Imagine 2017

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

1/132

2017Main Campus 5-Year Strategic Plan

1

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

2/132

Dear Colleagues and Friends,

After 90 days of input and feedback from faculty, staff, administrators, trustees, and students, I am pleased to issue the first

edition of The University of Toledo main campus strategic plan, which is entitled, Imagine 2017. This plan operationalizesthe universitys strategic plan, which is entitled, Directions 2011.

This document is a high level summary of the conversations that have occurred over the past 90 days; it is not a finely word-

smithed manuscript of university ideals, aspirations, and goals; it is a high level outline of action plans to solve big strategic

problems, which if solved, reposition The University of Toledo to survive and thrive in the 21st century.

For many years, as a result of persistently declining state appropriations to higher education, most public universities have

scaled back their operations and support of academic programs to the point of not being able to adequately support their

historical models of teaching, research, and service. Given this nations new normal economy, we are left with no otherchoice but to rebalance our tripartite mission and create a more cost-effective model of higher education--a model that

honors our past, upholds our core values, and achieves both high quality and financial sustainability in this new world.

This plan leverages the universitys current strengths in ways that will make it more distinctive and a better choice for

prospective students. If we implement this plan well, we will become the destination of choice for well-prepared students,

under-prepared students, adult learners, on-line learners, professional students, and graduate students; the university will

become a more effective system of higher education where teaching and learning are more effective, research and discovery

are widely embraced and strategically focused, and service and engagement are both relevant and impactful.

Thank you in advance for your willingness to explore this new path. If we navigate this path well, we will arrive at a better

and more sustainable destination. As always, teamwork is the key to our success because together, everyone achieves more.

In your service,

Scott L. Scarborough, Ph.D.

Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs

!

December 17, 2012

2

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

3/132

Section I - An Overview of the Mission and Vision

3

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

4/132

The mission of The University of Toledo is

to improve the human condition; to enablestudent success in scholarship and in life;

to advance knowledge through excellence in

learning, discovery and engagement; and to serve as

a diverse, public metropolitan research university.

4

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

5/132

VisionThe University of Toledo is a

transformative force in the world.

The University is a pillar of its

community, and is a thriving

student-centeredcomprehensive research university

known for its distinctive exploration of

the relationships between the liberal arts

and science and technology, whichincludes multiple nationally ranked

professional colleges and an exceptional

interdisciplinary core curriculum.

5

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

6/132

Compassion,Professionalism

andRespect

Discovery,Learningand

Communica:on

Diversity,Integrityand

Engagement,Outreach

andService

Excellence,Focusand

Innova:on

Wellness,Healing,

andSafety

Our core values do not change.

Teamwork

6

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

7/132

Teamworkis the key to our success.

7

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

8/132

Inputs OutputsProcesses

Motivated & ResourcedStudents

Expert & ProductiveFaculty & Staff

Inspiring & FunctionalFacilities

Engaging & SupportiveInformation Technology

Curriculum &Pedagogy

Financial Resources

Teaching & Advising

Research / CreativeActivity

Student Experience

Assessment &Program Review

Engagement & Service

Strategic Leadership &Management

Graduates Preparedto Succeed

Discovery, Invention,& Applied Research

Quality of Life

Philanthropy &Financial Sustainability

Pride & Inspiration

Economic Development

What is core?

8

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

9/132

A UT Sy!em of Higher Education2017

9

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

10/132

UT Sy!em of Higher Education

Portal for Well-prepared StudentsPortal for Prepared and Under-prepared Students

Portal for Adult Students Portal forOnline Students

Portal for Graduate & Advanced Professional Students

2017

10

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

11/132

Portal for Well-prepared Students

Portal for Prepared/Under-prepared Students

Portal for Adult Professional Students

Portal forOnline Students

Portal for Graduate & AdvancedProfessional Students

Jesup Scott

Honors College

YouCollege

college of adult

professionals and

Extended Learning

UTXnet World Campus

COLLEGE of Graduate

Studies

2017

11

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

12/132

Jesup Scott

Honors College

YouCollege

College of

Adult professionals

and Extended Learning

UTXNET World Campus

College of

Graduate Studies

Accelerated Curriculum & Experiential Learning

Experiential Learning & Student Success

Prior Learning Assessment & Student Success

Prior Learning Assessment & Convenience

Academic Quality &Career Advancement

2017

12

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

13/132

Jesup Scott Honors College

YouCollege

Adult

PROFESSIONALS EL

UTXNET World Campus

College of

Graduate Studies

Experiential Learning

Student-Centeredness

Flipped & WrappedClassrooms

Beautiful Campus

Elegant Online Experience

2017

13

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

14/132

JEsup Scott

Honors College

YouCollege

adult professionals EL

UTXNET World Campus

GRADUATE COLLEGE

Engineering

Law

Science AND MATH

VISUAL AND PERFORMING ARTS

Medicine

Pharmacy

Nursing

health sciences

Business

Education

CRIMINAL JUSTICE &

HUman Services

HUMANITIES &

social sciences

2017

COMMUNICATION

Portals

14

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

15/132


Advance the Body of Knowledge

Remain Current in Disciplines

Solve Community Problems

Economic Development

2017

15

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

16/132


Interdisciplinary Schools

Biomarkers / Advanced Simulation

2017

Green Chemistry & Advanced Renewable Energy

Healthcare Business Enterprise & Innovation

16

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

17/132


Toledo Early College High School

Patient Care - UT Medical Center

Toledo Museum of Art / WGTE

Learning Assessment / Shared Governance

2017

17

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

18/132

Section II - An Overview of our External Environment

18

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

19/132

More demand for graduates.

Less public financial resources.

More intense competition.

Fewer tuition rate increases.

More enabling technologies.

Fewer non-core programs.More international experiences.

The Future of Higher Education

19

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

20/132

U.S.$Condi*ons$

Economy'requires'more'graduates' Incoming'students'have'greater'challenges'

Prepara8on' Par8cipa8on' Affordability'

Revenue'model'is'not'viable'

All'revenue'sources'are'maxing'out' Revenue'and'expense'trend'lines'are'not'sustainable'

Why?%

) ) )) ) ) ) )) ) ))

!! ! !

! ! ! !

