This letter was during a budget crisis, a time when OSU was more interested in measuring students as widgets, and our leadership was faced with revitalizing the vision for "OSU."
Letter to Tim White- Thank you for all your efforts. I wish to offer my time and expertise with the campus-wide redesign process. My seven years with The SMILE Program, involvement with outreach statewide, and my experiences working with each academic college through their students and faculty, has given me a unique perspective on the role of connecting academic experience with community and outreach.
I'm concerned that we have translated “supporting resident undergraduate education” into “classroom instruction” as the overarching mission of the university. In developing the mission and metrics we may be missing the role of developing that undergraduate population, building a cohort with the necessary attributes to succeed at OSU, who will persist and attain, requires efforts beyond the classroom experience. Our academic efforts require internships, service learning, involvement in community and outreach, involvement in research and projects, all working to create a graduate that has both the content competencies, skills and experience to move out and be a successful graduate.
I'm very concerned that as we measure these efforts those that are "easiest" to define and measure will inherently take precedence over the more difficult and perhaps more powerful. For example, if we are striving to build a more diverse population and we must look systemically at the variety of barriers each student will experience and our efforts may play out over many years. I have a letter from a white pre-med., 3.96 GPA, who says one of the most important experiences of her undergraduate career was teaching Hispanic and Native American fourth and fifth grade students at our camp. She told me that she was surprised how smart and motivated they were studying field ecology. When she is a doctor she will treat patients differently based on this transformative experience. She now sees these students as “college material” and will work accordingly. Her experience is exemplary of SMILE and the mission of OSU.
How do we measure this? What's the metric? Is this strategic?
Unless we look at a holistic model for academic skills and experience we miss these transformative experiences, the involvement that keep students in school, helps them to make informed personal choices about steps in their careers, the kinds of experiences that stay with them when they reflect on their time at OSU. There is a current disconnect between these elements of student’s academic preparation. For example volunteering with SMILE is required as part of the Public Health MAT experience through our HS Challenge. Why should engineering students get involved with our engineering challenge middle schoolers if it’s not part of their program. What about the role faculty play in creating these experiences for students? Many faculty wish they could be more involved in these community-based projects but feel, rightly so, that this is not valued as part of retention and tenure. They will do the work but only at the expense of their careers-this is a foolish calculation.
So, if the goal is to best support a high quality students experience, to create the best graduates well prepared to pursue the career of choice, why don't we better define the overarching academic experiences for students and involve faculty in this effort? It is clear that if the goal is to grow impact then we must think outside the constraints of defining the undergraduate experience as classroom contact.
The comment has been made that while SMILE is highly effective at welcoming students into a family of learners, at creating a vivid vision for a future that includes academics, we may be creating false expectations for college life and what will be important once they arrive here.
We focus on a community of learners in a challenging and yet inviting world, an idealized view of academics. The view of people as life-long learners working and striving for excellence, working towards a common set of goals. Is this the academic experience the redesign envisioned? Have they gone only the first step or they even on a path to consider a model based on experience and success or are we only rearranging the deck chairs?
It seems to me that a coherent set of overarching goals should drive all efforts and that we should avoid the competitive metrics model. We should back off pitting one academic area against another. How can you define a common vision and strive towards these goals if we define a model that ultimately looks just like what we have now, with those deans and division heads that are best at protecting their turf in control of all academics and budgets. Putting a college into a division with a couple of other groups doesn’t mean anything unless there’s leadership to define a set of goals integrated into the mission of that group.
A truly different way to define the roles would be to look at overarching goals of undergraduate experience, define the elements and competencies more campus-wide, engage faculty in providing these experiences to include classroom instruction, service learning, research, outreach, creating an inviting campus climate, learning teams, while defining "student success" as the metric for campus-wide success.
We could involve a variety of groups, students, recent graduates, faulty, business and community leaders, in defining student success. We can then more tightly couple this metric to pre-college, post graduation, graduate and professional school enrollment and give us the chance to get more impact for effort on many facets.
Colleges would have a role in providing content competencies but also in providing faculty that are involved in the overarching university-wide goals as well. Where a coherent set of standards and goals exist for the undergraduate experience in which all efforts strive towards create a successful college graduate.
When I worked for a general contractor we had a designer who said, "If I can draw it, you should be able to build it." When they drew something with no supports we would laugh about hiring the "sky hook", a helicopter that would fly over the house in perpetuity. I also liked your comment about it "smelling right" although I guess we are all downwind of somebody and we can always point fingers.
