A Southern Maine Imperative:Meeting the Region’s Higher

Education Needs in the21st Century

A Report on the Future of the University of Southern Maineby the USM Board of Visitors

October 2000

October 1, 2000

Richard L. Pattenaude, PresidentThe University of Southern Maine96 Falmouth StreetP.O. 9300Portland, ME 04104-9300

Dear President Pattenaude:

In 1997, the 118th Maine Legislature created Boards of Visitors for eachcampus of the University of Maine System. Boards were charged with:(1) advising the head of each campus on community and regional needs,(2) advocating for the University,(3) reviewing for final recommendation to the Board of Trustees tuition increases, newacademic programs and the 5-year plan of the University; and(4) raising private funds for the University.

This report, A Southern Maine Imperative: Meeting the Region’s Higher EducationNeeds in the 21st Century, represents a significant response to our legislativemandate to advise you on community and regional needs and to recommendpriorities for the University’s five-year plan. Our report is based largely on anextensive community outreach project to assess the southern Maine region’sneeds for higher education and expectations for USM. We learned throughnumerous meetings with stakeholder groups that USM is vital to the future ofthe region and, indeed, the entire state. As this region’s primary source ofeducational excellence and educational opportunity, USM is unquestionablysouthern Maine’s university.

The primary message from our community outreach project is clear: Overthe next ten years, the University of Southern Maine must become one ofthe top-ranked public, regional, comprehensive universities in the UnitedStates in the quality, breadth, and the accessibility of its academic pro-grams. The people of this region and the businesses and institutions that mustcompete in the knowledge-based, global economy of the 21st century requireand deserve nothing less than such an educational resource.

Our report has important implications for several audiences. First, we trustthis report will guide you and your staff as you plan for the future of USM andposition the University to be among the very best of its peer institutions.

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN MAINE

USM Board of Visitors P.O. Box 9300Portland, Maine 04104-9300

(207) 780-4480FAX (207) 780-4549TTY (207) 780-5646

Chair: Rosalyne S. BernsteinAttorney

Eleanor BakerVice Chair and Tax Principal

Baker Newman & Noyes

John FitzsimmonsPresident

Maine Technical College System

Jane HaveyPresident

Capricorn Products

Jeanne HulitVice President &

Relationship ManagerKey Bank

Martin Joyce, Jr.Investment Executive

Tucker Anthony

Deborah KhadraouiPresident

Asina & Associates

Joseph R. MartinExecutive Vice President & CFO

Fairchild Semiconductor

Michael A. MooreSuperintendent

Gorham Schools

Thomas F. MoserPresident

Thomas Moser Cabinetmaker

Kenneth M. NelsonPresident & CEO

Nelson & Small Inc.

Peggy OsherOsher Map Library Associates

David OttPresident & CEO

Peoples Heritage Bank

Jon S. OxmanAttorney

Linnell Choate & Weber

Kenneth RossVice President

Clark Associates

Ex Officio:

Christopher O’Connor, ChairUSM Professional Staff Senate

Ryan Anderson, ChairUSM Student Senate

Tara Healy, ChairUSM Faculty Senate

Heidi Kreiger, ChairUSM Classified Staff Senate

Second, we direct this report to the faculty and staff who ultimately are responsible fordesigning and implementing the academic programs, the research initiatives, and the publicservice activities to meet the region’s needs and expectations. Our vision, shared by thecommunity, of a top-ranked, 21st century regional university departs from the traditional viewof how universities function in significant ways that create challenges and opportunities forthe University community.

Third, we direct this report to the southern Maine community, especially to civic andbusiness leaders. They have indicated throughout our outreach project that they are preparedto become active partners with USM in shaping and supporting the vision presented here.Now is the time for them to join with their representatives on the Board of Visitors to makesuch partnerships a reality.

Finally, and perhaps most important, we direct our report to the Chancellor and theTrustees of the University of Maine System to which we are fully committed, and to theGovernor and state legislators. The people of this region have clearly articulated their expecta-tions of USM, a university that will fuel our economy and serve our cultural and social needs.A top-ranked regional university is not a luxury or a choice—it is an imperative. We look toall of Maine’s public policy leaders for the level of active and continuing support that willmake that imperative a reality.

In response to our community dialogue, I am very pleased to present this challenging butdoable vision for the future of our regional university. We are now prepared to fulfill a secondelement of our charge from the legislature—to be strong advocates for the resources that canmake this vision a reality in the first decade of the 21st century.

Sincerely yours,

Rosalyne S. Bernstein, ChairUniversity of Southern Maine Board of Visitors

c: Governor Angus KingChancellor Terrence J. MacTaggartJames D. Mullen, Chair, Board of Trustees

This report outlines the southern Mainecommunity’s concerns over the role of the Uni-versity of Southern Maine (USM) as a vitalcomponent in the future of the region and theentire state.

From December 1999 through April 2000,the USM Board of Visitors sponsored a com-prehensive community outreach project to as-sess the region’s needs and expectations regard-ing the University. Consultants engaged by theBoard interviewed 11 regional business andcivic leaders and facilitated 15 focus groupsinvolving 180 stakeholders representing a widerange of interests.

The message from this project was clear: Be-cause the futures of the southern Maine re-gion and USM are integrally linked, USMmust become one of the top-ranked public,regional, comprehensive universities in theUnited States in terms of the breadth, thequality, and the accessibility of its academicprograms.

The citizens of this region have told us inno uncertain terms that they expect USM to:- have both a clear direction and perform mul-

tiple roles,- provide solid programs in science, technol-

ogy, and professional fields and in the lib-eral arts, and,

- be a high quality, first-choice institution whileat the same time be a source of educationalopportunity for those citizens taking the firststep toward lifelong learning.

Executive Summary

Based on those expectations, the USM Boardof Visitors recommends that USM:

• aggressively pursue the goal of becoming,by 2010, one of the top-ranked public, re-gional, comprehensive universities in the na-tion, and be so recognized by its peers;

• significantly expand academic programsneeded regionally in science and technol-ogy as well as in graduate and professionalfields, and pursue a “targeted areas of excel-lence strategy” so that programs tied directlyto regional priorities can become nationallycompetitive;

• enhance its broad range of liberal arts andhumanities programs central to a solid un-dergraduate education and the intellectualneeds of the region’s learners;

• place the broad and continually changingneeds of lifelong learners within the regionat the core of the design and delivery of aca-demic programs, develop a comprehensivenetwork of institutional partnerships andcollaborations, and make creative use of elec-tronic learning opportunities;

• clarify, focus, and assure the affordability ofprograms and services designed to encour-age University attendance, persistence, andlifelong learning; and,

• gain more financial support from the stateand from the business/industrial communitycommensurate with USM’s mission andshare of statewide enrollment.

