Committee final report

Feb. 7, 2005
Kristen Constant, Facilitation Group Coordinator

Overview

Strategic Planning for the period 2005-2010 began in January 2004 with the naming of the committee and sub-committee and the publishing of a web site
(http://www.iastate.edu/~strategicplan) and concluded (the first phase) Nov. 17, 2004, with the submission to the faculty senate for review.

The charge to the committee was to develop a shorter, specific, strategic and more substantive plan for use as a working document. The guiding principles for the strategic planning process are that it is open, inclusive and iterative. All full committee meetings were publicized on the strategic planning web site and were open to the public.

The web site served as just one means by which the university community was kept abreast of the progress of the process. Additionally, news releases to both the university and local communities alerted constituents of draft releases. These news releases and other news articles were also compiled on the web site for quick access.

Documents used in the environmental scan were also included on the web site. Open forums were held to generate discussion and collect feedback. Feedback to drafts were collected at strategicplan@iastate.edu and posted anonymously on the web site. (http://www.iastate.edu/~strategicplan/comments/comments.shtml)

All e-mails were personally acknowledged by the facilitation group coordinator. The environmental scan includes study of both global and local trends in higher education, as well as a careful SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis of Iowa State University. Input and feedback was solicited from alumni, the community, students, staff, faculty, administrators, county extension offices, and other friends of the university. The process included three iterations of the plan, the first two with 3-week input periods.

Committee Composition and Structure:

Provost Ben Allen appointed the 40-member committee, which includes representatives of the colleges, various university groups, students, alumni and parents. A smaller facilitation group (designated by * ) was assigned to manage the drafting of the plan and the compilation of feedback. Kristen Constant served as facilitation group coordinator.

• Ben Allen, Provost, vice president for academic affairs and provost*
• Sanjeev Agarwal, professor of marketing*
• Claire Andreasen, professor and chair of veterinary pathology.
• Julia Badenhope, associate professor of landscape architecture.
• Mike Banasiak, Government of the Student Body (GSB) and senior in management.
• Patrick Barr, assistant professor of history.
• Diane Beckman, associate director, administrative technology services.
• Igor Beresnev, associate professor of geologic/atmospheric science.
• Grant Blythe, GSB director of academic affairs and junior in electrical engineering.
• Charlotte Bronson, professor and chair of plant pathology.*
• Corly Brooke, professor of human development and family studies.
• Mark Chidister, assistant to the president for budget planning and analysis.*
• Kristen Constant, associate professor of materials science and engineering and administrative intern*
• Samuel DeMarie, associate professor of management.
• Paul Flakoll, professor of food science and human nutrition.
• Jerry Garcia, assistant professor of Latino/a Studies.
• Lawrence Genalo, professor of materials science and engineering.
• Jack Girton, associate professor of biochemistry, biophysics and molecular biology.
• Rupayan Gupta, senator, Graduate and Professional Student Senate, and graduate student in economics.
• Connie Hargrave, associate professor of educational leadership and policy studies.
• Madeleine Henry, associate professor of foreign languages and literatures. *
• Todd Holcomb, associate vice president for student affairs.
• Kevin Kane, program manager, academic information technologies.*
• Sonja Klocker, assistant to the vice provost for research and advanced studies.
• Surya Mallapragada, associate professor of chemical engineering.
• Richard Martin, professor of biomedical sciences.
• John Mayfield, professor of genetics, development and cell biology and associate dean in the Graduate College.
• Brian Meyer, director of college relations, Ag Information Services.
• Kristi Meyer, treasurer of Graduate and Professional Student Senate, and graduate student in mathematics.
• Deland Myers, professor of food science and human nutrition.
• Johnny Pickett, associate vice president for business and finance.
• Diana Pounds, manager in university relations.*
• Donald Reed, manager in athletic academic services.
• Paula Sandlin, secretary in ecology, evolution and organismal biology.
• Gebre Tesfagiorgis, director of institutional research.
• E. Ann Thompson, professor of curriculum and instruction.
• Karen Tuttle, Ames, president of ISU Parents Association.
• Greg Tylka, professor of plant pathology.
• Catherine Woteki, dean of the College of Agriculture.
• Tanya Zanish-Belcher, associate professor, library.
• Donald Zuck, Ankeny, ISU Alumni Association board of directors.

Additionally, John Schuh, Distinguished Professor and Chair of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies, served as facilitator for most of the full committee meetings and retreats.

Timeline (http://www.iastate.edu/~strategicplan/2010/process/timeline.shtml)

The 2005-2010 Strategic Planning Process began in January of 2004 with the naming of the committee and the first committee meeting. The bulk of the input for the environmental scan was collected over the spring semester although new documents were added throughout the process.

Two all-day retreats for the committee, held in June and August, served to sharpen the Mission, Values and Vision, and the first draft of the plan, which was released on August 30, 2004, to the entire university community was followed by a three-week feedback period (ending September 17, 2004).