So, on the macro scale I see a current plan hasn’t evolved enough to justify that effort that looks good on paper but doesn't set us on to a 5-6 years time course to redefine the undergraduate experience university-wide. On the micro scale I see a variety of ill-defined metrics that could mean most anything and leave me wondering if I'm essential and strategic enough to continue to be an integral part of OSU's mission.
So there’s my bias and resume. I would very much like to be involved in the process, as I strongly believe in the need to make real changes and I see a great need to think about solving the problems at hand over a much longer term that just next year. Otherwise we should just take our collective lumps, hunker down and ride this out as we all know that, “This too shall pass.”
Thanks again and take care.
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Larry Roper Letter-On SMILE's Impact
This letter tried to sum up what I thought SMILE members gained that helped them peruse their academic goals more successfully that other students from their cultures and communities--some good thoughts.
Dec. 2nd, 2001
Larry Roper
Vice Provost for Student Affairs
Greetings:
I’m glad I ran into you. Thank you for inviting me to the meeting for students services as much of my concerns are addressed by a vision of the “academic experience” as including much more than classroom contact with instructors. I’m sorry my schedule on Monday was already full but here are a few thoughts.
I’ve thought about the process of defining what a student needs, the attributes for a successful student, and the services we need to provide. A couple of thoughts come to mind related to our work to better define want SMILE does for students as we prepare them to create a vivid vision for an academic future.
As you may know, SMILE students seem to be persisting and attaining at a higher rate than their cohort. We are curious as to why; what attributes and assets do these students have that help them succeed. The potential list is large, from academic support to family support; but something seems to be helping our students over the barriers and challenges to their persistence and attainment. We would like to know if this is something that we can distill and use to better serve all students.
Here are a few thoughts about student experience in a system similar to one we are using to helps identify those essential attributes.
Foundational to college enrollment
Precollege community, better advising, family support, purpose to K-12 experience
Assets: basic needs, income, safety, transportation, employment
Attributes: prior skills, academic success, sense of self-efficacy, community and/or family support, sense of agency
Entrance
Transition to college, first generation and family issues, help to be in two worlds, translating one experience into another
Assets: above plus financial aid, housing, orientation, programs to overcome external barriers to access, advising, registration
Attributes: academically ready, both long and short-term goals, vision for progress of academic success, sense of belonging
College experience
A community of life long learners, with a place and purpose, welcoming each students as a valued member, bridge to the outer world
Assets: memberships supported, sense of belonging to community, leisure activities, academic problem-solving, tutoring and advising, plugged into a variety of information sources
Attributes: resilient, aware of services, secure, awareness of internal barriers to success, growing sense of power and purpose, responsible for creating the community for others
Developing “Metrics”
Membership
Academic
So just a few random thoughts. Please let us know how and where can be best involved.
Sincerely,
Ryan Collay-Programming and Evaluation Coordinator, The SMILE Program
Dec. 2nd, 2001
Larry Roper
Vice Provost for Student Affairs
Greetings:
I’m glad I ran into you. Thank you for inviting me to the meeting for students services as much of my concerns are addressed by a vision of the “academic experience” as including much more than classroom contact with instructors. I’m sorry my schedule on Monday was already full but here are a few thoughts.
I’ve thought about the process of defining what a student needs, the attributes for a successful student, and the services we need to provide. A couple of thoughts come to mind related to our work to better define want SMILE does for students as we prepare them to create a vivid vision for an academic future.
As you may know, SMILE students seem to be persisting and attaining at a higher rate than their cohort. We are curious as to why; what attributes and assets do these students have that help them succeed. The potential list is large, from academic support to family support; but something seems to be helping our students over the barriers and challenges to their persistence and attainment. We would like to know if this is something that we can distill and use to better serve all students.
Here are a few thoughts about student experience in a system similar to one we are using to helps identify those essential attributes.
