STRATEGIC PLANNING
& WASC UPDATE
Tom Bennett
Presentation to Academic Senate
February 1, 2006
Strategic Planning
Where We Are Now…
Cal State San Marcos
Strategic Priorities
*Academic Excellence
Student Life
Campus Climate
Community Partnerships
*Educational Equity
Council for University Strategic Planning
(CUSP)
Academic
Affairs
Input and
Feedback from
Campus
Community
Finance &
Administrative
Services
Advancement
CUSP
Foundation
Student
Affairs
Institutional
Planning
Recommendations
to University
Leadership &
Campus
Community
Finally……
Putting our Budget
Where our Plan is!
LINKING STRATEGIC PLANNING
TO THE BUDGET
 Culture change in how
the University will make
decisions regarding:
•Budget allocations
•Use of fiscal monies
•Mid Year Budget Review
•Unspent funds at yearend
Finally……Putting our Budget where our Plan is!
Strategic Planning Budget
(Estimates of new monies)
 $1,000,000 total funds available for FY 06-07
• $600,000 Permanent Funds
• $400,000 Fiscal Funds
 $2,000,000 total funds available for FY 07-08
• $1,400,000 Permanent Funds
• $600,000 Fiscal Funds
 $3,600,000 total funds available for FY 08-09
• $2,800,000 Permanent Funds
• $800,000 Fiscal Funds
Finally……Putting our Budget where our Plan is!
Three Year Implementation Model
Year 1:
Year 2:
Year 3:
• University Outcomes/
Goals
• Division Plans
• All-level plans
• Division Indicators
• Full implementation
• Division action plans to
overall university themes
• University Key Indicators
Provost’s Council & ART - Anticipated Academic Affairs Priorities for 06/07:
• Reducing SFR from current 23:1 to mandated 20:1
• Adding academic support staff
• Funding new academic program needs
Finally……Putting our Budget where our Plan is!
YOU are the Key to our Success. . .
• Take ownership – this is your university!
• Get involved and actively participate in the process
(Top-down / Bottom-up Process…)
• Freely contribute your thoughts and suggestions in
a way that will improve the process (no “rocks”)
• Keep a “University First” focus
• Recognize this will take time to perfect –
give grace and help us improve the process
• Strategic thinking is a daily thing not an event
Finally……Putting our Budget where our Plan is!
WASC – March 2007!
…Are YOU Ready?
Moving Beyond Compliance to a
Systems Approach to Quality:
Early Reflections on the New
WASC Accreditation Model
Ralph A. Wolff, Executive Director
Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and
Universities
Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC)
The New WASC Institutional Review Process:
A Learning-Centered Review Model
Learning Through Feedback
Feedback from:
•Proposal Review
Committee
•WASC Staff
Feedback from:
•Team visit
•Commission Action
• Follow Up
Stage 1
Proposal
Feedback from:
•Team report
•Commission Action
• Follow Up
Stage 2
2 years to
site visit
Capacity & Prep
Review
March 7-9, 2007
Stage 3
1 year to
site visit
Educational
Effectiveness
Fall 2008
Core Commitments
• Institutional Capacity:
– The institution functions with clear purposes, high
levels of institutional integrity, fiscal stability, and
organizational structures to fulfill its purposes.
• Educational Effectiveness:
– The institution evidences clear and appropriate
educational objectives and design at the
institutional and program level. The institution
employs processes of review, including the
collection and use of data, that assure delivery of
programs and learner accomplishments at a level
of performance appropriate for the degree or
certificate awarded.
Institutional Self-Review under the Standards—A Worksheet
Example:
Criteria for Review
2.7 In order to improve currency and
effectiveness, all programs offered by
the institution are subject to review,
including analyses of the achievement
of the program’s learning objectives
and outcomes. Where appropriate,
evidence from external constituencies
such as employers and professional
societies is included in such reviews.
Guideline
SelfReview
Rating
Importance
to address
at this time
Evidence Evaluation
The institution incorporates in
its assessment of educational
objectives results with respect
to student achievement,
including program completion,
license examination, and
placement rates results.
1. After completing this analysis, what are the 2 or 3 most important issues that should be emphasized under this Standard for
your institution?
1. 2. Looking overall at the quality and effectiveness of the institution’s data gathering and systems to support the review
process, what are institutional strengths for the Preparatory Review? For the Educational Effectiveness Review?
3. Looking again at the overall quality and effectiveness of the institution’s data gathering and systems, what are areas to be
addressed or improved for the Preparatory Review? For the Educational Effectiveness Review?
Educational Effectiveness Review
Our Three Themes
Theme #1
– Academic Master Planning
(David Barsky)
Theme #2
– Strengthening Academic Programs through
Assessment of Student Learning (Tom Bennett)
Theme #3
– Improving Retention of First-Year Students
(Susan Mitchell)
• Developing a WASC Oversight Committee
To help guide self review, serve as basis for evaluation,
and frame presentations to WASC…
Standard 1:
•
Defining Institutional Purposes and Ensuring
Educational Objectives
Standard 2:
•
Achieving Educational Objectives Through Core
Functions
Standard 3:
•
Developing and Applying Resources and
Organizational Structures to Ensure Sustainability
Standard 4:
•
Creating an Organization Committed to Learning and
Improvement
Sample Criteria for Review
CFR 4.4 The institution employs a
deliberate set of quality assurance processes
at each level of institutional functioning,
including new curriculum and program
approval processes, periodic program
review, ongoing evaluation, and data
collection. These processes involve
assessments of effectiveness, track results
over time, and use the results of these
assessments to revise and improve
structures and processes, curricula, and
pedagogy.
Sample Criteria for Review
CFR 4.2 Planning processes at the
institution define and, to the
extent possible, align academic,
personnel, fiscal, physical, and
technological needs with the
strategic objectives and priorities
of the institution.
Summary & Next Steps…
• Strategic planning & WASC must be linked
• Systems thinking (and the five disciplines)
provides a powerful framework (Peter Senge)
• More than a new WASC process – this is a
“culture shift” from compliance to
institutional inquiry and engagement
• Increased focus on 1) student learning
outcomes and results and 2) organizational
learning and quality systems
• Entire campus must be engaged
• We have lots to do – but very little time…
– Support the process, learn more, be ready
• I want to help you to be ready!
– Colleges, departments, programs, units, etc.