Subsequent meetings were held during the fall semester to craft the second draft. Starting in June, the facilitation group met at least weekly, and often more frequently. The second draft, released on October 11, incorporated feedback received on the first draft and included a description of measures to be used to indicate progress. Again, the feedback period was three weeks.

Final revisions were made and the third draft was submitted to the faculty senate on November 17. The faculty senate reviewed and supported the plan in January. President Geoffroy will submit the plan to the Board of Regents during the 2nd week in February, 2005.

Environmental Scan

SWOT Analysis

The Strategic Planning Committee generated a list of what it perceives to be Iowa State University's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT). Four groups were formed, one for each area, to generate these lists. After the initial lists were formed, the items were rank-ordered by another group, i.e., the list of strengths was ordered by the group that generated the list of weaknesses and vice versa. At the end of this exercise, the committee concluded that lists represent an internally focused view of the university and that the committee needed to go through another SWOT analysis while assuming an external view of the university. The results of this analysis appear here: (http://www.iastate.edu/~strategicplan/process/docs/swot.shtml)

Global, National and State Trends

Trends were studied through review of a number of documents (see "Trends and Analyses"), including the following:

• Batelle Report (pdf) "The State of Iowa - Biosciences Path for Development", Batelle Memorial Institute, June 2004
• Transforming e-Knowledge: A Revolution in the Sharing of Knowledge . Norris, D., Mason, J., & Lefrere, P. (2003). Transforming e-knowledge: A revolution in the sharing of knowledge. (The National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Ann Arbor, MI: Society for College and University Planning
• Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Fox, M.A., & Hackerman, N. (Eds.). (2003). Evaluating and improving undergraduate teaching in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. National Research Council of the Academies, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academies Press
• Knocking at the College Door: Projections of High School Graduates by State, Income, and Race/Ethnicity Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. (2003, December).
• Are College Students Satisfied: A National Analysis of Changing Expectations Low, L. (2000, February). Are college students satisfied: A national analysis of changing expectations. Washington, DC: USA Group Foundation New Agenda Series.
• The Condition Of Education 2003 The National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). The condition of education 2003 (NCES 2003-067). Washington, DC:
• Reauthorizing the Higher Education Act: Issues and Options Wolanin, T. R. (2003, March). Reauthorizing the higher education act: Issues and options. Washington, DC: The Institute for Higher Education Policy.
• Diversifying Campus Revenue Streams: Opportunities and Risks Hearn, J. C. (2003). Diversifying campus revenue streams: Opportunities and risks. Washington, DC: American Council on Education Center for Policy Analysis.
• Leading the Learning Revolution: Iowa State University... committed to the promotion, improvement and advancement of learning... ISU faculty
• Executive summaries: "Reports of the Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and Land-Grant Universities National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges. (2001, January). Returning to our roots: Executive summaries of the Kellogg commission on the future of the state and land-grant universities. Washington, DC:
• BLS Releases 2000-2010 Employment Projections Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2001, December). BLS releases 2000-2010 employment projections. Washington, DC
• Beyond Dead Reckoning: Research Priorities for Redirecting American Higher Education National Center for Postsecondary Improvement. (2002, October). Beyond dead reckoning: Research priorities for redirecting American higher education. Stanford, CA
• The New Professoriate: Characteristics, Contributions, and Compensation National Center for Postsecondary Improvement. (2002, October). Beyond dead reckoning: Research priorities for redirecting American higher education. Stanford, CA
• What Americans Think About Higher Education Selingo, J. (2003, May 3). What Americans think about higher education. The Chronicle of Higher Education, pp. A10-A17
• Renewing the Covenant: Learning, Discovery, and Engagement in a New Age and Different World National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges. (2000, March). Renewing the covenant: Learning, discovery, and engagement in a new age and different world. Washington, DC
• Access & Persistence: Findings from 10 Years of Longitudinal Research on Students Choy, S. P. (2002). Access & persistence: Findings from 10 years of longitudinal research on students. Washington, DC: American Council on Education Center for Policy Analysis
• Investing in People: Developing All of America's Talent on Campus and in the Workplace American Council on Education. (2002). Investing in people: Developing all of America's talent on campus and in the workplace. Washington, DC
• Shaping the Future: The Economic Impact of Public Universities National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges. (2001, August). Shaping the future: The economic impact of public universities. Washington, DC
• Student Financing of Undergraduate Education: 1999-2000 U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. Student financing of undergraduate education: 1999-2000, NCES 2002-167 by Lutz Berkner, Ali Berker, Kathryn Rooney, & Katharin Peter. Project Officer: Andrew G. Malizio. Washington, DC: 2002
• Report of the ISU Extension Futuring Committee: Submitted to Vice Provost Stanley Johnson -- March, 2003 Iowa State University Extension. (2003, March). Report of the ISU extension Futuring committee. Ames, IA

Input from Constituents

Focus Groups:

A number of focus group discussions were held both on campus and in other parts of the state. Discussion was guided by the following questions: What is your vision for ISU in the next 5-10 years? What do you see as major opportunities and challenges, or key issues facing ISU in the next 5-10 years?

