchant asked all the team chairs if a representative of the Accountability team could be an ad hoc member of all the teams. We want to learn how each team is looking at accountability. John McGowan talked about strategic planning using continuous quality improvement and provided a handout of his area's strategic planning process. Action Item: Representatives from Accountability Team will attend other team meetings after September 5th. Agenda Item: Date Requests and Surveys Discussion: Gerry Dizinno said the Institutional Research can provide benchmarks both internal and external. Information is available on every aspect of most institutions in the country. Institutional Research can create ratios and help establish benchmarks. A team may need subsets of peer institutions that Institutional Research can help the teams with. The use of surveys was discussed involving all the stakeholders - students, alumni, elected officials, UT System, Regents, employers, internal faculty and staff, community partners. Channel surveys through Sandy Welch before they are sent out. Action Item Agenda Item: Public Forums for Teams Discussion: Richard Lewis spoke about public forums. * He suggested forums for the entire process with both internal and external representatives. * Focus on shared visions, values, definitions and broad goals. * Identify teams (10 - 14 people) to train in teams of 2. * Have open dates, feedback loop, information gets circulated. * Richard would like to meet with teams and approach things in a similar, consistent manner, and this is a living process. * Ask for comments and recommendations that are simplistic and strategic and that tell where we are going. Not as much the functional or operational goals as the strategic goals. * May need to plan forum dates in the evenings and on weekends. * The use of surveys was discussed involving all the stakeholders - students, alumni, elected officials, UT System, Regents, employers, internal faculty and staff, community partners. Channel surveys through Sandy Welch before they are sent out. Action Item: In the next few weeks, begin to identify teams and dates to start the forums. Agenda Item: Communications Discussion: David Gabler * For all audiences, simplify process * Accountability and buy-in * Success of what is going on * Internal and external Agenda Item: Standards of Review of Teams work Discussion and Conclusions: * Rough team drafts by mid-October * Final team drafts in early December * Provide to Sandy what you want to see in draft content & standards for review for work and proposed deadlines for important benchmarks in the planning process. Action Item: Send Sandy Welch , by September 1st what you want to see in draft content & standards for review for work and proposed deadlines for important benchmarks in the planning process. Agenda Item: Other Discussions Discussion: One hour is not enough time to cover all information and issues. Action: All future meetings will be extended from one hour to two hours. Next meeting date: September 21, 9:00 - 11:00, BB 2.06.04 |
September 21MEETING CANCELLED BECAUSE REUNION RETREAT SEPTEMBER 22. |
October 24, 2006Present: Rosalie Ambrosino, Sandra Welch, Janice Kramer, Albert Carrisalez, Cindy Orth, David Gabler, David R. Johnson, Ericka Barrera, George Norton, James Almazan, Gerry Dizinno, John Davis, John McGowan, Jude Valdez, Kerry Kennedy, Kevin Price, Lisa Blazer, Mansour El-Kikhia, Marty Baylor, Richard Lewis, Robert McKinley, Jeff Kantor Absent: Betty Merchant, Julius Gribou, Mauli Agrawal, Bob Gracy, Sonia Martinez, Steve Wilkerson Agenda Item: Thematic Team draft reports are available on our website: http://www.utsa.edu/ir/StrategicPlanning/index.html The committee asked that everyone invest the time to review all the team drafts and look for omissions, synergies, redundancies. Teams need to update their drafts periodically. A professional writer will mold all the reports into one voice, remove redundancies, and put into a common format. The committee decided that a half day session was needed for all the teams to get together to discuss integration of the reports. Agenda Item: Focus Groups. Focus groups are an opportunity for input from the internal UTSA community. Faculty, staff, and students can provide feedback to what has been developed, what is missing, what they like or don't like, and implementation. Feedback will be provided to participants. Team leaders want feedback as soon as possible, after the Focus Groups are held. The external community will also have the opportunity for feedback in November and the team leaders will be asked to provide a summary of their team's goals and objectives. Action Item: Eight focus groups will be held the first week of November at the 1604 Campus and the Downtown Campus. Feedback will be compiled in a database. Agenda Item: Vision, Mission and Value Statements Vision/Mission/Value committee incorporated all revisions. Values are important to tell who we are and drive what we do. Each value statement will contain a definition. There was a motion to approve the proposed new mission statement, and the motion carried. Agenda Item: Discussion of Team Drafts Can't work in isolated silos. Must have interaction between all teams. Communication between teams needs to start now. Need a common format. When the drafts are integrated, look at what is truly strategic or operational to put into effect at a later date. A group or office needs to oversee the implementation of the Strategic Plan. Next meetings: November 28, 9:00 - 10:00, JPL 4.03.08 and December 4, 1:00 - 4:30, JPL 4.03.12 |