20

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

21/132

Outlook for US State Governments Remains

Negative in 2012Credit Pressure Continues Amid Risks from Macroeconomic Contagion and Federal Downsizing

Summary

For the fifth consecutive year, we have assigned a negative outlook to the US states sector. Whilerevenues have improved relative to the downturns nadir, the tentative growth in the U.S. economycould still be knocked off course by contagion caused by a European recession and debt crisis. Federaldownsizing will affect some states more than others but will likely be an overall drag on the economy.Even with revenue growth, states still face budget pressure, especially from Medicaid, employee healthcare and pensions. Many states continue to navigate the downturn adequately, but still face significantcredit headwinds. We expect selected downgrades where these risks are outliers relative to their ratings.

Despite these pressures, the default risk implied by our state ratings (general obligations ranging fromA2 to Aaa) remains very low to de minimus.

21

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

22/132

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

est

2012

est

Student Revenues % Government Appropriations %

Median % Revenues by Source for US Public Universities

Source Unknown

22

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

23/132

Percentage Change in Inflation-Adjusted Mean Family Income

by Quintile, 19801990, 19902000, and 20002010

!SOURCE: The College Board, Trends in College Pricing 2011, Figure 16A.!

23

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

24/132

All but the most elite universities face diminished student demand and increased price sensitivity dueto a prolonged period of depressed family income, household net worth, and a dip in the number ofdomestic high school graduates since the peak of 3.34 million for school year 2007-20082.

U.S. PUBLIC FINANCEJANUARY 16, 2013

An increasing proportion of our rated portfolio is unable to grow tuition revenue at the average rate ofinflation. In fiscal 2011, 35% of Moodys rated private colleges and universities and 21% of publicuniversities did not achieve tuition revenue growth at even the Federal Reserves target rate of inflationof 2%. In FY 2008, the last year before the global financial crisis and the recent peak in the number ofdomestic high school graduates, only 11% of privates and 9% of publics failed to grow their tuition

revenue by at least 2%.6 According to our fourth annual tuition survey, this faltering revenue trendcontinued in fiscal year 2012 and 2013. Such weak revenue growth means a college cannot affordmeaningful salary increases or new program investments unless it cuts spending on staff and existingprograms, or creates cost efficiencies.

24

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

25/132

Among students and faculty alike, there is a pervasive

sense that the [tuition] increases and the deep budgetcuts are pushing the university into decline.

New York Times

25

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

26/132

State of the Union: Obama Pushes for College AffordabilityWednesday, January 25, 2012

Tuesday night, President Barack Obama delivered his annual State of the Unionaddress to members of Congress and one of the issues he commented on was thestate of higher education.

"Higher education can't be a luxury," President Obama said, warning colleges anduniversities. "If you can't stop tuition from going up, the funding you get fromtaxpayers will go down."

Source Unknown

26

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

27/132

Research Funding: Federal Research Funding Cuts On the Horizon

Given looming federal funding cuts for sponsored research, the largest, top-tier research institutions,including both public and private universities as well as highly-rated independent researchorganizations, will likely maintain stable credit profiles and will successfully navigate an increasinglycompetitive research environment. Federal government funding represents more than half of researchgrants awarded to research universities in the U.S., and future growth of federal funding is expected to

slow dramatically compared to a period of rapid growth which began in the late 1990s. Federalstimulus funding (ARRA) created an increase of federal grants in 2009-2011, but the best managedresearch universities recognized this as a temporary infusion and did not model future budgets orinvest heavily in facilities or infrastructure based on these short-lived higher levels of federal support.

27

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

28/132

The impact of declining tax revenues on academic resources

has been severe for public higher education across the

country...American higher education is in a world of hurt;

the pain is increasing in intensity, and it is high time for

our hundred-year-old paradigm to change.

Dan Angel and Terry Connelly

28

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

29/132

Higher education is changing by virtue of 1,000

painful cuts...it wont be the same ballgame in thefuture. This time, it isnt coming back to normal.

Stephen Portch, Chancellor

University System of Georgia

29

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

30/132

$36 Million Glide Path to FY 2014

UT must reset its economic modelby $36 million by FY 2014

FY 2013

FY 2014

30

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

31/132

Efficiency(improvements/value(

reinvestments((

19#

Primary(ins5tu5onal(

decision(authority(

Efficiency( Reinvest(in(value(((

Administra5on(( Consolidate(administra5ve(func5ons(

Restructure(debt(

Reduce(administra5ve(costs(

Tackle(automa5c(cost(increases(in(

benefits(

Partner,(pool,(outsource(

(

Crosssector(sharing(including(public/

private(partnerships(

Expand/condense(course(scheduling(

Buy(capacity(from(alterna5ve(providers(

Increase(opportuni5es(for(workplace

learning(

Differen5al(pricing(by(program(

Reduce(crosssubsidies(unless(essen5al(

to(results((

Create/preserve(lowprice(op5ons((

Academic(leadership( Degree(produc5vity(Increase(reten5on/gradua5on(rates(

Increase(creditbyexam(

Encourage(testout(op5ons(

Academic(course(redesign(

Minimize(rework((

Reduce(credits(and(5me(to(the(degree(

(

Academic(program(streamlining(

Eliminate/consolidate(programs(

Trim(nonproduc5ve(research((

Consolidate(high(cost(programs(in(fewer(

loca5ons(

(

Savings(to(students((

Reduced(5me(and(credits(to(the(degree(

Textbooks/course(materials(((

(

Convenience(

Increase(distance(delivery(

Offer(hybrid(courses(

(

New(Academic(Strategies(

Reengineer(curricula(

Cohort(scheduling((

Reengineer(course(delivery(

(

Reinven5on(

Comprehensive(quality(improvement(

approach(

Learningdriven(models(

Customized(learning(

Alterna5ve(faculty(career(paths(

(

Reinve

st((

Increaseinstructional productivity

Streamlinedegreeprograms

Centralizescheduling

Usewebforstudentself-service

This is an inventory of whatother universities are doingto address fiscal challenges.

This is an inventory of whatother universities are doingto address fiscal challenges.

31

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

32/132

Percentage of Instructional Faculty in Degree-Granting

Postsecondary Institutions Employed Full-Time,19712009

!SOURCE: The College Board, Trends in College Pricing 2011, Figure 22C.!