Foundational to college enrollment
Precollege community, better advising, family support, purpose to K-12 experience
Assets: basic needs, income, safety, transportation, employment
Attributes: prior skills, academic success, sense of self-efficacy, community and/or family support, sense of agency
Entrance
Transition to college, first generation and family issues, help to be in two worlds, translating one experience into another
Assets: above plus financial aid, housing, orientation, programs to overcome external barriers to access, advising, registration
Attributes: academically ready, both long and short-term goals, vision for progress of academic success, sense of belonging
College experience
A community of life long learners, with a place and purpose, welcoming each students as a valued member, bridge to the outer world
Assets: memberships supported, sense of belonging to community, leisure activities, academic problem-solving, tutoring and advising, plugged into a variety of information sources
Attributes: resilient, aware of services, secure, awareness of internal barriers to success, growing sense of power and purpose, responsible for creating the community for others
Developing “Metrics”
- Access
- Physical
- Emotional
- Explore barriers to access
- Programs to help overcome barriers
Membership
- Rules of memberships transparent
- Recruiting of members part of program
- A variety of communities serving students
- Memberships doesn’t imply “sameness”
- Overcome external barriers to access
Academic
- Sense of purpose and motivation for program
- Involvement of students in academic climate
- Mission to create “real world experiences”
- Attributes for success in college and beyond
- Overcome internal barriers to access
So just a few random thoughts. Please let us know how and where can be best involved.
Sincerely,
Ryan Collay-Programming and Evaluation Coordinator, The SMILE Program
OSU Strategic Vision-2007
OSU-2007: Strategic Vision -- (this is a process that started in 2002 to create a future vision for OSU.)
The current version of the 2007 plan is at http://oregonstate.edu/leadership/strategicplan/goals.html
The University aspires to have positive and measurable impacts on the civic, economic, environmental, and social foundation of society - particularly for the major issues that are important to Oregon in its global context - and as such be recognized for excellence as a 21st-Century land, sea and space-grant university.
Fostering areas of excellence enables the vision, including attracting and retaining top faculty, staff and students, building an environment that embraces diversity and a global perspective, and configuring for efficiency and effectiveness of operations in the context of a changing and competitive environment.
Consequently, the University will:
1. Provide high quality disciplinary, professional, and interdisciplinary programs in which stakeholder constituents, including students and various 'publics', are meaningfully engaged.
2. Accelerate the development of excellence in five thematic areas: arts, sciences, and education; atmosphere, earth, and ocean systems; biosciences and health; engineering, business and technology; and natural resources. *
3. Attract and retain students of the highest quality and potential, and be recognized for excellence in providing a nurturing, challenging, and supportive environment for the student experience.
4. Attract and retain excellent faculty and staff, and foster a supportive environment for personal and professional growth, contribution, and satisfaction.
5. Increase recognition for an international and global perspective, and for providing such opportunities to faculty, staff, and students.
6. Advance diversity as a core educational value and to foster an environment that welcomes inclusiveness.
7. Provide robust information and communication systems that enable first-rate instructional, research, outreach, and administrative/business practices.
8. Optimally configure and manage academic and administrative units to capitalize on new opportunities and be maximally cost-effective.
9. Fully implement a coherent, visible and sustainable budget process, and provide a resource management practice that optimizes the generation and allocation of resources to core functions of the university, thereby advancing the strategic vision.
10. Engage university, OUS, state and private efforts to invest in facilities and people that enable first-rate instructional, research, and outreach programs.
11. Establish appropriate metrics to benchmark and set targets to measure progress toward our strategic vision.
* Five thematic areas:
* Arts, sciences, and education - core to the excellence of all educational programs; provides a foundation for the respective disciplinary teaching, research, scholarship, and outreach programs
* Atmosphere, earth, and ocean systems--understand and predict the long-term changes in the ocean, climate and terrestrial ecosystems, particularly of Oregon and the Pacific Northwest; improve predictive capacity for environmental hazards and change; use best available science to inform local, state, and national economic, environmental and social policy and practice
* Biosciences and health--develop and apply new technologies, strategies, products and policies to protect and improve the health of people, families, and communities, animals, and natural and human-dominated environments
* Engineering, business, and technology--develop and apply technology and entrepreneurial skills to drive Oregon's economy by improving and expanding current businesses, creating new businesses, and contributing to high quality life throughout the state
* Natural resources--improve the productivity, economic viability, and conservation of agricultural, forest, and marine resources, while concurrently improving environmental quality
The current version of the 2007 plan is at http://oregonstate.edu/leadership/strategicplan/goals.html
The University aspires to have positive and measurable impacts on the civic, economic, environmental, and social foundation of society - particularly for the major issues that are important to Oregon in its global context - and as such be recognized for excellence as a 21st-Century land, sea and space-grant university.
Fostering areas of excellence enables the vision, including attracting and retaining top faculty, staff and students, building an environment that embraces diversity and a global perspective, and configuring for efficiency and effectiveness of operations in the context of a changing and competitive environment.
Consequently, the University will:
1. Provide high quality disciplinary, professional, and interdisciplinary programs in which stakeholder constituents, including students and various 'publics', are meaningfully engaged.