November 28, 2006Present: Julius Gribou, Gina Mendez, John Davis, Rosalie Ambrosino, George Norton, Jeffrey Kantor, Steve Wilkinson, Gerry Dizinno, David Johnson, Lisa Blazer, Bob McKinley, Mauli Agrawal, Jim Almazan, Marty Baylor, Cindy Orth, Sandy Welch, John McGowan, Albert Carrisalez, Ericka Barrera, Richard Lewis, Bertha Perez (for Betty Merchant), Mansour El-Kikhia, David Gabler, Donna Nanny Absent: Jude Valdez, Kevin Price, Sonia Martinez, Kerry Kennedy, Adam Cowdin Agenda Item: Spring Schedule * Spring Reunion Retreat, February 23, 2007, BB 2.06.04 (University Room), 8:30 am - 3:00 pm * Spring Monthly Central Planning Committee meetings: 9:00 - 11:00 , January 12, February 9, March 9, April 13, May 11, UC 2.03.06 (Ash room) * Team Leaders will meet with Sandy as needed in the Spring * Team Leaders have asked team members to review other Thematic Team reports to look for gaps, overlaps, issues, etc. * Ask all VP's to look at all team drafts Agenda Item: Fall Focus Groups Richard Lewis reported on the eight focus groups that were held in November. * Richard and Dorothy are putting together a content analysis of the feedback from the focus groups * About 168 people attended the focus groups Dynamics were interesting and positive. Most realized that we want to have their feedback. * At all the focus groups, there were discussions on access and excellence, socio-economic development, and premier, research university. * Not a lot of discussion on the thematic teams or values. * Many asked how we implement the strategic plan and suggested that there be discussions in their own areas to understand how they can be a part of the strategic plan and where they fit. Bob McKinley said that to ensure implementation there must be transparency and a lot of communication. * More faculty and students need to be involved. Mansour El-Kikhia suggested the Team Leaders talk to the Faculty Senate. Lisa Blazer suggested mini-sessions for just the students. * Each team report must look at budget constraints to see what is realistic. The budget process must improve and there will need to be reallocations of the current available funds. New funding will be limited. * College forums will be held to get feedback from faculty and students. Next Meeting: Central Planning Committee meeting will be held on December 4th, JPL 4.03.012 (Regent's Room) from 1:00 - 4:30. |
December 4, 2006Feedback from Teams about Reports Activity #1: How does each plan overlap with your thematic area? Enrollment Management Community Engagement * School outreach programs * College preparatory programs (PREP, TRIO, etc) * P/20 programs with ISD's + Community College * STEM outreach Faculty/Staff Success * Will affect the quality and quantity of faculty and staff hired over the course of the 10 years * Increasing levels of graduation rates and standards to improve academic standing will require diversity and high level faculty and staff recruits * Need to determine new staffing and faculty levels to service enrollment management goals Globalization * Recruit international students Research * Increase number & quality of grad students * Increase quality of undergraduates in STEM * Selectively recruit grad students (specific areas) Student Success * Recruiting graduate students * The student success strategy to increase 1st to 2nd year retention rates from 65%-70% by 2016 will impact the EM goal of increasing UG enrollment to 28k by 2016 * The student success metric of increasing the number of students in graduate programs will impact the EM goal of increasing the grad enrollment to 7,000 by 2016 Community Engagement Enrollment Management * EM has goals of increasing Admission criteria. This needs to be well communicated with the public and as such overlaps with community engagement Community Engagement * Overlaps w/ student services (service learning) * Overlaps w/ research (economic development) * Overlaps w/ faculty staff (extended/continuing education) * Overlaps w/ globalization (business in community in ranked in international trade) Faculty/Staff Success * Community engagement will overlap faculty/staff success as a result of some of the programs that will be developed to help the community * Community engagement translates to a better overall impression of UTSA Globalization * Support for global initiatives Research * Get community support for research program ($'s) Student Success * Enhanced opportunities for service learning Faculty/Staff Success Enrollment Management * The EM target of 20% graduate enrollment and 80% undergrad will have implications for Faculty/Staff resources Community Engagement * Career development for faculty * Individualized development plan * Volunteerism (Staff) Globalization * Recruit faculty with global competence * Merit system for global initiatives * Global curriculum development * Administrative infrastructure for globalization Research * Increase in grants applications * Research infrastructure * Faculty individual development plan * External funding sources * Increase number + shape for research areas * Increase lab space for faculty * Change tenure process to reward research (e.g. Publications in top tier journals count more than other publications) * Graduate 228 Doctoral degrees per year * Develop 28 additional Doctoral programs Student Success * Student faculty ration * Teaching in career development/individualism plans * Goal attainment Volunteerism * Promotion policy * Recognition of teaching excellence * Number of faculty to (1) reform curriculum (2) offer required courses both fall/spring Globalization Enrollment Management * The EM group talks about admission criteria and about recruitment. This is an overlap with globalization who wants to see more international students at UTSA * Attract/recruit top quality international students * Recruit top quality faculty w/ international perspectives and experience Community Engagement * Promote communication about our international efforts Faculty/Staff Success * Support services * Training * International forums * Global perceptions throughout curriculum * Technology methodologies * Study abroad * Provide links to global perspectives * Staff/ Faculty positions for globalization effort * Participate in forums * Improve global/ international capabilities * Student, faculty and environmental infrastructure initiatives * Need to assess number of additional faculty/staff required to achieve globalization goals Research * Develop IT system to support world wide collaboration * Research center for intellectual and creative resources * Catalyst for socio-economic development * Link across globe to build collaborations & get faculty & students * How about international/global research Student Success * Technology -> student info & exchange * Internships * Service programs * Foreign learning opportunities * Support/ recruit international students Research Enrollment Management * Enrollment mgmt-desired increase in graduate enrollment * Attract undergrads interest in research * Recruit top graduate students Community Engagement * Internal and external research success publication * Community engagement needed for project research dissemination (publications, conferences, exhibits, speaker series, expert consultants, speaker bureau) * Research overlaps with community engagement when research projects are out in the community researching better methods of teaching/ learning (interdisciplinary programs) * Industry collaborative research * Technology extension services * Intellectual property licensing * Industry access to labs, databases, library and experts * Publicize research successes Faculty/Staff Success * Research directly correlates to the recruitment and retention of diverse faculty & staff * Need to access number of faculty/staff required to meet research goals * Recruitment of faculty * Retention of faculty * Institutional engagement/commitment to research (including adequate number of supporting staff) . Infrastructure for successful research * Multidisciplinary programs to further undergrad experience * Grant development support * Publicize research successor * Interdisciplinary research teams * Recruit top-notch researchers * Communication infrastructure Globalization * Promote global research * Faculty with global research agendas/ contacts * Achieve international focus & prominence in research and activities Research * Faculty/ Staff recruitment goals * Student recruitment success * Student success (STEM) * Community engagement- support/endowments Student Success * Redevelopment of new doctoral programs, key research faculty * Engaging undergraduate students in research * Attracting key research faculty * Multidisciplinary programs to foster undergrad research * Multidisciplinary collaborative programs Student Success Enrollment Management * Enrollment target for fall 2016 * The EM group strongly emphasized the importance of a quality undergrad academic program as a requirement for meeting EM goals. This is an overlap with Student Success Community Engagement * Volunteerism * Service learning * Internships * Career services links to get jobs * Community engagement necessary to identify what graduates are needed by economic community Degree programs aligned with needs of the community, industry, government and not-profit sectors * What programs are needed for athletes to be successful? * How does an athletic program contribute to overall quality of student life? * Community engagement to student success will improve the pipeline of quality students * College prep programs * School administration programs * STEM outreach programs * Child development & family programs Faculty/Staff Success * Student success plan requires greater faculty involvement in campus life and research * Faculty/ Staff to student ratio will be considered * One barrier that was noted was quality of pedagogy and professor availability Globalization * International exchange programs * International degree options * Degree programs with international components * Study abroad programs * Enhancing student success by engaging students in a systematic career development process * Global opportunities should enhance student commitment and involvement Research * Increase lab space for students * Providing "opportunities" which will include research opportunities * Improve graduate student support * Develop 28 additional doctoral programs * Graduate 228 doctoral students per year Activity #2: Which goals and/or objectives of your plan rely on another theme's success/ are in conflict Enrollment Management Enrollment Management CONFLICT Goal #1: Develop and implement enrollment policies and programs that will help qualified students gain access to a quality education, to persist, to succeed, and to graduate * Student success-grade replacement policy Faculty/ Staff Success Goal #1: Recruitment of faculty Objective #4: Develop faculty/staff ratios that are reflective of a tier one institution Goal #2: Retention of faculty Objective #1: Provide a diverse campus climate and collegial environment Objective #3: Address research support and infrastructure through research grants and endowments. Infrastructure support must streamline application process and provide staff support Goal #6: Institutional engagement of staff Objective #1: Promote and celebrate goal attainment Objective #2: Promote group volunteerism Globalization Goal #1: Graduates who are internationally knowledgeable, skilled, and sensitive in order to be successful in a global setting Objective #1: Infuse global perspective throughout the curriculum Objective #4: Attract/recruit top quality international students Goal #2: Faculty who are internationally prominent and activities engaged in research, teaching, and outreach addressing global issues. Objective #2: Achieve international focus and prominence in research activities Research Goal: Become a Tier 1 research University Objective #3: Graduate TBD (228) number of PhD students per year Objective #4: Develop TBD (28) number of new PhD programs Objective #5: Create an undergraduate research program Student Success Goal #1: UTSA will advance academic and student life policies and programs to achieve the graduation rate goals submitted to the UT system BOR by 2016 Objective #2: UTSA academic advising will become more engaged to eliminate barriers to student timely graduation Objective #3: UTSA will monitor performance in "gatekeeper courses" to see if academic support is needed to help students be successful in them Objective #6: Produce more graduates in the "STEM" disciplines Goal #2: UTSA will enhance and strengthen undergraduates and graduate education to increase student success to UTSA and beyond Objective #5: Develop doctoral programs in areas that have been targeted for excellence Objective #8: Develop opportunities for graduate education that are appropriate for the accessible to a broader segment of the population Goal #3: UTSA will create a campus