1

University of Minnesota, Duluth Strategic Positioning Report

November 29, 2006

Contents 1. Overview and Process ..............................................................................2 2. UMD Today .............................................................................................7 3. Demographics ........................................................................................10 4. UMD students ........................................................................................10 5. UMD Faculty .........................................................................................12 6. UMD Staff .............................................................................................12 7. Academic Programs ...............................................................................12 8. UMD Finances .......................................................................................12 9. Athletics.................................................................................................13 10. Planning Principles.................................................................................13 11. Aspirations for UMD..............................................................................14 12. Progress to date ......................................................................................34 13. Conclusion .............................................................................................36

Appendices A. University of Minnesota Fall 2004 Graduation and Retention Report ............37 B. Graduation Rates ...........................................................................................38 C. UMD Peer Group ..........................................................................................39 D. Fall 2004 Enrollments for Courses with 200 or more students .......................40 E. Fall 2004 Enrollment by ‘Major” (100 students and more).............................41 F. UMD Strategic Planning Committee and Subcommittee Roster .....................42

2

University of Minnesota, Duluth Strategic Planning Process

1. Overview and Process Data contained in this report on the whole is for the 2004-2005 academic year. As data for 2005-2006 is available, report will be updated to more properly reflect current conditions for the background of this planning document. As outlined in its February 2005 Strategic Positioning Report1, the March 2005 Academic Task Force Report2 and Administrative Task Force Report,3 the University of Minnesota is engaged in a new system-wide strategic positioning process. Indeed the Board of Regents in June 2005 endorsed the recommendations of President Robert H. Bruininks in his report “Transforming the University of Minnesota.”4 This report is a part of the strategic positioning process initiated by the University for each of the coordinate campuses. The Strategic Positioning Report, unanimously endorsed by the Board of Regents on March 11, 2005, creates a bold mandate for the University:

Our goal is no less than to transform the University of Minnesota into one of the three best public research universities in the world. The goal we announce applies an equivalent standard of excellence to all our campuses, each of which has its own unique mission and strong signature and reputation. An equivalent standard of excellence applies also to our network of statewide research [and outreach] centers and Extension Service offices, the legacy of our land grant tradition.

The following is the strategic positioning outline for the University of Minnesota Duluth. We have basically followed the outline as indicated, as well as the timeframe.

1 Strategic Positioning Work Group, The University of Minnesota: Advancing the Public Good—Securing the University’s Leadership Position in the 21st Century (January 2005), p. 5. Available at: http://www1.umn.edu/systemwide/strategic_positioning/index.html 2 See: http://www1.umn.edu/systemwide/strategic_positioning/pdf/SP_Acad_Task_Force_Report.pdf 3 http://www1.umn.edu/systemwide/strategic_positioning/pdf/SP_Admin_Task_Force_Report.pdf 4 Transforming the University of Minnesota: President’s Recommendations” adopted by the Board of Regents, June 10, 2005. Available at: http://www1.umn.edu/systemwide/strategic_positioning/pdf/umn_pres_rec.pdf

3

* * * * * * * * * * UMD Strategic Positioning Summary 19 December 2005 University of Minnesota Duluth The overall process is to be co-chaired by Chancellor Kathryn A. Martin and Vice Chancellor Vincent R. Magnuson. INTRODUCTION: The overall strategic planning process at UMD is a continuation of a process initiated in 1995. Subsequent to the transition plan, which was a 12 – 24 month plan done during the summer and early fall of 1995, and that has been, on an annual basis, updated, and that was updated until we began to use the Compact as both a planning process and a budgeting process. UMD used the Compact to continue our planning and one could go back to the transition plan through the Compact to this current strategic planning initiative to see that we have been very consistent in our campus priorities and the establishment of subcommittees mirrors the development of our initial priorities, as well as other variables that have impacted the UMD campus. FORMAT: Our format for planning is very simple, with a four-column spreadsheet as follows: • Where are we now: Current Issues • What are our primary goals? • What is our plan to reach these goals? • What are our assessment procedures? ASSESSMENT: Vice Chancellors Greg Fox and Bruce Gildseth have been charged with the responsibility to come up with a standard format for assessment with at least three measurable outcomes. Vice Chancellor Vince Magnuson will be involved with academic assessment measurement Each collegiate unit is charged to determine two measurable outcomes to measure quality. SUBCOMMITTEES: The subcommittees that have been established are as follows: • Undergraduate Education; • Advising, (to include ePortfolio and Knowledge Management Center); • Graduate Education; • Research; • Student Affairs, which includes Enrollment and Diversity; • Budget and Capital Projects; • Library; • American Indian Programs; • Technology;

4

• Development; • Intercollegiate Athletics; Each of the subcommittees has a minimum of four individuals. UMD Timeline: • November 2005 Chancellor forms and charges 12 working subcommittees. • 1 December 2005 Draft committee reports due. • 13 December 2005 Chancellor’s Group, Deans, General committee member meeting to review draft reports for discussion. • 15 January 2006 Revised subcommittee reports due. • 15 January— 19 February 2006 Revised drafts discussed at collegiate units with department heads.

• 20 February 2006 Chancellor’s Group, Deans, Department Heads, General committee members meeting to review draft reports

• 1 May 2006 Final draft for editing. • 8 May 2006 Draft planning report due to Central Administration.

• 8 June 2006 UMD Regents Presentation on Strategic Planning

• 15 June 2006 Chancellor’s Group, Deans, Academic Administrators update meeting

• June—October 2006 Continued discussions/integration • 15 November 2006 Final draft for editing • 30 November 2006 Planning report due to Central

Administration • Spring Semester 2007 Continued campus discussions

Our tradition at UMD is never to assume that a planning report is final, and all submitted reports will be stamped Draft because they will be under constant review and subsequent change. * * * * * * * * * * That Report summarizes the goal, mission, and values of the University of Minnesota, Duluth (UMD) as follows:

The University of Minnesota Duluth serves Northeastern Minnesota, the state, and the nation as a medium-sized, broad-based university dedicated to excellence in all its programs and operations. As a university community in which knowledge is sought as well as taught, its faculty

5

recognize the importance of scholarship and service, the intrinsic value of research, and the significance of a primary commitment to quality instruction. Central to the mission of UMD is high quality teaching nurtured by the research and artistic efforts of its faculty. This undergraduate focus is not at the exclusion of graduate programs, but with the keen expectation that UMD’s selected graduate and professional programs generally will mesh with and support its mission and focus on the undergraduate learning experience. As UMD creates a vision of its future, the EdD and the Integrated Biosciences PhD are central to that focus and our role in graduate education. The EdD will continue and extend our outreach throughout rural northeastern Minnesota, Wisconsin and northern Michigan, but perhaps most importantly will enable us to continue to serve various American Indian communities and Tribal Colleges. The Integrated Biosciences PhD will serve as a focal point for coordinated efforts by the Medical School faculty and College of Pharmacy faculty, both at Duluth, and the faculty of the College of Science and Engineering. Further, UMD acknowledges its Sea Grant designation and obligations to the history of the land grant university. UMD values and provides an inclusive, diverse community, with special emphasis on American Indian education. The programmatic focus of UMD is on the core liberal arts and sciences, maintaining a strong commitment to professional programs in the sciences and engineering, the arts, business, and education. Because of the strengths of the preprofessional programs, the School of Medicine and College of Pharmacy have located on the UMD campus. Defined future development will include strengthening the core liberal arts and sciences, K-12 professional development in education, and strengthened relationships with regional and Iron Range community colleges. The UMD College of Education and Human Service Professions has a strong commitment to the preparation of American Indian teachers through a partnership with tribal colleges and to the development of cohort groups for tribal college higher education administrators to receive their master’s degree in education. Ultimately, UMD’s challenge is to provide innovative solutions to the issues challenging the future of Northeastern Minnesota, to make a difference in the lives of people in this state and elsewhere, and to contribute meaningfully to the quality of life through improving public policy and finding solutions to those problems that impact our lives.5

The two Task Force Reports, issued March 30th, made several recommendations for consideration to President Robert Bruininks. In the Introduction to the Academic Task Force Report it was suggested that: 5 The University of Minnesota: Advancing the Public Good., pp 16-17, updated 5/2006.

6

Most of the recommendations in this report are specific to the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities campus, but all of the recommendations should be reviewed by coordinate campuses for potential applicability, as each of these campuses completes their strategic positioning processes currently underway. All chancellors should consider developing their own parallel Task Forces to develop specific plans for writing, honors, and diversity, as well as additional areas the chancellors may want to review.6

The University of Minnesota Duluth has and will continue to function based on the recommendations for fiscal and academic accountability according to the fiscal and accountability model. UMD operates independently and collaboratively, more like the Twin Cities campus, than like Morris and Crookston. This model operates on the following five principles:

1. Recognition and Attribution of Full Costs and Cost Increases: Cost increases must be modeled, reported, and acknowledged as campuses grow and change, regardless of where those costs ultimately are paid or the source of funds. Examples of core costs that at times in the past have been partially or fully paid centrally include compensation increases, capital costs, debt costs, facility repair and maintenance, increases in utilities, fringe rate increases, and general inflationary increases. Campuses cannot assume these costs automatically will be covered (in full or in part), and must include these costs as part of their overall budget planning, even if the costs are not currently attributed to their campus budgets.

2. Rationalization of Levels of State Support: The level of state support for any

campus should be compared against peers or otherwise rationalized and adjusted over time to benchmark levels. If the level of state support is expressed as a ratio (e.g., state support per FYE student or per faculty member), we must reach agreement on the appropriate strategic size of the campus as well.

3. Revenue Expectations and Enhancements: Campuses will be allowed and

encouraged to fully use their campus assets in the generation of new revenue, consistent with the missions of the University of Minnesota and the Board of Regents/administrative policies. Campuses will be encouraged—and expected—to develop innovative strategies to reduce administrative cost by developing strategic intra-campus partnerships to share administrative, financial and academic platforms where appropriate and to reinvest the cost savings into key academic programs and initiatives.