2. Accelerate the development of excellence in five thematic areas: arts, sciences, and education; atmosphere, earth, and ocean systems; biosciences and health; engineering, business and technology; and natural resources. *
3. Attract and retain students of the highest quality and potential, and be recognized for excellence in providing a nurturing, challenging, and supportive environment for the student experience.
4. Attract and retain excellent faculty and staff, and foster a supportive environment for personal and professional growth, contribution, and satisfaction.
5. Increase recognition for an international and global perspective, and for providing such opportunities to faculty, staff, and students.
6. Advance diversity as a core educational value and to foster an environment that welcomes inclusiveness.
7. Provide robust information and communication systems that enable first-rate instructional, research, outreach, and administrative/business practices.
8. Optimally configure and manage academic and administrative units to capitalize on new opportunities and be maximally cost-effective.
9. Fully implement a coherent, visible and sustainable budget process, and provide a resource management practice that optimizes the generation and allocation of resources to core functions of the university, thereby advancing the strategic vision.
10. Engage university, OUS, state and private efforts to invest in facilities and people that enable first-rate instructional, research, and outreach programs.
11. Establish appropriate metrics to benchmark and set targets to measure progress toward our strategic vision.
* Five thematic areas:
* Arts, sciences, and education - core to the excellence of all educational programs; provides a foundation for the respective disciplinary teaching, research, scholarship, and outreach programs
* Atmosphere, earth, and ocean systems--understand and predict the long-term changes in the ocean, climate and terrestrial ecosystems, particularly of Oregon and the Pacific Northwest; improve predictive capacity for environmental hazards and change; use best available science to inform local, state, and national economic, environmental and social policy and practice
* Biosciences and health--develop and apply new technologies, strategies, products and policies to protect and improve the health of people, families, and communities, animals, and natural and human-dominated environments
* Engineering, business, and technology--develop and apply technology and entrepreneurial skills to drive Oregon's economy by improving and expanding current businesses, creating new businesses, and contributing to high quality life throughout the state
* Natural resources--improve the productivity, economic viability, and conservation of agricultural, forest, and marine resources, while concurrently improving environmental quality
Thoughts on OSU's "Top Ten Land Grant" vision
The "Top Ten Land Grant” Vision for OSU (these are some ideas I've shared with a variety of folks at OSU.)
There are a great number of conversations around this element of the OSU Mission. Here’s one take on pieces of the puzzle.
First, “Find ways to build collaborations rather than document walls.”
Enter the conversation by making the following a priority at OSU/statewide.
* The role of researchers and research dollars in a broader vision of outreach
* The growing, and long overdue, need develop broader structural support for outreach scholarship at OSU
* The need to look at outreach as scholarship in terms of faculty rewards (not just as service)
* The need for university-wide collaborations akin to, and building on, extension's mission
* The need to build on the statewide mission through strategic, very public initiatives
Using this to enhance our ability to support faculty research efforts, support and train graduate students to participate in outreach, and develop in both scholarly these areas our “Top 10 Land Grant” vision. A key is seeking and targeting funding that builds our expertise on effective outreach, education and service to our community. Thereby, developing the community collaborations and partnerships necessary to reach out to all Oregonians. And to define how we’ll measure reaching the “Top Ten.”
* To articulate the commitment of each member of the faculty and staff to education and outreach
* To link all academic programs to service, to supporting initiatives to service the needs of a community
* To make rewards for faculty, staff, students and organizations part of the statewide outreach mission
* To look to, and build on, these successes as leadership
Strategic initiatives and examples:
Center for Outreach Scholarships in the College of Education
* Fund 2-3 faculty, professional masters as well as PhD assistantships
Take on a targeted problem on an 18-month cycle
* Look at Oregon’s hunger programs through an annual conference on hunger and nutrition
Build on capacity
* Build on supporting community-based solutions as exemplified by Watershed Councils and their support
Change the way we do business
* Define the underserved people/needs in Oregon and serve them
Link to the Legislature and state leaders
* Develop targeted 5 years plans for economic development in rural, formally resource dependent communities
Build Long-term vision for solutions
* Build on expertise to define and service communities outside the traditional service districts, or outreach for county agents
Ryan Collay, The SMILE Program
There are a great number of conversations around this element of the OSU Mission. Here’s one take on pieces of the puzzle.
First, “Find ways to build collaborations rather than document walls.”
Enter the conversation by making the following a priority at OSU/statewide.