environment and student life program that advances a sense of place and belonging, values learning, encourage active participation, supports student engagement, and promotes student success. Objective #1: Maintain and expand opportunities to support a culture of involvement and an expectation for success Community Engagement Enrollment Management Goal #1: Enrollment Policies and Programs Objective #5: Improve transfer credit policy Objective #9: Create pathways of future access for applicants initially denied admission Objective #10: Implement financial aid packaging to attract and support a student population that is academically diverse, and that will persist, succeed, and graduate Objective #11: Implement financial incentives as a tool to support undergraduate and graduate student success Objective #14: Improve family involvement in the UTSA student experience Community Engagement Objective #2: Establish internal roundtables/faces between three campuses, a "what's new in community engagement at UTSA." Objective #3: Estimate level of community engagement needed to support UTSA currently Objective #4: Estimate level of community engagement needed to support UTSA in 2016 Objective #5: Identity specific areas in community engagement where UTSA can excel Faculty/Staff Success Goal #6: Institutional engagement of staff Objective #2: Promote group volunteerism Globalization Goal #1: Graduates who are internationally knowledgeable, skilled, and sensitive in order to be successful in a global setting Objective #5: Develop university communication network to promote and facilitate information exchange about global activities. Goal #2: Faculty who are internationally prominent and actively engaged in research, teaching, and outreach addressing global issues Objective #4: Engage in service/outreach activities with global/international impact Objective #5: Develop global communication network to promote and facilitate information exchange and global activities Research Goal: Become a Tier 1 Research University Objective #1: Research $100M + in research expenditures per year Objective #2: Create a vibrant research culture Student Success Goal #3: UTSA will create a campus environment and student life program that advances a sense of place and belonging, values learning, encourages active participation, supports student engagement, and promotes student success Objective #1: Maintain and expand opportunities to support a culture of involvement and an expectation for success. Faculty/Staff Services Enrollment Management Goal #1: Develop and implement enrollment policies and programs that will help qualified students gain access to a quality education, to persist, to succeed, and to graduate Goal #1: Enrollment Policies and Programs Objective #1: UTSA, by the year 2016, will enroll 35,000 students. The student population will be 80% undergraduate students and 20% graduate students Objective #2: Set enrollment targets for fall 2016 by college, and by student level within college Objective #3: Implement undergraduate admission criteria to achieve a student population that will persist, succeed, and graduate Objective #4: Implement graduate admission criteria to achieve a student population that will persist, succeed, and graduate Objective #6: Implement undergraduate student recruitment strategy that is coordinated with the recommended admission criteria Objective #7: Implement graduate student recruitment strategy that is coordinated with the institution enrollment targets Objective #12: Improve new undergraduate student's tuition to UTSA Objective #13: Upgrade orientation Objective # 15: Improve probation and dismissal policies Community Engagement Goal #1: Coordinate type/levels of community engagement for all three campuses Objective #1: Develop consistent community engagement link in UTSA website for all three campuses Goal #2: Identify gaps in the various types of community engagement, and what is needed now to support the UTSA in 2016 Objective #2: Establish internal roundtables/cafes between three campuses, a "what's new in community engagement at UTSA" Objective #3: Estimate level of community engagement needed to support UTSA currently Globalization Goal #2: Faculty who are internationally prominent and actively engaged in research, teaching, and outreach addressing global issues. Objective #1: Recruit top-quality faculty with international perspectives and experience Objective #3: Infuse global perspective throughout the curriculum Objective #4: Engage in service/outreach activities with global/international impact Goal #3: A university environment and infrastructure that value and support global perspectives and initiatives Objective #1: Create an appropriate administrative structure to reflect the high priority of the global initiatives Objective #3: Provide support services necessary to successfully address the procedures, rules, policies, and regulations, etc. Required to operate in the global setting Faculty/Staff Services Goal: Become a Tier 1 Research University Objective #1: Reach $100M+ in research expenditures per year. Recruitment for faculty and staff Objective #2: Create a vibrant research culture (CONFLICT) Objective #3: Graduate 228 PhD students per year Objective #4: Develop TBD (28) number of new PhD programs Objective #5: Create an undergraduate research program Student Success Goal #1: UTSA will advance academic and student life policies and programs to achieve the graduation rate goals submitted to the UT system BOR by 2016 Objective #1: UTSA will establish a retention/graduation office to research and monitor policies, programs, and issues that relate to timely progression toward degree completion and to make recommendations for addressing barriers Objective #2: UTSA academic advising will become more engaged to eliminate barriers to student timely graduation Objective #3: UTSA will monitor performance in "gatekeeper courses" to see if academic support is needed to help students be successful in them. Objective #4: UTSA departments strive to ensure that excessive prerequisites are not listed for courses Objective #5: Enhance student success by engaging students in a systematic career