THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK 2000-2004 MASTER PLAN For additional copies, please contact: Office of the Provost The State University of New York State University Plaza Albany, New York 12246 http://www.suny.edu/provost/pubs.cfm Table of Contents: Mission of The State University of New York 1 Message from the Chancellor 3 The State University of New York Master Plan 2000-2004 5 Mission Review An Overarching Structure to Enhance Academic Quality 6 Overview of Mission Review 6 Mission Diff e rentiation: Market Niche and Role 7 Enrollment Planning 10 Access and Opportunity 12 Student Retention and Graduation 14 Articulation and Transfer 15 Benchmarking 16 Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes 16 Faculty Scholarship and Development 17 Inter-Campus Collaboration 19 Academic Program Directions 20 General Education 20 Teacher Education 21 Academic Technology 22 Linking Funding to Academic Quality 24 Service to Local Regions, the State, and the Nation 26 Business, Industry and Economic Support 26 Community College Workforce Development 26 Charter Schools 27 Research Foundation 27 Financial Management A Structure to Enhance Academic Quality 29 New Budget Methodology 29 General IFR and Supplemental Tuition Reimbursable Account 30 Residence Hall Operations 30 Campus-Related Foundations 31 General Management Practices 31 Hospital Flexibility 32 Operations – An Administrative Structure to Enhance Academic Quality 33 Conclusion 34 Appendices 35 List of Campuses 36 Mission Review: Recognized by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU)as a Best Practice in Higher Education 37 The Community Colleges of The State University of New York Strategic Plan for 2001-2004 38 Report of the Provost's Advisory Task Force on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes (Exec. Summary) 59 New Programs of Study Tentatively Planned for Introduction 2000-2004 65 Master Plan Amendments 1996-2001 70 Memo on 2001 Guidelines for the Submission of Undergraduate Academic Program Proposals 71 Report of the Provost's Advisory Task Force on General Education 73 SUNY Pass Rates on the New York State Teacher Certification Examinations 1999-2000 86 Provost's Advisory Council on Teacher Education Report and Recommendations (Executive Summary) 88 A New Vision in Teacher Education: Agenda for Change in SUNY's Teacher Preparation Programs 92 The State University of New York Budget Allocation Process 97 Quantitative Information 107 Capital Facilities 109 Board of Trustees 111 System Administration 111 Advisory Committees 111 Mission of The State University of New York (Chapter 552, Laws of 1985) “The mission of the state university system shall be to provide to the people of New York educational services of the highest quality, with the broadest possible access, fully representative of all segments of the population in a complete range of academic, professional and vocational post-secondary programs including such additional activities in pursuit of these objectives as are necessary or customary. These services and activities shall be offered through a geographically distributed comprehensive system of diverse campuses which shall have differentiated and designated missions designed to provide a comprehensive program of higher education, to meet the needs of both traditional and non-traditional students and to address local, regional and state needs and goals. In fulfilling this mission, the state university shall exercise care to develop and maintain a balance of its human and physical resources that: a. recognizes the fundamental role of its responsibilities in undergraduate education and provides a full range of graduate and professional education that reflects the opportunity for individual choice and the needs of society; b. establishes tuition which most effectively promotes the university’s access goals; c. encourages and facilitates basic and applied research for the purpose of the creation and dissemination of knowledge vital for continued human, scientific, technological and economic advancement; d. strengthens its educational and research programs in the health sciences through the provision of high quality care at ts hospitals, clinics, and related programs; e. shares the expertise of the state university with the business, agricultural, governmental, labor and nonprofit sectors of the state through a program of public service for the purpose of enhancing the well-being of the people of the state of New York and in protecting our environmental and marine resources; f. promotes appropriate program articulation between its state- operated institutions and its community colleges as well as encourages regional networks and cooperative relationships with other educational and cultural institutions for the purpose of better fulfilling its mission of education, research and service.” Message from the Chancellor In 1995, the Legislature called upon the Board of Trustees to craft a series of recommendations to enhance the quality and operational performance of the State University of New York. That work coalesced into the Board ’s landmark plan: Rethinking SUNY. As is made abundantly clear in this Master Plan, much of Rethinking SUNY has been translated into action that has dramatically strengthened the State University. For example, the first cycle of Mission Review — the University's core academic strategic planning process, now nationally recognized as a “Best Practice” in higher education — was brought to a successful conclusion in spring 2001. And, the University has adopted a system of performance-based budgeting which allows campuses to retain the tuition they generate and creates new incentives for the distribution of State funding to the campuses in ways that promote quality. both initiatives rest on principles articulated in Rethinking SUNY. But there is more work to be done, and that too is described in this Master Plan. When I joined the State University as Chancellor, I knew that the major objective of the Board of Trustees was to move the University into the front ranks of American higher education. That is a goal I enthusiastically embrace. The better the University becomes, the more successful it will be in attracting the top aculty, researchers, and students necessary for our State’s economic vitality. Fortunately, I joined the State University while Mission Review, an unprecedented and massive process involving all 64 campuses, was underway, allowing me to work with campuses to shape their goals and, through the campuses, the goals of the University. The executed final planning documents (Memoranda of Understanding) will be critically important as we continue to strengthen and improve the quality of the State University. In addition to Mission Review, several new efforts launched recently continue to enhance the University’s strength. We are taking steps to give the State University a new presence in Washington and to refocus the Research Foundation to support more directly research efforts on SUNY’s campuses. We are developing programs that will help the University match — and perhaps exceed — the levels of support given to other great public university systems. And, we created an Office for Business and Industry Relations to make the intellectual expertise of the University more readily available to companies, small businesses, and non-profit endeavors across New York State and beyond its borders. With each of these initiatives underway, we must now set new goals for the future, cognizant of the fact that we need not be defined by the limits of the State resources available to us. Accordingly, we intend to raise, across the breadth of the University, $1 billion in the next four years from private sources, including alumni, private corporations, and foundations. We also seek to increase sponsored research at the University to $1 billion per year within five years. Finally, it is our intention to increase campus-generated revenues by over $500 million in the next four years by, for example, growing out-of-state and international enrollment and by increasing the entrepreneurial activities of our campuses. Unlike any other institution of higher learning in New York State, the State University is literally everywhere, from Niagara Falls to the top of the Adirondack Park, from the heart of one of the most vibrant cities on Earth to the last lighthouse on Long Island. Given our geographic and intellectual breadth, our success is the State’s success. As the State University moves to the front ranks of American higher education, we also join in the greater effort to assure a strong future for the Empire State. Robert L. King, Chancellor The State University of New York MASTER PLAN 2000 - 2004 In December 1995, the State University Board of Trustees responded to a call from the New York State Legislature requesting a “multi-year, comprehensive, system-wide plan to increase cost efficiency in the continuing pursuit of the highest quality and broadest possible access consistent with the state university mission.” The Board of Trustees, in its plan entitled Rethinking SUNY, reaffirmed the statutory mission of the University. It endorsed additional propositions that The State University of New York Master Plan 2000-2004 also carries forward: - The State University exists to provide access to educational services of the highest quality; - Increased differentiation of campuses is fundamental to realizing the synergies achievable as a System; - Graduate, professional, and research programs are essential to the mission of the State University of New York and to the economic vitality of New York; and - Clearer academic standards and better means for measuring performance are central to increasing accountability. The direction of the University established by the Board of Trustees in Rethinking SUNY has been pursued diligently in the succeeding years and continues to drive the priorities presented in this Master Plan: quality, access, efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability. To ensure access to the highest quality education in a climate of constrained resources, the University will continue to become more self-sufficient, more focused, more creative, and stronger. The priorities of the State University Board of Trustees assume a particular significance given the goals in the plan of the Board of Regents, Excellence and Opportunity for All New Yorkers: The Statewide Plan for Higher Education, 1996-2004. Underscoring the momentum of Rethinking SUNY, this Master Plan sets out specific forward-looking objectives which will contribute to the statewide goals. The Master Plan is organized around four principal foci of effort across the University, each of which is intended to enhance academic quality: - Mission Review - Service to Local Regions, the State, and the Nation - Financial Management - Operations In addition to the plans and activities described in the body of the text under the four foci, there are several reports and other supporting materials in the Appendix that provide more detail about the University’s future direction. In short, The State University of New York Master Plan 2000-2004 is a description of the successes the State University of New York has achieved during the past five years in implementing Rethinking SUNY. More importantly,it sets out how the State University will continue to translate the principles of Rethinking SUNY into action. Overview of Mission Review Mission Review – An Overarching Structure to Enhance Academic Quality Since 1998, Mission Review has been the core academic strategic planning process of the State University. It is an on-going, campus-based effort that includes all 64 SUNY institutions both individually and collectively as part of geographic regions and sector groups. The aim of the process is to enhance academic quality by helping campuses clarify institutional goals, determine how best to pursue those goals, and identify specific benchmarks of success. Envisioned by Rethinking SUNY, Mission Review seeks to: - Ensure the highest levels of academic quality across the University; - Focus on the fundamental aspects of campus missions; - Encourage campuses to think strategically about their roles within SUNY, New York State, and the nation; - Enhance campus distinctiveness and differentiation; - Enhance the reputation of each campus relative to regional and national peers; - Foster cooperation with other campuses; and - Identify goals and benchmarks to monitor success. Mission Review is an unprecedented effort—in terms of its scope and detail—that has received broad support and is recognized by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) as a “Best Practice” in Quality Assurance (see Appendix, Mission Review Recognized). It is characterized by, and premised on, iterative dialogue between System Administration and the campuses. The Mission Review Process (shown on the next page) illustrates the iterative, back and forth nature of the effort, its comprehensiveness (i.e., includes planning at the institution, sector, and regional level), and its inclusiveness (bringing together all different constituencies). Mission Review Process: - Guidance Documents sent by System: customized questions about mission sent to all 64 campuses - Detailed responses to the Guidance questions are submitted to System by campuses - Interlocutor teams at SUNY System perform analysis of campus strengths and weaknesses - System visits to each campus for focused discussion about campus direction using pre-prepared Dialogue Points - Draft Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) using a common template proposed for campus review - Regional and Sector meetings - Continued dialogue with campuses - Provost Review of MOUs - Board Review of MOUs - Chancellor review of MOUs - Chancellor and Presidents each sign MOUs for all campuses The first cycle of Mission Review included more than 70 meetings, both individual visits to campuses and broader gatherings of campuses by geographic region and institution type. Results of Mission Review are brought together in Memoranda of Understanding (MOU); these documents—signed by campus and System leadership—lay out campus goals, plans, and benchmarks of success. The MOUs provide a framework for facilitating changes in and enhancements to campus missions. The Memoranda of Understanding articulate commitments on the part of campuses and System Administration toward the goal of achieving the highest possible academic quality for the State University. In the aggregate, they chart a course that is focused on high standards for academic quality and public accountability on the one hand, and campus autonomy and self-determination on the other. Where clear quantifiable goals could be specified, campuses have done so (e.g., retention and graduation rates). In other instances, campuses have committed to put in place and/or enhance campus-based procedures that will improve quality (e.g., regular external review of all academic programs). Some of the commitments made in MOUs will be fully realized once complementary System-wide initiatives are fully implemented (in such areas as general education, research, and assessment). The MOUs will serve as important reference and policy