become so focused on following a plan that they become blind to changing circumstances and fail to make important adjustments. This subcommittee believes that, for this reason, strategic planning should be ongoing and the document itself, a living one. Notwithstanding this, the subcommittee also recognizes that the process of ongoing assessment of the plan and changes to it may be characterized by some as capricious and arbitrary; perhaps even disingenuous.
An example of how a strategic plan must always be a work in progress and adaptable to new initiatives and needs occurred with the most recent strategic plan. Originally developed in 2004, the plan did not include Strategy Nine (regarding the reactivation of a formal alumni association). This major strategy towards growing and strengthening the University, and its attendant resources, was not added until 2006.
Comment 8: Comments from the Division of Science and Mathematics
DIVISION OF SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS RESPONSE TO STRATEGIC PLAN
The Division of Science and Mathematics is providing a unified response to the documents presented outlining the strategic plan developed for the campus community. The comments below represent the major issues raised upon reading the initiatives discussed in the plan. Specific division faculty members are also contributing individual comments that fall outside the purview of the concerns expressed herein in response to the plan.
1. A major concern of the division is the lack of any mention at all of building an endowment to allow the university to withstand hard times that may occur in the future. The number of high school graduates in the state is declining and the very nature of education is likely to change significantly in the near future as computing technology fosters major innovations in the delivery of education to students. An endowment is necessary to give the university the capital to implement needed changes to meet future demands.
2. The strategic plan offers no real vision for the future. It consists mainly of several tactical maneuvers to be applied in the short term but doesn’t really look ahead to the changing educational landscape, with increased emphasis on distance learning and the competition from for-profit institutions. There is no mention of any new educational initiatives. Thus there is no actual strategy in the strategic plan.
3. In addition to their normal duties of teaching, grading, advising, and university service, RU faculty are facing increasing demands on their time as new duties, such as assessment and the incorporation of the EU into a unified campus, come into being. The strategic plan as presented offers no plan to benchmark UIU RU faculty responsibilities by comparing them to faculty responsibilities at comparable institutions. In fact, the plan offers no support for faculty at all. The Seamless Movement and the Curriculum