32

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

33/132

FIGURE 3

Trends in Instructional Staff Employment Status, 19752009All Institutions, National Totals

0

5

10

15

20

25

35

45

1975 1989 1993 1995 2003 2005 2007 2009

PercentofTotalInstr

uctionalStaff

30

40

Full-Time Tenure-Track Faculty

Part-Time Faculty

Graduate Student Employees

Full-Time Non-Tenure-Track Faculty

Full-Time Tenured Faculty

Source: US Department of Education, IPEDS Fall Staff Survey.

33

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

34/132

Number of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Staff per 100 FTE

Students in Degree-Granting Institutions,

1976, 1999, and 2009

!SOURCE: The College Board, Trends in College Pricing 2011, Figure 22B.!

34

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

35/132

The rush to define the twenty-first-century university is driven

by a combination of political and economic factors. It isfueled, above all, by enabling technology curves...

Richard A. DeMillo

35

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

36/132

36

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

37/132

37

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

38/132

38

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

39/132

New pedagogical conversation

Average learning retention rates Lecture - 5%

Reading - 10%

Audiovisual - 20%

Demonstration - 30%

Discussion - 50%

Practice - 75%

Teach Others - 90%

National Training Laboratories

Bethel, Maine

39

U.S. PUBLIC FINANCE

JANUARY 20, 2012

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

40/132

INDUSTRY OUTLOOK

JANUARY 20, 2012

U.S. Higher Education Outlook Mixed in 2012Revenue Pressure and Heightened Public Scrutiny Force Colleges and Universities to DemonstrateBetter Operating Efficiency and Transparency

Summary Opinion

For 2012 Moodys maintains a mixed outlook for U.S. not-for-profit private and publiccolleges and universities, mirroring our 2011 outlook. We have a stable outlook for thediversified market-leading colleges and universities, which have the strongest market

positions and balance sheets and operate multiple revenue-generating business lines. Thesemarket leaders are typically rated in the Aaa and Aa categories, although not exclusively, andrepresent a minority of our rated higher education portfolio. We maintain a negative outlookfor the remainder of the sector which covers the large majority of rated colleges anduniversities which are far more dependent on state appropriations and/or student tuition.This majority segment attracts students more regionally, retains less pricing power and

maintains thinner balance sheets.40

U S PUBLIC FINANCE

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

41/132

INDUSTRY OUTLOOK


US Higher Education Outlook Negative in 2013Revenue Pressure on All Fronts Intensifies Need to Grapple with Traditional Cost Structure

For 2013, Moodys revises its outlook for the entire US higher education sector to negative,marking a shift to negative from stable for even the sectors market leading diversifiedcolleges and universities. The outlook for the remaining majority of the sector remainsnegative, as it has been since 2009. The new sector-wide negative outlook reflects mountingpressure on all key university revenue sources, requiring bolder actions by university leaders

to reduce costs and increase operating efficiency. As the economic growth languishes belowprevious benchmarks and the federal government seeks to reduce spending in key areas, evenmarket leading universities with diversified revenues are facing diminished prospects forrevenue growth. Universities have been restraining costs in response to the weak economicconditions since the 2008-09 financial crisis, but they have only recently begun examiningthe cost structure of their traditional business model.

41

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

42/132

The Expansion and Contraction of Public Higher Ed

G.I. Bill1944

NSF Act1955

High Ed Act1965

Sallie Mae1972

Bayh-Doyle Act1980

MedicaidPrisonsK-12

SpendingIncreases

1990s

Tuition& Fee

Increases1990s

NationalRecession

2007

StimulusFunds2008-2011

FederalFinancial

AidChanges

(?)

42

U.S. PUBLIC FINANCEJANUARY 16 2013

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

43/132


Existing cost structure of higher education will change as revenue growth remainsconstricted

The US higher education sector has hit a critical juncture in the evolution of its business model. Most

universities will have to lower their cost structures to achieve long-term financial sustainability and tofund future initiatives. Better strategic leadership, predicated on improved governance andmanagement, will be the backbone to transforming university operations and taking on the entrenchedcost drivers of the business model: shared governance, classroom instruction, tenure, and student lifeservices.

Nearly two decades of extraordinary annual revenue growth allowed universities to grow withoutfocusing on productivity and efficiency.26 The negative economic and political pressure built upduring the post 2009 financial crisis period is finally proving to be the catalyst for universities to focusmore aggressively on operating efficiency and cost containment. However, deeper and more structuralchanges will be necessary to adjust to the long-term muted prospect for revenue growth.

43

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

44/132

Top Line: Tuition & Fees / State Appropriations / Financial Aid / Grants / Gifts / Endowment / Other

Teaching

Administration

ServiceResearch

HarvardUniversity

Associates Colleges | Baccalaureate Colleges | Masters Colleges & Universities | Doctorate-granting Universities

Eastern IdahoTechnical College

DRU (90) | RU/H (99) | RU/VH (108)

Universityof Toledo

PepperdineUniversity

Small (127) | Medium (185) | Large (414)

BradleyUniversity

KetteringUniversity

University ofWisconsin -Green Bay

B/A (147) Diverse (392) | A&S (270)

AmherstCollege

BYUIdaho

SUNYCollegeof Tech

OwensCC

(1,920)

Undergrad Grad Unfunded Partially Funded Fully Funded Subsidized Profitable

Cash Flow

++ - - - Break-even - +-

Bottom Line - + - -All three missions are important; they all build reputation, but their economic

models are different. You have to find the right mix that your top line can sustain.

What to you do when your top line declines by $36 million?

-

Step 1

Step 2Step 4 Step 3Step 5 Step 6

Step 7

====================================================================================

In time...

44

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

45/132

Bowling Green State University President Mary Ellen Mazey.

BGSU to cut 100 faculty positions; move wouldeliminate nearly 11% of school's faculty this fallBY MARK REITER

BLADE STAFF WRITER

BOWLING GREEN Nearly 11 percent of Bowling GreenState Universitys faculty will be eliminated for the 2013 fall

semester, the school announced Friday.

The reduction of 100 full-time jobs at the main campus and

Firelands campus in Huron, Ohio, will be accomplished

through attrition, retirements, and the expiration of some

one-year teaching contracts, a BGSU spokesman said.

The college has 932 full-time faculty members on the

campuses.