Maine, like our nation and much of theworld, is in the midst of a critical transition toa knowledge-based economy. Human capital—talented people—is the primary currency ofeconomically competitive and culturally vitalregions. Top quality universities are central tothe development, attraction, and retention ofhuman capital. The southern Maine region,home to three of every five Mainers, requires auniversity with demonstrated excellence atundergraduate and graduate levels in profes-sional and technical fields linked to our emerg-ing industrial sectors. The liberal arts are criti-cal because they bind the social fabric of ourcommunities and serve as a foundation for life-long learning and economic prosperity.

This report summarizes the regionalcommunity’s vision for the role of the Univer-sity of Southern Maine (USM) as a vital com-

ponent in the future of the region and the en-tire state. From December 1999 through April2000, the USM Board of Visitors sponsored acomprehensive community outreach project toassess the region’s needs and expectations re-garding the University.1 Consultants engagedby the Board interviewed 11 regional businessand civic leaders and facilitated 15 focusgroups involving almost 180 stakeholders rep-resenting a wide range of interests.2

The message from our regional assessmentproject is clear: Because the futures of thesouthern Maine region and USM are inte-grally linked, USM must become one of thetop-ranked public, regional, comprehensiveuniversities in the United States in termsof the breadth, the quality, and the accessi-bility of its academic programs.

A Southern Maine Imperative:Meeting the Region’s Higher

Education Needs in the21st Century

A Report on the Future of the University of Southern Maineby the Board of Visitors

Overview

The southern Maine community has strongexpectations for its university, USM. The citi-zens of this region have told us that they:• see the quality of USM as a key element in

the economic and cultural well-being of theregion;

• expect USM to be a first-choice institutionfor students while also continuing to pro-vide educational opportunities for place-bound residents of the region. Participantsrejected the notion that “the future USM rep-resent only an incremental improvementover the current USM” or that a choice bemade between being either a “high-quality”or a predominantly “access-oriented insti-tution.”

• are pleased with USM’s recent accomplish-ments, positive about its future, and investedin its potential and capacity to fulfill regionalneeds. Reflecting the views of many partici-pants, one noted, “the University is not acasual resource. It is transforming for life.”

• believe that, in the 21st century, Maine musthave two university centers offering under-graduate and graduate academic programs,each critically important to the economicand cultural vitality of the state. Moreover,the southern Maine community stated un-equivocally that they have no patience withany form of destructive competition betweencampuses that becomes an obstacle to get-ting the quality university and the breadthof academic programming needed in thisregion. The fundamental assumptionundergirding higher education planning forthe 21st century is that USM and the Uni-versity of Maine (UM) are equal partners insecuring Maine’s future.

Our community stakeholders also believethat there are important gaps between whatthe region requires and the current capacity ofUSM.• The scale and depth of current academic

programs, especially in science and technol-ogy fields, are too limited to meet theirneeds.

• There are too few graduate, professional, andresearch programs targeted to the growingrequirements of our regional economy andexpanding knowledge-based businesses.USM must not be constrained by traditionalgeographic and organizational boundaries indeveloping programs to assure that regionalneeds are met. In doing so, the Universitymust be entrepreneurial and agile in forg-ing alliances with other institutions tosupplement on-campus capacity.

• USM must communicate continually withits stakeholders to respond to and influencecommunity needs and expectations. USMneeds to build on the good will fosteredthrough this outreach project to sustain mu-tually supportive partnerships with the re-gional community.The Board’s consultants observed that the

community’s aspirations for USM’s future haveembedded in them seemingly contradictoryexpectations. While these expectations cer-tainly represent challenges for a relatively smalluniversity, we have concluded that they are notinherently contradictory. Indeed, the commu-nity outreach sessions have clarified for theBoard what it truly means to be a public, re-gional, comprehensive university. USM should:• have both a clear direction and perform

multiple roles,

What the Southern Maine CommunityTold the Board of Visitors

USM’s role, responsibilities, and presence asa comprehensive university in the southernMaine region and throughout the state havegrown substantially over the last two decades.• With a fall 2000 enrollment of more than

10,800, USM has been the largest unit of theUniversity of Maine System (UMS) since1996 and serves more Maine students thanany other campus. Over a 12-month period,more than 16,000 individual undergradu-ate and graduate students take credit-bear-ing courses at USM.

• The University serves over 4,300 full-timeundergraduates, almost as many as Bates,Bowdoin, and Colby combined, belying theimpression that the campus is only a placefor part-time, nontraditional students.

USM’s Centrality to the Regionand the State’s Future

• USM serves about half the graduate studentsin the UMS.

• Of those students who live in Androscoggin,Cumberland, and York counties who attenda UMS campus, 75% attend USM.

• Residents of all 16 counties in Maine attendUSM, graduates live and work in all 16 coun-ties, and USM research and technical assis-tance projects are present in every county.

• Over 85,000 people participate in USM non-credit programs and conferences each year.Clearly, USM already is a vital component

in meeting Maine’s higher education needs.The University, then, must be a central playerin a sustained strategy leading to Maine’s edu-cational and economic growth in the 21st cen-tury.

Throughout our conversations with thecommunity and our own work, we have de-veloped a clear vision for USM. There are sixkey components to our vision. We believe thatthe USM of the future should:1. aggressively pursue the goal of becoming,

by 2010, one of the top-ranked public, re-gional, comprehensive universities in the na-tion, and be so recognized by its peers;

Key Recommendations

2. significantly expand academic programsneeded regionally in science and technol-ogy as well as in graduate and professionalfields, and pursue a “targeted areas of excel-lence strategy” so that programs tied directlyto regional priorities can become nationallycompetitive;

3. enhance its broad range of liberal arts andhumanities programs central to a solid un-

• provide solid programs in science, technol-ogy, and professional fields and maintain thecentrality of the liberal arts3, and

• be a high quality, first-choice institution

while at the same time be a source of edu-cational opportunity for those taking the firststep toward lifelong learning.

