^{Go directly to the original of the resource described below.}

‘Planning for Art Making and the Arts in Research Universities’ is the Theme of the  Initial Report of a Strategic Task Force Representing 30 Institutions.

The Chronicle of Higher Education has reported on an organization, started in Australia and the UK, that intends to collect and publish internal; messages and documents from universities: “UniLeaks will accept restricted or censored material of political, ethical, diplomatic, or historical significance which is in some way connected to higher education.”

It behooves every campus-based, or campus-serving professional to ensure their email correspondence is clear and their communication intent is obvious. Avoid circumstances in which you may be completely, one-hundred percent correct in your actions and writing, but where careless or even just imprecise language could be misinterpreted.

The Institute’s research found that the importance of innovation in the economy is giving rise to a new model for state economic development programs — one in which the development and distribution of knowledge is at least as important as more traditional incentive programs. The report acknowledges the long record of SUNY campuses in economic development, so it focused on finding additional lessons from other states.

Higher education institutions and systems that are successful in this arena, the report said, appear to rely on a combination of four key factors:

• Innovation — that is, using their research power to create knowledge that can have economic impact, and then actively working to help move new ideas into the marketplace.
• Knowledge transfer that helps businesses grow and prosper, through programs such as job training, technical and other consulting assistance, and assistance to startups.
• An activist role in revitalizing the communities in which they are located, such as efforts to help local elementary and secondary schools.
• And their core mission of producing the educated populace that’s needed to build, run and work in the innovation economy.

The Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities (now known as APLU) has released the results of its survey of member institutions, which are large, public institutions. Its report on the survey is titled Coping Strategics of Public Universities During the Economic Recession of 2009. (Since it officially began in 2007, we think it should be titled The Economic Recession of 2007-2010, but . . . what the heck.) The APLU says:

Strategic reviews of core activities are underway or planned by two-thirds of the nation’s public research universities according to a survey of chief academic officers by the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU). The survey focused on depth of budget cuts, strategies to close deficits, and impact on institutions and students at the nation’s 188 public research universities.

The full report on the survey is here.

Here's a report in the APLU's online newsletter, Public Voice, here's a direct link to the entire survey. Here's a summary of the survey by The Chronicle of Higher Education's Eric Kelderman and here's a summary by Inside Higher Ed's Jack Stripling. Jack wrote:

While the survey suggests that some hard choices have already been made by public universities, the long-term solutions indicate universities are still more apt to conduct further reviews than announce permanent changes at this point. Indeed, 67 percent of respondents said they plan a strategic review of administrative structures, compared with just 22 percent that said they plan to permanently change staffing levels for tenured and tenure-track faculty.

University competition is a game played on the leading edge of institutional behavior, not at the center. The optimal strategy is to move money from the less productive trailing edge to the more productive leading edge. Executed consistently over time, this strategy delivers an ever-increasing leading edge of highly competitive quality that pulls the center of the university’s operations relentlessly forward towards higher standards of performance. The financial crisis cycle provides periodic opportunities to move more money from the trailing edge for investment in the leading edge. Those institutions that take advantage of these crises benefit greatly.