Printed Saturday, January 19, 2013

45

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

46/132

Course% 75Program% 25

J HCOE Cost FY2012

Business Engineering Law SSARE Honors LLSS VPA NSM CALL HSHS Nursing Pharmacy Medicine Auxiliaries Centers Total

Revenue

Tuition Revenue - Undergraduate 24,583,878 15,823,076 - - 383,236 37,430,318 5,597,520 27,991,671 2,248,079 25,038,829 5,277,420 7,430,701 - - - 151,804,730

Financial Aid - Undergraduate (5,777,531) (4,836,299) - - (300,256) (10,629,105) (1,465,860) (10,495,035) (291,983) (6,498,820) (2,265,702) (2,852,507) - - - (45,413,098)

State Share of Instruction Undergraduate 7,274,345 9,413,359 - - 174,683 9,330,999 1,995,596 8,680,865 1,379,078 10,143,591 3,147,773 3,867,458 - - - 55,407,746

Tuition Revenue - Graduate 5,351,040 5,034,486 9,630,508 - - 3,673,505 127,382 6,090,757 - 14,134,735 3,110,764 5,682,185 32,165,906 - - 85,001,268

Financial Aid - Graduate (541,277) (258,325) (3,367) - - (196,310) (5,546) (173,022) - (1,168,259) (489,578) (19,417) (4,205,064) - - (7,060,164)

S tate Share of Instruction Graduate 2,135,145 3,510,241 3,194,666 - - 1,886,074 88,826 3,589,822 - 7,790,761 1,750,722 5,511,690 19,351,272 - - 48,809,219

Indirect Cost Recovery 21,206 518,704 1,043 - - 72,210 - 529,757 - 154,178 - 151,439 2,235,200 - 8,523,187 12,206,924

General Fee - - - - - - 244,752 - - - - - - 20,682,276 3,323,055 24,250,083

Other Fees 1,590,307 2,042,312 128,304 - - 682,116 273,490 1,237,200 53,345 1,532,246 1,348,551 1,619,699 137,733 163,620 9,783,165 20,592,088

Other Revenue 16,066 598,091 10,319 - - 104,716 36,134 145,525 - 132,799 16,721 5,166 17,879,737 69,556,739 14,407,482 102,909,495

Total Revenue 34,653,178 31,845,644 12,961,474 - 257,663 42,354,523 6,892,295 37,597,541 3,388,520 51,260,059 11,896,673 21,396,413 67,564,784 90,402,634 36,036,890 448,508,291

Expense

Faculty Salaries 8,676,597 7,750,912 3,603,058 112,907 325,957 11,444,818 2,942,416 9,881,936 193,465 11,900,063 3,614,354 4,364,927 23,190,738 4,761 7,303,846 95,310,756

Clerical and Administrative Salaries 2,487,380 4,363,354 1,730,316 15,503 423,562 2,802,246 807,346 3,484,923 750,743 3,107,791 694,955 2,196,470 9,319,089 8,336,754 55,514,215 96,034,646

Student Wages 498,030 1,672,317 95,355 154,891 19,115 1,272,096 103,248 2,936,404 3,868 1,127,765 29,088 463,179 5,199,373 2,009,780 3,879,011 19,463,520

Other Labor 47,645 62,484 158,893 764 - 28,428 18,441 28,877 2,197 71,707 889,457 4,056 395,766 4,457,400 (2,949,851) 3,216,260

Benefits 4,073,060 7,582,510 1,688,897 45,571 237,032 7,048,594 1,263,407 9,834,697 275,835 6,743,789 1,394,562 3,090,986 10,914,294 4,119,036 28,389,140 86,701,412

Departmental Expenses 1,812,980 2,428,227 3,223,301 120,061 143,867 1,045,794 808,542 3,670,473 415,831 2,321,320 352,769 1,329,657 4,991,370 48,416,995 37,866,990 108,948,176

Current Unrestricted Funds Only

University of Toledo College and Auxiliary Income Statements - FY2012

Depreciation 405,845 1,614,489 676,494 - 56,913 796,826 601,300 1,924,609 68,436 1,388,994 194,562 547,978 1,724,583 16,859,368 9,969,242 36,829,641

Total Expense 18,001,537 25,474,293 11,176,314 449,696 1,206,447 24,438,802 6,544,700 31,761,919 1,710,375 26,661,428 7,169,747 11,997,254 55,735,214 84,204,095 139,972,592 446,504,412

N et In co me Be fo re Co st Ce nt er Al lo ca ti on 1 6, 65 1,6 40 6,371,350 1,785,161 (449,696) (948,784) 17,915,722 347,595 5,835,622 1,678,145 24,598,632 4,726,926 9,399,159 11,829,570 6,198,540 (103,935,702) 2,003,879

Academic Cost Center Allocation 4,641,584 1,876,183 671,577 - 79,130 7,104,811 1,061,777 4,225,671 416,167 5,935,270 1,247,424 1,219,294 (2,206,692) - (26,272,197) -

Operating Cost Center Allocation 4,052,358 6,294,715 2,658,677 64,446 450,937 7,328,959 2,400,159 8,254,698 520,417 8,065,513 2,157,691 2,959,912 16,918,166 15,536,857 (77,663,506) -

Ne t Incom e A fter Cost C enter Allocat ion 7,9 57,698 (1,799,548) (1,545,093) (514,142) (1,478,851) 3,481,952 (3,114,341) (6,644,748) 741,560 10,597,849 1,321,811 5,219,953 (2,881,904) (9,338,317) - 2,003,879

Contribution Margin 23% -6% -12% -574% 8% -45% -18% 22% 21% 11% 24% -4% -10% 0% 0%

Other Revenue, Expense, and Transfers

Debt Related Expenses - - - - - - - - - - - - - (415,361) (39,311) (454,672)

Investment Gains (Loses) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (119,711) (119,711)

Capital Expense - (257,874) - (80,000) - (61,207) (18,244) (235,621) (11,687) (45,037) (62,152) (166,426) (245,622) (728,860) (2,577,367) (4,490,098)

Net Transfers (120,582) (19,600) 16,013 15,186 (738) 160,424 58,024 635,255 (287,301) (14,851) (52,872) 117,140 967,892 (17,262,250) 8,608,619 (7,179,641)

$10M Transfer to College of Medicine - - - - - - - - - - - - 10,000,000 - - 10,000,000

Adjusted Net Income 7,837,116 (2,077,022) (1,529,080) (578,956) (1,479,589) 3,581,169 (3,074,561) (6,245,114) 442,572 10,537,960 1,206,787 5,170,667 7,840,366 (27,744,788) 5,872,229 (240,244)