While the transition of Maine’s economy and theresponsibilities that have emerged for the campusare the primary reasons to consider carefully thefuture of USM, there are several other statewide con-cerns that have influenced our examination.• Concerns about the educational attainment of Maine

citizens, especially the levels of bachelor’s and gradu-ate degrees.4 Post-secondary education attainmentlevels in Maine are at or below national averages.The good news is that Maine ranks 14th in theU.S. (2nd in New England) in persons over age25 with at least a high school diploma, and weare at the national average for those persons withan associate’s (two-year) degree. The bad newsis that Maine ranks 44th for persons over age 25with a bachelor’s degree—at 19%—compared toa national average of 24% and a New Englandaverage of 29%. Although Maine has seen slightimprovement in educational attainment over thepast few years, our rate of improvement ranksonly 41st nationally. More troubling, Maine’sranking for those age 25 and older with a gradu-ate degree is even further behind the nationalaverage.5 There is a proven correlation betweena region’s or state’s level of educational attain-ment and its level of personal income. As thelargest higher education institution in Maine lo-cated in the most populous region of the state,USM has a critical role to play—perhaps thecritical role—in fostering lifelong learning andimproving the educational attainment levels ofMaine citizens.

• Concern about the “talent drain” to other states.Talented young Mainers leave and often do notreturn. Maine is far more of a net exporter ofcollege students than most other states. The per-centage of Maine high school students who goto in-state colleges or universities has declinedfrom 68% in 1977 to 46% (one of the lowest inthe nation).6 In net migration of first-year stu-dents, Maine ranks 43rd—just seven other statesexport more students than they attract in actualnumbers. The largest “out-of-state leakage” forhigh school graduates attending a four-year in-stitution is in the southern Maine counties ofCumberland, York, and Oxford, though manyof these students return to finish their under-graduate degrees at USM.7 The loss of so many

recent Maine high school graduate enrollees toout-of-state institutions has been attributed tothe limited draw within the New England regionof the colleges and universities within the UMS.8

Raising the quality and, in turn, the draw ofsouthern Maine’s regional university should beone of the key strategies for keeping Maine’shome-grown talent at home.

• Concern about the limited R&D capacity in Maine’sacademic institutions. Maine continues to receivea grade of “D” for economic development capac-ity in the annual assessments from the Washing-ton-based Center for Enterprise Development.A broad consensus seems to have been reachedacross the state regarding the need to make sub-stantial investments in university-based R&Dcapacity. In November 1998 voters passed a $20million R&D bond referendum and in 1999 theLegislature appropriated $10 million annually forUM and USM as an investment in R&D. USMreceives 20% of the total state appropriation forbuilding university R&D capacity. Noting that“these are only first steps,” a January 2000 studyby the Maine League of Women Voters observed

“The strength and status of a univer-sity system is linked to its level of re-search. At both UM and USM, it is stillsignificantly below the level needed toattract federal and institutional grants.This seriously limits the ability of UM andUSM to draw high quality graduate stu-dents and faculty as well as their abilityto function as centers for economic andintellectual growth.”9

The League’s study was undertaken to examinethe “structure, governance, funding, tuition, finan-cial aid, staffing, programmatic, academic, andquality issues” facing the UMS. In a series of rec-ommendations to strengthen the UMS, the League’sreport said that

“USM should become one of two graduate cam-puses, sharing with UM the responsibility for de-signing and implementing new graduate programssuitable to the needs of students and the state. Todo this, USM needs enhanced library resources,laboratories, and other facilities, as well as ad-equate funding to hire appropriate graduate fac-ulty.”10

Statewide Concerns that Must Drive USM’s Future

• with a clear focus and identity;• linked to the southern Maine economy,

stimulating the economy with research, withappropriately trained employees, with on-going training and development for growthand change, and with selected Ph.D.,master’s, and certificate programs related tothe needs of southern Maine;

• that provides both quality education andbroad access to the entry-level step in highereducation for Maine residents;

• that provides lifelong learning in a variety offormats: a continuum of learning for chang-ing career roles and needs including newtechnology and traditional liberal arts, de-gree and non-degree programs at all levels;research with a focus on what area businessesneed to be successful; and Senior College;

• that is flexible, creative, and innovative inthe delivery of education to increase access,including convenient schedules, technology,and nontraditional locations. USM shouldbe a virtual as well as an upgraded physicalinstitution including improved physicalplant, aesthetics, and technology;

• that is engaged in partnerships (not compe-tition) with other institutions such as theUM, the University of New England, tech-nical colleges, private regional institutions,out-of-state institutions;

• that plays a community leadership role as acenter for policy dialogue, a resource fornonprofits, a trainer of community leaders,a source of data, information, and knowl-edge;

• that has a student body and staff that re-flects the diversity of its region, that is a cen-ter for the study and instruction of differentlanguages and a rich melting pot of ideas;

• that is proactive, reaching out aggressivelyto recruit students, actively engaging busi-nesses in partnerships, inviting in minoritycommunities, developing internships with

dergraduate education and the intellectualneeds of the region’s learners;

4. place the continually changing needs of life-long learners within the region at the coreof the design and delivery of academic pro-grams, develop a comprehensive network ofinstitutional partnerships, and make creativeuse of electronic learning opportunities;

5.clarify, focus, and assure the affordability ofprograms and services designed to encour-age university attendance, persistence, andlifelong learning; and,

6.gain more financial support from the stateand from the business/industrial communitycommensurate with USM’s mission andshare of statewide enrollment.The following sections describe in more de-

tail our specific recommendations.

Recommendation OneAggressively pursue the goal of becoming,

by 2010, one of the top-ranked public, re-gional, comprehensive universities in the na-tion, and be so recognized among peer insti-tutions, through clear expectations and com-mitments from the state, the UMS, the busi-ness community, and the faculty and staff.

Participants in the business and civic leaderinterviews and the focus groups want a uni-versity of which they can be proud. Those whoare involved in businesses that compete in theglobal economy need locally based academicand research programs that are nationally com-petitive. If the businesses of the southern Maineregion need to be world class, can we ask any-thing less of our regional academic resources?Whether the stakeholders who participated inthese sessions were from business, nonprofit,or community organizations, they have a clearsense of what USM must accomplish to beconsidered among the top-ranked public, re-gional, comprehensive universities. They toldus that a top-quality regional, public univer-sity is a university:11

nonprofits, reacting quickly to seize oppor-tunities and respond to clear needs;

• that is user-friendly in all aspects, includingtransferability of courses, location, andscheduling of classes, child care, counsel-ing, and remote access.The concept of “first choice” is particularly

important to USM’s future, for both those stu-dents who have a choice about where to pur-sue an undergraduate or graduate education,and for those who are place-bound and do nothave realistic options except among regionalinstitutions within commuting distance. Bothconstituencies deserve local access to academicprograms of the highest quality that can helpthem pursue careers in the region’s companiesand institutions. Programs that better meet theneeds of regionally based students will also beattractive to out-of-state students.