development process Objective #6: Produce more graduates in the "STEM" disciplines Goal #2: UTSA will enhance and strengthen undergraduates and graduate education to increase student success to UTSA and beyond Objective #1: Develop indicators of student learning and a systematic assessment of student learning outcomes Objective #3: Expand the Writing Center in order to provide more students tutoring services Objective #4: Create a quantitative tutoring center to facilitate success in mathematics and science curricula Objective #5: Develop doctoral programs in areas that have been targeted for excellence Objective #7: Develop assessment methods and measures for determining progress in meeting established goals for graduate programs Objective #8: Develop opportunities for graduate education that are appropriate for and accessible to a broader segment of the population Goal #3: UTSA will create a campus environment and student life program that advances a sense of place and belonging, values learning, encourages active participation, supports student engagement, and promotes student success Objective #1: Maintain and expand opportunities to support a culture of involvement and an expectation for success. Objective #2: Create a center for inclusion and outreach to provide services and programs to students from underrepresented populations Globalization Faculty/Staff Success Goal #3: Institutional engagement for faculty Objective #4: Create an individualized strategic plan for faculty development Research Goal: Become a Tier 1 Research University Objective #1: Reach $100M+ in research expenditures per year Objective #2: Create a vibrant research culture Student Success Goal #1: UTSA will advance academic and student life policies and programs to achieve the graduation rate goals submitted to the UT system BOR by 2016 Objective #5: Enhance student success by engaging students in a systematic career development process Objective #6: Produce more graduates in the "STEM" disciplines Research Community Engagement Objective #5: Identify specific areas in community engagement where UTSA can excel Faculty/Staff Success Goal #1: Recruitment of faculty Objective #1: Develop a workload policy that is reflective of a Tier 1 Research institution Objective #4: Develop faculty/student ratios that are reflective of a tier one institution Goal #2: Retention of faculty Objective #3: Address research support and infrastructure through research grants and endowments. Infrastructure support must streamline application process and provide staff support Goal #3: Institutional engagement for faculty Objective #3: Increase research incentives for faculty Globalization Goal #2: Faculty who are internationally prominent and actively engaged in research, teaching, and outreach addressing global issues. Objective #2: Achieve international focus and prominence in research activities Student Success Goal #1: UTSA will advance academic and student life policies and programs to achieve the graduation rate goals submitted to the UT System BOR by 2016 Objective #5: Enhance student success by engaging students in a systematic career development process Objective #6: Produce more graduates in the "STEM" disciplines Goal #2: UTSA will enhance and strengthen undergraduate and graduate education to increase student success at UTSA and beyond. Objective #5: Develop doctoral programs in areas that have been targeted for excellence Objective #7: Develop assessment methods and measures for determining progress in meeting established goals for graduate programs Objective #8: Develop opportunities for graduate education that are appropriate for and accessible to a broader segment of the population Student Success Enrollment Management Goal #1: Develop and implement enrollment policies and programs that will help qualified students gain access to a quality education, to persist, to succeed,and to graduate Goal #1: Enrollment policies and programs Objective #1: UTSA, by the year 2016, will enroll 35,000 students. The student population will be 80% undergraduate students and 20% graduate students Objective #2: Set enrollment targets for fall 2016 by college, and by student level within college Objective #8: Create targeted scholarship opportunities for new students Objective #9: Create pathways of future access for applicants initially denied admission Objective #10: Implement financial aid packaging to attract and support a student population that is academically diverse, and that will persist, succeed, and graduate Objective #11: Implement financial incentives as a tool to support undergraduate and graduate student success Objective #12: Improve new undergraduate student's transition to UTSA Objective #13: Upgrade orientation Objective #14: Improve family involvement in the UTSA student experience Objective #15: Improve probation and dismissal policies Goal #2: Continually refine the enrollment management plan Objective #1: Incorporate assessment of progress made on the stated metrics into subsequent enrollment management planning cycles Faculty/Staff Success Goal #1: Recruitment of faculty Objective #1: Develop a workload policy that is reflective of a Tier I research institution Objective #4: Develop faculty/student ratios that are reflective of a tier one institution Globalization Goal #1: Graduates who are internationally knowledgeable, skilled, and sensitive in order to be successful in a global setting Objective #1: Infuse global perspective throughout the curriculum Objective #2: Provide global enrichment opportunities to all students Objective #3: Provide international career development opportunities to all students Objective #4: Attract/recruit top quality international students Research Goal: Become a Tier 1 Research University Objective #1: Reach $100M+ in research expenditures per year Objective #2: Create a vibrant research culture Objective #3: Graduate 228 of PhD students per year Objective #4: Develop 28 new PhD programs Objective #5: Create an undergraduate research program Student Success Goal #1: UTSA will advance academic and student life policies and programs to achieve the graduation rate goals submitted to the UT System