1 / 18

PROGRAM PRIORITIZATION Open Forum October 10, 2012

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.

buffy
Download Presentation

PROGRAM PRIORITIZATION Open Forum October 10, 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PROGRAM PRIORITIZATIONOpen ForumOctober 10, 2012

  2. PROGRAM PRIORITIZATION Committee Introduction Overview of process

  3. PROGRAM PRIORITIZATION Institutional Comparisons within UNC: NCSU UNC-G ECU Regional Comprehensive comparison: Sacramento State University

  4. 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)

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. PROGRAM PRIORITIZATION Criteria – a preliminary discussion

  8. PROGRAM PRIORITIZATION Success Concerns Hurdles

  9. PROGRAM PRIORITIZATION What will we define as success of this task force?

  10. 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

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. PROGRAM PRIORITIZATION What concerns do we have about this process?

  14. 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

  15. 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.

  16. PROGRAM PRIORITIZATION What hurdles do we need to overcome?

  17. 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

  18. http://www.wcu.edu/31453.aspFeedback / question submission coming soon.

More Related