Fundamental to the achievement of the over-all goal of becoming a top-ranked regionaluniversity is the support and commitment re-quired from each of the key audiences for thisreport. Policy leaders in Maine, the UMS Boardof Trustees, the business community, and theentire USM community of faculty and staffmust be committed to an increased pace ofchange, and to the intellectual and resourceinvestments required. The southern Maine re-gion deserves a level of commitment thatmakes this goal clearly attainable.

Recommendation TwoSignificantly expand academic programs

needed in the region in science and technol-ogy as well as in graduate and professionalfields, and pursue a “targeted areas of excel-lence strategy” so that programs tied directlyto regional priorities can become nationallycompetitive.

The focus group sessions made clear thatUSM’s external community believes that itsneeds are not being met by the current menuof academic programs. This is especially true

in the sciences and technology. The externalcommunity has told us that to be responsiveto the needs of the region’s technology-basedcompanies, USM must offer strong under-graduate and graduate programs in the scienceand technology fields. While those programscan draw upon specialist faculty at other in-stitutions and in the workplace, the commu-nity should not be forced to rely predominatelyon universities 50 miles (New Hampshire), 100miles (Boston) or 145 miles (Orono) away fortalented faculty, quality programs, student em-ployees, interns, and graduates. Nor shouldsuch programs be available only by distanceeducation mechanisms. The major implicationof this priority is that, over the next 5-10 years,USM will need to make substantial new in-vestments in its science and technology infra-structure well beyond the targeted R&D fundscurrently available.

The Board of Visitors strongly supports theproposition that there should not be unwar-ranted and inefficient duplication of academicprograms among the colleges and universitiesof the UMS. But the Board also believes thatthe economic vitality of the entire state andthe southern Maine region warrants the pro-vision of programs within the region that ad-dress its critical academic and research needs.It would be very inefficient to attempt to pro-vide such programs in ways that do not assureboth the access and the quality the regionneeds. In short, some careful duplication ofdegree authority between the two UMS gradu-ate centers is justified.

In expanding academic programs in the sci-ences and technology, as well as in graduateand professional fields critical to the region’sneeds, USM should invest in and emphasizeareas that have the potential to become recog-nized “centers of excellence” when comparedto national peers. In some cases, these will beprogram areas where the building blocks are

already partially in place, such as the MaineSchool of Law and the Muskie School of Pub-lic Service, which offers USM’s first doctoralprogram. In other areas, far more work will berequired to build programs that have the ca-pacity to serve as full-fledged partners withregional industries and other regional institu-tions. The new Bioscience Research Instituteof Southern Maine, which will be strategicallyaligned with Maine Medical Center and theInformation Sciences Research Institute, aretwo examples of potential centers of excellencemade possible by the investment of state R&Dfunds. In large measure, centers of excellenceshould focus on areas of graduate study andresearch where they can be competitive in re-cruiting outstanding faculty and students, gen-erating external research funds, and develop-ing extensive linkages with industry and ex-ternal institutions, both in and outside ofMaine.

A “centers of excellence strategy” also pro-vides an important vehicle for recruiting andretaining high-quality undergraduate andgraduate students through selective admissioninto those programs. While such program ordepartment selectivity is the norm in USM’sgraduate programs, at the undergraduate levelit is limited to programs with special require-ments such as engineering or computer sci-ence and to initiatives such as the RussellScholars Program and the Honors Program.This strategy also will assist USM in attainingwhat should be a clear goal to be achieved by2010—escalation from current classification asa master’s (comprehensive) institution to adoctoral/research university-intensive withinthe Carnegie Classification System.12

Recommendation ThreeContinue a broad range of the liberal arts

and humanities programs that are central toa solid undergraduate education and the per-sonal development of the region’s learners.

The external community, especially the busi-ness community, has told us in the focus groupsessions that a solid liberal arts-based under-graduate education is important for all stu-dents. The critical thinking, global understand-ing, analytic and communication skills that alljobs in the 21st century require of collegegraduates are the core learning experience ofthe liberal arts. The choice cannot be betweenscience and technology programming and lib-eral arts and humanities programming. A top-ranked public, regional, comprehensive uni-versity must do both and do them well. Theliberal arts and humanities must continue tobe the core underpinning for all academicmajors. In addition, selected undergraduateprograms deserve to be nurtured if they dem-onstrate their ability to attract outstanding stu-dents. Finally, USM should give particular en-couragement to those departments where thereis both a willingness and a capacity to crosstraditional academic boundaries to create in-novative and flexible programs that address thecross-disciplinary nature of today’s informationculture.

Recommendation FourPlace the broad and continually changing

needs of lifelong learners within the regionat the core of the design and delivery of aca-demic programs, develop a comprehensivenetwork of institutional partnerships and col-laborations, and make creative use of elec-tronic learning opportunities for students.

Three of every four undergraduate andgraduate students from Cumberland, York, andAndroscoggin counties who attend a UMScampus are students at USM.13 Similarly, three

of every four USM students live in these threesouthern Maine counties. Many of these stu-dents are place-bound in that their choice islimited to an institution within the region be-cause of job, family obligations, or resources,and often all three. Such students can be tra-ditional-age, full-time undergraduates, part-time degree students, or older lifelong learn-ers pursuing graduate or professional degrees.USM, therefore, has almost exclusive respon-sibility within the University of Maine Systemto provide those southern Maine residents whoare place-bound with access to public univer-sity programs.

If USM is to fulfill its mission responsibili-ties for the learning experiences of these place-bound students, the University must embracea broader view of its role as a vehicle for life-long higher education opportunity. Faculty andstaff must re-think fundamental, long-held as-sumptions about the role of USM in lifelonglearning, about how USM work is to be done,and about their partnership with students. Atthe heart of this perspective is a shift in think-ing from the University as the purveyor ofknowledge and principal provider of academiccourses and programs, to viewing the Univer-sity as a broker of learning opportunities anda facilitator of collaborations and partnershipsdesigned to meet the broad and the special-ized learning needs of students.

