Brief Campus Update
February, 2006
I hope that this note finds you well and that your semester is progressing in good order. I have not normally given campus an update after Board of Governors’ meetings, but the first two meetings with President Bowles have been important and I think that you need to be aware of key issues. They will clearly have a major impact on the way we do business.
First, the Board of Governors passed our new Master’s of Science in Science and Entrepreneurship. This is a very important degree and it keeps us focused on linking the University to the changing needs of society. Thanks to each of you who participated in developing this program.
Second, there are two studies that will be required of the universities that will have impact on us.
Book cost study. The Board of Governors approved a set of guidelines for reducing book costs. We are required to review these guidelines and determine how they can be implemented on campus to reduce unnecessary costs to students. I am asking Kyle Carter and Chuck Wooten to co-chair a committee to examine what policies, process, and procedures we can use to limit book costs.
- Efficiency. Erskine is implementing a strategic study of efficiency throughout the entire system. This analysis will involve both the General Administration and each campus. Campuses will need to complete internal studies to create efficiencies where feasible. Additionally, there will be an outside taskforce that will be appointed to review possible areas for improvement. I am asking Kyle and Chuck to jointly chair a taskforce on efficiency and to hold public hearings for the campus regarding this issue. This is a critical opportunity for us to examine our processes and procedures and to eliminate red tape. I also am asking Robert Edwards, the University’s chief internal auditor, to serve ex-officio on this taskforce. We need to be sure that we comply with state law but that we minimize unnecessary administrative expense. At the same time, it is possible that this taskforce will make suggestions with regard to changes in state law or rule that might increase efficiency without reducing needed state control of public funds.
In addition to these two general studies, Erskine also is taking personal interest in issues regarding teacher education. There will be a series of meetings with deans of education and deans of arts and sciences followed by a discussion with provosts to focus attention on teacher education issues. At the same time, Erskine is calling for a “rationalization” of teacher education offerings to eliminate low quality or under-performing programs while increasing support for high quality, strong enrollment programs. This review is very important and it has potential to affect the distribution of programs across the institution. I would strongly encourage you, if you are involved in any way in teacher education, to examine the quality of your program as well as ways to increase enrollment. It would not be a reasonable assumption that large enrollment will assure program continuation under this review.
To assure that we as an institution understand the quality of each of our individual teacher education programs, I am asking Kyle Carter to work with the deans to examine quality indicators as well as enrollment trends. This review will be happening over the next several weeks at the state level, so I would anticipate that our local review will follow suit.
In my last, more formal update, I noted that graduation and retention rates will be increasingly critical indicators of institutional performance as we move forward. I suggested that you examine your curricula to assure that students could reasonably graduate in four years even if they waited a semester or two to declare a major. I hope that you are discussing this issue in your departments and that you are taking a very serious look at how a student can actually complete a degree without having to take 18 or more credit hours in a semester. As a follow-up, I am asking Kyle to work with the deans to assure that these reviews are underway and for him to work with individual deans regarding specific programs. Graduation rates at Western are not where we would like them and improving them is the right thing to do, not just because it will most likely become a system requirement.
Michael Dougherty and the faculty in education have created several 2+2 degree plans that will help community college transfers graduate. These plans lay out a cross walk by course number for a degree program showing how specific courses in our curriculum correspond to community college courses. This type of model is very important for us as the number of community college graduates increase. I would strongly encourage each department to create similar models so that we can improve transfer graduation rates as well.
Finally, I should note that Erskine has fundamentally changed the way chancellors’ meetings are conducted. As a result, chancellors have much greater input than ever before in setting system priorities and engaging in system discussions. This is a very important change. This means that Western’s priorities are getting an open, fair hearing, and we have a major opportunity to effect the direction of the system. This is very exciting and it should be of increasing importance as we deal with very difficult issues over the next four or five years.
In this regard, I should mention that we have been requested to provide updates on our top two capital construction projects. Consistent with our previous plans, we listed the: 1) health building, and 2) an education building. Both of these facilities will help us address critical state shortages. Both involve current buildings that are not suitable for their current uses. We also requested that the system consider issues associated with land acquisition to allow us to protect the campus from negative land uses nearby.
Again, I hope you are having a good semester. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.