4. Academic Enhancements and Accountability: Each coordinate campus must

continue to lead its own change and strategic positioning process, consistent with these principles and consistent with its mission and that of the University. Each campus must be responsible for developing a long-range academic plan (with rationale), including enrollment targets and academic priorities.

6 Academic Task Force Report, at p.4; see pages 3-4 of this document.

7

5. Enhanced Regional Focus: The future vision of each campus must take into

account educational, rural and economic development in the region and where possible forge partnerships with them.

In the report of the President’s recommendations as adopted by the Board of Regents each campus is expected to ensure that it operates, consistent with its history and mission, within a new financial and academic accountability framework including regular monitoring and evaluation of progress. From pages 19-20 of the report:7

“The fiscal and academic accountability model for each campus will be based on the following operating principles: • Recognition and Attribution of Full Costs and Cost Increases • Rationalization of Levels of State Support • Revenue Expectations and Enhancements • Academic Enhancements and Accountability • Enrollment Models, Expectations, and Plan • Enhanced Regional Service and Programs • Increased connection with relevant Twin Cities campus initiatives and resources, and hopefully the Twin Cities campus will seek increased opportunities to connect with coordinate campus initiatives as well. The process will begin by gathering background data and analyzing a series of demographic, programmatic and fiscal issues the campuses face. This information will be shared shortly with the campus leadership, faculty, staff, and students. The data will then be used to frame an academic and fiscal accountability model and operating assumptions and to drive a long-term strategic planning and accountability process for the campus.

2. UMD Today Today the University of Minnesota Duluth is a strong, undergraduate institution with selected master’s degrees, in some instances meeting the needs of a special segment of the work force; i.e. Master of Environmental Health and Safety, Master of Advocacy and Political Leadership or the Master of Education delivered to tribal cohorts, specifically administrators on those campuses. In addition, the University of Minnesota system EdD is being delivered on the UMD campus. We acknowledge some improvement in our retention numbers from year 1 to year 2, and year 2 to year 3, however we see little chance of improvement in those areas until the ePortfolio and Graduate Planner are completed, and we are in the pilot phase and preparing for adoption on the campus. Although UMD initiated these projects, they are being managed by the Twin Cities Enterprise System. As was indicated in our Compact document and as we have indicated

7 “Transforming the University of Minnesota: President’s Recommendations” adopted by the Board of Regents, June 10, 2005. Available at: http://www1.umn.edu/systemwide/strategic_positioning/pdf/umn_pres_rec.pdf

8

with frequency over the past few years, the campus to date has invested approximately $1.7 million into the ePortfolio and Grad Planner, and these two technological support systems provide the cornerstone to improved advising and subsequently to higher retention and graduation rates. We would add that graduation rates are generally directly related to financial aid levels. For UMD to meet aspirational goals in terms of graduation rates, or to increase our graduation rates anywhere from 4% to 8%, it will require both the ePortfolio and Grad Planner, but also additional financial aid, both need-based and merit. UMD positions itself as “a comprehensive regional university [that provides] an alternative to both large research universities and small liberal arts colleges, [and] attracts students looking for a personalized learning experience on a medium-sized campus of a major university.”8 UMD offers 12 bachelor’s degrees in 75 majors. In addition to the two-year program at the School of Medicine and a College of Pharmacy program, UMD offers graduate programs in 21 different fields, plus six cooperative programs offered through the Twin Cities campus. Its Mission Statement9 reads:

UMD serves northern Minnesota, the state, and the nation as a medium-sized comprehensive university dedicated to excellence in all its programs and operations. As a university community in which knowledge is sought as well as taught, its faculty recognize the importance of scholarship and service, the intrinsic value of research, and the significance of a primary commitment to quality instruction.

At UMD, a firm liberal arts foundation anchors a variety of traditional degree programs, outreach offerings, and selected professional and graduate studies. Active learning through internships, honors programs, research, and community service promotes the development of skills, critical thinking, and maturity sought by society. Demanding standards of performance for students, faculty, and staff make UMD attractive to students with strong academic potential.

The campus contributes to meeting the cultural needs of the region and serves as a central resource point for the economic development of the region through community outreach and through an emphasis on the sea-grant and land-grant components of its program.

UMD significantly contributes to enhancing the national stature of the University of Minnesota by emphasizing quality programs central to the University’s mission and UMD’s distinctive mission within the University system, including graphic design and freshwater undergraduate research.

Providing an alternative to both large research-oriented universities and small liberal arts colleges, UMD attracts the student looking for a program that

8 http://www.d.umn.edu/facts/ 9 http://www.d.umn.edu/about/mission.html

9

emphasizes a personalized learning experience on a medium-sized campus of a major university.

The UMD learning experience includes undergraduate research opportunities for all students in the arts, humanities, and sciences plus an expectation of involvement in volunteerism and value-added leadership development opportunities. Maintenance of a high-quality residential learning environment makes a critical contribution to the strength of the undergraduate learning environment.

Technology continues to provide support and definition throughout the curriculum, operations, and outreach. Integration of cutting-edge technology is a focus in all planning efforts.10

In 1895, the Minnesota Legislature created the Normal School at Duluth, which was located at 2205 E. Fifth St. In 1921, the institution became the Duluth State Teachers College, and in 1947 it became a coordinate campus of the University of Minnesota. In 1948, ground was broken for the first building of the new campus and a building boom ensued to accommodate GIs returning from World War II. The old campus, which had housed the Normal School and the teacher's college, continued to serve UMD students for many years.11 The 244 acre campus has grown to include over 50 buildings (1,679,000 assignable square feet)12. Fall 2004 enrollment comprised 8,850 undergraduate students, 661 graduate students and 615 non-degree students.13 The University offers housing to 1,564 students in traditional residence halls, 96 students in suites, and 1,359 students in apartment-style units.14 The City of Duluth has a population of approximately 87,000 and is approximately 150 miles from the Twin Cities.15 The 2005-06 UMD compact identifies the following major capital investment priorities: A. SPACE AND FACILITIES ISSUES

1. Compact Initiative Impacts and Space Management

Office space: Office space for staff and faculty is at a premium with the needs associated with enrollment and program growth; some relief will be provided with the addition of the Swenson Science Building, the upcoming renovation of the Life Science building and the purchase of the Chester Park Elementary School.

10 Ibid. 11 http://www.d.umn.edu/facts/ 12 Accountability Report 2004-05 at p. 79. 13 Ibid. 14 http://www.d.umn.edu/housing/fac-ovrview.htm 15 http://www.visitduluth.com/general/duluth_facts.php

10

Classroom space: general purpose classrooms are in short supply, even though effectively managed; for 2004-05, %time utilization is nearly 80% (compared to the industry standard of 71%). Laboratory space: instructional and research laboratories are in short supply.

2. Major Capital Investment Priorities

• As part of the next capital budget, the campus is requesting $23 million for

construction of the Labovitz School of Business and Economics. We are currently designing the facility and by the completion of the legislative session we will be able to put the project out for bid.

• The campus is requesting authorization to begin the predesign of a $6 million American Indian Learning Resource Center. Other institutions which have created such a space have found it to be extremely beneficial in meeting academic achievement goals.

• We are in negotiations to purchase Chester Park School which currently exists within the UMD campus boundary. It would provide up to 35,000 assignable square feet for academic and administrative programs at UMD.

B. SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL ISSUES

While every campus of the University of Minnesota is increasingly relying on tuition to cover the operating costs for their programs, this problem is most significant on the UMD campus. Whether comparing UMD tuition costs to our peer group or to academic institutions with which we compete for students, in Minnesota and Wisconsin, the UMD tuition rate is significantly higher than all but the Twin Cities campus and private institutions. We must find an alternative method of funding the campus that adds resources beyond tuition to meet our programmatic needs. 3. Demographics In the state of Minnesota, from 2003 through 2013, the number of high school graduates is expected to decrease by 9.5%. About 85% of UMD students are Minnesota residents with approximately 44% from the Twin Cities area and 19% from Northeastern Minnesota; approximately 10% of the students are from Wisconsin and 1.5% are from N/S Dakota. International students comprise about 2% of the student population. 4. UMD students The UMD Student Body in Fall 2004

• The total student enrollment was 10,126. • 8,850 students were undergraduates. • 590 students stated they were minority. Minorities represented included Hispanic,

African American, American Indian, and Asian American. • 214 international students attend UMD.

11

• 95 percent of undergraduates enrolled full time. • 30.3 percent of students live in university housing. • 661 students are in graduate programs.

The Entering Class of Fall 2004

• 32 percent of the total enrollment were new students at UMD. • Of the new high school students for which a high school rank was provided

(2,219), 15 percent (330) graduated from the top 10 percent of their high school graduating class; 61 percent (1,325) graduated from the top 35 percent of their high school graduating class; 83 percent graduated in the top half of their class.

• 87.5 percent of new freshmen live in university housing. Since 1990 the average high school rank percentile of UMD students has remained relatively constant at about 70%. UMD has prided itself on being an access point for the University of Minnesota; UMD has intentionally positioned itself to have strengthened the profile of the top 500 students in each incoming class. That has allowed us to continue to play an important role as an access point to the University of Minnesota. ACT scores for UMD entering students have remained steady at 23. Admissions Applications Applications to UMD have risen each year, going from 4,436 in 1995 to 7,180 in fall 2004. UMD has had a general offer rate of over 75% each year since 1995, with a 78.1% offer rate in FY2004. The yield rate for UMD in 2004 was 42.1% in 2004. Retention Rates First year retention rates at UMD currently hover between about 75% to 78%. Second year retention rates range between about 65% to 68% and third year rates generally range from about 61% to 63%. For one, two, and three-year retention rates for University of Minnesota campuses, see Appendix A (p. 35); UMD is attempting to obtain similar information from peer institutions. Graduation Rates The four-year graduation rate for UMD students entering as freshmen in 2000 was the highest in four years at 25.9%. The five-year graduation rates ranges from about 45% to 47% and the six-year rate has been relatively steady with a graduation rate of 51% for freshmen who entered UMD in 1998.16 For graduation rates for University of Minnesota campuses, see Appendix B (p. 36); UMD is attempting to obtain similar information from peer institutions. Graduation rate targets for UMD have been established: 40%, 4 year; 60%, 5 year; and 65%, 6 year.