* The role of researchers and research dollars in a broader vision of outreach
* The growing, and long overdue, need develop broader structural support for outreach scholarship at OSU
* The need to look at outreach as scholarship in terms of faculty rewards (not just as service)
* The need for university-wide collaborations akin to, and building on, extension's mission
* The need to build on the statewide mission through strategic, very public initiatives
Using this to enhance our ability to support faculty research efforts, support and train graduate students to participate in outreach, and develop in both scholarly these areas our “Top 10 Land Grant” vision. A key is seeking and targeting funding that builds our expertise on effective outreach, education and service to our community. Thereby, developing the community collaborations and partnerships necessary to reach out to all Oregonians. And to define how we’ll measure reaching the “Top Ten.”
* To articulate the commitment of each member of the faculty and staff to education and outreach
* To link all academic programs to service, to supporting initiatives to service the needs of a community
* To make rewards for faculty, staff, students and organizations part of the statewide outreach mission
* To look to, and build on, these successes as leadership
Strategic initiatives and examples:
Center for Outreach Scholarships in the College of Education
* Fund 2-3 faculty, professional masters as well as PhD assistantships
Take on a targeted problem on an 18-month cycle
* Look at Oregon’s hunger programs through an annual conference on hunger and nutrition
Build on capacity
* Build on supporting community-based solutions as exemplified by Watershed Councils and their support
Change the way we do business
* Define the underserved people/needs in Oregon and serve them
Link to the Legislature and state leaders
* Develop targeted 5 years plans for economic development in rural, formally resource dependent communities
Build Long-term vision for solutions
* Build on expertise to define and service communities outside the traditional service districts, or outreach for county agents
Ryan Collay, The SMILE Program
Letter to Dr. Ed Ray, Pres. OSU
I sent this letter early in Pres. Ray's tenure as I knew he had the experience and vision to change the culture of OSU in positive ways. In particualar I was writing to support a Center for Engagement, Outreach.
Dr. Ed Ray, President Friday, December 16, 2005
Oregon State University
Subject: A Center for Outreach and Engagement at OSU
President Ray:
My experience at OSU suggests that many of the conversations on campus are best understood when interlinked. They include student engagement, pre-college programs, outreach and broader impact, P-20, and even elements of measuring faculty productivity. Each of these elements link within the “The Engaged University”. I have looked at other universities and suggest we form a, “Center for Engagement, Outreach” at the university level here at OSU. Here are some of my thoughts about the COE.
We need a central partnering organization to support, highlight and fund a holistic approach to university engagement. A center to enfold programs, academic and service courses, and research-funded outreach into a coherent coalition. A center that connects these programs within the OSU strategic plan and provides the tools to measure and document these successes, and to provide methods for improvement.
As Programming and Evaluation Coordinator for The SMILE Program I work to ensure our efforts are linked to the OSU’s Mission and Strategic Plan. Part of the rationale for our work is OSU’s Land Grant mission. The conversations that enfold outreach, pre-college programs, and funding partnerships focus on how to best fulfill OSU’s pledge to serve the least served.
We recognize that community-based and outreach programs are critical elements in OSU’s strategic plan: supporting engagement of faculty, staff and students, enfolding service as part of academic programs, and supporting federal research grants by providing BIO programs. Support from a COE would provide coherence for supporting these goals. It also provides focus for current and future initiatives.
The COE would:
* Create a campus-wide structure that takes responsibility for defining and instilling a sense of pride for OSU as a Land-Grant University.”
* Link to the Center for Teaching and Learning and their efforts to improve the academic experience and the efficacy of teaching and learning at OSU.
* Form a hub at OSU for academic programs to support outreach scholarship at OSU and provide both a research and assessment home for outreach programming.
* Provide the engaged university three things that are needed to define engagement:
• Makes the case for needs and service in Oregon;
• Links this case to research, programs and academics; and
• Provides the linkage through partnerships and programs, through academics and research, to fulfill this need.
* Define and document:
1) OSU as an “Engaged University”
2) Our vision for becoming a “Top Ten Land Grant”:
3) OSU as a Problem-solving university; and
4) Support and funding for broader impact and outreach campus-wide.
Further questions include:
Models
In reviewing materials, I visited Ohio State’s website—I know you are well acquainted with this campus’s efforts—to find out more about how they have structured partnerships and supported outreach programs as part of a systemic university-wide effort. It is clear in reviewing these materials that student/faculty engagement, Land Grant programming, and statewide priorities link throughout Ohio State’s materials.
