Learning Resources

Abstract: The institutions that will thrive in the future will be those that use high-quality, relevant mission-driven data as part of their strategic, integrated planning process. Because of this it is imperative to create integrated institutional effectiveness (IIE) offices that serve as the connective tissue among all units within a college or university. The data and expertise of institutional effectiveness can be leveraged to benefit the institution as a whole. In this article, we discuss the value of creating an IIE office and challenges associated with a centralized infrastructure.

Abstract: Part 1 of this series described a major contraction in the pool of college-going 18-year-olds that will reverse decades of growth and stability for higher education. Part 2 explored how we can shape a planning context that supports success in the coming 10 or 20 years. Part 3 suggests how our approach to planning must shift to prepare for abrupt change.

Abstract: Although many institutions have clear processes for collecting data at the institutional level, we often overlook unit-level data collection aligned with institutional metrics, resulting in hindered outcomes. In order to achieve institutional outcomes, we must collect actionable data on key performance indicators at different unit levels. This session will share how Binghamton University has established an integrated data collection and tracking process and the ways in which the pandemic has affected this process and shifted institutional priorities. Come learn from examples of departmental-, divisional-, and institutional-level dashboards and find out how to use them to inform planning and improve performance.

Abstract: In April of 2017 the University System of Georgia (USG) launched a system wide initiative, known as the Comprehensive Administrative Review (CAR). The charge was to identify and implement administrative service improvement, efficiencies, and administrative cost savings that can be redirected to student success efforts and core academic programs. As Chair of the CAR Steering Committee, Dr. Marrero will outline the objectives of the CAR, the process, implementation and reporting structures, and the results to date. Furthermore, as a President of two USG comprehensive universities during the process of and initial implementation of CAR (University of West Georgia and Georgia Southern University), Dr. Marrero will provide an institutional perspective and insight into building a culture of high performance with a focus on evidence-based leadership, accountability, and continuous improvement. The session will highlight why investing in and engaging your people is critical in building a culture of continuous improvement.

Abstract: Challenging times continue for higher education: calls for more accountability, assessment of outcomes, evidence of institutional performance, relevance for life and careers, and student success. Integrated strategic planning and decision making in this ever-changing environment is critical for campus leadership. To maximize accountability, assessment, analytics, and accreditation, it is imperative for campus leaders to develop an integrated approach that begins with standard metrics, aligns with performance-based goals, and connects with accreditation requirements. Analytics, learning analytics, and learning management systems provide the crucial link to learning standards that support the reporting, monitoring, and improvement of student learning.

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.