16 For retention and graduation rates see the 2004-05 Accountability Report, at pp 86-87.

12

Student Satisfaction Students surveyed in 2004 were asked how satisfied they were with their experiences at the University of Minnesota. Eighty percent of the UMD students report being extremely or moderately satisfied with their University of Minnesota Duluth 2004-05 experiences on the 2005 Student Satisfaction Survey.17 5. UMD Faculty Since FY1998, the number of UMD faculty has increased each year except one. UMD FYE tenure/tenure track faculty counts grew from 252 in FY1998 to 295 in FY2004. Non-tenure track faculty nearly doubled from 109 to 205 during that same period. Female tenured or tenure track faculty represented 33.8% of the faculty in FY2004. Faculty of color in FY2004 comprised 13% of all tenured or tenure track faculty. The FY2004 average salary18 for UMD professors is $79,900. Full compensation is, on average, $106,100. The average salary for UMD associate professors is $65,500 and average compensation is $88,700. The average salary for UMD assistant professors is $50,400 with average compensation of $70,400. When total average compensation is considered, UMD faculty compensation in all categories ranks 8/17 for full professors, 3/17 for associate professors, and 7/ 17 for assistant professors in relation to their peer group. For the UMD Peer Group see Appendix C (p. 37). 6. UMD Staff From FY1999 to FY2004, nonacademic staff decreased from 745 to 690 FTEs. During that same period, Academic Professional and Administrative staff increased from 158 to 195 FTEs. For UMD’s organizational chart see: http//www.d.umn.edu/admin/org/ 7. Academic Programs For the most popular courses at UMD by enrollment see Appendix D (p. 38). For the most popular primary majors for UMD students see Appendix E (p. 39). 8. UMD Finances The projected UMD operating budget for fiscal year 2007 is estimated to be $191 million with $149 million of non-sponsored revenue, including $76 million in tuition and

17 2005 SES survey data 18 None of these data include Duluth Medical School faculty salary and compensation.

13

university fee income. Like the Twin Cities campus, UMD has managed its funds successfully to balance its budget on an annual basis every year. UMD continues to have concerns that our tuition rate for full-time students exceeds that charged to students on the Twin Cities campus. Also, UMD tuition continues to be higher than any other institution in our peer group and more than $2,000 higher than comparable public institutions in Minnesota and Wisconsin. UMD continues to support President Bruininks’ effort to aggressively look for legislative redress or more rigorous HESO negotiation to change the reciprocity agreement with the state of Wisconsin. The current reciprocity plan costs the UMD campus $1.2 million in lost tuition revenue. The campus budget model maintains significant campus reserves to address the changing needs of the campus as we refine our priority initiatives. The result has been that we are able to apply approximately ten dollars to address our campus priority needs for every one dollar we receive from annual system-wide distribution of program funding. 9. Athletics UMD competes in 7 men’s and 9 women’s intercollegiate sports. Men’s and women’s hockey compete in NCAA Division I; all other sports are NCAA Division II. There are currently 410 Division I and Division II student athletes enrolled at UMD. Along with a 92% graduation rate, UMD has been and continues to be in full compliance with Title IX. 10. Planning Principles The principles articulated below were developed to help guide UMD’s strategic positioning process: Preeminent is that the responsibility for developing and implementing a process of change must be led by UMD itself. In devising a plan for its programs, UMD followed as a continuation of previous efforts begun in 1995 the seven decision-making criteria articulated in section V of the January 2005 Strategic Positioning Report: Centrality to Mission; Quality, Productivity, and Impact; Uniqueness and Comparative Advantage; Enhancement of Academic Synergies; Demand and Resources; Efficiency and Effectiveness; and Development and Leveraging of Resources.19 The planning process also considered the five operating principles listed earlier in this document. UMD reviewed and implemented where appropriate the recommendations outlined in the Administrative Task force, including but not limited to: Recognizing the University of Minnesota, its campuses, colleges, departments, and units as a single enterprise; and optimizing the use of the University’s physical, financial, and technological resources. 19 See: http://www1.umn.edu/systemwide/strategic_positioning/decision.html

14

UMD developed, communicated, and operationalized clear and measurable criteria and benchmarks for success. Academic Life and Student Support has participated for over a decade in a continuous quality improvement program in collaboration with the Minnesota Council on Quality using the Baldrige National Quality Criteria. 11. Aspirations for UMD Nine UMD subcommittees were formed and have been meeting to formulate draft working papers on the subjects to which they were assigned, answering these questions:

• Where we are now: Current Issues? • What are our primary goals? • What is our plan to reach these goals? • What are our assessment procedures?

The subcommittees, with their chairs, are:

A. Undergraduate Subcommittee: Tim Holst, Jack Bowman B. Graduate and Research Subcommittee: Jim Riehl, Mike Lalich, Carol Bock C. Budget and Capital Subcommittee: Greg Fox, Kjell Knudsen D. Student Affairs, Enrollment Issues and Diversity Subcommittee: Bruce Gildseth, Eric Weldy, Chris Haidos E. Advising Subcommittee: Arden Weaver, Jerry Pepper F. Education Subcommittees: a) PreK-12: Paul Deputy b) Indian Education: Jackie Millslagle G. Development/Public Relations Subcommittee: Bill Wade, Diane Skomars a) Athletics: Bob Nielson H. Technology Subcommittee: Linda Deneen I. Library Subcommittee: Bill Sozansky

Reports of the subcommittees (final draft) follow. UMD will continue to refine the subcommittee priority goals and implementation strategies throughout the remainder of the 2006-07 academic year. A. Undergraduate Subcommittee The Subcommittee recognizes that there is much that is excellent in the undergraduate programming at UMD, and does not recommend radical changes in direction. The subcommittee does recognize two very serious issues that are currently impeding progress, space and funding, and then has some recommendations on building and strengthening academic programs, and recommendations for increasing the quality of the undergraduate experience.

15

Space is currently a critical issue on the UMD campus. Growth in numbers of students, as well as growth in research/scholarly activities at the undergraduate, graduate, and faculty levels in many areas of campus have created critical space shortages in all types of space, including offices, classrooms, and laboratories/studios. It is recognized that this is not a problem that can be dealt with quickly and that the completion of the renovation of the Life Science Building, the opening of a new Labovitz School of Business and Economics Building, and the acquisition of Chester Park School will improve matters dramatically by about the fall of 2008. Depending on campus growth to that point, the subcommittee recommends that if classroom needs continue that the possibility of a new classroom building be considered, as well as the possibility of moving some functions off campus. Funding, especially for SEE, support staff, and course access, has lagged growth in student numbers and inflation, and is a critical need. It is recommended that concerted effort be made to increase SEE funding systematically for five years, and that funding for support staff and course access be given serious attention. The subcommittee recommends building on current strengths in academic programs, and considering selected new programs. This includes retaining existing accreditations, and achieving new program accreditations where appropriate. Selected possible new programs to be considered include Professional Writing and Journalism in CLA; Dance, Museum Studies, and Music Technology in SFA; Social Work at the baccalaureate level and selected licensure programs in CEHSP; Environmental Science, Civil Engineering, Aerospace Engineering, and Nursing in CSE; and Entrepreneurship in LSBE. There is also widespread campus support for increasing student participation in study abroad experiences, and it is recommended that a plan be developed for managed growth of study abroad programs. While the subcommittee did not feel that distance education was something to be pursued at the expense of other undergraduate programs, it is something that cannot be ignored, and it is recommended that a special subcommittee on distance education planning be created. A final programming recommendation is a review and evaluation of Continuing Education. To improve the quality of the undergraduate experience and to continue improvement of retention and graduation rates, the subcommittee recommends strengthening faculty engagement with students by increasing funding for smaller freshman classes, the nurturing of quality teaching, and continuing to emphasize undergraduate research/scholarly effort. Other recommendations include full integration of ePortfolio and implementation of Grad Planner, continuing efforts to recruit and retain more honors students, and the creation, funding, and implementation of a plan to address the issue of under-prepared students in freshman level courses. Adequate financial aid, availability of required courses in a timely manner and consistent and valuable advisor relationships also will contribute to increased retention and graduation rates.

16

Undergraduate Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures Academic Programs: • Build on current strengths in

academic program, and consider feasibility of new programs.

• Increase efficiency of scheduling; redirect resources.

• Increase participation in study/abroad.

• Develop and implement a plan for managed growth of study abroad programs.

• Achieve program accreditations where appropriate.

• Room utilization rates. • Increase participation in a study

abroad experience by 3% to 5% per year.

• Internal assessment report for VCAA review in 2007.

• Survey of possible accreditations which UMD does not have.

Academic Programs: • Review academic units’

undergraduate and graduate new program opportunities.

• CLA: Professional Writing; Journalism

• SFA: Dance; Music Technology • CEHSP: Social Work; Licensure

programs • LSBE: Entrepreneurship • CSE: Environmental Science;

Civil Engineering; Aerospace Engineering; Nursing

• Prepare, review and approve new program proposals.

Academic Programs: • Distance Education.

• Create a special planning subcommittee on distance education.

• Review planning committee recommendations and implement as appropriate.

Quality of undergraduate experience, retention and graduation rates: • Strengthen faculty engagement

with students.

• Provide funding to create smaller freshman classes.

• Nurture quality teaching. • Increase undergraduate student

research/scholarly and creative activity.

• Decrease average size of 1000 level courses.

• Review reward systems; use of IDS and other teaching professional development opportunities.

• Increase number of UROP awards, REU grants and other research/ scholarly/creative activity by undergraduates.