Such a shift in perspective for the 21st cen-tury is driven by demographic realities,lifestyles, and by the emerging opportunitiesavailable to students and faculty through elec-tronic learning and other means. USM shouldplace the higher education needs of its re-gional-based student customers at the core ofacademic program design and delivery strate-gies. In many program areas where there isdemonstrated capacity already in place, USMshould fulfill those responsibilities directly asa flexible, responsive designer and provider of

both degree and non-degree programs throughinnovative delivery mechanisms.

At the same time, USM must forge creativealliances with other institutions wherever qual-ity programming can be found to assure greaterdepth and specialization than the Universitycould provide on its own. The Universityshould expand as integral components of de-gree programs the electronic courses availablefrom other institutions, both in-state and na-tionally. Specialized learning opportunities alsocan be provided by drawing upon the humantalent in area industries and institutions to afar greater extent than is currently done. Also,to be more immediately responsive to emerg-ing needs and the extensive career shifting thatoccur in the workforce, the USM of the nextdecade should provide both undergraduateand graduate-level professional and technicalprogramming in formats other than full de-gree programs, e.g., certificate programs.

This shift in perspective about the role ofthe regional university has important implica-tions for the program design and delivery andthe student mentoring responsibilities of USMfaculty. One critical faculty responsibility willnot change. Faculty, not students nor businessconsumers, will retain ultimate authority overwhat constitutes a valid learning experienceand, therefore, what constitutes a valid USMdegree.

Recommendation FiveClarify, focus, and assure the affordability

of programs and services designed to encour-age university attendance, persistence, andlifelong learning.

Over the past 30 years, USM has focused onproviding broad access to higher education forthose individuals who seek the challenge andthe rigor of university-level academic pro-grams. USM has met this responsibilitythrough timely on-site and off-campus pro-gramming, as well as extensive academic sup-

port services for students, particularly thoseattending college for the first time. Notewor-thy examples of this commitment include pro-gramming that allows students at the UMS off-campus centers in York and Sagadahoc coun-ties to complete an associate’s degree at thecenters, and the partnership with the OxfordHills Higher Education Initiative. The roleplayed by USM’s Lewiston-Auburn College inthat community exemplifies the power of edu-cational opportunity to raise the aspirationsand the accomplishments of Maine citizens.

In becoming a high quality, first-choice in-stitution and in offering increased program-ming at the graduate level and in science andtechnology fields, USM must not give up itsresponsibility to serve as the primary sourceof educational opportunity for the region’s first-time and part-time college students. USM mustbuild on existing programs and support ser-vices to do an even better job of turning first-time college students into lifelong learners. TheUniversity’s participation in the System-wideCollegeStart initiative (providing communitycollege access statewide to Maine people incollaboration with the Technical College Sys-tem) is a necessary but insufficient responseto this task.

The challenge for USM is to provide clarity,focus, and effective programming for theseundergraduate learners, and to make a cleardistinction among the three different avenuesfor accessing the University. The first avenueis regular admission to challenging USM bac-calaureate programs. The second is conditionaladmission to the University with the require-ment that students need to fill gaps in theirpreparation to be fully accepted into a bacca-laureate major. The third category isnonmatriculated students who are permittedto take a limited number of selected courses.Students in the second and third categories arenot permitted to take most upper-level courses

in academic majors. Unfortunately, these dis-tinctions create confusion among students andthe broader community.

Much of the public dialogue about improv-ing aspirations and raising educational attain-ment has focused on getting students to at-tend college. At least equal attention shouldbe given to helping students learn the skillsthey need to stay in college. The primary goalis to help students in transition from highschool or work experience become successfulcollege students—to increase the rate at whichthey continue on to complete undergraduatedegrees. USM surely should be an institutionwith strong admission standards for its under-graduate majors. Yet it also should be an insti-tution that supports motivated students in theirquest to pursue a college education.

Planning already underway will be criticalto fulfilling this expectation of the regionalcommunity. We are confident that the facultycan design approaches to first-year courses andacademic support services that produce sig-nificant increases in persistence rates. We hopethat this planning will result in a programstructure that will provide the focus for ser-vices that help all students succeed, one ofUSM’s multiple roles as a public, regional, com-prehensive university.

Recommendation SixReceive more financial support from the

state and from the business/industrial com-munity commensurate with mission respon-sibilities.

Significant additions in funding and inter-nal shifts in allocations will be required to re-alize our vision for USM in the first decade ofthe 21st century. This vision includes greaterattention to inherently costly programming inthe sciences and technology, as well as otherprofessional fields relevant to the regionaleconomy; expanded graduate programming,

including a limited number of doctoral de-grees; and continued investments in new com-munications technologies. Similarly, all threeUSM campuses in Portland, Gorham, andLewiston-Auburn are badly in need of capitalinvestments to provide an appropriate facili-ties infrastructure for such programming. Thelack of appropriate infrastructure must notcontinue to be an obstacle to fulfillment ofmission responsibilities.

While USM’s enrollment could grow incre-mentally over the first few years of the newdecade, it is unrealistic to expect that enroll-ment growth alone can provide the investmentresources required. We believe that additionalinvestment resources should come from a com-bination of internal operating efficienciescoupled with new revenue flexibility, increasedcontributions from corporate partners, andmost important, a greater commitment of stateresources.

Internal efficiencies. Responding to the fis-cal crises and budget cuts of the early 1990sforced USM to seek a number of important costsavings from internal operating procedures.The University rose to the occasion and real-located a significant portion of its budget.While there probably are not significant addi-tional savings to be realized, some rethinkingof program delivery strategies to be imple-mented over a period of several years, espe-cially collaborations with other institutions asdiscussed earlier, could be appropriate. Morepromising would be the introduction of flex-ible revenue mechanisms for nontraditionalapproaches to delivering courses, certificatesand, in some cases, full degree programs.

Corporate contributions and partnerships.The University is in the midst of its first majorcapital campaign. Over the next 10 years, gen-eral contributions to programs and specificendowments should become a more signifi-cant component of University resources. Spe-

cifically, individual companies should increas-ingly become funding partners in both researchand educational initiatives that provide directbenefits to those companies.

