Team 1 Team 2 Team 3 Team 4 Team 5 Team 6 Team 7 Team 8 Team 9 Team 10
Team 11 Team 12 Team 13 Team 14 Team 15 Team 16 Team 17 Team 18 Home
Our team members independently evaluated the recommendations in the various reports, sorting proposals into immediate, medium, and long-term solutions and ranking them on a
five-point scale. The team then met to reconcile that process and craft a general report that contains what we believe to be central directions for action. Since so many of the particular ideas interact with one another, it seems critical first to identify the general directions we need to take and follow through with specific proposals once the directions are agreed to.
Preliminary ideas agreed upon by the group:
· Build change around 7-year time frame: 1-3 and 4-7 year blocks
The idea here is to focus our effort on an end vision of where we want to be in, say, seven years, and then to craft our plans for change and its implementation from that later date forward. We should be cautious not to embrace ideas simply because they appear good now without consideration for a longer term vision.
· We should focus on a few major themes on the above time frame
We need to pay attention to the human scale of what we wish to accomplish. By directing energy to an appropriate number of central themes, we stand the best chance of accomplishing something enduring and significant.
· Financial concerns should not be given first priority; rather ideas that could transform the university--we can hope the money would follow
While we must create financial stability for our endeavors, that stability nevertheless is not the end in itself. We need to make certain that our efforts are directed at the kind of university needed and valued by the State and our larger communities and one worthy of the faculty and students we have and wish to recruit.
· A thorough plan should be established before any new funds are funneled anywhere. Funds should follow those programs that fit new models.
· Almost none of the ideas we saw presented by solution teams offers a radical departure; but some of the reforms, taken together and communicated clearly, could have a visible impact on the quality of the institution within the time-frame envisaged.
1. EXTERNAL IMAGE
The UO must position itself strategically within the State and within the larger academic world to ensure that others know and recognize the missions we embrace. This requires both a public relations effort to better communicate who we are and what we (will) do and a marketing effort to expand the kinds of offerings we provide.
· Improve relationship with high school counselors
· Develop better communication and more coordination with community colleges
· Outreach to new markets: Bend/Portland, etc.
· Use the "UO Inc" concept to make certain aspects of U of O education accessible to a much wider group of people; employ carefully screened adjuncts to accomplish this mission
2. IMPROVE THE UNDERGRADUATE EXPERIENCE
· Career and professional readiness need to be joined to ideals of liberal arts
· Increased opportunities to link with professional world should be offered (internships, community service, etc.)
· General Education: the following components should be built in
Core model vs. distribution requirements
Skills need to join content rather than being taught separately
e.g. library, writing, oral, and internet skills should be built into courses rather than given as separate credit courses
Leadership/team building experiences-- should be mandated rather than left optional
Interdisciplinary course models should be encouraged
Core courses should be distributed among CAS and professional schools
· Improved advising process
Technical & mentoring advising functions should be divided central, informed few to do technical; all faculty to do mentoring
· Take back the residence halls!!
Use graduate RAs instead of undergrad RAs
Take some discussion sections to dorms on regular basis
3. CHANGING FACULTY CULTURE
Many of the changes we contemplate require some re-direction of faculty effort, especially those matters related to improving the undergraduate experience. Our compact or covenant with faculty (with ourselves) cannot be arbitrarily changed, and our ability to retain the best and the brightest precludes simplistic re-definition of duties and expectations. We must examine carefully how our faculty culture might need to change. Some relevant ideas include:
· Teaching needs to be equal to research--both excellent
· Service and advising need to count
· Make post-tenure commitment to "give back" in areas of service, teaching
· Not view tenure as be-all/end-all
4. RAISE STANDARDS FOR ADMISSION OF STUDENTS
· Short-term risk vs. long-term gain
· Inform high-school counselors of changes in admissions
· Use "U of O Inc." to absorb needs of some lower-end students
5. PROTECT AND BUILD RESEARCH FOUNDATION
We need to remind ourselves regularly that we are a research university so that our efforts to change and improve do not neglect investment and improvement in this fundamental mission.
· Build up mediocre areas while investing/pushing strengths
· Recognize research as an important element of all disciplines
Additional ideas that were not thoroughly discussed, but merit mention:
1. CHANGE ACADEMIC CALENDAR
Since this seems to be out of our control for the moment, the idea is to manipulate the present calendar structure to make it fit our needs.
2. STRUCTURAL CHANGE
While the idea of thematic colleges was appealing from a student point of view, our discussion brought out the idea of developing thematic programs out of disciplines, which would then thrive or wither according to their appeal, permitting the evolution of structural change from academic initiative and success rather than wholesale central restructuring . Thematic marketing of course offerings should still be contemplated.