Quality of undergraduate experience, retention and graduation rates: • Increase retention rate. • Address needs of under prepared

students.

• Increase use of ePortfolio • Review “time to graduation” -

accelerate graduation where possible.

• Create, fund, implement plan to address under prepared students in freshman level courses.

• Growth of 5% per year • Increase four-year and five-year

graduation rates by 10% by 2015.

Quality of undergraduate experience, retention and graduation rates: • Increase level of excellence in

student body.

• Recruit and retain more honors students.

• Increase the numbers of students in top 10% of high school class.

• Increase the number of high-ability students.

Increase campus diversity • Increase underrepresented

population.

• Address needs of non-native speakers including students, faculty, staff.

• Increase ESL courses in place.

17

B. Graduate and Research Subcommittee Graduate Education Subcommittee: Issue: Enrollment Recruitment of excellent graduate students is a high priority for the University of Minnesota Duluth. In order to increase enrollment in under-enrolled graduate programs, the following actions are proposed: 1) determine “best size” enrollment goals for each UMD graduate program, 2) develop and implement program-specific recruitment activities to achieve those enrollment goals, and 3) undertake a concerted campaign to publicize graduate education in general at UMD and to attract high quality graduate students to the campus. Annual review of program statistics by Directors of Graduate Studies and by the Associate Graduate Dean at Duluth will be used to assess the effectiveness of these actions. Issue: Graduate Student Support Excellence in graduate education is fostered when students are offered sufficient levels of financial support from the point of matriculation to timely degree completion. With that in mind, the University of Minnesota will take the following actions: 1) increase the stipend level for GTAs and GRAs so that salaries are competitive with those offered at comparable institutions, 2) pursue funding that is internally available for graduate student support, and 3) develop new sources for external and private funding (e.g. donor-funded fellowships). The success of these efforts will be measured by annual review of program statistics by program directors and the Associate Graduate Dean for Duluth. Issue: Campus Contribution to Graduate Education The University of Minnesota Duluth is well positioned to increase its contribution to graduate education in Minnesota. A proposal to offer the EdD at Duluth is under review in the Graduate School, with expected approval by the Board of Regents in Spring 2007, implementation in Summer 2007; likewise, a proposal to establish a multicampus (UMD, UMTC) PhD in Integrated Biosciences is under consideration by the Graduate School. In addition, the campus proposes to establish protocols for increasing participation of qualified UMD faculty in selected doctoral programs and to promote greater utilization of UMD faculty in cross-disciplinary initiatives. The success of the two new programs, once established, will be measured by reviews, as mandated by the Graduate School. Program statistics, such as graduate faculty rosters, and required program reviews will measure the degree to which Duluth faculty participate in graduate education.

18

Graduate Education Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures Supporting graduate students financially: • Increase the number and size of

developmentally appropriate, multi-year packages of financial support available to students in all UMD graduate programs.

• Pursue an increase in the number of and level of teaching and research assistantships.

• Vigorously pursue established opportunities for support of graduate students through the Graduate School.

• Pursue possibilities for private funding (e.g. donor-funded scholarships) that could be effectively combined with other forms of support.

• Increase yield of UMD program applications for fellowship funds offered through the Graduate School; do comparative analysis of successful and unsuccessful proposals.

• Increase the number and types of support offered by each program, including fellowships, tuition waivers, teaching and research assistantships, scholarships, etc.

• Collect and review program use of funds and relevant data on student enrollment, retention, and time-to-degree.

Effectively utilizing faculty resources: • Increase the number of Duluth

faculty appointed as “Senior Members” of the Graduate School faculty.

• Promote working relations among UMD faculty and Twin Cities Graduate School programs.

• Promote utilization of UMD faculty in cross-disciplinary initiatives.

• Increase number of UMD faculty appointments as Graduate School faculty.

• Tabulate and review doctoral advisement/committee responsibility.

Right-sizing high quality programs by increasing enrollment in under-enrolled programs to achieve student-faculty ratios appropriate to the discipline and in line with program’s expected outcomes for student learning.

• Develop, support, and implement program-specific recruitment activities with, and for, identified programs.

• Develop incentives for faculty to seek external support for graduate students.

• Increase awareness of graduate education opportunities at UMD by developing and implementing a publicity/recruitment campaign through the Duluth Graduate Office.

• Vigorously pursue recruitment funds from established sources, such as the Graduate School.

• Track relevant program data (# of inquiries, application, admissions, matriculations, and enrollments) to assess whether enrollment goals are being met.

• Track various recruitment efforts/devices to determine relative effectiveness of each activity.

• Monitor quality measures such as admissions minimums and progress toward degree to ensure that standards are being met.

Expanding UMD’s contribution to graduate education by increasing the opportunities for UMD faculty to participate in advisement of doctoral students.

• Develop a proposal for the EdD for approval by the Board of Regents in Spring 2006, for implementation in Fall 2007.

• Forward a proposal for the PhD in Integrated Biosciences for approval by the Board of Regents in Spring 2007, implementation in Fall 2007.

• Establish protocols for increasing participation of qualified UMD faculty in selected doctoral programs.

• Increase number of UMD faculty advising/mentoring doctoral graduate students.

• Prepare doctoral-level program proposals and forward for approval by Board of Regents.

19

Research Subcommittee: Issue: Dwindling Federal Research Dollars Faced with a decline in federal research dollars, UMD seeks to develop alternate funding sources for research and creative activities. This can be done by establishing cooperative agreements with interested corporations; by educating faculty on the potential of patents and licensing agreements; by investigating foundation support for research and scholarship; by providing incentives to faculty to seek external support; and by expanding opportunities for “external sales” of research instrumentation and consulting. Outcomes of these efforts will be measured through tracking expenditures on research and creative activity and by monitoring the number of patent disclosures, patents received, and licensing agreements. Issue: Exploiting UMD’s Strengths in Research and Creative Activity UMD will continue to focus on those areas for which the campus holds a national reputation and/or satisfies regional need while at the same time selectively developing new areas of research/scholarly/artistic emphasis. Areas of research emphasis include water resources (Center for Water and Environment, the Large Lakes Observatory, physical and biological sciences in the College of Science and Engineering), American Indian research and education (College of Education and Human Service Professions, College of Liberal Arts), and biosciences (College of Science and Engineering along with Duluth Medical School and College of Pharmacy). Faculty and staff at UMD are very active in outreach and public engagement. UMD will continue to service the region and the state in the area of economic development. (Natural Resource Research Institute, Center for Economic Development and Bureau of Business and Economic Research). This means that faculty hiring should be encouraged in areas which overlap UMD strengths and that additional resources should be provided to those productive areas. On the other hand, the campus is also prepared to react to new federal, state and industrial research opportunities and to commit seed money to promising new initiatives in research and creative activity. Usual measures of productivity (grants, publications, awards, performances, competition prizes, etc.) will be employed in conjunction with periodic reviews of research/scholarship focus areas for possible expansion or contraction. Issue: Participation in University-Wide Research Initiatives In order to facilitate more active participation of UMD faculty in presidential initiatives and other all-university programs, the campus will work to ensure the distribution of university-wide research initiatives to all appropriate faculty and research staff. UMD faculty and research staff will also be encouraged to become part of a university wide research expertise database and to serve on university research committees. Review of program/committee rosters and of the expertise database provides a means for measuring the success of these efforts. Issue: Visibility of UMD’s Achievements in Research and Scholarship While many individual faculty members at UMD are highly respected by other authorities in their respective fields of expertise, the campus as a whole has insufficient public recognition for its achievements in research and scholarship. Ways of achieving

20

such recognition include working with University Relations to publicize achievements in research and scholarship on a regular basis and transforming UMD into a site for national and international conferences, workshops, seminars, etc., particularly in areas of campus strength and/or potential growth. Review of publicity efforts and outcomes (news releases, campus-sponsored conferences, etc.) will be a measure of the effectiveness of these proposed actions.

Research Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures Exploit UMD’s strengths in research and creative activity by continuing to focus on those areas in which UMD holds a national reputation, satisfy regional needs, and develop new areas of research/scholarship emphasis.

• Provide resources to those areas of research and creative activity which have developed are likely to develop national and international reputations, and that satisfy regional needs.

• Encourage faculty hiring in areas which overlap UMD strengths.

• Provide seed money for establishment of new research focus areas.

• React to new federal, state, and industrial research opportunities.

• Increase grant and contract support.

• Perform regular reviews of research/scholarship focus areas for possible expansion or contraction.

Increase visibility and recognition of UMD’s achievements in research and scholarship.

• Collect and promulgate information on achievements in research, scholarship, and creative works on a regular basis.

• Interact with University Relations office to publicize achievements in research and scholarship.

• Develop UMD as a recognized site for national and international conferences, workshops, seminars, etc., particularly in areas of campus strength and/or potential growth.

• Collect and review processes and procedures to increase publicity involving UMD faculty and staff involving research and creative activity.

Increase participation in university wide research initiatives by becoming more active participants in presidential initiatives and other all university programs.

• Ensure distribution of university-wide research initiatives to appropriate faculty and research staff.

• Promote UMD faculty participation in university wide research expertise database.

• Encourage and support the participation of UMD faculty and research staff on university research committees.

• Collect and review information on the participation of UMD faculty and research staff in university wide research initiatives.

In light of dwindling federal • Investigate foundation and • Increase annual external research

21

research dollars, develop alternative funding sources for research and creative activities.

corporate support for research and scholarship.

• Educate faculty and research staff on the potential of patents and licensing agreements and external sales opportunities.

• Provide incentives to faculty to seek external support.

• Leverage current research dollars with new external sources.

expenditures. • Increase number of patent

disclosures, patents received, and licensing agreements.