State funding. Over the 30-year history ofthe UMS, USM’s share of the annual state ap-propriation has remained remarkably constanteven though its share of enrollment and mis-sion responsibilities has increased substantially.With over 30% of the System’s full-time equiva-lent students (FTE) and about half of UMSgraduate students, USM continues to receivethe same 25% of state appropriation that it didin 1970. One of the results of this inadequatehistorical approach to allocating the state ap-propriations is that USM is more dependenton tuition revenues than most other campuses.Another is that its estimated spending per FTEin 2000-2001 will be $10,520 compared to$15,893 at UM, the other graduate center.14

USM also receives the same 25% share of bondrevenues for capital facilities as it does for itsshare of the state appropriation for operatingfunds, and just 20% of targeted R&D invest-ment funds.

We believe that three significant changes inthe allocation of state funds should occur.

First, the historical approach to distribut-ing the state appropriation should be replacedby a formula that reflects USM’s programmaticresponsibilities and costs as a comprehensiveuniversity. Over the next five years (2001-2006), additional state appropriation funds tothe UMS should be allocated so that USM’sshare of the state appropriation, at very least,matches its share of FTE students. In 2000dollars, this would mean a base budget increaseby FY07 of just over $7 million that should betargeted by the University to the expandedacademic programming that we have recom-mended. Without such state investments, newprograms will not be possible.

Second, regarding the allocation of revenues

from bond referenda for capital improvements,the historical percentage that has been used toallocate the state appropriation for operatingexpenses should be discontinued as a meansof determining the distribution of capitalproject revenues from future bond referenda.Instead, the Trustees should determine capitalproject priorities and funds allocations basedon the relative needs of individual campuses.

Third, when the Legislature invests addi-tional funds in the UMS to increase R&D ca-pacity at UM and USM, USM’s share of thesenew funds should, at very least, match its share

of FTE students. This would be partial recog-nition of the increasing importance of scienceand technology programming at USM to thecompetitive position of technology-based com-panies in southern Maine.

We recognize that these financial recommen-dations may be problematic. But there is littlechoice if USM is to fulfill the mission assignedto it by the Trustees and the needs of the south-ern Maine community that have been pre-sented to the Board of Visitors throughout thiscommunity outreach project.

Conclusion

USM’s Board of Visitors was heartened bythe enthusiastic and thoughtful response fromcommunity leaders and discussion groups.This region cares deeply about USM, recog-nizes its centrality to the economic and socialfabric of the region, and is profoundly con-cerned about its development. Quite simply, agreat region needs a great university. It is not aluxury or a choice, it is an imperative. USMmust become one of the top-ranked public,regional, comprehensive universities in thecountry. Achievement of that goal requiresshifts in thinking, commitments and resourceallocations within USM, within the UMS towhich this Board of Visitors is fully commit-ted, and among Maine’s policy leaders.

This report and our recommendations arereally about the pace of change. The southernMaine region and the state cannot wait for in-cremental expansion of programs and programquality to meet the needs of the region moreeffectively than has been the case to date. Whatis required is concerted commitment of all ofUSM’s stakeholders to make real differences ina time frame that can start paying dividendssoon. We expect this report to provide the Uni-versity, the state, and the community with theinformation and the logic necessary to moveforward with dispatch and purpose in a dia-logue that will achieve this goal.

1. Campus boards of visitors are charged with ad-vising the head of each campus on communityand regional needs, advocating for the univer-sity, and reviewing…the five-year plan, amongtheir other statutory responsibilities.

2. Supported by a grant to the Board from theDavis Family Foundation, the project was con-ducted by the consulting team of Pamela Plumb,Elizabeth Reuthe and Carol Wishcamper. TheBoard also met with more than 30 of theinterviewees and group participants in an opendiscussion of the consultant’s report and pro-posed priorities for the future. In these inter-views and group sessions, stakeholders exploredalternative scenarios or futures for USM. Theywere encouraged to “mix and match” variouscomponents of individual scenarios and expresstheir views and opinions about the relative im-portance of alternatives. No University person-nel were present at any of these interviews orgroup sessions. The result of this outreachproject is an extremely rich body of informa-tion about stakeholder attitudes towards andexpectations for USM, information that comple-ments both the standard economic and socialdata that the Board has examined and the manyanecdotal stories. The Executive Summary ofthe Consultant’s Report, which includes the listof interviews and focus group participants, isattached as Appendix A. The Full Report to theBoard of Visitors is available in the Office of theUSM President, in each campus library, and theoffice of each school or college dean.

3. There is considerable interest expressedthroughout the external community—far be-yond those industrial sectors that would be di-rectly affected—that USM must expand andgreatly strengthen program offerings in scienceand technology areas at the same time that thereis great interest in not sacrificing the liberal artswhich are deeply valued.

4. Measures of Growth 2000, Sixth Report of theMaine Economic Growth Council, prepared bythe Maine Development Foundation, January2000, p: 10.

5. Ibid.6. This percentage increase in out-of-state college

attendance over the past two decades has beenaccompanied by a comparable increase in thecollege-going rate. Indeed, in purely numericalterms, the additional numbers of high schoolgraduates attending college are all going out ofstate while enrollment in the University of MaineSystem institutions has remained relativelystable. See “Demographic Profiles in Maine: En-

End Notes

rollment Challenges,” prepared by James H.Breece for the University of Maine System,March 1999. Also see Samuel M. Kipp, III, “AFresh Look at College-Going Rates in Maine,”prepared for the Finance Authority of Maine,Kipp Research and Consulting, Draft, April 12,2000.

7. See Breece table, “1997 Graduates Attending aFour-Year Institution in Maine.”

8. Kipp, p: 29. Full Report of the University of Maine System

Study, League of Women Voters of Maine, Janu-ary 2000, p: 23.

10. Op. Cit., p: 21.11. Assessment of Community Needs and Expec-

tations Regarding the Future of the Universityof Southern Maine, p: 2

12. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancementof Teaching classifies all higher education insti-tutions according to their primary activities. Un-der the Foundation’s proposed definitions ex-pected to go into effect within the coming year,USM currently is classified as Master ‘s (Com-prehensive) University I meaning that the in-stitution offers a wide range of baccalaureateprograms, and it is committed to graduate edu-cation through the master’s degree. Institutionsin this classification award 40 or more master’sdegrees annually—USM awards almost 400 in-cluding the J.D. degree each year. As a Doc-toral/Research University—Intensive, USMwould be expected to be committed to gradu-ate education through the doctorate and awardat least ten doctoral degrees per year across threeor more disciplines, or at least 20 doctoral de-grees per year overall.