documents for stakeholders throughout the University. Examples of ongoing efforts that will rely extensively on the Memoranda of Understanding include presidential evaluations, academic program proposal review, enrollment planning, and performance funding. Mission Differentiation: Market Niche and Role Although each Memorandum of Understanding lays out a plan specific to a campus, the complete set of these documents establishes a vision for enhanced academic quality throughout the State University. Certain key themes emerge across these planning documents; the following pages highlight some of the components anticipated to have the most dramatic impact on quality. Perhaps the most important step in Mission Review was the first: each campus was asked to clarify its mission and role within the University. Clear delineation of mission “envelopes” is useful, both to campus constituencies and to the broader constituency base of the State University. Campuses have defined their market niches in relation to their historic mission, geographic considerations, the range of academic degrees that are offered, and particular institutional strengths. This information is made explicit in the Memoranda of Understanding which, in turn, serve as useful reference documents for determining the appropriateness of newly proposed academic programs. In addition to mission differentiation at the institutional level, Mission Review also sought to clarify missions of various campus sectors across the State University. The SUNY system includes eight distinct categories of institutions (see Appendix, List of Campuses) which maximize the provision of quality higher education to New Yorkers. Having such a broad range of institutions enhances each citizen’s ability to contribute to society, participate in the workforce, and take advantage of lifelong learning opportunities. Mission Review reaffirmed the value of different sectors, which include: Four University Centers The four university centers—at Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, and Stony Brook—are, first and foremost, research institutions where the creation of new knowledge is a central part of campus mission. In addition to wide-ranging undergraduate and graduate programs leading to baccalaureate and master’s degrees, each university center has doctoral programs and professional schools. Thirteen Comprehensive Arts and Sciences Colleges This group comprises twelve traditional institutions, mostly located in small cities and towns, with academic offerings that include liberal arts and sciences and professional programs such as business and teacher education. In addition to a full range of undergraduate curricula, including honors programs, the comprehensive colleges offer masters degrees. The thirteenth—less traditional—comprehensive college is Empire State College, which enrolls a high proportion of working adults at extension centers throughout the state and via distance learning. Four Health Science Centers The State University’s four health science centers (HSCs) include two freestanding centers, in Syracuse and Brooklyn, and two university-based centers at the University at Buffalo and the University at Stony Brook. Three of the HSCs (Syracuse, Brooklyn, and Stony Brook) include University-owned hospitals. Each health science center has a college of medicine, nursing programs, and arrange of other health-related undergraduate and graduate programs. SUNY offers, through these centers, some of the highest quality health-related education, research, and patient care in the nation. Six Colleges with Special Missions The six specialized colleges include the College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Farmingdale (focusing on technology and applied sciences), Maritime College, the College of Optometry, the Institute of Technology at Utica/Rome, and the Fashion Institute of Technology (FIT). FIT, a unique community college within the System, offers associate through master’s degrees. Each of these colleges focuses on degree programs related to their special mission and role. Five Partnership Colleges Known also as statutory colleges, the five partnership colleges include four colleges affiliated with Cornell University: the Colleges of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Human Ecology, Veterinary Medicine (graduate schools only) and the School of Industrial and Labor Relations. A fifth institution, the New York State College of Ceramics, is affiliated with Alfred University. Each partnership college enjoys the benefits of being part of the State University of New York while being connected to, and located at, a private university. These colleges are exemplars of productive public-private partnerships. Five University Colleges of Technology The five University Colleges of Technology (UCT)—located in Alfred, Canton, Cobleskill, Delhi, and Morrisville—are linked through a consortium that facilitates cooperative planning and delivery of academic programs and services. This creative partnership allows students at any one of the five campuses to participate in courses originating from another campus using distance learning technology. Thus, UCT students benefit from a wider array of academic offerings and faculty. The five UCT campuses offer associate degree programs, and an expanding number of baccalaureate programs in technology and applied science appropriate to their missions. Thirty Community Colleges The State University’s 30 community colleges are located in every region of the state. Students study in a range of two-year programs leading to the associate degree, and in certificate and other non-degree programs. Many of SUNY’s community college graduates transfer to four-year institutions to earn a baccalaureate degree, while other graduates begin work immediately. The community colleges also have a wide range of offerings and resources supporting programs in lifelong learning and skill development for part-time students already in the workforce, either individually or through employer- supported, tailored courses. A number of community colleges offer residential living, and several operate in more than one location. SUNY’s community colleges are different from its state-operated campuses in that governance and operation are shared between the state and local sponsor (i.e., a single county or a group of counties). State-local shared governance is reflected in the membership of community college boards of trustees: they include both Governor-appointed and local sponsor-appointed members. Even though this governance difference exists, the community colleges are fully involved in a comprehensive planning process that is completely consistent and fully coordinated with the overarching system-wide strategic goals. Related Educational Centers The University’s related educational centers include the statewide network of Educational Opportunity Centers (EOCs). With more than a 33-year history, EOCs have pioneered providing urban communities with innovative academic programs leading to higher education, and with vocational training programs leading to gainful employment and economic self-sufficiency. In 1999-2000, the EOCs offered training and support to over 16,000 individuals. Enrollment Planning With enhanced academic quality as its guiding principle, Mission Review addresses enrollment planning from multiple angles, including setting realistic enrollment goals, specifying selectivity aspirations, and identifying benchmark institutions for comparative data. Campus plans to attract stronger students through initiatives such as merit scholarships and honors programs are also outlined in the Memoranda of Understanding. As part of Mission Review, campuses were asked to consider carefully their short and long-term enrollment plans in terms of both the size and the academic profile of their admitted student body. One of the outcomes of Mission Review is that a very rigorous enrollment planning process—one that takes into account campus goals and aspirations and progress toward those goals and aspirations— has been adopted by the Enrollment Planning Group in System Administration. This broadly representative group engages campuses in dialogue as needed and appropriate, and approves campus plans that are in concert with the thrust of the Memoranda of Understanding. Enrollment plans are evaluated for consistency with overall State University goals, previously expressed campus goals, demographic trends, campus capacity, workforce needs, funding constraints, and prior success in campus-based enrollment planning. Projections for 2004-05 are that enrollments will rise to 174,240 full-time equivalent students in state-operated institutions (nine percent increase over 2000-01) and to 145,151 full-time equivalent students at community colleges (five percent increase over 2000-01), for a total of 319,391 full-time equivalent students (seven percent increase over 2000-01). Planned total headcount will rise to 400,737 students (seven percent increase over 2000-01). The table on the next page summarizes State University planned enrollment growth from 2000-01 to 2004-05, across sector, and in the context of projected New York State public high school graduates. Projected Enrollment in Annual Average Full-time Equivalents through 2004-05 Projected Projected Current Projected Approved Projected Total Annual Proportion Proportion 2000-01 2004-05 Change Change of SUNY of SUNY University Centers 1 59,060 64,561 9.31% 2.33% 19.73% 20.21% Colleges 67,936 71,920 5.86% 1.47% 22.70% 22.52% Health Science Centers 7,478 8,459 13.12% 3.28% 2.50% 2.65% Statutory Colleges 6,607 6,668 0.92% 0.23% 2.21% 2.09% Colleges of Technology 11,438 12,500 9.08% 2.32% 3.82% 3.91% Specialized Colleges 7,977 10,132 27.02% 6.76% 2.67% 3.17% Community Colleges 38,722 145,151 4.60% 1.15% 46.37% 45.45% TOTAL 99,268 319,391 6.72% 1.68% 100.0% 100.0% New York State Public HS Graduates(2) 139,400 147,100 5.52% 1.38% 1 Excluding Health Science Centers 2 U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data Surveys and State Public High School Graduates Model, Table 34, June 2000. SUNY continually seeks to improve quality and increase the transparency of the enrollment planning process. To this end, clear guidelines describing the process and providing details about the methodologies used by the Enrollment Planning Group a redistributed to all campuses. At the conclusion of the annual planning cycle, each campus is provided with a summary of all approved plans, as well as the plans and actual enrollments for all campuses for the previous two years. In this way, campuses receive more detailed information to support their own enrollment planning efforts. The profile of an admitted class is another indicator of academic quality. Among the goals of Mission Review is enhancing the quality of students admitted to the State University of New York while maintaining the University’s long-standing commitment to access. To that end, all state-operated campuses have pledged to work toward enhanced selectivity and have committed to precise selectivity goals for entering classes. Campus-driven selectivity goals—informed by state and national peer comparison data—are made explicit in the Memoranda of Understanding. The following chart illustrates the rubric used by campuses and System Administration to determine the selectivity goals for undergraduate admissions. With a defining criterion of “at least 60% of students” (admitted as full-time freshmen) for each selectivity group, the matrix leaves considerable room for access to even the most selective State University campuses. Admissions Selectivity Chart is described below: Most Selective is Group 1, at least 60% of the students have high school averages from 85 to 100, with SAT scores higher than 1300 Highly Selective is Group 2, at least 60% of the students have high school averages from 80 to 100, with SAT scores higher than 1200 Very Selective is Group 3, at least 60% of the students have high school averages from 75 to 100, with SAT scores higher than 1100 Selective is Group 4, at least 60% of the students have high school averages from 70 to 100, with SAT scores higher than 1000 General Admission is open admissions. The matrix excludes part-time students, students admitted into EOP programs or special programmatic admissions. Access and Opportunity As a result of Mission Review, the Memoranda of Understanding will be relied upon to determine not only whether a given campus is reaching its targeted enrollment goals but also its goals for undergraduate selectivity. Campuses will be asked to provide updated information on selectivity annually, as part of the enrollment planning process. All indications suggest that the integrated Mission Review and enrollment planning process is successful in meeting State University goals for 1) more accurate enrollment planning consistent with MOU goals, 2) raising selectivity (where appropriate) and maintaining access, and 3) facilitating collaborative and more transparent planning. In addition to the profile of an admitted class, another indicator of academic quality is campus success in attracting students from a wide geographic area. As institutional reputation rises, applications from outside the campus’ local are a expand. Accordingly, in the Memoranda of Understanding many campuses have committed to expanding their geographical “draw.” Their effectiveness in doing so will be monitored over time. As a public institution, the University has a strong commitment to ensuring broad access and opportunity for New York State residents and that commitment was reaffirmed in Mission Review. In the coming years, the University plans to: - strengthen and build upon existing programs for access; - enhance outreach efforts to under-served populations; - promote diversity among faculty, staff and students; - address the technological needs of disadvantaged students; - produce graduates well-prepared in fields corresponding to state needs (e.g.,teaching); - expand collaborative efforts with public schools in at-risk communities; and - continue to support initiatives that combine the principles of access, service, and excellence at all levels of study. At the center of the range of programs that serve as mechanisms for access, diversity, and student support is the University’s highly successful Educational Opportunity Program (EOP). Designed for undergraduate students who have the potential to succeed in higher education despite economic and academic disadvantages, each year this program provides financial assistance, academic development skills workshops, advisement, and counseling to more than 11,500 students who might not otherwise have the opportunity for college-level study. As a complement to its undergraduate support programs, tuition waivers for study at the master’s, doctorate, and first-professional level at selected SUNY campuses dramatically expand career options for successful graduates from disadvantaged backgrounds. Students enrolled in the University’s opportunity programs come from a variety of backgrounds—urban and rural—that is representative of the diversity found in New York State. Though traditional forms of student support remain at the core of the University’s opportunity