ACADEMIC PLANNING
COUNCIL
Bulletin #73
February 23, 2006
I.
Systemwide Academic Planning Process
II.
Update on Existing Planning Activities
III.
Work Force on Multicampus Research
IV.
Undergraduate Education Update
I.
Systemwide Academic Planning Process
Acting Provost Rory Hume led the
Academic Planning Council in a discussion of the proposed multiyear systemwide academic strategic planning process. He noted that by creating cross-campus
discussions, each campus will be able to make wise academic and resource
decisions, developing academic profiles that will be most responsive to
California’s needs. Regents also want
better information on how resource decisions they approve, such as capital
expenditures, are based on academic planning.
He described the proposed process,
which will build on existing campus academic planning. The first year will start with Executive Vice
Chancellors describing their planning process and general academic direction, followed
by campus “listening tours” by the Provost, and ending in spring 2007 with a
series of presentations by Executive Vice Chancellors, Senate leadership, and
Chancellors, sharing planning information within their respective systemwide groups. The
President will report the findings from this first round of academic planning
to The Regents. More refined planning,
including a long-range enrollment plan, will be part of the second year of systemwide academic strategic planning.
Acting Provost Hume asked the APC
to advise on the overall framework for campus
presentations in the spring, so that all campuses are responding to the same
issues. Members were particularly
interested in campus plans for addressing diversity issues in
APC members urged that the
President’s letter announcing the planning process include a strong statement
reaffirming the University’s “first principles.” They suggested using the preamble of the
Academic Senate’s February 14, 2006 letter to the President with respect to
executive compensation, which describes what UC stands for. They further advised that campus
presentations in the first year should reflect these fundamental commitments to
Other topics the APC suggested that
campus plans address include ways of ensuring breadth of student learning of
the multiple skills required in a transnational society, including
technological and cultural literacies, and an
academic plan that teaches imagination and innovation.
Acting Provost Hume noted that the
APC will continue to play a central role advising him on the evolution of this
academic strategic planning process.
II.
Update on Existing Planning
Activities
Several academic planning
activities are already underway, including the Long Range Guidance Team (LRGT),
the Task Force on Planning for Doctoral and Professional Education (PDPE) and
its related subcommittees, and the Advisory Council on Future Growth in the
Health Professions. Acting Provost Hume
informed the APC of the current status of these various efforts.
The LRGT has continued to consider
what it will require for UC to be the best university system in 2025. While their work is not yet complete, they
have identified three areas of both concern and opportunity: the need to think and plan more as a system,
the need to be more relevant to
Through its subcommittees the PDPE
continues to address legal education, developing criteria for creating new law
schools; the need for additional doctoral programs in some allied health
fields; and whether there are barriers to the expansion of interdisciplinary
programs. The PDPE will also look at the
needs of CSU, K-12, CCC (as well as UC) for programs in educational leadership.
The Advisory Council on Future
Growth in the Health Professions will meet in coming months and report to The
Regents by the end of the year its recommendations for additional enrollments
and programs.
Director Julie Gordon described the
charge of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Future of International Education at UC,
which is to recommend a mission statement for the
University's international education efforts as they relate to the
University’s larger international strategy, and also to make recommendations on
the future of international education at UC including how UC might modify
existing universitywide and campus-based programs.
Part of the examination of existing programs involves a targeted look at
EAP. She pointed out that only half of the UC students who study abroad
do so through the Education Abroad Program (EAP), so the Committee has
undertaken an inventory of other existing programs across the system and how
they are organized. She noted that the Committee has asked EAP to
do a self-assessment and to consider how it sees itself in relation to other
international education efforts as well as to focus on its future as it relates
to the University's evolving international agenda. The Committee is in
the early stages of its work and expects to complete the review by December
2006.
III.
Work Force on Multicampus Research
APC member and UCORP Chair George Sensabaugh presented background information on the newly formed
Work Force on Multicampus Research. He noted that several Senate reports have suggested
the need for change in the review process, funding base, and definition of
the University’s existing MRUs. The success of these multicampus
research activities, manifested in continued funding, has had the effect of
making it difficult to mount new activities.
The Work Force will address three
tasks: defining what an MRU is,
recommending how MRUs should be reviewed so as not to
become permanent entitlements, and recommending how to create new MRUs.
APC members cited examples that
have worked in other settings, such as phasing out or reducing funding after a
certain number of years, or restricting renewal to a certain number of cycles,
and directing the saved funds to new projects.
They also acknowledged the difficulties of the approach, particularly
with respect to the possible need to place FTE and to the ongoing costs of operating
MRU facilities. It was suggested that
reviews should ask for ways in which the MRU benefits undergraduates, not as
part of the renewal criteria, but as a helpful way to provide evidence of the
value of an undergraduate education in a research university.
In related discussion, APC members
noted the opportunities for collaboration with researchers created by the new
contract with the Los Alamos National Laboratory. With more funding available it is possible
to expand research collaborations beyond just physics to include fields such as
biology and political science, to retain strong relationships with researchers,
and to provide excellent science to the nation. It was recommended that the Provost’s Office
look into furthering these relationships.
IV.
Undergraduate Education
Update
APC member and UCEP Chair Denise
Segura advised the APC that UCEP has drafted a memo recommending the formation
of a task force on undergraduate education, which might fit into the
University’s larger planning process. This
task force would work with campus CEPs and with
Undergraduate Deans to articulate underlying shared and distinct principles
about what undergraduates should be learning.
The Task Force will not look at specific curricula but will explore
general principles of General Education.
Its main focus will be on whether our undergraduate education is
preparing students for the 21st century, particularly in terms of
internationalization, civic engagement, and integration with the University’s
research mission.
The APC will continue discussion of
this topic at future meetings.