STRATEGIC PLANNING& WASC UPDATE

Tom BennettPresentation to Academic Senate

February 1, 2006

Strategic PlanningWhere We Are Now…

Cal State San MarcosStrategic Priorities

*Academic Excellence

Student Life

Campus Climate

Community Partnerships

*Educational Equity

Council for University Strategic Planning (CUSP)

Academic Affairs

StudentAffairs

AdvancementFinance &

AdministrativeServices

Foundation

InstitutionalPlanning

CUSP

Input and Feedback from

CampusCommunity

Recommendationsto UniversityLeadership &

Campus Community

Finally……

Putting our Budget Where our Plan is!

LINKING STRATEGIC PLANNING TO THE BUDGET

Culture change in how the University will make decisions regarding:

•Budget allocations

•Use of fiscal monies

•Mid Year Budget Review

•Unspent funds at year-end

Finally……Putting our Budget where our Plan is!

Strategic Planning Budget (Estimates of new monies)

$1,000,000 total funds available for FY 06-07• $600,000 Permanent Funds• $400,000 Fiscal Funds

$2,000,000 total funds available for FY 07-08• $1,400,000 Permanent Funds• $600,000 Fiscal Funds

$3,600,000 total funds available for FY 08-09• $2,800,000 Permanent Funds• $800,000 Fiscal Funds

Finally……Putting our Budget where our Plan is!

Three Year Implementation Model

Year 1:• University Outcomes/

Goals

• Division action plans to overall university themes

• University Key Indicators

Year 2:• Division Plans

• Division Indicators

Year 3:• All-level plans

• Full implementation

Finally……Putting our Budget where our Plan is!

Provost’s Council & ART - Anticipated Academic Affairs Priorities for 06/07:

• Reducing SFR from current 23:1 to mandated 20:1

• Adding academic support staff

• Funding new academic program needs

YOUYOU are the Key to our Success. . .

• Take ownership – this is your university!

• Get involved and actively participate in the process (Top-down / Bottom-up Process…)

• Freely contribute your thoughts and suggestions in a way that will improve the process (no “rocks”)

• Keep a “University First” focus

• Recognize this will take time to perfect – give grace and help us improve the process

• Strategic thinking is a daily thing not an event

Finally……Putting our Budget where our Plan is!

WASCWASC – March 2007! – March 2007! ……Are Are YOUYOU Ready? Ready?

Moving Beyond Compliance to a Systems Approach to Quality: Early Reflections on the New WASC Accreditation Model

Ralph A. Wolff, Executive Director Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and

UniversitiesWestern Association of Schools and Colleges

(WASC)

Proposal Capacity & PrepReview

EducationalEffectivenes

s

2 years tosite visit

1 year tosite visit

Stage 3Stage 1 Stage 2

The New WASC Institutional Review Process:

A Learning-Centered Review Model

Learning Through FeedbackFeedback from:•Proposal Review Committee•WASC Staff

Feedback from:•Team visit •Commission Action• Follow Up

Feedback from:•Team report•Commission Action• Follow Up

March 7-9, 2007 Fall 2008

Core Commitments

• Institutional Capacity:– The institution functions with clear purposes,

high levels of institutional integrity, fiscal stability, and organizational structures to fulfill its purposes.

• Educational Effectiveness:– The institution evidences clear and

appropriate educational objectives and design at the institutional and program level. The institution employs processes of review, including the collection and use of data, that assure delivery of programs and learner accomplishments at a level of performance appropriate for the degree or certificate awarded.

Institutional Self-Review under the Standards—A Worksheet Example:

 Criteria for Review  Guideline  Self-

ReviewRating

 Importance to

address at this time

Evidence Evaluation

2.7 In order to improve currency and effectiveness, all programs offered by the institution are subject to review, including analyses of the achievement of the program’s learning objectives and outcomes. Where appropriate, evidence from external constituencies such as employers and professional societies is included in such reviews.

The institution incorporates in its assessment of educational objectives results with respect to student achievement, including program completion, license examination, and placement rates results.

1. After completing this analysis, what are the 2 or 3 most important issues that should be emphasized under this Standard for your institution?

1.    2.  Looking overall at the quality and effectiveness of the institution’s data gathering and systems to support the review process, what are institutional strengths for the Preparatory Review? For the Educational Effectiveness Review?

3. Looking again at the overall quality and effectiveness of the institution’s data gathering and systems, what are areas to be

addressed or improved for the Preparatory Review? For the Educational Effectiveness Review?

Institutional Self Review Worksheet

Educational Effectiveness Review Our Three Themes

Theme #1– Academic Master Planning (David Barsky)

Theme #2– Strengthening Academic Programs

through Assessment of Student Learning (Tom Bennett)

Theme #3– Improving Retention of First-Year

Students(Susan Mitchell)

• Developing a WASC Oversight Committee

Standard 1: • Defining Institutional Purposes and Ensuring

Educational Objectives Standard 2: • Achieving Educational Objectives Through Core

FunctionsStandard 3: • Developing and Applying Resources and

Organizational Structures to Ensure Sustainability

Standard 4: • Creating an Organization Committed to Learning

and Improvement

To help guide self review, serve as basis for evaluation, and frame presentations to WASC…

Sample Criteria for Review

CFR 4.4 The institution employs a deliberate set of quality assurance processes at each level of institutional functioning, including new curriculum and program approval processes, periodic program review, ongoing evaluation, and data collection. These processes involve assessments of effectiveness, track results over time, and use the results of these assessments to revise and improve structures and processes, curricula, and pedagogy.

CFR 4.2Planning processes at the institution define and, to the extent possible, align academic, personnel, fiscal, physical, and technological needs with the strategic objectives and priorities of the institution.

Sample Criteria for Review

Summary & Next Steps…

• Strategic planning & WASC must be linked

• Systems thinking (and the five disciplines) provides a powerful framework (Peter Senge)

• More than a new WASC process – this is a “culture shift” from compliance to institutional inquiry and engagement

• Increased focus on 1) student learning outcomes and results and 2) organizational learning and quality systems

• Entire campus must be engaged • We have lots to do – but very little

time… – Support the process, learn more, be ready

• I want to help you to be ready! – Colleges, departments, programs, units, etc.