Academic Senate Update

1
Academic Senate Update

• Academic Prioritization Recovery Planning
  CommitteeCal Poly PomonaFebruary 14, 2007

2
Outline

• Committee Charge
• Membership
• SPPC Committee Formation
• Timeline
• Environmental Scan
• Data Collection Analysis
• Types of Recommendations
• Future Steps

3
PRPC Charge - 1

• Identify all academic and nonacademic programs
  within Academic Affairs.
• Identify any commonalities among the programs for
  the purpose of grouping the programs.
• Set up the common criteria for each group of
  programs by which each program will be examined
  for recommending increased support, decrease
  support, restructuring, or discontinuing.

4
PRPC Charge - 2

• Collect quantitative and qualitative data from
  various sources such as colleges, schools,
  departments, or institutional research, which
  could support such recommendations.
• Analyze data based on the criteria developed by
  the committee and propose recommendations.
• Report findings to the University President and
  the Academic Senate.

5
Members

• Dr. Phillip R. Rosenkrantz (Chair) - Industrial
  Manuf. Engineering
• Prof. Kip A. Dickson (Vice Chair) - Architecture
• Dr. Nancy Prince-Cohen (Secretary) - Education
• Dr. Liliane M. Fucaloro - English Foreign
  Languages
• Dr. Tomás D. Morales - Provost Vice President
  of Academic Affairs
• Dr. Barbara J. Way - Dean, CLASS
• Ms. Marian Sherman - Program Coordinator, Faculty
  Center for Professional Development
• Ms. Stevi Sterns ASI Representative

6
Support Programs Prioritization Committee (SPPC)

• Two members from each division
• Academic Affairs members are Don Straney and Don
  Hoyt
• SPPC has adopted the same basic criteria created
  by the PRPC. Will revise indicators.
• President Ortiz has asked the SPPC to have
  recommendations by the end of Summer Quarter
• Merging of recommendations by combined trustee
  committee

7
Timeline of PRPC Activities

• Development Phase Su 2005 W 2006
• Data Collection Phase S 2006 Su 2006
• Analysis Phase F 2007, ongoing
• Analysis
• Recommendations
• Continuous Improvement Phase

8
Environmental Scan

• RFP to update our environmental scan
• Use by both prioritization committees, VPs,
  Deans, IRAP, WASC committees, and anyone else who
  may need the information.

9
Data Collection and Analysis

• 3000 pages of data have been collected.
• Rich data set available for use by the entire
  campus
• 13 criteria scored and evaluated. Each criterion
  discussed and evaluated individually.
• 3 using quantitative data
• 1 using a combination of quantitative and
  qualitative data
• 9 using qualitative data (narratives)

10
Data Collection and Analysis

• Template information being used regularly by the
  Office of the Provost and other committees.
• The Office of Academic Resources
• The WASC Capacity and Preparatory Review
  Committee
• The Office of Research and Graduate Studies

11
Types of Recommendations

• Enhanced funding
• Status quo
• Decreased funding
• Merging with another program/department
• Discontinuance

12
Ongoing Process

• In the process of
• Evaluating each program holistically
• Examining academic affairs as a whole
• Will consult with colleges for clarification as
  needed throughout the process