13. Based on Fall 1998 headcount enrollments,7736 of the 10,593 students from Andros-coggin, Cumberland, and York Counties en-rolled in a UMS institution attended USM, 73%,reported in Demographic Profiles in Maine: En-rollment Challenges, prepared for the Univer-sity of Maine System by James H. Breece, March1999. It also should be noted that about two-thirds of high school graduates in these threecounties attend out-of-state colleges or univer-sities.

14. August 2, 2000 memo to USM President’s Stafffrom Sam Andrews, Chief Financial Officer.Andrews’ analysis was based on the Agenda ItemSummary entitled “FY2001 Educational & Gen-eral Operating Budgets” presented to the UMSBoard of Trustees at their August 2000 meet-ing.

Plumb, Reuthe, & Wishcamper USM Board of Visitors Outreach Project Report

The Board of Visitors of USM, as part of devel-oping a long range vision for the University, hiredPlumb, Reuthe and Wishcamper to carry out a se-ries of interviews and focus groups to test thecommunity’s needs and wishes for their public uni-versity in the future. The Board of Visitors wishedto hear from a broad spectrum of individuals andgroups in order to better understand how they de-fined the purpose of the University, what theythought the priorities for the University should bein the future, and what they saw as the future shapeof the University. The purpose of collecting the in-formation was to inform deliberations of the Boardof Visitors concerning their recommendations toUSM for direction and priorities in the future.

The consultants interviewed 11 community lead-ers from different sectors of the community askingthem the following questions:1. In what ways have you come in contact or been

involved with USM? Describe a high point.2. How would you describe USM’s role or mission

in Maine, especially southern Maine?3. What do you believe are the major unmet needs

in your company or business/industrial sectorthat should be addressed by USM?

4. What do you see as the five most pressing needsor issues facing the region and/or the state overthe next 5-10 years that USM has a responsibil-ity to help address?

5. Imagine there were no constraints and let your-self dream about what kind of public universityyou would like in southern Maine. What wouldthat university look like?

6. Given that 750,000 Mainers live within com-muting distance of a USM campus, is the Uni-versity currently positioned to meet the priorityneeds of that population and business/industrialbase?

The discussions were thorough and generallylasted an hour. The privacy of each individual’s re-sponses has been protected. However, the notesfrom these interviews are collected in an amalgam-ated fashion in Appendix A and the content is re-flected in the themes, polarities and undercurrentsin the report.

The consultants conducted 15 group meetingsranging from 5 to 30 people. There were a total of186 participants. The groups included: GreaterPortland business people, Maine Software Devel-opers Association members, non-profit organiza-tions, York County, USM staff and faculty, Lewiston/Auburn area, regional city managers, councilors andGreater Portland Council of Governments, second-ary school teachers and administrators, health ser-vice providers, southern Maine legislators, regionalbio-tech industries, other leaders in business, highereducation, international interests, and minority and

Section 1 - Purpose and scope of the consultants’ work

Appendix A

USM Board of VisitorsOutreach Project Report

Plumb, Reuthe, & Wishcamper

June 2000

USM Board of Visitors Outreach Project Report Plumb, Reuthe, & Wishcamper

refugee communities. Each meeting was one and ahalf hours and was facilitated by one or more ofthe consultants. The discussions were generallylively and generated a wide variety of ideas, sug-gestions, opinions and concerns. The purpose ofthe meetings was simply to collect information.Conflicting opinions were collected as they wereput out. There was not an intention to developagreements in the groups. Similarly, the consult-ants did not comment on the different ideas nordid they correct or add information when com-ments were made based on less than full informa-tion about the University. In the focus groups weasked the following questions:1. How would you describe USM’s role or mission

in Maine, especially southern Maine?

2. Imagine there were no constraints and let your-self dream about what kind of public universityyou would like in southern Maine. What wouldthat university look like?

3. The future USM could be made up of many dif-ferent elements depending on what you wouldlike the University to be. Using the handouts asa guide for what the different elements of USMmight be, make a list of the top five elementsthat you would want to see in the future USM.Write each of your choices on a different post-it.We will collect your responses and post them,grouping similar elements together.

4. Based on this meeting, what do you think is im-portant for the Board of Visitors to hear?

Section 2 - Summary of themes from the interviews and focus groupsThese themes are in response to the question,

“Imagine there were no constraints and let yourselfdream about what kind of public university youwould like in southern Maine. What would thatuniversity look like?”

Participants’ vision of USM includes a universitywhich…• is flexible, creative and innovative in the delivery

of education to increase access to USM includ-ing flexible schedules, technology, and non-tra-ditional locations. USM is a virtual as well as anupgraded physical institution including im-proved physical plant, aesthetics and technology.

• provides both broad access to the entry level stepin higher education for Maine residents and qual-ity education which makes USM a first choiceuniversity.

• is a more diverse university with various racesand nationalities encouraged to be part of thestudent body and the staff. The diversity makesthe University a center for the study and instruc-tion of different languages and a rich melting potof ideas.

• is tied to the southern Maine economy, stimulat-ing the economy with research, supporting theeconomy with appropriately trained employees,providing ongoing training and development forgrowth and change, providing selective gradu-ate level programs such as Ph.D., masters andcertificates related to the needs of southernMaine.

• provides lifelong learning: a continuum of learn-ing for changing roles including new technol-ogy and traditional liberal arts, certificate pro-grams, selected doctoral- and master’s-level de-grees, research with a focus on what area busi-nesses need to be successful, non-credit coursesand Senior College.

• develops partnerships (not competition) withother institutions: University of Maine, UNE,technological colleges, private regional institu-tions, out-of-state institutions.

• plays a community leadership role as a center forpolicy dialogue, a resource for non-profits, atrainer of community leaders, a source of data,information and knowledge.

• is proactive, reaches out aggressively to recruitstudents, actively engages businesses in partner-ships, invites in the minority communities, de-velops internships with non-profits, reactsquickly to seize opportunities.

• is user-friendly, including transferability ofcourses, location and scheduling of classes, childcare, counseling and remote access.

• is a university with a clear identity and sense offocus.