program operations, improvement of student performance, enhancement of the educational experience and promotion of innovation in service delivery are current priorities. New campus programs will include projects aimed at: increasing student-faculty interaction outside the classroom; providing greater access to and ease with technology; developing leadership skills among program students; integrating learning and living environments; fostering mentoring relationships; structuring opportunities for student participation in research and internships; encouraging alumni involvement; facilitating transfer from two-year to four-year programs; and encouraging graduate study. The University’s Opportunity Programs group works jointly with the Search for Education, Elevation, and Knowledge (SEEK) program in the City University and occupies a leadership role in the Tri-State Consortium of Opportunity Programs — comprising access programs in the public and private institutions of New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Student Retention and Graduation Enhancing academic quality extends beyond attracting strong and capable students to include providing excellent instruction and a supportive learning environment until timely graduation. Consistent with Rethinking SUNY’s focus on time-to-degree, State University campuses will continue to improve their retention and graduation rates. Through Mission Review, campuses have committed to raising first-year retention rates, and four-year and six-year graduation rates. Chart on First-Year Retention Rates is described below: The National Public Mean is 74% SUNY University Centers current rate is approximately 84%, with a five-year goal to reach 90%. SUNY Comprehensive Colleges current rate is approximately 72%, with a five-year goal to reach 81%. SUNY Specialized Colleges current rate is approximately 76%, with a five-year goal to reach 83%. SUNY Colleges of Technology current rate is approximately 56% with a five-year goal to reach 63%. Most of SUNY’s state-operated campuses meet or exceed the national mean first-year retention rate for public universities and colleges. Likewise, the average SUNY community college first-year retention rate (62.2 percent) far exceeds the national mean for public community colleges (52 percent). Nevertheless, each campus will strive to improve performance even further in this area. Initiatives include expanded first-year studies programs (e.g., Freshman Seminars), faculty mentoring of new students, placing students in supportive learning communities, and improved academic advisement. System Administration is committed to doing all that it can to support such efforts, including funding innovative approaches. Indeed, as part of Mission Review, campuses have received funding to support highly promising approaches to improving student retention. For example, the Colleges at Oswego and New Paltz will use Mission Review funds to invest in improved and enhanced academic programming for first-year students. Both campuses will adopt multi-pronged approaches that include faculty development and innovative, supportive programming aimed at beginning students. In this way,students will be better prepared to face academic challenges and more likely to persevere in their studies at the institution where they first enrolled. The State University’s six-year graduation rates at state- operated campuses also outpace the national mean for public colleges and universities. Likewise, average SUNY community college four-year graduation rates (30.8 percent) substantially outpace the national mean (21 percent). Once again, as part of the Mission Review process, all state -operated campuses have committed to specific goals for improving graduation rates. Where individualcampus graduation rates fell below the SUNY mean, campuses committed to more careful analysis of attrition patterns (by interviewing withdrawing students, analyzing transcripts of students who leave prior to graduation, and careful review of student and alumni survey results, for example) in order to help improve their performance. Chart on Six-Year Graduation Rates is described below: The National Public Mean is 45% SUNY University Centers current rate is approximately 63%, with a five-year goal to reach 71%. SUNY Comprehensive Colleges current rate is approximately 51%, with a five-year goal to reach 61%. SUNY Specialized Colleges current rate is approximately 53%, with a five-year goal to reach 67%. SUNY Colleges of Technology current rate is approximately 56%, with a five-year goal to reach 63%. For community colleges in particular, retention and graduation rates must be interpreted in the context of student goals. Many community college students do not enroll seeking a degree but rather to acquire specific skills or knowledge (for example, by taking a set of specific courses related to one’s job). Consistent with national efforts to focus on achievement of student goals in gauging success at community colleges, the Mission Review process has spawned an initiative to develop more comprehensive analyses of student intentions upon admittance and at subsequent points in their academic career. This System-wide effort will provide more accurate measures of community college effectiveness in helping students reach their academic goals. Student retention and graduation are, of course, affected in important ways by financial pressures facing SUNY students. Consistent with its access mission, the University remains concerned about economic barriers that may prevent a student from attaining a quality higher education in New York. SUNY will continue to seek adequate levels of financial support through federal, state, local, and private sources so that students can stay in school and graduate in a timely manner, consistent with individual educational goals. In addition to tracking retention and graduation rates as a matter of course through the System’s Office of Institutional Research, campuses and System Administration will now also monitor these trends as part of the enrollment planning process. Articulation and Transfer A major function of the University’s 30 community colleges is to provide students with access to an educational pathway leading to the baccalaureate degree and beyond. Each year, approximately 8,000 SUNY community college students transfer to upper-division SUNY institutions. More over, data indicate that transfers from SUNY’s community colleges fare exceptionally well at our upper-division institutions, often outperforming those who began their education at these institutions as freshmen. Independent colleges also actively recruit and welcome SUNY community college graduates. Each of SUNY’s community colleges has negotiated detailed articulation agreements with their most prominent transfer partners, including both upper-division SUNY campuses as well as independent colleges. In addition to articulation agreements, many SUNY community colleges and their transfer partners offer jointly registered programs. Students in these programs are effectively admitted to the upper-division campus at the same time they are admitted to the participating community college. Seamless articulation between community colleges and four- year institutions—a pillar of the University’s mission—continues to be a high priority for the SUNY Board of Trustees and System Administration, and it was a major goal of Mission Review. Board policy ensures that students with an A.A. or an A.S. degree who a re accepted into a parallel program by a SUNY baccalaureate institution will be granted full junior status and have the opportunity to complete their degree within two years of full-time study. Consistent with the high priority given to articulation, the Memoranda of Understanding include campus commitments to tighten existing articulation agreements, develop new articulation agreements, develop more jointly registered programs, and increase inter-campus collaboration. This approach to seamless transfer is reinforced in the emerging community college strategic plan (see Appendix, The Community Colleges of The State University of New York Strategic Plan for 2001-2004). As follow-up to Mission Review discussions, System Administration has formed a Transfer and Articulation Committee that is charged with monitoring and ensuring the implementation of relevant University policy as well as formulating recommendations for System-wide approaches to facilitate student movement within the University. Seven regional meetings were held in 2001 bringing together major transfer partners. Recommendations are forthcoming. Benchmarking As part of Mission Review, each SUNY state-operated campus identified both current and aspirational peers. Identifying benchmark institutions for the purpose of making appropriate comparisons enhances academic quality by providing national context for viewing oneself. Also, implicit in the identification of “selected benchmark institutions”is the notion that evaluation of campus effectiveness must be supported by data. Thesebenchmark institutions will be used to gauge individual campus quality improvement over time. The initial sets of benchmark indicators include: undergraduate enrollment; acceptance rate; SAT scores of entering students; high school grade point average; percent of full-time faculty; retention rate; graduation rate; and research funding. In the future, as more data become available and as campuses become more comfortable with the approach, the University will expand and refine the benchmarking process. And, of course, “peer” institutions will change as the quality and reputation of SUNY's campuses are enhanced further. Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes In 1999, the Provost's Advisory Task Force on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes was charged with recommending a process for assessing student learning outcomes and intellectual growth in general education and the major across the State University. Following extensive research and deliberation and broad consultation with the University community, the Task Force submitted its Report to the Provost in November 2000 (see Appendix, Report of the Provost's Advisory Task Force on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes). The Task Force report clearly identifies outcomes assessment as a cooperative venture between the faculty of the University and the academic leadership of campuses and System Administration. Recommendations call for a SUNY Assessment Initiative consisting of both campus-based and University-wide strategies. Consistent with the principles of Rethinking SUNY, emphasis is placed on campus-based assessment focusing on program improvement, and University-wide assessment focusing on accountability and advocacy. The proposed initiative is now well underway. Guidelines for the implementation of campus-based assessment of general education and the major were developed and distributed to campuses in December 2000. Campus-based assessment of the major will begin in fall 2001, and campus-based assessment of general education will begin in 2002-03. Preceding and concurrent with the Task Force's work on assessment, Mission Review emphasized the importance of comprehensive assessment in enhancing academic quality. Consistent with the recommendations of the Task Force, campuses have committed in their Memoranda of Understanding to meaningful assessment efforts, specifically including regular assessment of academic departments/programs, and participation in System-wide surveys of students and alumni. System Administration and campuses are committed to working together to ensure the validity of data interpretation through, for example, consistent and clearly delineated procedures for administering survey instruments so that data are comparable year-to-year and across the System. Many SUNY institutions, especially the community colleges, will rely increasingly on employer satisfaction data as a key component of their assessment efforts, properly reflecting the workforce-training element of their mission. By using such surveys within a comprehensive assessment framework, campuses seek to ensure that they successfully meet expectations—held by recipients and beneficiaries alike—of a State University of New York education. Faculty Scholarship and Development Expanding the level and distinction of the research enterprise within the University is an essential component of the University’s mission. Making new contributions to knowledge is and will remain at the heart of what the University does. It is also undeniable that world-class research promotes the stature of the State University and that enhancing the research environment on all campuses will enable the University to continue to attract the best and brightest faculty from around the world. Finally, University-based research directly and indirectly benefits the economy of New York (see also Research Foundation section under service to Local Regions, the State, and the Nation). Enhancing the research enterprise also enriches student learning. Superb research and teaching are closely interrelated and synergistic. Faculty who are actively engaged in creating new knowledge bring those insights to their teaching, at both a graduate and undergraduate level, and students are attracted by the opportunity to work with top-notch faculty researchers from whom they learn to do original work. Faculty researchers, in turn, benefit from explaining the importance and direction of their work to bright and inquisitive students. Indeed, student curiosity and fresh perspective can be catalysts for faculty research. Mission Review provided an ideal forum for discussion of research goals with all campuses. During campus visits and in regional and sector meetings, the intellectual and pedagogical value of research and its positive impact on the state and national economy were priority topics for discussion. State- operated campuses were asked to look thoughtfully at their current research expenditures and to set specific goals for increasing research over a five-year period. Overall, the University has set an aggressivegoal of reaching $1 billion per year in sponsored research expenditures within the next five years. Each of SUNY’s campuses will play an important role in achieving this goal. As a system, the University is carrying out a number of key initiatives to raise the level of funded research, including: - Hiring faculty committed to research and giving a high priority to facilitating their research efforts; - Providing a 20% match for every dollar of externally funded research activity (see also Financial Management – A Structure to Enhance Academic Quality); - Working with the State University Construction Fund to secure capital funding for research (especially startup costs for new faculty) in future planning; - Enhancing collaboration across SUNY and with peer institutions outside of the System; - Working with New York businesses to emphasize the importance of research and the building of a state-wide research infrastructure; - Working with the Legislature and the Governor’s Office to promote University-based research and the establishment of research initiatives in the 2001-02 budget and beyond; and - More