UMS strategic plan in context

Throughout higher education, academic leaders are assessing the condition of their institutions. Public policies, student demands, new technologies, rising costs, political pressures, and economic fluctuations are causing – if not forcing – boards of trustees, administrators, and faculty to assess whether they are prepared adequately to provide and sustain high-quality programs and services – now and in the foreseeable future.

The University of Maine System has been working for almost a year to develop a strategic vision for the future. The goal is to enhance the ability of Maine’s public universities to provide our state with high-quality, sustainable and affordable academic programs and services, leading-edge research and scholarship, and public outreach and partnerships.

The vision, and the draft strategic plan that supports it, have four interrelated objectives:

. to increase and sustain academic quality and service to students;

. to strengthen the University System’s role as a state partner and resource for educational betterment and economic development;

. to reduce overall administrative costs and unnecessary duplication of effort;

. to diversify and broaden its revenue base.

In March the Board of Trustees and I issued a draft strategic plan, a lengthy document that presents the conditions, issues, opportunities, and challenges facing the University System, its seven institutions, and 11 University College

outreach centers.

The draft plan was developed based on a planning model that 1) allows the trustees and me to use our statutory authority and responsibility to develop a proposed vision and structure for university education in Maine; 2) to release the draft plan and seek public feedback on the proposal; and 3) to use that feedback to revise and refine the plan in advance of full board discussion and action, after which an implementation-planning phase would begin.

We recently completed the second stage of our model process – a three-month-long public comment period, during which we gathered oral and written comments from hundreds of individuals through public forums, group meetings, and correspondence. The trustees and I believe that the model we chose to follow is working, and in the end will produce the desired results.

As readers of this newspaper may have noticed, some members of our own university community have expressed disagreement with elements of our draft plan as well as the process we chose to develop it. Disagreement is to be expected, especially with a proposal that engenders a variety of personal, philosophical, and political concerns. We respect the positions taken by those who disagree, and look forward to working with them to effect the changes needed to elevate Maine’s public university to even greater heights.

The responses the trustees and I have received to certain specifics of the draft plan and the process by which we developed it are remarkably similar to those currently facing Dr. John Hegarty, the internationally renowned academic leader of Ireland’s Trinity College of Dublin. In a recent newspaper article, Hegarty reportedly has “unleashed a storm of protests” for what the news report described as Hegarty’s ambitious restructuring plans, which are being pursued despite the appearance of strength within Trinity’s academic and research enterprises.

Under Hegarty’s plan, Trinity would reduce and consolidate administration, prioritize financial resources, create greater collaboration and cooperation among academic departments and disciplines, and diversify its financial base in response to recent cuts in government subsidy.

“This is about preparing ourselves for future challenges,” Hegarty told The Irish Times. “This is not change for change’s sake. This is what we need to do so that we can position ourselves for the change that is coming in any case from government and other outside parties.

“The challenge is to allow others to force this change or to introduce it in a controlled manner, through which [Trinity] itself can dictate things,” Hegarty explained.

The same argument is true in Maine. Though our public universities and newly renamed community colleges are experiencing record-high enrollments, the economic and community needs of our state demand higher levels of educational attainment. Maine cannot survive, much less prosper, if the educational attainment levels of our adult population remain well below what businesses, industries, and entrepreneurs need to locate, stay, and succeed in our state. If those of us within the university system don’t use our experience, judgment, and statutory authority to manage and position our institutions for future success and service, other interests will attempt to do so.

Over the next several weeks, the trustees and I will continue to evaluate the feedback to the draft plan we received during the public comment period. No doubt some changes to the draft plan will be made; several good ideas and alternatives have been offered and will likely be adopted. We will continue listening to stakeholders and constituents, including the 28 faculty members from across the University System scheduled to attend a day and a half-long work session on the draft plan at the end of July.

We intend to complete our review and assessment of public comment by late August. By Sept. 7 we will have finished developing and revising the plan and will have shared it with the full Board of Trustees and the public. We expect the board to act on the revised plan when it holds its next board meeting on Sept. 20.

With the board’s approval, we would proceed with developing – with the help of faculty, employees, and others – the specific details necessary for an implementation plan. The actual implementation process would begin sometime in early 2005, after I have presented the plan to the Legislature.

In Maine, as in other states and countries, higher education cannot succeed by adhering to the status quo. If Trinity College, celebrating its 412th year, recognizes its challenges and its need for institutional change, so too can this system, born only 36 years ago. More than ever, Maine must be able to depend on its universities as a primary catalyst for the future.

The University of Maine System’s influence over the state’s educational and economic climate is as significant as any other single entity in the state. Its level of quality, accessibility, efficiency and success are essential to Maine’s hopes and aspirations. The trustees and I are confident that the revised plan we develop and approve will, over time, satisfy those expectations.

Joseph W. Westphal of Bangor is chancellor of the University of Maine System. Details of the draft strategic plan and feedback can be found at www.maine.edu