Learning Resources

Abstract: The global COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally changed the world of higher education. As institutions look to the future, beyond the end of the pandemic, significant uncertainty exists. There is little question that colleges and universities will have to do a better job at planning, and boards at governing, to flourish in the years ahead. In this article an integrated model centered around three different time horizons, three areas of planning, and three types of governance is presented. The model can serve as a framework to demonstrate how these are all related, self-reinforcing, and usable as an aid for institutional leadership.

Abstract: Institutions need innovative student engagement strategies that cultivate collaborative governance in order to reflect changing learning paradigms and evolving societal needs, including recent pandemic-fueled inequities. This session will share diverse planner, leadership, faculty, and student perspectives on engagement and collaboration at North Orange County Community College. Join our panel to discuss how traditionally underserved students are reshaping higher education and gain tools and solutions that you can apply to engagement efforts on your campus.

Abstract: An effective mission statement can act as an institution’s North Star—providing a distinct, constant direction that a college or university can travel towards. But frequently, college and university mission statements are too broad, too vague, or too outdated to help institutions navigate today’s challenges and opportunities.

This toolkit will help you craft a mission statement that is both inspirational and useful. It will walk you through the steps of evaluating your current mission statement, facilitating the key conversations and decisions that underpin an effective mission statement, and writing a mission statement that serves your institution.

Abstract: During his year of ACE fellowship, Robert Schultz, department chair for teacher education at the University of Toledo, had a front row seat as Ohio State University adjusted to COVID-19, seeing firsthand the remarkable pivot a large institution can make when its leadership has spent significant time and effort on teamwork development. He discusses the need for collaborative governance and transitioning to the planning and change leadership that is necessary for schools to effectively strategize for what’s next.

Abstract: by Ricardo Azziz, Guilbert C. Hentschke, Lloyd A. Jacobs, and Bonita C. Jacobs
Johns Hopkins University Press
Baltimore, MD 2019
288 Pages
ISBN 9781421432601

Abstract: This article evaluates administrative bloat, the ballooning growth of administrative functions and personnel, in American higher education. This evaluation was undertaken through a review of the available literature describing administrative bloat. Though unintentional, increased spending and government requirements for accountability may have contributed to overall growth and cost in higher education. Similarly, the changing composition of faculty—in terms of tenure-track faculty, annual contracts, and adjunct faculty—may have also played a role in the increased influence that administration has over campus policy and curricular decisions. Strategies to mitigate the cost of administrative bloat and to balance campus decisions between faculty and administration are suggested.

Abstract: In 2009 the Arizona University System (supporting over 130,000 enrollments) through its Board of Regents directed its board president and the presidents of Arizona State University, University of Arizona, and Northern Arizona University to create an operational plan that reflected the board’s vision, goals, and strategic directions. A primary objective was to transform the system (or enterprise) vision into concrete goals and outcomes that would directly connect to financial decision making at the system and university level. The backdrop for higher education planning and budgeting expectations included the continuation of severe reductions in state funding, rapidly increasing student tuition and fees, and a call for greater accountability. The planning processes were characterized by the integration of board and presidential discussions, inclusion of constituent debate, identification of strategic choices, and approval of outcomes focused on measuring performance. The integration ran across and within three organizations or levels that included the Arizona Board of Regents, its system administration, and the three universities.