Baker@150.CAS.Progress.015

November 3, 2003

This is volume one, number five of an electronic bulletin designed to chronicle the planning process and organizational development within CAS as we join the rest of the University in the Baker@150 campaign for campus-wide growth and improvement. Baker@150.CAS.Progress is produced by Dr. Jamie Comstock, Vice President and Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, in collaboration with contributors from across CAS.

Review CAS Strategic Planning Process and Supporting Reference Documents at http://www.bakeru.edu/splt/splt.html

Strategic Planning Process takes to the road

Building on strong foundation, integrating with University Planning Goals, and navigating toward the future

October was the month for expanding awareness of and involvement in the CAS Strategic Planning Process. We presented an overview of the planning process at a special Staff Assembly, a faculty Town Meeting, a Student Senate meeting, a faculty Lunch Bunch gathering, and discussed the plan at the October Board of Trustee’s Meeting. In addition to these public meetings, the Strategic Planning Leadership Team meets regularly to facilitate progress on the planning agenda. The SPLT activities launched with a full day planning retreat during fall break and continue with bi-weekly, 2 ½ hour planning sessions.

The Strategic Planning Process is unfolding in seven interconnected steps that we hope to completed in May of this academic year. In the end, we will have a vision, mission, long-term objectives, and financial plan designed to support our movement from good to great. The plan will capitalize on the many pockets of excellence found throughout CAS and be designed to address the University-wide Planning Goals adopted by the Board of Trustees in May 2003. The seven steps include:

1. Identify Peer and Aspiration Institutions

2. Clarify CAS mission (What are we passionate about? What do we plan to do, for whom? With what major philosophical premises as a guide?)

3. Conduct Strategic Analysis (becomes data for strategic plan – work done in task force groups)

a. Identify our Key Stakeholder Groups

b. Define internal and external critical issues for each stakeholder group

c. Conduct Gap Analysis to ascertain which factors and trends can influence our overall performance; but, focus on those few critical issues that will truly make a difference to our long term success

d. Codify Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats

4. Formulate strategic direction (which is used to construct vision statement)

5. Establish long-term objectives (3-5 years, ideally completed in time for our Baker@150 celebration)

6. Develop Integrated Program-of-work, including

a. Academic Program Development & Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan

b. Student Development & Retention Plan

c. Faculty & Staff Development Plan

d. Continuous Process Improvement Plan (focused on increasing efficiency and making full use of available data management systems)

e. Integrated Marketing Communication Plan (to create awareness; enhance image; recruit students; and establish, maintain, and further cultivate relationships with parents, employers, alumni, friends, the community, and the Church).

7. Generate Financial Projections and Funding Plan

Any member of the Baker learning community may access information about the planning process from the Strategic Planning Leadership Team website, or by contacting the SPLT members directly at splt@wildcat.bakeru.edu

Set of 11 Peer and 11 Aspiration Institutions ready for use

See list and links below and on SPLT Website

The Selection Process

1. Four types of comparison groups (Competitor, Aspiration, Predetermined, and Peer) were studied in terms of their usefulness for Strategic Planning purposes at Baker. It was decided that the development of both a Peer Group and an Aspiration Group would be most useful.

2. Several methodologies for selecting institutions for inclusion in each of these groups were considered. A “Threshold” approach was chosen wherein a combination of both objective and subjective selection criteria are employed. At the initial level, selection decisions are based on systematic data-driven criteria. Final decisions are based on administrative input based largely on informed judgments.

3. In order to accomplish the systematic phase of the process, important selection criteria were identified for each the peer and aspiration lists. Two services were consulted (NCHEMS and the NCES Peer Analysis System) in generating the initial two lists. The criteria values were adjusted as necessary in order to generate a peer list and an aspiration list, each consisting of 15-30 institutions.

4. In consultation with the University president, the Academic Dean’s Advisory Council pared each list to 11 institutions using judgments based on first-hand knowledge of the institutions in the peer and aspiration pools, as well as a variety of factors not included among the initial sort criteria.