This model could guide OSU in building the infrastructure necessary to define and implement a campus-wide commitment to the core values and deliverables inherent in our Land Grant status. The overarching aspect that impresses me from Ohio State is the clear campus-wide statement supporting a Land-Grant University.
I would hope we could play a part of creating the infrastructure. Borrowing from existing successes seems to be an efficient starting point to generate the understanding and buy-in from a core group that builds on existing partnerships and experience.
Thank you so much for your time and commitment. I know this is something near and dear to your heart and expertise. I also believe, based on experience here at OSU, that we work best when we blend our core values into a coherent, elegant solution.
Sincerely,
Ryan Collay, Programming and Evaluation Coordinator
The SMILE Program
Dr. Ed Ray, President Friday, December 16, 2005
Oregon State University
Subject: A Center for Outreach and Engagement at OSU
President Ray:
My experience at OSU suggests that many of the conversations on campus are best understood when interlinked. They include student engagement, pre-college programs, outreach and broader impact, P-20, and even elements of measuring faculty productivity. Each of these elements link within the “The Engaged University”. I have looked at other universities and suggest we form a, “Center for Engagement, Outreach” at the university level here at OSU. Here are some of my thoughts about the COE.
We need a central partnering organization to support, highlight and fund a holistic approach to university engagement. A center to enfold programs, academic and service courses, and research-funded outreach into a coherent coalition. A center that connects these programs within the OSU strategic plan and provides the tools to measure and document these successes, and to provide methods for improvement.
As Programming and Evaluation Coordinator for The SMILE Program I work to ensure our efforts are linked to the OSU’s Mission and Strategic Plan. Part of the rationale for our work is OSU’s Land Grant mission. The conversations that enfold outreach, pre-college programs, and funding partnerships focus on how to best fulfill OSU’s pledge to serve the least served.
We recognize that community-based and outreach programs are critical elements in OSU’s strategic plan: supporting engagement of faculty, staff and students, enfolding service as part of academic programs, and supporting federal research grants by providing BIO programs. Support from a COE would provide coherence for supporting these goals. It also provides focus for current and future initiatives.
The COE would:
* Create a campus-wide structure that takes responsibility for defining and instilling a sense of pride for OSU as a Land-Grant University.”
* Link to the Center for Teaching and Learning and their efforts to improve the academic experience and the efficacy of teaching and learning at OSU.
* Form a hub at OSU for academic programs to support outreach scholarship at OSU and provide both a research and assessment home for outreach programming.
* Provide the engaged university three things that are needed to define engagement:
• Makes the case for needs and service in Oregon;
• Links this case to research, programs and academics; and
• Provides the linkage through partnerships and programs, through academics and research, to fulfill this need.
* Define and document:
1) OSU as an “Engaged University”
2) Our vision for becoming a “Top Ten Land Grant”:
3) OSU as a Problem-solving university; and
4) Support and funding for broader impact and outreach campus-wide.
Further questions include:
- Who is the core group that gets up each morning and says, “What are we doing today to make OSU an Engaged Land Grant University!”
- How we build our Land Grant commitment through student and faculty engagement and assessment of student’s learning?
- How could we better define OSU--“OSU--Problem-solvers” "Get-er-done!"
- How do we make the case for OSU being at the center for engagement in communities, as providing the highest quality education linked to a purpose, and connecting this educational quality to serving and building the communities of Oregon.
Models
In reviewing materials, I visited Ohio State’s website—I know you are well acquainted with this campus’s efforts—to find out more about how they have structured partnerships and supported outreach programs as part of a systemic university-wide effort. It is clear in reviewing these materials that student/faculty engagement, Land Grant programming, and statewide priorities link throughout Ohio State’s materials.
This model could guide OSU in building the infrastructure necessary to define and implement a campus-wide commitment to the core values and deliverables inherent in our Land Grant status. The overarching aspect that impresses me from Ohio State is the clear campus-wide statement supporting a Land-Grant University.
I would hope we could play a part of creating the infrastructure. Borrowing from existing successes seems to be an efficient starting point to generate the understanding and buy-in from a core group that builds on existing partnerships and experience.
Thank you so much for your time and commitment. I know this is something near and dear to your heart and expertise. I also believe, based on experience here at OSU, that we work best when we blend our core values into a coherent, elegant solution.
Sincerely,
Ryan Collay, Programming and Evaluation Coordinator
The SMILE Program
The Heart of OSU
(Larry Roper has supported a variety of community visions and he and I meet one afternoon; these were some thoughts I sent to him after our meeting.)
The “Heart of OSU”, Our Community’s Center
We need to enfold a number of essential functions and goals at OSU into a center, virtual and actual.
