ACADEMIC PLANNING
COUNCIL
Bulletin #70
April 7, 2005
I. Science
and Mathematics Initiative Update
II. Information
Technology (IT) Guidance Committee
III. Update on Long-Range Planning Activities
IV. Long-Range
Enrollment Planning
I.
Science and Mathematics
Initiative Update
Executive Faculty Associate to the
Provost Lynda Goff described to the Academic Planning Council progress that has
been made on the Science and Mathematics Initiative, a commitment of the
University’s to increase the number of K-12 science and mathematics teachers in
California (as outlined in the Compact with Governor Schwarzenegger). The goal of the initiative is to ensure that
Following a lengthy consultation
process with science, mathematics, engineering and education faculty, business
leaders, state officials, scientific societies and others, Faculty Associate
Goff presented a proposal for attracting undergraduates to K-12 teaching from
their first days as freshmen (or transfers).
In its broadest terms, “California Teach” (CaT)
would provide a STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) major
plus single-subject teaching credential preparation in four years plus one
summer. Incoming students would be
invited by the Governor and President Dynes to participate in the program through
introductory field experiences in the freshman and sophomore years, followed by
increasingly rigorous involvement in a summer institute and in the senior year,
capped by a year of paid internship after graduation. The program would not
replace existing credential programs and would work with existing programs,
such as COSMOS.
The proposal, which has met with
unanimous support from the Chancellors, will be refined and developed to full
implementation by a taskforce of University faculty. The goal is for UC to deliver 1,000 highly
qualified science and mathematics teachers a year by 2010, more than a
four-fold increase over current numbers.
The program could produce its first graduates as early as 2008.
APC members cautioned against
changing requirements of the individual STEM majors solely to satisfy
credentialing requirements. Existing
differences between the requirements of the credentialing commission and
requirements of UC majors can be handled through the activities and field
experiences of the summer institute, which would be taught by both STEM and
education faculty. Members noted the
high attrition in STEM majors (50 percent at UC and 75 percent at CSU) even
among students with excellent grades, and expressed hope that CaT might be a way to retain students in those majors.
II.
Information Technology
(IT) Guidance Committee
Associate Vice President Kris Hafner and UCLA faculty member Alfonso Cardenas (chair of
the Senate’s Information Technology and Telecommunications Policy Committee)
reviewed a proposal to create a universitywide
committee charged with strategic planning to meet long-term information
technology and information management needs.
They pointed out that while all areas of the University depend on an IT
infrastructure, decisions about IT investment, systems architectures and
development priorities are decentralized to campuses and departments and are
further fragmented by function (e.g., research, business activities,
teaching). A UC IT Guidance Committee
would address the systemwide role of IT to sustain
and improve UC’s competitiveness and seek solutions
that take advantage of the University’s size and extend benefits across a wider
group of users.
The proposed charge for the systemwide committee, comprising both academic and administrative
membership, would be to address the University’s strategic IT investment needs
in research (particularly large-scale projects), teaching, libraries, health
care, and administrative services. Leadership for the committee will reside in
the Provost’s office, working collaboratively with the Senior Vice President
for Business and Finance.
APC members suggested that while
the IT Guidance Committee will be helpful to the work of the President’s
Long-Range Guidance Team, it should retain an independent role that will
continue beyond the tenure of the Long-Range Guidance Team. In response to questions about the extent of
authority the IT Committee might expect to have in a decentralized environment,
AVP Hafner noted that there are precedents for more
centralized decision-making about the use of certain IT funds (for example, the
University’s inter-campus/Internet2 (CALREN2) network operated by CENIC) and
for collaboration on the design and development of large, complex systemwide projects.
For example, five campuses and UCOP are funding and developing a new
effort reporting system for federal contracts and grants, rather than each
campus developing such a system independently.
There were also suggestions that the expanded use of technology in learning
will be of particular value in preparing graduate students for future teaching
responsibilities.
The next steps will be to finish
shaping out the composition of the group, in consultation with the Senate, to
identify committee staffing resources and to assess the University’s current
and future position with respect to quality and availability of IT
infrastructure support for the UC mission.
III.
Update on Long-Range
Planning Activities
Provost Greenwood described the
status of the President’s Long-Range Guidance Team, discussed at the previous
APC meeting http://www.ucop.edu/planning/apcfiles/apc69.html. The group’s
membership has been expanded to include more campus representation and to
expand its perspectives on diversity, international affairs and health
sciences. The first of its 6-8 meetings
will be May 26-27 at which time it will clarify its charge, consider broadly
the future of
Provost Greenwood described the
general strategic topics that the Guidance Team is likely to concentrate on,
including growth in graduate education, the quality of undergraduate education,
as well as access issues, international engagement, infrastructure issues
broadly conceived (human resources, facilities, research and academic support,
information technology) and viable financial models.
Senior Vice
Provost Julius Zelmanowitz noted that the Task Force
on Planning for Doctoral and Professional Education, also discussed at the
previous APC meeting, would be supporting the Long-Range Guidance Team. The scope of the charge to the group has been
expanded to include consideration of both program and student support funding,
and has been clarified to include planning for professional education. He also noted that a report on the
possibility of additional joint UC-CSU Audiology
doctoral programs was near completion.
President Dynes had already sent a letter to CSU Chancellor Reed
inviting them to participate with UC in the expansion of these programs.
IV.
Long-Range Enrollment
Planning
In preparation for development of a
new long-range enrollment plan, Special Assistant Carol Copperud
presented a history of enrollment planning at UC since 1988. She noted the characteristics of the 1988,
1995 and 1999 plans and the APC’s role in the
consultation process.
The 1988 plan, covering the years
1988 to 2005, set a target of 20 percent general campus graduate enrollment at
all campuses except
The University’s current plan ends
in 2010-11. The next planning period
will probably extend to 2020. After
many years of undergraduate growth, the University will be facing different
challenges as projections of high school graduates, the most significant factor
driving UC undergraduate enrollments, show Tidal Wave II ending in 2008,
followed by a decade without further growth.
The APC discussion centered on how
best to return to the planning aspirations for graduate enrollments set forth
in the 1988 plan. There was agreement
that it will be critical to build public support for growth. The next enrollment plan will be less about
demographic pressures at the undergraduate level than previous plans, and more
about how restoring the balance of graduate-undergraduate enrollment will keep