C. Budget and Capital Subcommittee Please find enclosed an updated draft of the capital projects we have identified as priorities during the next planning cycle. The list was compiled after reviewing previous planning documents and holding individual meetings with each of the collegiate deans and the associate vice chancellor for academic administration. It should be noted that projects currently under construction on the campus, as well as those listed as current active projects, are consistent with the previous planning documents for the campus including Vision 2010, except one. The Stadium Apartment demolition and replacement, identified as a need by the building code officials of the University of Minnesota, does not appear on the previous documents. There are only five projects on the list of potential capital projects which were not included on previous planning documents. They include:

AB Anderson Hall Campus Center Football stadium upgrade Limnological Lab Voss Kovach addition for Civil Engineering

We have not identified a source of funds for any of the potential capital projects and the list is significantly larger than what has been included in recent legislative requests. If they become part of the University of Minnesota legislative capital request, the campus would be responsible for one-third of the total project cost. If they are not part of the University legislative request, the campus would be responsible for 100 percent of the project cost. The second portion of the subcommittee task was to review the budgeting process for the campus. We note that the new internal budget model will create increased transparency with regard to the fiscal transactions between the UMD campus and the system office. While sometimes this may reduce our costs, other times our cost conceivably could increase based on agreed-upon standards of assessment. But in every case the campus would benefit by knowing that it is paying only for those costs which are related to its mission and a fair share of system-wide expenses.

22

For the campus the most significant risk in the new budget model will be the financing and operating costs of new and renovated facilities. Currently we are responsible for one-sixth of new project costs and the system pays for one-sixth of the new project cost plus 100% of the recurring operating costs (in part from the soon-to-be-eliminated IRS tax). The subcommittee recommends increased caution when reviewing requests for new capital projects The centralized campus budgeting system which has been in place at UMD over the past several years was reviewed and we note that over the past ten years, allocations have consistently been in support of previously-identified campus priorities. We believe the current budget allocation model for the campus should be retained and that regular assessment occur to ensure that future allocations meet priorities identified in this strategic planning process.

Budget and Capital Subcommittee Current Active Projects 2006 2008 2010 Labovitz School of Business & Economics (new)

$23M

X

Chester Park $1.2M purchase, $5-7M renovation

X

Bohannon Hall: HEAPR ventilation/fire protection $4M

X

American Indian Learning Resource Center $6M

X

Stadium Apartment Demolition & Replacement $10-12M

X

X

Ongoing Priorities Mechanical Systems & Sprinkler Updates Property Purchase Potential Capital Projects With No Current Assigned Priority, Year of Construction or Engineered Cost Estimate (alphabetical order)

2006* 2008 2010

AB Anderson Hall

Campus Center

Central Entrance Road $2-3M

Football Stadium: upgrade

Heller Hall

Labovitz School of Business & Economics (current): renovate – ventilation/fire protection

Limnological Lab code and renovation

Marshall W. Alworth Hall

23

Recreation Fields

Sports & Health Center: renovate-ventilation/fire protection

Voss Kovach: civil engineering

Current estimated cost of renovation in 2006 dollars, based on Library renovation is $150/square foot.

* It is not possible to add any projects to the 2006 legislative capital request.

D. Student Affairs, Enrollment Issues, Diversity Subcommittee Student success is clearly a complex issue that is best insured by surrounding students with opportunities to make good, well informed decisions. Sometimes, despite our best efforts, students will make poor choices, and those poor choices can have potential effects on their academic success. UMD has experienced a fairly rapid increase in the number of undergraduate students. With the increased student population, we have seen a corresponding increase in the number of physical and mental health issues. Students are coming to UMD with less skill in balancing personal and academic priorities and can benefit from a campus-wide approach that supports mental and physical wellness. In addition to developing a campus initiative in this area, we believe the addition of a full-time chemical dependency counselor will allow UMD to provide resources to those students in need as well as develop a consistent message to the greater population regarding moderation. A combination of national standards and campus data can be employed to monitor the effectiveness of our efforts. UMD has been successful in recruiting NHS/NAS classes that have allowed the institution to thrive. We enjoy tremendous capability in the market with stellar facilities, a quality reputation, and a desirable location. However, the demographics point to a shrinking pool of high school candidates. Couple this with increased costs and intense competition from both public and private schools, and it’s readily evident that our past success will be increasingly difficult to repeat. Clear retention targets will certainly be key to offset the expected decrease in NHS numbers, but so too will investment in technology, human resource and physical space thus allowing the Office of Admissions to retain its market share of students. This investment will require some staffing changes/realignments, and will allow us to capitalize on the strengths of UMD as we continue to recruit a diverse and capable student body. Parents are currently the most influential people in a high school student’s decision about where to go to college. They have displaced guidance counselors—now dead last due in part to fiscal realities facing the majority of public high schools. As an aside, MN is second to last in the nation for student/high school counselor ratio—currently at 1:806. A recent survey of UMD’s NHS population indicated that over 50% came from families where one or both parents lacked a college experience. Financial aid application data for this same population put their expected family contribution at or above our cost of education. These are bargain shoppers who are not necessarily vested in the collegiate ideal. However, we believe they also recognize good value and are more willing to pay

24

should their student and family receive quality opportunity and service. We have seen a modest increase in the number of families sending multiple children to our campus and believe parents to be a great untapped resource in our recruitment and retention efforts. We believe UMD must develop a consistent and deployed message for how we interface with parents. Surveys, focus groups and repeat business will certainly inform our success.

Student Affairs, Enrollment Issues & Diversity Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures Students are making poor behavioral choices resulting from academic and personal pressures. • Equip Health Services (HS) with

the proper staff and resource needed to assist students.

• Insure student physical and mental fitness through consistent access to campus resources and facilities.

• Support the addition of one full-time chemical dependency counselor in HS.

• Develop a campus-wide initiative/plan to address college student drinking.

• Use of American College Health Association (ACHA) – National College Health Assessment (NCHA) survey.

• Use a post-course survey to assess the impact of the new web-based College Student Drinking course on influencing drinking behavior among freshmen.

• Track and assess improvements in the number of alcohol related incidents’ reported through our on- and off-campus partners.

Demographic trends indicate a smaller pool of NHS/NAS. Increased academic costs and keen competition will impact our recruitment capability. • Provide Office of Admissions

with the financial and technological resources to enhance its ability to recruit NHS/NAS students.

• Identify specific enrollment targets and goals in the recruitment of underrepresented/int’l students.

• Support deployment of tech initiatives—Web pages/portals, document imaging.

• Add one full- or part-time position to assist with int’l student recruitment and retention.

• Track and assess improvements in the enrollment and retention of all UMD students by collegiate unit.

• Track and assess improvements in the enrollment and retention of underrepresented students including international students by collegiate unit.

Millennial parents are more involved in their students’ education and can be key partners in our recruitment and retention efforts. • Develop a consistent and fully

deployed approach to our interaction with parents and family members.

• Engage parents as partners in our recruitment and retention efforts.

• Develop a campus-wide plan, including philosophy statement and guidelines, for parental involvement—e.g., identify specific parental and institutional expectations.

• Build parent communication into our recruitment/retention plan.

• Assess parent and families understanding of UMD’s expectations regarding parental involvement, as well as their level of satisfaction—e.g., conduct written and on-line surveys, and parent and family focus groups.

• Track and assess satisfaction through repeat business—siblings at UMD

25

E. Advising Subcommittee

Currently we have addressed most of the goals and are developing assessment strategies with focus on the quality of advising as measured through retention and graduation rates. We will be continuing to revise this report, and will in the next few weeks have a developed framework for advising. The attached grid summarizes the task force’s vision and recommendations for both supporting and strengthening academic advising on the UMD campus. Through consultation with multiple constituencies, including the Advising Board, Career Services, and the Subcommittee on Student Life, Enrollment, and Diversity, we have identified three primary issues of concern and opportunity.

First is the need for academic advisement to be adequately supported, recognized, and coordinated. Our goals here revolve around the development and oversight of a broad advising plan or model that will articulate key advising philosophies and demonstrate our concern for multiple student constituencies across campus. This ambitious goal, once completed, will then serve a useful informative role for all interested parties, including faculty, staff, students, and parents. Central to this goal is attendance at the NACADA summer institute – a week-long working conference where such a plan could be drafted. We also feel very strongly about the need to consider ways of evaluating and recognizing academic advising. With the exception of a couple “end-of-year” awards, there currently is no formal system in place that evaluates advising as a partner to the teaching, research, and service missions of faculty and staff. We understand the complexities inherent in such a proposal. At the same time, we feel that movement in this direction clearly signals senior administration recognition of the importance of advising. Our second primary issue is the significance of advisor-advisee relationships to retention and graduation rates. Consistent with our desire to regularize and systematize how advising is understood and evaluated, we also strongly encourage a more coherent and comprehensive overhaul of how retention is conceptualized, measured, and improved. We assume that advising matters in retention; and, there is research evidence that it does. But, we need campus-based evidence and must not shy away from the challenges inherent in gathering such. An active institutional researcher and/or an “overseer” of retention will be necessary to this goal. Our final primary issue addresses the important and growing role of technology in the advising equation. This issue presents a two-pronged challenge: bringing options online, and keeping students, faculty, and staff updated on what those options are and how to use them. Our advising technology professionals, including the staff of the new Knowledge Management Center, understand these issues well. However, as options grow, the time demands put on this staff to educate the UMD community about the opportunities are going to become increasingly problematic. Creative effort will need to be applied to the challenges of effectively incorporating technology into our thinking about advising.

26

Advising Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures Advisement needs to be adequately supported, recognized, and coordinated: • ACC and the Advising Board

develop and implement a holistic advising plan by May, 2007.

• Advising is evaluated.

• Design and publicize a model plan in which key partners contribute in an on-going basis to its implementation and evolution.

• Provide additional recognition for faculty and professional advisors.

• Advisor attendance at NACADA summer institute to develop campus-wide advising plan.

• Use of CAS Standards every five years.

• Bring NACADA consultant to campus to assess campus progress approximately 18 months after summer institute attendance.

Strong advisor-advisee relationships contribute to improved retention and graduation rates: • The advisor-advisee relationship

is evaluated and strengthened.