These include:
• Outreach
• Service Learning
• Community Involvement
• Campus Climate
• Pre-college, K-16 partnerships
• Recruiting and Retention
These functions and goals share a number of essential characteristics and a central location would foster a network with both programming and academic faculty. These functions are broader than academics, or student affairs, as they extend from the university’s mandate, reaching every aspect of program and policy. We must find a home where these foundational elements are not relegated to too few scattered and isolated efforts.
It is critical to reduce our dependence on student-learners to create these essential functions. For too long, students have had to create programs from whole cloth. If these are essential functions, then we must Pony Up the money and support. Rather than depend on students for administration, we should enfold their energy into existing well-defined and managed structures.
Similarly, we need to support both program and administrative faculty in their effects to serve students. It is essential to understand the issues related to campus climate, to recruiting and retention, and to have these complex and intertwined problems attended to in a structural rather than haphazard way.
Additionally, academic faculty are under increasing pressure to provide substantial outreach as part of their research funding. To have individual faculty responsible for creating and delivering materials that is central to the outreach and Land Grant mission of the university is unrealistic and less than productive. We must seize the opportunity, as well as fulfill our Land Grant mandate, to provide programs, products and materials that have a sustainable impact in all our communities.
Related to this, we must support academic programs whose teaching and research provides the rational and expertise for administering programs through the center. We need to make the center a source for innovation. We need to develop experience in effective program delivery and design, in funding assessment for campus as well and Oregon-wide programs. We need to support faculty and students in their endeavors to develop and deliver on their experience and expertise on how we best foster a supportive campus climate.
There are so many great questions. How do we effect changes in poverty, support underserved communities? How do we connect our research to the fruitful application of this knowledge on campus and in Oregon?
There is tremendous unfulfilled potential to develop outreach scholarship, for example, and to support expertise in community development such as through Sea Grants support of community partnerships. There is much more unlinked expertise and we could build capacity to serve both our university community as well as broader communities.
Building on Successes, Overcoming barriers
OSU has a long history of successes. For many student-run programs we can build administrative support. We can build on successful programs. We have a successful history of outreach to underserved communities in Extension, 4-H and The SMILE Programs. We have a number of campus groups whose mission is improving campus climate. The center offers an opportunity to not just highlight the needs or have conversation, but it could offer a mandate, create a mission. “All who enter here will be treated with dignity.”
However, in too many of these programs, particularly those that depend on student volunteers, we have not established continuity. If we have a program that depends on graduate students to run the programs, we lose experience and momentum each year. For less essential programs perhaps this is acceptable but for programs like Community Life, this is not functional. It takes too long; we lose too much institutional knowledge. If Service Learning is to rise to its potential as an integral aspect of each students experience at OSU, we cannot depend on the random nature of annual interns and volunteers. If we seek to enfold academic program in service we must be more substantial.
We must create long-term institutional support for offices, faculty and programming staff. We must provide a home to involve those wonderful students into an existing, well supported, growing program. We can use their help. We must not depend on their abilities to create something each year from nothing. It is wrong, ineffective and inefficient.
Steps to success
In a number of areas, we have taken baby steps. We each know pieces of the puzzle. A few are aware of some considerable detail but we have not yet created a sense across the campus that we will make a substantial change and a commitment to goal-oriented management. Unless we have the opportunity to step up, we will nibble around the edges. We must first communicate, convince, and demonstrate the need and our commitment. Then we can begin a step-wise process of creating a center for OSU’s commitment to communities.
Step 1
• We need to create a cross-campus administrative unit to bring together these functions.
• Where essential functions are missing or depend on volunteers, temporary workers; we set these areas as priorities to allocate funds.
• We retool the OSU Strategic plan to better integrate efforts with these functions
• We create a students’ group to inform the unit how to best integrate and support ongoing student-run groups
Step 2
• We create through the mission and functional units a plan to seek funding through grants and foundations to support both the overall mission and the work of individual units with the structure.
• We begin design work for a building to house those units without either an academic or an administrative home.
• Through the creation of a strategic plan, we begin delivering services that support outreach, service learning and foster a positive campus climate
Step 3
• We break ground on a sequence of ecologically friendly buildings to house these functions
• We create an endowment to support programs and faculty
• We become a national center of excellence on outreach, service learning and campus climate
*************************************
Ryan Collay, The SMILE program and many others (draft as of Wednesday, October 31, 2007, originally from 2004 or 5)
The “Heart of OSU”, Our Community’s Center
We need to enfold a number of essential functions and goals at OSU into a center, virtual and actual.