BOR by 2016 Objective #1: UTSA will establish a retention/graduation office to research and monitor policies, programs, and issues that relate to timely progression toward degree completion and to make recommendations for addressing barriers Objective #2: UTSA academic advising will become more engages to eliminate barriers to student timely graduation Objective #5: Enhance student success by engaging students in a systematic career development process Objective #6: Produce more graduates in the "STEM" disciplines Goal #2: UTSA will enhance and strengthen undergraduate and graduate education to increase student success at UTSA and beyond. Objective #1: Develop indicators of student learning and a systematic assessment of student learning outcomes Objective #2: Advance and recognize teaching excellence Objective #5: Develop doctoral programs in areas that have been targeted for excellence Objective #6: Provide infrastructure support for doctoral programs that are developed. Objective #7: Develop assessment methods and measures for determining progress in meeting established goals for graduate programs Objective #8: Develop opportunities for graduate education that are appropriate for the accessible to broader segment of the population Goal #3:UTSA will create a campus environment and student life program that advances a sense of place and belonging, values learning, encourages active participation, supports student engagement, and promotes student success Objective #1: Maintain and expand opportunities to support a culture of involvement and an expectation for success. Activity #3: Gap Analysis — Where are the gaps? Enrollment Management * What do we not know that will impact on strategic planning process * Competition for students * Don't leave faculty, departments, and colleges out (you do better than student success!!) Work with them too! * Budget-Metrics relationship? Research * Enrollment management goals and strategies need to reflect more content re: Academic Affairs. How will enrollment increase in colleges- new degree programs, increase course sections, etc. Community Engagement * What specific benchmarks will we be using? * What is the working definition of "community engagement?" * Budget-Metric relationship? * Better define goal(s) of community involvement * Arts outreach-performing arts * We need a marketing plan/branding/image-building plan to tell people who we are and where we're going * What do we not know that will impact our strategic planning process Faculty/Staff Success * Don't see link to university themes * How should faculty be involved in university theme success? * How should staff be involved in university theme success * Diversity * Budget-Metrics relationship? * Support a culture of involvement and an expectation for success * Strategic Communications for success: make values, mission, and vision part of everyday communications * Encourage better campus-campus communication * What do we not know that will impact our strategic planning process Research * Create a vibrant research culture Globalization Community Engagement * If we're going to recruit more international students we have to spend the dollars to develop & sustain the recruitment program Globalization * Focus on Mexico and Central America * Overcome immigration policy barriers and foreign university competition for the world's best students, faculty, and researchers * Budget-Metrics relationship? * What do we not know that will impact our strategic planning process Research * We need to insure compliance with the expert control laws * For some research areas, we will have to limit some nation's, researchers participation Research * Competition for research $ * Budget-Metrics relationship? * What do we not know that will impact our strategic planning process Student Success Faculty/Staff Success * Diversity Research * Student success piece needs additional content from colleges: core curriculum/overall ug curr. Overhaul similar to what UT Austin has: more on role of colleges Student Success * Public education reforms: policies, reorganize ISD'S, funding * For improved High School student attainment as pipeline to UTSA * We need an open discussion about the place of athletics in the strategic plans * Budget-Metrics relationship? * Attention to success of Master's students * Faculty/Staff- training/teaching/support * Faculty/Staff- programs/policies * What do we not know that will impact our strategic planning process Activity #4: Identifying Strategic Initiatives- Potential Initiative Groups |
Central Planning Committee Minutes
January 12, 2007
Present: Julius Gribou, Rosalie Ambrosino, George Norton, Steve Wilkinson, Gerry Dizinno, David Johnson, Lisa Blazer, Mauli Agrawal, Marty Baylor, Cindy Orth, Sandy Welch, Albert Carrisalez, Betty Merchant, Sonia Martinez, Kevin Price, David Gabler, Donna Nanny
Absent: Jude Valdez, Kerry Kennedy, Adam Cowdin, Ericka Barrera, Jim Almazan, Richard Lewis, Bob McKinley, Bob Gracy, John Davis, Gina Mendez, Mansour El-Kikhia
Agenda Item: Spring Schedule
* Spring Reunion Retreat, February 23, 2007, BB 2.06.04 (University Room), 8:30 am - 3:00 pm
* Spring Monthly Central Planning Committee meetings, 9:00 - 11:00 , January 12 and 26, February 9, March 9 and 23, April 13 and 27, May 11,
* Focus Groups after Spring Retreat to include College faculty forums, and community groups.
Agenda Item: Draft Strategic Plan
* Cindy Brockwell has completed the draft strategic plan. All team leaders and Central Planning Committee members are asked to review it and share it with team members and to get feedback. It is on the website at:
http://www.utsa.edu/ir/StrategicPlanning/UTSADraftDocument.pdf. You will need to use the password: roadrunner (all lowercase).
* There was discussion about how many pages should the plan be, what the Deans' involvement will be, how best to work on the document, and how best to communicate the progress on the plan.
* Prioritize what is realistic to do with the budgets that we have.
* There will be a revised draft that is due the week before the Spring Retreat (week of February 12th).
* Send proposed clustering of initiatives to Donna and she will send to the group.