Adjusted Contribution Margin 23% -7% -12% -574% 8% -45% -17% 13% 21% 10% 24% 12% -31% 16% 0%

Student Credit Hours (SCH) 84,826 55,633 12,189 - 1,431 131,505 19,201 98,583 7,526 113,785 22,559 28,386 53,619

N et Incom e Afte r C os t C enter Alloca tion per SC H 9 4 (32) (127) (1,033) 26 (162) (67) 99 93 59 184 (54)

Total Expense per SCH 212 458 917 843 186 341 322 227 234 318 423 1,039

46


7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

47/132

J ,

Public universities face unique governance and management challenges

We expect to see more governance stress at public universities because management teams, facultiesand governing boards are often poorly aligned. University managers are driven increasingly by market

strategy even as they face rising faculty opposition to change, while the boards often remain largelyfocused on political tactics to deal with state government criticism or promoting a corporate focuslacking communication styles suitable to universities. In 2012, we saw an extreme example of howthese conflicting priorities can result in clashes among governing boards, management teams andfaculties in the firing and subsequent rehiring of the University of Virginias president.29 PennsylvaniaState University, on the other hand, was an example of concentration of power in a few dynamicsenior managers with inadequate board oversight.

47

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

48/132

Key Messages

1. Increasing teaching productivity is an economic necessity.

2. Improving the perception of our commitment to undergraduateteaching is a goal.

3. Lecturers will not lose their positions--just the opposite is true.

4. UT will always be a research university.

5. The amount of unfunded research and service may have

to be adjusted or more evenly distributed.

6. Faculty Senate will appoint members to an Appeals

Committee; there will be pedagogical exceptions.

7. Programs/courses with low enrollments need to be reviewed.

48

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

49/132

During the last hundred years, higher education has become

stratified. American universities come in three varieties. TheElite universities...are at a tremendous advantage as they

compete for students, money, and global prestige. To some

universities, reputational ranking is irrelevant; these are the

For-Profit entities. Most colleges and universities lie in theMiddle, a land where the resources of the top-ranked schools

are just out of reach, a region where they find themselves

unable to find ways of using what money they have to become

more competitive. In American higher education, wealthflows to the top and bottom strata, but not the Middle.

Richard A. DeMillo

49

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

50/132

Institutions without an overwhelming brand

advantage have no chance of success...

Richard A. DeMillo

50

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

51/132

Being more selective allows universities to recruit top students who are likely to become alumni that

earn relatively higher incomes, and therefore can provide larger philanthropic donations. This is

especially true for private universities that have national and international reputations and attractstudents globally. Public flagship universities, while less selective than their private peers, often operatesmall honors colleges within that are nearly as selective as top private universities. Most

philanthropic gifts over $50 million are bestowed for the purpose of funding research programs, or toprovide financial aid for low-income students. Research programs aiming to cure diseases or make

other technological advances are often the beneficiaries of such large gifts.

51

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

52/132

The real advantage of the traditional universities...is their

ability to meld online and face-to-face learning experiences.

Clayton Christensen & Henry Eyring

52

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

53/132

...the life changing professor puts the traditionaluniversity on a different plane than its low-cost competitors.


53

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

54/132

With ones livelihood at stake, the preference of some faculty

members for disciplined-focused scholarship over instruction

becomes a self-preservation mandate for all. The survivors ofthe process expect to be paid more while teaching less, as do

star recruits from other universities. The greater absence

of senior professors from undergraduate classrooms affects

not only the quality of instruction but also its cost...Themore established and research-oriented a university becomes,

the more its instructional costs tend to grow...For students,

universities fashioned after this model are expensive and

difficult to access; they provide preparation more appropriateto advanced study in graduate school than to the workplace.


54

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

55/132

...good employment requires a masters degree.Clayton Christensen & Henry Eyring

55

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

56/132

J uly 22, 2011

The Masters as the New BachelorsBy LAURA PAPPANO

William Kleins story may sound familiar to his fellow graduates. After earning his bachelors inhistory from the College at Brockport, he found himself living in his parents Buffalo home,

working the same $7.25-an-hour waiter job he had in high school.

It wasnt that there werent other jobs out there. Its that they all seemed to want more education.Even tutoring at a for-profit learning center or leading tours at a historic site required a masters.

Its pretty apparent that with the degree I have right now, there are not too many jobs I wouldwant to commit to, Mr. Klein says.

So this fall, he will sharpen his marketability at Rutgers new masters program in Jewish studies(think teaching, museums and fund-raising in the Jewish community). Jewish studies may not bethe first thing that comes to mind as being the road to career advancement, and Mr. Klein is notsure exactly where the degree will lead him (hed like to work for the Central Intelligence Agencyin the Middle East). But he is sure of this: he needs a masters. Browse professional job listingsand its bachelors required, masters preferred.

Call it credential inflation. Once derided as the consolation prize for failing to finish a Ph.D. or justa way to kill time waiting out economic downturns, the masters is now the fastest-growingdegree. The number awarded, about 657,000 in 2009, has more than doubled since the 1980s,and the rate of increase has quickened substantially in the last couple of years, says Debra W.Stewart, president of the Council of Graduate Schools. Nearly 2 in 25 people age 25 and over have

a masters, about the same proportion that had a bachelors or higher in 1960.

56

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

57/132

Section III - An Overview of our Enrollment Trends

57

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

58/132

Undergraduate Graduate

4,624

16,876

UT Fall 2012 Enrollment: 21,500

UT Fall 2011 Enrollment: 22,610

58

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

59/132

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

UT Undergraduate Total UT New Student EnrollmentUT Direct from High School Graduate Students

59

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

60/132

60

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

61/132

0

1,500

3,000

4,500

6,000

EHSHS BUSINESS ENGINEERING GATEWAY

UT Fall 2011 UT Fall 2012

61

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

62/132

0

525

1,050

1,575

2,100

LLSS PHARMACY SCIENCE / MATH NURSING


62

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

63/132

0

300

600

900

1,200

MEDICINE LAW ADULT ARTS


63

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

64/132

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

65/132

0%

17.5%

35%

52.5%

70%

Scholarship / Aid Location Campus Visit Major

What led you to enroll at UT?