These include:
• Outreach
• Service Learning
• Community Involvement
• Campus Climate
• Pre-college, K-16 partnerships
• Recruiting and Retention
These functions and goals share a number of essential characteristics and a central location would foster a network with both programming and academic faculty. These functions are broader than academics, or student affairs, as they extend from the university’s mandate, reaching every aspect of program and policy. We must find a home where these foundational elements are not relegated to too few scattered and isolated efforts.
It is critical to reduce our dependence on student-learners to create these essential functions. For too long, students have had to create programs from whole cloth. If these are essential functions, then we must Pony Up the money and support. Rather than depend on students for administration, we should enfold their energy into existing well-defined and managed structures.
Similarly, we need to support both program and administrative faculty in their effects to serve students. It is essential to understand the issues related to campus climate, to recruiting and retention, and to have these complex and intertwined problems attended to in a structural rather than haphazard way.
Additionally, academic faculty are under increasing pressure to provide substantial outreach as part of their research funding. To have individual faculty responsible for creating and delivering materials that is central to the outreach and Land Grant mission of the university is unrealistic and less than productive. We must seize the opportunity, as well as fulfill our Land Grant mandate, to provide programs, products and materials that have a sustainable impact in all our communities.
Related to this, we must support academic programs whose teaching and research provides the rational and expertise for administering programs through the center. We need to make the center a source for innovation. We need to develop experience in effective program delivery and design, in funding assessment for campus as well and Oregon-wide programs. We need to support faculty and students in their endeavors to develop and deliver on their experience and expertise on how we best foster a supportive campus climate.
There are so many great questions. How do we effect changes in poverty, support underserved communities? How do we connect our research to the fruitful application of this knowledge on campus and in Oregon?
There is tremendous unfulfilled potential to develop outreach scholarship, for example, and to support expertise in community development such as through Sea Grants support of community partnerships. There is much more unlinked expertise and we could build capacity to serve both our university community as well as broader communities.
Building on Successes, Overcoming barriers
OSU has a long history of successes. For many student-run programs we can build administrative support. We can build on successful programs. We have a successful history of outreach to underserved communities in Extension, 4-H and The SMILE Programs. We have a number of campus groups whose mission is improving campus climate. The center offers an opportunity to not just highlight the needs or have conversation, but it could offer a mandate, create a mission. “All who enter here will be treated with dignity.”
However, in too many of these programs, particularly those that depend on student volunteers, we have not established continuity. If we have a program that depends on graduate students to run the programs, we lose experience and momentum each year. For less essential programs perhaps this is acceptable but for programs like Community Life, this is not functional. It takes too long; we lose too much institutional knowledge. If Service Learning is to rise to its potential as an integral aspect of each students experience at OSU, we cannot depend on the random nature of annual interns and volunteers. If we seek to enfold academic program in service we must be more substantial.
We must create long-term institutional support for offices, faculty and programming staff. We must provide a home to involve those wonderful students into an existing, well supported, growing program. We can use their help. We must not depend on their abilities to create something each year from nothing. It is wrong, ineffective and inefficient.
Steps to success
In a number of areas, we have taken baby steps. We each know pieces of the puzzle. A few are aware of some considerable detail but we have not yet created a sense across the campus that we will make a substantial change and a commitment to goal-oriented management. Unless we have the opportunity to step up, we will nibble around the edges. We must first communicate, convince, and demonstrate the need and our commitment. Then we can begin a step-wise process of creating a center for OSU’s commitment to communities.
Step 1
• We need to create a cross-campus administrative unit to bring together these functions.
• Where essential functions are missing or depend on volunteers, temporary workers; we set these areas as priorities to allocate funds.
• We retool the OSU Strategic plan to better integrate efforts with these functions
• We create a students’ group to inform the unit how to best integrate and support ongoing student-run groups
Step 2
• We create through the mission and functional units a plan to seek funding through grants and foundations to support both the overall mission and the work of individual units with the structure.
• We begin design work for a building to house those units without either an academic or an administrative home.
• Through the creation of a strategic plan, we begin delivering services that support outreach, service learning and foster a positive campus climate
Step 3
• We break ground on a sequence of ecologically friendly buildings to house these functions
• We create an endowment to support programs and faculty
• We become a national center of excellence on outreach, service learning and campus climate
*************************************
Ryan Collay, The SMILE program and many others (draft as of Wednesday, October 31, 2007, originally from 2004 or 5)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