• Cross-collegiate effort to develop appropriate models and instruments.

• Promote student participation in advisement.

• Use of specific advisor effectiveness instruments.

• Measure increases in student participation in advisement activities.

Realize the benefits from technology for improving advisement: • Grad Planner is operational

during the 2006-2007 academic years.

• Students are taught how to use the Grad Planner with a concerted effort during freshman year.

• Faculty and student satisfaction. • Correlating technology use with

selected variables.

Realize the benefits from technology for improving advisement: • Advisors are trained in the use

of on-line advising tools.

• A UMD website is developed to assist advisors by aggregating advising tools and resources in one space.

• ACC, Student Affairs, FYE, and KMC will work collaboratively to identify best content and ways to present information on online advising tools to students and advisors.

• Annual measure of the percentage of departments in which all advisors have received training on advising tools.

F. Education Subcommittees a) PreK-12 Subcommittee The University of Minnesota Duluth has over a 100-year history of service to PreK-12 populations in the Northern Minnesota region and at the state level. We are recognized nationally for our work We are poised to take our engagement with PreK-12 populations to the next level. As a recognized leader in the state in Education, Special Education and Early Childhood Education our five critical issues and the associated goals will spur our work on to meet the needs of the 21st century, our second century of contribution. Our work with the University of Minnesota Presidents, Initiative on Children, Youth and Family has supported our efforts. The PreK-12 Strategies task force associated with the UM Strategic Positioning effort has further supported our work. Our efforts to create a

27

more comprehensive and cohesive collaboration plan are a direct result of the recommendations that emerged from that task force. This issues represented on the Strategic Plan for PreK-12 are a culmination of work from a wide range of students, staff and faculty in Education and Human Service Professions. Faculty in other child and family related Departments are working with several projects concerning Children, Youth and Family. Our efforts to create UMD Children’s Place with a campus-wide collaboration for programming is an example. Our curricular revisions and increasing efforts with regard to diversity is another example of our current direction.

PreK-12 Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures Increase Diversity in a tangible way: • Recruit and retain students of

under represented populations. • Recruit and retain diverse

faculty.

• Education Social Justice Committee.

• Diverse faculty liaison and mentor.

• Work with Admissions.

• Increase in diverse faculty. • Increase in diverse students. • Increase in retention and

graduation.

Meet the curricular needs of the region for secondary and elementary education: • Create in-service programming

that meets current need. • Curricular revision to meet the

needs of the 21st century. • Create a track/plan for alternate

licensing.

• Outside consultant and facilitator for curricular review and modification.

• Curricular proposals Fall 2006. • Implementation Fall 2007. • Increase tenure-track faculty in

secondary education.

• Approved curricular changes. • Collect initial student outcomes

data by Fall 2008.

Academic initiatives and research related to the UM Children, Youth and Families initiatives and the UM PreK-12 Consortium now forming: • Focus on Early Childhood

initiatives. • Include related programs

involving research with children (i.e. Psychology, Social Work, Communication Sciences and Disorders).

• Encourage interdisciplinary initiatives (i.e. Medicine, Pharmacy, Criminal Justice).

• Incentives for faculty involvement in generating key initiatives.

• Stimulate involvement in collaborative research across the system.

• Increased coordinated proposals for academic initiatives.

• Increased grant and research production.

• Implementation of new or significantly enhanced academic initiatives coordinated with UMD campus and UMD system.

Comprehensive collaboration and partnering with PreK-12 with increased cohesiveness, depth and integration: • District-Wide Professional

Development Program. • Technology and Arts program

Grant School and District-Wide.

• Develop an integrated proposal with District 709.

• Involve UMD Teacher Education Council for campus-wide approach.

• Seek funding through grants and academic initiatives.

• Move from individual based to comprehensive unit/s based

• Consistent process documented by meetings and drafts.

• Proposal and funding. • Data for student outcomes from

program assessments (NCATE, BOT, HLC).

28

plan. Campus-wide collaboration for UMD Children’s Place for programming and interaction for infants, toddlers and preschoolers: • Integrated Unified Early

Childhood program between the Program and the Care Center.

• Programming from Music, Art, Environmental Education.

• Cultural and Global programming using UMD resources.

• Child Care Parent Advisory Council, Faculty liaison form a task force; develop a cohesive and comprehensive plan.

• Medicine and Pharmacy provide services.

• CSE provide hearing and language screening services.

• Parent, teacher, student assistant surveys of child learning.

• Documentation of activities. • Student outcome data from

Education Assessment.

b) Indian Education Subcommittee The primary goal for American Indian Programs is to increase enrollments and subsequent graduation rates of Native American students at both undergraduate and graduate levels. A plan to reach these goals includes coordinated recruiting across programs and levels; partnerships with Tribal colleges to promote an increase in transfer students; culturally-based licensure programs to attract Native students to the teaching profession; and improved student support services on campus. A second goal is to improve the level of cultural competence on campus and in the community. Events and experiences that enhance cultural competence need to be shared across programs. But the primary vehicle will be work toward revitalization of the Ojibwe language, which can then provide the foundation for culturally based academic programming. A higher level of cultural competence will also support the goals of higher enrollments and retention rates. Throughout this work, two additional goals must remain in focus: to maintain and strengthen American Indian academic programs with sufficient funding and faculty lines, and to increase collaboration across and among these programs; and the American Indian Advisory Board must be active and recognized on campus.

Indian Education Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures Recruitment and retention of Native American students: • Expand opportunities for

Native American students across campus.

• Identify recruiting capacity to target Native students; coordinate recruitment across programs and levels.

• Increase the number of outreach cohorts.

• Develop partnerships with Tribal Colleges (articulation); develop alternate curricula for teacher licensure.

• Increase undergraduate enrollment by 40% over next 3 years.

• Increase number of cohorts in progress.

Recruitment and retention of Native American students:

• Identify recruiting capacity to target Native students; coordinate

• Increase number of Native American students in graduate

29

• Expand graduate program opportunities for Native American students across campus.

recruitment across programs and levels.

• Increase the number of outreach cohorts.

• Develop partnerships with Tribal Colleges (articulation); develop alternate curricula for teacher licensure.

programs. • Increase number of cohorts in

progress.

Recruitment and retention of Native American students: • Provide opportunities for

student success.

• Examine curriculum and student support services; make recommendations that will increase retention

• Increase undergraduate and graduate completion rates (average of 50% increase across programs/levels)

Promote cultural competence campuswide • Revitalize the Ojibwe

language.

• Provide campuswide workshops/colloquia/programs that enhance cultural competence.

• Collaborating with Tribal colleges and community, develop outcomes for language, an oral proficiency exam; and strengthen undergraduate and graduate academic language offerings across departments.

• Conduct satisfaction survey among Native students.

• By January 1, 2007, prepare quarterly intermediate reports including: collaborating colleges; Ojibwe outcomes; specifications for the oral proficiency exam.

Maintain and strengthen American Indian academic programs by providing recurring funding for American Indian Projects; fill additional tenure-track lines for Native programming.

• Secure recurring funding. • Funding in place.

Address fragmented American Indian programming and lack of collaboration across and among American Indian programs by supporting programming and collaboratives through revival of the American Indian Advisory Board.

• American Indian Advisory Board meets at least once each semester.

• Increased activity and focus of American Indian Advisory Board.

G. Development/Public Relations Subcommittee It is the goal of both KUMD Radio and the College of Liberal Arts to integrate an academic course into the operational activity of the station. Working in conjunction with the CLA Department of Communication, an academic credit course/internship will be available at KUMD to students in fall 2006. The primary goal of the Alumni Office will be to increase its national scope and participation. This will be accomplished by recruiting board members with national representation and by planning more alumni events in various locations throughout the country. The “Reaching Higher Campaign” which began its quiet phase June 2005 has as its goal $20 million. The plan is as follows:

30

1. Complete an in-house feasibility study to determine the focus of the campaign.

2. Beginning March 2006, bring together a campus campaign planning committee to

meet periodically throughout the campaign.

3. Prior to public launch of the campaign, write and print campaign statement.

4. Continue with ongoing and major/lead gift solicitation. The conclusion will be to celebrate the successful completion of the “Reaching Higher Campaign” on or before December 31, 2008.

Development/Public Relations Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures Launch “Reaching Higher Campaign”: • Goal in excess of $20 million.

• Complete “in-house” feasibility study.

• Write campaign case statement in Spring of 2006.

• Major/lead gift solicitation ongoing.

• Successfully achieve campaign goal and complete the campaign by December 31, 2008.

• Campus Campaign Planning Committee to meet regularly, beginning in March 2006.

• Increase alumni giving. Increase alumni gatherings in key regions throughout country.

• Continue to recruit Board members w/national representation.

• Meet w/Development Leadership to become more aware of development activities and possible opportunities for cooperation and crossover.

• Events in key UMD areas throughout the country.

Integrate academic course into operational activity of KUMD Radio station.

• Work cooperatively with CLA Communications Department.

• Academic credit course/internship available at KUMD to students in Fall 2006.

a) Athletics Subcommittee Our strategic planning process for the department of intercollegiate athletics has examined several major issues that will impact the future of our athletic program and our future success. Our strategic plan has been geared to address these major issues through the identification of specific goals and objectives. Our primary goal is to insure a successful transition from the North Central Conference for our Division II sport programs while maintaining a high level of competitiveness in the Western Collegiate Hockey Association and our high standards for academic excellence and gender equity. To meet this primary goal, we must provide for necessary growth in program expenditures while maintaining our financial stability and improve our athletic facilities to keep pace with our competition.

31

Three specific objectives that have been identified as a part of our strategic plan:

1. Increase funding levels and department revenues by creating a new special event to raise money for women’s athletic scholarships, working with student leadership to increase student fee support for athletics, increasing endowment funds and broadening our current annual fund raising support among alumni and hockey season ticket holders.