Next Meeting: Central Planning Committee meeting will be held on January 26, 2007, 9:00 - 11:00, MB 3.106 (Regent's Room)
|
January 26, 2007Present: Marty Baylor, Cindy Orth, Betty Merchant, Ericka Barrera, Sonia Martinez, Kerry Kennedy, John McGowan, John Davis, Jude Valdez, Gina Mendez, Sandy Welch, Janice, Kramer, Julius Gribou, Bob McKinley, Gerry Dizinno, Steve Wilkerson, George Norton, Kevin Price Absent: Adam Cowdin, Albert Carrisalez, David Gabler, David Johnson, James Almazan, Lisa Blazer, Mansour El-Kikhia, Ricardo Romo, Richard Lewis, Robert Gracy Agenda Item 1. Clustering of Initiatives * Thematic areas/organizational structure of report: Feedback from Committee members reflects agreement that the draft provided in mid-January is bulky and includes a mixture of institutional, functional and organizational suggested initiatives and activities. Julius Gribou expressed his team's relief that so much of their work had been included but also agreed the work to date is too comprehensive. Sandy Welch shared the instructions to the professional writer that she was to combine and put in one voice, but not to delete content. We discussed the content/sequence of strategic plans outlined in the matrix handed out at the meeting from selected universities. Agenda Item 2. Dialog with University Community to Set Priorities * Focus groups: Similar to the above consensus, the committee noted that the draft provided on January 15th is not the plan. Concern was expressed that it should not be public. Assurance was given that it is not available to the public but to the Central Planning Committee via a password-protected site. We don't want constituents to get stuck on the operational details. Betty Merchant expressed concern that faculty will ask about their (perceived) lack of input, with a perception that the plan is top down. Sandy Welch noted that messages announcing focus group opportunities ran daily for two weeks in the UTSA Update last fall, and that on web based feedback survey was provided for those who could not attend. In addition, each dean and ASO was sent a separate reminder to send to faculty members asking them to attend. Jude Valdez suggested providing an executive summary for each section of proposed institutional initiatives as an overview.. For instance, all the Deans have read the combined drafts. Gina Mendez said that Dr. Zapata had encouraged his faculty to read the drafts. Kerry Kennedy asked what expectations the Committee has of its constituents - that this needs to be pared down. Gerry Dizinno said it was premature in the document's current state to provide it to a broad constituency and to pare it down first. The Central Planning Committee decided that we should wait until the first draft is put together by the working group, then encourage faculty to read the draft. Betty Merchant noted that the faculty members concerned about faculty governance can be drafted to work on [college level] plans. Julius thought his college, because of its structure, might have to break down the work a little differently. Sandy asked how we should handle concern that, because we've edited down the large combined drafts, we've hidden something. Gerry noted that in its current state, he sees the document is not a plan but is brain storming. Sonia Martinez warned that we do not want [our constituencies] to get stuck on the details. Gerry said that it should not be difficult to decide on a format and level of detail. Bob McKinley said that to address this issue and other communication concerns we need to anticipate and be prepared for potential questions The faculty and all constituents will have an opportunity, in addition to feedback at presentations in the near future, to be involved in planning as appropriate with their responsibilities. Communication organized around the themes will help address and capture issues. We need to consider alignment of reaction given that there are other constituents, such as students, staff, as well as critical people external to the university. The Student Government Association and college student advisory groups should be involved in the discussions. We need to identify the imperatives without which our initiatives cannot succeed. The initiatives will unfold over ten years - we must focus on what the priorities are - what is of importance to the (success of the) University. What is the strategy? Regarding the detailed work already provided by the teams, Kerry Kennedy noted the need to assure them that nothing will be lost, it is being categorized to get to the strategic part for each university level. The rest will fall in to place. Their work is being preserved. What are the gaps, their suggestions? The Committee agreed to form a working group to create a format, extract those things that are truly strategic at the university level to bring back to the committee to bless and provide to our constituencies. This weekend the Central Planning Group will review the plans (links will be sent) and our thematic drafts this weekend and provide feedback no later than Monday morning to the working group. The Central Committee members are to inform the working group of their suggestions regarding a framework as well as suggested university level strategies. They are also to think again about potential strategic clusters among the themes. A handout described the clusters suggested in the December Central Planning Group retreat. Creating the plan framework and suggested university level strategic initiatives to include has to be done rapidly. The volunteer working group settled on meeting Monday afternoon, January 29th, after the ELC luncheon. They will take a 30 minute break after the luncheon, and convene at 2:30 in a location to be announced. They committed to staying until a strategic plan draft is settled on. The working group is composed of Mauli Agrawal, Rosalie Ambrosino, Gerry Dizinno, Julius Gribou, Sonia Martinez, John McGowan, Bob McKinley, Gina Mendez, Berry Merchant, George Norton, and Sandy Welch. Sandy suggested that the working group use the weekend to code the document by unit level to identify university level initiatives and to think about potential theme clusters again in preparation for Monday. Kerry pointed out that there are common strategic needs. Sonia and several committee members noted the cross sectional dependencies that exist for success of the plan. Gerry Dizinno said we can have a version for distribution after that meeting. Erica Barrera suggested also sending out the Vision and Mission statements. Sandy said there was one more meeting about the Mission, Vision and Values statements, which would then be included after Committee affirmation. Committee members asked for links to be provided for them to access the draft and other plans. We agreed once the working group provided the draft plan document, in the interest of time, we would read and via 'Reply to All' share comments and approve its broader distribution. * Sandy Welch asked for volunteers to form a central writing team. This team will take the suggestions of the working group above and address writing the plan, eliminating gaps, and polishing the writing. She suggested that reviewing the other universities' plans offers ideas for what we may still need to write, such as providing information about UTSA - who we are, the value we bring, as well as challenges. The team leaders will arrange for the writers to meet with the thematic teams to discuss with them the proposed