65

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

66/132

Why Students

Dont Cometo UT

June 2012 Survey: 1,381Undergraduate Students

66

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

67/132

0%

15%

30%

45%

60%

Location Backup Plan Reputation Other

Why didnt you come to UT?

67

Do you feel your college choice is a

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

68/132

Yes No Not Sure

Do you feel your college choice is ahigher quality university than UT?

68

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

69/132

The surrounding city isnt the safest, soI took that into consideration.

69

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

70/132

The only reason that I chose BGSU over UT

is simply that I continually heard from many

different people what a good teaching school

BGSU was. This decision was a very difficultone for me, one that I spent a lot of energy on.

I was torn, and frankly my parents wish that

I had chosen UT over BGSU.

70

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

71/132

So what does all this data implywe should do?

1. UT must take action to strengthen its academic reputation.

2. UT must take action to make the campus feel safer to

prospective students and their families.

3. The scholarship and financial aid program must be wisely

and effectively administered.

4. The campus must be beautiful and the campus visit must

deliver a WOW! experience.

5. UT must take action to change the perception of UTs

commitment to undergraduate teaching.

71

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

72/132

Section IV - The Meaning of Student-Centeredness

72

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

73/132

Reasons that Students Leave

N.Raisman&Associatesbasedoninterviewswith1,254studentsnationwide.

73

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

74/132

The student-centered university is the exception today. In

the future, no other kind is likely to succeed.


74

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

75/132

Us-Centered Student-Centered

Rankings

Accrediting Bodies

Academic Journals

Peers

US

Community Needs

Employers

Funding Agencies

Students Families

STUDENTS

University University

75

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

76/132

Value Proposition

Avalue proposition is the entire set of customer experiences. The experiences a customer will have generally revolve around three areas:

quality, price, and service.

All three areas are interdependent. Customers do not experience a strategy; they experience the execution of the

strategy. Focus on the Moments of Truth of your customers experiences with the

organization; each MOT is an opportunity for them to feel special, cared for,

and appreciated.

You want to create a dialogue with the customer throughout the entirecustomer experience; the internet is key to all of this. Watch what customers

do, not what they say, because it is in what they do that reveals their truepreferences.

Another aspect of the customers experience is aesthetics. More and more, onthe margin, aesthetic quality is going to determine more of the value ofproducts.

76

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

77/132

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

78/132

Student Success

What sets the 20 best-practice schools apart is how well theyimplement their programs and the meaningful ways their initiativestouch a large number of students.

The first step is to know your students. The second step is to draw a map of student success.

The third step is to teach students what the institution values, whatsuccessful students do, and how to take advantage of institutionalresources.

The fourth step is to create systems that make available what studentsneed when they need it.

There is no common or dominant organizational structure across best-practice schools.

Student success is not a function of the amount of spendingit is afunction of spending wisely.

78

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

79/132

Student Success=Prior Academic AttainmentX

IntelligenceXInstructionXSupportXEffortXEmotional StrengthXFinancial Resources

79

d

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

80/132

Core Student Success Programs

OrientationFirst-year programsAdvisingTutoringCounselingStudent life

80

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

81/132

...we observe two distinct groups of college students who

have different jobs-to-be-done. In one group, the experience

is central to the college experience. Because of family and workresponsibilities, students in the other group dont want to

spend time on campus to earn a degree.


81

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

82/132

Wooing the next generation of [students will] take not only

cutting edge electronics but also a compelling user experience:a mix of reliability, ease of use, and beautiful design.

Richard A. DeMillo

82

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

83/132

To survive increasing competition, most universities need

to be both more student focused and more narrowlyfocused in their academic offerings.


83

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

84/132

Section V - Main Campus Strategic Analysis

84

SWOTANALYSIS

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

85/132

StrategicAnalysisofStrengths,Weaknesses,Opportuni8es,andThreats

Strengths Weaknesses

Opportuni8es Threats

S W

O T

85

SWOTANALYSIS

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

86/132

SummaryofStrengths

STRENGTHS

Widearrayofacademicprograms.

Strongfacultyinmanyprograms.

STEMMprogramsareperceivedtobestrong.Lawisperceivedtobestrong.

Honorsprogramisperceivedtobestrong.

Perceivedcontributortoregionaleconomicdevelopment.

Pipelinefromundergraduatetograduateprograms.

Jobreadygraduatesoftheprofessionalprograms.

Communityengagement.



S W

O T

86

SWOTANALYSIS

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

87/132

SummaryofWeaknesses

WEAKNESSES

UTisperceivedbymanytobeamid-8eruniversity.

BusinessprogramsareperceivedtobeinferiortoBG.

Educa8onprogramsareperceivedtobeinferiortoBG.PerformingartsprogramsareperceivedtobeinferiortoBG.

Undergraduateprogramsareperceivedtobeinferiorto

MiamiUniversityofOhio.

Studentreten8onislow.

Studentdebtishigh.

Academicprogramsarethinlystaffed.



S W

O T

87

SWOTANALYSIS

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

88/132

SummaryofOpportuni8es

OPPORTUNITIES

Strongerrela8onshipswithcommunitycolleges.

Post-graduatecer8ficateprograms.

Technologicalandpedagogicalinnova8ons.

For-profithighereduca8onen88eshavenotyet

achievedhighbrandvalue.

Universityrela8onshipswithexternalen88es:

-ToledoPublicSchools;EarlyCollegeHighSchool;WGTE

-StateandFederalGovernment

-RegionalEmployers

-ToledoMuseumofArt



S W

O T

88

SWOTANALYSIS

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

89/132

SummaryofThreats

THREATS

Statefundingisdecreasing.

Federalfinancialaidisatrisk.

Tradi8onalresearchfundingisdecreasing.

Tui8onandfeeincreasesareattheirlimits.Flagshipuniversi8esarethriving;regionalstate

universi8esareatrisk.

NWOhioisstrugglingeconomically.

For-profitandfreehighereduca8onisgrowing.

Someneighborhoodsaroundcampusarenotsafe.

Changingpercep8onofthevalueofacollegedegree.



S W

O T

89

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

90/132

90

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

91/132

Problem #1

UTs brand is not as strong as it needs to be. Only market-leading

colleges and universities will survive in the 21st century.

PROBLEM #2

Students in the 21st century need an advanced degree to enjoy thesame competitive advantage in the marketplace that students onceenjoyed with just an undergraduate degree.

