The Pathway to Success Goal IV Strengthen and Leverage Programs of Strength and Promise.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
2025 Planning Contacts Meeting November 8, 2012 K-State 2025.
Advertisements

Biennial Review 1. Timeframe: August 1, 2011 – July 30, 2013.
The Periodic Review Report at the Community College: Opportunities for Collaborative Institutional Renewal Valarie Avalone, Director of Planning Dr. Michael.
AB 86 Adult Education Regional Planning. What is AB86 ? $25 Million Statewide for Planning AB 86, Section 76, Article 3 The purpose is develop regional.
2015 Workshop Permanent Status and Promotion Policy and Procedures Overview.
1 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Office of The Assistant Secretary for Administration and Management Human Resources Center The Department of Labor’s Performance.
Institutional Effectiveness Operational Update Presentation made to the Indiana State University Board of Trustees October 5, 2001.
A Joint Labor/Management Effort Spring Lori Chapman Labor Relations Associate Office of Faculty & Staff Labor Relations Elizabeth Sullivan Executive.
Dr. Mark Sanchez, Liz Estrella, Tony Anderson, Dr. Romero Jalomo
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS FACILITATED BY: JOHN D. WELTY AASCU-PENSON CENTER.
The Pathway to Success Goal IV Strengthen & Leverage Programs of Strength and Promise 2 nd Annual Strategic Planning Stakeholders Conference Thursday,
Magnet Program Audit for Baltimore County Public Schools Presentation of Key Findings and Recommendations November 19, 2013 Marilyn Zlotnik, Vice President.
WELCOME! We will begin our webinar at the top of the hour As you log on, do not be surprised if you don’t hear anyone else; participants are placed on.
Columbia-Greene Community College The following presentation is a chronology of the College strategic planning process, plan and committee progress The.
Mia Alexander-Snow, PhD Director, Office for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness Program Review Orientation 1.
The Program Review Process What is Instructional Program Review?
Federal Emphasis on Accountability in Higher Education and Regional Accreditation Processes Carla D. Sanderson Commissioner, Southern Association of Colleges.
Introducing the Planning Process Dr. Cathy Fleuriet, Associate Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness Dr. Lisa Garza, Director, University.
University Strategic Resource Planning Council Budget.
Academic Assessment Task Force Report August 15, 2013 Lori Escallier, Co-Chair Keith Sheppard, Co-Chair Chuck Taber, Co-Chair.
Promotion and Tenure Lois J. Geist, M.D. Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Development.
STUDENT SERVICES REVIEW January 8, Context – Administrative Unit Reviews Objectives Roles Unit Self-Study Internal Review Committee External Reviewers.
University of Idaho Successful External Program Review Archie George, Director Institutional Research and Assessment Jane Baillargeon, Assistant Director.
Promotion in the Clinical Track Lois J. Geist, M.D. Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Development.
Mia Alexander-Snow, PhD Director, Office for Planning and Institutional Effectiveness Program Review Orientation 1.
NEASC FIVE YEAR REPORT FITCHBURG STATE COLLEGE JANUARY 2007.
Florida Tech’s University Assessment Committee For A Continuing Culture of Assessment.
Quality Assurance and Quality Improvement.  Standard Pathway - Required for all institutions granted initial accreditation, institutions in significant.
Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science Review and Planning Process Fall 1998.
Think Academics: Academic Visioning David Marker Interim Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs.
Innovation through Institutional Integration (I 3 ) National Science Foundation Directorate for Education and Human Resources National Science Foundation.
2006 Fall Workshop PLANNING and ASSESSMENT: A TUTORIAL FOR NEW DEPARTMENT CHAIRS – A REFRESHER COURSE FOR OTHERS.
The University of Kentucky Program Review Process for Administrative Units April 18 & 20, 2006 JoLynn Noe, Assistant Director Office of Assessment
Systems Accreditation Berkeley County School District School Facilitator Training October 7, 2014 Dr. Rodney Thompson Superintendent.
COLLEGE OF CHARLESTON FACULTY COMPENSATION COMMITTEE Report to Faculty Senate November 5, 2013.
School Accreditation School Improvement Planning.
SACS Reaffirmation and the QEP Introduction and Welcome – Kay Jordan, Joe Scartelli Administrative Support: Personnel SACS Reaffirmation Overview – Rick.
Public Universities and the Challenge of Budgeting in a Recession Teresa A. Sullivan Provost and Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs University.
2008 Spring Semester Workshop AN INTRODUCTION TO STRATEGIC PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT WORKSHOP T. Gilmour Reeve, Ph.D. Director of Strategic Planning.
The Periodic Review Report and Middle States Accreditation PRR Workshop April 9, 2008.
SPC Advisory Committee Training - TAC Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office 1 Abridged from the SPC Advisory Committee Training on October.
SPC Advisory Committee Training Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office SPC 10/9/20151.
Academic Affairs Instructional and Research Equipment Requests FY Purpose Instructional and research 1 equipment is of increasing concern to our.
CONTEXT FOR ACADEMIC STRATEGIC PLANNING AT UM Foundation for upcoming Accreditation process Identify key issues and opportunities to address over the next.
27 February 2012 Provost's Report to College Senate.
CREATING A CULTURE OF EVIDENCE Student Affairs Assessment Council October 2013 Dr. Barbara Copenhaver-Bailey Assistant Vice President for Student Success.
HLC Criterion Five Primer Thursday, Nov. 5, :40 – 11:40 a.m. Event Center.
A Commitment to Continuous Improvement in Teaching and Learning Michaela Rome, Ph.D. NYU Assistant Vice Provost for Assessment.
An Overview of the Promotion & Tenure Process UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY NEW FACULTY ORIENTATION AUGUST 20, 2015 KATIE CARDARELLI, PHD ASSOCIATE DEAN FOR ACADEMIC.
1 Establishing a New Gallaudet Program Review Process Pat Hulsebosch Office of Academic Quality CUE – 9/3/08: CGE – 9/16/08.
Academic Program Review Workshop 2017
Strategic Planning Council (SPC)Update
2017 Workshop Tenure and Promotion Policy and Procedures Overview
We’re going to follow the chronological order of the process.
Assessment Cycle and Academic Effect
Budget & Planning Calendar.
College of Alameda Integrated Planning and Budgeting Process
Technology Committee Report to the Budget Committee & College Planning Council March 7, 2012.
Program Assessment Processes for Developing and Strengthening
NWCCU update February 13, 2018.
Administrative Review
Assessing Academic Programs at IPFW
Office of the University Provost & the Graduate College Present:
Academic Program Review Comprehensive Report
PAc-28 Educational Leave of Absence
Training for Reviewers Fall 2018
2025 Planning Contacts Meeting
Fort Valley State University
UND’s Promotion & Tenure Process: Electronic Submission and Next Steps
Responsibility for assessment at Brooklyn college – a distributed leadership model OFFICE OF Institutional effectiveness September 9, 2019.
Presentation transcript:

The Pathway to Success Goal IV Strengthen and Leverage Programs of Strength and Promise

STRENGTHEN AND LEVERAGE PROGRAMS OF DISTINCTION AND PROMISE Strengthen and leverage the programs that have been designated programs of distinction or promise, to bring greater prominence to them and to the University as a whole.

BENCHMARK INDICATORS By the year 2010, Indiana State University will: -- define the methodology and criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of programs of national and regional distinction or promise -- define an ongoing system to enable new programs of distinction and promise to be identified and supported; and -- develop strategic plans for programs currently identified as programs of distinction and promise

BENCHMARK INDICATORS (CONT.) By the year 2014, Indiana State University will: -- increase resources provided to programs of distinction and promise -- complete an evaluation of all programs of distinction and promise based upon the criteria and methodology established by 2010; and -- document that 75 percent of programs of distinction and promise will be meeting or exceeding expectations defined by the criteria and methodology established by 2010

INITIATIVE I STRENGHTEN PROGRAMS OF DISTINCTION AND PROMISE Objectives By May 31, 2010 appoint a new Distinctive Programs Oversight Committee (DPOC) to work in concert with the Provost to strengthen and leverage ISU’s Distinctive Programs – DPOC composition will consist of: Chairperson – Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs Two Deans Two Department Chairpersons Two Faculty Members

INITIATIVE I STRENGHTEN PROGRAMS OF DISTINCTION AND PROMISE By July 31, 2010, the DPOC will define the criteria and methodology to assess the set of Distinctive Programs identified in 2007 – Criteria must define a systematic assessment system that validates the efforts and success of each program in meeting its goals – Criteria must address how the program leveraged the University investment to advance its plan – Process must define an annual reporting process that will be reviewed and evaluated each year to guide programs.

INITIATIVE I STRENGHTEN PROGRAMS OF DISTINCTION AND PROMISE By October 30, 2010, each of the programs identified as Nationally Distinctive, Regionally/State Distinctive or a Program of Promise will prepare a report summarizing how the investment by the University has assisted the program in achieving its goals. This report may not exceed five pages.

INITIATIVE I STRENGHTEN PROGRAMS OF DISTINCTION AND PROMISE By December 1, 2010, each of the current programs may submit a five-year strategic plan which outlines the vision for the program and how an additional investment by the University will assist the program in achieving its goals and advance the mission of Indiana State University. The plan will include: – Measurable goals that the program will meet over the five year period – How the Program aligns with the Strategic Plan of the Department/College/University and how the investment by the University will assist the College in meeting its Strategic Plan – What additional support will the Department/College provide in support of the plan?

INITIATIVE I STRENGHTEN PROGRAMS OF DISTINCTION AND PROMISE By March 1, 2011, DPOC will review the submitted plans and will prepare a recommendation to the Provost regarding programs for future support. The review process shall include external reviewers. In the future programs will be recommended in two categories only: – Distinctive Programs – Programs of Promise

INITIATIVE I STRENGHTEN PROGRAMS OF DISTINCTION AND PROMISE By April 1, 2011, the Provost will recommend to the President a set of programs for investment. By May 1, 2011, the President will inform the Campus of the final recommendation. By July 1, 2011, DPOC will define a process and timeline that will enable “new” programs to apply for recognition.

Budget A five year budget of $5,000,000 is recommended. Up to 60% or $3,000,000 may be base budget investments At least 40% or $2,000,000 will be one-time investments Programs of Distinction may request up to $1,000,000 over the five year period. These programs will not be eligible for any additional funding.

Budget Programs of Promise may request up to $500,000 over the five year period. Programs of Promise are eligible to seek this status for a second five year term. Funding cycle must be developed to ensure that funds are available to support new programs. In all cases, no program shall receive more than $1,000,000 from this initiative. For all funded programs, an annual report that demonstrates clear progress in meeting strategic plan and measurable goals is expected. Programs that fail to submit report and/or meet goals may have their funding reduced or eliminated.

Initiative II Create a Center for Rural Studies Objectives By August 1, 2010 appoint a representative committee of faculty and staff to determine if a University Center for Rural Studies has the potential to serve as a stimulus for program growth and development across the campus. By November 1, 2010, the Committee will submit its final report to the President for review and appropriate action.

QUESTIONS