Similarly, the Chancellor has offered10 goals for the University for the year 2000. These ten goals should be seen as steps toward our longer-term goals.
The University of Kansas is the university for the state of Kansas. That means we must be the best university possible for our citizens and we must meet their needs. In some of our endeavors we hold the "sole franchise" for the state. For example, we are the state's only medical school and, as a result, have responsibility for all of the state's training in several health fields. As the research university for the greater Kansas City metropolitan area, we also have primary responsibility for meeting the research and graduate training needs of the region. In many of our other activities, we share responsibility with the other Regents institutions or with other state and local enterprises. Strategic recommendations should recognize our role as sole provider, regional leader, or key collaborator and should offer suggestions for enhancing all of these roles. Sensitivity to the needs of all constituents requires consultation with the widest possible audience. Task forces should solicit input from the broad community, including our friends and alums, as well as those who have challenged us to do better in the past. We also must look to the existing University leadership, especially those in the governance system, for guidance in our discussions.
We can assume that nearly all recommendations generated by this process will have funding implications. Such considerations, however, should not be the focus of the task forces. Decisions on funding will be made in the coming years and will be a matter for University-wide discussion. Indeed, identifying private and public funding for task force recommendations will be a logical next step. For now, task forces should focus on defining what is "the right thing to do," developing strategies for getting that done, and assessing the realistic probability for accomplishing it.
The most important of all consideration is quality. We cannot afford to sacrifice our tradition of quality in research, teaching, or public service in an attempt to be "strategic" in our planning. We must sustain our dedication to quality research and teaching. Indeed, it is that tradition of quality that allows us the very opportunity to enter into this strategic planning discussion.
| Date | Activities |
| Sept. 9 | Faculty Convocation Address |
| Sept. 10-30 | Consultation with University community |
| October | Convene Task Forces |
| Nov.- March | Task force activities |
| Gather information | |
| Develop recommendations | |
| April | University review of implementation plans |
| May | Begin implementation |
The goal of the task forces is to create a list of concrete recommendations for the long-term future of the University. These are likely to include suggestions for changing some of the current ways we do things and recommendations for developing new activities. Each task force should also address all six components of the Scholarly Community and offer recommendations regarding infrastructure as well as student, staff, and faculty development.
The University of Kansas is a complex organization with physical resources in Lawrence, Overland Park, Kansas City, Wichita, and other towns and cities throughout the state. As each of these centers has developed, it has assumed an individual identity and level of independence, resulting in a variety of perceptions of the University by our constituents. Opportunity exists to unify KU's image in the eyes of the public. For example, although our historical identification of place has been Lawrence, KU's activities are geographically spread throughout Kansas City (Medical Center, Edwards Campus, Juniper Gardens Research Center, etc.). We have the human resources to enhance KU's existing contributions and establish new partnerships within the metropolitan area through inter-campus collaboration.
When faculty from Lawrence and Kansas City met at the Government University Industry Research Roundtable GUIRR (Appendix IV), they expressed a strong interest in lowering the barriers to joint research. Such changes could have a profound impact on the degree of integration across campuses. The establishment of a new research foundation in Lawrence provides an opportunity to review out University wide policies in research and development with an eye toward fostering inter-campus collaboration. Parallel opportunities exist in the teaching and service domains.
Our ultimate goal is to operate a single university with well-coordinated internal operations and a clearly defined external image. As part of that effort, we should work to ensure that academic and research programs on one campus are optimally served by the other campuses: faculty resources are shared, curricula are coordinated, equipment and materials are compatible, administrative procedures are complementary, etc. The exact form of this unified institution should be determined by our collective strengths and by the available opportunities; however, inter-campus unity can only come from intra-campus unity. In these deliberations and in our other duties, we must not think of ourselves as "departmental representatives" or "campus representatives" or "faculty representatives" or "staff representatives." Instead, we must see ourselves as partners in a greater mission.
Task Force I will consider the following as part of its deliberations:
As Kansas' flagship institution, KU has a special responsibility to serve its citizens. We are proud of our long tradition of public service in the state. Our success has come from individual efforts by students, staff, faculty, and academic units, and by offering high quality undergraduate and graduate education. This collaborative process, Initiative 2001, offers us the opportunity to develop a clearly articulated philosophy of public service that spans the entire University. We have several existing models to draw upon in developing our philosophy including the Geological and Biological Surveys, the Life Span Institute, the School of Medicine, the KUMC Hospital, the School of Education and the KU summer camps, among others.
What is needed is a conceptual framework to assist in integrating these resources and guiding our collective service activities in the future. In developing this framework, existing incentives to service and barriers to service must be identified. Faculty rewards for service vary greatly across the University. We must find strategies for recognizing the full range of faculty contributions without risking the breadth and quality of our teaching and research. While it is reasonable to assume that service will always be more central to some units' missions than to others, no unit should consider its mission to be solely service, research, or teaching. Resources must be fully integrated in a way that facilitates all three components of the KU mission.
Task Force II will consider the following as part of its deliberations:
KU is a single university that derives its strengths from the quality of its component parts. Building premiere learning communities that enhance educational experiences and foster positive interaction among faculty, staff, and students is essential to the future of both the institution and society as a whole. The strategic challenge is to enhance the nature of the educational experience at KU by identifying a role that builds on our historic strengths and encompasses our collective values. As a research university, research must be part of that experience for undergraduate and graduate students. If research is central to our learning communities, then all KU students should have a meaningful research experience consistent with their program of study.
For learning communities to be effective, they must be inclusive and represent the diversity of our society. It is important that we build learning communities that are appropriate to the various parts of the institution. Physical environment, student demographics, and educational programming differ across the four campuses and each site has its own set of opportunities. As a result, separate task forces have been formed on each campus to discuss the opportunities at that site and to draft recommendations regarding their particular learning community.
Peter Drucker, in the March 10, 1997, issue of Forbes magazine, predicted the demise of campus-based education as the Internet becomes the medium for standardization. A great deal would be lost if there were no alternatives to such standardization. Although we will incorporate and maximize the positive aspects of technology, particularly in our instructional mission, we will continue to enhance the KU physical environment. Face-to-face instruction in a rich environment of frequent student-faculty and student-student interaction must continue to have a place in higher education. We will provide such an environment on the KU campuses.
The various task forces addressing Initiative III will consider the following as part of their deliberations:
Email Page
Print Page