91

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

92/132

Problem #3

New digital technologies are enabling new and potentially more cost-effective models of higher education. New entrants that use thesetechnologies are threatening traditional universities.

PROBLEM #4

Students in the 21st century need an international education tocompete in an increasingly global economy, but the cost of studyabroad is prohibitive and unrealistic for many students.

92

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

93/132

Problem #5

Many high school graduates are unprepared for college, and many are

from low socio-economic family backgrounds. They need cost-effectivedevelopmental work.

PROBLEM #6

Enrollment is declining; student retention and graduation rates are low.

93

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

94/132

Problem #7

PROBLEM #8

Public resources to support higher education are declining, and thelimits of tuition and fee increases and student debt have been reached.Higher educations cost structure must come down while outcomes

that are important to students and funding agencies must improve. UTmust reduce its cost structure by approximately $36 million.

Lecturers are treated as second-class faculty; they need a better career

path.

94

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

95/132

Problem #9

PROBLEM #10

UT does not have the financial resources to support the comprehensive

research university model in all areas. As a result of trying to do so,staffing and systems are inadequate throughout the university.

UT academic structures are not optimally designed to respond tochanging conditions in the external environment. Morale in someparts of the university is low.

95

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

96/132

Section VI - Solutions to Strategic Problems

96

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

97/132

Overarching Strategic Priorities

Academic Quality

Student Experience

Teamwork and Empowerment

Student Success and Learning Assessment

Distinction and Reputation

Efficiency, Focus, and InnovationProblem Solving for Our Community

97

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

98/132

98

Jesup Scott

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

99/132

Name, enhance, market, and enlarge UTs HonorsCollege to create a recognizable, high-quality sub-brandwithin The University of Toledo, and thereby enlarge thepipeline of well-prepared students into the universityswide array of undergraduate and advanced degreeprograms. Encourage honors students to completetheir undergraduate degree in three years and beginadvanced degree programs at the beginning of theirfourth year.

HonorsCollege

UTs brand is not as strong as it

needs to be. Only market-leadingcolleges and universities willsurvive in the 21st century.

Students in the 21st century need anadvanced degree to enjoy the samecompetitive advantage in the marketplacethat students once enjoyed with just anundergraduate degree.

Feature experiential learning (internship, co-op, servicelearning, study abroad, undergraduate research,

simulation) for all students to enhance student learningand employability. Partner with Digerati to increaseexperiential learning capacity and support.

1.

2.

Brand

99

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

100/132

100

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

101/132

101

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

102/132

102

X

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

103/132

New digital technologies are enabling new

and potentially more cost-effective modelsof higher education. New entrants thatuse these technologies are threateningtraditional universities.

Students in the 21st century need aninternational education to compete in anincreasingly global economy, but the cost of study

abroad is prohibitive and unrealistic for manystudents.

XCreate UTXNET World Campus to advancethe branding and delivery of web-based educational

content, the effective use of academic technology inall learning environments, and the awarding ofcompetency-based college credit. Partner withApple Higher Education to achieve these outcomes.Engage faculty in this work.

Use UTXNET WORLD CAMPUS toincrease the number of hybrid courses, flipped

classrooms, and international digital connectionsinside and outside UT classrooms.

3.

4.

NET

WORLD

CAMPUSMOOC

103

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

104/132

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

105/132

Lecturers are treated as second-

class faculty; they need a bettercareer path.

Convert Lecturers to Assistant, Associate, andfull Professors of Practice with 3- to 5-yearrenewable contracts and 9- to 12-monthannual employment terms.

8.

Faculty

105

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

106/132

Public resources to support higher

education are declining, and the limits oftuition and fee increases and student debthave been reached. Higher educations coststructure must come down while outcomesthat are important to students and fundingagencies must improve. UT must reduce itscost structure by approximately $36 million.

UT does not have the financial resources tosupport the comprehensive research universitymodel in all areas. As a result of trying to do so,staffing and systems are inadequate throughoutthe university.

9. Step 1 - Reduce administrative overhead.Step 2 - Increase instructional productivity in all

academic units; provide additional support for increasedteaching productivity (e.g., TAs, academic advisors, teamteam teaching, and new instructional technologies).Step 3 - Streamline degree programs and courseofferings; reengineer academic administration, studentaffairs, and academic support functions.Step 4 - Implement a college incentive funding formulafor capital funds.Step 5 - Adopt a new faculty hiring plan to account for

faculty retirements over the next few years.Step 6 - Use technology to enable student self-service.

Funding

106

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

107/132

UT academic structures are not optimally

designed to respond to changingconditions in the external environment.Morale in some parts of the university islow.

10. Divide EHSHS into three colleges: Education,Health Sciences, and Criminal Justice and HumanServices. Create a new college: College ofCommunication.

Make institutional investments in the followinginterdisciplinary schools: Green Chemistry andAdvanced Renewable Energy, Biomarkers, AdvancedSimulation, and Healthcare Business Enterprise andInnovation.

Use University Council to foster a new spirit ofuniversity teamwork and to improve responsivenessto the needs of internal and external stakeholders.

Structure

107

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

108/132

1. Brand.2. Undergraduate degree.

3. For-profits & MOOCs.4. International education.

5. Under-prepared students.6. Declining enrollments.

7. Faculty mix & career paths.8. Funding & financial model.

9. Academic structures.10. Morale.

2017

1. Enhanced honors college.2. Experiential learning (Digerati).

3. UTXnet World Campus.4. Hybrid & flipped classrooms (UTC).

5. YouCollege (Apple Higher Ed).6. Pricing/aid & student-centeredness.

7. Professors of Practice.8. $36 million stepwise process.

9. New colleges & partnerships.10. University Council.

108

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

109/132

Key Metrics

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

110/132

#

Key Metrics

Total Enrollment

Retention % Graduation %

Student Learning Student Satisfaction

Job Placement %

Alumni Satisfaction Employer Satisfaction

Funded Research

Operating Income $

Operating Margin %

Philanthropy $ Community Outcomes

110

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

111/132

Most organizations failNOT because they dont have a goodstrategic plan; they fail because they dont

EXECUTEtheir plan well.