2. Devise plans to target specific facility projects including a capital project for the

football stadium upgrade, working with the city and state to support the new DECC arena project through the legislature, and cooperating with university departments on the renovation of existing building space for offices and program support functions.

3. Restructure present staffing resources and supplement both our coaching salary

pool and professional development funding to assist with the retention and the recruitment of quality coaches for our highly competitive coaching positions.

Athletics Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures

Continue a successful transition into the North Central Conference with our NCAA Division II sport programs. • Run a highly competitive

athletic program while maintaining a strong commitment to academic excellence.

• Improve our coaching staff positions and staff development funding to assist in retention of coaching staff.

• Maintain gender equity in all pertinent areas.

• Utilize Athletic Academic Center, staff and academic advisors. Develop academic success plans for all at risk student/athletes.

• Shift current staffing resources and supplement salary pool to upgrade highly competitive coaching positions.

• Provide professional development funding for all sport staffs.

• Hold a new fund raising special event with focus on funding for women's athletic scholarships.

• Increase graduation rates to maintain similar or higher graduation levels on both the NCAA Cohort Graduation data and our institutional graduation tracking.

• Provide $1000 per DII sport and track usage of all professional develop funds.

• Monitor EADA reports and NCAA self-study to test gender equity levels.

Maintaining financial stability while providing for necessary growth in expenditures. • Increase revenues and funding.

• Work with student leadership and student service fee committee to increase service fee funding levels to $500,000 over the next three years.

• Broaden our current annual fund base with alumni giving and a priority seating campaign

• Increase endowments.

• Target goal for annual fund of $450,00 cash.

• Goal of $3 million in total endowment by fiscal year end 2007-2008.

Improving facilities to keep pace with league opponents • Upgrade football facility. • Build a new arena at the DECC • Renovate office and support

areas to meet current and future

• Plan a successful financial campaign to remodel football stadium.

• Campaign for referendum and help secure legislative support for project.

• Involve state, university, and private resources.

32

need of the department. • Develop a plan for the utilization of existing space in conjunction with HPER and Recreation.

H. Technology Subcommittee UMD will improve learning spaces, including classrooms, computer laboratories, informal spaces, and online environments. An ITSS classroom designer should be involved in all major building and renovation projects. Emphasis will be placed on development of a high-tech classroom building through renovation of the SBE Building and support for an Information Commons in the UMD Library. The need for informal learning spaces is recognized and such spaces will be created. Online learning environments will be enhanced through provision of technology tools and support. Technology use will be improved through a combination of improved infrastructure and education. UMD will maintain high availability, scalability, service continuity, security, and integrity of the data network and system infrastructure. UMD will revise and adopt “Recommendations for UMD Technology Mission, Beliefs, Goals, and Competencies.” Students, faculty, and staff will receive adequate training to help them make effective use of technology. Student ownership of computers, including laptop computers, will be encouraged, and support to keep them running well will be provided. Technology tools will be used to enable research requiring innovation and collaboration within UMD, within the UM system, nationally, and internationally.

Technology Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures Learning Spaces: • Improve learning spaces,

classrooms, laboratories, informal spaces, and online environments.

• Support the Library’s Information Commons.

• Provide space for informal learning and tools for online learning.

• Involve an IT classroom designer in all major building and renovation projects.

• Develop high-tech classroom building through renovation of LSBE Building.

• Increase the number of technology-equipped classrooms.

• Survey students and faculty.

Technology Infrastructure and Security: • Maintain high availability,

scalability, service continuity, security, and data integrity of network and system infrastructure.

• Upgrade the campus data network to provide full redundancy in all buildings.

• Upgrade computer systems using clustering and mirroring techniques.

• Secure and routinely review computer workstations that access private data.

• Store private data on secured,

• Increase the percentage of buildings with redundant network infrastructure.

• Increase the percentage of critical services with clustered or mirrored systems.

• Increase the percentage of servers storing private data that are under the control of ITSS or OIT.

33

centrally managed servers. • Increase the percentage of computer workstations and devices accessing private data that are secure.

Guide and enhance the use of technology across the UMD community: • Through education, effective

use, and research applications.

• Revise and adopt Recommendations for UMD Technology Mission, Beliefs, Goals, and Competencies.

• Provide training to support maximum use of technology.

• Expand student ownership of laptop computers and other handheld devices.

• Use information technology to enable research.

• Track completion, approval, and periodic review of recommendations document.

• Increase the numbers who have attended training and survey effectiveness of training.

• Increase the percentage of students who own their own laptop computers and other handheld devices.

• Survey faculty satisfaction with technology support for research.

I. Library Subcommittee The UMD Library will partner with ITSS, faculty, and instructional support units to ensure students acquire the information literacy competencies required to complete their education and compete in the work world of the 21st century. Information literacy competencies include understanding the structure of information and knowledge, creating and executing strategies for finding the needed information, analyzing and evaluating information, and synthesizing and integrating information to complete an assignment or solve a problem. The Library will take the lead to create a state-of-the-art Information Commons, a physical space where library resources, technology, and a variety of services designed to support student learning, writing, and research are brought together, and work with faculty to build information literacy competencies into the curriculum. The UMD Library will respond to the demand for information in all formats by providing access to quality information resources including a comprehensive selection of commercially produced electronic indexes and abstracting services and journals as well as digitized collections of primary source materials and books in the public domain.

Library Subcommittee

Primary Goals Plan Assessment Procedures Create a state-of-the-art Information Commons by 2010: • A physical space where library

resources, technology, and a variety of services designed to support student learning, writing, and research are brought together.

• Define purpose of Information Commons.

• Identify partners, services, venues, and governance.

• Work with partners to design and develop services.

• Build Information Commons space based on services.

• Gather input from students and faculty about needs and services.

• Survey students and faculty satisfaction with developed services and space.

The Collections: Respond to demand for information resources in all formats: • Provide access to quality

information resources

• Review use and relevance of current electronic resources.

• Point to digitized collections of primary source materials and materials in the public domain

• Use collection analysis tools to compare UMD holdings to peer institutions.

• Survey students and faculty to measure satisfaction with

34

including a comprehensive selection of commercially produced electronic resources and digitized collections of primary source materials and materials in the public domain.

from our online catalog. information resources and access to information.

The Services: Support the changing information needs of our users: • Work collaboratively with

faculty to build information literacy competencies into the curriculum. Information literacy competencies include understanding the structure of information and knowledge, creating and executing strategies for finding the needed information, analyzing and evaluating the information, and synthesizing and integrating information so it can be used to complete an assignment or solve a problem.

• Identify faculty, programs, and/or instructional services interested in working on information literacy initiative.

• Review and adopt information literacy standards.

• Determine the scope of the information literacy program.

• Work with faculty to design a pilot information literacy program.

• Implement pilot.

• Pre-test students for information literacy competencies.

• Post-test students for information literacy competencies.

12. Progress to date The following is a brief representative summary of progress to date with respect to strategic planning initiatives. I. Exceptional Students

• The record freshmen class (2,315) of Fall 2006 contains 64 Best of Class scholars. • UMD’s all-campus Honors Program, now in its fourth year, has students enrolled

in each of the four class levels. It is expected that 15 seniors will complete their capstone experience and graduate this year.

• Freshman-sophomore retention has increased with a Fall 2006 freshman to sophomore retention rate of 80%.

• Increased graduation rate targets have been established as follows: 40%, 4 year; 60%, 5 year; and 65%, 6 year. The work of the campus Student Success Team, the fourteen retention-related Transitional Leadership Program (TLP) projects, and plans to fully utilize the graduation planner tool are aimed at further improving graduation rate targets.

• The quality of the Fall 2006 freshman class remains high with an average ACT of 23 and an average high school rank of 69. 734 students in the new freshman class are in the top 20% of their high school class.

II. Graduate and Professional Programs

• A new graduate program at Duluth, the EdD, has been approved by the Graduate School and, pending Regents’ approval, will accept students in Fall 2007.

35

• The all-university Integrated Biosciences master’s degree program began operation in Fall 2006 with an entering class of 14 students.

• An all-university Integrated Biosciences PhD is under review. • The MEd program in the Department of Education in the College of Education

and Human Service Professions has enrolled two cohorts of students in the Fall of 2006. One program cohort is off-site and registers 16 American Indian students; the second cohort in Duluth registers 22 students. Planning is nearly complete to offer this degree program off-site next year at Mesabi Range Community and Technical College.

III. Exceptional Faculty and Staff

• Exceptional tenured or tenure-track faculty continue to be hired by the collegiate units from across North America and beyond. In 2006, 27 new faculty began their careers at UMD. Recruitment efforts focus on individuals with outstanding potential as teachers and creative scholars/researchers.

• Collegiate data shows that a recruiting emphasis on diversity resulted in the hiring of 9 faculty of color and 11 female tenured/tenure-track faculty.

• Research start-up packages were provided to new hires to assist in research program development; a number of awards in excess of $100,000 were provided to laboratory science faculty.

• Twenty staff will receive Outstanding Service Awards in Spring 2007. Awardees will receive cash awards of $2,500.

IV. Exceptional Organization

• UMD technology support continues to provide increased services to faculty, students and staff. For example, the campus wireless network covers almost 85% of the campus buildings housing research and instruction as well as the student union.

• UMD will offer tech camp number 10 in January 2007. Approximately 180 faculty have previously benefited from a week-long program to enhance instructional technology skills. The January 2007 tech camp will feature on-line course development.

• The recently purchased Chester Park Elementary School is being used for swing space in 2006-2007 while a complete remodeling effort is being done on Bohannon Hall. Approximately 90 faculty and staff are temporarily housed in Chester Park.

• UMD is actively participating in and assisting in coordination, development, and implementation of the Phase I (5.1) and Phase II (6.0) of the ePortfolio, an important tool for student achievement tracking.

• Twenty-three UMD staff from across the campus are participating in the University Transitional Leadership Program, a year-long program designed to improve performance excellence.