aggressively seeking federal support for research, in part through establishing a direct SUNY presence in Washington, DC (see Research Foundation section under Service to Local Regions, the State, and the Nation). Academic quality and strong and distinguished faculties go hand in hand. The State University of New York is profoundly enriched by its faculty, who rank among the most accomplished educators and scholars in the nation. Their contributions are essential to fulfilling the University’s tripartite mission of instruction, research, and service. As part of Mission Review, campuses have made commitments to enhance the quality of faculty by: - Increasing the proportion of faculty holding the Ph.D. degree at State University community colleges; - Expanding external review of faculty scholarship in making promotion and tenure decisions; - Expanding the use of student evaluations of the quality of faculty teaching; and - Facilitating faculty scholarship. System Administration has also committed resources to help support faculty development through the creation of a unit within the Provost's Office charged with developing new programs and overseeing current initiatives that recognize and reward extraordinary performance by SUNY faculty. Recognition programs include the Chancellor’s Awards for Excellence and the Distinguished Faculty ranks in research, teaching, librarianship, and service. New efforts involve expansion of support for collaborative faculty research and greater involvement of distinguished faculty in planning and framing State University policy. In addition, the University’s Conversations in the Disciplines will be expanded to facilitate more cross-campus collaboration within disciplines. Tuition support for faculty and staff seeking advanced degrees is another area that will receive greater attention, to increase the proportion of faculty holding the Ph.D. degree. Inter-campus Collaboration Through joint and cooperative programming, the State University provides a wider range of instruction, research, and public service for a larger number of New York citizens than would otherwise be possible. In addition to intra-System collaboration, many State University campuses actively participate in regional organizations that involve non-SUNY institutions, including the Associated Colleges of the Mid-Hudson Area, Hudson-Mohawk Association of Colleges and Universities, Long Island Regional Advisory Council on Higher Education, Associated Colleges of the St. Lawrence Valley, Rochester Area Colleges, and Western New York Consortium of Higher Education. These organizations provide a vehicle for collaboration in the form of student cross-registration at participating campuses; joint workshops, symposia, exhibitions, and special projects; and shared use of expensive equipment and services among member institutions. Coordinated inter-institutional activities have long had a place in SUNY, but the University now seeks to capitalize further on its systemness by expanding such efforts. Increasingly, resources are shared, services jointly contracted for and other consortial arrangements established between State University campuses. In the area of campus operations, there are many vibrant cooperative business practices within the University. For example, campuses in the Western New York region have had a cooperative agreement since 1997 which commits them to collaborate in areas such as library storage, trademarks/ licensing, legal services, printing, purchasing, training/ staff development, and physical plant services. Joint purchasing is used among the campuses along the I-81 corridor, and the colleges of technology have undertaken a strong program of jointly developed marketing and outreach. In Rochester, the SUNY Student Resource Center is a joint venture between Monroe Community College, SUNY Brockport, Empire State College, and the Rochester Public Library that serves all of the respective communities. And, new facilities are increasingly being constructed with the needs of multiple communities (and campuses) in mind; the planned baseball facility at Hudson Valley Community College, with anticipated heavy usage by all of the counties in the Capital District, is a case in point. Many campuses intend to strengthen their ties to sister SUNY institutions in the area of facilities and operations, and these plans are specified in the MOUs. As a result of Mission Review and other campus-driven initiatives, interinstitutional relationships are being further enhanced through such mechanisms as jointly registered programs and articulation agreements, scholarly exchanges, and multi-campus interdisciplinary research. For instance, while there are currently almost 500 jointly registered academicprograms in the University, the Mission Review process encouraged campuses to increase that number as well as the number and specificity of articulation agreements, so that seamless transfer becomes a reality for more students. Jointly registered programs and detailed articulation agreements are particularly important in disciplines such as education and nursing, where shortages of professionals across the state and nation are reaching critical levels. Besides facilitating transfer and enhancing access, these programs are effective recruitment mechanisms for participating campuses, thereby increasing the mutual benefits of such collaboration. Research is another increasingly important area of cooperation, as illustrated by the success of SUNY–private institution partnerships in newly funded academic research centers. State University campuses have led a number of such initiatives, often on a regional basis, aimed at fostering highly productive, cutting-edge collaborative research and development. For instance, in 2001 the University at Albany, in partnership with Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, was designated as a New York State Strategically Targeted Academic Research (STAR) Center to provide the science and technology resource base for the development of micro- and nano-electronics. Similarly, several other SUNY campuses, including the University at Buffalo, the University at Stony Brook, Cornell, the College of Environmental Science and Forestry, the Health Science Center at Syracuse, and Alfred State College, received support for collaborative initiatives from the New York State Office of Science, Technology and Academic Research (NYSTAR). In the MOUs campuses have committed to expanding collaborative research, and System Administration intends to facilitate such efforts (see Faculty Scholarship and Development). Academic Program Directions The range and mix of academic programs in the State University of New York is ever evolving, aimed at meeting student and state needs while staying abreast of intellectual currents. Campuses periodically add new programs (see Appendix, New Programs of Study Tentatively Planned for Introduction 2000-2004), modify existing programs, anddiscontinue ones that are no longer appropriate. As part of the Mission Review process, each campus identifies priorities for program development that are consistent with its current and projected intellectual strengths and mission. Consistent with long-standing SUNY and State Education Department practice, proposals for new programs and/or revisions to existing programs are reviewed and approved by the University Provost on behalf of the State University Board of Trustees, before being submitted to the State Education Department for registration. With Rethinking SUNY’s call for streamlining administrative procedures, the University’s review process for new undergraduate programs was revised and streamlined in 2000-01 (see Appendix, Memo on 2001 Guidelines for the Submission of Undergraduate Academic Program Proposals). The new guidelines require that proposed programs be consistent with campus mission, reflect market need, and have demonstrable quality. System Administration has also committed itself to be accountable for meeting specific timeframes for various stages of the review process, and program proposals may now be submitted electronically. Similar enhancements to the graduate program review process are planned for 2001-02. General Education The State University believes that its graduates should have the general knowledge and skills necessary to participate in and contribute to a democratic society and to continually enrich their lives as educated individuals. The University seeks to inculcate such knowledge by a broad-based and coherent program of general education. Resolution 98-241 of the State University Board of Trustees, passed in December 1998, mandated a minimum of 30 credit hours of general education coursework— in 10 specified subject areas and two learning competencies—for all baccalaureate candidates within the University. This policy took effect for students entering in fall 2000, and every campus with undergraduate programs committed to meeting the requirements of this policy in the signed Memoranda of Understanding. In 1999, the University’s Provost convened an Advisory Task Force on General Education, comprised of faculty and administrators from across the University, to develop learning outcomes for each of the content areas and guidelines for implementation of the general education requirement (see Appendix, Report of the Provost’s Advisory Task Force on General Education). Subsequently, the Provost empanelled an Advisory Council on General Education (PACGE) to help review individual campus implementation plans to ensure that the letter and spirit of the resolution would be met. Ongoing activities involving general education include: - System interaction with newly formed SUNY General Education Directors Association; - Development and recommendation of policies on transfer as it relates to general education; - Identification of best practices in general education; and - Refinement and improvement of extant guidelines for implementation of the Board policy. Teacher Education Teacher education was historically the centerpiece of many of the State University's senior campuses, most of which originated as normal schools to train public school teachers. Although the missions of these institutions have evolved, the 16 campuses with teacher education programs remain committed to preparing superbly qualified teachers. The University takes justifiable pride in the strong reputation of its graduates who become teachers—a reputation built on outstanding performance on teacher certification examinations (see Appendix, SUNY Pass Rates on the New York State Teacher Certification Examinations 1999-2000) and, more importantly, success in the field. Through its formal teacher preparation programs, the State University educates about 25 percent of the teachers certified through college and university programs in New York State each year. Additionally, a large number of SUNY graduates with non-education degrees later become certified as teachers through alternative processes. This accounts for an estimated additional 15 percent of the New York State certifications, bringing the total proportion of State University graduates to approximately 40 percent of the teachers certified annually through higher education institutions. To help ensure the University’s continued leadership in the field of teacher education, the Provost established the Advisory Council on Teacher Education in December of 1999. The Council was asked to examine and make recommendations on: 1) aligning the supply of and demand for teachers (especially in high-demand subject areas such as math and science and in school districts with the greatest need), 2) ensuring that teacher education programs require intensive and relevantfield experiences, 3) identifying research on issues of teaching effectiveness and learning, and 4) attracting the most academically capable students and accommodating well-educated individuals seeking to change careers and become teachers. In March 2001, the Advisory Council issued its final report (see Appendix, Provost's Advisory Council on Teacher Education Report and Recommendations) and the University now intends to vigorously pursue programmatic and policy directions set forth in that document. Toward that end, in June 2001, the Chancellor proposedand the Board of Trustees endorsed an action agenda outlining specific steps the University will take to facilitate the implementation of the Council’s recommendations. The three overarching goals of the agenda include: ensuring that all SUNY students pursuing teaching careers receive the best possible preparation to become effective teachers; addressing New York State’s need for teachers (particularly in high-need schools and specific disciplines); and continuing to accurately assess and improve SUNY’s teacher education programs. (See Appendix, A New Vision in Teacher Education: Agenda for Change in SUNY’s Teacher Preparation Programs for further details.) Academic Technology The State University is committed to harnessing technology for the enhancement of instruction and learning, including innovative uses of technology in campus classrooms, laboratories, and libraries and through distance learning. The University has made significant progress in this regard during the past five years. Technological advancements for the near future include planning for the next iteration of SUNYNet—the University’s universal data communications network— and increased participation across the System in the rapidly growing Internet 2 community, linking the University with all the major colleges and universities, and research centers in the United States. SUNY Learning Network Since 1995, the University has emerged as a leader in online education as evidenced by the tremendous growth of its distance learning program: the SUNY Learning Network (SLN). SLN’s roots can be traced back to the Mid-Hudson Regional Learning Network—a project aimed at providing community college graduates in the Hudson Valley a means of completing their bachelor’s degrees without having to move to a state-operated campus. Although early plans called for instruction delivered exclusively by two-way video, following discussions with the Sloan Foundation (an early and generous supporter of the SLN initiative) the project’s emphasis shifted to delivering courses via the Internet. In keeping with the tenor of Rethinking SUNY and a separate report of the State University Presidents Task Force on Distance Learning (1995), a number of strategic decisions were made to launch SLN, including: - Campus participation would be voluntary; - SLN would serve as a support infrastructure, not as a degree-granting entity; - Campuses would emphasize full-degree programs, not just stand-alone courses; - Campuses would retain complete academic authority over offerings and would have responsibility for program, course, and faculty selection; - Courses would be fully asynchronous, faculty-led and class-cohort-based; and - SLN would ultimately become a self-sustaining program. The SUNY Learning Network, now six years old, has one of the longest and most successful track records in online education. At its core, SLN provides a complete support infrastructure of faculty training and course development, course-management software