¾«Æ·SMÔÚÏßӰƬ

Norlin Library

n=26

Intro by Jeff Cox

• Intro on teaching and reaching visioning
• Laying out of fall work
• Role of Committee and Report

Q.  Can you tell us more about the white papers? 

            A.  The white papers are meant to give people a chance to lay out an idea in more detail than might be done in a meeting or open forum.  They can be short or long, done by one person or a group.  They need to be submitted by December 15 for the Committee to consider, but we encourage early submissions.  We can use white papers to convene a themed session.  In addition, many themed sessions will likely result in white papers for the Committee to consider.

Comment:  Commends the transparency and openness of the process.

Q. What is the objective at the end of 3 years?  Where is this supposed to go?

            A.  The Provost wants us to envision what we want to be, thinking of our university in 10 and 20 years.  We anticipate that from this process, not only a vision emerges that moves the campus forward, but there will be several initiatives that we can undertake and implement in the next 3 years. 

Q.  What is the relationship of this effort to Flagship 2030?

            A. This effort is a follow on to Flagship 2030, many aspects of which have been achieved and some of which have been sunsetted.  The Strategic Imperatives of the Chancellor are his next step along the strategic path for the University. 

Comment:  Our structure (e.g. physical setting) inhibits collaboration and energy.  See BioFrontiers as a counter example.

            Discussion:  We talk about silos but our entire physical plant and organization dictates exactly this.

Comment:  We need to articulate learning goals for students (Mike Grant did that but not explicitly).  How do we articulate these to faculty and students?

Comment:  We have separated the world of teaching and research.

            Discussion:  MCDB has a model for engaging students in research that might be used as a model across campus.

Comment:  Availability of distance education is uneven across campus and we are falling behind.  Discussion:  Online classes, lessons learned that can be shared at the campus level.  Coursera was clearly not good.  We need a better platform.  The directive from the Provost not to put MOOCS online except through CU is stifling.  In addition, Continuing Education is self-funded, which creates another set of barriers.

Comment:  How do we foster community?  How do students define community?

Comment:  We have created an internally competitive environment between units – over students, dollars, space.

Comment: Tired of hearing about entrepreneurship.  It’s not everywhere and isn’t appropriate for every discipline.

Comment:  Question the constant growth model.  We are setting our students up for success.

Comment:  Information and digital literacy is something we need to be teaching students.  Not just nuts and bolts, but the framework within which we operate, derive authority, etc.

Comment:  Silos for student, particularly cross-college.  Can’t even just try a class to see if it’s a good fit.

Comment:  Need to promote cross-disciplinary connections, particularly between Arts and Sciences.

Comment:  Internationalization:  We don’t have a senior leadership position in international work (rare among R1 universities).  Amount of resources that support international students is pathetic.  There is a lack of an international framework at the campus-level.  Not just about students and education, but also research.

Comment:  RAPS – why eliminate them?  Why not grow them and improve them?

Comment:  If we are going to be community and student centered, we are going to have to change P&T.

Comment/Discussion:  Not all students are getting jobs after their degree.  Some schools require an internship.  Students get lost at ¾«Æ·SMÔÚÏßӰƬ.  And we’ve just eliminated student orientation.  We are failing at on-boarding our students.  (and our staff too)

To find out more about how to get involved, visit the Academic Futures website at