Polarities:The following are polarities or apparent oppo-

sites which were held by the same group or indi-vidual at one time, not by separate camps which

Plumb, Reuthe, & Wishcamper USM Board of Visitors Outreach Project Report

disagreed with each other. The following polaritieswere raised by many participants and present di-lemmas to be resolved. How can the University holdand address both components of the statement atthe same time?• There is a strong call for the University to have a

clear focus and identity and, at the same time, ademand for the University to fulfill many rolesfor many groups from business to minorities,

from entry-level access to selective, high qualityeducation.

• There is considerable interest in growing the of-ferings in the area of technology and a simulta-neous interest in not sacrificing the liberal arts.

• There is a demand for easy access to higher edu-cation for a broad spectrum of the populationand a desire to see the University be a high qual-ity, first choice institution.

Section 3: Results of the Priorities’ Question from the Focus Groups:Graph of the themes mentioned most often in the priorities’ exercise showing how often each was

mentioned under each priority.Priority

Themes #1 #2 #3 #4 #5

Standards comparable to top flight regional universities 43 17 17 17 14nationally and increasingly first choice for many students

Broad range of science degrees and an increasing number 32 26 46 31 30of professional programs including master’s and doctoralprograms relevant to the economy

Increasing emphasis on open enrollment and low costs to 26 19 7 9 7encourage college attendance and lifelong learning

Broad range of liberal arts and science degrees 14 24 11 7 8

Increasing focus on flexible program delivery mechanisms, 12 17 24 21 24both scheduling and electronic

Strong applied connections with technology-intensive 11 11industries and business

Research consistent with expanded graduate programs 11 17

Extensive connections with K-12 schools 7 5 6 8 8

Section 4 - Themes from different interest groups as represented in focus groupsAlumni:

Two campuses seen as an issue, commuter vs.residential institution

Need for more resources, especially fiscal andfacilities

USM should be more unfettered from externalconstraintsBio-tech:

Important to prepare young graduates for thecurrent and emerging industries so that they areemployable and so that businesses do not need togo out of state to hire

More integration with business such as on-sitelearning for student interns and regular employ-

ees, business professionals as instructors, incuba-tor program

University needs speed and flexibility to stayahead of the curveChamber of Commerce:

Strong desire to bring more Maine high schoolstudents into higher education and to have USMbe aggressive in making that happen

USM needs to be preparing (retooling) peopleto work in the emerging industries–that availabil-ity of trained labor will, in turn, spur more busi-ness

Need to accommodate non-traditional studentswith innovative, flexible delivery mechanisms

USM Board of Visitors Outreach Project Report Plumb, Reuthe, & Wishcamper

Greater Portland Council ofGovernments/Corporate Partners:

Meet the needs of this area’s engineering, com-puter science and bio-tech businesses with betterquality programs, faculty and more graduate andresearch programs and internships; concerned thatthose employers must go out of state to hire people

Be the first choice school (not the second choiceor only choice); improve USM standards by increas-ing acceptance criteria, investing in faculty and fa-cilities (including aesthetics) and consider creatinga community college to address the open accessissues

Develop a really bold vision. Develop an inde-pendent endowment and promote itself within theUM system and increase state funding.Health Services:

There is a large unmet need for health and healthpolicy research

Need innovative ways to link University andwork sites for educational opportunities

Suggest building more partnerships with othercolleges and universities within and outside Maine,as well as with people in the private sectorHigher Education:

More seamless relationship between institutions,easier movement between schools; complement,not duplicate one another

Need to focus on the areas where the Universitycan build a strong reputationInternational:

Importance of training students for what isneeded in the future such as technology, informa-tion management, business management, and de-velop the skills to be innovative and to change

Think more globally, attracting international stu-dents and making opportunities for Maine studentsto study internationallyK-12 Education:

Desire for USM to be receptive, flexible and ableto model “cutting edge” adaptation to current re-form going on in education (“best practices”)

Desire for far-reaching outreach and interactionwith educations in all corners of southern Maine

Concern about teacher preparation in shortageareas, in certain content areas, and specializations(especially foreign language and special education)

Legislators:Strong interest in both serving the area with open

access, low cost education, and in a high qualityuniversity attracting out-of-state students, and be-ing a focal point for northern New England

More integration with technical colleges andother campuses, fewer barriers to students whowant to move from one to the other

Expanded service in York and Oxford countiesLewiston/Auburn Group:

Desire that USM provide people with the abilityto learn, to help people be flexible, and to changeif needed

Desire for one university with ease of transfer-ability; concerned that students can’t transfer credits

Interest in USM working more closely with thecommunity and employers to assess and meet com-munity needsMaine Software Developers Association:

Intense interest in improved IT (informationtechnology), undergraduate, master’s, doctoral, andcertificate programs at USM. Angry about Ph.D.program in computer science being located inOrono vs. USM.

Concerned about the quality of current IT gradu-ates. Want USM to work closely with business toidentify needs, to improve undergraduate programstandards to match business needs, to put meat onthe bones with graduate programs and to developrobust internship and co-op programs and net-works.

Want USM to deliver IT graduates who have goodtechnical and social skills, good grounding in mathand can really write, who know how to producesoftware, communicate with clients, and under-stand time and business management.Minority/Refugee Community:

More members of the minority and refugee com-munity should be hired in jobs at all levels of theUniversity; faculty, administration and Board ofVisitors need to reflect diversity

USM should take a leading role in language studyand instruction

USM should help bridge and connect academicopportunity to minority and refugee populations,e.g., outreach to high school students, give ac-knowledgment to immigrants arriving in Portlandwith academic backgrounds in their countries oforigin

Non-Profits:USM could play a larger role in providing a fo-

rum and a clearinghouse for issues of non-profits,using internships for experiential learning oppor-tunities, and generally engaging with non-profits

USM needs to welcome and encourage a varietyof non-traditional students, diverse ethnic groupsand languages, individuals with handicaps to seekhigher education

USM should serve as a think tank to explore theissues of the region

University Planning and Budgeting AdvisoryCommittee (UPBAC ) representing USM Staffand Faculty

Desire for better integration of the Portland andGorham campuses with the surrounding commu-nities, with each other, and with the entire univer-sity system

Interest in making USM a more attractive placefor the best students and faculty; need to improveUSM’s environment, space, facilities, offerings, anddiversity

More doctoral and graduate programs with re-search and scholarship and adequate facilities andfaculty to compete nationally

York County:Lack of visibility of Sanford program (“best kept

secret in education”); increase P. R.USM needs to be more student-friendlyPerception of young people leaving the state for

jobs elsewhere; need more emphasis on technol-ogy/associate degree programs