and server infrastructure, and student and faculty help-desk services. It also provides SLN-wide marketing, promotion, and program management services to participating campuses. Course enrollments in SLN have increased from 119 in 1995-96 to more than 25,000 in 2000-01, and course offerings have grown from eight courses to more than 1,500 during the same timeframe. In addition, system-wide participation is up from just two campuses in 1995-96 to 47 campuses in 2000-01, and 53 campuses will offer courses in 2001-02. Graph on SUNY Learning Network Courses is described below: In the 1995-96 academic year, SLN offered 8 courses In the 1996-97 academic year, SLN offered approximately 25 courses In the 1997-98 academic year, SLN offered approximately 190 courses In the 1998-99 academic year, SLN offered approximately 420 courses In the 1999-00 academic year, SLN offered approximately 1000 courses In the 2000-01 academic year, SLN offered approximately 1500 courses Targeted growth in SLN offerings is one of the key components of the Mission Review Memoranda of Understanding. Many MOUs contain commitments for deepened involvement in the program. Over time, it is expected that SLN will also develop non-credit and non-degree learning modules aimed at businesses. Libraries Libraries are not only repositories of our collected knowledge, they are an essential tool for scholarship. Providing full access to that knowledge is an ongoing challenge — one which the State University is meeting head on by harnessingtechnology through its automated library initiative. In 2000 the State University launched SUNYConnect, a bold new effort that electronically links all the libraries of the System, creating the largest library collection of any public university in the world (totaling over 18 million volumes). A major part of SUNYConnect is the installation of library management software that will create an Internet-accessible catalog of library materials, allowing searches of all State University library collections. This software also provides a common circulation process enabling students to directly access and borrow materials from any SUNY library and receive them within two days. Significant savings are anticipated from the creation of a common library management system and reduced (unnecessary) duplication in library holdings. The new system will organize and highlight journals and data provided through the State University’s Office of Library and Information Services, and also offer direct access to hundreds of online journals now available at State University libraries. Other projected features of SUNYConnect include: a comprehensive collection of full-text, full-image and multimedia digital publications and services that will be available at any time and from anywhere; a web-based information literacy course; and shared regional storage and preservation facilitiesthat will ease space pressures in individual libraries. Additionally, the University is part of a statewide, comprehensive, coordinated system of higher education resources and distance learning programs, to which all New Yorkers will have access via telecommunications and local libraries. Linking Funding to Academic Quality Steps Toward a Performance-Based Funding Model The University’s new budget model—driven by Rethinking SUNY and implemented in FY1998-99 (see section, A Financial Management Structure to Enhance Academic Quality)—gives campuses more autonomy, while still insisting on an appropriate level of accountability. This model also rewards successful performance in areas such as research productivity and enrollment management, and thus is performance-driven in important ways. One of the long-term directions the University plans to pursue in refining the budget model is a more explicit category of funding that rewards campus achievement of goals relating to academic quality. In 1997, as an offshoot of the budget model planning group, the Provost empanelled an Advisory Task Force on Performance Indicators to develop measures to drive the allocation of merit-based funding that recognize outstanding performance and the achievement of campus goals. This task force conducted extensive deliberations and proposed a series of measures based on analyses of SUNY data sets as well as data from national sources. The State University seeks to recognize outstanding performance in three areas: (1) student achievement (e.g., graduation rates, student evaluations of the quality of academic experience, and transfer student success); (2) faculty achievement (e.g., scholarly productivity in terms of research and publication, and teaching effectiveness); and (3) institutional services and environment (e.g., the quality of campus services and facilities). Relying in large part on the work of this Task Force, the University began a pilot program of performance awards in FY2000-01. Because SUNY views enhancement of academic quality as its top priority, it plans to expand and refine the performance indicator model, relying on recommendations from its campus leaders. In the future, the model will reward improvement as well as current high levels of performance; it will also incorporate more sophisticated means for recognizing scholarship in the humanities and the performing arts. Mission Review Funding A commitment to academic quality has driven the entire concept of Mission Review, including the funding awards made through this initiative. Indeed, one of the foundations of the Mission Review process is that many campuses need additional—and transitional— financial support to achieve some of the goals they set for themselves. Put simply, Mission Review funding is used to support campuses in their efforts to realize the aspirations outlined in their Memoranda of Understanding. In 2000-01, campus submissions for Mission Review funding totaled over $45 million. With $11.5 million in accumulated funds, support was provided to 29 campuses. Proposals were selected on the basis of academic merit, following rigorous review by a broadly representative System Administration committee, using the following criteria: demonstrable impact on academic quality; consistency with core mission; evidence of institutional commitment; extant institutional strength; sustainability of proposed project or initiative; measurability of outcomes/mechanism for accountability; positive extra-institutional effect; and potential for replicability as a “best practice.” Within this larger pool, a sub-pool of $2.5 million was earmarked to bolster doctoral programs by enhancing the competitiveness of Ph.D. student stipends; proposals for this sub-pool also underwent rigorous review, this time by a committee of campus experts (see Appendix, Mission Review Stipend Committee under Advisory Committees). Mission Review awards necessarily entail precise conditions and terms, including the specification of how progress toward achieving project goals will be monitored. Because many campuses requested multi-year funding commitments, some awards were made over a period of three or more years; these campuses will have to achieve specified milestones before subsequent installments of funding are released. The University intends to make annual awards of Mission Review funding, always on a fully competitive basis, to SUNY campuses. Follow-up monitoring and reporting on the effectiveness of these awards will ensure that these investments yield maximum benefit—not the least of which is enabling the supported programs to be recognized as “best practices.” Service to Local Regions, the State, and the Nation Business, industry and Economic Support The economic impact of the State University is vast. Indeed, one might even regard the University as a $6 billion industry with 64 locations around the State. In many instances the State University campus is a region’s largest employer, providing a solid base of employment, educating the citizenry, working to build business and industry, and enriching the quality of life through cultural offerings. In addition, SUNY campuses draw students from outside the community who in turn add to the local economic base. The University also strengthens the business environment in New York via its Small Business Development Centers, through the creation of incubator facilities to foster high-tech industries, and through efforts to transfer the fruits of University research to industry. Small Business Development Center Since its establishment in 1984, the Small Business Development Center (SBDC) has helped create and save over 68,500 jobs in New York State. It has worked one-on-one with 156,000 clients who have, in turn, invested over $1.6 billion in their New York State businesses. Funded in part by the U.S. Small Business Administration and host campuses, the SBDC has 23 regional offices and 21 outreach offices located at the State University, CUNY, and private college campuses. In addition to providing business advice to New Yorkers, the SBDC works in partnership with other government agencies to open up opportunities for New York entrepreneurs. Strategic Partnership for Industrial Resurgence In 1996, the University’s engineering schools formed the Strategic Partnership for Industrial Resurgence (SPIR) to provide a vehicle for delivering advanced technical assistance to foster development of high- tech regions similar to California’s Silicon Valley or North Carolina’s Research Triangle. These regions grew through strong bonds between industry and universities, manifested most powerfully through university engineering schools. SUNY’s engineering schools hope to achieve similar results in New York. Since its inception, more than 2,600 SPIR projects have involved more than 1,000 companies. In 1998 alone, over 3,000 jobs were either retained or created due to 700 SPIR projects. Community College Workforce Development Central to the missions of the State University’s 30 community colleges is their role in workforce development. The Community College Workforce Development Training Grants program, aimed at stimulating economic growth throughout New York, provides funding for such efforts. The goal of the program is to promote and encourage the location and development of businesses in the state, and to create greater employment opportunities for individuals. Between 1999-2001, funding through the State University to 131 employer- approved projects provided job training for more than 12,000 employees. Most of the participating companies are small-to medium-sized businesses, from diverse fields such as manufacturing, building trades, health, e-commerce, service industries, tourism, and the fashion industry, to name a few. Every State University community college has participated in this program and, as a result, in 2000-2001 an estimated 470 jobs were created and 6,000 positions retained. A required match of at least 25% from participating business multiplied the effect of these grants. SUNY will continue to seek support for this program. This pivotal role in workforce development is prominently reflected in the Community College Strategic Plan (see Appendix),which calls for further enhancement of these efforts. Charter Schools The New York State Charter Schools Act of 1998 granted the State University Board of Trustees authority to approve up to 50 new public charter schools. Charter Schools are innovative public schools of choice created by parents, educators, civic leaders and other community leaders, open to all students and designed to improve learning. Operating under a five-year license, or charter, these schools are freed from most of the state laws, rules, and regulations controlling public education. This allows them greater flexibility in determining curriculum, staffing, hours, budgeting, and other features. In re turn for this flexibility, public charter schools must set measurable goals for student achievement or face revocation of their charter. The SUNY Board of Trustees created the Charter Schools Institute to administer its responsibilities under the Charter Schools Act. The Institute oversees the review of applications and monitors the progress of schools that have been granted charters. To date, the Institute has received nearly 160 applications for charters, of which the University Trustees have approved 25. Research Foundation Research conducted at the State University not only contributes new knowledge and understanding, and leads to economic growth, but also frequently addresses significant social problems. Thus, SUNY research is a vehicle for service to the people of New York, the nation, and the world. The Research Foundation of the State University of New York is a private, non-profit educational corporation whose primary responsibility is the administration of externally funded contracts and grants for and on behalf of the University. Since its establishment in 1951, the Research Foundation has facilitated research, education, and public service at SUNY’s state-operated campuses. Consistent with the principles of Rethinking SUNY, the Research Foundation provides the administrative flexibility and expertise to respond quickly to the special demands and needs of sponsored programs. To support campuses effectively, the Foundation is governed by a Board of Directors which includes faculty researchers, campus leaders, and representatives from System Administration, as well as representatives from private business and industry. In 1999-2000, SUNY’s research expenditures for more than 7,500 sponsored programs (funded by governments, corporations, foundations, and other entities) totaled over $440.5 million, an eight percent increase over 1998-99. Projects sponsored by the federal government totaled $243.4 million, or 55 percent of total revenues, bringing substantial federal dollars to New York. Such researchactivity provided more than 16,000 full- and part-time research jobs statewide. The Research Foundation works with SUNY faculty to move discoveries into the marketplace; its technology transfer program protects research findings and helps faculty market new technology and ideas by linking them to business firms. In 1999-2000, gross royalty income on University inventions reached a new high of $16.2 million and the State University was ranked among the top 12 U.S. universities for royalties collected from inventions licensed to industry. The University also reached a record level of patent activity in 1999-2000, with 68 U.S. patents awarded. With a total of more than 500 patented inventions, SUNY ranks among the top ten U.S. research institutions in the number of patents issued annually on inventions and discoveries. SUNY's research efforts also gain strong support from ongoing state initiatives. New York has recently substantially increased its investment in the research infrastructure that will enable its universities to become national leaders in key fields. For example, two incubator programs—the Center for Environmental Science and Technology Management (CESTM) at the University at Albany and the Long Island High Technology Incubator (LIHTI) at the University at Stony Brook— provide important educational resources for training scientists, engineers and researchers in such diverse areas as atmospheric chemistry and artificial intelligence. At the same