• Initiatives in the American Indian Education focus area are producing significant outcomes. Graduate programs in the Department of Education and the Department of Social Work are currently providing many opportunities for American Indian students to get master’s degrees off-site. The Department of

36

Education is currently offering two different off-site degree programs to American Indians leading to undergraduate degrees. Additional degree programs are in development with tribal colleges.

• Approximately 250,000 square-feet of campus space has recently been remodeled or is currently undergoing remodeling to provide modern and efficient classrooms, offices, laboratories or student services space.

• Economic development in Northern Minnesota and beyond is fostered by numerous strategic initiatives by the University of Minnesota Duluth Center for Economic Development, the Natural Resources Research Institute and the Bureau of Business and Economic Research.

13. Conclusion In conclusion, as is obvious, this document is and will continue to be a work in progress. As our planning began in 1995, the University of Minnesota system has undergone several format changes. We are committed to the standing committee structure and to the material provided in Section 11, “Aspirations for UMD.” The campus has targeted its financial resources to accomplish the objectives identified by those earlier planning efforts. The result has been the transformation of the campus, with an emphasis on advising, course access, new graduate programs, undergraduate majors, economic development, and research initiatives that meet the needs of the state of Minnesota. We have enjoyed broad support from deans, associate deans and the faculty and staff on the subcommittees thus far involved in the process. During the remainder of 2006-07 we will have two or three work sessions for a broader campus review of the document, particularly the subcommittee reports listed under “Aspirations for UMD.” We are nowhere near the completion of any matrix for assessment, however we are now generating retention and advising data down to the department level in the collegiate units and are attempting to identify how to “close the gap” between data and the actual matriculation of our students. As mentioned previously, the entire process at UMD will be greatly strengthened once the ePortfolio and Graduate Planner are completed. With the Knowledge Management Center in place and advising counselors in the collegiate units, an Advisement Coordination Center, and deep commitments across the campus, we believe that we are well positioned to continue the refocusing of our priorities through the work of our subcommittees and to improving our advisement, retention and graduation rates. For a list of individuals who were involved in updating the campus plan, see Appendix F (p. 40).

37

APPENDIX A: University of Minnesota Fall 2004 Graduation and Retention Report Retention rates one year after entry

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

UMD 75.8% 77.1% 78.3% 76.4% 78.7% UMTC 83.1% 83.1% 84.4% 85.8% 86.3% UMM 80.4% 85.0% 82.5% 79.6% 86.7% UMC 63.8% 59.4% 61.6% 68.2% 62.4% Retention rates two years after entry

1999 2000 2001 2002 UMD 65.9% 68.2% 67.5% 65.9% UMTC 74.1% 73.6% 75.6% 76.8% UMM 69.1% 71.1% 70.0% 74.1% UMC 45.0% 59.4% 50.2% 54.7% Retention rates three years after entry

1999 2000 2001 UMD 61.3% 64.3% 62.2% UMTC 68.4% 67.2% 69.5% UMM 62.9% 64.2% 63.5% UMC 39.0% 36.6% 41.2%

38

APPENDIX B: Graduation Rates Four-year rate

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

UMD 25.8% 23.5% 22.6% 22.5% 25.9% UMTC 26.1% 27.8% 28.9% 32.1% 32.3% UMM 45.4% 38.2% 39.7% 40.2% 40.9% UMC 18.6% 22.6% 26.3% 19.7% 20.1% Five-year rate

1996 1997 1998 1999 UMD 46.8% 47.1% 45.0% 47.4% UMTC 47.7% 48.8% 50.4% 56.0% UMM 61.7% 55.7% 53.6% 55.8% UMC 34.8% 38.4% 33.9% 33.5% Six-year rate

1996 1997 1998 UMD 51.2% 52.8% 51.0% UMTC 54.2% 55.1% 56.9% UMM 63.2% 60.3% 57.1% UMC 39.1% 39.6% 37.4%

39

APPENDIX C: UMD Peer Group

Cleveland State University Florida Atlantic University Marquette University Oakland University Old Dominion University University of Central Florida University of Colorado – Denver University of Massachusetts – Dartmouth University of Michigan - Dearborn University of Nevada – Las Vegas University of North Carolina – Charlotte University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee Villanova University Wright State University – Dayton

40

APPENDIX D: Fall 2004 Enrollments for Courses with 200 or more students DESCR HEADCOUNT College Writing 1159 General Psychology 886 Intro Coll Learn 770 Human Nutrition 730 Interpersonal Comm 500 Calculus I 460 Prin Econ: Macro 457 General Chemistry I 455 Prin Econ: Micro 437 Public Speaking 427 Prin of Fin Acctg 414 Developmental Psych 401 General Biology I 378 Intro to Sociology 370 LC Integrative Seminar 348 Jazz Studies 346 Educ in Mod Society 345 Finite, Intro Calc 322 Art Today 314 Precalc Analysis 296 Intro to Film 295 Intro to Crim 288 Intro Astronomy 278 Legal Environment 272 Physical Geography 258 Human Diversity 254 Applied Statistics 236 College Algebra 229 Mgmt Information Systems 220 Human Resource Mgmt 216 Production, Operations Mgmt 215 Prehistoric Cultures 211 Org Behavior, Mgmt 210 American Govt,Pol 204 Principles of Mkt 204 Corporation Finance 202 Intro to Art 200 Organic Chem I 200

41

APPENDIX E: Fall 2004 Enrollment by ‘Major’ (100 students and more) MAJOR GRAD MED PHAR UGRD Headcount Undecided 1099 1099 Pre Business 925 925 Psychology B A Sc 477 477 Biology B S 371 371 Criminology B A 309 309 Pre Elementary/Middle Sch Educ 292 292 Non-Degree 288 288 College in the Schools 223 223 Marketing B B A 211 211 Management B B A 206 206 Pre Pharmacy 188 188 Pre Communication 175 175 Elect/Computer Engineering 162 162 Computer Science B S 152 152 Graphic Design B F A 146 146 Pre Medicine 146 146 Mechanical Engineering 141 141 Finance B B A 140 140 Social Work M S W 130 130 Elementary/Middle Sch B A Sc 127 127 Political Science B A 125 125 Education M Ed 121 121 Accounting B Acc 113 113 Communication B A 109 109 Medicine M D 107 107 English B A 106 106 Teaching Social Studies 105 105 Biochem/Molecular Biology B S 103 103 Pharmacy Pharm D 103 103 Pre Accounting 100 100 Studio Art B F A 99 99

42

APPENDIX F: UMD Strategic Planning Committee and Subcommittee Roster Strategic Planning Committee Kathryn A. Martin, Chancellor Vince Magnuson, Vice Chancellor for Academic Administration Greg Fox, Vice Chancellor for Finance and Operations Bruce Gildseth, Vice Chancellor for Academic Support and Student Life Bill Wade, Vice Chancellor for University Relations Jack Bowman, Dean, School of Fine Arts Paul Deputy, Dean, College of Education and Human Service Professions Kjell Knudsen, Dean, Labovitz School of Business and Economics Linda Krug, Dean, College of Liberal Arts Jim Riehl, Dean, College of Science and Engineering Undergraduate Subcommittee Jack Bowman, Dean, School of Fine Arts Tim Holst, Associate Dean, College of Science and Engineering Karen Heikel, Director of Summer Session Mark Nierengarten, Department Head, Health, Physical Education and Recreation Wayne Jesswein, Associate Dean, Labovitz School of Business and Economics Jill Jenson, Department Head, Composition Graduate and Research Subcommittee Carol Bock, Associate Dean, Graduate School Mike Lalich, Director, Natural Resources and Research Institute Jim Riehl, Dean, College of Science and Engineering Budget and Capital Subcommittee Greg Fox, Vice Chancellor for Finance and Operations Kjell Knudsen, Dean, Labovitz School of Business and Economics Student Affairs, Enrollment Issues and Diversity Chris Haidos, Associate Director, Admissions Office Eric Weldy, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Academic Support and Student Life Susan Pelayo Woodward, Director, Hispanic/Latino/Chicana Learning Resource Center John Weiske, Director of Housing Advising Subcommittee Jerry Pepper, Associate Dean, College of Liberal Arts Arden Weaver, Associate Dean, School of Fine Arts Kim Roufs, Director, Advisement Coordination Center Paul Treuer, Director, Knowledge Management Center Education Subcommittee PreK-12: Paul Deputy, Dean, College of Education and Human Service Professions Jackie Millslagle, Associate Dean, College of Education and Human Service Professions Bruce Munson, Department Head, Education Joyce Strand, Assistant Professor, Department of Education

43

Mark Nierengarten, Department Head, Health, Physical Education and Recreation Dan Glisczinski, Instructor, Department of Education Jim Sersha, Instructor, Department of Education Casey LaCore, Director, Darland Connection Program Julia Williams, Instructor, Department of Education Indian Education: Jackie Millslagle, Associate Dean, College of Education and Human Service Professions Rick Smith, Director, American Indian Learning Resource Center Priscilla Day, Associate Professor, Social Work Joy Dorscher, Director, Center for American Indian and Minority Health Ben Clark, Program Director, Bridges to Education through Science and Technology Program John Red Horse, Department Head, American Indian Studies Development/Public Relations Subcommittee Bill Wade, Vice Chancellor for University Relations Diane Skomars, Director of Development Bob Nielson, Athletics Director Technology Subcommittee Linda Deneen, Director, Information Technology Peter Angelos, Technology Director, College of Liberal Arts Don Krueger, Technology Director, Labovitz School of Business and Economics Bob Krumwiede, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Academic Administration Jason Davis, Program Manager, Information Technology Library Subcommittee Bill Sozansky, Library Director Ken Risdon, Associate Professor, Department of Composition Robyn Roslak, Associate Professor, Department of Art & Design Harlan Stech, Department Head, Mathematics and Statistics Liz Benson Johnson, Assistant Director, Library Kathryn Fuller, Library Coordinator for Reference Services Adele Krusz, Library Coordinator for Circulation Darlene Morris, Library Coordinator Computer Technology