111

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

112/132

Strategyfor

Main Campus

te

am

experiencestudent

problem

solving

#

develop

build

reengineer

begin

become

112

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

113/132

Shifting GearsPlan

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

114/132

StructuresCreate

TeamsAppoint

EconomicRebalance

Projects

Begin

2getherStick

New

Implementation

Model

Capital

Shifting GearsImplementationPlan

114

"We will always endeavor

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

115/132

We will always endeavorto transmit our university

greaterin honor and esteem,

betterand more glorious

than it was transmitted to us."UT Student Pledge in the Early 1900s

115

First Year Timeline

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

116/132

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP

Reorganization I

MC Strategic Plan

Marketing Research I

Stakeholder

Communication

Reorganization II

Strategic Plan

Implementation

Marketing Research II

FY 14 Budget / CBA

University Council

Baseline Metrics

Process Improvement

Marketing Plan

Capital Investments II

MC / College Strategic

Plan Revisions

Budget Changes

Capital Investment I

Learning Assessment

NY Curriculum

Changes

116

Main Campus Road to Greatness

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

117/132

Main Campus St-ategic Plan

Start Here Beautif5l Facilities

St5dentCenteredness Great Teamwork

Teamworkis the key to our success.

End Here

Great Outcomes Enabling Technolog

Exeriential Learing

ExerH Facult & Staff

(Graduation & Career Success)

Learing Assessment(Measurement & Improvement)

2017

Main Campus 5-Year Strategic Plan

U s- Ce nt er ed S tu de nt -C en te re d

Rankings

Accrediting Bodies

Academic Journals

Peers

US

Community Needs

Employers

Funding Agencies

StudentsFamilies

STUDENTS

University University

(Efficient Systems & Processes)

(Skilled Leadership)

(Orderly and Clean)

(Teaching, Research & Serice)

(StFdent Life & Serices)

(InterHships and Much More!)

(The Plan for Academic Distinction)

117

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

118/132

118

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

119/132

Engaging the Present.

Creating the Future.

119

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

120/132

Appendix: Step 2 Slides

120

Provost Organization Chart

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

121/132

Curriculum and Accreditation

Academic Finance

Research

Graduate Studies

International

Provost & EVP

Student Affairs

Academic Operations

Assessment & Program Review

Enrollment Management

Institutional Research

Administrative Assistant

Libraries

Deans

Experiential Learning

State Reporting

UTXNET

Registrar Teaching Center

121

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger,

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

122/132

Albert Einstein

y g g gg

more complex,and more violent. It takes a touch of genius --

and a lot of courage -- to move in the opposite direction."

122

Overview of Competency-based Education

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

123/132

Knowledge(knows)

Success / FailureDegree /Certificate

Career

Skills(can do)

Student /Learning

Objectives

Citizenship

Faculty /Curriculum

Learning

Assessment

Learning

Assessment

Evaluation /Grade

Textbook&

Articles

OnlineInformation

&Instruction

ExperientialExercises

750 minutesof instruction

per credit hour

120 credit hours

FederalFinancial Aid

$

Degree / Certificate ProgramGeneral Education

Institutional

p yand Learning Assessment

directindirect

Learning Outcomes / Competencies =application of knowledge and skills at specific

levels of performance in a variety of situations.

PostGraduate

Cracking theCredit Hour

Other competency-based methods:- course-based prior learning

assessment- prior learning portfolios- independent study; challenge exams

- standardized exams (AP/CLEP)

123

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

124/132

General Education Learning Goals

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

125/132

Write and speak in a manner consistent with

accepted standards.

Apply quantitative methods and computer

programs to solve common problems; access anddiscern the relative value of information;

Describe key scientific principles in the biological,

physical, social, and behavioral sciences.

Know and appreciate the aesthetic, ethical and

multicultural dimensions of the arts and humanities.

Describe and apply principles for healthy living,

lifelong learning, and career development.

Students who complete the core curriculum will

be able to:

SCHs

9

6

12

3

36

==

Total

6

125

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

126/132

Humanities &Social Sciences

Business &Innovation

Visual &Performing Arts

Law Engineering

Health SciencesAdult

ProfessionalsYouCollegeHonors College

Natural Sciences

& Mathematics

EducationCriminal Justice &Human Services

Proposed Honors College General Education Course Offerings

First WritingSecond Writing

Art History &Visual Literacy

PhysicsU.S. Government

and the LawComputerLiteracy

Philosophyof Learning

Anatomy &Physiology

College Algebra& Statistics

Interdisciplinary Arts -Careers & Leadership

Sociology

World Historyand Cultures

PharmacyMedicineNursing

Biology

Food, Nutrition &Conditioning

Chemistry

Communication

Public Speaking

126

Key Events Management

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

127/132

Key Events Management

Campus VisitsNew Student Orientations

Lecture Series

Graduation Ceremonies

Concerts and Presentations

Football and Basketball Games

Board of Trustee Meetings

Alumni Events

127

Blue Ocean Strategy

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

128/132

Blue Ocean Strategy

128

Blue Ocean Strategy

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

129/132

gy

129

New Faculty Workload Guidelines

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

130/132

Tenure-Tenure Track Lecturer

Starting Teaching Hrs. per CBA 12 SCH 15 SCH

Other Significant Faculty Work Per CBA (up to 3) (up to 3)

Institutional Interdisciplinary School (up to 3) (up to 3)

Grant Buy-out (no limit) (no limit)

Case Exception (no limit) (no limit)

Total Actual Teaching Load ? SCH ? SCH

Reserved Time for Research

Reserved Time for Service

20% (8 hours per week) Non-core

10% (4 hours per week) Non-core

================================

----------------------------------------------------------

130

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

131/132

New Minimum Class Sizes

Undergraduate Courses 30

Graduate Courses 15

Doctoral Courses 8

Exceptions on a Case by Case Basis.

Note: Previous class size minimums: 24/15/8/6.

131

7/29/2019 Imagine 2017

132/132

What that research tells us is this: Smaller classes arebetter, but only if the teacher is a very good one. In otherwords, class size matters, but teacher effectivenessmatters more. That means you're better off with 28, 30,or maybe even more students and a great teacher, than24 or 22 and a mediocre one. What's more, to reallymake a difference, smaller must mean much smaller.Fewer than 16, for instance. Meanwhile, class sizereduction is very expensive, so it doesn't always work

from a cost/benefit analysis relative to other choices.

Imagine 2017

Documents

Transcript of Imagine 2017