time, these state-of-the-art facilities give start-up companies access to university libraries, computing support, and other important scientific and technological tools. Promoting research is vital to enhancing the academic quality and stature of the State University, and in increasing the University’s contribution to the economic health of New York State and beyond. As noted previously, the State University intends to increase total sponsored activity to $1 billion per year within the next five years. Through Mission Review, campuses set specific goals for research and these goals are included in the Memoranda of Understanding. To ensure campus success in reaching research goals, the University will continue to provide support for research through its budget process and through initiatives such as Mission Review Funding. The Research Foundation will also play an increasingly important role in supporting the University’s aggressive research goals. Its efforts to establish a stronger SUNY presence in Washington, D.C. will help to maximize campus success in attracting federal grants. Financial Management – A Structure to Enhance Academic Quality The State University has a responsibility to be an efficient and effective stewardof the public resources entrusted to it. Rethinking SUNY was premised upon devolving more fiscal and operational control to campuses. Its guiding principles were increased management flexibility, better realization of System synergies, and reinvestment of savings in support of academic quality. By 2000, several important initiatives begun as an outgrowth of Rethinking SUNY were fully operational, returning significant dividends to the campuses and the System. These initiatives showed results in the areas of budget, residence hall operations, campus-related foundations, general management practices and hospitals, as described below. New Budget Methodology In light of Rethinking SUNY, the University designed and has put in place a new budget methodology for allocating and distributing the funding that supports University operations (see Appendix, State University of New York Budget Allocation Process). Fiscal year 2000-01 marked the final year of a three-year phase-in of the University’s new budgeting process—a process designed to foster campus autonomy, recognize improved performance, and reward campus success in achieving their educational missions. Underpinning development of this performance-based budgeting was the goal of allowing campuses to retain and manage their own fiscal resources. (Conversely, campuses are required to assume greater responsibility for the costs of local decisions.) Key characteristics or objectives of the new methodology are: - The campuses retain all tuition monies and other campus-generated revenues, encouraging entrepreneurial activity; - The method for distributing student-enrollment support has been simplified: instead of categorizing enrollment level and type among 40 categories, enrollments are grouped into a cleaner and more predictable set of 12 categories based on actual and historic data on cost of instruction; - The University matches every dollar of external research funds with 20% of additional funding, thus encouraging further growth in sponsored activity and an overall rise in SUNY’s research stature; - The link between mission and funding has been tightened; - Mission Review-based funds are distributed to enhance academic quality (see Mission Review Funding); - Adjustments for the extraordinary costs of special programs are included; - Campuses in metropolitan NYC receive a funding adjustment reflecting the higher costs they incur; - SUNY continues to recognize and support State- initiated institutes and land grant and forestry activities; - The predictability of funding distributions (within the approved State budget levels) has been increased; and - Perhaps most importantly, a high degree of transparency has been introduced into the process. The State University core instructional budget for 2000-01 was $1,761.8 million. This was an increase of $110 million, or approximately seven percent, from the previous year. Tuition and fee revenue for the state- operated campuses and statutory colleges increased by $18 million in 2000-01, largely due to enrollment increases. Future efforts to continue the refinement of budget methodology will focus, among other matters, on enhanced performance-based funding (see Steps Towards a performance -Based Funding Model) and the distribution of state funds for University-wide programs. All new or improved distribution methodologies will be characterized by predictability, simplicity, accountability, campus involvement in methodology development, and constant emphasis on promoting academic quality. General IFR and Supplemental Tuition Reimbursable Account The State University budget structure includes separate accounts for campus activity that is not included in the core instructional budget, generally referred to as Income Fund Reimbursable or IFR accounts. These accounts were previously charged maintenance and administrative overhead fees, set by System Administration. In an effort to move more fiscal control to the campuses, these overheads, which were previously pooled centrally, are now credited directly to the campuses along with interest earnings on the fund balances. Campuses now set the overhead rates for their IFR programs. Residence Hall Operations SUNY implemented new policies and guidelines for residence hall operations in fiscal year 1997-98, aimed at increasing efficiency by permitting campuses to manage directly more of their financial and program activities. Importantly, the guidelines require student participation in decisions pertaining to residence halls operations. With the new guidelines and policies in place, student demand for on-campus housing and residence hall rehabilitation and construction have all increased dramatically. Approximately $500 million in projects are scheduled over the next five years to meet the students’ needs for safe and comfortable housing. In 1999-2000, residence hall revenue increased $21.8 million, or 12 percent, over the previous year, as a result of increased occupancy and reasonable rate increases of approximately 4 percent overall. Campus-related Foundations Consistent with the need for the University to do effective fund-raising, solicit support from alumni, friends, and other patrons, foundations are assuming a more prominent and central role in the University’s future. Campus-related foundations derive the majority of their revenue from gifts and contributions in support of campus educational activities. In 1999-2000, support for campus-related foundations totaled $179.2 million, a 19 percent increase from the previous year. Total campus-related foundation net assets increased to $545 million, a 13.5 percent increase over the previous year. Of the $106.5 million expended in 1999-2000, about 73 percent supported scholarships, academic programs, and special events on SUNY campuses. The Chancellor has set a specific goal of $1 billion in private fund raising over the next four years and many campuses are in the midst of, or are planning, capital campaigns. A new council of SUNY Chief Advancement Officers has recently been established to share expertise regarding development programs and the Research Foundation has created a unit to help promote the quality and impact of campus-specific development efforts. General Management Practices The State University achieved significant budgetary appropriation and execution authority in the mid 1980s, providing for a level of budgetary flexibility greater than that of other state agencies. Enhanced control over position management was also gained in the early 1990s. However, the University has made a continuing effort to acquire greater authority from external agencies in the execution of its financial and personnel resources and to delegate this authority to the campuses. These efforts can all be traced back to Rethinking SUNY, which called for enhanced management flexibility and devolution of authority to local, campus decision makers. This thrust will continue to be a high priority for the University. Over the past five years, the State University has been able to establish higher thresholds with external control agencies related to the competitive bidding process. As a result of these efforts, SUNY campuses need not acquire competitive bids for purchases below $30,000; must receive three written quotations for purchases between $30,000 and $75,000; and must receive at least five sealed bids for purchases over $75,000. Other state agencies are required to perform a formal competitive process for any purchases over $15,000. The approval of contracts is another area in which the University has been able to obtain greater flexibility. The University is now only required to obtain prior approval from external agencies for contracts valued at over $150,000 (certain exceptions exist). Other agencies must receive prior approvals for contracts at significantly lower amounts. In addition to greater authority from external agencies, policies internal to the University have been modified to give the campuses greater authority. For example, approval by System Administration for certain telecommunication, computer equipment, medical equipment and consulting services was necessary five years ago; campuses now have the authority to make these purchases without System Administration review. Likewise, in the area of human resources, campus presidents now have the authority to provide administrative leaves and additional sick leave to employees, which previously required the Chancellor’s approval. Work in this area is not yet done. The University intends to continue to seek less restrictive limits on the competitive bidding process and on pre - approvals for contracts. Greater authority for the campuses to classify positions and a streamlined process for the creation of new position titles will be pursued with the Department of Civil Service. Within the University itself, there will be continued emphasis on reducing or eliminating cumbersome approval/review processes (e.g., streamlined program review process, described under Academic Program Directions). Hospital Flexibility The University’s hospitals were given additional management authority under legislation enacted in mid 1990s. That legislation sought to address operational concerns arising from the hospitals’ state agency status, environmental changes in health care financing (including deregulation of the health care industry at federal and state levels) and financial difficulties related to the financing of the University’s operating budget. Although the legislation provided what, at the time, was perceived as the necessary authority to address major concerns of the University’s three hospitals, changing market dynamics and unexpected reductions in the funding of graduate medical education offset enacted legislative benefits. The University’s hospitals have remained hampered by their inability to access working capital and capital financing. This, in turn, has limited their ability to take advantage of new business opportunities. Over the last five to ten years, the hospitals have essentially maintained their current market share, with some slight increase in volume attributable to brand recognition. The University’s current legislative agenda seeks to broaden the existing flexibility legislation by addressing issues such as access to capital financing, establishing more realistic purchasing rules, increasing healthcare worker salaries to attract and retain skilled patient care staff, and facilitating the formation of full-service healthcare networks. More generally, the agenda seeks to enhance the ability of SUNY’s hospitals to compete successfully in a rapidly changing market and to continue to provide superb patient care. Operations – An Administrative Structure to Enhance Academic Quality In Rethinking SUNY, the Board of Trustees called for the Chancellor and System officers to examine System Administration and to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the central office. By implementing the recommendations in that plan, the size of the support functions at the State University Plaza was reduced by almost 30 percent in the mid- to late-1990s. As a more recent step in streamlining and improving services and performance, in 2000-01 the State University conducted (with the assistance of IBM’s Education and Consulting Services) a joint planning exercise, entitled “Realigning for Excellence,” for the three entities which make up the State University Plaza (i.e., the Research Foundation, the Construction Fund, and System Administration). Specific attention was paid to business services, human resources, facilities management, telecommunications, and information technology. The immediate challenge was to improve the inter-relationships among these three entities (while retaining their separate corporate status), thereby enhancing their joint effectiveness and improving the quality of services to campuses. A second focus of this effort has been to help all of the entities housed at State University Plaza to use technology more effectively in their operations, including the promotion of e-commerce in dealings with campuses and extra-University constituents. The fundamental thrust of the Realigning for Excellence (RFE) initiative is to add value to the University by structuring central administrative functions in ways that are more supportive of the University, especially the campuses. The University’s senior leadership plans to implement many of the RFE recommendations in the coming months, with particular attention to: - Creating internal councils, organized around core administrative functions, to promote cooperation and communication within the State University Plaza; and - Creating campus advisory committees to work with such internal councils to ensure productive partnerships and collaboration in the development and delivery services. Looking to the future, SUNY’s leadership will—with considerable campus and faculty involvement—continue its strategic planning efforts by crafting new and sharper mission and vision statements for the University and identifying specific actions which should be taken to ensure SUNY’s success. The Memoranda of Understanding that were signed with campuses as part of Mission Review will provide a campus-based and academically oriented foundation for this effort. Conclusion The State University of New York has made tremendous strides since Rethinking SUNY. As called for in that planning document and described in this Master Plan, key efficiencies have been realized and attention has been focused on achieving academic excellence. The Mission Review process represents a significant planning and evaluation effort—unparalleled in SUNY’s history and unrivaled in American higher education—that has defined the University’s academic agenda for the next four years. Memoranda of Understanding will guide planning and policy making for campuses and System alike, and will provide a mechanism for ensuring accountability in the coming years. Service to local regions, the state, and the nation will continue to be a