News > November 8, 2007

By Caitlin Brooks | Staff writer

A forum about the recently released preliminary draft of the university’s Strategic Plan was held Nov. 1 in Pugh Auditorium for faculty and staff.

“Our plan going forward is to use the next stage to encourage comments from students, faculty and staff,” said Provost Jill Tiefenthaler at the beginning of the session. “We will go back to work with your suggestions and concerns in mind to make it an even better strategic plan.”

Though the draft, which is the culmination of over a year’s work, spans 16 pages and five equally vast priorities, one issue dominated the faculty forum.

The first of five pillars upon which the plan is based is the goal to “build academic programs of nationally recognized excellence,” according to the Strategic Plan.

A new concept for the university falls under this category.

The Interdisciplinary Institutes, as they are referred to in the draft, aim to “foster new directions in faculty research and creative activity; increase interdisciplinary research opportunities for students; enhance the reputation of the university as a center of research excellence and innovation; and build intellectual community on campus,” according to the plan.

The Institute for Public Engagement, designed to further the university’s motto, pro humanitate, will extend the capability to reach out to the community using scholarship and teaching that facilitates the public good.

The Institute for Issues of Conscience and Voice aims to increase inquiry on the ways consciousness, values, power, ideas and religious traditions shape world view of the past, present and future.

The Institute for Entrepreneurship and Social Enterprise will bring all of the university’s existing centers on entrepreneurship under one umbrella.

This unification will encourage innovation and “action towards the creation of value – social value, artistic value, intellectual value as well as economic value” according to the Strategic Plan.

The finaland most controversial institute is that of the Integrative Science for Learning and Discovery. Its stated aim is to boost the university to become a national leader in cross disciplinary sciences.

Most faculty at the meeting expressed great enthusiasm for the institutes, but Mary DeShazer, professor of English, expressed concern about the focus of the institutes.

She reminded the audience that the university is, first and foremost, a liberal arts school and asked why a specific humanities institute was not outlined, in light of the Integrative Science Institute for Learning and Discovery.

A possible fifth institute on global humanities was mentioned, though nothing is certain.

The lack of a humanities institute was not the only point of contingency on this hot topic.

Funding and staffing were also of great concern to the faculty body.

“There is a lot of other stuff in this (draft), guys,” Tiefenthaler said after nearly 20 minutes on the topic. Nancy Suttenfield, senior vice president and chief financial officer of the university, addressed the financial issue.

“We conducted a study of non-academic departments and identified over 70 difference places for additional revenue and savings for the school. For example, this year we found a different way of purchasing ThinkPads which saved the school $1.7 million,” Suttenfield said.

“We will focus financially on what we need to do internally before focusing on add-ons,” Tiefenthaler said in regards to funding the institutes.

“(To move on) first we need a general consensus on the Strategic Plan, and then we need to prioritize and set realistic goals,” Tiefenthaler said.

“Some faculty may want to start working on the institutes, but we need to get the right people to do the right jobs.”

“But wouldn’t these institutes tax already overextended professors?” some asked.

“We know time is critical,” Tiefenthaler said. “The institutes are more about bringing faculty together, promoting research, but they are not supposed to restructure the curriculum. They are to help professors find time to focus on scholastic efforts and connect with students.”

They will create administrative support and structural support so that professors feel less of a strain, she said.