university strategic plan content and get input about what they think would be strategic initiatives would be appropriate for President Romo versus initiatives that more appropriately reside with Vice Presidents (or their areas). She noted that the timeline for the writers work with the teams is very tight. Academic Affairs is holding a strategic planning retreat on the 2nd of February and Dr. Ambrosino is to begin meeting with colleges on the 9th. The Spring Retreat occurs on February 23rd. See below about assurances regarding the hard work they have contributed to the plan. * We will engage each Vice Presidential area's constituencies to gather feedback once the draft is put together. The Vice Presidents should determine how they want to do this. The focus group facilitators are ready to help if requested. However, the means of communication is to be left to each Vice President. Cindy Orth noted that she had received some critiques from her external constituents. It was agreed that external feedback received would be provided to Sonia Martinez. * The Committee discussed the CMO meeting on Monday. Julius said that the working group not already identified to attend that meeting, ought to come to it to hear the executive commentary. Next meeting is February 9, 2007, 9-11 am, MB 3.106. |
February 9, 2007Present: Bob McKinley, Elaine Sanders, David Gabler, Jeff Kantor, Julius Gribou, Gage Paine, David Johnson, John Davis, Kevin Price, Lisa Blazer, Gerry Dizinno, Steve Wilkerson, Mauli Agrawal, George Norton, Jude Valdez, Cindy Orth, Sonia Martinez, Richard Lewis, Betty Merchant, Sandra Welch 1. David Gabler, Mission/Vision/Values * Handed out the current version of Mission/Vision/Values explaining that the Team was well representative of UTSA and there are statutory requirements and legislative requirements to be met. * Bob McKinley suggested that we vote on the statements at this oversight level to take the Retreat. We need to move the process forward and momentum is important. * There was discussion from Jude Valdez and Kevin Price about what a "research" university is. Why not include education or teaching? Were focus group comments taken into consideration? Kevin stated that a mission statement provides framework that the whole group can buy-in to. All constituents should be able to look at it and say that this is what we are doing. * Gerry Dizinno, Elaine Sanders, David Johnson, & Mauli Agrawal all said that a "Research University" is a particular type of university that we are aspiring to. The term "research" includes teaching. It was discussed that we may need to educate the internal and external community on what "Research University" means. Sonia Martinez stated that the external community needs to understand what "research university" means. * Julius stated that Core Values are key in marketing and how we relate to the community at large. * Richard Lewis said that this group needs to make a decision about the statements and move forward. We won't get total consensus and we need to move toward implementation. He stated the group has done a good job of putting the Mission/Vision/Values statements together. Jude Valdez and Jeff Kantor agreed that the statements are close to what is needed, but just a small amount of tweaking needs to be done. * Bob McKinley suggested that we honor the focus group comments and the Academic Affairs retreat comments. He also said we need to move forward to implementation. It was agreed that David Gabler will have a meeting with his team to take a final look at the statements, including both the focus group comments and the comments from the Academic Affairs retreat. It was discussed that the final version be sent out via email to the Central Planning Committee for an up or down vote prior to the Retreat on February 23rd. 2. Academic Affairs Input into Drafts * Julius Gribou, Elaine Sanders, Mauli Agrawal and Sadiscussed the Academic Affairs Retreat on February 2, 2007. They talked about the underpinnings/overarching Academic Affairs issues that should be included in the draft. The 3 underpinnings from the retreat were Globalization, cultural Pluralism, and Transformative Leadership. The Areas of Excellence that the Deans identified in the retreat are: health, security, energy, human development, and sustainability. There were many commonalities among the Colleges. Mauli said that there was little tension and everything fell into place as the discussions started. The Deans were in agreement about what and where they needed to go. Julius said that mission, financial, and admission models were discussed. UTSA will probably be a mid-exclusive admission model, which is still a research model. Sandy said that the underpinnings and areas of excellence will go into the Strategic Plan. Every University needs areas of excellent to market. There are gaps and they need to be addressed. Julius said that we do have uniquenss and niches: security, health, human development, sustainability and there is funding associated with these niches. There was discussion about the broadness of sustainability. Julius said that sustainability includes history and culture. Mauli said that academics drive research and that nothing from the Academic Affairs retreat contradicts anything the teams have done. David Johnson said that the Academic Affairs retreat defined was excellence means in a broad programmatic sense. All colleges will contribute to areas of excellence. There will be a universal core and programmatic focus. 3. Strategic Planning Retreat, February 23, 2007 * Richard Lewis suggested some potential discussions for the Retreat on 2/23 - discussion on Academic Affairs Retreat input, and definition of access that everyone agrees with. * Bob McKinley has developed the first cut for the agenda for the Retreat on the 23rd and he asked the CPC for 2 - 3 things to accomplish at the retreat. * Julius has for a clear understanding of academics in the University and what infrastructure is there. He also asked to update the Matrix from the Deans and have it available at the Retreat. The Deans will email Elaine Sanders with the comments to fill in the matrix from the colleges and area of excellence. * Jeff Kantor suggested establishment for implementation process and ownership of the process. Jeff is still concerned that sustainability is too broad. * David Gabler said that accountability for the Strategic Plan and use of the plan as a University. * Jude Valdez suggested ratification of the Mission/Vision/Values * George Norton wanted the Retreat group to see the latest version of the Strategic Plan Draft and ask what other pieces are still to come. * Betty Merchant asked how we will know what resources are available. * Bob McKinley said that we don't want to get operational, but have broad discussions and be aware of overall possibilities of financial structure. Bob said that we need to start the discussion on implementation - how to monitor, alignment with Deans, VP's. What is the role of the CPC? The CPC is a clearinghouse for all things to do with the Strategic Plan. We need qualitative and quantitative measures. Have a website that the community can access to see the progress of the Strategic Plan. 4. Sonia Martinez said that we need to have a discussion with Athletics because it has a cross-campus impact. How to integrate Athletics? * Jeff Kantor, Sonia Martinez, Lisa Blazer, Gage Paine, Betty Merchant, and someone from Resource Development Team will work on this. |