priority for the University. From charter schools to workforce development, from basic research to technology transfer and incubator centers, the State University is committed to using its expertise for the betterment of citizens of New York and beyond. Management flexibility and devolution of authority has freed our campuses from some of the constraints entailed by a state bureaucracy. Along with increased autonomy, campuses have assumed greater accountability for their academic and non-academic decisions. More than ever before, goals and expectations are explicitly stated and successful performance is recognized and rewarded across the University. At its heart, the University is fundamentally about excellence in learning and teaching. SUNY judges itself on the quality of the education that it provides to its students and on how that education transforms and empowers students’ lives. Our faculty and institutions take equally seriously their obligation to push the boundaries of knowledge and human understanding through research and scholarship. Fulfillment of academic goals is how the State University best strengthens and serves New York State. Appendices: - List of Campuses - Mission Review: Recognized by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) as a Best Practice in Higher Education - The Community Colleges of The State University of New York Strategic Plan for 2001-2004 - Report of the Provost's Advisory Task Force on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes (Executive Summary) - New Programs of Study Tentatively Planned for Introduction 2000-2004 Master Plan Amendments 1996-2001 - Memo on 2001 Guidelines for the Submission of Undergraduate Academic Program Proposals - Report of the Provost’s Advisory Task Force on General Education SUNY Pass Rates on the New York State Teacher Certification Examinations 1999-2000 - Provost's Advisory Council on Teacher Education Report and Recommendations (Executive Summary) - A New Vision in Teacher Education: Agenda for Change in SUNY’s Teacher Preparation Programs - State University of New York Budget Allocation Process - Quantitative Information - Capital Facilities - Board of Trustees - System Administration - Advisory Committees List of Campuses University Centers University at Albany University at Binghamton University at Buffalo University at Stony Brook Colleges Comprehensive Arts & Sciences Brockport Buffalo Cortland Empire State College Fredonia Geneseo New Paltz Old Westbury Oneonta Oswego Plattsburgh Potsdam Purchase Specialized Environmental Science and Forestry Farmingdale Institute of Technology at Utica/Rome Maritime Optometry Statutory Ceramics at Alfred University Agriculture/Life Sciences at Cornell University Human Ecology at Cornell University Industrial/Labor Relations at Cornell University Veterinary Medicine at Cornell University Health Science Centers Health Science Center at Brooklyn Health Science Center at Syracuse Colleges of Technology Alfred Canton Cobleskill Delhi Morrisville Adirondack Broome Cayuga Clinton Columbia-Greene Corning Dutchess Erie Fashion Institute of Technology Finger Lakes Fulton-Montgomery Genesee Herkimer County Hudson Valley Jamestown Jefferson Mohawk Valley Monroe Nassau Niagara County North Country Onondaga Orange County Rockland Schenectady County Suffolk County Sullivan County Tompkins Cortland Ulster County Westchester Educational Opportunity Centers Bronx Brooklyn Buffalo Capital District Long Island Manhattan North Bronx Career Counseling and Outreach Center Queens Rochester SUNY College and Career Counseling Center Syracuse Westchester Mission Review: Recognized by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) as a Best Practice in Higher Education At its November 1999 annual meeting, the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) released an Action Agenda entitled, “A Commitment to Students, Community and Society.” The Action Agenda calls for public comprehensive colleges and universities to “…ensure that they remain accessible and affordable, to communicate their vision and their success, and to continue to provide higher education opportunities that will ensure an enlightened and educated citizenry … " In conjunction with communicating this Agenda, AASCU felt it important to recognize the significant progress currently being made in these areas. The Agenda highlighted 100 examples of best practices in four areas: Quality Assurance, Public Engagement, Advocacy and Communications, and Access and Inclusion. Responding to AASCU’s request for submissions, the University was awarded three citations for the following programs/initiatives: Mission Review (Quality Assurance), Campus-Wide Assessment and Institutional Accreditation at Fredonia (Quality Assurance), and the Center for Social Responsibility and Community at Oneonta (Public Engagement). A) Mission Review – cited for its intention to position campuses to compete most successfully for students and to deliver high-quality programs; to enable SUNY institutions to leverage resources; to avoid unnecessary duplication of resources; and to achieve more consensus on the mix and level of teaching, research, and service on each campus. B) SUNY College at Fedonia – cited for combining campus-wide assessment and institutional accreditation. The campus has embarked on an institutional self-study as the accreditation for the Middle States begins. A comprehensive approach to institutionalizing the assessment process will be developed and implemented. C) SUNY College at Oneonta – cited for its Center for Social Responsibility and Community. The Center works to develop a strong sense of social responsibility in undergraduate students through a range of service, volunteer, and philonthropic experiences. The Community Colleges of The State University of New York Strategic Plan for 2001-2004 Introduction The SUNY Community Colleges have completed the development of this five-year Strategic Plan and submits it to its many publics herewith. This re p resents the first strategic plan in the history of the system of community colleges. The planning process began in 1998 when the Association of Presidents of Public Community Colleges (APPCC) and the New York Community College Trustees (NYCCT) commissioned a study on the community colleges from the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS). This study, which recommended the development of a vision and strategic plan for the system of community colleges, became an impetus for undertaking this major planning initiative. The Strategic Plan was developed by the Office of the Vice Chancellor for Community Colleges and involved the collaboration of many constituent groups, including the Chancellor and senior staff, the Advisory Committee to the Vice Chancellor for Community Colleges, the APPCC, the NYCCT, the Faculty Council of Community Colleges, and the Committee on Community Colleges of the SUNY Board of Trustees, as well as several other community college staff committees and other individuals. This document delineates a set of activities designed to guide the growth and development of the SUNY community colleges as a system of colleges over the next five years. The development and adoption of the new Mission and Vision statements for the community colleges preceded the process of development of this plan. These statements are included here. The strategic plan outlines the primary activities that will be undertaken in the next several years to achieve the vision for the community colleges. Implementation of the strategic plan will be a challenging yet most exciting and promising undertaking. Strategic planning is intended to competitively position the organization, and the conditions are ideal for strengthening the community colleges in higher education in New York State. It is about developing strength as a system and improving our capability to respond to state needs, demonstrating our willingness and ability to think out of the box, especially where new types of programs and delivery systems are concerned. In many ways, we are already well positioned to achieve our vision—many of the items proposed in this plan are well underway. I was recently asked how, in addition to everything else we presently do, we would possibly mobilize and find the time and resources to implement our vision. My response is this: first, we must believe our vision is achievable, and most of us genuinely believe it is. Second, it will have commitment, participation and leadership at all levels to operationalize it—including college, system, SUNY and college trustees, state political leadership, community, and business and industry. Third, it will have considerable sustained time and effort on the part of college presidents, faculty and staff, with the support and assistance of system administration, and the recources sufficient to enable it to happen. Our Strategic Plan is dynamic in that it will change and grow as conditions change and our experience evolves. The driving force behind the success of this plan will be the shared belief in and support for the vision. I hope this is merely the beginning of a long tradition of strategic action by the SUNY community colleges as a system. Robert T. Brown Vice Chancellor for Community Colleges September 2001 Mission Statement The SUNY Community Colleges ensure open access to high quality postsecondary education and contribute significantly to the development of an educated citizenryand skilled workforce. They offer comprehensive learning opportunities ranging fromtransfer and career degrees to programs customized to serve specific individual, community, business and economic development needs. All share a dedication to instruction and services that nurtures the academic and personal achievement of individuals with diverse backgrounds and aspirations. Vision Statement The SUNY Community Colleges, individually and as a system, are leaders in higher education in New York State and in the nation. They are highly effective in responding to the educational needs of all people and the local, regional, state and global communities to which they belong. Innovative and flexible learning options, strategies and technologies characterize their array of constantly evolving programs and services in general education, workforce training, community service and economic development. Strategic Goals - Achieve a greater system identity and the capability to act as an effective system, including coordinating and facilitating system-wide activities - Improve local governance and state coordination roles and relationships - Achieve broad-based recognition and promotion of the SUNY Community Colleges - Develop the role of SUNY’s community colleges in statewide and regional workforce and economic development - Ensure responsiveness to statewide needs by expanding the capabilities of a common framework for joint program development and delivery - Ensure adequate resources to support the development and operation of the Community Colleges, including physical facilities and technology, in a manner consistent with the system mission and vision - Develop and recognize the talent of college faculty, staff, presidents, administrators and trustees - Implement and evaluate progress toward achieving the vision for the Community Colleges, and ensure overall performance effectiveness and measurable outcomes Report of the Provost’s Advisory Task Force on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes Executive Summary In Fall 1999, the Provost established an Advisory Task Force on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes as a committee broadly representative of the SUNY community. Membership included faculty, campus academic leadership and professional staff, students, and System Administration staff. The Task Force was charged with the responsibility to: - Examine and discuss the issues involved in implementing undergraduate student learning outcomes assessment today—specifically, in the context of a large and diverse university system such as the State University of New York, and to make recommendations regarding: - A process for assessing student learning outcomes and intellectual growth in General Education and the Major that will provide the faculty and academic leadership with an important and effective way of improving the quality of undergraduate education, and the University with a coherent and meaningful longitudinal data base with which to be accountable to its stakeholders. The Task Force began its work on the SUNY Assessment Initiative in November with a general discussion about the many practical and philosophical issues involved in outcomes assessment, particularly as it affects the State University. Subsequently, it formed a number of working groups to study the issues in greater detail. At every step, the Task Force has endeavored to keep the University community informed, by publishing summaries of its meetings, meeting with groups such as the University Faculty Senate, the Faculty Council of Community Colleges, academic vice presidents, vice presidents for student affairs, and the Provost’s Advisory Council on General Education, and sharing its Interim Report with campus presidents and campus communities. It has been the Task Force’s goal to maintain a very transparent and collegial process so as to be able to develop recommendations that will find broad support across the State University. Assessment's Dual Functions: Improvement and Accountability The Task Force believes that assessment serves two complementary functions in higher education today: “Assessment as improvement” and “Assessment as accountability,” and that both of these functions have an appropriate place in the SUNY Assessment Initiative and can strengthen the University’s institutions and the system as a whole. Assessment as Improvement The SUNY Assessment Initiative places foremost emphasis on assessment as a means of improving student learning. Outcomes assessment is based upon the belief that improvement in practices is a healthy aspect of institutional life. A number of colleges and universities across the nation have acted systematically on this belief and, in the process, enhanced their programs, student learning outcomes, and their academic reputation. Assessment of student outcomes is also in the best interests of faculty, who have a great stake in knowing whether or not their teaching efforts are effective in promoting student learning. There is a growing literature on the advantages of the assessment orocess in facilitating communication among faculty and providing them an opportunity to collaborate regarding the intended outcomes of their curricular programs. Assessment as Accountability As a publicly supported institution, SUNY has a responsibility to demonstrate to its stakeholders that it is fulfilling its mission. These stakeholders include: The Board of Trustees, College Council members and the Boards of Trustees of Community Colleges, executive and legislative officials, students and their p a rents, the public, employers and the communities served by campuses, and accrediting and regulatory bodies. The Task Force’s recognition of these two functions of assessment is directly reflected in the following recommendations: - The SUNY Assessment