The Lists

Final Peer Institutions Adrian College (Adrian, MI) Carroll College (Helena, MT) Central College (Pella, IA) Franklin College (Franklin, IN) Maryville College (Maryville, TN) Monmouth College (Monmouth, IL) Northland College (Ashland, WI) Texas Lutheran University (Seguin, TX) Wartburg College (Waverly, IA) Westminster College (Fulton, MO) William Jewell College (Liberty, MO)

Final Aspiration Group Institutions Augustana College (Rock Island, IL) Beloit College (Beloit, WI) Cornell College (Mount Vernon, IA) Depauw University (Greencastle, IN) Earlham College (Richmond, IN) Franklin and Marshall College (Lancaster, PA) Kalamazoo College (Kalamazoo, MI) Rhodes College (Memphis, TN) Roanoke College (Salem, VA) Southwestern University (Georgetown, TX) Stonehill College (Easton, MA)

Peer Primary Selection Criteria Four-Year Private Not-for-Profit Institutions Bachelors Level Institutions Institutions with Religious Affiliations Regionally Accredited Institutions Members of Athletic Associations Co-ed Institutions Centrally Located, Geographically Rural, Small Town, Large Town, or Urban Fringe Designations Selective Admissions Policy (High School GPA, Entrance Exams Required) Full-Time-Equivalent Enrollment Less than 2500 Students 25th Percentile ACT Composite Score Range 18 - 23 Freshman Cohort Graduation Rate Range 40% - 70% Tuition for First-Time Full-Time Freshmen Range $10,000 - $20,000 Long-Term Investments Range $10 million - $70 million Net Assets Range $20 million - $120 million

Aspiration Primary Selection Criteria Four-Year Private Not-for-Profit Institutions Bachelors and Masters Level Institutions Regionally Accredited Institutions Members of Athletic Associations Coed Institutions Geographically Limited to 50 United States No Urbanization Designations Selective Admissions Policy (High School GPA, Entrance Exams Required) Full-Time-Equivalent Enrollment Range 700 - 2500 25th Percentile ACT Composite Score Greater at Least 21 24th Percentile SAT Verbal and Math Scores Greater at Least 500 Freshman Cohort Graduation Rate at Least 55% Tuition for First-Time Full-Time Freshmen at Least $15,000 Long-Term Investments at Least $30 million Net Assets at Least $50 million

Step Three Underway: Task Force Groups forming to conduct strategic analysis

We are now well into Step Three, the Strategic Analysis of key issues influencing our overall performance. During this step we will form six large task force groups, each comprised of faculty, staff, students, and SPLT members who will lead the task force data gathering and analysis procedures. Some Task Force groups also will include alumni, parents, and BOT members.

At the start of this phase, the SPLT identified nine stakeholder groups including (1) students, (2) parents, (3) High School and Community College counselors/advisors, (4) staff, (5) faculty, (6) alumni & friends, (7) the community, (8) the United Methodist Church, and (9) Administration and the Board of Trustees. Then, through an active collaborative process, the SPLT members used their collective experience as higher education professionals to identify important issues/variables for each stakeholder group. During this process, it became apparent that many of the important issues were relevant to several different stakeholder groups. Therefore, the list of issues was analyzed for redundancies and then factored into six functional areas of work: (1) Academic Program Development and Instructional Quality, (2) Admissions and Recruitment, (3) Faculty and Staff Development and Retention, (4) Student Development and Retention, (5) Institutional Mission and Advancement, and (6) Administrative and Support Services. A list of the Key Issues Across Functional Areas of Work can be found on the SPLT website.

SPLT members have been assigned to provide leadership to one of six Strategic Analysis Task Force Groups who conduct data gathering and Gap Analysis that will form the database for our strategic plan. We are taking care to include all people who volunteered to “get on the bus” and be an active part of the strategic planning process by responding to my previous requests. Some of these volunteers also were included as participants in the selection of our Peer and Aspiration Comparison Groups and many are members of the SPLT.

If you want on the bus, now is the time to let us know. We will make sure there is a seat for you and that you have a voice in plotting our course from good to great. We welcome participation from all members of the Baker CAS community.

In Context

As we plan for the future, we must never forget that our optimism is grounded in the long tradition of excellence that is Baker University. When the fine Kansas statesman Bob Dole left the U.S. Senate to make a run for the Presidency, he said that we must always “be proud of the past, but focused on the future”. It is in that spirit that we approach this planning process. I expect that as we compare ourselves to our peer institutions we will discover many reasons to be proud of our past and current practices. And, as we calculate the gaps between Baker and our aspiration institutions we will discover some “best practices” and changes we can make that will point us toward a future of long term success.

Thanks for your interest in our CAS planning process. Welcome Aboard! -- Dr. Jamie Comstock