• 3-23-04 ISU Foundation Board of Governors
• 3-26-04 All University Open Forum
• 4-09-04 Faculty Senate Resource Policy and Allocation Council
• 4-09-04 Department Chairs Cabinet
• 4-16-04 Information Technology Steering Committee
• 4-20-04 Faculty Senate Executive Board
• 4-22-04 Provost Advisory Group
• 4-28-04 Ames Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors
• 4-28-04 Ames Economic Development Commission
• 4-29-04 All University Open Forum
• 4-29-04 Council of Deans
• 4-29-04 President's Advisory Committee on Diversity
• 5-17-04 President's Cabinet
• 5-21-04 ISU Alumni Association Board of Directors
• 5-21-04 ISU Foundation Board of Governors
• 5-24-04 Graduate and Professional Student Senate
• 5-25-04 University Professors
• 5-27-04 Distinguished Professors
• 6-03-04 Des Moines area Business and Civic Leaders
• 6-11-04 External Affairs Collaborators

Position Statements:

Unsolicited position statements were collected from a number of campus groups including, High Performance Computing, Undergraduate Deans, Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, and "Greening" of ISU.

Feedback

All feedback was compiled and posted on the web as well as distributed to facilitation group members and the president. A summary of the feedback appears here:

Strategic Plan Feedback for Draft I

Top 5 concerns

1. The role of arts and humanities (social sciences, too)
2. Stronger inclusion of diversity
3. Globalization/ International Perspective
4. The role of extension and land grant responsibilities
5. The use of patents as a performance measure

Other Themes

1. Environment
2. Various student outcomes
   • Critical Thinking
   • Innovation
   • Ethics
3. Ethics (not just for students)
4. Life-long learning
5. High Ability Students
6. Athletics
7. Costs of Tuition
8. Dwindling resources
9. Campus Climate, Family-friendly policies
10. Support for teaching excellence

Strategic Plan Feedback for Draft II

Top Concerns

• "Land Grant Ideal" needs to be defined better - relevance today?
• P & S and Merit Staff Value is not communicated
• Too "inward looking"
• Globalization is not emphasized enough
• Diversity - not strong enough commitment
• Needs to have bolder language
• The integration of science and humanities

	Draft 1	Draft 2	Repeats
	9-18	10-30
Faculty	104 (48%)	34 (37%)	21 (62%)
Staff	22 (10%)	20 (22%)	5 (25%)
Extension	35 (16%)	18 (20%)	11 (61%)
Admin	15 (7%)	7 (8%)	6 (86%)
Ugrad	16 (7%)	2 (2%)
Grad	1 (<1%)	1 (1%)
Alum	21 (10%)	5 (5%)	1
Misc	2 (1%)	5 (5%)
	216	91	44 (48%)

Process Evaluation

All committee members, including the facilitation group members were given a survey requesting feedback on the strategic planning process. Thirteen responses were returned. Most comments were very positive and complimentary of the facilitations group's efforts. The substantive recommendations were:

• Process and make available the results of the environmental scan
• Full day meetings are too long (half day would work better)

Written and Electronic Records:

All written facilitation group and full committee records are in five three-ring binders that resides in President office files:

• Environmental Scan
• Draft I
  • Press
  • Feedback to draft 1
• Facilitation Group Activity records - Draft 1
  • E-mail between facilitation group members
• Draft II
  • Press
  • Feedback to draft II
• Facilitation Group Activity records - Draft II
  • E-mail between facilitation group members
• Working Documents
  • All drafts
  • Meeting agendas
  • Process Feedback

An electronic copy of all electronic files is on a CD-ROM

Integration with Accreditation and Self-Study

The strategic planning process and evaluation is described in the self-study for accreditation with the Higher Learning Commission (HLC).
(http://www.iastate.edu/~accreditation/3-future/310.htm)

Various other components of the self-study refer to the strategic plan in descriptions of the decision-making process, resources, budget planning, evaluation, learning outcomes, knowledge and engagement and service.

Use, Monitoring, & Revision

Implementation Plans: An initial meeting with the Provost and vice presidents was held to determine primary and secondary responsibilities for each of the 32 goals and to discuss strategies for follow-through, including implementation plans, monitoring progress on revisions or adjustments to the plan. Metrics will be reported yearly both to the board of regents and the university community.

Plan Dissemination

When the plan has been approved by the board of regents, a graphic design of the plan will be developed for community-wide distributions.

The guiding principles for the strategic planning process are that it is open, inclusive and iterative. All full committee meetings were publicized on the strategic planning web site and were open to the public.