Initiative should place foremost emphasis on assessment as a means of improving academic programs, pedagogy, and student learning. - The SUNY Assessment Initiative should consist of both campus-based and University-wide strategies, with campus-based assessment focused primarily on program improvement and University-wide assessment used primarily to serve accountability and advocacy functions. The State University, largest in the nation, is also one of the most diverse, consisting of 64 campuses that have unique missions and which have operated effectively over the years according to their own governance and curriculum processes. Just as campuses have been allowed to implement the SUNY General Education requirement in ways that are consistent with their own structures and procedures, so must they be given flexibility to assess their programs “in accord with their own characteristics.” The Task Force therefore recommends: - The SUNY Assessment Initiative must respect the diversity that exists among SUNY institutions, especially their unique missions. - All activities carried out as a part of the SUNY Assessment Initiative should incorporate and respect existing governance and curriculum structures and processes. Individual campuses and programs cannot be expected to implement comprehensive and effective campus-based assessment of General Education and the Major without new funding set aside for that purpose. A paramount responsibility for System Administration is to work assiduously with the campuses and the Trustees to guarantee that assessment efforts receive adequate resources, staff assistance, and funding on a sustained basis. Further, the SUNY Assessment Initiative provides System Administration with an invaluable opportunity to use assessment information to inform the teaching and learning process, highlighting the various campus-based assessment approaches so that communication across campuses is enhanced and faculty from different institutions can learn from each other. The Task Force therefore recommends: - SUNY System Administration should make a commitment to providing adequate resources on a sustained basis so that campuses are able to develop and implement effective modes of assessment of student learning outcomes. - Individual campuses should support assessment efforts by making assessment-related funding needs a priority in their budgets. - SUNY System Administration should assume responsibility for coordinating and facilitating assessment efforts across the 64 campuses and should provide multiple forums for the purpose of highlighting and publicizing best assessment practices. - SUNY System Administration should commit itself to the provision of databases that are reliable, coordinated, and available to appropriate persons. Campus-Based Assessment of General Education Each campus is responsible for determining the particular structure and content of its campus-based General Education assessment plan, following existing governance and curriculum processes. Similarly, individual campuses should have autonomy in determining how to disseminate the results of their campus- based General Education assessment program to their own communities. Some external review of assessment plans is desirable, preferably by faculty, administrators, and System Administration representatives who have a good working knowledge of assessment. It is also desirable that there be some uniformity among campuses in the format of the assessment plans as well as in the reporting of assessment results. Toward these ends, the Task Force makes the following recommendations: - Campus-based assessment plans of General Education should be developed and implemented primarily by faculty members who teach in the program, with the assistance of professional staff and students when appropriate, and submitted to and approved by the campus’s Faculty Senate or Council. - Campus General Education assessment plans should be approved and reviewed regularly by a group consisting of University faculty, campus chief academic officers, and representatives from System Administration. This General Education Assessment Review (GEAR) group should be formed jointly by University Faculty Senate and Community College Faculty Council leadership and System Administration, and should include individuals who are knowledgeable about assessment. - Campuses should use a standardized format, developed jointly by the campuses and System Administration, in reporting the results of their General Education assessment program to System Administration. Reported results should indicate the percentage of students exceeding, meeting, approaching, and not meeting the delineated learning outcomes. University-wide Assessment of General Education SUNY University-wide assessment is governed by the assumption that academic assessment is primarily a campus -based responsibility of the faculty as they conduct the educational programs of their institutions and participate significantly in the initiation, development and implementation of those educational programs. Although campus-based assessment should be the focus of the SUNY Assessment Initiative, the Task Force believes that there is an appropriate place for University-wide assessment as well. Information derived from University-wide assessment will be used primarily by System Administration for accountability purposes—enabling it to report on the status of General Education outcomes in SUNY as a whole—and to advocate on behalf of the University. The Task Force specifically recommends: - University-wide assessment should periodically assess, using common measures, a representative sample of students from across SUNY in order to gauge students’ attainment in the learning outcomes of the Implementation Guidelines in Mathematics, Basic Communication, Critical Thinking (Reasoning), Information Management, and the understanding of the methods scientists and social scientists use to explore phenomena. - A University-wide Assessment Implementation Working Group, comprised of faculty and students from across SUNY, with representatives from System Administration, should be formed to develop the actual assessment instrument(s) to be used, as well as the procedures to be followed. - University-wide assessment should utilize a variety of evaluation approaches, all of which are demonstrated to be valid and reliable. - Campuses should have sufficient time to develop and implement their own assessment programs before implementation of University-wide assessment proceeds. Assessment of the Major Each campus is responsible for overseeing the process through which the assessment of academic major programs takes place, following existing curriculum and governance procedures. It is desirable that individual campuses establish a uniform format for programs to follow in developing their assessment plans, that program assessment take place on a regular basis, and that there be external review of programs when practicable. The Task Force does not recommend University-wide assessment of academic majors. Instead, the role of System Administration should focus on revising extant program review policies and on monitoring the frequency with which program review takes place across the University. Toward these ends, the Task Force makes the following recommendations: - Campuses and programs should have maximum autonomy in the development of assessment plans for academic majors, and should include the input of faculty, professional staff, and students. - Assessment of academic programs should take place every five to seven years, should incorporate external review whenever feasible, and should include delineation of the programmatic goals and objectives for the major with an emphasis on the programmatic activities that are intended to accomplish these goals and objectives and the learning outcomes students should demonstrate as they progress through the program to completion, as well as a strategy for measuring change in students’ knowledge and skills over time. - Academic programs should use a standardized format and consistent procedures developed by their campus in developing and implementing their assessment plans, although latitude should be granted for programs also undergoing accreditation or certification. - Each year institutions should submit a report to System Administration providing a summary of the academic programs that underwent review during that year and the major findings, as well as a listing of programs scheduled for review during the next academic year. - Recommendations for assessing student learning outcomes in the Major should be carried out within the broader framework of the University Faculty Senate’s Guide for the Evaluation of Undergraduate Academic Programs. - System Administration should renew its efforts to track campus-based assessment and program review efforts. Utilization and Reporting of Assessment Results Assessment is not evaluation, nor is it competition. Assessment is a process, first and foremost, for understanding and improving student learning. Further, a true “culture of assessment” requires that assessment results—for campus-based assessment of General Education and the Major, and forUniversity-wide assessment—be shared only with appropriate stakeholders.The Task Force therefore makes the following recommendations with respect to the utilization and reporting of assessment data gathered as part of the SUNY Assessment Initiative: - System Administration should only report data gathered through University-wide assessment for accountability purposes after adequate reliability and validity estimates of the measures being used are demonstrated. - Stringent guidelines should be developed and adhered to in order to ensure that confidentiality of assessment data is maintained. - Assessment results should never be used to punish, publicly compare, or embarrass students, faculty, courses, programs, departments, or institutions either individually or collectively, or to make public comparisons among groups of students based on gender, race, ethnicity, or other demographic factors. - System Administration should publicly disseminate assessment data only through aggregate reporting for SUNY as a whole, or by sector. - While individual programs are free to use their own assessment results in ways they see fit, individual campuses should publicly disseminate assessment data only through aggregate reporting for the institution as a whole, or by school or college. Incentives for Engaging in Assessment Activity Just as System Administration and individual campuses must provide adequate support for the actual implementation of effective assessment, they must also convey to faculty and staff across the State University that participation in assessment is worthy of recognition and reward. In this way, assessment is acknowledged as a valuable—and valued— activity. The Task Force therefore recommends: - System Administration should support State-operated/funded institutions with resources for campus-based assessment through Performance Funding, based upon a determination of the extent to which campuses have implemented their assessment plans for General Education and the Major. An alternative incentive process will need to be established for community colleges. - Individual campuses should reward academic programs for assessment activities through their budgeting process to the greatest extent possible and recognize the assessment- related efforts of faculty and professional staff through appropriate personnel processes and incentives. New Programs of Study Tentatively Planned for Introduction 2000-2004 CAMPUS PROGRAM NAME AWARD Albany Nonprofit Management & Leadership Adv. Cert. Albany/ Social Work/Law M.S.W./J.D. Albany Law Urban & Regional Planning/Law M.R.P./J.D. School Binghamton Accounting B.S./M.S. Biological Sciences B.A./M.A. Biomedical Anthropology M.S. Computer Engineering /Electrical Engineering B.S./M.S. Computer Science/Information Science B.S./M.S. Electrical Engineering B.S./M.S. Philosophy, Politics & Law/Philosophy (SPEL) B.A./M.A. Buffalo (Center) Acute Care Nurse Practitioner M.S. Aerospace Engineering /Business Administration B.S./M.B.A. Applied Economics: Information & Internet Economics Adv. Cert. Assistive & Rehabilitative Technology Adv. Cert. Biotechnology B.S. Chemical Engineering /Business Administration B.S./M.B.A. Computational Physics/Physics B.S./M.S. Computational Science Adv. Cert. Computer Science B.S./M.S. Ecology, Evolution & Behavior Adv. Cert. Exercise Science B.S./M.S. Exercise Science/Nutrition B.S./M.S. Geographic Information Science Adv. Cert. Geological Sciences B.S. Geriatric Nurse Practitioner M.S. Industrial Engineering /Business Administration B.s./M.B.A. Interdisciplinary Social Sciences/Social Work B.A./M.S.W. Management Information Systems M.S. Manufacturing & Operations Management M.S. Mechanical Engineering/Business Administration B.S./M.B.A. Media Arts Production M.F.A. Physical Therapy D.P.T. Public Health M.P.H. Temporomandibular Disorders & Orofacial Pain Adv. Cert. Stony Brook American Studies B.A. Biochemistry/Chemistry B.S./M.S. Bioengineering B.E. Chemistry B.S./M.S. Computer Integrated Engineering Adv. Cert. Engineering Chemistry/Chemistry B.S./M.S. EnvironmentalStudies B.A. Health Sciences/Occupational Therapy B.S./M.S. Industrial Management Adv. Cert. Physical Therapy M.S. Physical Therapy D.P.T. Political Science/Public Policy B.A./M.A. Public Policy M.A. Stony Brook/ Applied Mathematics B.S. Farmingdale Applied Mathematics B.S./M.S. Brockport Early Childhood Education B.A. Early Childhood Education B.S. Environmental Science B.S. Buffalo College Applied Economics M.A. Business Administration B.S. Music Education Mus. B. Cortland Childhood Education M.S.T. Musical Theater B.A. Professional Writing B.A. Second Language Education M.S. Ed. Special Education M.S. Ed. Special Education - Childhood/Childhood Education B.S. Fredonia Business Administration: Finance B.S. Business Administration: Management B.S. Business Administration: Management Information Systems B.S. Business Administration: Marketing B.S. Communication: Audio/Radio Production B.S. Communication: Communication Studies B.S. Communication: Media Management B.S. Communication: Public Relations B.S. Communication: TV /D i gi tal Film Production B.S. Early Childhood Education B.S. Ed . Middle Childhood Specialist: Mathematics B.S. Visual Arts: Art History B.A. Visual Arts: Ceramics B.F.A. Visual Arts: Ceramics B.A. Visual Arts: Drawing B.F.A. Visual Arts: Drawing B.A. Visual Arts: Graphic Design B.F.A. Visual Arts: Graphic Design B.A. Visual Arts: Illustration B.F.A. Visual Arts: Illustration B.A. Visual Arts: Painting B.F.A. Visual Arts: Painting B.A. Visual Arts: Photography B.F.A. Visual Arts: Photography B.A. Visual Arts: Sculpture B.A. Visual Arts: Sculpture B.F.A. Geneseo Musical Theater B.A. Oswego Accounting/Public Accounting B.S./M.B.A. Global & International Studies B.A. Public Accounting M.B.A. Plattsburgh Communication Disorders & Sciences Cert. Journalism B.A. Women’s Studies B.A. Potsdam Business Administration B.S. Early Childhood Education B.A. Purchase Arts Management B.F.A. Cinema Studies B.A. Journalism B.A. Brooklyn HSC Molecular & Cell Biology Ph.D. U